You were asking about:

1             Death penalty

Opposition to CIR is often based on the unfoundedfear that it might lead to the re-introduction of the death penalty. There isno reason to think that there would ever be a citizens’ initiative on thismatter, and still less reason to think that any subsequent referendum wouldsucceed. But, in any event, nothing would or could limit the ancient andunchallenged executive prerogative of mercy. It is impossible to argue that CIRwould lead to the actual execution of anyone, ever.

It should also be noted  that the death penalty operates most prominently in China,Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. In none of these countries does CIRoperate and if it did there is every chance that the death penalty would be abolishedthrough the use of CIR.

In any event, there is no reason why the death penalty couldn't be specifically excluded from the enabling CIR legislation. This is a non

issue.

2             Compulsory Voting.

Compulsory voting has been part of the politicalprocess in Australia for nearly a century and there is little opposition to it.Whilst we do not necessarily endorse (or oppose) compulsory voting we doacknowledge that it makes CIR easier to implement and safer to accept. Forexample, in Taiwan (see the CIR Worldwide page) a citizens initiated referendumcan only pass if it has a majority of the whole electorate - not just amajority of those who vote. This makes successful referendums almost impossiblein Taiwan, but the reason for the requirement cannot be rejected outright. Ifonly a minority of the electorate votes on a particular matter, should thatminority have the power to bind the whole electorate? (On the other hand, ifonly a minority of the electorate turns out to vote at a general electionshould that minority be able to determine the government? And if they cannot,what then?) Compulsory voting, whatever other advantages and drawbacks it mayhave, does make CIR a safer and more appealing proposition. It also helps tonegate the influence that well-funded interests might have. (See separate entryfor Limits on Advertising)

3             Privacy Statement.

CIR Australia gives an unqualified assurance thatit will not divulge any identifying information about any member or anycorrespondent. This commitment does not extend to the publication of surveyswhich have been explicitly expressed to be conducted with the intention ofpublishing individual responses.

4             Legislation The introduction of CIR into any Australianjurisdiction must be by way of legislation. The exact form which thatlegislation should take in any individual parliament or assembly is entirely amatter for the body concerned. The essential nature of CIR - referendumsinitiated by the general population - may take various forms and CIR Australiatakes no stand on any particular form. The principle is important, the detailsare not. Versions of proposed CIR legislation are shown elsewhere on this site.All have their advantages.

5             Parliamentarians' Views.

On 2009-02-05 a survey was conducted of all Australian parliamentarians to ascertain their views on CIR. The result of that survey can be seen at

6             How to join and why to join CIR Australia.

Supporting and joining our organization is thebest way of being involved in politics - without actually being involved inpolitics. We are strictly neutral on all political matters (except of courseCIR) and we are totally independent of any political party. We invite you toconsider that political power in Australia has long since passed fromparliament to the currently dominant political party. (And sometimes not evenwith the dominant party so much as the dominant faction of the dominant party).Only 1% of Australians belong to a political party but perhaps 95% of politicalpower rests with the parties. This is not good for Australia and it is not goodfor democracy.We would point out that CIR, in one form or another, is widelypracticed around the world (see the CIR Worldwide page) and that nojurisdiction has ever repealed CIR legislation. CIR, or Direct Democracy as itis sometimes called, started in Switzerland in 1874. It has worked very well inthat country, and elsewhere, and there is no reason at all why it should notwork in Australia. It doesn’t matter who you vote for or what your politicsare. If you believe in the decency and good sense of your fellow Australiansyou should consider supporting CIR Australia. Just go to theJoin Us page. Go on, you will feel much better if you do.

7             Policies of the political parties.

None of the major political parties in Australiahas CIR in its platform. There are some minor parties which advocate CIR butthese parties currently have no parliamentary representation to speak of. Wewill be asking each of the major parties, (The Australian Labor Party, theLiberal Party of Australia, the Australian Greens and the National CountryParty) to state its policies and intentions on CIR. All responses will beposted on the website.

8             Frequencyof referendums

Overseas experience shows that there really aren’t that many issues which provoke thecitizenry to demand a referendum. Referendums, after all, are costly andburdensome exercises for their proponents. Experience also shows that less thanhalf of all citizens’ initiated referendums are successful. For example, in theUSA in November 2006 there were state elections in 20 CIR states (as well as 17states which do not have CIR). A total of 76 initiatives were on the ballot andonly 41% were successful. (There were also 4 referendums and other propositionsgenerated by the various legislatures). From the experience in the USA we canreasonably predict that at each Australian state election there would be nomore than four or five initiatives on the ballot; not very many by anystandard.

(We acknowledge with thanks the Initiative &Referendum Institute Ballotwatch from which these statistics were complied. Fora complete picture of the 2006 elections please see:)

9             On-line and mid-term voting.

Most jurisdictions, (Washington and Coloradobeing among the exceptions) which have a form of CIR combine referendums withscheduled elections. This has the advantage of economy and the disadvantage ofdelay. Individual jurisdictions will have to decide which option best suits itsneeds. The issue is complicated in Australia by compulsory voting. If mid termballots were permitted, the issue of compulsion would have to be addressed.Similarly with on-line voting. We encourage anything which promotes democracybut we acknowledge that compulsory voting is an important issue in Australiaand the implications of mid term and on-line voting need to be carefullyconsidered.

10            Terminology.

Initiative & Referendum: After much debate ithas been decided that we should call ourselves Citizens' Initiated Referendum.There are arguments that initiative relates to new legislation and referendumto existing legislation, but for all practical purposes there is no difference.A change in the law is a change in the law.

11            Limits on advertising

Opposition to CIR is sometimes based on a fearthat wealthy interests might have an unfair advantage. This question has beenthoroughly researched in Switzerland and the USA and the better view seems tobe that money has a very small influence on ballot outcomes. There have beennumerous attempts to limit spending in the USA but all have failed whenchallenged in the courts. It is also a fact that spending limitations are easyto circumvent. We think that it might be best not to have any limitation onspending or advertising unless and until it can be shown that there is a realneed for it. For more information on campaign funding and the role of money please see:

12             Date format

We have used the international date format aslaid out in ISO 8601. That is, in the yyyymmdd configuration. It takes a bit ofgetting used to but there is much to commend it. For further information please see:

13 Entrenchment

There has always been argument about whether CIR generated legislation should be treateddifferently than other legislation. One view is that if a law has been enactedas a result of a referendum, then that law should only be repealed, orsubstantially amended, by way of another referendum. Another view is that lawspassed by referendum should be subject to the same repeal and amendmentprocedures as all other laws.  CIR Australiasuggests the following compromise: that any law enacted as a result of CIRshould only be overturned by either a referendum, which could be called by theparliament at any time, or by a resolution passed by both houses of parliamentby a two thirds majority. The supremacy of parliament is thus preserved but thewill of the electorate is not easily overridden.