tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-418581095311857454.post363813848433556333..comments2023-11-06T11:31:25.673-08:00Comments on Activist Teacher: An analysis of the Hackland ruling in Guergis v. Novak et al.Denis Rancourthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16743375141824505606noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-418581095311857454.post-57271777717308881132012-09-06T14:12:16.854-07:002012-09-06T14:12:16.854-07:00To clarify the wording, its the Ministers that ser...To clarify the wording, its the Ministers that serve at the pleasure of the PM - their appointment is a matter of internal political party preference and politics. They can be appointed and dismissed at will at the discretion of the PM - they know that going in to the job. Even if a Minister believes they are being dismissed for the wrong reasons, their job exists at the whim of the PM, which Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-418581095311857454.post-58728520504143583902012-09-06T13:22:45.955-07:002012-09-06T13:22:45.955-07:00Hmm, even as told, Hackland's analysis seems c...Hmm, even as told, Hackland's analysis seems correct - you may not like that the PM has extraordinary discretionary powers in the make up of Cabinet, but its the system that exists. Its simply not within the purview of the courts to interfere with these decisions. They serve at the pleasure of the PM and they know that going in. This is basic first year law school knowledge from public and Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com