Bicameralism In Australia

Problems of Bicameralism
Legislative Gridlock
One of the largest problems of having a bicameral system is the potential to have legislative gridlock. Legislative gridlock is when the government has difficulty passing legislation and it can also occur when the proportion of bills passed and the agenda of the legislature declines or cannot agree. A legislative gridlock then results in sustaining the government’s overall decision-making productivity and causing delays in the legislative making (Junge, König and Luig, 2015, 778). The second house then may be able to block progressive legislation, resulting in legislative gridlock and not full representing the true interests required of the houses. This also links to another demerit of bicameralism of how expensive and resource wasting the duplication of bills and blockage of bills can be with the second chamber. While this may be a major concern for most bicameral systems, the Australian Constitution has a method for resolving a deadlock between

William Heller (1997, 486) argued that through a bicameral system, the government is forced to add more spending to the budget than normal in order to pass through the two houses. This then increases the government’s budget deficit. Through a unicameral system, the number of members are fewer and the process is more direct causing an elimination of the legislative duplication and redundancy. However, the money that can be saved by reducing the amount of staff and bill duplication is invaluable compared to the ineffectiveness of legislation from a unicameral government. A bicameral government upholds the effectiveness of legislative making and ensuring that the little details of bills can be amended by going through the two houses. Moreover, bicameralism helps the government’s operations by confirming thoroughly that the legislation that is be effective and the best it can