Here is a more detailed look at the direct voting system that has been in use for over 150 years in Switzerland -
a system that has helped build a peaceful and prosperous nation.
Introduction
Direct Democracy has the potential to put absolute control over government actions into the hands of the people of BC.
A proper Direct Democracy Act in BC would be the ultimate victory of “people” in a 2000 year struggle to wrest power from “government”.
Today a proper Direct Democracy provision in a BC constitution that is amendable only by the people would improve on even the Swiss and the Americans, who have the world’s most advanced models in this area to date.
Aim
The aim of this paper is : 1 to provoke further discussion on this important topic, and to encourage all British Columbians to become “experts”, and 2 to search for a proven mechanism for the voters of BC to have the last word when they feel it is necessary, and 3 to examine the mechanics of a comprehensive Initiative, Referendum and Recall proposal. The Swiss are the only people in the world with 150 years experience of this method of governing themselves.
The Direct Democracy legislation that will surely one day be passed in British Columbia must subject government in BC for all time to the wishes of the people, and it could become the example for the rest of the world to copy. This is as it should be, because we have the experience of Switzerland and the us of A to guide us, and with these two examples to copy we should be capable of producing the near perfect document.
What are the elements of a comprehensive system of Direct Democracy ?
Question: What do British Columbians NOT WANT from a referendum system ?
Answer. The people do not want to vote on something every weekend. And they do not want to be taxed to pay for expensive referendums.
Question: What is it British Columbians DO WANT from a referendum system ?
Answer. They want to have a say whenever they think it is necessary. They want the results to be binding on government. They want a cheap and easy system. They want a system that the government cannot wriggle out of.
Question: Is there a system that gives the people full control, but is cheap and easy ?
Answer. Yes, in Switzerland the politicians know that all their legislation faces an optional referendum, so they propose sensible laws because they do not want their work vetoed. As a result, although the Swiss people have the right to vote any time they want, they rarely have to.
In BC no loophole should be left - no major action by government should ever again be possible without the approval of the majority of the people. The key here is that it is a fact that under the Swiss system the people approve a government action when a referendum is NOT called. This is the simplest method for controling government that can be devised.
All other methods leave some loophole that allows government to evade control by the people. As examples of this,
- The present BC initiative/recall legislation intentionally sets a petition threshold that is impossible to meet,
- The commonly heard suggestion these days that the people “should be able to vote on important issues” is deceptive because it leaves government to decide IF the people will be allowed a vote at all,
- The American system of holding votes only at election time delays WHEN the people can vote, and
- The American system also works in government’s favor by bundling issues to confuse and force the voter to decide maybe 10 issues at once instead of one.
All referendums are either REQUIRED, or OPTIONAL. Referendums concerning the constitution are required. Referendums concerning legislation are optional - at the option of the people.
The majority of legislation proposed by government never triggers an optional referendum. The people simply opt to allow it to become law.
In addition, both the government and the people can propose changes to laws and to the constitution. This is called INITIATIVE.
The highly praised American system lacks these built-in levers that the Swiss can pull. At the federal level Americans are as helpless as the people of BC to control government, and it is pointless for British Columbians to copy the American system of voting.
How can the Swiss success be copied in BC ?
The following four components giving full control to the voters can be enacted by the BC Legislature:
- A mechanism is needed to allow the people to approve ALL legislation before it becomes law. (The Optional Legislative Referendum).
- A mechanism is needed to allow the people to approve all amendments to BC’s new constitution before they take effect. (The Required Constitutional Referendum).
- A mechanism is needed to allow the people to initiate and force into law legislation which the government declines to enact. (The Optional Legislative Initiative).
- A mechanism is needed to allow the people to initiate and enact an amendment to the BC constitution which the government declines to enact. (The Required Constitutional Initiative).
- A fifth component will extend control to public servants and the judiciary.
- A mechanism is needed to allow the people to promptly but fairly remove from office any elected or unelected public servant and any member of the BC judicial system (The Recall).
Precedents available to guide us. We can draw on the comprehensive Swiss system for 150 years of experience with binding Legislative and Constitutional Initiatives and Referendums. The Swiss system has survived so many years in spite of conditions far worse than those in today’s BC - Swiss civil war, four languages, three main nationalities, and over 20 cantons or provinces. The argument that the Swiss system would not work in a larger geographical area such as BC seems to have little substance to support it. If anything, such an argument may indicate a need for some degree of decentralising part of BCÕs decision making process.
To seriously argue that “the people of BC should not have a system for controling the government of BC” because of the size of this province is the establishmentÕs feeble rearguard action. It is significant that in a century and a half the Swiss have made no move to abolish their Direct Democracy and return to the representative democracy that plagues BC today.
For help in designing our Recall we can look to the experience of the 20+ states of the American Union
Examining the five elements one at a time:
- The Legislative Referendum - This device from Switzerland is automatic and water-tight. It lessens the need for recall of elected MLAs. It removes the ability of small but powerful lobbies and advisors and “handlers” to unduly influence our law making.It removes a government’s ability to withhold permission for a binding referendum. It is a powerful incentive to the majority party in government to consult with the opposition parties when drafting legislation which must eventually face the inevitable referendum; or put differently, it encourages legislation by consensus.In Switzerland the electorate has 100 days from the publication of a statute in which to gather a certain number of names on a petition (BC could use either a figure, eg 50 000, or a percentage, eg 3% of the voters’ list). A successful petition forces a national referendum which is binding. Defeated statutes may not be reintroduced for a certain number of years. (Swiss voters have in the past turned down three tax increases in a row). Proposed Treaties are also subject to binding referendum (for example in BC the FTA, NAFTA, the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child, and submissions to the WTO would be subject to the optional referendum)Consensus legislation in Switzerland seems to have generally resulted in voter turnouts as low as 50%, indicating that the Swiss are contented with the working of the system. It is logical that the “threat” of rejection by referendum will raise the quality of consultation and serious debate in the BC Legislature. In Switzerland and in other countries, the frequency of use of the legislative referendum dropped off as governments gradually came to more closely reflect the popular will.Note that Switzerland recently found it necessary to repeal the “emergency exemption” clause, which permitted the government to shelter legislation from the people’s veto. Note also the Swiss time-saving feature - people need only go to the polls in the event of unsatisfactory legislation.
- The Constitutional Referendum - The proper definition of a Constitution is the one in BlackÕs Law dictionary: “A charter of government deriving its whole authority from the governed”.A constitution (the basic law of the people) should not be set in concrete, but should permit fine-tuning over time by either government or by popular initiative (both initiatives requiring popular assent).With such a method the people can control modifications to a constitution they wrote themselves in the first place, as contrasted with the deadlock in amending the present so-called Canadian constitution (which has never been submitted to a people’s vote). The “So-called’ constitution, because Peter Hogg, apparently a specialist in constitutional law, seems to have called the BNA Act “the opposite of a constitution”.The drafting stage of BC’s new constitution should have major public input, and the issues should be “unbundled” (that is, approved individually), and future amendments put forward by government would only be enacted after a binding referendum.
- The Legislative Initiative - BC voters should have the power to institute, to amend or to repeal legislation on which the BC government declines to act.The correct threshold number of signatures to activate an initiative should be the choice of the voters. The voters want the right to initiate legislation, but do not want to run to the polls once a week. The Swiss have developed an acceptable system of polls every three months, with each issue the subject of a separate vote.The cost of this “unbundling” of issues is reduced by the use of volunteer manned polls, and has never been the target of an attempt to abolish the system as too costly. In fact the Swiss seem to be discussing ways to extend their direct democracy. A Swiss initiative requires twice as many names on the petition as the legislative referendum, due to the more relaxed time constraints.
- The Constitutional Initiative - Partial amendments to the BC constitution proposed by the people should be put to binding provincial referendum on the production of a stated number of voter signatures - again a threshold to be decided by the people (100 000 in Switzerland). The drafting of a proposed constitutional amendment can be done by experts retained by the initiators, or by government lawyers if the initiative so requests.The ability to make regular amendments to the country’s constitution is desirable because it is the foundation document, and few persons have the wisdom to write perfect guidelines for all future situations. An interesting and sensible suggestion that has recently been circulated is that disputes over constitutional questions should not be decided by a tiny group of persons called a court, especially a court that has been selected previously by government. The people who “wrote” the original constitution should decide what is unconstitutional. Perhaps as a compromise court decisions on constitutional questions should be subject to optional binding referendum.
- The Recall - For citizens to be able to exercise total control over the government that they have elected, a form of recall is vital. The only question is what form it should take. Citizen control over the making of law is little use without citizen control over the administration of law. The people must be given the power to remove all public officials; that is, elected and appointed officials of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.We must leave no loopholes. The American experience is proof of that - recall exists in only 13 states and many local governments, but not at the highest (federal) level, and today Americans are as helpless as citizens of other countries to control the activities of those who would centralise power.Arguments against Recall of senior officials and judges grow weaker with each scandal. The truth is that under the Westminster Parliamentary System inherited by Canada, the executive are not directly elected by the voters, but by the “parliamentary electoral college”. Experienced experts in law have written that the device called “Cabinet” is a convention which is not upholdable under the law, and which has grown up in the past 200/300 years to suit the aims of the elite who consider that only their elite is fit to rule.Likewise the concept of the independence of the judiciary really means no more than the elite’s independence to choose suitable judges, and the judges’ independence from accountability to the citizens. This nonsense should be swept away and all officials made “swiftly removeable for cause” - no more 5 year delays in removing an official who is serving a 4 year term.
- Summary
- A watertight direct democracy clause in the BC constitution will include all 5 elements;
- A concise summary of Initiative and Referendum over the years and in all nations is available in short book form. The Australian lawyer Geoffrey Walker presents all aspects of the case for Initiative and Referendum, including a section detailing with and refuting all known objections to Direct Democracy, together with interesting voter patterns in a section on voting results. Useful suggestions are made for the drafting of direct democracy legislation.