> > Often, representatives of public interest groups are
> >invited who then ask questions of the parties.  For example, we had
> >one a few weeks ago where representatives from an Islamic immigrant
> >organization were invited to confront the "prograssive" party on the
> >allegedly racist immigration policies in its platform.  These sorts of
> >meetings are frequent on Norwegian TV, and they are held live in prime
> >time.
>
> You speak as if this was something odd?

I've never seen it in America or Australia, except at election time
and then only rarely.  I don't mean something like showing the
parliamentary sessions on TV, like they were doing in Australia when I
was there.  That was kind of embarrassing, actually, watching grown
men paying each other out.  What they do here is pick an issue that
needs some work and get people together to discuss the problem, and
they do it pretty much weekly or every other week (not now during
summer holidays), and they do it on one or the other of the two
national TV networks in prime time.  That wouldn't happen in America.

> >The government is always a coalition.  It doesn't have to work out
> >that way but it seems like an effect of the parties sticking to their
> >platforms.
>
> More likely largely to do with the parliament being elected by
> proportional representation. I find it difficult to conceive of a
> political system where parties stick closely to their platforms. ;-)

That's what I said when I saw it.  But there it is.

> >  The only way to get the right combination of party
> >policies is to have a coalition.  You would think that the parties
> >would change their platforms to be more like what Mr and Mrs Knudsen
> >say they want in the polls, which would result in an American style
> >system where the Democrats differ from the Republicans in name only.
> >But they don't do that in Norway.  The Socialist Left party is always
> >the Socialist Left party.  The Labor Party is always the Labor party.
>
> The thing with a proportional representation system is that a minority
> party has an incentive to be somewhat loyal to that minority interest,
> rather than try to be all things to all people. If the party does the
> latter, then the minority they depend on may well abandon them, without any
> guarantee that anyone else will believe them and change their vote.

I agree.

martin

Martin Smith                    Email: [log in to unmask]
P.O. Box 1034 Bekkajordet       Tel. : +47 330 35700
N-3194 HORTEN, Norway           Fax. : +47 330 35701