Lesson video

Hi there, how are you doing today? My name is Mrs. Tomasi, and I'm gonna be working with you on your citizenship lesson.

So if you're all ready, let's make a start.

So today's title is, is direct democracy better than representative democracy? And that's part of our unit on the strengths and weaknesses of the UK democratic system.

The outcome today, so hopefully by the end, you'll be able to recognise what direct and representative democracy are, and analyse the strengths and weaknesses of each of them.

Right, we will make a start.

Keywords for today.

So you've got direct democracy, which is a type of democracy where the people decide on the policy directly, for example, for a vote or referendum on each issue.

Got representative democracy, a type of democracy where citizens choose others to represent them in making important decisions on their behalf.

And you've got referendum.

A general vote by the electorate on a single political issue, which has been referred to them for a direct decision.

It's a form of direct democracy.

So make sure throughout the lesson, these are gonna be highlighted in bold.

So just have a look for them.

We will make a start with the first section of the lesson in the outline, and that is what is direct democracy? So democracy, what is it? It is a system of government where we get to vote in regular fair elections for representatives who make decisions and laws on their behalf.

There's different ways that democracy happens.

So this is through direct democracy, and we have representative democracy.

Any ideas what they might be? You might have heard of the word direct, or actually heard of the word represent.

What does that kind of mean? So what might these terms mean? We've got Jun here saying, "Do you know what direct democracy is?" And Jacob's replies, "Direct means to go straight to someone.

"Is this the same with democracy?" And yeah, exactly that.

So direct democracy is where the people decide directly.

So in terms of if we're thinking about going somewhere direct, they are going straight to the laws and the decision-making process.

So this could happen through a vote or a referendum on each issue.

We've got an image here.

This is ancient Athens, and this was the start of direct democracy.

So it's got a long date back in history.

The reason ancient Athens was a direct democracy was because they allowed male citizens to be part in the decision-making process.

They would be able to raise their hands and cast a vote, and obviously the majority rule went.

Thing to note here, it is specific in who can actually take part.

So this is also a flawed democracy because not all citizens were allowed to take part.

There were rules.

So in a direct democracy, citizens decide directly on policies without using a representative.

Today, it looks different across the world.

It could be in the form of citizens having greater involvement and more power in all decision-making.

It could also just be that they have regular referendums and give a general vote to people on an issue.

So as you say on there, not all countries have direct democracy, and it varies by country.

True or false? A country is either a direct democracy or not.

That is false.

Why? Not all countries have a direct democracy.

In those that do, countries can choose to use different forms of direct democracy.

One common thing that countries use with direct democracy is a referendum.

Now, this is when a general vote by the electorates on a single issue.

So the result of that issue will then be the decision that is made.

So if the majority voted no, that is then what is gonna happen.

And they're normally based on yes or no questions.

Example that we've had in the UK before, to do you agree Scotland should be an independent country? So with that in mind, do we think that the UK is a direct democracy? It's not.

It has used forms of it before, such as referendums. An example being in 2016, where the European Union referendum was held and citizens got to vote whether to stay or leave the EU.

Obviously the outcome of that was that they chose, the majority chose to leave.

And then this was then what was put in place.

Now, it is rare in the UK for them to hold referendums because we have parliament and in parliament we have representatives.

Got another picture here of the country here.

This is Switzerland.

Switzerland is a direct democracy and a little bit different here.

Citizens get to vote in referendums up to four times a year, 15 federal proposals on issues affecting their local constituencies.

So another thing that they've got in Switzerland is the popular initiative.

Now this allows the citizens themselves to propose changes to the constitution and the rules.

So if an initiative gathers 100,000 signatures, then it goes to a national vote.

So this is a way that actually the citizens themselves have got something that they're really passionate about.

It could end up going to a national vote and it could end up getting proposed.

So yeah, this is another way that they use direct democracy.

So just a quick check for understanding.

Which is an example of direct democracy in the UK? Is it A, UK citizens voting for their local councillors? Is it B, UK citizens voting in a referendum? Or is it C, UK citizens voting for their member of parliament? It is B.

So they're voting in a referendum.

And we'll move on to our first task of the day.

So we've got Lucas here who's saying, "I think mobile phones should be banned in schools.

"It makes it hard to focus." And then we've got Aisha saying, "I think they can be useful.

"Let's use direct democracy.

"This is something we should all vote on." Now, obviously this is a big debate that happens on whether phones and that should be used in class.

So Lucas and Aisha are at a school council meeting and they'd like everyone to have a say on this issue at school.

For part one, can you design a referendum on this topic considering the following? So have a think about who's gonna be able to vote in this referendum.

Should it be all years? Is there a restriction? Is it only older years? Is it only younger years? Can staff join in? Should they have a say and be able to explain why they think this as well? When will the referendum happen? So how long are you gonna give people to make that decision? And how are the votes gonna be counted and collected? Remember as well, when we said before, referendums tend to have that yes or no style question.

So for the second part, explain how your referendum is an example of direct democracy.

Feel free to create this in any form that you like.

If you just take a minute to pause and then when you switch back on, we can go through some feedback.

So hopefully you have designed your referendum.

Now, it could look a bit like this.

Obviously, as I said, it's quite free for you to design it in any way you want.

But it's thinking about your question that you're gonna use.

So should mobile phones be banned in school to improve focus and reduce distractions? And then obviously they'll get to vote yes or no.

Decided here, all staff members and students get to vote and the referendum will take place in two weeks.

In the run-up, they'll have lessons to understand it better.

They'll have a single day of voting and everyone will vote in the school hall in secret.

Each class will have a time slot to vote and everyone will be given a card.

The school council will count all the votes and announce the results in an assembly.

Did you come up with something similar or have you come up with a completely different idea? It'd be great to see the different types of referendums that could run.

Then when it comes to explaining it, obviously this is an example of direct democracy because we've ensured all staff and students get to decide on the issues directly.

The majority result from the referendum decides whether phones get banned or not.

And this means everybody that votes will impact on the school policy that's put in.

So we're now moving on to our next outline, which is what is representative democracy? Representative democracy, if you remember going back to the start where we looked at kind of asking what was direct and representative, if somebody represents you, they're acting on your behalf.

For example, if you've got a class and they're organising a party, in a direct democracy, everyone would vote on all the details, so down to the invitations, the colour, the theme.

Whereas in a representative democracy, you will pick a few candidates or a few classmates and then they will make the decisions.

They will go off, they'll do all the planning and they'll come back and it'll be organised.

Obviously, it'd be much quicker and more efficient to get those few people to go off because they're a small group and they can work together and come up with it.

And they're probably the people that really wanna organise it as well.

So true or false? In a representative democracy, everyone gets to vote on every detail.

That is false.

Why? That is direct democracy.

In contrast, in a representative democracy, you elect someone to make decisions and represent your interests.

The UK is a form of representative democracy.

Can you think who might represent us in the UK Parliament? It's the MPs.

So we vote for MPs for a general election and it happens at least every five years.

They are then chosen for their knowledge, experience and ability to deal with complex issues.

Once elected, they meet in the House of Commons, which is in the Parliament.

And there you have a picture of the House of Commons.

So what is the role of an MP? Now, the UK citizens can get in touch with the MP.

All you have to do is you can go onto the Parliament website, you can find your MP and they'll give you all the contact details.

And if you have any issues, you can email them.

Now, that's not restricted to having to be over 18 either.

If you have an issue that you'd like to raise concerns for in Parliament, then you can get in touch with your MP.

What else do MPs do? They vote on laws in Parliament.

They take into account the interests of their constituents, so their people in their areas that they represent.

And they also ask questions to government ministers on behalf of their constituents.

So, another check for understanding here.

Which of the following is an example of representative democracy? Is it A, voting in a referendum? Is it B, citizens proposing new laws? Or is it C, electing members of Parliament? It is C.

We're moving on to the next task.

So, can you ask these following questions? One, what is a representative democracy? Two, why do we elect representatives instead of making decisions ourselves? And three, how does voting in a representative democracy differ from direct democracy? So, if you just take some time now to go through them, and then we can feedback when you are done.

You finished there? So, your answers could have included the following.

Two, what is a representative democracy? We have a representative democracy is a system of government where citizens elect representatives to make decisions on their behalf.

These officials, such as MPs, are chosen for elections and are responsible for creating laws, making policies, and addressing issues that affect the public.

For number two, we've got, why do we elect representatives instead of making decisions ourselves? So, we elect them because it would be difficult and time consuming for every citizen to vote on every decision or law that needs to be made.

In a representative democracy, the elected officials are chosen for their knowledge, experience, and ability to focus on the details of complex issues.

Now, for the third one, your answer could have looked like this.

So, how does voting in a representative democracy differ from direct democracy? So, in representative democracy, you're voting to elect the leader who'll make the decisions for them.

You don't vote on every single law or policy themselves, but you trust the representative to do this for you.

Obviously, in a direct democracy, it allows citizens to vote directly on laws or policies without going through elected officials.

Now, that takes us on to our third and final outline for today, which is what are the pros and cons of direct democracy? We've got Lucas here again.

"So, is one form of democracy better than the other?" he says.

Aisha replies, "I think that depends on the need of the country and what works for their citizens." Now, there are advantages and disadvantages to both direct democracy and representative democracy, and that's what we're gonna look through now.

So, can you think of any advantages of direct democracy? You might be thinking that decisions may be more acceptable to the population.

Why is that? Because if we've got the majority that are voting and they're involved in it, then you'd think that they would accept it.

Voters know they're voting on a specific issue they care about, so actually there's more political engagement, more people to vote, because they wanna see that change or they don't wanna see that change.

It prevents a concentration of power because power is dispersed, obviously, amongst all of the people.

Then we move on to disadvantages of direct democracy.

So here, sometimes it could create an emotional response from citizens in the media rather than rational.

If people feel very passionately about something, they might not be thinking about the long-term benefits or consequences of it.

Some decisions may be too complicated for people to understand.

We were saying before, you could have an elected person who might be knowledgeable or skillful in that area.

If we're putting every decision to every person, not each person is gonna be skillful in every single topic that comes up, so that could be a bit too much.

And if you're deciding on too many issues, sometimes it could be, "Actually, do you know what? "I'm not gonna vote on this one "because it's too much," or people have a lot going on, so it might just be too much for them.

It could be costly as well, time-consuming to run regular referendums. 'Cause even if you think, "Have you seen how an election works "and voting?" Obviously, you're gonna need people to be there, to oversee it.

You're gonna need every area.

You're gonna need people to count votes.

There's a lot of work that goes into it that sometimes people might not think about, so obviously, it could be costly and time-consuming.

So, quick check for understanding.

Which of the following are advantages of direct democracy? Is it A, more people may vote if they're interested in the topic? B, power is dispersed amongst the citizens? Or C, representatives might have more expertise than citizens? There's actually two here, so it is A and B.

Obviously, the third one is actually an advantage of representative democracy.

Right, so if we go on to the advantages of representative democracy, and I've kind of given you one already.

So, the representatives might have more experience and expertise than ordinary citizens.

Not always, but actually in some cases and some issues that they're dealing with, they might, so obviously that is a good thing.

And they have time to become familiar with the issues that affect their constituents.

What this is saying is that they're obviously representing the people in their area.

Now, that's their job.

So they're dedicating that time to find out what's going on in their areas.

And obviously if they don't and they don't take an interest, then it's more highly unlikely that they would get voted in again because the constituents are gonna have a say in who gets to vote for them.

And another advantage, we've got representatives can educate the public on political matters.

Again, so this is their job.

This is what they're out there doing and they're passionate about it.

So they can educate the public on it as well.

Some disadvantages of representative democracy.

The same on the flip side that we've got that they might be more knowledgeable.

They might also not be more knowledgeable than citizens with certain issues.

So obviously that proves its disadvantages.

And they might feel pressure to vote along party lines, even if it conflicts with the people in their local area, the constituents.

What this is saying is that if a member of parliament is affiliated with a political party, then their party might have certain views and they might ask them to vote in a certain way.

So that can be quite conflicting and hard for the member of parliament to decide whether they stick with their constituent or their party.

So it may be challenging to hold representatives accountable between elections.

'Cause if we think like for a member of parliament, we're looking at elections every five years.

So yeah, that could be a long time.

Final disadvantage we've got here is that there could be ongoing political disagreement, which could result in the use of direct democracy anyway.

So if no one can get along, they could end up going to a referendum to make that decision, which they could have done in the first place.

So actually is that more time consuming? Another check for understanding here.

So we're looking for a following, which of the following are advantages of representative democracy? Is it A, representatives might have more expertise than citizens? B, representatives may feel pressure to vote along party lines.

Or C, decisions may be more acceptable to people if they have voted for them.

So it takes some time to answer that.

It is A.

As we kind of have been through before, they might be more knowledgeable and they've got the time to find out about each of these situations.

So we're moving on to our final task now.

And this is for you to decide.

So you've seen advantages and disadvantages of both.

Which form of democracy do you prefer? Direct democracy or representative democracy? You're gonna write a speech to justify your choice, including the advantage of your chosen democracy, the disadvantage of your chosen democracy and how it could be overcome and how elections ensure that the voices of all people are heard.

So you've got some time now.

Obviously, pause it if you need to and then come back when you are ready to feed back.

How was that? Now, you may have written a speech similar to this.

Obviously, you may have gone along a different line.

So in this case, they've chosen direct democracy because it gives citizens more power to have influence over key issues and make decisions more acceptable to the population.

This means citizens will be happier, be more likely to support the government and the country.

However, it would be time consuming to vote on every decision.

And so smaller specific committees, for example, a housing and buildings committee could be created and individuals could choose which committee they wanted to attend and vote on.

This would ensure we were only voting for issues that they cared about or were knowledgeable about.

This type of direct democracy would allow citizens' voices to be heard because they're more likely to engage with the committees that they're interested and passionate about.

How did you find that task? Did you get a speech similar to that? Or did you have something more detailed, some different ideas there? Hopefully, that's given you a bit of an insight into direct democracy versus representative democracy.

And that brings us to our summary.

So direct democracy is where citizens decide on policy directly.

For example, for a referendum on each issue, Switzerland uses this type of democratic system.

Strengths of this include decisions being more acceptable to citizens, whilst weaknesses include it being costly and time consuming.

Representative democracy is where citizens choose others to represent them to make important decisions on their behalf.

This is seen in the UK.

Strengths of this system include representatives having time to become familiar with issues that affect their constituents, whilst weaknesses include ongoing political disagreement, which sometimes results in the use of direct democracy anyway.

Hopefully, that summarised it for you.

Thanks for joining in with the lesson today.

And I hope you've gained a bit more knowledge there on democracy.

Enjoy the rest of your day.