Arguments against referendums

Those who dislike referendums are often accused of being unoriginal and simply opposed to change of all kinds. However, there are some powerful arguments against the device:

• It is associated with totalitarian rule. Dictators find it attractive as a way of claiming democratic legitimacy, even when the vote has taken place without free speech or safeguards against fraud. The questions can be phrased in a way that influences the choice of voters. However careful the wording, it may exclude certain options that might actually be very popular. To be fair, the words of the question should themselves be chosen by a referendum, but this would make things impossibly complicated.
• People who do not normally take an active interest in politics can be swayed by emotional public speaking, rather than deciding on the real issues.
• Even if all the campaigning groups are given equal funding and equal access to the media, people tend to vote for the side that is supported by the best-trusted politicians, regardless of the arguments.
• Referendums can be held at a time that suits the ruling party. So, despite all the outward trappings of direct democracy, elected representatives retain the most powerful influence over the eventual decision.
• In other European states, a vote that does not suit the ruling party tends to be followed by another poll so that the public gets the 'right result' in the end.

All of these arguments were expressed before' the first UK-wide referendum, held in 1975, on the question of continued membership of what was then the European Economic Community (EEC). Before the contest was held, the arguments against the use of referendums tended to be used by people who wanted the UK to stay in the Community. With justification, they claimed that the then prime minister. Labour's Harold Wilson, only favoured a referendum because it allowed him to avoid personal responsibility for a decision that was bound to split his party.

As it turned out, the supporters of EC membership had reason to be thankful for Wilson's decision. The result of the poll, held on 5 June 1975, was almost two-thirds in favour of continued membership. The turnout was high — also around two-thirds — and almost every area of the UK said 'yes'. The pro-EC group could thus claim that 'the people had spoken', and that the issue of EC membership was now settled for ever.

However, the defeated opponents of membership had plenty of counter-arguments. The question presented to voters was: 'Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?' Voting to stay in was very different from voting to join in the first place — but the electorate had not been allowed a direct vote when the initial decision was taken. So, opponents argued, the outcome was a foregone conclusion. In addition, the pro-EC campaign was much better funded than the opposing side — and when the UK had joined, people had been bombarded with favourable government propaganda, funded by the taxpayer.

For opponents of what is now (since 1993) the EU, it is significant that there has been no further UK referendum on this subject, despite the important changes that have taken place in Europe since 1975. 'Eurosceptics' believe that successive governments have been frightened of holding a vote that will go against them. This viewpoint is supported by the fact that the argument for the principle of referendums seems to have been won. Few people currently deny that there should eventually be a referendum on membership of the European single currency. The question now is not whether such a poll will be called, but when.

Date: 2016-03-03; view: 734