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.
This can slow down the political process immensely, and as the government has a mandate to put through such legislation, pressure groups become undemocratic and start to undermine the democratic process. One last reason why pressure groups undermine democracy is the fact that they themselves may be undemocratic, and the leaders of these groups may not truly represent the views of their leaders. This undermines the whole point of pressure groups groups and thus can be seen as the 'politics of self-interest' and can present the public with overbiased and false information. Overall however, pressure groups are more likely to help the democratic process rather than hinder it, as they advance and improve political participation, and as participation is a vital part of democracy, pressure groups are an important part of the UK's democracy. While pressure groups may have unbalanced influence due to varying methods and funds, they are generally good at being a channel of representation between the people and the government, keeping the government in touch with the people.
BENTHAM developed the notion of democracy as a form protection for the individual into a case for universal suffrage. Utilitarian’s have argued that individuals will vote so as to advance or defend their interest. Bentham believed that universal suffrage is the only way of promoting the greatest happiness for the greatest number. However, liberals also have an ambivalent view of democracy. Liberalism places great stress on the protection of individual’s rights while democracy emphasise on collective control.
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
This is criticised because the current political party in power have the ability to make their own decisions for the UK before listening to what the people want. This then becomes a problem because they may make changes that the majority of the population will not agree with. However, near to the next election they may decide to listen to people as they want them to vote for them (the current political party in power) during the next election. Secondly, the UK has a hereditary monarchy and a house of lords, both which are not elected. This contradicts a democratic society and is seen as a dictatorship because elections are the cornerstone of a democracy.
A voter could switch from voting for the Conservatives to vote for the Labour Party at the next election because they decide according to single issues. In general the public today is not really aligned to parties anymore. I would say that party allegiance is something which is nearly vanished in Britain’s voting behavior. There are still groups which are strongly related to one or the other party but that is not as common as was in the 50s and 60s. The important things today are which party has at the moment the right promises for the single voter and which party is better in delivering policy goals.
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.
This was most likely why the British government did not support the plan, as it would have given the colonists even more power to self govern, and would have allowed the Colonies to have more power of taxation during a time where Britain was beginning to levy more taxes on them. However, had
Firstly, a codified constitution would clarify the nature of the political system to citizens of the state. Most British citizens do not understand the concept of the constitution, nor what the UK constitution entails. It is therefore an argument that having a codified constitution would raise public awareness and support for the government would grow. It would also enable the public and people in government to view the constitution whenever necessary for matters such as court cases, etc. This would encourage public involvement in politics and act as an improvement to our democratic society.
So one interesting possibility for Electoral College reform is to educate the voters more clearly and involve them in the process earlier on. While the theory of this is good, it would be difficult to implement since much of the voting population currently feels disenfranchised. This proposal also does note address the problems of two-party