Sir Humphrey's Department of Unspin has its weekly poll on this issue this week. One of the first comments on that poll points to the example of Switzerland, then it could work for us.
However, I don't think it is as simple as that. California also allows such referendums, and had a problem were one referendum was in favour of reduced taxes, and another in favour of increased government spending (and of course there was no surplus available). Obviously referendums do not work as well there.
The problem is that referendums cause problems with a representative democracy. In a representative democracy, we have the doctrine of responsible government, where the government is responsbile to parliament and the people for its decisions. They are responsible for taking in the appropriate information, and making decisions which inevitably involve trade-offs, and can be held accountable for them.
Referenda provide a way for a government to abrogate responsibility.
In addition, a government run by referenda would be very susceptable to mob-rule, and a small but well timed misinformation campaign could significantly affect government policy by influencing a referendum.
I am very reluctant to abandon the Westminster system of government that has served us and other Commonwealth countries for so long.
However, referenda do still have their uses:
However, I don't think it is as simple as that. California also allows such referendums, and had a problem were one referendum was in favour of reduced taxes, and another in favour of increased government spending (and of course there was no surplus available). Obviously referendums do not work as well there.
The problem is that referendums cause problems with a representative democracy. In a representative democracy, we have the doctrine of responsible government, where the government is responsbile to parliament and the people for its decisions. They are responsible for taking in the appropriate information, and making decisions which inevitably involve trade-offs, and can be held accountable for them.
Referenda provide a way for a government to abrogate responsibility.
In addition, a government run by referenda would be very susceptable to mob-rule, and a small but well timed misinformation campaign could significantly affect government policy by influencing a referendum.
I am very reluctant to abandon the Westminster system of government that has served us and other Commonwealth countries for so long.
However, referenda do still have their uses:
- Binding referenda should always be held on constitutional changes (such as removing the right of appeal to the Privy Council that happened a few years ago). These are changing the overall framework of how our government works, and so should require either a super-majority in Parliament, or the approval of the people at a referendum.
- Binding referenda should be held on some social / moral issues (such as the Civil Union Act), particularly when such issues will be very difficult to reverse by a future government. Of course, it is probably difficult to compile a list of issues that should be included.
- Indicative referenda should still be able to be initiated by citizens as is currently the case. This provides a way to raise the profile on an issue and provide a clear message to politicians, but should not be binding. I think for a number of issues, the political implications of ignoring an overwhelming indicative referendum are sufficient.
Trackbacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: