'What is a Referendum and what are the arguments against them?\r'

'1) What is a Referendum?\r\nA referendum is when a citizen (18+) is asked to fetch their legal opinion on a certain skip or proposal. Unlike an resource this process is not binding and the outcome is blossom to discussion. A referendum piece of tail force in a new constitution, law, amendment, the recall of an pick out official or simply a specific presidency policy. It is a form of exact democracy.\r\n2)\r\nA referendum is when a citizen (18+) is asked to express their opinion on a certain issue or proposal.\r\nMany have been issued in the away; examples of this ar, 11 September 1997. Tony Blair issued a pre-legislative referendum held in Scotland ask whether there was support for the creation of a stinting Parliament with devolved violences, and whether the Parliament should have tax-varying powers. The reason for this was the turn over party had beneficial won the election and accommo insure in their manifesto was the establishment of a Scottish Parliament.\r\n 4th November 2004, Tony Blair (Labor Party) issued a referendum in nitrogenern England. The ballots have-to doe with the question of devolving limited political powers from the UK Parliament to elective regional assemblies in North East England, North West England, Yorkshire and the Humber. The reason for this was Labor government es vocalize to introduce regional assemblies, to be behavely elected.\r\nfifth May 2011, the ‘Alternative Vote’ referendum was drawn up as part of the Conservative- Liberal Democrat coalition, to be asked across the whole U.K. The Referendum concerned whether to replace the puzzle voting system with an alternative virtuoso. This was because the Labor government, who were antecedently in power in 2010, apply their majority to pass an amendment to their Constitutional Reform Bill to include a referendum on the introduction of AV to be held in the next Parliament, naming a appetite to restore trust in Parliament in the wake of the 2009 expenses s substructuredal.\r\n3) Arguments against Referendums\r\nIn this essay i bequeath talk about the arguments against referendums, the effects and some generation consequences it can incur.\r\nA referendum is when a citizen (18 years and above) is asked to express their opinion on a particular issue. In Britain, referendums date back to 1973 and ever since has been used as a mechanism for feedback on issues regarding laws, voting systems and so on, its a form of institutionalise legislation, used selectively.\r\nThose who atomic number 18 against direct legislation will argue that the use of referendums is an possibleness for politicians to absolve themselves of responsibility for making difficult decisions. When representatives hunch that ultimately the result of their efforts may be transposed by the process of referendum, they will take down in the mouther interest in the discharge of their legislative duties.\r\nIt doesnt horizontal reflect well on the party eff ect it. If the measure succeeds at the general vote the cite for it goes to the great deal and if it doesnt, the blame goes to the legislature.\r\nWe elect a pristine Minister, legislatures, to consecrate the decisions of how to run our country. By electing, its an official imprint that we trust them to conduct, obviously voting the party whos manifesto we atomic number 18 partial to. Referendums are useful, yes, exclusively how does it make legislatures look when matters such as ‘do you emergency a Mayer- 1998, Tony Blair are issued. When was the time when legislatures took the bull by its horns and made decisions for the good of the nation and not base on doing what the populate indirect request so theyll build voted in the next election. As Margaret Thatcher once said, â€Å"if you just set out to be liked, you would be prompt to compromise on anything wouldnt you and you would achieve nothing”. Referendums bet to be a vehicle to become the apple of the nations eye to the point that in 1997 elections- The Labor party promised in their manifesto a referendum for the establishment of a Scottish parliament knowing that Scotland wanted it unless just didnt get enough votes last time.\r\nGovernments are also unlikely to hold them unless they are fair confident they will win the vote, which was the chemise in 2004, the devolution referendum for the North East. Labor wanted to render English Regional Assemblies and thought they would win the vote therefore created three referendums only for the first one to be rejected by the earth. And this being the case, the government are unlikely to be neutral participants and the give voice of the questions can distort the results. So is a referendum rightfully the government wanting us to tick the yes so they can blame us if something goes wrong?\r\n isolated from the time consuming, expensive and tedious way that is baffling in a referendum, after all that, whos to say that people wil l vote? One of the criticisms against direct legislation and a really compelling one, relates to the small size of the votes cast at a referendum. The result of the ballot does not fairly represent popular opinion, because in most cases, opponents of the issue will go to the polls in larger proportion than its supporters.\r\nMoreover, when people are frequently asked to cast their votes, as is when Tony Blair was elected in 1997, making referendums a much more important part of politics, theyll begin to abstain from voting. Its comely to be included in the decision plainly people become tired of voting after a piece of music. The result is that the decision findd at is that of the nonage and it becomes difficult to know whether there is any public opinion at all on the referendum.\r\n comprehend as the referendum is time consuming, it sometimes involves harmful delays in passing many laws of vital national importance. any this takes away from the educative value of the referen dum. When you have citizens who are not interested in public personal business and the issue is of national importance, the referendum becomes a comedy. As was the case in June 1975 when the Labor government had a power split on the issue of Europe and issued a referendum across the whole United Kingdom- ‘Do you want to stay in the EC? Because of this time gap, while the ballot is lying on your kitchen table, coverage on the issue from the media whether it is newspapers, TV etc. can importantly influence the result. Whereas if the issue would have been dealt with in parliament alone- you would not get the opinion of people who are paid to keep people entertained.\r\nThe real digression between direct action and the action of the legislatures are the voters cannot assemble and discuss matters and consequently the opportunity to arrive at truth is lost. Truth emerges from the clash of opinions. Which brings us back to the substantialness of referendums.\r\nFinally, some could argue that referendums countermine (or have potential to) Parliamentary Sovereignty. Parliament is sure as shooting threatened by the use of referendums. Referendums put the people before the parliament. The milkweed butterflyty of parliament becomes the sovereignty of the people, introducing direct democracy into the political system, challenges the indirect, representative democracy that has been the marrow squash of UK political system. If the people vote one way, their representatives another, who should prevail, who is sovereign?\r\nIn conclusion the manner in which the referendum is used reflects greatly on the government and at times can make you question the quality of the governments political parties. The referendum can be of great use but whether the pro outweigh the cons or vice versa is congress to the issue at hand. Using the drawbacks weve discussed one can assume or hope that if legislatures had an option, referendums would not be their first choice.\r\n'