Final panel [l-r]: Kate Quinn (UCL), Alexander Williams (High Commissioner for Jamaica), Michael Bromby (Truman Bodden Law School, Cayman Islands), Katherine Collin (Georgetown University), Derek O’Brien (Oxford Brookes University). [photo: Godfrey Baldacchino]
When can a small state use a referendum which serves the aspirations of its people? What wording do you put on the ballot form for an achievable result? These are questions for most countries embarking on a referendum exercise but they’re even more pronounced for small states.
These and other challenges came under scrutiny at a conference entitled Referendums in Small States and Territories: The Elusive “Yes” Vote, held on 16th and 17th April at Queen Mary University of London. It was jointly organised by the Centre for Small States at Queen Mary’s, the University of the West of England (UWE) and the University of Malta. Presentations dealt with Bonaire, Bougainville, the Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Greenland, Grenada, Guernsey, Guyana, Jamaica, Jersey, the Falkland Islands, the Dutch Caribbean, New Caledonia and Puerto Rico.
Professor of Constitutional Law at Queen Mary’s, Dr Caroline Morris, opened the two-day event raising the questions the conference would explore – why referendums are still relevant and how they’re put together in today’s world. Professor of Sociology at the University of Malta, Godfrey Baldacchino, outlined the use of referendums for countries after the “break-up of empire”. He added that today’s international relations now meant a rethink on independence when countries needed someone to call up for help, as in the case of the Falkland Islands.
Self-determination
The first panel on 16 April was chaired by Professor Peter Clegg, Professor of Politics and Head of the School of Social Sciences at UWE. First panellist Jamie Trinidad, Director of Studies in Law at Wolfson College, Cambridge, put referendums in the context of international law evolving around the right to self-determination from the UN Charter onwards. He outlined the role of the referendum process as a way to resolve some of the fall-out from decolonisation. He pointed out that it was also a “useful corrective” to the notion that territories could be carved up like pieces of real estate.
It was impossible for panellists throughout the sessions to avoid referring to statements from American President Donald Trump. Political Scientist and Chairman of the President of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe, Bruno Kaufmann, outlined cases where the referendum voting tool had been used as much by demagogues and dictators as by democratic territories. Panel one speakers outlined the various ways in which a referendum could be used as a “top down” approach or as a “voice of the people” system. They outlined the importance of trusted institutions, a civic infrastructure that works and an inclusive process.
“Constitutional change is not only about designs, it’s about imagining,” said Thom Oliver, Senior Lecturer in Politics in the Politics and International Relations Programme at UWE. He added that for people being asked to vote, they needed to know “not just can we change, but can we feel the change”.
“Outrageous claims”
The United Kingdom’s 2016 referendum on Brexit was raised several times, even though the UK hardly qualifies as a small state. Some speakers referred to it as an opinion poll rather than a referendum, without a legal text or the mapping out of an electoral vision beyond leaving or remaining. This prompted discussion over the use of “outrageous claims” during referendum campaigns and the role of funding and social media in such public votes. Discussion also veered towards the use of the referendum process as a political tool and a party tactic, as an excuse to “chicken out” of a difficult topic or kick an issue into the long grass.
The types of topics chosen for referendums also came under scrutiny – from votes on social issues to major constitutional change.
Australia’s Voice referendum: Lost opportunity or rejection of ‘fake progress’?
Research Article: Saint Lucia’s journey to the appellate jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice
Editorial: Glasgow, the Referendum and the Commonwealth Games
Between Scylla and Charybdis: Social Media in Sri Lanka’s Constitutional Referendum
Greenland is “ours”
By focusing on referendums in small states in the Caribbean, the conference discussed how this process works within the dynamics of a small society. Panel two did this with a series of case studies which highlighted the pressures on referendums – from deep political divides, personality politics, the dominance of one political party, the politics of opposition, strong connections between leaders and voters and a Westminster system which delivered a zero-sum game.
These obstacles had allowed referendums on moving from the Privy Council to the Caribbean Court of Justice to be scuppered as well as defeats on votes for republicanism and statehood.
Beyond small states, panels three and four looked at referendums in the Atlantic/Europe region and “unresolved” referendums. The University of Puerto Rico’s Professor Emilio Pantojas-Garcia outlined his island’s seven plebiscites on its constitutional status. His first slide on Puerto Rico as America’s 51st state drew laughter as panel four chair, Prof. Baldacchino, said, “I thought this was going to be Canada!”
It was hard to keep the American President’s aspirations out of the narrative. Greenland expert, Ulrik Pram Gad of the Danish Institute for International Studies, outlined the drawn-out development of Greenland and its relationship with Denmark as that country had moved into the European Community, while Greenland had then left the EC and then started moving towards a form of self-government. The long-drawn-out discussions over the roadmap for Greenland’s status outside the Kingdom of Denmark had, for now, crashed into the return of Donald Trump to the White House. Participants questioned whether concern about the possible future alliances of an independent Greenland could have fuelled President Trump’s statements on taking ownership of Greenland. In the first day’s final Q&A, a question on the appealing size of Greenland for the United States led Ulrik Pram Gad to state: “We’re a big island. We’re using it. It’s ours”.
Referendum scaffolding
Day two allowed participants a chance to hear from the official side of referendum preparation as Jamaica’s High Commissioner to London, H.E. Alexander Williams, outlined the work of the island’s constitutional reform process en route to a vote on republicanism. Needing a two-thirds majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate and also a majority in a referendum, Jamaica does not have the luxury of Barbados’s move to republicanism in 2021. Mr Williams outlined the importance of ”deep and meaningful” public education, a desire to “make the voters want the change” and the importance of timing and making sure that the referendum is not held at a time of heightened political partisan tensions. “You need to make the [referendum] message simple,” he said.
Many of the panellists were keen to highlight examples of when referendums work well, such as the 2018 vote to legalise abortion in Ireland, or when a referendum can have long term implications and pull down an entire regional structure, such as the 1962 demise of the West Indies Federation.
Organisers want to compile a referendum toolkit with examples of best practice and “cautionary tales” to help future referendum planning. The conference explored in depth who should give permission to hold a referendum, who should have the power to push the results through and when a referendum should be binding or advisory.
On suggestions to pull together strands of constitutional change into one referendum attempt, H.E. Williams advised that Caribbean constitutions had evolved by gradual change, while preserving what had worked, and avoiding the types of crises seen elsewhere in the world caused by major constitutional change. “Jamaica, like a number of former colonies in the Caribbean … works most of the time,” he said, advising those seeking referendums not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
As Swiss democracy expert, Bruno Kaufmann, had said early in the proceedings, referendums work when you “feel you’re part of a collective engagement”. He had outlined the discussions as being aimed at “making referendums great again”.
In wrapping up, Caroline Morris said that the organisers had aimed to analyse the “scaffolding around the referendum” and pointed to the process as the oldest and purest form of democracy, citing the “enduring nature of the referendum as a testament of democracy”.
Debbie Ransome is the Web Editor for the Commonwealth Round Table.
Related articles:
The Centre for Small States
Understanding Referendums: The Comparative Politics of Direct Democracy by Matt Qvortrup
Round Table Book Review: The Political Economy of Divided Islands Unified Geographies, Multiple Polities
Brexit and the Commonwealth: What next?
The Irish abortion referendum: How a Citizens’ Assembly helped to break years of political deadlock
Eric Williams on the West Indies Federation: One from ten leaves nought
