Copenhagen showed up the need for new social change strategies
I&R ~ GB
protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to produce
adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
initiative or law proposal. Detail about how this works may be found via
http://campaignfordemocracy.org.uk/directdemocracyexamples/
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rodmell/
http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html
http://www.iniref.org/carta.htm election campaign call
Companies and corporations can be directed and controlled by citizens'
initiative and referendum (I and R).
To adapt to citizen-led democracy, experts and concerned groups must
modify their tactics in order to inform and appeal directly to the
electorate.
Pro-environmental law has been made by I and R. An example from Europe
is The Alpine Initiative, well recorded in a video to be found via
http://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
I&R ~ GB
Robert Peffers
"I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
news:7pc3ni...@mid.uni-berlin.de...
Don't you think there are enough bloody idiots trying to run the UK already?
Just look at today's happenings - The three main Westminster parties agree
to have a face to face TV debate.
This is obviously only really applicable to England as the other three
countries have a very different system of politics and the main parties in
these countries are not the three main Westminster parties. In Scotland, in
particular, the latest opinion poll shows that the SNP are the leading
contenders for the Westminster election. The Tory Party are not even in the
first 5 as they only have a single Westminster MP. Yet there they are to be
shown on TV along with Labour and the Lib/Dems as the main parties. Now,
who, in their right mind, would really claim that Nick Clegg has the
slightest chance of leading the next Westminster government?
Yet you want to give Joe Public the right to dictate how the country is run
at nut & Bolt level?
If the three party leaders at the head of the top parties are making an arse
of running the country what chance has Joe Public got of doing a better job?
There are enough idiots in politics already.
--
Auld Bob
I&R ~ GB
Please dinny overlook that we propose PARTIAL direct democracy. The
parties and parliaments remain in place but that system is enhanced by
the citizens' proposition ("initiative") plus the optional veto
plebiscite. Sure, this keeps the politicians on their toes, and that is
good.
The people are not too stupid to select and throw out candidates, Bob,
and the elected candidates are supposed to decide on policy and
government as a whole.
fitlike min
> How can governments be made to act responsibly? Campaigning, lobbying,
> protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to produce
> adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
> parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
>
> Companies and corporations can be directed and controlled by citizens'
> initiative and referendum (I and R).
>
> To adapt to citizen-led democracy, experts and concerned groups must
> modify their tactics in order to inform and appeal directly to the
> electorate.
>
> Pro-environmental law has been made by I and R. An example from Europe
> is The Alpine Initiative, well recorded in a video to be found viahttp://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
>
> I&R ~ GB
Copenhagen was a load of shite. The Chinese realised this but are too
polite to admit it. Thank God for them at least.
If you want to have your country run by a bunch of long haired hippies
then you would be in favour of Copenhagen.
The con of the century.
F.
Robert Peffers
"I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
the Scottish Government and government attention is mandatory.After a
lifetime of knocking doors during election campaigns I know well the level
of political awareness among the general public. It is quite unbelievably
low with most people's grasp of the subject coloured by the same sort of
blind belief that drives the World's belief in God. In other words what they
believe is rock solid but there is not a shred of evidence to back up their
belief.
--
Auld Bob
Nkosi (ama-ecosse)
> On Dec 23, 3:38 am, I&R ~ GB <infoT...@OUTiniref.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > How can governments be made to act responsibly? Campaigning, lobbying,
> > protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to produce
> > adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
> > parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
>
> > Companies and corporations can be directed and controlled by citizens'
> > initiative and referendum (I and R).
>
> > To adapt to citizen-led democracy, experts and concerned groups must
> > modify their tactics in order to inform and appeal directly to the
> > electorate.
>
> > Pro-environmental law has been made by I and R. An example from Europe
> > is The Alpine Initiative, well recorded in a video to be found viahttp://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
>
> > I&R ~ GB
>
> Copenhagen was a load of shite. The Chinese realised this but are too
> polite to admit it. Thank God for them at least.
> If you want to have your country run by a bunch of long haired hippies
> then you would be in favour of Copenhagen.
> The con of the century.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I am a long haired hippie biker petrol head who believes global
warming is a farce and only instituted to allow governments to tax us
with new taxes as they realise we are a little pissed with increasing
amount of the old taxes.
Nkosi
Eunometic
> "I&R ~ GB" <infoT...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in messagenews:7pc3ni...@mid.uni-berlin.de...
>
>
>
> > How can governments be made to act responsibly? Campaigning, lobbying,
> > protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to produce
> > adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
> > parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
> > initiative or law proposal. Detail about how this works may be found via
> >http://campaignfordemocracy.org.uk/directdemocracyexamples/
> >http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rodmell/
> >http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html
>
> > Companies and corporations can be directed and controlled by citizens'
> > initiative and referendum (I and R).
>
> > To adapt to citizen-led democracy, experts and concerned groups must
> > modify their tactics in order to inform and appeal directly to the
> > electorate.
>
> > Pro-environmental law has been made by I and R. An example from Europe is
> > The Alpine Initiative, well recorded in a video to be found via
> >http://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
>
> > I&R ~ GB
>
> Don't you think there are enough bloody idiots trying to run the UK already?
> Just look at today's happenings - The three main Westminster parties agree
> to have a face to face TV debate.
> This is obviously only really applicable to England as the other three
> countries have a very different system of politics and the main parties in
> these countries are not the three main Westminster parties. In Scotland, in
> particular, the latest opinion poll shows that the SNP are the leading
> contenders for the Westminster election. The Tory Party are not even in the
> first 5 as they only have a single Westminster MP. Yet there they are to be
> shown on TV along with Labour and the Lib/Dems as the main parties. Now,
> who, in their right mind, would really claim that Nick Clegg has the
> slightest chance of leading the next Westminster government?
>
> Yet you want to give Joe Public the right to dictate how the country is run
> at nut & Bolt level?
Like the Swiss ban on minarets.
The lunar left would see its ideas and policies crushed by plebescite
peoples democracy which is why leftist governments always end up
either totalitarian or using the same easily manipulated system of
representational Government as other elites.
> If the three party leaders at the head of the top parties are making an arse
> of running the country what chance has Joe Public got of doing a better job?
Joe public would do an infinetly better job than some party hack who
spends much of his time taking party donations and getting lobbied and
spin doctoring hidden agendas.
Switzerland is better run than most countries.
> There are enough idiots in politics already.
There are enough idiots on the internet yet i don't see you leaving
it.
fitlike min
wrote:
> On 22 Dec, 19:40, fitlike min <killwh...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 23, 3:38 am, I&R ~ GB <infoT...@OUTiniref.org> wrote:
>
> > > How can governments be made to act responsibly? Campaigning, lobbying,
> > > protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to produce
> > > adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
> > > parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
>
> > > Companies and corporations can be directed and controlled by citizens'
> > > initiative and referendum (I and R).
>
> > > To adapt to citizen-led democracy, experts and concerned groups must
> > > modify their tactics in order to inform and appeal directly to the
> > > electorate.
>
> > > Pro-environmental law has been made by I and R. An example from Europe
> > > is The Alpine Initiative, well recorded in a video to be found viahttp://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
>
> > > I&R ~ GB
>
> > Copenhagen was a load of shite. The Chinese realised this but are too
> > polite to admit it. Thank God for them at least.
> > If you want to have your country run by a bunch of long haired hippies
> > then you would be in favour of Copenhagen.
> > The con of the century.
>
> > F.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I am a long haired hippie biker petrol head who believes global
> warming is a farce and only instituted to allow governments to tax us
> with new taxes as they realise we are a little pissed with increasing
> amount of the old taxes.
>
> Nkosi
My apologies to you in that case..
Stan de SD
> How can governments be made to act responsibly? Campaigning, lobbying,
> protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to produce
> adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
> parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
>
> Companies and corporations can be directed and controlled by citizens'
> initiative and referendum (I and R).
>
> To adapt to citizen-led democracy, experts and concerned groups must
> modify their tactics in order to inform and appeal directly to the
> electorate.
Maybe the electorate has already realized that anthropogenic global
warming is a farce, and they are no longer buying into the mass
hysteria driven by manipulated data that is intended to steal their
freedoms and condemn them to living like third-worlders?
Robert Peffers
"Eunometic" <euno...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:c9bb009e-3799-4397...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
Your own level of logic demonstrates my point far better than I ever could.
Why would my leaving the internet make the slightest difference?
I'm not leaving this country either, nor am I leaving the UK.
I'm not stopping voting either, so just how does your strange implication
about leaving the internet due to idiots, like you, change the fact that
there are lots of idiots about - everywhere?
I just do not want the idiots getting a bigger legal right to enforce their
views upon the running of the UK.
If there were no other reason the simple fact that the general public do
strange things when prompted by a few people for their own benefit would be
enough.
Let me point out a few truths for you.
We have a constant stream of, "Experts", on the TV who are all used by the
powers that be to influence the way people spend their hard earned cash, (or
even worse use there not so hard earned credit cards).
It the Advertisements were not enough the stream of cheaply made, "Expert
Programmes", makes up for it.
There are less people who actually cook these days yet the TV often has wall
to wall celebrity chefs.
We are in a deep financial depression and we have many hours of TV programs
devoted to property buying and renovating.
We have fashion, "Experts", telling us how we should dress, decorate our
homes, what books to read, what music to listen to and what computer games
we should play.
What about the on-line campaign that saw off the TV programme winner's
Christmas number 1?
As long as Joe and Josie Public can be made to dance to such people's
instructions there is little hope of them running the country for the best.
Do you think all the companies who spend billions on adverts don't know what
they are doing?
What they are doing is manipulating Joe & Josie Public for profit.
--
Auld Bob
I&Rgb
Petition is by no means equivalent to or a substitute for "the
initiative". Petition is a way of asking or begging the ruler or
authorities. The ruler is not obliged to take any notice. The citizens'
initiative enables the people to govern their own affairs. A citizens'
proposal endorsed by an agreed large number of people cannot be rejected
by the authorities without a decision (plebiscite, referendum) of the
whole electorate. More detail about citizen-led democracy via web site
below.
I&Rgb
I&R ~ GB <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote:
>> How can governments be made to act responsibly? Campaigning, lobbying,
>> protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to produce
>> adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
>> parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
>> initiative or law proposal.
>
> down to the failure to obtain agreement amongst governments who's
> people's had different agendas?
Citizen-led direct democracy such as "initiative and referendum" can be
used at all levels of governance. Practically speaking, the line in
international affairs of a country can by set by referendum of that
country, mandating politicians. For example, this happened in Italy via
people's law petition in order to (successfully) change European Union
policy.
> Or are you just bandwagon jumping for PR purposes?
We take examples as they pop up, to show how CDD can work. In order to
achieve reform we need help, please join or donate to support the
campaign, via link below.
Robert Peffers
"I&Rgb" <in...@iniref.org> wrote in message
news:7psahv...@mid.uni-berlin.de...
Yes they do.
Look it the Holyrood model.
> The citizens'
> initiative enables the people to govern their own affairs. A citizens'
> proposal endorsed by an agreed large number of people cannot be rejected
> by the authorities without a decision (plebiscite, referendum) of the
> whole electorate. More detail about citizen-led democracy via web site
> below.
>
> I&R ~ GB
> http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html
--
Auld Bob
>
>
>
>
>
I&R ~ GB
They do take notice? Point here is that the ruler (parliament,
government) is not OBLIGED to take notice. A petition is only a
petition, a request, begging. In Scotland or anywhere else. In contrast
the citizens' initiative can be a law-proposal or veto. It expresses the
sovereign power of the electorate and can lead to a legally binding
decision.
Definitions of initiative and referendum are at
http://www.iniref.org/about.html
I&R ~ GB
I&R ~ GB
> I&Rgb <in...@iniref.org> wrote in news:7psaim...@mid.uni-berlin.de:
>
>> soupdragon wrote:
>> I&R ~ GB <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote:
>>>> How can governments be made to act responsibly? Campaigning,
> lobbying,
>>>> protesting and demonstrating, while necessary are unlikely to
> produce
>>>> adequate policy and action. An additional tool, which can force
>>>> parliaments and governments to change direction is the citizens'
>>>> initiative or law proposal.
>>> So explain how this would work when the failure of Copenhagen was
>>> down to the failure to obtain agreement amongst governments who's
>>> people's had different agendas?
>> Citizen-led direct democracy such as "initiative and referendum" can
> be
>> used at all levels of governance. Practically speaking, the line in
>> international affairs of a country can by set by referendum of that
>> country, mandating politicians. For example, this happened in Italy
> via
>> people's law petition in order to (successfully) change European Union
>> policy.
>
> instead, answered a question I didn't ask.
>
>>> Or are you just bandwagon jumping for PR purposes?
>> We take examples as they pop up, to show how CDD can work.
>> Or are you just bandwagon jumping for PR purposes?
>
> We take examples as they pop up, to show how CDD can work. In order to
> achieve reform we need help, please join or donate to support the
> campaign, via link below.
>
> I&R ~ GB
> http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html
>
Your question "how this would work when the failure of Copenhagen was
>>> down to the failure to obtain agreement amongst governments" is
hypothetical because we in UK and countries do NOT have any citizen-led
direct democracy (CDD) to speak of. CDD can indeed influence or steer
international policy. For instance, if UK had changed its environment
policies before then its position could have been stronger in
Copenhagen. For How To Do It see the Alpine Initiative: video via
Robert Peffers
"I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
system?
If any petition is submitted it must be considered. If it meets the
conditions it must be heeded.
Let's be honest here, Any system where the parliament does not have the
right to reject some of the daft things certain people/groups would attempt
to force through would be anarchy.
Abortion lobby: We want abortion for all.
Anti-abortion: No abortion for anyone.
Hanging lobby: Hang every guilty person.
Anti-hanging: Hang no one.
Racists lobby: No immigrants.
Anti-racist: Free open borders.
Nuclear lobby: More and bigger deterrent.
anti-nuclear: no deterrent.
Any one daft enough to think Joe & Josie Public can run the country is mad.
Just look at the protest/anti-protest situation on our streets.
The extreme right wing have a march and the anti-group march too. The police
then try to keep them apart and people die or are injured.
Only mad people would put the power to force through extreme policy in the
hands of the general public.
Is it not proof enough that we have suicidal bombers, people who run amok
with guns and extreme marchers on the streets of Britain without giving such
people a right to run the country.
--
Auld Bob
I&R ~ GB
> I&R ~ GB <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in news:7q1ir0...@mid.uni-
> berlin.de:
>>>>> down to the failure to obtain agreement amongst governments" is
>> hypothetical because we in UK and countries do NOT have any citizen-
> led
>> direct democracy (CDD) to speak of.
>
> deliver any different a result from that achieved.
>
>> CDD can indeed influence or steer
>> international policy. For instance, if UK had changed its environment
>> policies before then its position could have been stronger in
>> Copenhagen.
>
> think would have allowed Britain to influence or steer international
> policies any better than it did in the face of considerable 3rd World
> opposition to the proposals? Do you actually know what Capenhagen was
> about? Or are you suggesting gun-boat diplomacy would have worked
> better?
Your question "how this would work when the failure of Copenhagen was
>>> down to the failure to obtain agreement amongst governments" is
hypothetical because we in UK and countries do NOT have any citizen-led
direct democracy (CDD) to speak of. CDD can indeed influence or steer
international policy. For instance, if UK had changed its environment
policies before then its position could have been stronger in
Copenhagen. For How To Do It see the Alpine Initiative: video via
http://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
I&R ~ GB is a campaign for democracy reform. We are independent of
political parties and do not advocate particular policies. See
introduction via http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html
I&R ~ GB
Robert Peffers
"I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
news:7q6dvl...@mid.uni-berlin.de...
Your views seem to be against anything on the political spectrum that is to
the right of Genghis Khan.
Furthermore, you still have not explained who will be the people to draw up
this, "independent", written document?
--
Auld Bob
I&R ~ GB
question "how this would work when the failure of Copenhagen was
>>>>> down to the failure to obtain agreement amongst governments" is
>> hypothetical because we in UK and countries do NOT have any citizen-led
>> direct democracy (CDD) to speak of. CDD can indeed influence or steer
>> international policy. For instance, if UK had changed its environment
>> policies before then its position could have been stronger in Copenhagen.
>> For How To Do It see the Alpine Initiative: video via
>> http://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
>>
>> I&R ~ GB is a campaign for democracy reform. We are independent of
>> political parties and do not advocate particular policies. See
>> introduction via http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html
>>
>> I&R ~ GB
>>
>>
>>
>>
> You could have fooled me that you were independent of parties.
> Your views seem to be against anything on the political spectrum that is to
> the right of Genghis Khan.
> Furthermore, you still have not explained who will be the people to draw up
> this, "independent", written document?
Auld Bob appears to refer to an exchange with Aracari not with us.
Regarding constitutional reform and democracy see our thoughts in a
piece entitled "Citizen-led democracy is essential for sustainable
constitutional reform" at http://www.iniref.org/latest.html
Further, Auld Bob has omitted to reply in the matter of petition versus
citizen-led democracy, such as initiative and referendum: See more at
http://www.iniref.org/steps.html
I&R ~ GB
Robert Peffers
"soupdragon" <m...@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CF46E926...@62.141.42.83...
> "Robert Peffers" <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote in
> news:vYydnUiN-NnwtKPW...@bt.com:
>
>>
>> "I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
>> news:7q6dvl...@mid.uni-berlin.de...
>>> soupdragon wrote:
>>>> I&R ~ GB <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in
>>>> news:7q1ir0...@mid.uni- berlin.de:
>
> put up 4 each and ask the public to phone in and vote for their
> favourite.
>
> Happy New year..
Cheers!
I make a point of switching channels if the show features celebs, reality TV
or features Russell Brand or Wossie.
--
Auld Bob
Robert Peffers
> I&R ~ GB <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in
>
>> Robert Peffers wrote:
>> question "how this would work when the failure of Copenhagen was
>>>>>>> down to the failure to obtain agreement amongst governments" is
>>>> hypothetical because we in UK and countries do NOT have any
>>>> citizen-led direct democracy (CDD) to speak of. CDD can indeed
>>>> influence or steer international policy. For instance, if UK had
>>>> changed its environment policies before then its position could have
>>>> been stronger in Copenhagen. For How To Do It see the Alpine
>>>> Initiative: video via http://www.iniref.org/alpine.html
>>>>
>>>> I&R ~ GB is a campaign for democracy reform. We are independent of
>>>> political parties and do not advocate particular policies. See
>>>> introduction via http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html
>>>>
>>>> I&R ~ GB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You could have fooled me that you were independent of parties.
>>> Your views seem to be against anything on the political spectrum that
>>> is to the right of Genghis Khan.
>>> Furthermore, you still have not explained who will be the people to
>>> draw up this, "independent", written document?
>>
>> Auld Bob appears to refer to an exchange with Aracari not with us.
>
> where you failed to answer any of the points put.
>
>> Regarding constitutional reform and democracy see our thoughts in a
>> piece entitled "Citizen-led democracy is essential for sustainable
>> constitutional reform" at http://www.iniref.org/latest.html
>>
>> Further, Auld Bob has omitted to reply in the matter of petition
>> versus citizen-led democracy, such as initiative and referendum: See
>> more at http://www.iniref.org/steps.html
>
> its place a standard cut-and-paste that bears no relation to the
> exchange has been stuck up?
>
Nah! I have replied several times and given citations to the petition system
as used by the Scottish parliament.
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/publicInfo/htsapp/index.htm
Seems they don't want to know.
However, the Scottish Parliament is head & shoulders in the way it does its
business. Little pomp & circumstance, no piddling around division lobbies
and electronic voting from the floor of the house and instant counts.
--
Auld Bob
I&R ~ GB
Parliament and political parties = Indirect ("representative")
democracy. We at I&R ~ GB propose to add in elements of (real) democracy
in which the electorate can select and decide on public issues and veto
government. A petition is only a petition, a request, begging. In
Scotland or anywhere else. The citizens' initiative can be a
law-proposal or veto. It expresses the sovereign power of the electorate
and can lead to a legally binding decision.
Definitions of initiative and referendum are at
http://www.iniref.org/about.html
Plan of campaign via http://www.iniref.org/
I&R ~ GB
Robert Peffers
"I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
news:7qcgdn...@mid.uni-berlin.de...
After all I seem to have spent long hours knocking doors during election
campaigns and have a bit of a problem with giving everyone the chance of
having a direct say.
--
Auld Bob
I&R ~ GB
not to vote in elections (for politicians). Direct democracy thematises
one or a few issues at a time, provides information about pros and cons
and gives people a sense of taking part in public life in a meaningful
way. This all leads to greater interest and knowledge -- admittedly it
would take some years in GB and countries.
Robert Peffers
"I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
average person id 365 days in the year. We have the Parliament Channel, 24/7
news channels and newscasts on almost every channel both Radio and TV. Just
how many of those Joe & Josie Publics do you think will have left one of
these channels to answer the knock?
Not only do the general public not watch these services but they swap
channels as soon as a political broadcast comes on. They do not know and
they do not want to know. I've been in conflict with a person, on another
group, who thinks he is an expert. Yet he is lost when it comes to party
politics. He is only loyal to one party and, in his view, no other could
ever be right on any subject. I've never stated my own party of choice and
he thus bases his opinions of what I support on the basis of his own
loyalty. Within the same post he has classed me as both an extreme left-wing
Socialist Workers Party supporter and a Nazi, (Nationalsozialist), who were,
of course, fascist and thus extreme right-wing. When I laughed at him he
replied that it was the same thing. I laughed even more when his chosen
party leader made the NHS his top priority and thus showed the party was a
socialist party as most UK parties are. I wonder how many rock solid party
supporters have said to me, "The ********* party is the working man's
party", "or, "The *********", is the party of business". Yet anyone with
open eyes can see there is nothing between the two main parties and both are
more or less centrist. As long as non-thinkers show such stupid party
loyalty and who are thus blinded to the truth it is a very dangerous move to
give them a direct affect upon the running of the country.
--
Auld Bob
I&R ~ GB
> "I&R ~ GB" <info...@OUTiniref.org> wrote in message
You're looking mainly at political parties. Only a very small part of
the electorates are party members. There is widespread public
estrangement from politicians. If you ask people in GB+NI what they
think about reforming our democracy you get replies like the following
(from real people real replies):
I would like to have the opportunity to vote on issues that I feel
strongly about. ... why not let the people themselves vote on policies?
Can we not be trusted? A party�s policies frequently seem to change
during the course of a parliamentary term so why should I vote for a
person belonging to a party and not be sure that he will not carry out
his election pledges? What about all the issues that were not mentioned
during the elections? How will I know at the time of voting that my
representative will act in my best interests?
Yes, there should be more referenda. Of course the political
apparatchiks will denigrate this as leading to populist policies, but in
these days of good communications the whole raison d�etre of the MP as
representative is undermined .
Yes. Events evolve and change by the week/day. Elections every x years
assume a snapshot in time of public opinion, which may have been
appropriate 100 years ago ? not today.
We sent representatives to a London Parliament by horse and carriage and
trusted them to act in our best interests. Nowadays with instantaneous
communication why do we need to continue this archaic practice? Why
can�t I vote for issues that I have views about? What political
candidate or political party can I vote for with the certain knowledge
that my own values, concerns, ideas will be represented? Political
parties do not always deliver on their promises or election manifestos
and anyway the differences between the main political parties seem to be
in name only.
If one argues that some issues may not attract sufficient numbers of
them to vote then we need only to look at voting statistics in the
Houses of Parliament. No parliamentarian is sufficiently interested or
knowledgeable on every issue so rather than allowing them to be
persuaded by their party whips on how to vote, why not allow the
population to vote?
I do not trust politicians to vote for what they promise in their
election manifesto. I also realise that no politician or political party
shares all the same views as myself. I want to vote on issues that
affect me and that I am interested in. I would prefer to vote for issues
not for people or parties. I can represent myself and my family and my
community. Why should I ask a stranger to do it for me?
It would certainly help me to feel that my little vote is making a
difference, as a general or council election can seem to encompass such
huge issues that you feel you are a drop in the ocean. Also, I think
less and less people have faith in just one party as they may agree with
certain issues from one and others from another. It seems silly to me
that all our democracy is voting in someone who then takes it from there
and makes all the decisions.
It would be more democratic to have more referenda and opportunities to
vote on issues and not just parties. I think people feel more strongly
about specific issues rather than parties nowadays anyway.
---------
Remark: Opinion surveys from the 1990s onwards have repeatedly shown
that a large majority of adults support the above points of view.
Bob, you are in a tiny minority.
I&R ~ GB
http://www.iniref.org/