We should have elections every year?
On average, everyone strongly disagrees with consensus between 376 voters. |
|
Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
We should have elections every year
You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.
Reasons To DisagreeDoes not allow enough time for progress (dealing with issues), and instead time is spent on campaigning (promoting issues) 1 September 2005
It would mean less time passing bills and more time campaigning. I also believe that it would make people not want to stand for the election because it would be too stressful on them. 17 November 2005
That would be a certain recipe for administrative chaos. 5 March 2006
Perhaps rather than elections - we could have an annual referendum to decide on areas of policy weakness or additional requirements. Certainly to remove a limited number of individuals from office who have not performed adequately or who have become implausable in the public eye - this process could be initiated to prevent what is occurring now where the PM decides to maintain an individual in office where some serious breach of ethics has occurred. Result - less Parliamentary privilege. 1 August 2006
Instead of holding the politicians accountable every year, we should have additional measures to recall our representatives at any time as such that a vast number of the constituents should decide. Another problem with yearly elections would be the cost with the extra administrational support required for it. 15 April 2007
If our elections were every four years instead of every three great politicians have enough time to achieve and crap ones have enough time to hang themselves! 12 January 2008
bit too excessive ppl would get sick of voting 1 May 2008
A 3 year term is too short. Year 1 = settling in, Year 2 doing something, Year 3 gearing up to the next election. 21 June 2008
expensive, time consuming and daft. Nothing would ever get done 4 November 2008
Yeah right - then nothing would ever get done! BUT PERHAPS IT'S A GOOD IDEA - WITH PRACTICE WE MAY GET BETTER AT MAKING AN INTELLIGENT SELECTION - IF WE GOT ANY INTELLIGENT CANDIDATES. 1 September 2009
We have to pay for it, Imagine how much higher our taxes would be! 24 December 2009
Referendums aren't legally BINDING so why waste your breath with them. An ELECTION every FOUR years will be better than several legally binding referendums because constituents should be able to judge policies for themselves!? 14 May 2010
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner 27 August 2012
|
Reasons To AgreeI agree because I'm a Politics junkie love it. Love the performances, like learning the party values and their vision. This election it amases me how many are short sighted and greedy. 13 September 2005
If it is glaringly obvious that a party has acted the opposite to the manifesto it presented during campaigning, we should have the opportunity to punish it by removal. 20 August 2006
Permanent revolution! 10 February 2007
This will keep all politicians honest. 24 August 2007
How can anybody disagree with this, but also agree that democracy is good?? 2 December 2012
|
Reasons for Remain Neutral
In order to keep the buggers honest we could have rolling elections. Let's have 100 electorates, and have an election in six of those electorates every three months. That might force the parties to take a little more interest in what their real employers require of them.
My View
You can make your comments once you have voted.
You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.