Should modern politics be replaced with an entirely new system of governance that appeals directly to the United Kingdom population?

With the general election on its way we must consider one key ingredient that is meant to accompany the electoral bandwagon, which is conspicuous in its absence: public interest! The lack of excitement at the prospect of a victory for either of the three main parties has rendered the country’s political atmosphere stagnant. Last year’s United States presidential election created far more fervour than the one that will decide our own government. Students, who would traditionally be expected to be at their most politically impassioned, are showing signs of apathy. Our current parliamentary system resembles an anachronistic relic which no longer effectively realises the desires of the electorate in the form of legislation.

Reinvigorating politics
One theory currently adopted by younger voters is the idea of the United Kingdom (UK) substituting our representative system for one which closer resembles the principles of direct democracy. Arguably, this could reinvigorate political interest. Direct democracy is a system whereby the power to implement new legislation would be placed on the population. Currently, this power is possessed by elected Members of Parliament, who will represent the members of their constituency over four years. However, this mechanism fails to function when MPs become disconnected from the public voters. Compared to other systems, this breakdown appears more prevalent in the UK. Initiatives like referendums are rare, and the party whip system often ensures that an MP will vote in accordance with their party, regardless of his constituents’ desires. The true impotence of the general public was perhaps best exposed in 2003 when a protest march of over a million people failed to prevent Tony Blair invading Iraq. Now, while a government ignoring public demands and passing unpopular legislation is nothing new, when Parliament approved the motion to go to war, it seemingly dispelled any remaining belief in the egalitarian principles which should underpin democracy.

This disengagement is consolidated by the practical difficulties of voting in the UK election. Despite introducing the postal vote, the process of voting still fails to correspond with the advanced technology used in the 21st Century. Considering the importance of the internet in modern society, is it not logical to create a system where citizens can register their vote online? This removes the need to disrupt their working day or wait in long queues, which arguably act as deterrents to voting. Further, new technology has made direct democracy appear more practical than ever. In the past, it would have been difficult to refer every piece of legislation to the public, hence elected representatives. This is simply no longer the case, in a nation where millions vote on X-factor every week.

However, arguments against democracy include the theory that society needs detached politicians to negate the transitory whims of the populace. This suggests that the public are too ill-informed, disinterested, or too easily influenced to be granted such responsibility. Firstly, these are the same arguments that were put up against democratic ideas back in the eighteenth century, and have come up again every time suffrage has been extended. Also, this position overlooks the fact that in general, people’s disinterest in politics is a consequence of how powerless they feel. How many times have you heard someone complain that they are not voting because ‘it doesn’t change anything’? This feeling has only been exasperated by the way the ideology of both the Labour and Tory parties has moved towards the centre over the past twenty years. People are left feeling devoid of a real choice, which has arguably led to the popularity of politically extreme parties like the British National Party. While the public may not rate either party highly, they still hold strong beliefs about policy. However, if they were regularly consulted for their views, they might feel more engaged.

Direct democracy in the modern world
Many critics also associate direct democracy with ‘anarchy’ or ‘chaos’, fearing its implementation would lead to the complete breakdown of governance. Surprisingly, for over a century, Switzerland has used a method of law-making which closely resembles that of direct democracy. There national laws must be passed by the citizens first before being ratified by the government. Similar practices apply at state-level right across America, most famously New England. Furthermore, in Latin America every country (except Bolivia) now employs directly democratic mechanisms to some extent. In these places, having a direct voice in policy making has transformed attitudes from disillusionment and fear of the corrupt regimes which ruled in the 1980s, to a far more engaged mood to coincide with its economic growth. Critics should not forget that even in the purest of democratic systems, the traditional structure of governance is still of vital importance and the executive is still at the top. The distinction between direct and representative systems is that in direct systems, the power for decision-making is largest at community level and is filtered down as it goes up; unlike the hierarchical power structure under which we are currently governed.

A new direction for Britain?

Truth be told, implementing direct democracy in the UK would be a very controversial and risky move. Even I, despite my interest, cannot be sure it would work. Culturally we are a very traditional country and have strong beliefs vested in the idea of Parliament as sovereign. It is clear that this current apathy cannot continue indefinitely. Perhaps the next election will bring the lowest turnout on record, and perhaps the elected party will struggle to gain enough support by the population as a whole. If we do get the first minority government since 1974, the legislative process may become even more dysfunctional and people may become even more disillusioned. Maybe then we’ll re-examine our system of governance, a system that has hardly evolved in the past hundred years.

Kojo Koram is in the fourth year of a Law and English Literature joint honours degree