Why are there debates in parliment?

We have the government and opposition in parliment. The job of the government is to govern. What then is the job of the opposition? I thought it was to provide a check on, and to prevent abuses. But given the name, perhaps some of the opposition misunderstood their job and spend most of their time in opposing the government, whatever the case?

I thought that parliment was a place where matured leaders debate important issues that have profound beneficial effects for the people. And not for schoolboy styled debates on whether it is correct to use "fish" or "fishes". Or perhaps this schoolboy debate is already more matured than the name-calling childish antics we read regularly about?

However absurd this sounds, it sometimes seems to be the truth. While we have so many, many issues that need to be argued, discussed and decided upon for the country to go forward (which I assume is the purpose of parliment in the first place), we also have many esteemed members of parliment who seems to be more focussed on arguing on technicalities, and trying to punish those that are wrong on petty, technical grounds.

Why the relentless pursuit of a mistake? Whether due to ignorance or an attempt to mislead, it makes no difference to the man on the street. What good would it do to the people?

While these may be important for the purists (especially lawyers, who amongst other things, often cite technicalities to throw out a case), it serves no purpose for the rest of the rakyat who has voted the parlimentarian in.

Perhaps it might be a good idea for every member in parliment to think through and answer a simple question before he opens his mouth. The question is, "What good does whatever I am going to say achieve in terms of real benefits for the people?" And if he doesn't have a decent answer for this, then perhaps he should reserve his energy and parlimentary time for something constructive.

We debate everything, and run out of time to discuss the important things. While searching for the exact truth is admirable (for scientist), we perhaps should spend a bit more time on moving forward in this fuzzy world without exactness. I am too lazy to link or quote examples here because you (the reader) can go read the newspaper.

It scares me that the opposition (and many see them as the saviour of the country) is supposed to be the voice of rationality checking on those vested with the power to lead the country, . may one day be the power that is leading the country.