MNHQ here: should we support a Citizens Assembly as a way of breaking a Brexit deadlock?

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

We've been asked whether Mumsnet would support the idea of a Citizens Assembly to try to bridge the divide within the UK electorate over what should happen next with Brexit, and address what's looking like a deadlock in Parliament .

Current polling seems to suggest no majority in the country at large for any one Brexit outcome, from May's deal to a second referendum to no deal. (Here are YouGov's figures on May's deal from a few days ago and here's another set of YouGov figures appearing to show that no current proposal has majority support). Inasmuch as anyone knows anything, the conventional wisdom seems to be that there's also no majority in Parliament for any of the possible ways forward.

Citizen's Assemblies aim to be neutral forums for participative decision-making. (You can see the Wikipedia definition here.)

The Republic of Ireland set up a Citizens Assembly as part of the process that resulted in the repeal of the 8th Amendment to the Irish constitution, contributing to the recent referendum decision to change Ireland's abortion laws.

For Brexit, the proposal is that an assembly of 500 citizens (from a longlist of 10,000 people drawn from the electoral register) would be randomly selected by a polling organisation to be demographically representative of the UK electorate. The Electoral Commission would facilitate the process, and a non-voting Chairperson would call experts to give evidence from a variety of perspectives. The aim is that the Assembly would take place within the space of a week towards the end of 2018 or the beginning of 2019, and that its recommendations would be passed to Parliament for a vote.

A previous Citizens Assembly on Brexit was held in 2017: you can see the summary report of its recommendations here.

We'd be interested to know whether you think this is something MN should support - please let us know what you think (and if you're an expert on constitutional conventions please feel free to contribute )

Thanks
MNHQ

Agree on the inadvertent discrimination against for example women with caring responsibilities, low income people, people on zero hours contracts or self-employed, teachers who can't take time off during the year, to name but a few. Retirees and the comfortably off would easily become over represented.

Absolutely undemocratic and shame on you MNHQ for even considering supporting this.

What if a Citizens Assembly is as demanding, foolish and naive as parliament? How would a Citizens Assembly change the negotiation with the EU? What if a Citizens Assembly comes up with a similar unpalatable compromise that current UK gov is proposing?

The only consultation that could undo or strengthen brexit is another ref. I can't see how this -well intentioned- initiative could avoid further polarisation.
The question now is about legitimacy and respect of democracy whilst protecting the country. A panel will never fulfil that.

its recommendations would be passed to Parliament for a vote. it's a way of formally testing out the views of the electorate, and recommendations then being discussed in Parliament. It is completely democratic. It seems to have been useful to Ireland. Nothing the panel came up with would be binding, but used as info to feed into the decision making process. Democracy at its best, really?

onalong I'll reserve judgement till the Commons Statement this afternoon. A Citizen's Assembly, however is not part of the normal workings of the UK Constitution or its decision making process.

Ireland (where a Citizens Assembly has been used) is a Constitutional Democracy with Referendum mechanisms built in. The UK has no such tradition and look at the mess the last Referendum has caused.

Thanks @mumsnet.

What if a Citizens Assembly comes up with a similar unpalatable compromise that current UK gov is proposing?

I you read the last citizens' panel report linked to in the OP (here) it has internal contingencies which cover if the UK proposal can't be agreed.

Sorry-here -citizensassembly.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/CAB-summary-report.pdf

Very dubious about this.
How well informed would the contributors be..

This is the conversation that should have been had up and down the land a bazillion and one times BEFORE the referendum. But it wasn't. So now we need to find the best way through and this could be a useful contribution to the process, which needs all the help it can get to keep moving, right?

The vote has been called off - allegedly - and there's a statement this afternoon to mps at half 3.

Wouldn't this be better held off until after that?

A bit pointless really.
There are really only 3 choices. Out (crash deliberate or accidental).
The WA as it stands.
Remain.

As far as I understand it, any other proposal submitted to the EU will simply be turned down so there is no point in the UK thinking of yet more crap and alienate itself even further. It is the pinnacle of arrogance to think the UK is actually that important in the grand scheme of the EU. Women are supposedly good at 'empathy' try looking at this from a European point of view for a few minutes.
Although only an economic aspect, how would you feel about your taxes going up £400 a year to support Portugal 'flouncing about'?

It seems completely misguided to appoint a randomly selected group to try and crack this absolutely critical decision. The main problem with the referendum was that the vast majority people made an emotional decision, or one based on their own biases (in either direction), or at worst a dice roll as they weren’t really sure. Few people understood anything about the complexities at hand.

I’d back a representative panel of informed, credible people from both sides of the argument- economists, youth workers, community organisers, heads of industry etc. so the full range of informed opinions could be debated without political bias.

Another talking shop would be worse than useless.

{I’d back a representative panel of informed, credible people from both sides of the argument- economists, youth workers, community organisers, heads of industry etc. so the full range of informed opinions could be debated without political bias.}
With the extensive NDAs and so much 'secret dealing' such as Fox's visit to USA there is no point in this forum whatsoever as it can only be a talking shop as NO ONE can reveal what is actually going on.
It is not impossible that the likes of BMW/Nissan/Airbus/big Pharma simply close their doors on or after March 29 and never reopen.
Pandora's box has been opened and the UK public and most of Westminster have had a blindfold put on us.

Given opinions are so finely balanced, there will be huge sensitivity around how representative those 500 people can actually be, and so I would worry that this just adds a further unconvincing option into the suite of apparently more robust options we already had namely the referendum and parliament. The deadlock can only be broken by a narrowing of options and not a widening especially if the new option is less robust than the previous two. Basically I think either call a second ref or put the burden on government to govern.

No thank you.

As the last three years has shown, leaving the EU is a Massively complicated and convoluted concept. It should never have been put to the public.

The selection of that 500 people would be blamed on the outcome of their decision whichever way it goes.

What we need to do is Revoke.

And then find out properly why people voted Leave and propose ways to address those issues, which imo on the whole have little to do with EU membership and more to do with government policy on immigration and austerity.

MN should not get involved.

@onalongsabbatical

The views of the electorate have already been “formally tested out”

That sounds fantastic. I'd support it. The people involved would be representative but, having heard from experts and devoted time to the decision, more informed than an average voter like me.

Stella Creasey contacted you so its not impartial already then

Given how much wheeler dealing goes on behind the scenes when it comes to democracy, such a small sample makes me prickle a little. That may be a bit tinfoil hat though. There should definitely be 'something' though. The current scenario is nuts and the people should be heard again.

I think its an excellent idea. Its become clear that MPs are all too involved in the game of seeking personal and party political advantage to put the country first and sort things out.

What would MN's support entail, practically speaking?

I think we should support our parliamentary democracy rather than have self promoting talking shops outside Parliament.