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

Terrible idea. MPs are elected to represent us and they need to start doing this. But their all too worried of how they will be perceived to do what's best for the country.

And as a whole I don't trust the general public. They voted for leave in the first place.

{And as a whole I don't trust the general public.}
But you are one of them!!

Maybe there should be 650 selected. One from each constituency in the UK

Maybe there should be 650 selected. One from each constituency in the UK

And in the interests of local democracy they could be voted for by people in their constituency?

And in the interests of local democracy they could be voted for by people in their constituency?

And call them members of parliament!

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.

You do realise that the only groups who voted in a majority for remain are the As and Bs. The richest and most privileged people in our society. So basically what you are suggesting is that the majority of lower middle and working class voters that they are so thick that their vote and voice is worthless and you know what they think better than they do. Plus you’re going to tell everybody who voted for the Tories and therefore austerity and limits on migration that they didn’t mean to, didn’t know what they were doing and are stupid too?

It is a fact that longstanding worklessness and the erosion of socioeconomic resources in areas that overwhelmingly voted to leave is a legacy first of the dismantling of British industry that occurred under Thatcher and then the austerity programmes of Cameron and May, and not of our membership of the EU, which in fact has been propping up many of the most deprived communities in the UK over many years.

That people did not recognise this and instead took up the narratives promoted by the gutter press of European bureaucracy and 'swarms' of immigrants being to blame for their reduced life chances does suggest a failure to engage with the facts, most obviously because of ignorance and an inability to engage intellectually with the matter at hand. I appreciate that there are some Leavers who had more complex and nuanced reasons for wanting to leave, but vox pop after vox pop makes it excruciatingly obvious that those are very, very much in the minority.

Characterising Remainers as 'rich and privileged' is actually well wide of the mark when you look at what rabid Leavers some of the richest and most privileged in our ruling class have chosen to be, for their own financial benefit and not, let's be clear, because of any conscientiously felt political stance. However, the grain of truth at the heart of your cliche, Augusta, might be that affluence enables access to the kind of education and information that allows a more reasoned analysis of the facts than some garbled shite about 'sovereignty'. Using that analysis to address the inequalities that unquestionably exist between different regions of the UK can only be a good thing, and I would question the clarity and motives of any Leaver who would choose deliberately to sidestep that very necessary dialogue in favour of ploughing on regardless into the national catastrophe that Brexit is becoming.

@august2012 rabidly means 'aggressively' with a little connotation of foaming at the mouth. But you know that.

Clearly we disagree on the primary drivers of Brexit. However we are agreed that this citizens assembly plan is neither democratic nor desirable.

No, I wouldn't support this, for the same reasons that I don't think Brexit should have been decided by a referendum in the first place.

These are incredibly complex issues, and a week is nowhere near long enough for the average man/woman in the street (and I include myself in this) to get their heads around the issues. In any case, as another poster has already pointed out, we know that people only believe "experts" when it suits them to do so - otherwise it's Project Fear/sunlit uplands or whatever.

We pay our elected politicians to get a proper grasp on the issues and to represent us in parliament. We then hold them accountable in a general election, and if we don't like the decisions that they have made, we can kick them out. Where would the accountability sit for this citizens' assembly? Nowhere!

The standard of debate about Brexit, both on MN and in RL, demonstrates that most people on both sides of the debate have incredibly simplistic views and a limited understanding of the issues. I'm not saying that our parliamentarians necessarily have a better understanding of the issues, but we have at least paid them to engage with the various options and scenarios, and I think they should bloody well get on with their jobs and accept whatever consequences might ensue.

We have a citizen's assembly it's called parliament.

We elect members called MPs and the act in the best interests of the country.

The ludicrous referendum has done enough to subvert our democratic process.

I don't quite understand the proposed purpose for this assembly. Is it being suggested that a random group of UK citizens negotiate with the 27 countries of the EU about 600-odd treaties forming the whole agreement with the EU?

If so, no, don't see how they can in this time limit, even if you did somehow get a random group with decent international negotiating skills and high knowledge of all political processes.

I agree with Alexa. The more I read this, the more unsure I am as to whether this is a good idea. I suppose an assembly would not be making a decision here influenced partly by party politics. However, it is a complex issue and the assembly wouldnt have the reports and information from experts at hand

God no.

In the past Govts of National Emergency have proved to be successful. What the policy of such a govt would be, though.....

We employ MP's at a pretty high cost to do this. I don't see why we need employ more people to make even more of a dogs breakfast of the whole situation. And the idea up thread that we should only have those that are degree educated in such an assembly is laughable - I can see those media and David Beckham studies graduates being a great boon to the decision making process. Degrees have been devalued massively over the last 20 years.

I don't agree with this. A group of 500 people is never going to be representative of the country, it's much too small a number. The Tories created the mess, they can sort it out. Don't hand the responsibility of the future of our country over to a handful of the general public.

Congratulations, Stella Creasey. This is the one idea I’ve heard that is more stupid than having a binary referendum on a question where one of the answers leads to a completely untested scenario that could jeopardise our economic and social security for a generation.

I think this is a good idea, I would support this and would be happy to be involved if randomly selected.

I'm pro remain and not happy at all about brexit but I think at this point fighting to remain will only lead to a no deal brexit. If we had a general election called tomorrow we wouldn't get a party in power with the will to revoke. So I think supporting TMs deal is the only option available for anyone who doesn't want to crash out without a deal.

The benefit of a citizens panel would be they'd put individual ego aside and propose a compromise? Could our mps just grow up and do that please

Having seen the intellectual calibre of random citizens when I was on jury duty recently, it’s a huge no from me.

Terrible idea. Just. No.

It is a fact that longstanding worklessness and the erosion of socioeconomic resources in areas that overwhelmingly voted to leave is a legacy first of the dismantling of British industry that occurred under Thatcher and then the austerity programmes of Cameron and May, and not of our membership of the EU, which in fact has been propping up many of the most deprived communities in the UK over many years.

It’s not ‘a fact’ that Thatcher was completely responsible for the decline in manufacturing. In fact it arguably declined more under New Labour than under her.

fullfact.org/economy/did-labour-decimate-manufacturing/

In 2016, unemployment was around 5%. Around half a million of that number are long term unemployed. So even if every single one of them voted Leave (and many may be EU citizens not eligible to vote) that still leaves almost 17 million votes unaccounted for.

The EU’s ‘propping up’ of deprived areas frequently benefits those who are making a profit or parachuted in public sector managers and locals often feel it only offers a few badly paid jobs with little opportunity for them.

Again, you are assuming that working class and lower middle class people were too stupid to know what they were voting for and that their voice should be ignored because other people (like you) know better than they do themselves what they really want, so they should just shut up and do as they’re told.

And you’re left wing. It’s an absolute disgrace this sort of thing is coming out of the left wing. It’s absolutely divorced from the original purpose of the left which championed the rights of the working class to participate in politics and decried the sort of people who claimed the working classes were too thick and ill educated to participate in politics. The left wing now is just an elitist playground for posturing bourgeoisie to play at student politics.

Since MNHQ regard 'Loveliest baby names' as more important a topic than Brexit which is in the process of trashing lives all across Europe you have to wonder if it is not just a 'money making scheme' for MN.

This seems a very bad idea to me, for lots of reasons others have mentioned upthread.

It’s a lovely idea but far far too late. There’s so much to assimilate in such a short time and the concerns about representation made by PPs are extremely concerning.
There’s no real mandate either. The representative part is filched from the jury process in criminal courts but is hugely problematic when weighed against that of (very recently) elected MPs and the referendum result.

It would just be another voice making noise with no power.

The 'Thatcher' period, and in fact any other rarely looks at other global events going on at that particular moment. Pits declining because they needed investment in better machinery, the opening up of easier seams of better coal in Poland and many other global changes all contribute. Of course having a government (of either flavour) who don't really understand the various industries simply makes things worse. Pouring millions into steelmaking when India and China are getting into gear and capable of producing at a fraction of the UK's cost with their outdated plant is just crazy. The fact that the 'Westminster bubble' then and now have next to no clue about how the world really works or if they do, make the wrong strategic choices, often based on getting reelected, shorttermism rather than long term investment.