current systems of representative and direct democracy 1.1

what is direct democracy?

• system where decisions are made by the public

• opinions are not channelled through politicians and other representatives

• type of democracy is consultive + no distinction or differentiation between citizens and the government

what is representative democracy?

• citizens vote for a politician in the hope that they make decisions on their behalf, where further mediation takes place in parliament

Who keeps sovereignty in a representative democracy?

• The voters

  • decide whether or not to renew the mandate of their representatives

What model is representative democracy based on?

• Delegate model - Edmund Burke - principle - elected politicians should represent the interests of their constituents, no matter their own political opinions
  - however, are expected to employ attributes of the trustee/representative model - use their own political education to make the best possible decisions

What are the layers of representation in UK democracy?

• Westminster - Commons made up - 650 MPs - represent constituents

• Devolved assembles in Scotland, Wales and NI represent the particular country

• Elected mayors and local councils represent smaller section of the public

advantages of direct democracy

• Citizens actively make policies – does not go through others

• Equality - no differentiation in importance of opinion, whether it is a politician or a citizen

• only form of pure democracy

• everyone is heard

disadvantages of direct democracy

• everyone has to be constantly involved and up to date with the latest politics

• impractical - modern day society- time consuming

• unlikely one decision pleasing everyone involved can be reached

• only achievable in small communities

examples of when direct democracy is used

referendums, electronic petitions, recall of MPs

advantages of representative democracy

• decisions mediated- high likelihood of pleasing the majority

• less time consuming

• allows people with experience in discussed field

  • e.g., expert politicians, scrutiny of HOC and HOL

• enables citizens - elect politicians who feel share political views with

• rights protected

• ensures accountability - representatives know they will not get re-elected if do not fulfil their role

disadvantages of representative democracy

• public yields no direct power

• room for corruption and bias in politicians’ decisions

• due to mediation process, many peoples’ vote - disregarded

• elitist

• houses of parliament not diverse in gender

• some MPs disengaged from public

  • e.g., Tory MP Remainer even though constituency voted Leave

    • Dominic Grieve - Beaconsfield

  • e.g., second jobs - conflict of interest

    • George Osborne editor of Evening Standard while MP

• Westminster not actually representative

  • Tory and Labour dominates 80.7%

stat and counter for number of people that read news every day

• 2020 - 38%

• However, RD ensures politicians make relevant decisions in terms of experience and interest

  • 2018 - 85% cabinet - Russell Group

stat and counter for people in the UK have social media – allows for a modern take on direct

• 84.3% of people in the UK have social media – allows for a modern take on direct

• However, time it takes for a bill to pass if fast-tracked in currency RD system - a couple of days - Coronavirus Act 2020

stat and counter for low general election turnout 2019 with RD

• 67.3% (82.6 in 1951) AND ALSO only 48% think info available online abt politics is trustworthy

• however, 86% people satisfied with election process asked in 2021

what makes up good democracy?

• No favouring to a particular social class/background/race/financial situation

• Regular elections

• An age limit e.g., 16/18, so votes have a larger chance of having more educated thought behind them

• Make it easy to vote – more of the population will feel an incentive to engage if they can do it with ease, especially as people have busy lives

• Democratic voice

• Free and fair debate

what is electoral reform society

• independent organisation for democratic rights

• characteristics that should underpin ‘good democracy’

3 ways UK democracy ailing recently

• A failure to reform democratic institutions to a point where they could be regarded as ‘twenty-first century compliant’

• A perceived crisis in political participation

• Falling public confidence in the political institutions that comprise the state – and also in many of its leading players·    

Factors seen as contributing to the perceived problems with UK democracy:

• Failure to complete the second phase of Lords reform/ electoral reform

• Low levels of voter turnout (82% 1951- 67.3% 2019, 59% 2024)

• Collapse of mainstream Party membership (3.2% to less than 0.5% of electorate Conservative- from 1970)

• Falling public confidence in politicians

Constitutional Reform Act 2005

• Act that created the UK supreme court – led to greater separation of power within UK constitution

• Act that strengthened the independence of the judiciary

Proposals for democratic reform

• Further Devolution

• Power of Recall

• House of Lords Reform

• Digital Democracy

• Electronic Petitions

• Reform of the Westminster Electoral System

key info further devolution

·      spread power out the whole of the UK

·      deals with issues arising for that particular country/area

for further reform of further devolution

• works well with political consensus; increase chances of a proposal being accepted

• respond to local issues quicker

• Reduce the problem of London-centric policies that disregard the needs of the rest of the UK

• Scotland, Wales, Northern Island typically have different views and needs, which are not prioritised by government

• Devolved parliament can make legislations that are specific to a problem in a specific area; decisions can be made by people who have experienced

arguments against further reform of further devolution

• 2004 78% of people in NE England voted against having their own assembly

• Won’t have as high turnout for assemblies

• More voting opportunities – democratic overload, discourage citizens, too much voting - decrease enthusiasm for politics

• The authority of the central government would decrease – increase confusion in different areas – different legislations for areas in close proximity

key info power of recall

• Passed in 2015

• Enables voters to trigger by-elections if 10% of them sign a petition

• Circumstances when it can happen – MP been sentenced to prison/ suspended from HOC for at least 21 days (extreme circumstances)

• Broadening these circumstances would give constituents more power

• E.g, USA, 18 states have recall provisions, in 2013 governor of California, Gray Davis, recalled over failure to balance budget

against reform (power of recall)

• it goes far enough and fulfils its functions

• Regular elections can be expensive, impractical

• Politicians may focus on short-term popularity presence rather than long-term, just to stay in power; less benefit for constituents in the long run, as politicians would be spending time on how they are seen as opposed to innovating and improving their constituencies

• Recalling an MP is a resource-heavy process – diverting resources away from other government functions

• e.g., Fiona Onasanya for perverting court of justice 2019

for reform (power of recall)

• does not go far enough -the electorate need to be fully satisfied and have trust in their MP

• Makes MPs more like delegates, limits Burkean principle of freedom of conscience (can vote the other way against your party if your conscience feels it is right)

• Can ruin long term plans

• Enhances accountability of elected politicians

• Deters corruption

• Makes sure officials stay responsive to their constituents

• Aids keeping trust from the public in the system of democracy

• Makes it easier to adapt depending on circumstances/ difficult times

• Helps to preserve direct democracy – democracy becomes invalid when citizens bare no control over the officials – otherwise risk of arbitrary behaviour

• Greater public voice

• e.g., Ian Paisley - failed to declare luxury holidays paid for by the Sri Lankan government - just over 9% - stayed 2018

key info HOL reform

• House of Lords- unelected and unaccountable; selected through political patronage

• David Cameron left office (2016), appointed 13 peers (his political allies)

• If the HOL contains peers which have to be elected, Westminster is fully democratically accountable, currently not

• Currently lots of peers in HOL due to patronage

• 1999, HOL Act removed most of hereditary peers to 92

• 829 peers

for further reform (HOL reform)

• Increases the democracy

• Prevents corruption and bias due to potential bribery (Lord Cruddas)

• Financial segregation – peers tend to be wealthier – little experience of many of the problems that would be helpful to empathise with when passing bills

• same generation of people (average age is 71) – old fashioned opinions and outlook; need a fresh, new perspective - need new perspective - e.g., (Fox) Hunting Act 2004

• 829 people – very expensive

against further reform (HOL reform)

• elected lords may be too political – essentially the same as HOC

• peers have no worry about their popularity – make radical decisions that they believe are right

• argely free of constraints and views of specific political parties – more impartial decisions

• has been in system for centuries – served well in this time

• many peers have decades of experience, longevity – this would all be scrapped if peers became elected only, seen how political narrative evolves over time - e.g., Lord Layard LSE, since 2000 - 2009 Apprenticeship Act

• political patronage is unfair

• revising chamber on HOC

key info e-petitions

• Form of petition, signed online, normally online

• Traditionally used to demonstrate large amounts of support for an opinion and then put pressure on the government to act on this opinion

• Coalition government introduced legislation stating that after 100000 signatures a petition will be considered for debate

for reform (e-petitions)

• Contributed to UK democracy -giving public more control over what is discussed in parliament 

• Easily accessible + format easy for people to make petitions at any time and be heard by gov

• making e-petitions more powerful, by making them automatically trigger parliamentary vote, would make parliament more accountable

• 2019, an e-petition calling on the UK to stay in the EU gathered over 6 million signatures - demonstrated how controversial Brexit remained

• Majority of e-petitions permit children under the age of 18 to sign – meaning they can have a say in politics despite not being able to vote 

• Allow people - easily find people who are campaigning about issues that are important to them

• E-petitions are more easily circulated and signed that a paper petition 

against reform (e-petitions)

• Could bog Westminster down in unconstitutional and impractical debates – take time away from more important debates

• Some of most popular e-petitions - banning Donald Trump from the UK, - not even parliament’s right (instead home sec)

• Because of how easy to set up - site can attract jokes 

• Online petitions can be abused if signers use nicknames instead of real names, - undermining legitimacy 

• under 18s can sign e-petitions - chance that they may not be taken seriously / too young or uneducated to understand

• don’t attract participation from older people without access to the internet

• less participation from lower income citizens who - don’t always have a secure access to the internet - not an accurate view of public opinion

• online bullying 29% uk teens have experienced online bullying

key info digital democracy

·      Allows people to have more involvement to the political process online

·      Numerous ways electronic platforms can aid the voting system

for reform (digital democracy)

• Able to vote on phone – more voting - 84.3% people - social media - have phone

• First generation immigrants who have not been educated – can educate themselves

• Much less time consuming

• Language accessibility

• Electronic political discussion - easier to discuss- more political engagement – good for democracy

• Higher levels of direct democracy – reduce anger against politicians

• More online engagement – tracked, written down, gov held accountable

against reform (digital democracy)

• Does not reach the entire population – expensive and many elderlies access the internet

• Less confidential – more voting manipulation

• Cyber interference – e.g., Russia intervening with Trump’s election– more fraudulent

• Social media propaganda

• Standard of debate online – more bullying, descends into arguments 29% teens in UK experienced online bullying

plan representative vs direct

P1: - experts in rep e.g., 85% Cabinet 2018 went to Russel Group Uni BUT not representative (direct has equality) -65% Sunak cabinet independent school, commons only 40% women

P2: - less time consuming in rep, less practical, only works in small communities, if people need to be constantly going out and voting, it may lower the already falling election turnout (67.3- 59.8%) + BUT could create online platform (84% social med - better direct - doable), advancements in technology

P3: - need to be up to date w politics (only 38% news 2020) so rep better BUT MPs aren’t engaged in rep e.g., Grieve and Osborne - so direct better