How has direct democracy been used more in the UK in recent years?

Other than referendums, New Labour also introduced direct democracy in the form of a system whereby citizens can directly e-mail ministers with their questions or comments. Following this, as an experiment, the government set up a 'peoples panel', designed to test reactions to particular policies of MORI, the polling agency. This again allows a more direct involvement into politics for people.

c) What are the arguments for and against direct democracy?

We have seen voter apathy rising and rising in recent years that the winning party seems to come under scrutiny for their legitimacy to rule. It has been argued that this increase of voter apathy is due to a belief that the individual votes do not count, or the parties are far too similar to really make a choice, or simply that politics is too difficult for the average person to understand. Whether the answer is any of these, direct democracy would certainly solve them. The system of direct democracy would undoubtedly make people feel more involved, they would see that, contrary to popular belief, their opinion does matter and, as all decision-making would be placed upon average citizens, there would be no politicians, and so no language left misunderstood by many.

Along with this, direct democracy would ensure decisions were based on a majority rule, rather than, like in many of the other possible systems, a party having to get just one or two more votes than the party coming second. This ensures fair elections, where each vote counts and so ensures legitimacy.

Although direct democracy has its good points, it can too be argued that the biggest flaw with direct democracy is the time it takes. In Athenian times, when direct democracy was used all the time, over forty assemblies would be held each year, and, in each meeting, every citizen has the right to speak, vote etc. and so meetings could last a very long time and so would be far too impractical for today's society.

As I mentioned previously, direct democracy can increase the interest of people in politics, but there is nothing to say it will increase their knowledge. It can be suggested that politicians today are exactly that, politicians, and so have the time to do the background reading, the experience and support of others in building on their knowledge to deal with issues efficiently and effectively. If our society, for example, practised direct democracy, many people would vote purely on face value, without fully understanding the future implications, and long term effects on society.