Referendums as we had in the Netherlands are unthings.The reason is that a complex problem is deposited with the population, people who have not been incorporated into the problem which should then give a yes/no answer. Chance!
Many people like to oppose the government and seize the opportunity to vote against, whatever the subject. So at least give these people a box where they can do that without disturbing the subject.Something like [x f * ck The government, I just want to zeiken!
I much prefer that the politicians just do their job and that I have to choose what to do in the elections.
The usefulness of a referendum is that the people can speak about a matter.In ordinary elections you vote for a person or a party, but you do not know what their fine words are. You then have to choose a total package. In a referendum you know exactly what one wants.
The disadvantage of a referendum lies with politics.Politics often know what the right solution is, or is working with power games (Brexit referendum).
Anyone with power is afraid of unexpected things because you can then lose your dominant position.
The great danger of a referendum is that the outcome is different than the politicians want.
The biggest problem is the need to legislate for a referendum so that it cannot threaten politicians.That is why an advisory was introduced instead of a legislative referendum. Thanks to D66 abolished again, because D66 is for referendums.
Another problem with referendums is that there are sometimes very complex cases.It should be a simple yes/no question.
In The Netherlands one makes more use of consultation.This is a more controlled process. In order to achieve this, you have to have a lot of meat, but it is not difficult to get into such a club. Best instructive. Talk about the neighbourhood.
If you think about politics, you can match it well with a family or a circle of friends.How are decisions taken? Who can talk. Are we going to take a walking tour? Do we keep a family reunion? Do we buy a car and which one? Who can decide on the decisions?
You can also see the disadvantages as teething diseases.How could you enter referendums?
What can referendum goon?I think you can expiride the best with local referendum. And then really local and not about really political matters. Not about matters that the politicians are awake to.
Really local is about a certain neighborhood.Should a certain property be demolished or refurbished? Should a square be a park, or conversely a park a square?
If you have a little bit of how to deal with a referendum you can also make more political choices and for the whole municipality or the whole country.
Who can vote?Everyone who has a direct interest in the referendum. Near referendums are that people who live in the neighbourhood, but also others, interested parties, are allowed to express themselves. You can also work nearby, of course. Those others must then physically log in to get a call card.
Turnout threshold.In the referendum on the association agreement on Ukraine, opponents of the referendum (proponents of the Treaty) were summoned not to vote. As if the whole country had suddenly converted into anarchism. This is a political game. You are allowed to talk but you are walking angry, because you think you can get your way. The goal was not to reach the emergence threshold. This is still childish for words. (I myself signed for the referendum, and after a long balancing vote for the treaty. Just because the treaty was now there.) I think you don’t really have to have an attendance threshold at all.Instead of an attendance threshold, you could set a reconsideration referendum so that you can keep the same referendum twice. The people who have not been voting the first time, but are startled by the results, can vote again.
Costs.You have to organise a referendum so that they are as cheap as possible. A neighbourhood referendum can simply be organized as a participation evening with ballot papers in a high hat.
I can all come up with hooks and eyes, but I think that referendum in the way outlined above can work well.
That is what I think about referendums.As Benjamin Franklin once said: ‘ Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. ‘
We do not choose our representatives because we are too lazy to think about important things, but because we have neither the time nor the knowledge to be able to make a good choice!
The fact that a referendum is held does not mean that everyone suddenly becomes an expert on a subject that the experts themselves never agree on!How can Jan Modaal make a better choice about the EU than a minister who has been working at the Ministry of Finance for twenty years?
The concept is beautiful: yes, we take the decision ourselves.But anyone who thinks it is a good idea, I recommend you to dive into history: There are countless examples of the people who only think about the short term and not the long term (see the Russian Revolution for example , ancient Athens, the Roman Empire, etc)
Incidentally, I can imagine where the idea comes from: The current wave politicians are breaking more promises than they can invent new promises, so I get very good that people are ready with the current guard.Show this in the upcoming elections!!! Are you opposed to the actions of the coalition, then vote for an opposition party, and not again for the hypocrites…
Dance for the A2A Freek!