Three Months of Britain's e-Petition System

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?"

Comments

it's a homonym

[User 956]

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.

Well, online wine delivery never really took off in the States, I hope the Brits have better luck.

Validity?

[SeaFox]

Any way one can provide feedback to their government is a valid one. As long as you demonstrate constructive criticism in your method, anything is better than nothing.

The better question is whether the government will take the feedback seriously at all, or if this is like the proverbial comments box that feeds into the building's waste chute.

Re:Validity?

[Anonymous Coward]

There were more than 600,000 people protesting in Britain at the start of the Iraq war.
It went ahead anyway.

Re:Validity?

[rm999]

Good point, feedback is always a good thing; I guess the important question is whether this is the correct way of doing it. Politicians are very busy, and don't like their time being wasted. If the system is not taken seriously, like a lot of other online petition sites, it will lose effectiveness and just waste time.

If this does take off, and becomes the main way for the people to bring up complaints, it will give more voice to people who are tech savvy - not exactly the ideal in a democratic republic (or whatever Britain is).

I like the idea though. I wish more American politicians embraced something like this.

Re:Validity?

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Blockquoth the AC:

There were more than 600,000 people protesting in Britain at the start of the Iraq war. It went ahead anyway.

That's true, but ignoring a couple of million protesters has effectively brought down Tony Blair and neutered the New Labour government. I can't think of a single high-profile, high-impact change they've got through since then.

The nastiest thing in the works is probably the whole ID cards and National Identity Register policy, for which the introductory legislation has already passed (though only after being rammed through with all the power the government could muster). I nevertheless predict with confidence that this will policy will die before it becomes mainstream, and the framework will be quietly "forgotten" by the next election. Over-hyped arguments about fighting terrorism and pleas to trust the government just ain't what they used to be, and I rather suspect that once the current political fad of believing the world is about to end because of environmental catastrophes has passed, I think privacy and personal freedom will be the Next Big Political Hot Potato.

On which note, it's interesting that by far the most-signed petition on the site objects to the introduction of vehicle tracking and road pricing measures. Many in government, including quite a few of my local councillors as well as the big central government players, seem to think this is inevitable. I rather suspect that it will be shot down on a similar basis to ID cards: it's a not-so-stealth tax, and it's a gross invasion of privacy. It's also overcomplicated when a much simpler alternative already exists via petrol tax, which could achieve much of the same end result. And of course, it's the answer to a problem that has only been created through a combination of poor government strategy and naive business management. The correct answers don't even seem to occur to them: not planning such that much of the population doesn't work locally; providing effective public transport alternatives rather than unreliable, overpriced, and generally less pleasant "services"; getting heavy freight off the roads and onto the alternative networks as much as possible; setting higher basic driving standards to reduce the number of incompetent/inconsiderate drivers who cause a disproportionate amount of congestion; providing serious facilities for cyclists rather than half-assed cycle lanes that do more harm than good, and encouraging employers to provide basics like secure cycle storage and showers at the office; management realising that flexible working hours as a minimum and often telecommuting are now both possible and indeed desirable arrangements for many workplaces; and so on, and so on.

Of course, whether any e-petitions like this will make the slightest difference to government policy remains to be seen. But if opposing a flawed and abusive policy to address the wrong underlying problem can get 600,000 names behind it within a couple of months, put me down as number 600,001; it's got to be worth a try, and even if the current government don't care, it could raise the profile of the issue come election time and get a commitment from other parties to oppose it.

Re:Validity?

[PaulBu]

... it will give more voice to people who are tech savvy - not exactly the ideal in a democratic republic (or whatever Britain is).

And why would you say that? I guess we would both agree that in our time it is, in some sense, better when people going to polls are literate (as in, able to actually read something about an issue) -- not that I would advocate taking the right to vote from illiterate people, that would be wrong.

The same slight bias towards "tech--" (and probably something else) -- savvy individuals might be healthy as well.

Paul B.

P.S. Yes, I do like the idea too!

Re:Validity?

[TubeSteak]

If the petitions are narrow & specific, then I agree this might be a useful tool.

But more often, you got petitions like "cure world hunger" or some other broad/vague wording which has zero chance of being feasible... but what politician is going to come out against curing world hunger?

FTFA, it seems like the Brits have relatively specific petitions, which is a good thing. OTOH, how many successful petitions will ever advocate higher taxes or anything that will require sacrifice?

Re:Validity?

[sumdumass]

One of the reasons for a government is that what best ofr you isn't neccesarily best for everyone. On the same note, what is best for everyone might not be whats best for the country. And even more easily seen is that just because something is popular doesn't mean it is the best for anything.

I'm not saying that anything you describe is good or bad. It is just that governments do things against the populous for reasons we don't like. A good case might be distribution of wealth. Some people might thinkit is a good idea to take all the money from the rich and spread it around to everyone equaly. And when you realize that means you would recieve several thousand dollars it might even be popular too. But we know that if anything like that happened, it would likley ruin the econemy, cause massive inflation and stop the incentives for anyone to make more then they currently are (if it gets taken and given away to someone who made less).

The points you brought out don't seem like anything I would like to happen here but i think we are on the same track. I guess the system might be a good way to let the government make a solid case for doing something that isn't popular and they will probably throw the dog abone every once in a while too. I think it is definatly a bad ordeal if your government takes an opinion poll before take a stance on something. Which might be the end run effect of this petition system were they see how many people are going to be pissed before doing something. This is something that got america in the shape it is in.

Re:Validity?

[DavidShor]

Controlling road usage with a petrol tax is like conducting surgery with a sludge hammer.

In order to manage traffic, prices would need to be algorithmically changed several times a day depending on how much road capacity exists in an area. Otherwise you will have large areas of road with excess capacity being held up by crowded bottlenecks.

Re:Validity?

[AGMW]

If road pricing was in place and I knew that driving on a motorway between 7-9am would cost me more than driving outside of that time I would see if I could change my travel plans. In effect reducing road congestion, which is the whole point of the bill.

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?

[julesh]

If the petitions are narrow & specific, then I agree this might be a useful tool.

A lot of them are. Some which may be of interest to slashdotters include:

to make software patents clearly unenforcible
to Abandon plans to make it a criminal offence to possess "violent pornography"
to Abolish all faith schools and prohibit the teaching of creationism and other religious mythology in all UK schools
to levy a tax on energy inefficient light bulbs so that their long term financial and environmental cost is visible in their retail price
to force Ofcom [UK equivalent of FCC] to allocate the unused radio spectrum after the analogue switchover to HDTV services
to ensure that any website launched by the government complies with accessibility standards (WCAG AA at least)
to Improve Open Source use in govenment and local govenment work places
to Reject any motions to extend the copyright term for sound recordings
to award Professor Stephen W. Hawking a Knighthood
to Arrange for British Standard Time to be maintained in England permanently

and of course the petition for the prime mininster to stand on his head and juggle ice-cream. All feasible, most narrowly defined, or at least easy to investigate ways of achieving.

Re:Validity?

[AGMW]

It would be like banning a drug because the doctors administering it are too poorly trained to administer it safely all the time

Good analogy. If medical trials were undertaken for a new drug and it was found that the Drs couldn't administer it correctly, do you think the powers that be would :-
a) Issue a licence for the drug anyway, because the Drs will get the hang of it eventually
b) Send it back to the drug companies until they can provide a simpler administration system

My guess is they'd send it back to the drug company.

Sure, work to make the technology foolproof, but in the meantime don't foist a half-baked technical solution on the public just because it sounds like a good idea. The fact of the matter is that this kind of technology just isn't foolproof yet and there will be security leaks, and for that reason the tech is simply not ready to be rolled out yet!

Re:Validity?

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Although somewhat true, other forms of transport (i.e. roads and planes) do actually receive massive subsidies via methods such as road/airport building projects.

Except that roads don't. In fact, if you look at the amount of money raised by the government through direct methods of taxation on motorists (petrol tax, VED, etc.) and compare it to the amount of money spent on maintaining the roads and providing related services like road policing, you'll be lucky to find a year in which motorists get back as much as 1/3 of what they're charged. The motorists subsidise the government, and heavily, not the other way around.

This is one obvious reason the whole "everyone should use public transport" argument is disingenuous. If everyone used public transport, UK Plc would go bust within months. The same hypocrisy is evident in speeding fines, congestion charging, car parking charges and so on as well, of course: those administering such schemes have a vested interest in charging as much as possible from as many people as possible without actually making it so expensive that they really do change people's behaviour.

The short answer:

[Fyre2012]

Yes

Is this a valid way to provide feedback to the government or merely an exercise in keeping the populace happy?

Since when is having a happy populace providing feedback to encourage positive change in our governments a bad thing?

2,400 Petitions, 1 Million SIGNATURES

[IanDanforth]

Please edit original submission for accuracy.

-Ian

Re:2,400 Petitions, 1 Million SIGNATURES

[IanDanforth]

Maybe I'll get a +1 Funny :)

My experience

[Bogtha]

I signed a petition to add an exception to copyright law for personal use a month or two ago. A couple of weeks ago, I got an email from the system notifying me of the government's response:

As you may be aware, in December 2005 the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, announced that there would be a review of the intellectual property framework in the UK, led by Andrew Gowers.

The findings of this review have now been published and recommend the introduction of a private copying exception for the purposes of format shifting. This would allow individuals to copy music which they have legally bought on compact disc onto an MP3 player without infringing copyright.

The Government welcomes this recommendation and is currently considering how such an exception should be created in UK law.

Now obviously the petition didn't have a huge effect, but at least they are aware there is public demand for this, and it's helped me keep track of what they are actually doing about it.

Re:My experience

[steevc]

There's also a petition to make software patents unenforcible that people may wish to sign. It would be good to see it get more signatures than some of the sillier ones.

The road pricing petition is doing suspiciously well with 30x the signatures of the next most popular. That's over 1% of the population. Either someone has been marketing it well or there may be invalid signatures. You have to submit your address, but that's not hard to fake.

public opinion worthless

[swell]

If we had a government that listened in the USA, we would have mandatory church attendence, half the population in jail, and subsidies for any group (unions, lobbyists, Mexicans, etc) that could gather enough signatures.

Thank goodness that politicians DON'T have to cater to everyone!

Re:Sure

[Bogtha]

Sure it is. Besides, if MPs or Congressmen accept emails but don't respond to them, wouldn't that also be a way of "merely keeping the populace happy"?

Interestingly enough, the same people who built this petition system for the government also created WriteToThem — write your message in a text box on the site, and they email/fax/post it to your MP. This has the advantage of them being able to spot when an MP is ignoring people and they've published league tables and other statistics about how responsive MPs are.

Tagging a slashdot question...

[Coopjust]

Whenever Slashdot asks a question in a story I perform a service as a reader:

I tag the story "yes", "no", and "maybe".

Just doing my part ;)

How about a ballot instead?

[troll -1]

I'm from the UK, lived in the US for many years. This irks me a bit. When I first came to the US I was surprised at how much Americans get a real say in how their government runs.

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.

Re:How about a ballot instead?

[TheDugong]

I'm from the UK and live in Australia, which is somewhere between the US and the UK in this respect.

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?

Re:How about a ballot instead?

[bogjobber]

That's one of the really great things about federalism. Your voice can be heard and have an impact on local issues, most of the time without the national government stepping in and screwing things up.

how many understood the petition they signed

[pbhj]

How many understood the petition they signed? 600,000?

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

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

[Geof]

Any way one can provide feedback to their government is a valid one.

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, 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.

This is a bad Idea

[TheSloth2001ca]

Here in Canada was had a Politician recommend a similar system...

"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_Minu tes#Stockwell.2FDoris_petition

I can't believe

[peepleperson]

that I'm the first to point out that the 33rd most popular petition is for Tony Blair to stand on his head and juggle ice-cream.

Re:I can't believe

[adrianmonk]

the 33rd most popular petition is for Tony Blair to stand on his head and juggle ice-cream.

Two things:

1. That's truly hilarious (in a British sort of a way).
2. If Blair has any brains or political savvy at all, he'll one-up the person who started that petition by waiting until the momentum and press coverage behind it peaks, then announcing that, because he is absolutely committed to being responsive to citizens' needs, he'd be glad to stand on his head and juggle ice cream. And then, of course, he'll actually do it, with skill and aplomb.

Dr Graffin's "Web-surdities"

[Tiro]

One of my favorite writers posted about this a few years back. After reflecting upon his thoughts, I concluded that assembling mass support for an issue depends on individuals' personal/emotional involvement. That interest and enthusiasm can be multiplied by getting people together in physical proximity, which energizes them. Having a lot of loud, energized people in the capital city is a lot more compelling to the rest of society than an "e-protest".

Here is the link to the article: http://badreligion.com/news/essays.php?id=8. He has since become a Ph.D and a biology instructor at UCLA.

To quote from the first two paragraphs:

Recently, I read an article in the paper that related the growing trend of "Digital Demonstrators" (Wall Street Journal, Dec. 3, 1998). It said that "virtual marches" could be an effective way to bring about social change. It stated that "activists can demonstrate with a mouse click...

This really pissed me off! First of all, it is a gross misrepresentation of what motivates social and political change. Ultimately, social change comes from an emotionally based behavior pattern. The reason people change in unison is because we are united by a similar emotional response. We are not moved to change the laws if we don't have an emotional experience that connects us to the political issue.

Re:How about a breath of fresh air instead?

[Bogtha]

The queen is head of parliament.

People who aren't from the UK often get confused by this. The Queen, for all practical purposes, has no political power. No monarch has entered the House of Commons in well over three centuries.

The last time they tried it was in 1642 — Charles I tried to arrest five MPs for treason, and the House of Commons told him to bugger off. Shortly afterwards he was defeated in civil war, and parliament created a court to put a monarch on trial for the first time in history — he ended up being executed.

These days, the monarch's representatives don't even enter the House of Commons unless they have permission from the Members of Parliament. They rarely even express any political opinions.

Lots of people read history books about how kings and queens used to be dictators, but that's exactly what it is — history. The monarchy is an anachronism; a leftover we use mainly as a tourist attraction. We don't "recall" them because there's no point, not because we can't.

Re:Populism != Democracy

[moehoward]

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

Re:How about a breath of fresh air instead?

[bky1701]

Funny, see, no one ever asked ME about the DMCA, net neutrality, copyright extension ad nauseam, the PATRIOT Act... need I go on? Needless to say, medical marijuana is still "bad".

Democracy theater, that's all we have. Important issues are ALL left up to the "wise" ones in the senate.

This is modern Britain

[Budenny]

"Is this a valid way to provide feedback to the government or merely an exercise in keeping the populace happy?"

Neither. It is a way of compiling a database of potential troublemakers.

Re:How about a breath of fresh air instead?

[alext]

This is utter nonsense, it was entirely the GG's initiative. He represents the Queen completely, for her even to have been consulted would have been a breach of protocol.

And I've no idea what you mean by "double dissolution" as a cause, perhaps you mean dissolution was the effect?

The problem with a petition against ID cards...

[simm1701]

If you are against ID cards (and I am) are you really going to put your name and address on a petition stored in a database the goverment run?

I mean really?

Re:The problem with a petition against ID cards...

[coastwalker]

It would be cowardly not to. The problem with the ID card system and the state database is its potential for misuse not paranoia that the death squads will be on the street next week. The most likely problem comes when different departments of Government start data mining the information collected for excuses to impose penalties or deny services to individuals to save money. Government security organisations already have the ability to mine most databases for what they regard as suspicious individuals and this is unstoppable. What is most objectionable is that petty bureaucrats be allowed to pick off the tails of the normal distribution and discriminate against them. The first rule of Engineering is that if you want to control something then you have to measure it first.

Re:How about a breath of fresh air instead?

[thetroll123]

>1337, the Hundred Years War?

1337? Shouldn't that be "teh hu|\|Dr3D y3aRz \/\/aR" then?

Big success for the government

[Dan100]

This website was a stroke of genius for the government. Before, every few months they had the very embarrassing spectacle of the large wad of a paper petition being hand-delivered to Downing Street, usually with the petitioner flanked by photographers, with the result that the petition and its issue was splashed across the newspapers the next day.

The last one I know of was a anti-drink driving campaign 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.

Protests

[MrSteveSD]

If they can ignore 1 Million people marching in London against the Iraq war, they can certainly ignore 600,000 on some website. What you really need is something like the Swiss system where the public can instigate a referendum. All they have to do is get a certain number of signatures together to kick off the process.

There is an anti-software-patent petition: sign!

[H4x0r Jim Duggan]

If you are eligible ("a British citizen or resident"), sign the petition against software patents: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/softwarepatents/

And pass it on to everyone you know. It only has 1,800 signatures right now and the deadline is Feb 20th. And if you want to learn more about software patents, try:

• http://ciaran.compsoc.com/software-patents.html
• http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/swpat/swpat.en.h tml
• http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html
• http://ifso.ie/documents/ifso-2005-11-18.html

Million Moron March

[Grashnak]

Anyone can set up an internet petition and get idiots to sign it. 99.99% of such things should just be ignored as the bleating of ignorant sheep. Most people lack understanding of even the least complex of issues faced by governments today, yet they flock to internet petitions demanding the the government "fix healthcare" or "stop global warming", as if those were check-boxes that the government could just flick on or off. I'm all in favour of internet discussions/forums/chats that involve an actual exchange of views or at least the transmission of information, but having people simply add their l33t handle to an internet petition is meaningless. Oh, and I almost forgot, sign my petition to nerf Paladins.