Based on a decision reached by Yisrael Beitenu party leader Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, which was passed by the party’s governing committee, in the next Knesset party cabinet ministers will have to resign from Knesset. In line with the Norwegian Law.
The Knesset numbers 120 members, a subject which has often been a cause for proposed reforms. In 1996, then-Justice Minister Yossi Beilin, backed the ultimately unsuccessful institution of the so-called “Norwegian law”, which would require appointed members of the cabinet to resign their seats in the Knesset and allow other members of their parties to take their positions while they serve in the cabinet; this would have resulted in more active members of the legislature being present in regular sessions and committee meetings. This proposed law has also been favored by other politicians, including Binyamin Netanyahu. Lieberman feels that by doing so, it will create the badly needed separation between the executive and legislative branches of government.
This also means that if the party would break from the government for one reason or another, those ministers could not remain in Knesset since that are no longer counted among the 120 Members of Knesset.
There is one exception to Lieberman’s plan however, the party leader, who will maintain his MK position along with his cabinet post.
(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
5 Responses
Separation of powers would be a radical change. Whenever the Israelis make little tweaks they end up worse off (e.g. direction election of prime ministers). They could switch to an American (“strong president”) model, but that would be very difficult after 65 years of a parliamentary (British style) system. For all purposes it would require a “second republic” (brand new reboot), which is unlikely.
I believe that under the Norwegian model, if a minister leaves his post, he returns to Parliament, with the last person on his party’s list being bumped out. Not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing, but a former minister is not just out on the street if he/she leaves the government.
an Israeli Yid
#1
You’re misinformed
The Israeli system is based on the french or continental system of proportional representation
In the British system”first past the post”,followed by
Commonwealth countries
(akin to the US House of Rep. and State legislatures)
the country is divided up into districts,which leads to much less parties-generally about 3- and more stability.
The British were forced held a referendum on this in 2011, due LDP coalition conditions and insistence and it was blown down by 2-1 majority.
.
#1
The US and British district system with all it’s virtues suffers from it’s own deficiency,namely,gerrymandering
#1 However you ARE on to something:
Sir, – I hesitate to enter any political debate, especially at this very sensitive time, but the letters on Friday from Graham Young and Mark Ritchie both make the same very relevant point.
I believe Mr Young is incorrect in suggesting that Westminster is trying to concentrate power in all three of the smaller countries in the UK. They have enjoyed a remarkable devolution from the mighty south east of England.
But both gentlemen are absolutely correct in suggesting that the enormous power enjoyed by the leader of the governing party, between elections, is the power of a dictatorship that is almost beyond the dreams of most petty tyrants. In the last 50 years the Prime Minister has accrued Svengalian influence.
He chooses the cabinet, the promotion to the Judiciary (in England)..
The House of Lords. The whip system has become a diktat; almost all MPs represent not their constituents but the policies of their beloved leader.
The Lords only have delaying powers, though the standard of debate in that House is clearly better than in the rather appositely named Lower House. If we enjoyed an elected president the problem would be worse in that once more the political parties would take over.
In Scotland there is no second house. The recent work of Mr Swinney would suggest that the judiciary is under threat. Unlike almost all civilised countries there is no buffer to absolute power.
That is, of course, but one; the next election. We have bred a class of politicians who regard the next invitation to the ballot as Mount Parnassus; what Britain or Scotland is to be like in 30 years is absolutely immaterial.
Think of who controls our power sources and most of our big businesses. That is entirely because of the short-termism and self-interest of most of our politicians, sadly going back for decades.
Oh to be back to in a real democracy!
Robert Lightband.
Clepington Court,
Dundee.