Proposals for the introduction of Elements of Direct Democracy in Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Proposals quoted from Our-Say, Unlock Democracy, Power Inquiry, I&Rgb

The “four sets of proposals” may be found in www at 

Comments by

Michael Efler e-mail michael.efler @ mehr-demokratie.de
Ph.D. Political scientist and economist. (Doctoral thesis: International Investment Agreements – current status and reform options) Board member, Mehr Demokratie e.V. Germany

Our-Say

For a citizens' referendum-demand I find a hurdle of 2.5% to be appropriate, not too high. However I would differentiate among the various levels of government. In local government units it is much easier to collect endorsements (signatures) than across the whole country. A scale of hurdles from one to three percent could be considered.

It is a good idea to assign defined duties in administering direct democratic procedures – as suggested – to the Electoral Commission.

The proposal to regulate spending in referendum campaigns I find good. Incidentally, in the USA this would be illegal.

Holding referenda together with elections is not a good idea. Firstly, for some citizens' initiatives this would result in long delays before coming to referendum. Secondly, if they concur with elections, there is a tendency for referenda to be ignored by the mass media and so to fall out of view of the electorate.

The collection period for endorsements seems too long for the local government level. Here, six months would be appropriate.

The Our-Say proposal does not contain mention of topic exclusions, which I reject on principle.

Also, the question of which referendum majority will be accepted remains open: Should a simple majority of votes cast suffice? Or, should a pre-defined minimum ballot turnout be required?

Further, I miss a description of the role of parliaments in the direct democratic procedures. The parliaments should at least have the right to adopt a proposal (“citizens' initiative") of the people. Also, I would like to see the parliaments gain the right to put forward an alternative proposal.

Unlock Democracy

The proposal is brief, numerous important components of the direct democracy procedures remain to be filled in, such as excluded topics, requirements for acceptance of (majority) referendum decision, rules about information concerning the referendum proposal.

A five percent hurdle for citizens' referendum-demand at the national level I find much too high, for the local level a bit too high.

Power Enquiry

To set the quorum of eligible voters at 60 percent is absurd, worse than in Italy. That would mean the death of direct democracy in the UK. Also I view the "embargo clause" (v. If a proposal fails at the referendum stage, it cannot be brought before the British people within the next five years) as unnecessary and very restrictive. Experience in Switzerland leads me to criticise the exclusion of budget and taxation politics.

I welcome that a "three-step" model of citizens' initiative and referendum has been proposed. I recommend that the second step (referendum-demand after the proposal has been rejected by parliament) should be more difficult than the first, because this is a demand for a public decision by the sovereign people, whereas the first step is designed only to mandate the parliament to consider the proposal.