Table of Contents
Peter Cook was a marvellous satirist who entertained people for decades. One of the films he starred in, and co-wrote with John Cleese, was the political-themed satire, The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer. The fascinating thing about this movie: it was made in 1967 but accurately predicted a number of events (such as a change of government in 1970) which took place years in the future.
One of the amusing leg-pulls in the movie, possibly written in response to millions of people regularly bemoaning a supposed lack of “democracy”, is where Michael Rimmer has emerged as Prime Minister (having murdered his predecessor) and decides to turn Britain into a “true democracy”. We then see postmen delivering bulging sacks to each house in the country – stuffed with a huge series of questions the people are asked to vote on.
We see a Mr Spimm and his wife in their lounge room surrounded by stacks of paper having spent the day voting “yes” or “no” on vast numbers of ‘referendum questions’, pondering “Should we keep a continued military presence in mid Wondai?” [it’s in Queensland]
It has always amazed me the number of micro-parties and even somewhat larger (however temporarily) parties who jump on the referendum bandwagon. People are told we don’t live in a democracy, that their voices are not heard, and the answer to the problem is numerous referenda so that you, the people, are truly in charge. The response from “the people” to this new democratic world of opportunity has been to basically ignore it; although “you know who” came close in 2014.
Perhaps most people don’t want to spend their free time answering questions about how many pencils, lavatory rolls and staples should be purchased by the Lottery Grants Board.
The only party which has advocated for this referendum palaver in a responsible way has been Winston Peters. If you look at the fine print (and few people have) he makes it clear you can’t have a referendum which singles out any sort of “minority group”; just stick to the big stuff. Notwithstanding that, I can only think of a single Winston-initiated referendum; the compulsory super issue back in 1997.
As an amusing aside; when ballot papers were posted to everybody on the issue of superannuation in 1997 I was the sole person in the entire country to vote “Yes”. 1.4 million geniuses voted “NO!”; then there was my rather lonely ballot paper comprising the other viewpoint, haha!
Anyway, there are a number of dangers with the endless referenda idea.
First, unless there are some parameters, lots of fringe notions, based on calumny and stirring the pot, will sooner or later be on the ballot paper.
Secondly, it has the whiff of mob rule about it. Our system, which works fairly well despite itself, leaves lawmaking to people who have been ‘elected’ to do so and leaves such matters as criminal guilt or innocence to jurors. In short, we don’t need “Mrs Brown from Petone” sticking her nose into whether someone she doesn’t like very much is guilty, or whether vast sums of money should be stolen from her neighbour and given to her.
If you really care about some of these issues; now – literally now – is the time to advocate for them. Knock on 1000 doors over three weeks rather than relying on referenda between elections.
