Is There A Democratic Defecit In The UK

A democratic deficiency is when government or other government institutions fail to adhere to the principles or operate in a way that promotes democracy. Recent years have seen a lot of discussion in the UK about Britain’s flawed democracy. Low regard is given to politicians. Low esteem is shown for politicians.

The UK saw its lowest general election turnout since 1918, when universal voting was first introduced. The Labour government was voted down by more voters than the ones that were elected to it. It was just under 65% in 2010. Low turnouts, in effect, call into question the legitimacy of government and its ability to fulfill its electoral mandate. So, low turnouts can make democracy less democratic as citizens lose their ability to influence politics. However, the defenders for the status quo maintain that there is no democracy deficit in the UK since citizens in this country have their rights and freedoms protected under the rule.

The 1998 Human Rights Act and the 2010 Equality Act are both examples of this. Also, Britain’s membership in the European Court of Human Rights is evidence of it. Reforms are also being undertaken to make the country more democratic, fair and free. Local referendums are often less popular than national ones. Sunderland’s referendum on a direct elected mayor (2001) saw a 10% turnout. The Backbench Select Committee of Parliament still has the sole power to decide whether or not an issue is abandoned or discussed. It is possible that e-petitions are more frustrating because of the above reasons.

Another reason Britain’s democracy is protected is the fact that unlike other countries, it has free and fair elections. Therefore, there can never be a deficit. The democracy of Britain has changed over time. The 1928 election gave women equal rights to vote as men. Plural voting was eliminated in 1948. The UK’s 18-year-olds can now vote. They are also allowed to vote secretly in elections that are held every five years. The Electoral Commission organizes these elections. They are internationally acclaimed for their fairness and impartiality. The transition from one election to the next is relatively smooth. The winner’s leader is often sworn in within days. Even 2010’s negotiation due to a divided parliament went very smoothly. Arrangements were reached within days, rather than the months in some countries. Due to the fact that voting is open to everyone, and that 18-year-olds can vote, party policies will be more balanced and equitable for all. Voting for a candidate or another person is a way for citizens to express their opinions about the government. FPTP is a simple plurality voting system that favors two parties dominance, the Conservative and Labour. The Labour party was able to win 29% of vote and 258 seats. Liberal Democrats were able to get 6% fewer votes and 201 fewer seats.

FPTP discriminates towards smaller parties like Liberal Democrats because they have a low number of supporters and are less likely to win a majority. FPTP encourages tactical vote (voting for parties they dislike to prevent others from getting to power) as well as increasing the number of votes wasted (votes that are not used to elect a person). It was discovered that 15.7million votes, which is more than half of the total vote cast in 2010, were lost. The general election would have been the same if the 15.7million voters had stayed home. The FPTP system is criticized for creating “disproportionate outcomes” in general elections and being “undemocratic”. The FPTP system contributes to voter apathy by making voters feel that their vote is a waste if they vote in a minority party or if they live where their candidate will win. The Alternative Vote was a system proposed in 2010 by the Lib Dems. This majoritarian system ensures the winning candidate gets the 51% majority. It can also be used to allow for 2nd or 3rd preferences in case of emergency. Unfortunately, the referendum resulted in a defeat for AV by most Tory and Labour politicians (32.1% supported it and 67.9% opposed).

Reformers suggest that politicians might be the reason for the UK’s declining democracy. This could be because they are unwilling to encourage serious change in our electoral system.