GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES POLICIES

Public Service Overview

It is very common to hear the terms, “Smaller and Leaner Government”, “Reduce the Numbers of Public Servants” or “A Bloated Bureaucracy”. There is no doubt that the Public Service needs an overhaul to make it more efficient, productive and accountable. Far too often we hear of billions of dollars being wasted and unaccounted for, and yet nothing ever changes. It is often stated that the Public Service is over manned and questions are raised when the number of public employees increases. The Public Service, love them or loathe them, do provide an important service to the Country, the fact that sometimes they get it wrong or appear to be incompetent, is not grounds to conduct widespread layoffs and disbanding of Government departments.

One of the major factors contributing to Government incompetence, is, the fact that we elect people who have immense power, but very little ability. Far too many politicians, who may mean well, haven’t got a clue what they are doing. This must be frustrating for senior public servants who have trained, studied and worked all their lives in a particular department, only to play second fiddle to a politician, who may never have had a proper job and is completely disinterested in the portfolio which they have been given.

Matters are further complicated by politicians appointing their “best friend” into a role for which they are woefully inadequate to perform. The fact that so much incompetence appears to be so easy to sweep under the carpet, is a sad indictment of the system. Transparency and accountability are the key to resolving this. We will make it impossible for a public servant to cover up the mistakes of an incompetent Government Minister.

With regards to cutting numbers, do you really want a smaller army, police, nurses etc, for all these people are public servants. So, the political statement of making the public service smaller, contradicts those same politicians who argue for more soldiers, police, nurses and teachers.

Ironically, the one group of public servants who we could do with reducing, to save money and reduce bureaucracy, are the politicians, some of whom appear to be a complete waste of space, spending all their time travelling around the world, at the tax payers expense, instead of tackling the problems for which we elected them for. It is funny how those politician’s that claim that the public service is wasting money in times of crisis, never have an issue with accepting their own pay rises, for which they have done nothing to warrant or merit.

This nonsense needs to end. We need to make the Public Service, including politicians, efficient, productive and accountable. All spending, down to the cent, needs to be fully documented and accounted for and severe penalties need to be enforced against those responsible for misplacing billions of tax payers’ money. At the same time, we need to ensure that we have the appropriate number of public servants to undertake the tasks that are required, such as more soldiers, police, nurses and teaches etc.

To this end the National Conservatives propose the following policies, ideas and recommendations. Some we will implement as part of our strategy to reform and build the nation, others will be subject to discussion and review, with the changes ultimately being ratified by public referendum.

Political Structure Changes
  • Abolish the Senate
  • Abolish State Governors
  • Abolish State Upper Houses
  • State Governments to be repurposed as State extensions of the Federal Government
  • The Federal Government will be the main operation of Government.
  • Federal MPs will double up as their respective State MPs.
  • Federal Parliament will sit for two weeks in every month to conduct federal affairs.
  • The other two weeks MPs will return to their respective States to enact and administer agreed legislation and spending etc.as agreed in the Federal Parliament to be administered at State level.

 

Example: Federal Parliament may allocate $200 million for road development in Victoria. The Victorian MPs will then decide, at State level, where and how the money is allocated and spent.

Political Structure
  • Monarchy
  • Governor General
  • A democratically elected lower house Government
  • The current number of 150 MPs is sufficient.
  • All Federal MPs will also represent their respective State at State level on all matters concerning that State.
  • Each State Government will elect their own State Premier, treasurer and other positions as required, who could be any MP from the Prime Minister down to a back bencher.
  • All State roles will work with their Federal counterparts to ensure a smooth running of the Government and the implementation of Government policy.
  • Councils will be empowered, with greater responsibility and working more closely with the local Councillors and State Government MPs.

These measures would see savings in government expenditure, by not having a Senate, State Government MPs or Senators or the duplication of State Government functionality. Public servants that are no longer required for one department will be redistributed to other ministries or Councils.

Government Salary Caps

The Country’s finances are in a precarious state and we are, as a nation, effectively bankrupt. We have an ever-increasing National and State debt, that will take determination to clear, by radically reducing Government spending.

It is interesting to note that the very people who are responsible for getting us into this mess, are some of the highest paid workers in the Country. Which is strange when they are incompetent at what they do. It is only fair that the people responsible for the mess should help fix it. To this end, we will introduce a salary cap for all public service workers. With the exception of some occupations, all public service wages will be capped at $200,000 plus standard superannuation per annum. This means that those currently on $800K to $1m per annum, will have to take a pay cut. This will enable these workers to keep their jobs, but at lower pay. The alternative is, that they may lose their jobs, if departments have to be cut.

Federal MPs Salary as at 1 July 2025                      MPs New Rate

Backbencher MP           $233,643 per annum                $180,000

Minister                        $403,034 per annum                $190,000

Cabinet Minister           $408,875 per annum                $200,000

Prime Minister              $607,471 per annum                $200,000

Senators                      $233,643 per annum                $180,000

Civil Servants pay will reflect the office that they represent, so the head of the Civil Service will be paid the same as the Prime Minister, and the civil servants will then match the department that they work for. No civil servant will earn more than the respective elected MP. Senior civil servants will only get a pay rise when the MPs do and the MPs will only get a pay rise when they have fixed the Countries finances. With the average salary for a public servant being $67,693 to $96,127, the $200,000 salary cap will not affect the rank-and-file workers.

MPs will be expected to live within their electorate or an adjacent electorate. The MPs office will be situated in or near the Council Offices, if practical. We will look at building permanent identical MPs offices in each constituency, thus no one MP will be better positioned than another and the buildings will be owned by the Government, thus saving on rent and other expenses.

MPs will be given a company car for their use and the cost will be covered by the Government. They will be expected to use that car where ever practical and only use other transport if necessary. Parliamentary expenses will be fully reviewed and significantly modified, with many allowances being cut or removed altogether. We will end the culture of entitlement that MPs have and bring them in line with the acceptable expectations of the private sector, which are a lot stricter.

Potential Salary Savings

Backbencher MP           $233,643 per annum    $180,000 saving $53,643 x 67 = $3,594,081

Minister                        $403,034 per annum    $190,000 saving $213,034 x 20 (40) = $8,521,360

Cabinet Minister           $408,875 per annum    $200,000 saving $208,875 x 21 (42) = $8,772,750

Prime Minister              $607,471 per annum    $200,000 saving $407,471 x 1 = $407,471

Senator                        $233,643 per annum    $180,000 saving $53,643 x 76 = $4,076,868

Future Government and Opposition salaries will be the same, as overall they will be lower, with there not being a great difference between an MP and a Ministers salary, as we were to believe that people wished to get elected to serve and not to get paid well.

The estimated saving of $21,295,662 is slightly high as it does not take into account that opposition minsters are paid less than their government counterpart, but the savings on base salaries will be at least $17,000,000. The 76 Senators are paid a base salary of $233,643, with higher salaries for Cabinet Ministers. By just reducing their base salary will save $4,076,868. If the Senate was abolished then the base salary savings will be $17,756,868

Current State MPs and Senators 1 July 2025

State                           MPs                 Senators

Victoria                         88                    40                    $211,972         x 128   = $27,132,416

Queensland                  93                    0                      $189,505         x 93     = $17,623,965

New South Wales         93                    42                    $178,616         x 135   = $24,113,160

South Australia             47                    22                    $217,773         x 69     = $15,026,337

Western Australia         59                    36                    $179,462         x 95     = $17,048,890

Tasmania                     35                    15                    $140,185         x 50     = $7,009,250

ACT                              25                    0                      $192,574         x 25     = $4,814,350

State Total                  440                 155                                                     = $112,768,368

These figures do not include ministerial salaries, which could take the total to nearer $135m. By removing all these members of parliament, you will reduce government spending and obtain greater value from the federal MPs that will hold two positions.

The argument against this measure is, who will do all the work, that they currently do. The counter argument to this is, what precisely do these MPs do; and have jobs and work been created, simply to give these MPs something to do. There is a substantial amount of unnecessary bureaucracy in the government machine. Why do we need departments that specialise in climate change, diversity, gender affirmant, on-line content watch dogs, human rights and others that are not fit for purpose nor provide any benefit to the country. Streamlining government is the first step to fixing the budget and reducing the deficit.

Full and Open Government Accountability and Transparency

The Federal government is increasingly isolated from the challenges faced by ordinary Australians. The political class, including the media and bureaucracy, live in a “Canberra Bubble” We propose a plan to burst the Canberra Bubble and bring about more transparency, accountability and efficiency to government.

We are committed to being completely open and honest with the people. Australians have a right to know what their politicians are doing and keeping the public apprised of developments. Every Australian has the right to know how and where their tax dollars are being spent. To this end our government is committed to updating the public of our progress through our “Report to The Nation” nightly video podcasts. Refer to “Report to The Nation” Policy.

We will also develop an on-line live access to the treasury and the finances. Any one will be able to log in a view all the finances of the Country and to see how every single cent is spent, in real time. This will enable those who have an interest in finance, to be able to provide comment and contribute how the government could improve things. Meticulous record keeping will be maintained, with every payment attached to a corresponding invoice. This will help reduce duplication, wastage and leakage.

Post Parliamentary Benefits

Benefits handed out to politicians after they leave parliament are not reflective of societal expectations. The whole system of benefits will be thoroughly reviewed. We will stop any new payments for former politicians. Those who have qualified previously for Parliamentary Pensions will only be eligible to receive them upon reaching retirement age. Further, whilst recognising the status of the office of Prime Minister, a former Prime Minister must serve a minimum of four years in that position to be eligible for post-Parliamentary benefits.

Reform The Rules on Donations to Political Parties

Donations, excluding membership fees, to political parties, candidates and associated political entities, which are made by individuals, corporations or unions should be capped at an annual amount of $1200 with a maximum aggregate of $4800 over a four-year period. Full record keeping must be maintained by political parties, candidates and associated political entities, and it will be necessary to disclose these donations to the electoral commission. All donations made are tax deductive for the giver, and are tax exempt by the receiver.

All contributions received “in excess” of the annual capped amount, must be recorded with the full identity of the doner. A quarterly report must be submitted to the Electoral Commission disclosing all excess donations. All anonymous donates that exceed the cap threshold, must be reported to the Electoral Commission as soon as practicable, but no later than 14 days from receipt. Anonymous donations cannot be kept and if the donor’s identity cannot be established, then within one calendar month of the receipt of the donation, the money must be paid into the Electoral Commissions Bank Account, where it will sit for six months waiting to be claimed by the donor, whereafter the donation will be forfeited and kept by the Electoral Commission to be used to cover their expenses.

Electoral Reform

Dual citizens will not be disbarred from standing for parliament. The voting system will change, you will only have to number the candidates that you wish to vote for, you will no longer have to number every candidate. The voting slip will also have to make reference of whom which candidate has done a preference deal with another candidate.

Weighting Vote System

There are two main voting systems; “first past the post” the candidate with the highest number of votes wins. “Proportional Representation” the total number votes cast, result in parliamentary seats being distributed based upon the percentage of votes received for each party. There are pros and cons for each of these systems.

Australia uses the “Preferential” system, where you must select all candidates, but preferencing them in order of choice. As candidates fail to meet the minimum requirement, they are knocked out and their second preference candidate is selected. This process continues until you have one candidate reaching 50.01% of the vote. There are pros and cons for this system as well. The biggest concern is that it favours the larger parties over the minor parties; and the top two candidates will never have their preference votes considered.

We could try the “Optional Preferential” system, where you only have to put a number against your candidate or candidates or choice, leaving the other candidates blank. But this can result in the unnumbered votes being distributed equally among the remaining candidates, which again benefits the larger parties.

The “Weighting Vote” system is, where you number each candidate 1 to 6 and each number has a weight point attributed to it.

Choice 1 – 25 points

Choice 2 – 20 points

Choice 3 – 15 points

Choice 4 – 10 points

Choice 5 – 5 points

Choice 6 – 1 point

All other choices will only receive 1 point

Under this system every vote is counted and every candidate gets points based upon your preference. The candidate with the highest number of points wins. If there is a tie, then the winner is chosen, based upon the number of Choice 1 votes that they received. For the purposes of establishing if this system is viable and fairer, we would need to counts the votes of one seat from a recent election and see what the outcome would be. The merits for this system are, that if every voter’s third choice candidate was the same, then in theory that candidate would win by virtue of achieving the highest number of points. Under the current system, it is unlikely that your third-choice vote would be counted, rendering it meaningless. It also means that someone who is generally popular, but not the favourite has a chance of winning under the points system, but would probably never win under the current system.

This is just a suggestion and not a policy, but it is worth the exercise to explore its merits.

Minimum Age and Requirements to be a Member of Parliament

One of the biggest gripes that people have of our MPs is, that many of our MPs have had no or very little life experience. Not many have had a normal job and very few have ever run their own business. So, it is not surprising that they cock it up, simply because they don’t have enough practical experience to do the job properly.

We therefore want to introduce legislation that stipulates minimum requirements for a person to become an MP.

  1. MPs must be aged 30 or older
  2. The prospective MP must had held full-time employment for a continuous period of ten years prior to seeking election.
  3. A candidate must be fluent in both spoken and written English.
  4. Men – Fathers with young children, aged ten years or younger, should consider their application carefully and should err on the side of not standing, until their youngest child is aged eleven.
  5. Women – Mothers with young children, aged ten years or younger are ineligible to stand as a candidate, until their youngest child is aged eleven. Even then they should consider their application carefully and should err on the side of not standing.
  6. Only Australian Citizens are eligible to run for parliament and they must have been a citizen for at least ten years. Dual citizenship is not a bar to standing and they will not be required to renounce their dual citizenship, but if elected, they must swear the oath of allegiance to Australia, that overrides any other consideration of their other citizenship. Why is this important. It is important because a person may not be able to do anything about their former citizenship and would you really trust someone who denounces their former citizenship, just to gain office. Furthermore, dual citizens are no less loyal to Australia, than a person of single citizenship.
  7. The Governor General must exercise their power to remove any politician that undermines Australia, its people and their rights.
Bill of Rights

Common Law is the most powerful law in existence, as it implies the rights of people, without actually having to write them down. Such as your implied right to free speech and opinion. Unfortunately, in recent times, the flaunting and ignoring of these basic rights have seen them undermined or eroded. To address this problem, we will introduce a Bill of Rights, to emphasise and reinforce the most basic common law rights. This Bill will not override or diminish common law in any way, but will be a document that the people can refer too, when they feel that their rights are being ignored or undermined. As we saw during covid, people who were demonstrating that they had rights, were simply brushed aside and told to submit. These breaches of our common rights must never again be allowed to occur.

Who Has The Right to Vote and Voting Age

The voting age will remain at 18 years of age and only Australian citizens will have the right to vote.

Electoral Commission

All state and federal electoral commissions will remain under this department. We will ensure that these commissions are properly resourced, so that they can maintain the integrity of elections and to account to the voter, that they have been free, fair and accurate. We will consider bringing in voter ID cards to prevent rorting and double voting. We will want to change the voting rules to allow people to only number the candidates that they wish to vote for and not everyone.

Local Government Councils

Local councils need to be given more authority and scope over their respective areas. Councils are more accountable to their rate payers than state government MPs are. Councils deal with local issues, so by empowering local authorities, more of what is required will be done. The local MP should be dealing with the council to ensure things are done. Local councillors must work with the local MP to ensure things are done. The local councillors, although independent, must be part of the team to provide the best outcomes for the local people.

Cutting the Binds that Impede the Country
  1. Withdraw from the United Nations

Saving USD$66,515,218 – AUDS$102,157,349 annually

  1. Withdraw from the World Health Organisation

Saving USD$32m– AUD$50,683,039 annually

  1. Withdraw from the Refugee Convention

Saving an estimated. AUD$2B annually

  1. Withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord

Saving an estimated $52B over 12 years or $4.33B annually

  1. Withdraw from the World Bank

We paid in 2012-13 $552.6m to be part of this organization

  1. Withdraw from the International Monetary

Fund Membership is $6,572,400,000 annually

  1. Abolish the Renewable Energy Target
  • Australian Renewable Energy Agency Grants $1,852 million
  • Clean Energy Finance Corporation – Subsidised Loan Financing $89 million
  • Clean Energy Finance Corporation – Subsidised equity Financing $663 million
  • Total Savings $2,604 million

 

  1. Abolish energy subsidies

Wind turbines are subsidized $500K a year for each turbine. With 2077 turbines the RET provides $1.09B per annum

Fossil fuel subsidies $14.5B across Australia

We do not consider tax breaks or incentives as subsidies.

  1. Abolish the Human Rights Commission (all 9 commission divisions)

Saving $22.9m

  1. Abolish 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act

No expected savings

  1. Abolish the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation & Disinformation) Bill 2024

Although already cancelled, there would be no expected savings

  1. Abolish laws that infringe upon religious rights and freedoms

No expected savings

  1. Abolish public funding of political parties, left-wing woke ideological, indoctrination and political correctness

Saving an estimated $68.6m per election

There is an estimated annual saving of $32 Billion if we remove all subsidies. Bearing in mind that this figure is paid with borrowed money, we will also be accruing interest on this amount, all of which has to be paid for by the tax payer. The interesting point is the $14.5 Billion subsidy to the fossil industry. It is not clear from reports precisely how this subsidy works and what it pays for. The figure may include tax breaks or tax subsidies by the government paying for the tax rebate on fuel. Either way, this needs to be thoroughly vetted, as we should not be subsidizing private companies that deal in the coal, gas and energy sectors. If the government is going to pay companies to dig our coal and gas out of the ground, then we might as well nationalize the industry and pay for it ourselves and keep all the profits.

Empowering the People

The meaning of Democracy is, “Power of the People” or “Rule by the People”. This doctrine should be reflected in how the Country is run, “Government of the People, by the People, for the People”. Unfortunately, today’s so-called democracies are little more than elected dictatorships, with politicians promising the earth, but once elected, completely ignoring the wishes of the people, and doing whatever they like. The people are then left with no option, but to put up with the Government, until the next election. Where the whole unsatisfactory saga repeats itself again.

It is imperative, if we are to have a civil society, that the people must have the power over their government. The statement “Politicians are our servants and not our masters” is often banded about, but the truth is the politician acts like they are the master and we the people should learn our place and be quiet. This is most exemplified by the way in which politicians answer questions. They simply don’t provide an answer of any merit, as if they know best and its none of our business to know. This arrogance needs to end and all politicians must provide full and frank answers to any question that the public or their representative asks. Politicians must always remember that they are our servants and we the people are their masters. They are in parliament to do our bidding and run the country efficiently; and if they cannot or will not then they need to go, sooner rather than later.

Government Transparency

The lack of transparency is a major factor contributing to the decline of the country. Governments, politicians and public servants are able to make decisions in secret and borrow money to fund projects that have never been fully disclosed to the public. The same public that end-up wearing the debt burden that ultimately ensues, because of the incompetence of the plan or its poor implementation. The public have a right to know what our politicians are doing and especially what they are spending our money on. The public should be consulted on proposed major spending plans, to gage opinion and seek approval. It is far too easy for a politician to commit the country to something that often sees the costs blow out and increases the nation’s debt. Full transparency of the treasury and every other government department is essential, if we are serious about controlling the nation’s debt.

Government Accountability

It is far too easy for Governments to act irresponsibility and incompetently and get away with it. Errors and mistakes are simply covered up and forgotten about. Money just vanishes without a trace and the stock standard answer is, “I don’t recall that”. In any other areas of life or business, this would simply not be accepted, and yet, politicians have turned this obfuscation into an art form. They will not think twice about lying to cover up mistakes as long as they get away with it. And why is this the case, is simple, there is no proper accountability of our politicians or public servants. We need to bring in a strict code of accountability, so that politicians can be held fully accountable for all their actions. There must be serious consequences for politicians that abuse their office or are simply utterly incompetent and drive the country onto the rocks.

David Flint's "The Four R's" Plan

RETURN TO THE CONSTITUTION

The First R: Return the government of the country to the principles set out in the Constitution.

On one carefully considered export report to the Premiers, returning to world-best federalism, as our founders intended and the people approved, this would save about $160 billion not once but every year. In four years, we’d pay off the debt. We could also start on important infrastructure projects, especially harvesting water to make us that food bowl of the world the politicians are always talking about.

REFORM POLITICAL PARTIES

The Second R: Reform the political parties.

This could be done by requiring that in return for the vast amount of financial and legal privileges they receive, they be taken from the hands of the power-brokers and lobbyists and they become open and transparent and democratic. As indeed they are in most comparable countries. The question is why are our parties like those in a banana Republic?

RECALL ELECTIONS

The Third R: Recall elections.

Working Australians are accountable 24/7. So why shouldn’t the politicians also be similarly accountable? Instead, they only face the people every three or four years, too often in pre-selections where the successful candidate is not necessarily chosen not on merit. In such cases, the candidate is chosen because he or she will do the bidding of some powerbroker or lobbyist.

REFERENDUMS

The Fourth R: Referendums.

Why shouldn’t the Australian people be able to do what the Swiss can do and be able to petition for the holding of a referendum to change the law, introduce a new law, approve a treaty, review an interpretation of the Constitution by the High Court or form a new state?

Report to the Nation Format

Nightly One hour Video Podcast

Allow 1 Minute              Intro using Cinema music

18 Seconds                  Pearl and Dean Present 18 Seconds

6 Seconds                    REPORT TO THE NATION 6 seconds

First 20 minutes

20 Minutes                   Provides an introduction and update on what has been done

Advert Break

1 Minute                       Advert of Choice

Second 20 minutes

20 Minutes                  Provides an overview of what we will be doing

Advert Break

1 Minute                       Advert of Choice

Third 20 minutes

20 Minutes                  Questions and Answers from public and media

Outro Music with Credits

3 Minutes                     Classic Australian Music

Total Running Time per show 1 Hour 6 Minutes

The hour-long video podcast will be shown every night, Monday to Saturday, excluding Sunday, so there should be 25 shows per month. There can be a special show at the end of each month to have a general questions and answers for the month’s reports. Over the course of a year each department will have provided twelve updates on what their department is doing and how things are progressing.

First Show will be a report from the Prime Minister, providing an overview of the plans of the Government. Ongoing the Prime Minister will provide updates on what has been accomplished and how things are progressing.

Second Show will be a report from the Treasurer, providing an overview of the plans of the Government.  Ongoing the Treasurer will provide updates on the financial position of the nation and how things are progressing.

All other departments will produce a show in the following order. Each department will need to stick to the format, but can apply their own particular characteristics to personalise their show.

Ministerial Departments

  1. Prime Minister
  2. Treasurer
  3. Financial Services Minister
  4. Health & Aged Care Minister
  5. Education Minister
  6. Housing Minister
  7. Energy Minister
  8. Trade & Industry Minister
  9. Employment & Workplace Relations Minister
  10. Home Affairs Minister
  11. Justice Minister
  12. Government & Public Services Minister
  13. Foreign Affairs Minister
  14. Welfare & Social Services Minister
  15. Environment Minister
  16. Defence Minister
  17. Agriculture, Fisheries & Food Minister
  18. Communications Minister
  19. Infrastructure & Transport Minister
  20. Heritage, Culture & Tourism Minister
  21. Immigration Minister
  22. Aboriginal Affairs Minister
  23. Science, Innovation & Technology Minister
  24. Women’s Affairs Minister
  25. Religious Affairs Minister
MP Monthly Podcast Report to the Constituency

All MP’s will be required to do at least once a month a report to the constituency pod cast, to update their electorate about what is happening and being done in their constituency and what their MP has been doing for the past month.

On-Line Referendum

Referendums would best be described as true democracy, for they actually ask the people their opinion and if acted upon, will truly give a democratic outcome. Referendums appear to be very costly at least $165 million, if you include $30 million for discussions. The cost almost makes referendums cost prohibitive, but it is very important in a democracy, that the people are asked to participate as much as possible.

We should set up a special referendum government website, which can be used by anyone to put forward a motion for a referendum. It would be voluntary and would require people to vote for or against any issues, which would ultimately lead to a set of referendum questions that would be put at each election.

The way it would work. You would log on to the website, using your tax file number, this is because everyone over the age of 18 has a TFN, which is unique to them. Unless a voting digit ID is introduced.

In the motion section, you would propose a motion or question.

Example;

I propose that the wearing of bicycle helmets, whilst riding a bicycle, no longer be compulsory.

They can also add an explainer as to why they want this motion to be put to a referendum

The motion would be logged as M267. You now need 100 people to second the motion. So, it is up to you to tell your friends, family and anyone on face book, that you have proposed a motion and that you require 100 people to log in and second it. Every logged motion would NOT be visible to the public generally. The reason being is, that you could get millions of motions, making it near impossible for anyone to surf them all. So, the onus is on you to get the support of 100 to second the motion. This is easier said than done, but it will eliminate timewasters or people putting up frivolous motions.

Once the motion has received 100 seconders, the motion will then move to the confirmed seconded section. This section is now visible to the general public; it will also send out an RSS to anyone who wishes to receive details of new motions. Now the general public can vote for or against the idea. The motion needs to receive 1 million clear votes in favour to proceed to the referendum stage. It will be done on a first past the post basis. So, if 1 million people vote in favour and none against then it will go to a referendum, but if 200,000 people vote against then the difference is 800,000, so the motion stays open until such time that it gets 1 million clear votes, say 1.3 million versus 299,999 the Yes vote has won by just one vote. This stage is not the referendum; it is purely the stage that determines genuine real issues. If the 1 million clear votes cannot be achieved then the motion does not proceed. The motion can stay there until the election, when all unsuccessful motions will be deleted. So that the process can start again after the election.

Because the motion has received 1 million clear votes, it is clearly an issue that is of interest and value and as such would be added to the list of referendum questions to be put to the people at the general election. The proposers, seconders and supporters do not need to do anything more. The reason that the pass mark requirement is set high is to ensure that we do not get hundreds of referendum questions at the election, although that could be a possibility.

The motion now becomes a referendum question and is entered into the referendum section as a confirmed question. The order of the questions is based upon the number of yes votes that it received at the motion stage. So, if a motion won 4m to 3m then that would go above the motion that won 2.5m to 1.4m. When the general election is called, you will get your normal green and white voting paper plus a referendum paper, which lists all the questions. The questions will be available on the website weeks before the election, so that people can consider them carefully. But at the voting booth, they will tick yes or no to all the referendum questions.

Prior to this political parties will be able to see the growing list of questions and either agree with them, reject them or have no opinion. If they support or reject them, they can state this in their manifestos, this will then enable the voters to see which political parties align with their views.

Now after the election, no matter the outcome, the elected Government must implement those referendum motions that voted yes and won. The problem will be if a Party rejected a particular question, but wins office. They will be obliged to implement the will of the people. So, politicians will have to be careful, because they will have to determine which if any, they support, but if they support or reject and get it wrong then they will be in an embarrassing potion of having to implement something that they disagree with. But that’s democracy. On a positive note, it will enable politicians to see what millions of people think about certain things and bearing in mind the questions did get up they would be unwise not to get on board, but if a question got up on a 6m to 5m then there was a lot of people who rejected the motion, so they would be equally unwise to ignore the wishes of those people.

Government & Public Services PDF Version

Icon

Government & Public Services

1 file(s) 162.75 KB
Download