Should the UK use more referendums?

The use of referendums is a form of direct democracy which was originated in the Ancient Athens, direct democracy is where the people themselves make key political decisions;however back then it was a lot easier for direct democracy to occur as the population wasn't as large as it is today. It can be argued that direct democracy is on the rise again through many ways and referendums are one way.

Referendums is where citizens (either all of them or only those in a certain region) are asked to determine a question of public importance. In some countries the result of a referendum is binding on the government, however in the UK that isn't that case as parliament remains sovereign. In addition to this it virtually unthinkable that the UK Parliament would defy the expressed result of a referendum. All referendums always have an answer of 'yes' or 'no' otherwise the result would be indecisive.

It could be argued that referendums is the most direct of democracy. The people's views on a particular question are clearly indicated; there is not no confusion that could be cause by politicians that simply claim to represent the public view when it is for their own benefit. In other words, a referendum helps to make decisions legitimate and confirms the printable of government by consent. However many issues are too complex for the majority of the people to understand and make a judgement on, even though we are educated as ever but come political issues still remain rather complex and technical. For example, issues arising from proposed European Union treaties may be to complex for popular consideration. The danger of the situation is that the debate may be presented simple and emotional arguments and the true nature of the issues will be neglected. Therefore it could be argued it is best for a representive democracy as they are educated and able to make expert decisions.

Also it could be beneficial for referendums to be used more as it could prevent governments from making an unpopular decision when a 'no' vote is delivered; this occurred in 2004 when regional government was rejected by the North-East England. It could also be argued that in 2011 negative vote on the electoral system to be changed to AV, prevented a change that would have been unpopular. On the other hand referendum campaigns are expensive, therefore there is a danger that one side will prevail simply because it has more resources.

A referendum effectively entrenches constitutional changes, it protects them from attacks by future governments whose policies may only be short term. In order to reverse a referendum decision, it is widely accepted that another referendum would have to be held. This principle prevents the possibility that a future government would be able to simply dismantle constitutional reforms already made. How ever it can be described as the danger of the tryanny of the majority. Referendums are effectively the government by majority. Therefore the minority that loses are not even taken into account of any way. Also there is a danger of people using a referendum as an opportunity to express their disafaction with the government and ignore the issue in the question at all. Therefore it could be argued that elected representatives are able to weigh up the interests of everybody with out leaving the minority defenceless as we expect modern democracy to protect the minorities.