Better democracy

A great many of us have listened ad nauseum to the nonnegotiable claim by the supporters of Brexit that the result of the June 2016 referendum represented the irreversible will of the people. In the case of the UK, a simple majority in the votes cast is sufficient to determine a binding result.

This version of democracy can be contrasted with the much more sophisticated referendum systems applied in the many “democracies” throughout the world which take into account relevant factors absent from a binary system. Switzerland is perhaps one of the best examples of a system with incorporated safeguards aimed at ensuring a result reflecting the will of the people for major decisions but with a majority of 60-40 required for constitutional issues and a minimum participation rate of 40 per cent of eligible electors. If similar regulations applied in the UK, the referendum result would clearly have been different. It is difficult to reconcile the principles of democracy with a decision made by what could be a small percentage of eligible voters, particularly when “activists” rather than the sleeping majority are more likely to vote.

Against this background, which raises the issue of which version of democracy can truly reflect the will of the people

and the principle of one man, one vote, there would appear to be a good case for examining what refinements could be introduced into a democratic system which may benefit by being brought up to date with the changing world, as technology plays an ever-increasing role.

When Aristotle proclaimed that “democracy is best attained when all persons alike share in government the utmost” it would appear the message may have some relevance to present day politics. His subsequent observation that “democracy was the worst form of government and leading to mob rule” should perhaps focus attention on how it can be improved.

ROBERT MITCHELL

Matthews Drive Newtongrange, Midlothian