Three Months of Britain's e-Petition System 183
eldavojohn writes "The idea seems simple. Provide feedback for your government via the internet. If enough people sign a petition, address it. That was the idea when an e-Petition site was launched in Nov 06 for Prime Minister Tony Blair. The BBC is reporting on the million or so petitions that the PM has received since the site went live. While most petitions are rejected or ignored, they have a top ten with one petition having 600,000 signers. Is this a valid way to provide feedback to the government or merely an exercise in keeping the populace happy?"
How about a ballot instead? (Score:5, Interesting)
In many states people vote on everything from whether to build a dam to who's gonna be their sheriff and fire chief. In some places they even vote for judges. In the UK it seems the best they can ever do is a petition, which of course carries no real weight. When I lived in California I was amazed that people actually got to vote on medical marijuana. In the UK such a concept would be considered outrageous. I mean, a county in England, unlike a US state, couldn't even vote to extend pub opening hours. Tough decisions like that are always left to wise men in parliament.
While I think the idea of an e-petition is good, I'd much rather see some real democracy. I don't remember a referendum ever in the UK about anything.
Sorry for the off-topic rant, but it had to be said.
how many understood the petition they signed (Score:3, Interesting)
I got an email that was trying to pass off a dated road tax experiment as about-to-be-implemented public policy - see my journal for my full response: http://yro.slashdot.org/~pbhj/journal/160052 [slashdot.org]
When I looked in to it I actually liked the sound of reduced council tax in favour of direct mileage taxation *instead* of vehicle based duty.
Unfortunately there was no "nosign" option. So 600k may have signed but what if 700k that looked at the petition didn't?
Not necessarily (Score:3, Interesting)
It really depends who the "one" is. If the mechanism for feedback is open to some but not to others, then it can actually decrease democracy. Lobbying can be criticized on these grounds, because it buys disproportionate influence for some. So can government consultations that exclude important groups.
In Canada, for example [thehilltimes.ca], the minister responsible for copyright reform is meeting frequently with CRIA (effectively the Canadian branch of the RIAA), but not with Canadian artists. A similar effect can be achieved more subtly. The use of particular technologies (e.g. requirements for Internet Explorer, or even for Internet access where not all people have it) or procedures (e.g. requirements to comment in person in a different city during working hours), or the restriction of comment to certain groups, can do more harm than good.
Mind you, I'm only criticizing your assertion, not your conclusion. The British effort sounds like a good thing, though I think you're right to be skeptical about the response of government.
Re:How about a ballot instead? (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem with "real democracy" is that there are a lot of ignorant people.
For instance, Toowoomba in Queensland (QLD) which is under severe drought recently had a vote on whether to start using recycled water for drinking water, like most modern cities outside of Australia. The vote ended up being "no". The leader of the no campaign's main argument seemed to be that people will call the town "Poowoomba". The vote was held regardless of the fact that there was no other viable option anyway.
The "wise man in parliament", QLD premier Peter Beattie, has now basically said "tough luck. There is no choice. Water is going to be recycled."
The problem now is that will there be enough water in time.
I am in no way anti-democracy and will defend ignorant people having their say. However, sometimes my jaw literally drops at the ignorance of a lot of voters (and the administrators for that matter). Surely there has to be some kind of happy medium?
This is a bad Idea (Score:2, Interesting)
"When former Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day ran for Prime Minister of Canada, he proposed a mechanism to call for a referendum. A petition on any particular subject which gathered at least 350,000 signatures of voting age citizens ("3% of the electors") would automatically trigger a national referendum.
Mercer's "rant" asked viewers to log on to the 22 Minutes website, and sign an online petition asking the party leader to change his name to Doris Day (after the singer/actress). Producers claim to have obtained in excess of 1,200,000 online votes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Hour_Has_22_Min
Re:Populism != Democracy (Score:3, Interesting)
Very good. Thanks for the insight and answer to my sort of question.
Reminds me. I always have to laugh when I think of Nixon's legacy. Always demonized as an evil republican, but he ultimately acted as a populist. For god's sake - price controls on every day needs (bread, milk). Went to China. Ended a war (vietnam) started by a democrat, lowered the voting age to 18, started getting mid-evil on oil companies, etc. Also, look at how he handled Row v. Wade. Hard to argue that he was a Republican in any major decision/policy other than supreme nominations.
Just to be inquisitive because you had an intelligent response, what are your thoughts on these points regarding Nixon?
moe
Big success for the government (Score:3, Interesting)
The last one I know of was a anti-drink driving campaign [bbc.co.uk] last December, where the parents of a teenager who'd been killed by a drunk delivered 16,000 signatures to No 10 calling for tighter drink-driving laws. The poor lad's picture was in all the papers the day after.
Since the introduction of this website, that's all stopped. These petitions garner nothing more than a short story buried in BBC News. Downing Street is over-joyed as it has cut off another source of embarrassment.
Re:Validity? (Score:4, Interesting)
That's actually a good point and potentially worthwhile, but could this be achieved by other means because I REALLY don't want a tracking device in my car!
A short story: A friend was recently called by a bunch of blackmailers who threatened his family unless he paid them some money. He obviously called the police who whisked him and his family away to a safe house and stationed an armed response unit near his house for when he came back to recieve the next call (somewhat surprising his father-in-law!). They caught them, as it happens, but there is NO WAY IN HELL that he will allow his wife and kids to drive around in a vehicle that ANYONE could track, and therefore aid in the finding and kidnapping of his family. It just won't happen! And don't tell me that "only the authorities" will have access to the system because I've worked in IT for over 20 years and I just don't believe you!
Let alone the concept of the Gov being able to track you. I seriously don't swallow the "congestion" argument either as it must be incredibly expensive to throw this technology at the problem when a row of toll booths could do much the same, and increasing tax on petrol (move the Road Fund Licence - UK Only - onto petrol too!) will mean you pay more for a more thirsty car, or if you drive it more aggressively, or if you drive in rush hour. Not perhaps quite the granularity of satallite tracking, but way-way-way cheaper to setup!
Re:Validity? (Score:5, Interesting)
A lot of them are. Some which may be of interest to slashdotters include:
to make software patents clearly unenforcible [pm.gov.uk]
to Abandon plans to make it a criminal offence to possess "violent pornography" [pm.gov.uk]
to Abolish all faith schools and prohibit the teaching of creationism and other religious mythology in all UK schools [pm.gov.uk]
to levy a tax on energy inefficient light bulbs so that their long term financial and environmental cost is visible in their retail price [pm.gov.uk]
to force Ofcom [UK equivalent of FCC] to allocate the unused radio spectrum after the analogue switchover to HDTV services [pm.gov.uk]
to ensure that any website launched by the government complies with accessibility standards (WCAG AA at least) [pm.gov.uk]
to Improve Open Source use in govenment and local govenment work places [pm.gov.uk]
to Reject any motions to extend the copyright term for sound recordings [pm.gov.uk]
to award Professor Stephen W. Hawking a Knighthood [pm.gov.uk]
to Arrange for British Standard Time to be maintained in England permanently [pm.gov.uk]
and of course the petition for the prime mininster to stand on his head and juggle ice-cream [pm.gov.uk]. All feasible, most narrowly defined, or at least easy to investigate ways of achieving.