Do you think the voters should be allowed to vote for important issues, rather than just for our leader?

Question

Eg - going to war on Iraq/Aghanistan, allowing terrorists to live here on our taxes.

These aren't just minor issues - what if Iraq/Aghanistan could fight back? It would be us civilians that get bombed, not the Prime Minister.

And allowing every global piece of scum to come here is spoiling OUR lilives, not MPs sat in their electric gated mansions.

I think on major issues - war, immigration, healthcare - voters should vote on these issues.

You may argue that it'll take forever - but how about all the 'consultations' and studies - they take years and are ignored if they go against what the government want.

We could have a deadline of voting - eg 30 or 60 days. That wouldn't extend the timescale too much but would allow voters - who pay the government's wages - to have a say in what goes on in their own countries.

The problem with any government (Labour or Tories) is that once they get in they do whatever they want, and when it comes to election time they just lower taxes to dupe us. At least if we vote in important issue we can't complain...

Answer 1

the average american voter has enough trouble getting out once a year and voting. how many do you actually think would show up to vote 15-20 times a year? not nearly enough. this is why we select someone that we believe will best represent our political beliefs. it just wouldn't work.

Answer 2

No. Too many people lack the intelligence needed to understand even basic questions and issues. People would be making decisions based purely on their prejudices and what they were told to think by the tabloid press.

Answer 3

this is why it's important to vote for the people who you feel best represent your own ideals.  

Answer 4

your fundamental flaw is waking up and leaving something on the pillow fast asleep thats just on the first bit do you think bombs would drop on your cozy hamlet and leave the big city alone have you got relatives or an ex thats getting to much from the system by any chance start with those that deserve the least and i will think along your thatcherism lines middle england small town minds have long gone your vote doesnt mean thats it think lateral and collective

Answer 5

I agree entirely.

BUT it's potentially dangerous. People love to make the more talked about or popular decision, whereas politicians' job is to find out the bare facts.. which they, unlike us, have access to. For example, if they knew that.. say. Italy was 100% definitely about to attack us, politicians would stop it from happening by going to war, whereas the public might be mad after iraq and say "no way" without knowing the hard facts.

Basically, it'd work if they somehow forced people to read all the facts and debates first.

But yes, we hand over control to a bunch of people who are in the spotlight and are therefore too scared to make any rash or tough decisions.

Also, the vote should not be the be-all and end-all, but should count for half the votes. The public can be very stupid sometimes. Heck if the american people can vote bush for a second term, the UK can do just as bad

Answer 6

There should be more referendums on important issues, but I am afraid this government are anti referendum, don't for a minute think you live in a real democracy, that disappears the moment you put your X on the ballot paper.

Answer 7

Yes, I agree with you. The public should be allowed to vote for issues that may concern them such as wars abroad and so on. The war on Iraq did come to home soil in the form of 7/7. Why should politicians decide the future of every British citizen especially if it means harm? A politician's goal is to look after the interests of the people in their country plus be objective and rational when it comes to making important decisions. I have noticed that there is a trend to steer towards the "shoot first, ask questions later" idea rather than to use communication and diplomacy. Those two skills are a demonstration of folk with a higher intelligence and less ignorance than those currently in power. We should have a peaceful revolution and get a new government elected who will put the British people first and silly, pointless self-forfilling policies second. We also need a government who will stand up to the likes of the USA because the USA are sometimes quite often wrong!

Answer 8

I AGREE! If we got to vote on issues and our leaders the world would probably have a better world!

Answer 9

Interesting question, but I don't agree with referendums.  The trouble with voting on issues, is in this country there are so many Sun/Mail reading people who will vote the way their paper tells them.  The media already controls who the government is, and allowing them to make individual decisions is scary.

Also governments do have to make a certain number of unpopular decisions, sometimes taxes do have to be increased - but who's going to vote for tax raises ?

I was, and still am, against the war - and I believe the government should listen to the electorate - but I'm against referendums, and think governments should be responsible for their choices, and not be able to pass the responsibility on.