DIRDEM    

 

Home

Mission

December 2016 Join us

 


Home

Blog

Civil Liberty
Coalitions
Constitution
Courts and Judicial System
Electoral Reform

Election Promises
Engaging the Citizen
Europe
Experts
Government
Legislation
Lobbies and Special Interests
Media
Narrow Election Results
Parliament
Party Funding
Petition
Political Parties
Politicians
Politician's Pay
Recall and Term Limit
Referendum
Separation of Powers
Swiss Model
Third Party
Tax and Public Spending
Trust in Government



 

 





 




 

 


 

 

Legislation

 

The amount of new laws passed in most countries has outrun the capacity of the politicians and parliaments (that are supposed to control them) to  discuss and monitor them intelligently. This applies even more to the vast amount of secondary legislation that is added by bureaucrats in order to implement these laws.

In the EU, for example, its unelected bureaucrats have churned out an astonishing 90,000 pages of directives, regulations and decisions during the past 50 years. Would this have been possible if the citizens would have had the opportunity to question and vote on all this legislation?

We do not propose that the passing of new laws and regulations should automatically involve the holding of a referendum. This would obviously be impractical. But the mere threat that the imposition of any measure that neglects to consider the interests of the electorate or important constituencies could lead to a referendum would act as a brake on ill-considered legislation.

Involving the citizens in legislation would reduce the amount of laws passed as the capacity of the individuals to properly assess and process the necessary information by definition is limited.
 

But the citizen cannot be involved in the technical details of legislation!
This is one of the favourite arguments that the opponents of direct democracy have at their disposal. Even people who in principle like the idea of closer citizen involvement seem to be puzzled by the question how direct democracy could work in practice.
The solution to this 'conundrum' is quite simple. Most laws would still be proposed and agreed in the traditional fashion, that is by the elected representatives in Parliament, regional bodies or town halls. But all legislation of major importance would have to be subject to a mandatory referendum. All other legislation would still be subject to a facultative referendum that would have to be launched by the citizens that want to object. They would then have to find sufficient support before a referendum on the issue would have to be held. The number of supporters would have to be large enough to demonstrate that a referendum has real support but not too large so as to make it impossible to launch a referendum. A number between 5 and 10% or registered voters may be just about right.
The result of such a system would be that the government would avoid introducing legislation that has very little hope finding majority approval. This in turn would reduce the number of issues that would require the holding of a referenda.
 

Stop to 'proposals', 'initiatives' and 'schemes'
More and more legislation and bureaucratic regulation is created as a consequence of so-called 'proposals', 'initiatives' or 'schemes' launched by elected politicians or civil servants.
We think this is a symptom of what is wrong with the legislative process in our societies. People who have an in-built interest to increase their power or force their individual views on others are in the driving seat when their main focus should be on the smooth running of the government machinery. Their attention should be directed towards the efficient execution of existing legislation and only in extremis should they add new rules and regulations. These should not be created with the stroke of a pen and nodded through by subservient placeholders (aka Members of Parliament) but the process of launching new laws should start at grassroots and only be moved forward if enough citizens are willing to back it.

 

Every new initiative that is set up increases the distrust we feel for the State
Apart from the fact that most of these 'initiatives' are thinly disguised edicts based on only a shred of legitimacy we just want to point out the main cause of this malaise: the citizens are effectively excluded from the process of legislation and only a radical reform can reverse the growing distrust that is felt.
Direct action in the form of protests such as truck drivers blockading streets in order to support their demands will become a growing feature in our societies if this root-and-branch reform is not started soon.

More on Legislation
 


 

Why you should support
Dirdem:

Are you angry when people want to control your life?

Are you angry when people want to live off the fruit of your work?

Are you angry when people want to tell you what to think?

►If your answer is YES
to any or all of the above questions then you should support our Movement.



DIRDEM
is more than a traditional Political Party. We do not see this Cause as a career choice - or stepping stone leading to a lucrative career in the private sector.

DIRDEM
is not a Think Tank that publishes lengthy reports that are only read by a few insiders and later disappear in some library of filing cabinet.

DIRDEM
is not a Lobby or Special Interest Group that tries to gain advantage at the expense of other groups of society.

DIRDEM
is not a Religion or Ideology and does not try to make people believe in something except in the belief that no one should be allowed to rule our lives.
 

Decisions you would be able to influence:

By giving the reader examples of recent policy decisions we highlight the dramatic impact the introduction of Direct Democracy would have on the political life of all countries.

All the following decisions where taken without the participation of the affected citizens. Some - if not most - were highly controversial and have a negative effect for at least some major parts of the country's population.

The present system of government not only leaves the citizens powerless in the face of a never-ending tide of legislation, it also inevitably leads to inefficient use of taxpayer's money and a steady erosion of civil liberties.

See what decisions the citizens could influence directly in a proper democratic system

 

 

 Disclaimer l Home
Copyright Dirdem 2012 All rights reserved