It is in the ‘national interest’, Mr. Brown thundered as he addressed the House of Commons over his decision not to hold a referendum on the new EU treaty. As the Conservatives waved their arms and cried high treason, Brown prudently shuffled out of the chamber and quietly headed back to Number Ten.

How could he? The very heart of our democracy is supposedly at stake, and Mr. Brown would not even consult his loyal voters? If you believe what the Conservatives say, it is a travesty. Of course, Mr. Cameron is secretly breathing a sigh of relief; he did not want to come out as anti-Europe just yet. But no matter who you listen to, one thing is certain. Brown’s decision has exposed an important truth: direct democracy is a fraud, a farce. Referenda are about as democratic as Brussels is universally loved.

At first it may appear terribly old-fashioned of me to say such a thing. The redistribution of power to the people is, after all, an aspiration shared by individuals from across the political spectrum. Worse still, opposition to direct democracy tends to smack of elitism. However, as harmless and valuable as they may seem, referenda are as dangerous as they are undemocratic.

Direct democracy is not a danger because it gives the public too much power, but because it gives us too little. Referenda scarcely end up being representative of popular opinion. Instead, they have become a breeding ground for marginal interests. This great experiment in mass participation has been hijacked by a noisy and determined minority.

Conservative America loves to hold a referendum. On policies that would never survive the test of an election, or probably indeed the courts, conservatives have triumphed using state initiatives. Same-sex marriage was banned in seven states in 2004. Abortion was nearly criminalised altogether in South Dakota. Affirmative action for African Americans has suffered similar setbacks across the United States. Do not make the tragic mistake of thinking that, even in admittedly conservative regions, these policies are as popular as they seem. Campaigners for gay rights, abortion, and affirmative action traditionally find it much more difficult to mobilise support than their opponents, despite often having the majority of people behind them.

Ultimately, and sadly, it does not really matter what people think. What matters is whether they will vote. While the quiet, moderate majority sits at home, the vocal and committed minority heads off to the ballot box. Imagine if Britain were to put immigration to the vote. Most people, on the whole, support or at least accept the necessity of this cross-border pastime. But how many of those would leave the comfort of their homes on a cold January morning to cast their vote? Not many, to be sure. Experience tells us that we would be left with that noisy majority who fervently oppose it. They are, after all, stealing our women.

Turnout in past referenda support this unfortunate reality. The turnout for devolution in London in 1998, for example, was a pathetic 34 percent of the electorate, and, for a regional assembly in the North East of England, only an embarrassing 48 percent of the electorate bothered to vote. If referenda were extended to controversial issues such as abortion and immigration in Britain, such low turnouts would be both highly likely and probably disastrous for those affected.

Brown faces precisely this problem over the new EU treaty. The majority of people probably realise that the treaty is not going to result in the creation of some sort of EU super-state. They understand that its provisions benefit us profoundly, and are not all that controversial. Things like sharing information on terrorism, for example. But there are those that genuinely believe this treaty will inundate Britain with sixty billion new immigrants, none of whom can speak a word of English and who are all, of course, out to rip us off. They imagine a nightmare scenario in which we suddenly lose all our powers to Brussels, who will then proceed to ban the viewing of football at the weekends.

When it comes to referenda, these are the people who matter. They flood online forums and hijack the debate. People like Gary from Banbury, who believes that the EU is ‘taking over our democracy and imposing very damaging Europe-wide policies upon us’. How alarming. Those who had originally seen direct democracy in Britain as a great liberal crusade, as I did, are now understanding that it is just the opposite. The project needs to be revised, amended, adapted. It cannot continue in its current form. Commentators have claimed that Brown has subverted democracy, but referenda provide the opportunity for a far more insidious subversion. It is something that must be exposed. You can be assured that everyone at Westminster is breathing a sigh of relief.

Filed under: andrewnoakes, democracy, directdemocracy, eu, europe, gordonbrown on November 15th, 2007