by Tony Orman

 “The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.” ==Albert Einstein 

Increasing dissatisfaction with politicians

New Zealanders are increasingly distrustful of politicians. And the poll figures emphatically show it. Just five months ago in May, researcher Dr Stephanie Worboys of the Maxim Institute researched the public’s “trust deficit” of Parliament. 

Dr Worboys said “A Parliamentary survey published in 2023 found that public engagement with Parliament had “hit a new low” of 13%. The survey also found that only 36% believed that Parliament dealt with issues of importance to them.  Additionally, only 43% believed that the views of everyday New Zealanders were represented in Parliament.”

Not surprisingly, the survey seemed to go unnoticed, or ignored, by mainstream media.

Other figures verified the strong trend. The parliamentary survey showed just 36 percent (one in three) of New Zealanders are strongly committed to voting. Or to put it another way, 64 percent couldn’t care less. They are afflicted with apathy.

The price of apathy

Apathy has always been a problem. Last century, Albert Einstein said “The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

But long before that in ancient Greek BC times philosopher Plato rued “The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” To cite another quote, “Apathy’s a problem but who cares?” 

We should, it’s the erosion of democracy.

Journalist and writer Amy Brooke cares

One person does care deeply is Amy Brooke of Nelson who is a regular contributor to the UK/Australian “Spectator” magazine: https://www.spectator.com.au/author/amy-brooke/  to the Australian “Quadrant” and to the Australian “News Weekly”  as well as well as interviews with Rodney Hide on “Reality Check”. Radio: https://realitycheck.radio/replay/amy-brooke-authoress-nzs-liberal-policies-errant-church-leaders-christianity-history-favourite-novels-and-more/

While her first love is writing for children (she is the author of highly successful children’s books), another book of hers, The 100 Days Claiming Back New Zealand published over a decade ago, deals with “what has gone wrong and how we can control our politicians.”

Her blueprint for remedying the declining democracy and the subsequent apathy afflicting New Zealand’s political system, is based on Switzerland’s government, a strong form of democracy adopted over 170 years ago — tried and proven.

Reclaim Democracy, Swiss style

“Nothing can possibly rescue New Zealand from the on-going process of poor decision-making by our political parties, unless New Zealanders themselves take matters in hand,” she says.

“If we are to reclaim a genuine democracy, there is a very simple and highly achievable way way to do this – the 100 Days as practised in Switzerland,” she says.

How does the highly successful Swiss democracy work?

Switzerland is a direct democracy and alongside the usual voting rights accorded in democracies, the Swiss people can also stop politicians passing laws with which they disagree.

Switzerland’s democracy was set up in 1848 when the country voted overwhelmingly on a new constitution.

“It is so simple, as so many great ideas are,” says Amy Brooke. A fundamental core is the insistence that all acts of parliament are subject to a Facultative Referendum.

“What this means is that parliamentary decisions become law in Switzerland only when a set period of 100 days has passed. However, within those 100 days, if 50,000 citizens demand that the ratification of proposed legislation be put to the whole country, because of concerns, a vote by the people then has to take place by way of a referendum,” she explains. The people make the final decision.

“The provision of 100 days scrutiny by the public — of all legislation passed by parliament – is the key to preserving a genuine democracy where the people of the country make the final decisions,” explains Amy Brooke.

Negative Voting

So why replace New Zealand’s current system with the Swiss model?

Amy Brooke doesn’t mince her words and concern. The New Zealand public has strongly trended to negative voting at elections.

“The reality is we have lost being a true democracy. In actual fact, our democratic freedoms now extend only to throwing out one political party or coalition when it’s seen as having done so much damage that it should be removed, to exchange it for another – which nobody now really believes is going to be any better.”

New Zealand is no longer a representative democracy. She gives as example when in 2009 the anti-family, anti-smacking legislation was enforced.

“It was instigated by a reputedly Marxist Green MP, Sue Bradford, supported by a heavily socialist and domineering Prime Minister Helen Clark and scandalously endorsed by National Party leader John Key telling his party members to do as they were told. Not one of the major parties’ so-called constituent MPs stood up to be counted and represent the public, when polls showed 85% of New Zealanders were opposed to this ominous and intrusive legislation.”

Amy Brooke exhorts New Zealanders to claim back their country. “Yes it can be done. And it’s not difficult for New Zealanders to say they’ve had enough, that they claim the right to make decisions that affect them.”

The Swiss claimed that right over 170 years ago. They have proved it works and it does so simply,” she adds.

Undemocratic

Amy Brooke says the public are well aware that political parties cannot be trusted, as reflected in the low faith the public has in politicians.

Would the Swiss system mean the end of political parties? “No. It would be unreasonable if individuals were not entitled to come together and on the basis of shared principles, form associations,” she says.

She cautions about likening the 100 Days Facultative Referendum initiative to a Citizens Initiated Referenda. “They are not the same thing. The latter is where a proposal arises and individuals lend their signature to it, to establish or to object to a particular law only. However, the 100 Days Facultative Referendum enables the people to stop in its tracks any legislation it sees as damaging.”

Under the 100 Days Facultative Referendum, the decision of the majority of public, is binding on government.

Rotating leadership

There are other aspects of the Swiss model that should appeal to the disenchanted New Zealand public. For example, the Swiss president (equivalent of our Prime Minister) is drawn from a Federal Council and the presidency rotates.  After one year, he or she has to step down and the position usually then goes to the previous year’s Finance Minister – who then steps down in turn. 

“Such a provision here would have stopped a Jacinda Ardern in her tracks. Or indeed an over-bearing Christopher Luxon, backing the discredited CO2 alarmist hoax- which is costing the country so much.”

The most successful democracy in the world, where the government respectfully refers to the electorate, i.e. voting public, as sovereign is Switzerland.

The fact that not the Swiss government, but the people of the country itself actually make the decisions, has brought this about.