"We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue."
HM Government UK 2010

Promised democracy reform purged from the Conservative/LibDem Localism Bill

Proposal for effective urgent action by Parliament


A precious cargo of citizen-led democracy was thrown overboard during the Localism Bill's passage through Parliament. Both the Conservative Party before the last general election and the Conservative/Libdem Coalition in their 2010 post-election agreement stated that they would introduce the local citizens' referendum. In their coalition agreement the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats promised localism, power to the people and stronger local democracy. Although imperfect, early drafts of the Localism Bill contained some improvement in citizen-led democracy, such as the right to trigger a referendum on any local issue. Predictably, big industry and conservative interest groups, acting through liberal "democrat" MPs (peers), lobbied to sabotage the Bill.

We present below a chronological compendium of notes, and comments on press articles, which illustrate how we at Iniref~I&Rgb observed and tried to influence the fate of citizens' democracy in the Localism Bill.

Sadly, Her Majesty's government and parliament failed to anchor any substantial democracy reform in the Localism Act (Royal assent 15th Nov. 2011). Unsurprised, the reform campaigners will continue. Below, we sketch a way forward with a proposal for a NEW Democracy Bill which truly will return more political power to  the people in both local and central governance. This legislation will introduce a "tool-kit" of citizen-initiated democracy such as: the citizens' law-proposal which can lead to legally binding ballot; citizen-initiated referendum with which law made by Parliament and policy of government can be blocked, vetoed, revoked or changed.
 
Contents

• Democracy in the Localism Bill: What remains of promised citizen-power if the government caves in to big lobbyists? 21st August 2011

• Reply to Eric Pickles MP: Local planning and democracy. In the Guardian online newspaper, 15 September 2011

• Tories and LibDems betray on local democracy? Alert by Andrew Boff, member of the Tory party and London councillor. October 12th 2011

• Localism Bill – Community Empowerment DROPPED! Counter-Arguments. Reply to a Future of London report. October 13th 2011

• Liberal Democrats remove local referendums on any issue (so claim LibDem peers). 10th November 2011

• Local Government Association LGA axed community empowerment (18 referendum clauses) from Localism Bill (so claims LGA). 11th November 2011

• Con/Libdems fail democracy exam. Remedy outlined: NEW Democracy Act. 18th November 2011

• Tamworth angered by Localism Bill: Right to "instigate" a referendum on any local issue removed by government. 10th March 2012

• Need for reform of direct democracy in community and parish: INIREF reply to Cotswold Journal: Parish polls 'are playing games with democracy'. 19th April 2012

• Lords and lobbies demolish democracy in Localism Bill. 15th May 2012



Democracy in the Localism Bill: What remains of promised citizen-power if the government caves in to big lobbyists?

21st August 2011

The Localism Bill among many, many other topics contains draft law which would introduce some elements of citizen-instigated democracy (1). From the beginning the Bill has offered the right of voters to present a proposal if it has been endorsed by at least one in twenty eligible voters. The Council is then obliged to hold a referendum. Some exceptions were defined from the beginning and in response to lobbyists (e.g. some companies many from the building industry, electricity suppliers, even some environmentalists) and local government associations, additional grounds which would enable councils to refuse a valid referendum demand ("petition") were inserted by the government.

The democracy on offer in the Localism Bill has been transformed to look more like forms of consultation or control available to local governments.

Never has the Conservative/Libdem coalition gone so far as to propose in draft legislation that a referendum resulting from a citizens' proposition could lead to a ballot which is legally binding (2, 3). Again, if this is how things remain, then the democracy of the Localism Bill, which was supposed to fulfill the election promise of devolving real political power to citizens as well as councils, will turn out to be little more than a time-wasting and frustrating framework for consultation or petitioning, procedures which we have had for a very long time.

The Localism Bill has not completed its passage through Parliament (4) so there remains time to improve it. For instance, an amendment to make the results of local referendum legally binding has been presented by Zac Goldsmith MP and other members.

1. Memorandum  (L 40) on Localism Bill,  published by House of Commons Public Bill Committee

2. Season for change in Britain? Citizen-led democracy. Iniref 2010

3. The Coalition Agreement 2010. How about the promised shift of "power to the people"?  Iniref 2010

4. The Localism Bill main page

Discuss on-line at WordPress

Transmit your opinion to Conservative Party via "Direct Democracy"




Reply to Eric Pickles MP: Local planning and democracy

COMMENT BY INIREF  15 September 2011 11:28AM

The Localism Bill is supposed to improve democracy. You write,

"The local plans that councils draw up together with residents will hold greater sway than ever. And we are looking to introduce neighbourhood planning, a new means for residents to have a say over the look and feel of the places where we live."

Which local residents will be involved here? Will they be elected? Chosen by sortition (lot)? If not, how will planning become more democratic? Surely the same old bunch of cronies will continue to dominate.

Powerful democratic tools could be the citizens' initiative and referendum. Local people -- any citizen -- could put forward a plan or policy and demand that a referendum be held about it. Council plans could be put to public ballot if a large, agreed number of people sign a demand. Your Localism Bill, Mr. Pickles, does indeed contain a proposal to introduce the citizens' referendum. The catch here: you insist that the council will not be obliged to abide by the people's decision!

Make citizens' referenda legally binding!

-----------------------

A REPLY TO:

Eric Pickles, Communities Minister

A democratic design for the future of Britain's communities

The current planning system is inefficient and complex – our reforms will put it back in the hands of local residents

--------------------------------------------
I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/




Tories and LibDems betray on local democracy?
October 12th 2011

The Localism Bill is currently being debated in the House of Lords. The Bill contains a section which would give people the right to put forward proposals and demand local referenda. Now it looks as though even this minor democratic reform will be withdrawn.

Andrew Boff, as a member of the Tory party and London councillor,  has for years pleaded for genuine local democracy. Quoting Lord Greaves, the Liberal "Democratic" peer who proposed to remove the democracy reform, Boff writes

“Councils already have the powers to hold referendums when they choose to do so” {stated by Lord Greaves, Ed.} Don't you get geddit m'Lud? What about when the people want to hold a referendum on an issue that they choose in one of the many local authorities which are one party states? Who the hell are local councillors if they are not servants of the people rather than their masters."

INIREF comments:

Both the Conservative Party before the last general election and the Conservative/Libdem Coalition in their published agreement stated that they would introduce the local citizens' referendum. From the Coalition agreement p. 27, "We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue."

If the ruling parties in government do NOT push this through, then the coalition agreement will be seen as being worth less than the paper on which it was printed.

Further, in order to provide effective local democracy which would encourage citizens to act responsibly in public affairs, the amendment (Goldsmith et al) which would make citizen-initiated referenda legally binding should be adopted.

A REPLY TO:

Andrew Boff: The removal of the clauses from the Localism Bill, allowing local people to originate policy, is a victory for the political class, not the public

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/



Localism Bill – Community Empowerment DROPPED! Counter-Arguments

INIREF replies to a Future of London report: Update on the Localism Bill – Community Empowerment?
October 13, 2011 By Natalia

"During the debate in the House of Lords this week, the entire chapter (18 clauses) on referendums has been dropped."


INIREF comments:

The Conservative/Liberal-Democrat 2010 coalition agreement contains the following clear statement, p. 27,

"We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue."

What are the promises of our politicians worth?

Further, the arguments made in the House of Lords against community empowerment by direct democracy are unconvincing. They reflect the views of local politicians, businesses, building and infra-structure (e.g. electricity) concerns, who have raged against the democratic components of the Localism Bill from an early stage.

The criticisms of the citizen-instigated referendum are wrong, for instance:

a. "the risk of misuse by extreme groups"  Extreme groups are already able to organise and take part in elections. They have won seats. This has not led us to abolish elections but many oppose extremists by other means. Regarding citizen-instigated referendum, it is nonsense to suggest that extremists could decide anything. It is the electorate who decides in referendum. Even the "petition" for referendum presents a difficult hurdle for a small group. Most people simply would NOT sign up for extremist or malicious proposals. (Hurdles must be set at an appropriate level: contact info@iniref.org).
Reference to "the risk of misuse by extreme groups" is scaremongering in order to ward off democracy reform.

b. "the advisory nature of the referenda was called into question". Yes, this is a good criticism of the Localism Bill. But it is perverse to suggest this as a reason against the democracy reforms. The answer is to make the results of local referenda legally binding. An amendment to do just this has been put forward by a mixed party group of MPs in the Commons. This amendment should be made!

c. "disempowerment of, local authorities". The powers of local authorities are fixed by central government and could not be changed by local people in referendum. With citizen-instigated referenda it is true that policy proposals could be made and council decisions vetoed. But this does not "disempower" local government. As long as local councils follow the will of their electorates then no referenda are needed. In general, the quality of local politics would be improved by having stronger, more participative democracy.

d. "potential costs". Often raised as a "bogeyman" by opponents of direct democracy. Where there is citizen-instigated referendum public budgetting tends to be more efficient. Also, referenda often lead to savings, by trimming expensive council schemes or conserving valuable buildings. Also, democracy is worth a lot! Central government could provide funds for local referenda if need be.

See also a comment by Andrew Boff, London councillor, at conservative-home, who criticises the LibDem attack on the Localism Bill
"The removal of the clauses from the Localism Bill, allowing local people to originate policy, is a victory for the political class, not the public"

I&R ~ GB
Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
http://www.iniref.org/



Liberal Democrats remove local referendums on any issue

iniref
Posted 10th November 2011 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

Regarding the Localism Bill, you claim that the LibDems were ”Promoting local democracy” but go on to admit that you helped to axe a major reform of our democracy.

“…. the proposals for non-binding local referendums on any issue were also removed by Liberal Democrats. Although having the laudable aim of improving democracy, in practice, they were open to hijack by extremist groups on low turnouts, and would be very expensive for local authorities, particularly at a time of economic constraint.”

The “citizens’ initiative” and right to demand referendum, removed from the Bill in the House of Lords, with government agreement, was not meant to replace local government by permanent direct democracy but to enable people to raise issues neglected by councils and to propose a veto-ballot for unwanted proposals. A substantial and valuable improvement from the citizens’ perspective and regarding quality of public governance. Repeated surveys have show strong public support: your party risks losing votes because of this.

During the Bill’s passage through Parliament the design of the proposed citizens’ referendum was criticised. The “blanket” hurdle of five percent was said to be too low. This could have been changed, for instance by raising the hurdle for small communities. The non-binding nature of proposed referenda was said to be a negative feature — people might regard the whole thing as a waste of time if councils could simply ignore the citizens’ vote. So why not accept the amendment to make the polls binding?

You raise “the risk of misuse by extreme groups” Extreme groups are already able to organise and take part in elections. They have won seats. This has not led us to abolish elections but many oppose extremists by other means. Regarding citizen-instigated referendum, it is nonsense to suggest that extremists could decide anything. It is the electorate who decides in referendum. Even the “petition” for referendum presents a difficult hurdle for a small group. Most people simply would NOT sign up for extremist or malicious proposals. (Hurdles must be set at an appropriate level: contact info@iniref.org). Reference to “the risk of misuse by extreme groups” is scaremongering in order to ward off democracy reform.

You write that referenda “would be very expensive”. In comparison to bailing out profligate bankers? Potential costs have often been raised as a “bogeyman” by opponents of direct democracy. Where there is citizen-instigated referendum public budgetting tends to be more efficient. Also, referenda often lead to savings, by trimming expensive council schemes or conserving valuable buildings. Also, democracy is worth a lot! Central government could provide funds for local referenda if need be.

The Conservative/Liberal-Democrat 2010 coalition agreement contains the following clear statement, p. 27,

“We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue.”

What are the promises of our politicians worth?

Regards,
for

I&R ~ GB Citizens’ Initiative and Referendum
http://www.iniref.org/


A REPLY TO:

That’s the way to do it! How Liberal Democrats made the running on the Localism Bill

Annette Brooke MP and Lord (Graham) Tope are the Lib Dem Co-Chairs of the Parliamentary Policy Committee on Communities and Local Government, and led the Lib Dem response to the Localism Bill. Here they outline what they, working with colleagues in the party and many beyond, helped achieve. (end quote)



Local Government Association axed community empowerment from Localism Bill


11th November 2011

The Local Government Association represents many hundreds (where is their membership list?)  of city and district councils. Their income from fees, paid out of public funds, is substantial.

Their chair bleats triumphantly that the LGA successfully lobbied to remove from the Localism Bill one of the few potentially useful reforms towards participative democracy and the much (by ConLibdem) touted community empowerment.

If you disagree with this policy then ask your Council (if they are LGA members) to formally complain or consider resigning from the Local Government Association.

INIREF commented on-line:

http://www.lgcplus.com/briefings/corporate-core/governance/making-the-localism-bill-work-for-councils/5037620.article

Sir Merrick Cockell, chairman, LGA wrote:

"We also worked hard for councils around the issue of local referendums. .... The LGA succeeded in removing these from the legislation."

(iniref:)
Congratulations. The LGA with accomplices from the building and development industry lobbies and in cahoots with much of the ruling class of the three major parties has succeeded to axe that part of the Localism Bill which was probably the most important to the citizens of this country.

You have done a great disservice to democracy in England. Repeated surveys have shown that over seven out of ten British adults approve the introduction of citizen instigated referenda in local and central governance.

The Conservative/Liberal-Democrat 2010 coalition agreement contains the following clear statement, p. 27,

"We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue."

What are the promises of our politicians worth?

signed for,

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
http://www.iniref.org/



Con/Libdems fail democracy exam. Remedy outlined

18th November 2011

INIREF COMMENT on Conservative/Liberal-Democrats' failure to legislate for effective, user-friendly democracy. With a suggested remedy.

Many things need to be done to improve our democracy. This article (1) looks at e-petitions, in this case perhaps better dubbed a hybrid of citizens' proposition (initiative) and mass petition. What is the context in which this apparently minor reform, or gimmick, may be located?

Attempts by the current coalition to reform democracy have so far been ill thought through, remote from theory, formulated apparently in haste and in ignorance of experience made in other countries where democracy is more advanced.

The Coalition has fumbled with democracy in local government. Their showpiece proposal was in the "community empowerment" section of the Localism Bill. This promised that local people would be able to put forward a proposal and call a poll on any local issue (among issues within the remit of the Council). The ease of triggering such a poll was debated in Parliament, with a range of hurdles from between 5 and 30 percent of eligibly voters being suggested. Protests were received by the government from builders, developers and local authority associations that the reforms might allow voters to adversely influence their profits and plans. Finally this Autumn the LibDems in the House of Lords, with the agreement of the Communities minister and no hint of protest from Her Majesty's opposition, scuttled the "community empowerment" section. Sunk it in the Thames (2).

The Conservative/Liberal-Democrat 2010 coalition agreement contains the following clear statement, p. 27,
“We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue.”

So, what will the Coalition do for democracy in central governance?

In Autumn 2009 at an early hustings-style meeting David Cameron promised that he would introduce citizen-initiated referendum both at local and national levels.

In contrast the Coalition agreement offers only a weaker sort of participation, rather than the direct democracy waved tauntingly to potential voters by David Cameron: "We will ensure that any petition that secures l00,000 signatures will be eligible for formal debate in Parliament. The petition with the most signatures will enable members of the public to table a bill eligible to be voted on in Parliament."

Comparative study of modern democracy shows that the best option is a combination of "representative" democracy with elements of effective electoral participation and control such as the citizens' proposition and optional veto referendum. Our chances of moving towards this optimum with the ruling coalition now in November 2011 look very slim.

The debacle of the Localism Bill has shown that democracy is far too important to be included in a bill which contains many other topics with no direct connection to the regulation of democratic governance. Further, the low quality of content and debate about this legislation in and around Parliament, taken together with the sham-nature of democracy introduced as "e-petition" show that for our political rulers and elites a rapid programme of learning about modern democracy is urgently needed. Such a learning process could usefully be stimulated by the public presentation of a law proposal dedicated to the introduction of effective political participation by citizens. Such a law proposal, a basis for what might come to be termed The Democracy Bill, should establish principles of democratic governance and for all levels of public governance from parish to central state contain proposals which:
1) Establish or re-affirm the constitutional base of electoral action, by ruling that all political and constitutional power in the state stems from the people. This power can be exercised by electing candidates and in legally binding ballots on public matters.
2) Introduce facilitatory ground rules for several instruments of citizen-initiated democracy such as:
2.1) citizen law-proposal which can lead to legally binding ballot
2.2) citizen-initiated referendum with which law made by Parliament and policy of government can be blocked, vetoed, revoked or changed.
2.3) elector-initiated procedure to recall an elected Member of Parliament, assembly or council and other publicly elected official.
----------------------------------------

1. A REPLY TO:
E-petitions, meant to be a force for good that reconnected people and politics and helped to restore public confidence, may end up doing exactly the opposite  Editorial The Guardian, Thursday 17 November 2011 

2. Eighteen clauses concerning the citizens' right to initiate a local referendum were deleted.

---------------------------------------------
I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/



Tamworth angered by Localism Bill: right to "instigate" a referendum on any local issue removed by government
10th March 2012

http://www.thisistamworth.co.uk/Water-fight-going-away/story-15456945-detail/story.html

Ken Forest wrote, "It may be that when the new Localism Bill gets passed that would be the time to force a local referendum?" from This is Tamworth, 9th March 2012

iniref informs:

The Conservative/Libdem government did promise in their coalition agreement (2010) to introduce the citizens' right to "instigate" a referendum on an local issue. Unfortunately this promise was broken: the right to referendum was thrown out of the Localism Bill by the Libdems and Tories. This example of citizen-led democracy, which is supported by over seven out of ten British adults, does not appear in the Localism Act which has already been passed as law of the land.

More detail may be found via http://www.iniref.org/latest.html



INIREF reply to Cotswold Journal:

Parish polls 'are playing games with democracy'

19th April 2012

We entirely agree that the regulation of parish polls should be improved. It is refreshing to see that a politician, the mayor of Shipston, "“believed the Act needs strengthening" and the bar should be set higher than six electors to call a parish poll ..." In contrast, many politicians -- see the fate of the Localism Bill -- are keen to restrict effective participation in public issues by the people who elect them.

Our organisation also wrote to the minister for community affairs urging that the parish poll rules should be re-written. Our letter is published on-line here http://iniref.wordpress.com/letter-to-communities-ministry-re-state-of-the-art-local-democracy/

We wrote " A major cause of low turn out is the poor design of the existing referendum procedure. It takes just a handful of residents to demand that a poll must be held. However, in order to ensure that there is strong public interest, enough to guarantee a reasonable turn out, a substantial proportion of the parish electorate should at an early stage become involved by being approached and persuaded to endorse the proposal. The ideal “hurdle” depends on the size of the community, larger units such as a town requiring a smaller percentage."

Reform of the parish poll received a set back when a whole section dealing with local democracy ("community empowerment") was struck out of the Localism Bill after attack by liberal-democrat peers and interventions by planning and business lobbyists hostile to stronger local democracy.

It is to be hoped that the people's right to instigate referendum in local government, and the parish poll, will soon be included in future reform legislation by the Con/Libdem coalition government which promised so much in this field.
--------------------------------------------------------
I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/



Lords and lobbies demolish democracy in Localism Bill

15th May 2012

Are you looking forward to getting together with some like-minded fellow-citizens to start up a local, district, town or city referendum? New rules for referendum were promised, to feature in the coalition's much touted Localism Act.

Well, forget it!

Many people will be angry to learn that a showpiece reform which was supposed to deliver "power to the people" has been drastically cut back.

FROM PARLIAMENT'S OWN WEB SITE, 14th May 2012 http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/localism.html

"Localism Act 2010-12  Royal Assent 15 November, 2011

Key areas

The provisions relating to councils include:

  • giving residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue"
-----------------------------------------

This statement at services.parliament.uk is now WRONG and the government has known for some months that it is wrong.

A section of the Localism Bill "giving residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue" (see detail below, 1) was removed by the government in late 2011 after objections by lobbyists and an attack by liberal "democrat" politicians in the House of Lords. Elected MPs in the House of Commons, apart from a tiny group, did not resist this serious setback to reform of local politics and democracy.

THE RESIDENTS' RIGHT TO "TO INSTIGATE LOCAL REFERENDUMS ON ANY LOCAL ISSUE"
DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE NEW LOCALISM ACT


Footnote
1. Features of the Localism Bill (December 2012) included:
– Citizens will be able to demand and obtain a referendum on any local issue "economic, social or environmental". One in twenty members of an electorate must endorse the referendum proposal.
– All levels of local government are to be involved, e.g. the Greater London Area, cities, towns, counties and districts.
– Electronic collection of endorsements can be used.


HOME | CAMPAIGN | 3-STEP-DD | JOIN | DONATE | BALLOT | INTRO | INFO