We campaign for more and better democracy with town meetings for public debate, the citizens’ law-proposal (initiative), the veto-referendum to keep government in “check” plus the right to sack (recall) the MP whom we elected. To achieve reform like this will need a successful country-wide campaign which brings strong public pressure for change. At our web site you can find arguments for citizen-led democracy and free resources about direct democratic procedures such as citizens’ initiative, issue-ballot, veto- referendum, recall of elected MPs.

Campaign Aims: Power to the People. Essential principles of governance outlined.

View our web site index at http://www.iniref.org/


4 Responses to “ABOUT INIREF / I+R ~ GB”

  1. chris morton Says:

    It is pretty clear that the GOVERNMENT offers us a fig leaf; with their total access to PR machinery it may be a fairly snazzy fig-leaf. And as well as avoidance of real change, n ways of postponing any at all

    How about something NOW, eg restoring power to the House of Commons and especially its select committees. Even if we didn’t vote for our MPs they might be attracted by the opportunity to get some power now rather than have to earn it by a decade of doing what the whips say and the concomitant corruption?

    What constitutional basis is there for the cabinet office and its ‘special advisers’ almost exclusively from big business? Why not get rid of it (including the cabinet) and replace it with a business preparation committee of the chairmen of select committees with a rotating chair?

    Does emperor Camereron have any clothes?

  2. chris morton Says:

    Hello Michael

    The promised referendum on AV (a) is the absolute minimum change to voting that can be made, way short of proper Prop Rep and ensuring the continuation of party doctrinaire as opposed to negotiated policies (b) even if passed despite a thoroughly tendentious prior campaign, would then be postponed until after the boundary commission; quite possibly beyond the next election. Fig leaf no 1.

    The promised local reforms (a) work against each other, mean people most likely to cap local taxation even harder than the government already has, constructively minded people still having to work very hard to achieve necessary margins (b) as local authorities are already so severely restricted for cash, they can only make the tiniest variations on Whitehall imposed models; there is no real choice if there is no fair way of financing it. Fig leaf no 2.

    The real reform option for local government would be to levy income tax (and purposive purchase tax, not blanket VAT & other excise) locally and pass what LAs think it worth passing to Westminster. Against that benchmark the proposed reforms are hardly even the stem of a fig-leaf

  3. iniref Says:

    Some of the issues raised by Chris Morton will crop up in the Con/Libdem government Localism bill which should appear this week. A preview followed by INIREF comments appeared in Friday’s Guardian http://tinyurl.com/2vmsyjm

    At iniref.org we are especially interested in the proposals concerning citizen-led democracy such as that described in the Con/Libdem coalition agreement, “We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: