Engagementworks
Phone: +64 22 198 5043
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Our Services
    • Audit & Review Services
    • Community engagement checklist
    • Significance & Engagement Resource Kit
    • Resources and Links
  • Buy Community Engagement Basics Online
  • Community Engagement Basics Online
    • Introduction
    • Session 1
    • Session 2
    • Session 3
    • Session 4
    • Session 5
    • Session 6
    • Session 7
    • Session 8
    • Session 9
    • Bonuses
  • Our Training >
    • Short Courses >
      • Governance & leadership (LS-010)
      • Engagement overview (LS-020)
      • Social media for leaders (LS-030)
      • Preparing an engagement strategy (PS-010)
      • Preparing an engagement plan (PS-020)
      • How to use the engagement toolbox (PS-030)
      • How to use engagement planning templates (PS-040)
      • Understanding & planning internal engagement (PS-050)
      • Understanding & using online engagement tools & social media (PS-060)
      • Engagement tips & tricks (PS-070)
      • Engagement case studies (PS-080)
      • Dealing with engagement conflict (PS-090)
    • Practitioner Workshop Series >
      • Community Engagement 101
      • Community Engagement Basics (Local Government)
    • Governance Workshop
    • Training Photo Gallery
  • Our Free Stuff
  • Our Blog
  • Case Studies >
    • Invercargill City's Caravan
    • Sport Bay of Plenty's GO4it Programme
    • Wellington region local government reform
    • Newcastle's fig trees
    • Sport Waitakere's 8M8s
  • Our Newsletters
  • Contact Us

Community engagement beats referendums

1/7/2013

2 Comments

 
Many people think that binding referendums are or should be an important cornerstone of democracy.

This belief has re-emerged as councils in the Wellington region submit their preferred options for reform to the Local Government Commission.

The Porirua City Council is the most recent to call for a binding referendum to provide a final stamp of approval from the region's voters.

A referendum has limited effectiveness. I think that far too much expectation and reliance are placed on referendums and making them binding is a step too far.

Indeed, I believe that using the referendum tool in this context is pointless.

New Zealand's recent history with referendums from issues as diverse as how Fire Service employees should be treated, to physical discipline for children and young people, to local body amalgamation between Nelson and Tasman should have provided sufficient evidence that these are an expensive waste of time.

There are far better alternatives that provide opportunities for communities to engage on an issue and have their say in a meaningful way.

To be binding, a referendum would need to be compulsory for all registered electors, with a significant majority in favour of one of its outcomes, before that referendum could be treated with any real respect.

Turnouts in referendums are often small, in many cases less than 30 per cent of registered electors. Disempowering or ignoring non-participants could be a brave political move, if these were a majority of the voter population and any outcome was to be mandatory.

Then there's the construction of the referendum's question itself. It needs to reduce what could be a complex situation down into a black-versus-white choice.

Such a reduction is dangerous, particularly for voters who may be unfamiliar with the detail of the proposal and how they may be affected by any outcome.

Then there's the issue of the importance of the issue that the referendum may be about. An importance threshold needs to be set at a high level, otherwise electors could be endlessly deluged with referendums about all manner of issues that may have no relevance for them. If that was the case, the already low rates of participation would fall further.

So what are the alternatives?

Good engagement processes should be established with communities long before a single outcome is promoted.

Effective participation should give communities a lot of say in defining opportunities or problems, listing and evaluating options and ranking their priorities. If such a process happens, then any outcome that could be delivered from a referendum would be unnecessary.

The toolbox for community engagement contains lots of options. Choosing the right tool or tools comes down to the level of engagement that is desired, target communities to be reached and the resources available to make something happen, particularly time and money.

Decision-making is something that many New Zealanders expect elected representatives to do for them, but they also expect good engagement processes that involve them before any decision point.

Good community engagement processes should give elected representatives confidence to make decisions that they know will sit comfortably with most people.

Done well, good engagement processes can depoliticise an issue.

Good engagement before a decision is made can greatly reduce the controversy that often happens afterwards, particularly legal challenges. While even the best run engagement process won't please everybody, it will build a strong sense of commitment to and ownership of the outcomes from most of the participants.

On the other hand, New Zealand's recent history tells us that a referendum comes at a considerable cost and usually produces an outcome that is ignored by voters, by elected representatives or both. On that basis, it is a tool best forgotten.
This article was published in Wellington's Dominion Post newspaper on Monday 1 July 2013. 
2 Comments
Dominic Baron
21/7/2013 05:11:46 pm


Brett Sangster's observations appear in quotes below and are then followed by my response:

“MANY people think that binding referendums are or should be an important cornerstone of democracy.”

Let's be precise: referendums are intrinsically binding. Anything else is just an opinion poll. When using the word 'referendum' no qualifying adjective is required. To qualify it is to diminish it. That is exactly the same for 'democracy'. It means very precisely: the direct rule of the people. To qualify it with adjectives such as 'representative' or 'direct' or 'real' is to diminish it.
It is not just 'many people' who consider referendums to be the foundation stone of democracy, one of the most successful nations on this planet has its democratic constitution based on referendums: Switzerland.

“This belief has re-emerged as councils in the Wellington region submit their preferred options for reform to the Local Government Commission.”
“The Porirua City Council is the most recent to call for a binding referendum to provide a final stamp of approval from the region's voters.”

That is the logical democratic way to proceed. It should not even be necessary for Councils to “call” for referendums. They should be automatically invoked by their constitutions in order for the people to ratify or reject their proposals.

“A referendum has limited effectiveness. I think that far too much expectation and reliance are placed on referendums and making them binding is a step too far.”

Quite the contrary. Just look at the history of referendums carried out in Switzerland. They are the most effective instrument of democracy precisely because they are intrinsically binding.

“Indeed, I believe that using the referendum tool in this context is pointless.”

Then Brett Sangster believes that democracy is pointless too.

“New Zealand's recent history with referendums from issues as diverse as how Fire Service employees should be treated, to physical discipline for children and young people, to local body amalgamation between Nelson and Tasman should have provided sufficient evidence that these are an expensive waste of time.”

Those were not referendums, but they should have been. They were a waste of time precisely because they were not referendums. As opinion polls they nevertheless showed massive disagreement between the people of New Zealand and the tiny political clique that suppresses their will.

“There are far better alternatives that provide opportunities for communities to engage on an issue and have their say in a meaningful way.”

That is so wrong and muddle-headed. There is no alternative to democracy. Only the people have the sovereign right to make the laws by which they wish to live. In what more “meaningful way” can the people “have their say” than by a direct vote to decide what the law is to be?!

“To be binding, a referendum would need to be compulsory for all registered electors, with a significant majority in favour of one of its outcomes, before that referendum could be treated with any real respect.”

As explained above: referendums are intrinsically binding – yet voting is not compulsory in Switzerland. The results of all referendums are totally respected because they are the true will of the people.

“Turnouts in referendums are often small, in many cases less than 30 per cent of registered electors.”

Even a referendum turnout of 30% of the registered electors is 10,000 times more representative of the people than the 0.003% who squat in 'parliament'.

“Disempowering or ignoring non-participants could be a brave political move, if these were a majority of the voter population and any outcome was to be mandatory.”

This is an absurd argument as those who choose to vote do so because they are interested in making the decision. Those who choose not to vote are obviously indifferent to the decision. No “brave political move” is required as no “disempowering or ignoring” of “non-participants” is remotely involved.

“Then there's the construction of the referendum's question itself. It needs to reduce what could be a complex situation down into a black-versus-white choice.”
“Such a reduction is dangerous, particularly for voters who may be unfamiliar with the detail of the proposal and how they may be affected by any outcome.”

Brett Sangster really needs to look at the way the Swiss handle the whole matter of developing the question to be put, as well as all the materials sent out to each registered elector to study several months ahead of the actual vote.

“Then there's the issue of the importance of the issue that the referendum may be about. An importance threshold needs to be set at a high level, otherwise electors could be endlessly deluged with referendums about all manner of iss

Reply
Dominic Baron
21/7/2013 05:20:37 pm

PART 2 of my responses to the article on Referendums:

“Then there's the issue of the importance of the issue that the referendum may be about. An importance threshold needs to be set at a high level, otherwise electors could be endlessly deluged with referendums about all manner of issues that may have no relevance for them. If that was the case, the already low rates of participation would fall further.”

Referendums are put to the Swiss people at Federal, Cantonal, and Communal levels. All the issues are relevant and important, otherwise they would not come up for decision by referendum.

“So what are the alternatives?”
“Good engagement processes should be established with communities long before a single outcome is promoted.”

What on earth are “engagement processes”? And what on earth could be a more engaging and decisive process than a referendum?

“Effective participation should give communities a lot of say in defining opportunities or problems, listing and evaluating options and ranking their priorities. If such a process happens, then any outcome that could be delivered from a referendum would be unnecessary.”

That is just waffle. The most effective and engaging method for communities to exercise their sovereign right to make laws is by referendums.

“The toolbox for community engagement contains lots of options. Choosing the right tool or tools comes down to the level of engagement that is desired, target communities to be reached and the resources available to make something happen, particularly time and money.”
“Decision-making is something that many New Zealanders expect elected representatives to do for them, but they also expect good engagement processes that involve them before any decision point.”

Unfortunately the “toolbox for community engagement” does not yet contain the three most basic tools of democracy:
1] the initiative referendum – where the people put forward a proposal for a new law;
2] the recall referendum – where the people dismiss an elected member of an assembly;
3] the veto referendum – where the people vote on a new proposal from an assembly.
That is the the way for the people to truly own the laws that they have decided upon.

“Good community engagement processes should give elected representatives confidence to make decisions that they know will sit comfortably with most people.”

There can be no better confidence in the creation of new laws than ratification by referendum.

“Done well, good engagement processes can depoliticise an issue.”
The only satisfactory way to resolve and defuse contentious political issues is by referendums."
“Good engagement before a decision is made can greatly reduce the controversy that often happens afterwards, particularly legal challenges. While even the best run engagement process won't please everybody, it will build a strong sense of commitment to and ownership of the outcomes from most of the participants.”

The only truly thorough and satisfactory way to “build a strong sense of commitment to and ownership of the outcomes” is by referendums. That is the way to make decisions and laws that the people really own.

“On the other hand, New Zealand's recent history tells us that a referendum comes at a considerable cost and usually produces an outcome that is ignored by voters, by elected representatives or both. On that basis, it is a tool best forgotten.”

Absolutely wrong! Democracy costs resources. The people want democracy and accept the cost. The outcomes of our Claytons 'referendums' were certainly not ignored by the voters but they certainly were trampled into the dust by the politicians. The referendum tool is simply not yet in the toolbox of our political system because we do not yet have democracy.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Picture

    Authors

    Brett & Don share their thoughts. Engagement isn't always the only thing that excites them!

    Archives

    December 2015
    November 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    January 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    April 2014
    February 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013

    Categories

    All
    Advice
    Ideas
    Opinion
    Tools

    RSS Feed

Picture
Engagementworks
© 2023