Implementing the Will of the People !

" Democracy " is a word that means different things to different people.   What is supposed to get implemented is what more than fifty percent of the people decide, but in practice that is what rarely happens.    Decision making is subjected to both politics and the individual moral judgements of the people we elect to represent us in parliament.

This " Same Sex Marriage "  issue is a case in point.  Repeated opinion polls reveal that the vast majority of the Australian people approve, but it has not become law because one side of politics resists and it has never come to a vote in our parliament.  We are now in the middle of a non-binding postal vote and even when that delivers a clear verdict there is no guarantee that the men and women we sent to parliament to represent us will abide by our decision.

Now another important matter is about to go to a vote in the New South Walers Legislative  Council.  This is a law change to allow voluntary euthanasia  for terminally ill people.  Unfortunately, many life ending diseases deliver an agonising death and the medical profession faces a dilemma. In the past, many compassionate doctors gave relief by the use of what was termed the " double effect " of applying morphine to ease that relentless pain - but is also indirectly hastened death for the patient.

Many doctors are now reluctant to adopt that procedure because they fear that now medical ethics has become an issue with some of their colleagues they may be reported.  The prospect of facing a tribunal for what at present is regarded as a breach of the law gives pause to their feelings of compassion.  A law change is needed to sanctify a much needed act of mercy.

Even if voluntary euthanasia gets the nod in the Legislative Council, it will still have to pass to the lower house where both sides of politics may allow a conscience vote.  It is personally opposed by both the premier and the leader of the opposition, and by one of the smaller  political parties.  If the people we send to parliament to do our bidding refuse the will of the people, perhaps it is time to give a new strength to " people power ".

If enough of the population is sufficiently moved to sign a petition on an important issue like voluntary euthanasia or same sex marriage then that issue needs to be resolved by the people by way of a binding referendum that requires the parliament to accept that decision.  Such a vote of the people would clearly take precedence over the politics of political parties and the personal wishes of sitting parliamentarians.  Where there is doubt about an issue, and it is sufficiently important to be taken out of the hands of individual politicians, it would best be settled by being put to an  referendum for settlement.

Obviously, we would not want vocal critics pushing minor matters to such a solution and probably the necessary filter to determine what is sufficiently important to be decided by a national  binding referendum would be the High court of Australia.   Clearly, both same sex marriage and voluntary euthanasia meet the criteria for such a referendum.

In fact, knowing that such a sword of Damocles hangs over their heads would probably make those parliamentarians less pedantic and more likely to obey the will of the people.