Problem with Politics - not using referendums

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Problem with Politics - not using referendums

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#305753 1-Jun-2023 22:37

I am little over politics, when governments don't actually do anything while they are in power. They are too scared to do anything that may see them ousted in the next election, so they tinker

Elections leave us with basically 2 choices Left or Right ideas, and one side doesn't have the monopoly on good ideas

Why don't we use referendums especially at election time? eg should govt

put controls on housing market, to ensure people can afford to buy houses
pay everyone a universal basic income, so they can dismantle most of Social Welfare
remove GST on fresh food?
should we have capital gains tax
should businesses be required to do more in-house training, than bring in immigrants to fill gaps
should IRD be required to publish statistics on hourly rates for Gender/Role/Ethnicity

If we had referendums, and we maybe electing people who can act on the referendum results

Sadly, I don't think there is any hope.. we are bound to repeat the same mistakes.. until we have a brave leader

SepticSceptic

2263 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 779

Trusted

#3083524 1-Jun-2023 23:34

So you'd be happy if, like the USA, a slim majority of christian fundies managed to swing a referendum vote to illegalise abortions, cut social services, ban certain books, etc.
It may be the will of most of the people, but could have detrimental effects on marginal and minority people.

Referendums seem like a good idea, but would need to be focussed on the more mundane issues, like how many benches should be installed in the local park.

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557

#3083643 2-Jun-2023 08:59

The reason is because in practice it leads to "unexpected" outcomes. For example taking your housing example, get too heavy handed on housing and we will see the bubble pop, and a heavy recession. (I am all for the changes that have been made so far)

We have plenty of good examples of where legislation that probably would not have gotten past a referendum has come and worked well eg. Same-sex marriage, Prostitution reform act 2003. We even have MPs walking back their views against such legislation long after it has been in place.

We also have examples of where it did not work well. For example a basic health evidence based approach was not fully understood publicly with the Cannabis Reform referendum. These are complex issues where experts should have the weight of decision making. Not someone who read a pamphlet for 3 minutes or has been feed a facebook advert.

I believe we should increase the government term from 3 to 4 years to give better opportunity to enact "controversial" policy and see the changes.

Paul1977

5171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2192

#3083733 2-Jun-2023 11:15

You could require a 65-70% majority for it to be binding to ensure it truly is a majority vote.

But this biggest problem with referendums is that most people don't know enough about the issues and the long-term consequences of many political decisions to cast a truly informed vote. Just look at Brexit.

But the OPs point is quite right that governments seldom commit to the long term strategies our country requires because long term gain often requires short term pain. Most voters won't vote for short term pain, so Governments are reluctant to enact those policies for fear of being voted out.

But given peoples propensity for short term thinking, I don't believe more referendums would result in particularly good long term outcomes anyway.

EDIT: All of that leaves us with it being very unlikely that the long term policy changes required will ever happen.

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#3083740 2-Jun-2023 11:25

Paul1977:You could require a 65-70% majority for it to be binding to ensure it truly is a majority vote.

Yes, a 51% referendum result is not mandate for change..

But if we can get more referendums that get 65+% then it should be bit hard for individual governments to not apply the change, or reverse a change.

John Key famously said he had a mandate to privatise state owned assets when get got into parliament with 51%. If he got into government along with referendum on selling govt assets that was 65+% that would be a mandate.

Referendums could be made on

lowering age to vote
raising age to purchase alcohol
actions for climate change