After the EU referendum, many people like Farage said that the referendum as it was carried out is the democratic voice of the people.
Simple majority.
No minimum percentage of electorate turnout required.
No independent commission to police false statements/arguments or pull them.
No real limit on funding by big business to whatever side lies in their interest.
If this is such a good way to make decisions, should each government publish it's policy agenda and make up a list of potential laws which people can vote on in the same way. Once at the end of the lifetime of each parliament. In fact you could do polls and then put the things people wanted most to vote on most appear on the ballot.
Such as;
Should income tax be banned?
Should stamp duty be abolished?
Should people only get (pro rata) out of the welfare system what they have paid in?
As above, for NHS. You pay your insurance/taxes, you get treatment
Should politicians get allowances, rent, subsidised bar and restaurant?
Should charlie or willie be next monarch?
should electricity be free?
Should the UK carry out missions in Iraq or Syria with the US or Nato? Instead of how it was voted for in parliament.
You get the gist. Put in your own.
Is it the basis on which you should let a simple majority, with same conditions as above, make good decisions for the common good? It was used to make a pretty major decision, so why not other major decisions (forget monarch )?
AIBU to think if people are saying referenda under the above conditions are more democratic than a parliamentary democracy, why aren't they campaigning for most decisions to be made this way?