Quality of Direct Democracy in the Brexit saga
A reply to William Wallace in the Yorkshire Post
iniref wrote on 21/02/2017
quote: "'The will of the people', the Daily Mail insists, requires that we now accept whatever the Government puts forward. So we have slipped from Parliamentary democracy to direct democracy, in which an authoritarian political leader is allowed to interpret occasional expressions of the popular will without a continuing process of criticism."
Iniref: Direct democracy can be much better than the brexit referendum and its consequences. Modern direct democracy as used in other lands does not provide acclamation for an authoritarian leader (paraphrased "For Brexit I shall use the Royal Prerogative") but enables input from the electorate into deliberations and procedures of parliament and government. Above you call for a second referendum about our relationship to the EU. Yes, it would be reasonable, as we similarly argued for the Scots independence campaign, to hold a second ballot, on the conditions and terms negotiated by HM gov for the UK to leave the EU. If the people want such a ballot then they should certainly get one. Better than a poll imposed by government (formally parliament) would be a well-designed, citizen-launched and binding referendum.
A reply to http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opinion/william-wallace-out-of-depth-may-in-thrall-to-authoritarian-tory-right-1-8398796
Published/re-printed on February 21, 2017 by Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/quality-direct-democracy-brexit-saga-iniref-iandr?published=t
More detail about direct democracy in the UK may be found at www.iniref.org