Advertise
-
Books
-
A poem for the day – Launching the Whaler Juan Peron
A Belfast epic, and one of my oldest poems, the opener of my first collection, Grub. The gist of the story was found in Moss & Hume’s Shipbuilders to the World: 125 Years of Harland and Wolff, Belfast, 1861-1986, which tells how Eva Peron was due to launch a huge whaling vessel in Belfast, built [...] read our review » -
Do Words Matter?: Book Review of Political Discourse and Conflict Resolution – Debating Peace in Northern Ireland
I share many of the concerns of Andy Pollak, whose recent post ‘My Response to the Slugger Begrudgers’ zeroed in on the ‘relentless flow of negativity’ of some Slugger commentators. Pollak’s post was largely concerned with the medium of the blog. Indeed, I think the anonymity of the online world encourages extreme discourse and allows [...] read our review »
-
“You can see Newton’s mind at work…”
To add to the open access treasure trove at the Royal Society, Cambridge University Library is putting online some of its collection of books, maps, manuscripts and journals. We have called the first phase of our work on the Cambridge Digital Library the Foundations Project, which runs from mid-2010 to mid-2013 and has been made possible [...] read our review »
-
Comment on Why referendums should be banned
on 15 December 2010 at 5:35 pm
Dewi wrote:
“On Latvia it’s the turnout provision that’s strange.
A 2008 Pensions reform referendum had 96% approval but only 38% turnout…I’m not sure that that’s fair.”
You are right. A high participation hurdle can be a problem in at least two ways. Firstly, it may be unrealistic because turnout for recent (candidate) elections has been even lower. Secondly, the hurdle can allow a strong minority to “sabotage” a referendum proposal by calling for their supporters to boycott the ballot. This has happened often in Italy where the clear will of a large majority has been blocked. There, for the national law-repeal referendum (abrogative), a fifty percent turnout is required.
Go to comment
Comment on Why referendums should be banned
on 15 December 2010 at 4:03 pm
The Localism Bill introduced this week contains some cautious moves towards citizen-led democracy. Some positive features are:
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.
—————
A critique of citizens’ democracy in the Localism Bill may be found here: Localism Bill and Direct Democracy: Comments please and also at our blog
Go to comment
Comment on Why referendums should be banned
on 13 December 2010 at 12:19 pm
Some of your antipathy is directed towards “authority plebiscites”, referenda imposed “from above”. Often these have been abused and in general do little to improve the quality of governance and democracy. See for instance the UK referendum about Europe (1975) or the (non-) referendum an the EU constitution.
Most serious advocates of direct democracy do not recommend “authority plebiscites” but propose to blend some citizen-led procedures with the prevailing system of parties, parliaments and councils. As a way to govern ourselves, just having a vote once every five or so years is not very effective. Many public issues, some major, are omitted from election campaigns and manifestos. When new events and circumstances crop up, the “demos”, the electorate should — many argue — possess the ability to intervene effectively in public policy both at local and state levels. The citizens’ proposition enables good ideas to be debated and go to referendum; the veto-referendum allows bad or unwanted government policy to be blocked.
See more about citizen-led democracy at http://www.iniref.org/
Go to comment