RECENT referendums held in Scotland and the UK have brought traditional forms of political decision-making and representation into question, producing “a shift in our democracy that we cannot ignore” ... and an event tomorrow will discuss if, when and how they should be used.
Titled Democracy in Action? The Place of Referendums in Scotland and the UK, the public discussion is being hosted in Glasgow by political think-tank the Centre for Scottish Public Policy (CSPP), in partnership with the Democratic Society and law firm Brodies LLP.
It will include contributions from Rachel Ormston, associate director of the polling firm Ipsos Mori; Alistair Stoddart, a policy expert from the Democratic Society; and Charles Livingstone, a partner in Brodies.
It will examine the role of referendums and explore the legal uncertainty surrounding their use in Scotland and the UK.
Voters were called upon to settle far-reaching legislative issues in 2014 and last year – Scotland’s constitutional future and the UK’s relationship with the European Union – and the discussion will examine the issues this raised for democracy and the type of political participation enabled by referendums.
Professor Richard Kerley, CSPP co-chair, said: “The CSPP has been engaged in debates about Scottish politics for many years, and we believe the emergence of various referendums has produced a shift in our democracy that we cannot ignore.
“This discussion will enable citizens to ask essential questions, namely: what happens when complex decisions are left in the hands of voters by politicians, and what rules should our society discuss and possibly establish, to ensure that referendums are organised and their results implemented in a democratic manner?”
Stoddart said: “Referendums have dominated our democracy over the last few years. Have they contributed to encouraging a more politically engaged public? Or have they made our politics binary and confrontational?”
Ormston added: “In principle, the British public likes the idea of being more directly involved in taking important political decisions.
“Yet exposure to recent referendums has not necessarily increased our enthusiasm for them, while there remain questions over how well informed we feel in practice about the issues recent votes have been used to determine.”
Meanwhile. the Electoral Commission has said efforts to reach 16- and 17-year-olds with information on registration and voting appear to be paying off in a year in which they were able to vote in council elections for the first time.
But its report on the administration of the elections warned that these “new voters” have high expectations of further automation of the registration process. It said the teenagers found it easier to access information about casting their votes than those aged between 18 and 34 (84 per cent compared to 69 per cent).
Only seven per cent of 16-17 year-olds said it was difficult to complete their ballot paper, compared to 16 per cent of the elder group.
The report also found that this younger age group backed further reforms to the electoral registration process, with nearly three-quarters (74 per cent) of those aged 16 and 17 believing people should be automatically added to the electoral register when they receive their National Insurance number.
Sue Bruce, the Electoral Commissioner for Scotland, said: “More than any other group, young people expect from their public services the same efficiency and streamlined processes that they experience elsewhere. Electoral processes need to keep pace.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here