What is a representative democracy UK?

Representative democracy, also referred to as liberal democracy, refers to a democratic system where citizens elect politicians to make decisions for them on their behalf. Representative democracy differs from direct democracy, as in direct democracy citizens vote directly on policy creation rather than have a representative do this for them. Representative democracy can be seen as more advantageous then direct democracy to citizens, as the electorate often do not have the political interest or time to make direct policy decisions. Having a representative to make decisions for the electorate also means that a wide-range of citizen’s views are aggregated through a singular politician in a coherent manner. However, there are no clear instructions on how a politician elected under a representative democratic system should respond to their constituents’ policy views. Some argue that those that are elected to represent should simply be a delegate and a mouthpiece of their constituents. Others argue from the ‘trustee representative’ perspective of Edmund Burke. This refers to representatives using their own autonomous judgement to better the nation, meaning they can therefore act against the short-term interests of individuals that elected them. One key example of a representative democracy would be the United Kingdom. Citizens within the United Kingdom vote for who they want to represent their constituency in Parliament. This voting occurs every five years during general elections. This means that those who have been elected can be held accountable for their decisions, as they can be voted out of power. The Members of Parliament that have been elected to represent citizens make voting decisions within the House of Commons, where country-wide policy legislation is partly decided. They also make decisions on local issues within their constituency. Representative democracy is also used within the Scottish, Welsh, Northern Irish, and European Parliaments. Moreover, it is used within local council elections that take place in the United Kingdom. Representative democracy is additionally used within the United States. Citizens elect members of Congress from each individual state, and elect the President, to pass laws upon their behalf.  

Britain is a representative democracy. This is where citizens within a country elect representatives to make decisions for them. Every 5 years in Britain the people have the chance to vote into power those they wish to represent us in Parliament. These MP’s meet in the House of Commons to discuss matters and pass acts which then become British law.

Within the House of Commons, each elected MP represents an area called a constituency.

The voters in this constituency passed on the responsibility of participating in law making to this MP who, if successful within the Commons, could be re-elected by that constituency at the next general election. However, in stark comparison to direct democracy, the people hand over the responsibility of decision making to someone else who wishes to be in that position.

For five years, MP’s are responsible to their electorate. In this way they are held accountable to them. If they fail to perform (or if the party has done badly during its time in office) they can be removed by the people of their constituency. In this way, the people exercise control over their representatives.

However, by handing to their MP’s the right to participate in decision making within the Commons, the electorate is removing itself from the process of decision making. Though MP’s have constituency clinics where the people can voice an opinion on an issue, the electorate play no part in the mechanism of decision making – that process has been handed to MP’s and the government.

Within representative democracy, usually two types of MP’s emerge. There are those who believe that they should act and react to what the party and electorate wish – they believe that they have been elected to represent both; though an argument would be that the party wants the best for the electorate so the two are entirely compatible.

The other MP’s are the ones who believes that they should act in accordance to their conscience regardless of party and electorate stance. This gives such a MP the flexibility to ignore the wishes of both his party leadership and his constituency – therefore allowing himself to do as he/she sees fit. Is this democratic in any form?

However, is it realistic for a MP to do what his/her constituency electorate wishes all the time? If he/she always follows the wishes of the majority within his/her constituency, what happens to those in the minority? Are they condemned to five years in which their views may be heard but are not acted on? Does a representative within the boundaries of “representative democracy”, only represent the majority view and thus state that the wishes of a democratic society have been fulfilled?

The “Tyranny of the Minority” is something that pure democracy is meant to prevent.

One way of expanding the participation of the electorate and therefore the whole ethos of democracy would be to initiate more mechanisms whereby the public can participate, should they wish, in the decision making process. Such mechanisms could be the greater use of public enquiries and referendums. Both would allow the public the ability to participate in the complete process of examining an issue, but they would not guarantee that the public would have any say in the final decision made by government.

Related Posts

• Democracy is a word frequently used in British Politics. We are constantly told that we live in a democracy in Britain and that our political…

What is meant by representative democracy?

What is representative government in simple terms?

When did Britain become a representative democracy?

What are the features of a representative democracy?