Supporters would argue that referendums should be used in the UK. This is for many reasons, such as allowing the public to have control over decision making. In doing so, making that decision is far more representative because it would be the popular choice, therefore making it far more legitimate. Also, because they’re secret ballots it means the voters can be non-partisan furthermore granting the final outcome to be a more justifiable choice due to f the vast amount of voters. In addition, referendums are a form of direct democracy, consequently giving the public control over decision making.
Representative democracy has been able to flourish in recent years as elected individuals who make decisions are arguably more knowledgeable than the electorate themselves. There is a greater sense of accountability to elected individuals to the public and more responsibility taken by those in power to protect the interests of the people by limiting the power of the government. Arguably, the question posed is of popular interest today as Britain has been described as a largely consultative democracy. A representative democracy is advantageous compared to a direct democracy as elected MPs are of sufficient educational backgrounds and are more superior in knowledge at making the most effective decisions. Arguably the elected MPs are the reason that a representative democracy flourishes with the elected MPs superseding the knowledge of the public.
This would encourage public involvement in politics and act as an improvement to our democratic society. If people know their rights and freedoms and understand how the government works it would dissolve the problem of political ignorance and apathy. This argument shows that a codified constitution is of greater benefit than an uncodified constitution because it will lessen political apathy, however, one could argue, how much better of an understanding would the public have of politics if the constitution was codified than if it was uncodified? Our basic rights and freedoms are common knowledge, and our human rights are codified as they are part of the EU which has a written constitution. Manifesto’s for political parties, such as Labour, are also written and campaign projects clearly set out
Referendums were used this way in the 1998 London referendum on whether to adopt an elected mayor. Using referendums in these ways allows for participation from the people, therefore wider use of them could be said to increase legitimacy since the decisions are made by the people instead of by a government which may have had less public support. Referendums are a form of direct democracy, used besides the UKs
Conservatives argue that if a society is organic, there will be a 'natural aristocracy' (Burke). This is the idea that some people are born with the talents and abilities to lead society, while others do not. These people will lead and shape society. This could be said to lead to a natural inequality. However, conservatives argue that this is fair, as those who shoulder mores responsibility in society should be repaid more in terms of wealth than someone with less responsibility.
The Uk judiciary has different methods that provide the protection of civil liberties within britain. However, there are also different drawbacks that make these protections difficult in the face of parliamentay pressure. The European convention on Human Rights Act 1998 has effectivley provided a stable document that reassures and states the rights of all citizens over Britain. Since this act has been passed, judges have been able to rule and make more effective decisions. This is because this act has persuaded judges to rule more confidentally rather than having to follow instructions of the common law e.g precedents.
First we will take a look at the positive outcomes for citizens and society as a whole if this type of program was set up. First citizens would have more say in the process of laws being decided and may actually help in the process since many government officials do not have the time or resources to go over every page in the laws they are reviewing or signing in. Also citizens would have more control over something they may completely disagree with, for example the recent decisions to insert more stimulus money towards the economy would more strongly be rejected by a citizen based vote than a Democratic majority based Congress. Also a system like this would bring our system closer to a federalist based system on which our founders wanted our society to be and would take away some control of our government branches and would give states even more say in crucial decision making processes. This would make it much more difficult for governments to grow and enact more control over its citizen's daily lives, issues and
Another problem was that even though there are anti-discrimination policies, a slight differential treatment towards minorities is still present. Employers expect and demand more input from minority groups and that is why people are hesitant to leave their workplace to cast a vote (Rivers, 2012). An outside source looks at voting from a different perspective. An interestingly opposing statistic is that minority groups with higher education and social status take the time to participate, as voting is very important to them. They want to take part in the choice of their government because it took so long and so much effort for them to receive the equal rights and abilities to enjoy democracy (Speel, 2010).
Democracy may be defined as a political system in which people exercise power over the decisions which affect their lives. In the case of the UK, there is much evidence to support the claim that it is democratic, but there are features which undermine this claim and this essay will attempt to examine the evidence. One of the strongest arguments in support of the claim that the UK is a genuine democracy is that we have universal adult suffrage, which means that all UK citizens aged 18 or above have the right to vote for representatives to make decisions on their behalf. In addition, democracy is also strengthened by the fact that the electorate can choose representatives at local, regional, national and international (EU Parliament) levels. In addition, the elections are held at regular intervals, which ensures that the representatives are accountable to the electorate.
They believe that the political system is democratic therefore education is needed to prepare people for citizenship. They believe that through this people have a better understanding of the political system therefore they are more able to exercise their voting rights wisely at election time. 4) How would Marxist explain the purpose of education? Marxists believes that the purpose of education seems to have a beneficial role only for certain groups. The reason why they believe this is because the look at the society in terms of 2 groups (powerful and less powerful groups).