Monday 28 September 2015

Should the UK use more Referendums?


Should the UK use more referendums? 

 Referendums provide a way for the public to have a direct influence on the legislative process. They are a perfect example of direct democracy in modern society, as citizens of the UK vote on the issue, instead of the Members of Parliament (MP's) who are elected by their constituencies.
In the past, Referendums have faced issues such as Scotland's Independence, the use of alternative voting for general elections in the UK and whether there should be a Mayor of London of Greater London Authority.
Unsurprisingly,the large majority of the population are all for the more common use of referendums - people love having their voice heard and being able to get directly involved in politics, which can also be seen by the increase of pressure group membership and the increase in smaller party membership. 
Nonetheless, others should find the regular use of referendums tedious and platitudinous, especially if used every week. This also arises the issue of, of the UK was to have more referendums, how would the country decide what to have a referendum on?
 Would we have a referendum to decide what to have a referendum on? Would we have a referendum to have a referendum to decide whether or not we want a referendum? 

Furthermore, general elections in the UK result in a pretty disappointing turnout, with around 65% in the most recent elections, so how can we assume that referendums would have the same or even lower, turnout? Either way, this isn't representative of the citizens, so decisions may be made as a result of a referendum, but this result does not reflect how the people feel about the issue. 
However, with an increased use of referendums, it may also educate the public and motivate them to become more familiar with the UK Political system and politics in general, so this way actually increase voter turnout. 

As seen with the Scottish Referendum, both sides of the campaign were huge, especially the 'Better Together' campaign. The referendum took around £13.3m to be held, and nonetheless, nothing changed as a result of it. Therefore, this may be seen as a huge waste of money, as nothing changed, despite  £13.3m being spent. 

Referendums can also help make a decision when there is a division in Government, for example, the Conservative Party are internally divided on the issue of EU Membership, so by holding a referendum, it settles inter party disputes.   However, some may see this as Politicians avoiding having to decide on difficult decisions, and avoiding taking responsibility fort them. Nonetheless, no matter the results of a referendum (of which isn't binding) the Government doesn't have to go through with the decision, so ultimately the PM still has to make a decision on the issue on hand.

Words and language of the question may also be biased in a referendum, so the question has to go through many checks to reduce bias as much as possible. The media may also be bias, and attempt to change the public's personal opinion on the topic through 'propaganda' of such. The result of the referendum may also be affected by the party in Government at the time - for example, many blamed that the unsuccessful result of the AV referendum was down to the Liberal Democrats being unpopular, and the Conservatives being too dominate in Parliament. 

Lastly, a constant use of referendums would strengthen our democracy, by allowing the public to speak for themselves, instead of through a single MP.  This highlights the fact that Government should be 'by the people', as well as 'for the people' and 'of the people.' 

To conclude, a use of referendums would continue to strengthen our democracy by including more direct democracy, and may even increase political turnout and interest, but a remaining issue would be how to decide on what issues to have a referendum on, and an increased use of referendums may also increase political apathy.