Ich werde ab  11.12.2009 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am
22.12.2009.

Bei dringenden Angelegenheiten wenden Sie sich bitte an:
roswitha.scheurich@...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Parish Poll result to be ignored by Council

Interesting debate up there in Northampton East:

http://www.northantset.co.uk/news/Town-votes-39no39-to-leisure.5884928.jp
Published Date:
04 December 2009

Town votes 'no' to leisure centre plan

"I think they should look at investing money in the existing facilities
instead of going ahead with the Manor Park plans"
Derek Wood

.....

Rushden Town Council leader Colin Wright, who has been working on the
Manor Park project with East Northamptonshire Council, was disappointed
by the outcome of the public vote.

He said: "I'm disappointed with the vote but this project was in our
manifesto in the run-up to the last town council elections and we were
voted in on it. We were given a mandate by the public then to proceed
with this and we will continue to do so.

"The outcome of this poll will make no difference as this project is a
key element to the future of our town and is vital if Rushden is going
to survive.

"It's disappointing that this poll, which is not legally binding, has
cost the taxpayer £8,000."

--------------------
See related:

http://www.iniref.org/local-referendum.html "How To"
http://www.iniref.org/poll-regulations.html Parish Poll rules must be
re-written


I&R ~ GB

DIRECT DEMOCRACY CALL AT POWER 2010
http://www.power2010.org.uk/blog/entry/idea-of-the-day-one-million-voters-can-ca\
ll-a-referendum/

Ken submitted the following "big idea": Idea of the day: One million
voters can call a referendum
17.11.2009 // by Guest

This idea comes from Ken in Dorset:

What's the big idea?:

*Governments must establish a referendum whenever requested by a million
voters and governments must abide by the results of such a referendum.
*
----------------------------------------------
*PLEASE VISIT THE POWER 2010 CAMPAIGN AND SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS
PROPOSAL!
<http://www.power2010.org.uk/blog/entry/idea-of-the-day-one-million-voters-can-c\
all-a-referendum/>*

THE "TOP FIVE" IDEAS WILL RECEIVE SPECIAL TREATMENT BY THE POWER CAMPAIGNERS

----------------------------------------------

I&R ~  GB replied as follows:

michaelmacpherson [Moderator] 1 hour ago
<http://www.power2010.org.uk/blog/entry/idea-of-the-day-one-million-voters-can-c\
all-a-referendum/#comment-23449784>


Ken in Dorset wrote: "What's the big idea?:
Governments must establish a referendum whenever requested by a million
voters and governments must abide by the results of such a referendum."

Among an impressive collection of recommendations for reform of our
democracy and governance, the Power Inquiry put forward a proposal for
partial direct democracy (Report 2006, Recommendation 24). The proposal
had two stages, a citizens' initiative which if successful must be
debated in Parliament. To reach this stage it was suggested that 400,000
voter-endorsements (signatures) would be required. If Parliament rejects
the proposal, then the proposing group (plus others of like mind) could
push through a demand for plebiscite by collecting a further 400,000
endorsements. Additionally, as in other countries, Parliament would be
able to put forward an alternative proposal and both must be put to the
electorate for decision.

Of course the exact numbers and procedures need to be debated publicly.

This sort of democracy, citizen-led, is unpopular with politicians. In
oder to get elements of direct democracy introduced we need a focussed
campaign. Some campaign tactics for the coming election may be found
here http://www.iniref.org/carta.htm

and more information about direct democracy, initiative, referendum and
recall here http://www.iniref.org/

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Michael Macpherson wrote:
   To: Democracy-Forum@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:14 AM
   Subject: Re: [Democracy-Forum] Re: Greetings fellow Democrats



   snip to:

   To summarise things simply, I think that John, with his Simultaneous
   Policy - Voting for Global Peace & Justice www.simpol.org/ idea, favours
   moving towards better co-ordinated public policy (e.g. re. finance)
   globally. Thomas pleads that more support should be given to smaller
   political parties. (From my observations the latter can improve the
   quality of politics. For instance, having green parties in parliament
   has cause other parties to adopt their proposals. At least one green
   party which entered government was effective in pushing through the
   reforms which they had promised. Problem for GB is that the electoral
   system keeps small parties out of UK government.)

   In their principles the proposals of Tom and John do not have to exclude
   each other. Even if we consider only local democracy (e.g. towns +
   cities) we as citizens must consider the global effects of our decisions
   and policies.

   Unsurprisingly I want to add in a plea for more DIRECT issue-based
   democracy at all levels of governance. Considering only the
   nation-state. With citizen-initiated referendum we-the -people can play
   a role on the international stage. For instance, we can approve by
   plebiscite a proposal to MANDATE our representative, say in the EU or at
   United Nations, to push for a particular policy. The Swiss have done
   this at the UN, the Italians for EU. These are more good reasons to push
   for more citizen-led democracy -- to this end see
   http://www.iniref.org/carta.htm and http://www.iniref.org/tactic.html

   Michael


   Thank you, Michael.

   And, yes, you are absolutely right that Simultaneous Policy (Simpol) and
voting in new parties or candidates are not mutually exclusive. Not mutually
exclusive provided, that is, we make a distinction between national
issues/policies and global issues/policies. The reaaon there's a vital need for
this distinction is because of the phenomenon of destructive international
competition, and this applies, I suggest, as much to national party politics as
to citizen-initiated referenda.

   Let me explain. Let's say, for example, that citizens in one country (or in a
restricted group of  countries) used a citizen-initiated referendum to force
their government(s) to cut carbon emissions by 60-80% so as to ensure that their
nation(s) did what is necessary to solve global warming.

   The problem is that no sooner had campaigning got under way, business
interests in those countries would very logically and justifiably complain that
such a unilateral cut would harm national competitiveness, cost masses of jobs,
harm the economy, etc, etc because it would necessarily increase business costs.
As a result, it would either put them out of business or force them to move
elsewhere to some country not implementing the cut. Citizens, if they behave
logically and sensibly, would then withdraw their support for their own
referndum initiative.

   So my point is that, in today's world, we have to start distinguishing between
two fundamentally different kinds of policy: on the one hand there are
unilateral policies which CAN be implemented by any nation (or relatively small
group of nations) independently because they would not endanger the
competitiveness of those nations; and, on the other, simultaneous policies which
must be implemented by all, or virtually all, nations simultaneously because
that is the only way to overcome the competitiveness problem.

   So, while you're right that citizen-initiated referenda and new, more ethical
political parties would be very valuable and welcome, we also need to
acknowledge, I think, the severe limitations placed upon them in a world where
capital, corporations and investors move freely across national borders.

   In addition to that, what a closer look at Simpol would show, is that it is,
in fact, a form of issue-based direct democracy along the lines you call for,
Michael. Although it uses politicians and parties as passive conduits for
implementing its agenda, that agenda itself is designed democratically by
citizens and politicians have no influence on it. Effectively, then, Simpol
could be described as global direct democracy in action. Moreover, because it
uses existing democratic processes (albeit it in a highly unconventional
fashion) to achieve its objectives, it can be taken forward in all democratic
countries regardless of whether citizen-initiated referenda are permitted.
Citizen-initiated referenda, where they are permitted, however, could be a very
useful tool for advancing Simpol.

   So, there too, the two are not mutually exclusive!

   All the best,
   John













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

John Bunzl wrote:
>
>
> Thomas Austin wrote:
>
> Well john,
> No!
> "Isn't it time, then, that we re-thought what politics and democracy
> really mean in the age of globalization?"
>
> And again No! Thinking globally before thinking independently of what
> Democracy means is to duck the issue entirely. First we must think of
> what (our) Democracy means to us, we--the--people. Unless the idea is
> to do away with Democracy altogether we must each begin with
> ourselves, the people.
> I think, dear John, that you are making excuses to do away with the
> status-quo and replace it with yet more of the same. Perhaps you would
> do away with politicians full stop and give the bankers the keys to UK
> Plc/HMS UK, or whatever you wish to call 'it'?
> I may have missed all that you have already said as to quite what you
> mean, quite what you leave dangling. If this is so do please point me
> to where your idea is laid out.
> Chow all,
> Oudeis
>
> Dear Thomas,
>
> I agree that we must all think about what our Democracy means to us.
>
> It is for precisely that reason that we need to understand why it has
> become relatively meaningless, at least as far as international issues
> are concerned. It is precisely for that reason, in other words, that
> we need to understand how globalisation and the free movement of
> capital have subverted and crippled our national democracies to such
> an astonishing extent and why, therefore, simply voting in a different
> party, or different candidates, won't make any significant difference.
>
> We can, of course, ignore the realities of globalisation if we want
> (and as you seem to suggest we should) but that would be to consign
> ourselves and our democracy to ever increasing meaninglessness.
>
> That's not what I want, but if it's what you want, go right on ahead
> and ignore reality.
>
> best wishes
> John Bunzl
>

To summarise things simply, I think that John, with his Simultaneous
Policy - Voting for Global Peace & Justice www.simpol.org/ idea, favours
moving towards better co-ordinated public policy (e.g. re. finance)
globally. Thomas pleads that more support should be given to smaller
political parties. (From my observations the latter can improve the
quality of politics. For instance, having green parties in parliament
has cause other parties to adopt their proposals. At least one green
party which entered government was effective in pushing through the
reforms which they had promised. Problem for GB is that the electoral
system keeps small parties out of UK government.)

In their principles the proposals of Tom and John do not have to exclude
each other. Even if we consider only local democracy (e.g. towns +
cities) we as citizens must consider the global effects of our decisions
and policies.

Unsurprisingly I want to add in a plea for more DIRECT issue-based
democracy at all levels of governance. Considering only the
nation-state. With citizen-initiated referendum we-the -people can play
a role on the international stage. For instance, we can approve by
plebiscite a proposal to MANDATE our representative, say in the EU or at
United Nations, to push for a particular policy. The Swiss have done
this at the UN, the Italians for EU. These are more good reasons to push
for more citizen-led democracy -- to this end see
http://www.iniref.org/carta.htm  and http://www.iniref.org/tactic.html

Michael










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thomas Austin wrote:


Well john,
No!
     "Isn't it time, then, that we re-thought what politics and democracy really
mean in the age of globalization?"

And again No!  Thinking globally before thinking independently of what Democracy
means is to duck the issue entirely. First we must think of what (our) Democracy
means to us, we--the--people. Unless the idea is to do away with Democracy
altogether we must each begin with ourselves, the people.
I think, dear John, that you are making excuses to do away with the status-quo
and replace it with yet more of the same. Perhaps you would do away with
politicians full stop and give the bankers the keys to UK Plc/HMS UK, or
whatever you wish to call 'it'?
I may have missed all that you have already said as to quite what you mean,
quite what you leave dangling. If this is so do please point me to where your
idea is laid out.
Chow all,
Oudeis


Dear Thomas,

I agree that we must all think about what our Democracy means to us.

It is for precisely that reason that we need to understand why it has become
relatively meaningless, at least as far as international issues are concerned.
It is precisely for that reason, in other words, that we need to understand how
globalisation and the free movement of capital have subverted and crippled our
national democracies to such an astonishing extent and why, therefore, simply
voting in a different party, or different candidates, won't make any significant
difference.

We can, of course, ignore the realities of globalisation if we want (and as you
seem to suggest we should) but that would be to consign ourselves and our
democracy to ever increasing meaninglessness.

That's not what I want, but if it's what you want, go right on ahead and ignore
reality.

best wishes
John Bunzl


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thomas Austin wrote:
   To: Democracy-Forum@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 11:01 AM
   Subject: [Democracy-Forum] Greetings fellow Democrats.



   Good morning each,
   After what seemed like ages of commenting on Political Blogs, of reding
comment after comment of complaint as to our present state, I determined to
change tack and to offer my own brand of solution. My solution to all our
current woes [might as well begin as I mean to end].
   The overweening concern I identified was the lack of engagement in Politics by
the electorate, especially at elections. We all can sure complain, but can we
come together to contribute to success in the future?
   I lit upon this slogan to set the scene, "Vote for option 4 or more."
   My plea to my fellow electors was to; Stand or support a Local Independent at
the next election.
   I continue to plough this lone furrow, but I am much assisted by the existance
of other groups such as your own, power2010 etc.
   There are many aspects of reform that must be promoted and brought to the
attention of all, but my main intention is to bring to the attention of the
electorate that we-the-people need not accept that Politics is a matter for
Politicians and that the way forward can and should begin AT the next election
by the candidature of Local Independents (with continued Political Reform as
their aim) to take the voice of the public to Parliament.
   I look forward to a rewarding association with you all.
   Oudeis

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




   Dear Thomas, Friends,

   I agree with the sentiment that we the people need to assert our rights.
However, do we not need to take note of some of the underlying reasons why so
many of us have become disenchanted with politics and politicians?

   It's tempting, of course, to put it down to "corrupt MPs" or "inept
politicians" and hence, presumably, your call to elect independent candidates.
But do we ever ask ourselves WHY politicians so often fail to do what we the
people want them to do, especially when it comes to global issues like climate
change or financial market regulation?

   For example, if drastically cutting emissions means increasing the costs of
industry, so making it uncompetitive and consequently resulting in mass job
losses, wouldn't politicians be crazy to cut emissions?

   And if imposing strong financial market regulations including caps on bonuses
means that banks move their operations to some other country, wouldn't
politicians be crazy to regulate?

   Indeed, isn't this precisely why they aren't doing so?

   My suggestion, then, is that we are not taking into account the new
circumstances of globalisation under which politicians are no longer free to do
what citizens want them to do. Furthermore, voting in independent candidates
will not help because they would only be subject to exactly the same
constraints.

   Isn't it time, then, that we re-thought what politics and democracy really
mean in the age of globalization?

   best wishes

   John Bunzl




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Good morning each,
After what seemed like ages of commenting on Political Blogs, of reding comment
after comment of complaint as to our present state, I determined to change tack
and to offer my own brand of solution. My solution to all our current woes
[might as well begin as I mean to end].
The overweening concern I identified was the lack of engagement in Politics by
the electorate, especially at elections. We all can sure complain, but can we
come together to contribute to success in the future?
I lit upon this slogan to set the scene, "Vote for option 4 or more."
My plea to my fellow electors was to; Stand or support a Local Independent at
the next election.
I continue to plough this lone furrow, but I am much assisted by the existance
of other groups such as your own, power2010 etc.
There are many aspects of reform that must be promoted and brought to the
attention of all, but my main intention is to bring to the attention of the
electorate that we-the-people need not accept that Politics is a matter for
Politicians and that the way forward can and should begin AT the next election
by the candidature of Local Independents (with continued Political Reform as
their aim) to take the voice of the public to Parliament.
I look forward to a rewarding association with you all.
Oudeis






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
--------------------------------------------
**
BACKGROUND
A general election for Britain and Northern Ireland will almost
certainly take place in 2010. The three large political parties are NOT
clearly committed to introduce elements of genuine citizen-led
democracy. The conservatives have talked of "election primaries" and
petitions to Parliament. Gordon Brown praises "citizens' juries", an
apology for effective democratic innovation. The LibDems at their
conference rejected a proposal for genuine  direct democracy.

To achieve STATE OF THE ART democracy we must introduce PARTIAL DIRECT
DEMOCRACY. The three main elements which we at I&R ~ GB propose are:

1) The Initiative. A proposal which has been endorsed by an agreed
(large) number of voters must within reasonable time be debated in
Parliament. If Parliament rejects or fails to address the proposal then
a plebiscite ("referendum") must be held.

2) The Veto Referendum. A law or ruling made by Parliament or government
must be put to referendum if a large number of voters demand this.

Once we have "1)" we can push through further reforms such as

3) The Recall. Members of parliament may be dismissed in the period
between elections. An agreed large number of electors from the MP's
constituency may demand that a ballot be held to decide whether the MP
should be dismissed. A dismissed MP would be disqualified from a
resulting by-election.

-----------------------------------------------

*UK DIRECT DEMOCRACY ELECTION-CAMPAIGN*
As campaigners for and supporters of "citizens' initiative and
referendum" we must begin to put pressure on candidates, sitting MPs and
parties in their headquarters. Please help, and play your part -- see
the following:

*WHAT YOU CAN DO*
The I&R ~ GB (direct democracy) election strategy is ready.

Please read the pages "Frame one", "Frame two" and the short "Statement
on UK democracy ...."

If you agree with the plan-of-action then why not join in? It will not
take much time, there are no extra costs and if enough people join in we
will make a big impact.

Here are the documents with urls (hyperlinks):

*START <http://www.iniref.org/carta.htm>*

*OPEN ELECTION-CAMPAIGN STRATEGY <http://www.iniref.org/tactic.html>
FRAME ONE <http://www.iniref.org/tactic.html>
Setting the scene <http://www.iniref.org/tactic.html>


OPEN ELECTION-CAMPAIGN STRATEGY <http://www.iniref.org/tactic2.html>
FRAME TWO <http://www.iniref.org/tactic2.html>
The election-campaign plan-of-action <http://www.iniref.org/tactic2.html>


INDEX PAGE AND PROMISE <http://www.iniref.org/carta.htm>
STATEMENT ON UK DEMOCRACY BY MEMBERS AND PROSPECTIVE MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

-----------------------
*Contact:
I&R ~ GB
info AT iniref.org <mailto:info@...>

/We would like to have your feed-back.
Send us your comments and suggestions for improvement.
How can we help the direct democracy campaign to succeed?/




*


*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Editor wrote:

"The new planning process is already controversial and will become more
so once it swings into full operation next year. Decisions will be taken
quickly and once made cannot be overturned by ministers (a point the
Conservatives intend to change). There are promises of consultation, but
no right of veto for local people on big projects."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/10/ed-miliband-nuclear-energy-p\
olicy

I&R ~ GB replies:

Not only is there NO right of veto for local people, there is no right
of veto by the electorate. The British people have no democratic means
to block a bad law or government policy.

We give away our vote to a party and candidate once every five years and
after that we have nothing to say about what the government does. Sure,
after five or so years we can "throw the blighters out" but  it is
likely that in many policy areas  the new lot will follow very similar
lines.

If We The People took for ourselves the right to referendum, then we
could veto unwanted policy about specific public issues. This type of
partial direct democracy has operated for  many years in Italy,
Switzerland and more recently in all Lands of Germany. A reasonably
large number of voter-endorsements must be collected in order to trigger
this procedure.

Generations to come will be affected by a decision to massively build
nuclear power stations. The public must be informed about previous
nuclear disasters at Calder Hall, Harrisburg, Chernobyl and elsewhere,
and about the technical and environmental problems which for new
installations remain unsolved. It should be possible to call a
referendum on this and for instance on new laws which give greater
powers to central government.

More about citizen-led democracy may be found via
http://www.iniref.org/carta.htm
http://www.iniref.org/index.enter.html

churchill9_2000 wrote:
>
>
>
> I fear Paul is very naive! The present form of "democracy" in most of
> the EU countries is corrupt and mainly influenced by wealth and power.
> This is certainly true in the UK, France and Germany ( where i
> presently live ) and it is very significant that all these countries
> fear referendums nearly as much as the devil fears holy water!
>
> Given that referendums are certainly not completely foolproof they are
> certainly the better choice in many ways. That is why in analysis the
> Swiss form of democracy whilst not being perfect is still the better
> way for the majority of people!
>
> When one looks at EU Power House Germany the real level of democracy
> is shocking! About half the members of the Bundestag come in over the
> very dubious Party Lists where certain shady party figures in the
> background decide who comes on the list and in which order. Even the
> President of the Federal Republic is not elected by the people - and
> this is quite frightening! At Land level it is the same story, the
> President of each Land is not elected by the people and neither is at
> least half of each Lands Parlament.
>
> In the EU it is the same story, who elected Barroso President of the
> Commision again? Not the people! Who selected/elected the all powerful
> commisioners - NOT the people. The commisioners are elected over the
> Old Boy Network and by the Lobby Groups. Who will decide the
> forthcoming EU President and Foreign Minister etc?
>
> Yes you are right - NOT the people that is certain!
>
> Who is proposing in the order of EU priorities to get Turkey in the EU
> now? Again NOT the people - the people have other problems within
> their countries and about the actual EU and want something completely
> different! A financially transparent EU where each members pays its ways!
>
> Certainly at the forthcoming next UK general election the vote should
> go to they that garantee a referendum over the EU and membership etc!
> Why not?
>
>
> --- In Democracy-Forum@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Democracy-Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Michael Macpherson
> <mm@...> wrote:
> >
> > Paul wrote 28 Oct 2009 at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/diggers350/
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/diggers350/>
> >
> > "I agree with you that more public participation in national decision
> > making is essential/necessary. But in the absence of any framework for
> > discussion that recognises the real and highly disruptive influences
> > that ecological limits will have on society in the near future
> (climate,
> > energy supply, food production, water, population, etc.) any process
> > would be as false and misleading as the present closed-off political
> > dialogue -- and hence no better."
> >
> > Michael Macpherson:
> >
> > Well, we agree on the importance of "more public participation in
> > national decision making" and could discuss how this might be achieved
> > and organised.
> >
> > It is remarkable, although not mysterious, that the "eco-lobby" in
> > Britain is wary of or opposed to the introduction of (partial) direct
> > democracy. It's remarkable because of the stark contrast with other
> > countries. In, say Sweden and Switzerland, the available tool of
> > citizens' initiative has been used by pro-environment groups in
> order to
> > push through referenda. In Germany today, more similar to UK in that
> > direct democracy is unavailable at the national level, the formal
> > campaign for "more democracy" (five thousand paying members) enjoys
> > strong support from many dozens of group-alliances, from
> pro-environment
> > to humanist plus trade-unions and some political parties.
> >
> > It is very important to improve our politics and governance, for the
> > whole spectrum of domestic political fields plus international affairs.
> > Partial direct democracy can do this, bringing improved electoral
> > control and involvement: The "veto referendum" can act as a brake to
> > stop bad or unwanted law. The "initiative" (proposition) allows
> creative
> > and urgent matters to be put onto the public agenda. Great tools for
> > social movements.
> >
> > Certainly, good information and deliberation are need for complex
> > issues. The reforms, instruments which we propose would build in these
> > features, our proposals take these aspects into account. A brief
> > presentation is here http://www.iniref.org/steps.html
> <http://www.iniref.org/steps.html> -- more detail
> > available at web site and on request.
> >
> > Michael.
> >
> > Dr. Michael Macpherson
> > I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
> > Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
> > http://www.iniref.org/ <http://www.iniref.org/>
> > http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/i-and-r.gb
> <http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/i-and-r.gb> sign up for reform
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I fear Paul is very naive! The present form of "democracy" in most of the EU
countries is corrupt and mainly influenced by wealth and power. This is
certainly true in the UK, France and Germany ( where i presently live ) and it
is very significant that all these countries fear referendums nearly as much as
the devil fears holy water!

Given that referendums are certainly not completely foolproof they are certainly
the better choice in many ways. That is why in analysis the Swiss form of
democracy whilst not being perfect is still the better way for the majority of
people!

When one looks at EU Power House Germany the real level of democracy is
shocking! About half the members of the Bundestag come in over the very dubious
Party Lists where certain shady party figures in the background decide who comes
on the list and in which order. Even the President of the Federal Republic is
not elected by the people - and this is quite frightening!  At Land level it is
the same story, the President of each Land is not elected by the people and
neither is at least half of each Lands Parlament.

In the EU it is the same story, who elected Barroso President of the Commision
again? Not the people! Who selected/elected the all powerful commisioners - NOT
the people. The commisioners are elected over the Old Boy Network and by the
Lobby Groups. Who will decide the forthcoming EU President and Foreign Minister
etc?

Yes you are right - NOT the people that is certain!

Who is proposing in the order of EU priorities to get Turkey in the EU now?
Again NOT the people - the people have other problems within their countries and
about the actual EU and want something completely different! A financially
transparent EU where each members pays its ways!

Certainly at the forthcoming next UK general election the vote should go to they
that garantee a referendum over the EU and membership etc! Why not?



--- In Democracy-Forum@yahoogroups.com, Michael Macpherson <mm@...> wrote:
>
> Paul wrote 28 Oct 2009 at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/diggers350/
>
> "I agree with you that more public participation in national decision
> making is essential/necessary. But in the absence of any framework for
> discussion that recognises the real and highly disruptive influences
> that ecological limits will have on society in the near future (climate,
> energy supply, food production, water, population, etc.) any process
> would be as false and misleading as the present closed-off political
> dialogue -- and hence no better."
>
> Michael Macpherson:
>
> Well, we agree on the importance of "more public participation in
> national decision making" and could discuss how this might be achieved
> and organised.
>
> It is remarkable, although not mysterious, that the "eco-lobby" in
> Britain is wary of or opposed to the introduction of (partial) direct
> democracy. It's remarkable because of the stark contrast with other
> countries. In, say Sweden and Switzerland, the available tool of
> citizens' initiative has been used by pro-environment groups in order to
> push through referenda. In Germany today, more similar to UK in that
> direct democracy is unavailable at the national level, the formal
> campaign for "more democracy" (five thousand paying members) enjoys
> strong support from many dozens of group-alliances, from pro-environment
> to humanist plus trade-unions and some political parties.
>
> It is very important to improve our politics and governance, for the
> whole spectrum of domestic political fields plus international affairs.
> Partial direct democracy can do this, bringing improved electoral
> control and involvement: The "veto referendum" can act as a brake to
> stop bad or unwanted law. The "initiative" (proposition) allows creative
> and urgent matters to be put onto the public agenda. Great tools for
> social movements.
>
> Certainly, good information and deliberation are need for complex
> issues. The reforms, instruments which we propose would build in these
> features, our proposals take these aspects into account. A brief
> presentation is here  http://www.iniref.org/steps.html  -- more detail
> available at web site and on request.
>
> Michael.
>
> Dr. Michael Macpherson
> I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
> Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
> http://www.iniref.org/
> http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/i-and-r.gb  sign up for reform
>

Paul wrote 28 Oct 2009 at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/diggers350/

"I agree with you that more public participation in national decision
making is essential/necessary. But in the absence of any framework for
discussion that recognises the real and highly disruptive influences
that ecological limits will have on society in the near future (climate,
energy supply, food production, water, population, etc.) any process
would be as false and misleading as the present closed-off political
dialogue -- and hence no better."

Michael Macpherson:

Well, we agree on the importance of "more public participation in
national decision making" and could discuss how this might be achieved
and organised.

It is remarkable, although not mysterious, that the "eco-lobby" in
Britain is wary of or opposed to the introduction of (partial) direct
democracy. It's remarkable because of the stark contrast with other
countries. In, say Sweden and Switzerland, the available tool of
citizens' initiative has been used by pro-environment groups in order to
push through referenda. In Germany today, more similar to UK in that
direct democracy is unavailable at the national level, the formal
campaign for "more democracy" (five thousand paying members) enjoys
strong support from many dozens of group-alliances, from pro-environment
to humanist plus trade-unions and some political parties.

It is very important to improve our politics and governance, for the
whole spectrum of domestic political fields plus international affairs.
Partial direct democracy can do this, bringing improved electoral
control and involvement: The "veto referendum" can act as a brake to
stop bad or unwanted law. The "initiative" (proposition) allows creative
and urgent matters to be put onto the public agenda. Great tools for
social movements.

Certainly, good information and deliberation are need for complex
issues. The reforms, instruments which we propose would build in these
features, our proposals take these aspects into account. A brief
presentation is here  http://www.iniref.org/steps.html  -- more detail
available at web site and on request.

Michael.

Dr. Michael Macpherson
I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/
http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/i-and-r.gb  sign up for reform

Ich werde ab  26.10.2009 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am
02.11.2009.

Bei dringenden Angelegenheiten wenden Sie sich bitte an:
roswitha.scheurich@...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If a petition like this could lead to a referendum then it could produce
real change. As things are, it will be ignored by the powers that be.

More examples. Greenpeace has listed ten policy aims (at its web site).
Some of these could be formulated as "citizens' initiatives" and, if we
had the right to demand referendum, we could change what the government
does.

More about citizen-led democracy via http://www.iniref.org/

Michael


Paul Mobbs wrote:

  >
  > A petition to ask Brown to respond to the UKERC report
  > [http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/support/Global%20Oil%20Depletion] on the
impacts of an
  > imminent peak in global oil production is now on-line:
  > http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/UKERCoilreport/
  >
  > It's worth signing, if only for the entertainment value of Gordon
Brown trying
  > to resolve in words the contradictory messages of market economics
with the
  > reality of what a declining energy supply means for the 'business as
usual'
  > mentality.
  >
  > [please forward!!]
  >
  > P.
  >
  > - --

I&Rgb LOGO <http://www.iniref.org/>
===============================================================
IR+R NEWS - news about democratic reform, citizens' initiative,
referendum, recall of elected officials. A service of
Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R ~ GB
===============================================================

IN THIS NEWSLETTER THERE ARE THREE ITEMS ::::::::::::::::::::


*1) MP3 AUDIO: DAVID CAMERON PROMISES CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY NATIONAL AND
LOCAL

2) **CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY IS ESSENTIAL FOR SUSTAINABLE CONSTITUTIONAL
REFORM

3) LOCAL GOVERNMENT ESTABLISHMENT OPPOSED TO MORE DEMOCRACY
*
---------------------
MP3 AUDIO: DAVID CAMERON PROMISES CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY NATIONAL AND LOCAL

The Conservative Party** and its leader have substantially answered the
question posed recently by The Independent newspaper "how is Cameron
going to give power to the people?".

In section 3.3. of the Tory green paper "Control Shift" we find QUOTE
"The right of popular initiative is a feature of many political systems
in the developed world. In Switzerland, people have mechanisms for
direct democracy on almost everything from planning applications, to the
precise use of tax resources, to medical ethics. Perhaps the most famous
expression of American civic independence is in Oregon, where the system
known as "citizen initiative" was introduced as long ago as 1902. Under
the Local Government Act 2003, local councils can choose to hold
referendums on any local issue. But there is no mechanism for residents
to petition for a local referendum per se. We will give power to
residents to hold local referendums on any local issue by legislating to
ensure that a referendum is held in a local authority area if 5 per cent
of local citizens sign a petition in favour within a six month period."
UNQUOTE

The above applies to the local government level. In a recent BBC radio
broadcast David Cameron, Leader of the Conservative Party**,  may be
heard saying that the citizens' right to initiate a referendum would be
brought in at country/state level. (Source: BBC radio 4. Beyond
Westminster: The case for replacing or revising our system of
representative democracy. September 2009). A sound clip
<http://www.iniref.org/cameron.bbc.mp3> may be heard or loaded down here
CAMERON <http://www.iniref.org/cameron.bbc.mp3>

At I&R ~ GB, the campaign for citizen-initiated referendum, for over a
decade we have advocated similar reforms, to enhance our indirect
"representative" democracy with elements of citizen participation in the
periods between elections.
---------------------
CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY IS ESSENTIAL FOR SUSTAINABLE CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

/EXTRACT  FULL ARTICLE <http://www.iniref.org/peoples.constitution.html>
/In almost all modern states there is a clear distinction between
constitutional and other law. Commonly, it is more difficult to change
constitution. For instance, a "super-majority" of elected
representatives may be required and an indication of regional consensus
needed. These measures serve to indicate how importantly constitution is
regarded. There are very good reasons to distinguish constitutional from
other law and to treat it with more care.

For decades, across the world, it has been accepted and practised that
only an electorate -- The People -- may enact a state constitution. In
many countries, a number of them in Europe, NO change can be made to
state constitution unless (a) the electorate has been informed and
consulted (b) a broad and extended public debate has been enabled and
organised (c) a referendum (plebiscite) has been held for the final
decision. READ MORE <http://www.iniref.org/peoples.constitution.html>
--------------------
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ESTABLISHMENT OPPOSED TO MORE DEMOCRACY

In recent decades government and opposition have competed in offering
suggestions to improve involvement of voters, citizens, in running
public affairs. Most people (shown by research) regard voting in an
election once every few years to be a very poor way of taking part. In
surveys over 70 percent of adults approve that an agreed large number of
voters should be able to trigger a referendum on any public issue.

Local government officials and politicians have voiced strong opposition
to the introduction of citizens' initiatives which could lead to
plebiscite, that is a referendum which can overrule the council. NLGN*
appears to echo and amplify this fear, which is partly attributable to
unfamiliarity with the procedures of citizen-led democracy. The
"alternative" offered by NLGN resembles a petition. The council is not
obliged to act on the proposal and no referendum of the electorate is
foreseen. This would make voter frustration even worse.

In democratic governance, if a vote is needed, there will usually be
winners (majority) and losers (minority). These change profile from
issue to issue. (Consensus is by no means excluded.) By claiming that
minority rights will be abused if the electorate gains more say, NLGN
unjustifiably raises fear. Which scenario of abuse do you predict?

We replied to a similar article at the web site of "Public Service" at
http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=10593

More about citizen-led democracy may be found via our web site
www.iniref.org
--------------
I&R ~ GB

*NLGN = New Local Government Network

A reply to http://www.progressonline.org.uk/Magazine/article.asp?a=4682
Community proposal. Tory plans for local referendums need more thought.
08 September 2009
=============================================

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain

http://www.iniref.org/

Discuss or comment at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/democracy-forum
Donate via http://www.iniref.org/index2.html

** I&R ~ GB is independent of political parties.









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

<http://www.iniref.org/support.html>

===============================================================
IR+R NEWS - news about democratic reform, citizens' initiative,
referendum, recall of elected officials. A service of
Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R ~ GB
===============================================================

/THREE ITEMS/

REFORM OF LOCAL DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN ENGLAND AND WALES

DIRECT DEMOCRACY NEWS FROM USA STATES

EVENTS IN GREECE 2009

----------------------------------------


REFORM OF LOCAL DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN ENGLAND AND WALES

Reform of Parish Poll and other Direct Democracy Regulations
<http://www.iniref.org/poll-regulations.html>

International comparison of participative, citizen-led democracy shows
the UK and its countries near the foot of the league table -- see our
new on-line diagram. <http://www.iniref.org/introduction.html>The only
level of governance in which the electorate may intervene in general
matters of public policy is "The Parish".  Paradoxically the
"regulations" (Local Government Act 1972) make it far TOO EASY to
initiate a "Parish Poll" so that the action may attract very little
attention and ballot turnout is often low. Also, the "decision" taken by
the electorate in ballot is NOT binding on the council, so that many
people see the whole procedure as a waste of time and effort.

Some suggestions about how to reform the regulation of citizen-initiated
referendum and parish poll may be found at the INIREF web page
Reform of Parish Poll and other Direct Democracy Regulations
<http://www.iniref.org/poll-regulations.html>and your COMMENTS are invited.

----------------------------------------

DIRECT DEMOCRACY NEWS FROM USA STATES

Thanks to: BallotPedia Review Volume 1, Issue 5: 9/1/2009 /
/

     * The Washington Secretary of State
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FWashing\
ton_Secretary_of_State>
       announced late on August 31
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FBC2009%\
23August>
       that Referendum 71
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FWashing\
ton_Referendum_71_%25282009%2529>
       had qualified for the November 3, 2009 ballot
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FWashing\
ton_R-71_qualifies_for_November_ballot>.
       A Post-certification signature challenge
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FPost-ce\
rtification_signature_challenge>
       has already been filed challenging the certification.
     * On August 25
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FAugust_\
25%2C_2009_ballot_measures_in_California>,
       voters in California were friendly to a variety of local tax
       measures, but they weren't friendly to a school board member in
       the Alisal Union School District
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FJesus_V\
elazquez_recall%2C_Alisal_Union_School_District%2C_California%2C_2009>.

     * Will 2009 go down as the year of the veto referendum
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FVeto_re\
ferendum>?
       An Oregon tax hike referendum
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FOregon_\
tax_hike_referendum_likely_to_be_on_January_2010_ballot>
       is likely to qualify, supporters say, but that'll be a January
       2010 ballot
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2F2010_ba\
llot_measures>.

     * The statewide November 3, 2009 ballot in Maine
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FMaine_2\
009_ballot_measures>
       is a ballot hound's dream. It has marriage, taxes, school
       consolidation and marijuana. ....

     * innovative proposal afloat in Florida for a new petition form
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FFlorida\
_lawsuit_calls_for_new_petition_forms>.

     * Casino foes in Ohio
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FOpponen\
ts_lay_out_arguments_against_Ohio_casino_initiative>
       are preparing their anti-casino arguments, but some say that the
       fifth time will be the charm.
     * Washington's Top-Two Initiative (2004)
      
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=30986389&msgid=404246&act=8688&c=2770\
42&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fballotpedia.org%2Fwiki%2Findex.php%2FWashing\
ton%2527s_%2522Top-Two%2522_debate_will_go_to_court>
       is still in lawsuit limbo.


       Contact BallotPedia <http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page>


----------------------------------------

EVENTS IN GREECE 2009
N.G.O Forum for Citizens' Democracy
Dear DD colleagues,
We are waiting your ideas and proposals for making the  agenda of  our
2nd  Direct Democratic Euro-Vision ( DD E-V) Conference  in Athens
(Saturday Oct. 3rd and Sunday  Oct.4th), that will be combined also
with  parts  of the Conference " Democracy in  Motion",  organized by
our German DD  colleagues of   "Omnibus der Direkten Demokratie" (
www.omnibus.org ) and  Goethe Institut of Athens.

            You are also invited in  our  Local Direct Democracy Project
in Aghia Paraskevi, Athens, where  we  organize on  Monday , October
5th, 2009 at  19:00  our 2nd  Local Citizens'  Assembly and
Observatory,  deciding for the  local Referenda that will take place
here  next  December  and  implementing  the  four  bases of   our
local  Direct Democracy  project :

A. unions of  people  living  in concrete   Neighborhoods-Building
Squares, as  local  Planning  cells  of  our  town,
B. Thematic  Neighborhoods  -local NGOs- of  Citizens with  common
Interests,  recognized  officially and  supported  by the  Municipality,
C. Citizens' Observatory  with Citizens' Juries  monitoring the Mayor's,
local  enterprises's   and  Submayors's  works  and organizing local
Referenda,
D.Local  Ombudsman, coordinating  all the  above issues  in favor  of
Direct  Democratic  principles.

Please  inform  your  friends  and  interested  Citizens  for
implementing  Direct  Democracy  on  similar  principles  all  over
Europe  in order  to participate  and inform us  as  soon as  possible
of  your own  interest.   Contact George L. Kokkas geoko@...
N.G.O Forum for Citizens' Democracy Tel.: +30 21036483

**----------------------------------------
IR+R NEWS
I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/
http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/i-and-r.gb  /sign up for reform/






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ich werde ab  11.08.2009 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am
01.09.2009.

Bei dringenden Angelegenheiten wenden Sie sich bitte an:
roswitha.scheurich@...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

PLUG-IN citizen-led democracy/APPEAL FOR CO-OPERATION

Below you can read a short letter addressed to Climate Campaigners.
which can serve as an example of a request for co-operation among people
and groups concerned about "worthy causes" ;-)

Sincerely,
Michael
----------

Protests like *Climate Camp* are invaluable in bringing dangers and
challenges into public view. They can help to inform and may change
people's attitudes.

To alter *government action* and direction of *public policy* we need
*stronger democracy* so that the people can overrule the politicians,
colluding with their backers in business and finance.

*Direct democracy* is a big part of the answer but without the right
"tools" it will remain an unfulfilled dream. These tools of citizen-led
democracy include *"the initiative"* (law-proposal), the
*veto-referendum* (a government law can be blocked or repealed); plus
"*the recall*" of elected MPs and officials.

Join the struggle for democracy in 21st century Britain. *"It's about
time"*.

Why not "PLUG IN" the campaign for direct democracy, adding this call to
your demands? See for example I&R ~ GB.

All the best,
Michael

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum <http://www.iniref.org/>
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/
Basic presentation <http://www.iniref.org/steps.html>
The case for more democracy <http://www.iniref.org/case.html>
Sign up for reform <http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/i-and-r.gb>

*Links*
http://campaignfordemocracy.org.uk/directdemocracyexamples/
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rodmell/








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I&Rgb LOGO <http://www.iniref.org/support.html>
===============================================================
IR+R NEWS - news about democratic reform, citizens' initiative,
referendum, recall of elected officials. A service of
Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R ~ GB
===============================================================

IN THIS NEWSLETTER THERE ARE THREE ITEMS ::::::::::::::::::::

1) THE OXFORD TIMES
2) HOWL OF OUTRAGE AND THEN?
3) RESOURCES FOR CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS "FAQS"

1)
THE OXFORD TIMES Thursday 16th July 2009
http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/features/4489974.The_man_to_lecture_our_leader\
s/

Interview with Vernon Bogdanor, Professor of Government at Oxford University
Prof. Bogdanor is quoted as follows:
"People are saying we should have more control ourselves. Not just elites."
"People are demanding a greater degree of political control of public
services."
"Direct democracy could take the form of five per cent of the local
electorate being able to trigger a referendum on any given subject."

I&R ~ GB REPLIES:
In the UK and England many important public services, such as health,
education and others, for instance, regional investment (thereby jobs
and prosperity), are governed from the centre. So, gaining more say ONLY
locally, in parish, town or county affairs could bring further
frustration for those who try to get involved.

Effective participation in democracy could be achieved by using the
"citizens' proposal" (initiative) at all levels, from UK/Westminster
"up" to local politics. To proceed, a proposal must  be supported by a
very large number of voters and if parliament rejects it a referendum
must be held. Unwanted laws or government proposals can be vetoed by
optional referendum. These "tools" of democracy are up and running and
have been well tried in other countries.

More detail may be found via the following links:
http://www.iniref.org/
http://www.iniref.org/steps.html
http://campaignfordemocracy.org.uk/directdemocracyexamples/ 0

=============================================

2)
HOWL OF OUTRAGE AND THEN?
After a global howl of outrage, we have returned to business as usual:
The nation watches and either feels its veins bulge with rage or shrugs
with resignation, despairing at society's inability to change. Jonathan
Freedland guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 23 June 2009
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/jun/23/banks-mps-reform

I&R ~ GB REPLIES:
Changing the electoral system promises to improve representation of
citizens' views and desires but it allows only indirect democracy.
As with "first past the post" you give away your vote to a candidate or
party (-list) and have no effective way to influence policy for around
five years. This applies to a vast majority of the population.

In the introduction to the Power Inquiry report 2006 we find

"This is not a report simply about constitutional change. It is a report
about giving people real influence over the bread and butter issues
which affect their lives."

"The disquiet is really about having no say. It is about feeling
disconnected because voting once every four or five years does not feel
like real engagement. Asking people set questions in focus groups or
polling is a poor substitute for real democratic processes."

How do you pundits and chatterers suggest that we should achieve this
"real engagement" which is clearly not allowed through "voting once
every four or five years" ?

Some ideas may be found in our "Our reply to the Power Inquiry" via
http://www.iniref.org/latest.html
(scroll down the page)
=============================================

3)
RESOURCES FOR CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS "FAQS"

Better Democracy New Zealand <http://www.betterdemocracy.co.nz/faq.php>
http://www.betterdemocracy.co.nz/faq.php

Canadians for Direct Democracy (CDD) <http://www.npsnet.com/cdd/FAQs.htm>
http://www.npsnet.com/cdd/FAQs.htm

Direct Democracy Campaign: Twelve Questions and Answers
<http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rodmell/quest.htm>
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rodmell/quest.htm

Tim Clarke's
FAQ about Direct Democracy A NEW PRODUCTION: YOUR COMMENTS INVITED
<http://www.iniref.org/faq.doc>

=============================================

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum

Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/

Discuss or comment at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/democracy-forum
Donate via http://www.iniref.org/index2.html









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Mark Barrett wrote:
  >
  >
  > I'd argue strongly that INIREF and others should consider linking the
struggle for cit initiated referenda and such like to initiatives for
people to have a real say in actual day to day decision making in their
local communities - to make democracy a reality we need to locate the
appropriate path to a decentralised, community focused society aswell as
new forms of inclusive law making powers. Both will be supported in
rhetoric of parties seeking power, but we need to be ready - 100%
expectant even, given invariable previous form throughout political
history - of opportunistic party/factional political promises to give
"power to the people"  to do direct action for it, so they cannot be
allowed to get off the hook!

  >



  > 2009/6/9 Michael Macpherson <mm@...>
  >
  >
  >     June 2009.
  >
  >     Although largely ignored by government and censored by the "serious"
  >     press, numerous calls to strengthen democracy by introducing the
  >     citizen-initiated referendum at all levels of governance will
have been
  >     noticed by those who read on-line comments and blogs. At least one
  >     senior UK academic a few days ago publicly echoed this call.
  >
  >     Guess who ?!
  >
  >     For over a decade our reform group has advocated the introduction of
  >     citizen-led procedures such as the "initiative" , used to make
  >     law-proposals or to recall MPs, and the citizen-triggered
veto-referendum.
  >
  >     With a general election not too far ahead it is pertinent to ask
if and
  >     if so how the political parties would introduce elements of direct
  >     democracy if elected to power.
  >
  >     We have followed manifestos and public statements and summarised what
  >     can be expected of the hitherto larger parties. To read this go to
  >     http://www.iniref.org/latest.html and follow the link
  >     Citizens and Direct Democracy: What chance of reform do the major UK
  >     political parties offer?
  >
  >     I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
  >     Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
  >     http://www.iniref.org/
  >


  > --
  > "We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet /Yet is
there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.”


Michael Macpherson for I&R –  GB.

Mark, the "Citizens' Initiative and Referendum" CIR or "citizen-led
(direct) democracy" are fully compatible with the ideal which you sketch
-- decentralised, community focussed society. The excellent short film
"Alpine Initiative" <http://www.iniref.org/alpine.html> shows this as do
many anecdotes from Britain and elsewhere. http://www.iniref.org/alpine.html

CIR is shorthand for a deep reform-, transforming movement. At the
fundament of CIR is full expression of the people's sovereignty but this
does not have to be exercised continually in ballots or referenda.
After, sometimes even before, an initiative crystallises out of people's
needs and voices, a tendency to consensus or compromise has been seen.
And politicians learn that they have to take more care.

Citizen-led democracy offers a range of tools which can be applied to
many problems in public governance. For instance, citizens' assemblies
can be called by electorates, as can public inquiries. Many of the needs
for more and better participation and empowerment which people have
increasingly expressed can be fulfilled at least in part.

Referendum campaigns have often been "single issue" and most have faded
away. Across the world since around 1990 a trend has emerged for
non-aligned CIR campaigns. A vast range of worthy causes and political
issues and problems can be tackled with CIR. Active groups and
individuals from many creative backgrounds have recognised the value of
CIR and that, if we introduce it, they will be able to use it
constructively. I listed groups supporting
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Democracy-Forum/msearch?query=Animal+Experimentat\
ion&submit=Search&charset=ISO-8859-1>
one CIR campaign, in message 273 at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Democracy-Forum/  In UK and its countries
people have yet to realise how valuable CIR is.

Michael

p.s. cc to James Armstrong as part reply to his recent comment about
citizen-led democracy.

Dr. Michael Macpherson
I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

June 2009.
Although largely ignored by government and censored by the "serious"
press, numerous calls to strengthen democracy by introducing the
citizen-initiated referendum at all levels of governance will have been
noticed by those who read on-line comments and blogs. At least one
senior UK academic a few days ago publicly echoed this call.

Guess who ?!

For over a decade our reform group has advocated the introduction of
citizen-led procedures such as the "initiative" , used to make
law-proposals or to recall MPs, and the citizen-triggered veto-referendum.

With a general election not too far ahead it is pertinent to ask if and
if so how the political parties would introduce elements of direct
democracy if elected to power.

We have followed manifestos and public statements and summarised what
can be expected of the hitherto larger parties. To read this go to
http://www.iniref.org/latest.html and follow the link
Citizens and Direct Democracy: What chance of reform do the major UK
political parties offer?


I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/

Hallo Magdalena,

For the forum, could you please summarise the aims of the Lawful Rebellion?

Do they include citizen-led democracy such as the "initiative", used to
make law-proposals or to recall MPs, and the citizen-triggered
veto-referendum?

Regards,
Michael




Magdalena Gniatczynska wrote:
>
>
> --- On *Tue, 9/6/09, Magdalena Gniatczynska
> /<magdalenagni@...>/* wrote:
>
>
>     From: Magdalena Gniatczynska <magdalenagni@...>
>     Subject: Re: [londonsocialforum2003] CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY: LAWFUL
>     REBELLION
>     To: londonsocialforum2003@yahoogroups.com
>     Date: Tuesday, 9 June, 2009, 3:47 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>     --- On Mon, 1/6/09, Magdalena Gniatczynska <magdalenagni@
>     yahoo.com
>     <http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=magdalenagni%40yahoo.com>>
>     wrote:
>
>     > From: Magdalena Gniatczynska <magdalenagni@ yahoo.com
>     <http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=magdalenagni%40yahoo.com>>
>     > Subject: Re: [londonsocialforum2 003] CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY:
>     ELECTION BRIEFING
>     > To: londonsocialforum20 03@yahoogroups. com
>    
<http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=londonsocialforum2003%40yahoogroup\
s.com>
>     > Date: Monday, 1 June, 2009, 7:01 AM
>     > Dear everyone interested in
>     > Citizen-led Democracy,
>     >
>     > WANTED: 1 million Brits to enter Lawful
>     > Rebellion
>     >
>     > Here's a selection of some websites explaining
>     > what Lawful Rebellion is. There's a meeting on the 13th
>     > of June.
>     >
>     > https://www. thebcgroup. org.uk/ <https://www.thebcgroup.org.uk/>
>     >
>     > http://www.tpuc. org/node/ 240 <http://www.tpuc.org/node/240>
>     >
>     > http://www.darklake -synectics. co.uk/ithilien- web/lawful_
>     rebellion. html
>     <http://www.darklake-synectics.co.uk/ithilien-web/lawful_rebellion.html>
>     >
>     > http://www.ukcolumn .org/2009/ 05/24/my- personal- journey-into-
>     lawful-rebellion /
>    
<http://www.ukcolumn.org/2009/05/24/my-personal-journey-into-lawful-rebellion/>
>     >
>     >
>     > http://www.wholetru thcoalition. org/2009/ 05/12/wanted-
>     one-million- rebellious- britons/
>    
<http://www.wholetruthcoalition.org/2009/05/12/wanted-one-million-rebellious-bri\
tons/>
>     >
>     > http://spktruth2pow er.wordpress. com/2009/ 03/10/lawful-
>     rebellion- conference- the-nature- of-the-governmen t/
>    
<http://spktruth2power.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/lawful-rebellion-conference-the-\
nature-of-the-government/>
>     >
>     > http://www.nworesis tance.com/ the-new-world- order-explained.
>     html <http://www.nworesistance.com/the-new-world-order-explained.html>
>     >
>     >
>     > http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=LPH5ikNKaVE
>     <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPH5ikNKaVE>
>     >
>     >
>     > WOULDN'T IT BE NICE TO UNITE IN LAWFUL
>     > REBELLION ?
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     > Magda
>     >
>     >
>     > --- On Sat, 23/5/09, Michael Macpherson
>     > <mm@...
>     <http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mm%40iniref.org>> wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     > From: Michael Macpherson <mm@...
>     <http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mm%40iniref.org>>
>     > Subject: [londonsocialforum2 003] CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY:
>     > ELECTION BRIEFING
>     > To: democracy-forum@ yahoogroups. com
>    
<http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=democracy-forum%40yahoogroups.com>\
,
>     > londonsocialforum20 03@yahoogroups. com
>    
<http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=londonsocialforum2003%40yahoogroup\
s.com>,
>     "UKCPN"
>     > <ukcpn@yahoogroups. com
>     <http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ukcpn%40yahoogroups.com>>
>     > Date: Saturday, 23 May, 2009, 5:44 AM
>     >
>     >
>     > I&R ~ GB Citizens'
>     > Initiative and Referendum
>     > Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
>     > http://www.iniref. org/ <http://www.iniref.org/>
>     >
>     > CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY: ELECTION BRIEFING
>     >
>     > Ideas for the imminent council ELECTIONS (June 2009)*
>     > run-up period:
>     >
>     > 1 Ask representatives of political parties, incumbents and
>     > candidates
>     > about their attitudes to citizens' direct democracy.
>     >
>     > 2 Write to head offices and approach local party
>     > constituency branches.
>     >
>     > 3 Suggest that they should indicate support for I and R in
>     > their
>     > election manifestos, if they have not already done so.
>     >
>     > 4 Show them our short proposal
>     > http://www.iniref. org/steps. html
>     <http://www.iniref.org/steps.html>
>     > and ask them to introduce a similar proposal in the local
>     > or county
>     > council (we'll supply further detail on request).
>     >
>     > 5 Democracy Reform needs YOU! Consider
>     > voting ONLY for those candidates
>     > who pledge to work for the introduction of I and R if they
>     > get elected.
>     > If there are no suitable candidates then write on your
>     > ballot paper
>     > DIRECT DEMOCRACY NOW and drop it in the ballot box!
>     >
>     > 6 Stand yourself as a direct-democracy candidate in a
>     > future local or
>     > country election.
>     >
>     > 7 Approach press and mass media about this.
>     >
>     > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
>     > I and R refers to Citizens' Initiative and Referendum,
>     > defined here as
>     > Citizens' Direct Democracy CDD
>     > ------------ --------- --------- --------- ----
>     >
>     > We welcome requests for materials about and arguments for
>     > Citizens'
>     > Initiative and Referendum
>     > Write to info@iniref. org
>     <http://uk.mc237.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=info%40iniref.org>
>     >
>     > * http://www.direct. gov.uk/en/ Nl1/Newsroom/ DG_178227
>     <http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_178227>
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > ------------ --------- --------- ------
>     >
>     > Yahoo! Groups Links
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ich werde ab  20.05.2009 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am
25.05.2009.

Bitte wenden Sie sich an Frau Roswitha Scheurich:
roswitha.scheurich@...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/

CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY: ELECTION BRIEFING

Ideas for the imminent council ELECTIONS (June 2009)*
run-up period:

1 Ask representatives of political parties, incumbents and candidates
about their attitudes to citizens' direct democracy.

2 Write to head offices and approach local party constituency branches.

3 Suggest that they should indicate support for I and R in their
election manifestos, if they have not already done so.

4 Show them our short proposal
http://www.iniref.org/steps.html
and ask them to introduce a similar proposal in the local or county
council (we'll supply further detail on request).

5 Democracy Reform needs YOU! Consider voting ONLY for those candidates
who pledge to work for the introduction of I and R if they get elected.
If there are no suitable candidates then write on your ballot paper
DIRECT DEMOCRACY NOW and drop it in the ballot box!

6 Stand yourself as a direct-democracy candidate in a future local or
country election.

7 Approach press and mass media about this.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I and R refers to Citizens' Initiative and Referendum, defined here as
Citizens' Direct Democracy CDD
-------------------------------------------

We welcome requests for materials about and arguments for Citizens'
Initiative and Referendum
Write to info@...

* http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_178227

We hire them at elections. They are supposed to work for us.

So we should be able to sack (fire) them too.

There is a way to do this to sitting MPs in the constituencies of our
towns, counties and cities.

It is called THE RECALL!

Here is how it works:
The recall process resembles the "citizens' initiative" used in direct
democracy.  A person or group makes a public proposal (here to dismiss a
politician or elected public official) then an agreed proportion of
constituents must endorse (sign) the proposal, in order that a "vote of
no confidence" (leading to "recall", dismissal) be held.

If the sitting MP loses the RECALL ballot then a by-election will be
held in due course.

More here:  http://www.iniref.org/recall.html

If you favour this idea pass it on to five of your friends.

--------------------------------------------
I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/

Responsibility and democratic rights: Gov. Green Paper

Here is our first comment on the latest discussion paper of the Ministry
of Justice,Green Paper 2009
Rights and responsibilities: developing our constitutional framework
(see contents below)
http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/rights-responsibilities.pdf
=================================================
COMMENT
7 April 2009 at 5:41 pm

I want to ask the green paper’s authors why they have omitted to
consider improvements of our democratic rights, a major area of
responsible citizen-action in which an urgent overhaul is needed. I
refer here to improving democracy in the UK, countries and locally, by
adding to our “political rights” for instance “the right to participate
in the exercise of political power” (Marshall, cited in the green
paper). A respected observer and establishment insider not long ago
referred to the UK as an elective dictatorship and in league tables of
political participation Britain scores poorly. So called political
apathy and low election turnout result in part from these deficits.

You write “The challenge is how best to remind people of the importance
of individual responsibility and to give this greater prominence.”

It would be hard to imagine a better way to express personal civic
responsibility than by taking part in running our own public affairs.
Such expression however is hindered by a fundamental flaw in our
indirect, “representative” democracy which is that a single vote cast
once every four or five years gives us, the electorate, very little say
in public policy.

By introducing elements of direct, citizen-led democracy, we could
enable the electorate to decide on selected issues and (by calling a
referendum) veto unwanted law passed by local council or central government.
================================================

The above comment from I&R ~ GB has been posted to the government's web
site, see http://governance.justice.gov.uk/join-the-debate/
Section: Approaches to a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
-------


Rights and responsibilities: developing our constitutional framework
Contents
Foreword 3
Executive Summary 8
Chapter 1
Bills of Rights – seeking stability in times of uncertainty 11
Chapter 2
Responsibilities 14
The case for change 17
Criminal Justice 19
Education and the family 20
Examples in international and national instruments 22
Chapter 3
Rights 29
Criminal justice 32
Equality 37
Good administration 39
Social justice and the welfare state 41
Healthcare 44
Children 46
Living within environmental limits 48
Chapter 4
Legal Effect 51
Enforceability – a range of options 52
Decision-making and resource allocation: the role of the courts 57
Relation of a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities to other legislation 58
A Bill of Rights and Responsibilities and devolution 58
Chapter 5 Next Steps 62
-----------------------------------

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/
http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/i-and-r.gb sign up for reform

PERHAPS THE BEST EVER SHORT FILM ABOUT

CITIZEN-LED DEMOCRACY

DESERVES AN OSCAR !!!!

NOT yet ON YOU TUBE – HERE'S HOW TO FIND THE FILM IN THE SWISS
CYBERBUNKER !!!!

Go to

http://www.iniref.org/blog.html

and follow

SWISS ALPINE INITIATIVE AND PEOPLE'S REFERENDUM: SHORT FILM
(link to another page)

Re.: Control shift: returning power to local communities. Responsibility
Agenda, Policy Green Paper No.9. Conservative Party.

A QUESTION FROM I&R ~ GB

Probably the best democracy so far invented is a combination of direct
(citizen led) and indirect (parties, councils, parliaments) democracy.
Switzerland, all of its cantons, and about half the states of the USA
have this. It really does give power back to residents (voters,
citizens) by creating genuine public debate and in some cases decision
on important issues in the period between elections. In order to be
effective and to avoid frustration and further public "apathy", the
result of such a referendum must be legally binding (unless the
proposers make clear from the beginning that it is advisory). More
detail to be found via http://www.iniref.org/

IS IT THE INTENTION OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY THAT THEIR PROPOSED
CITIZEN LED LOCAL REFERENDUMS SHALL BE LEGALLY BINDING?

Note: In section 3.3. of the "Green Paper" we find QUOTE "The right of
popular initiative is a feature of many political systems in the
developed world. In Switzerland, people have mechanisms for direct
democracy on almost everything from planning applications, to the
precise use of tax resources, to medical ethics. Perhaps the most famous
expression of American civic independence is in Oregon, where the system
known as “citizen initiative” was introduced as long ago as 1902.
Under the Local Government Act 2003, local councils can choose to hold
referendums on any local issue. But there is no mechanism for residents
to petition for a local referendum per se.
We will give power to residents to hold local referendums on any local
issue by legislating to ensure that a referendum is held in a local
authority area if 5 per cent of local citizens sign a petition in favour
within a six month period." UNQUOTE

I&R ~ GB Citizens' Initiative and Referendum
Campaign for direct democracy in Britain
http://www.iniref.org/

Ich werde ab  06.01.2009 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am
12.01.2009.

Bitte wenden Sie sich an Frau Roswitha Scheurich:
roswitha.scheurich@...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]