2015-1: Hong Kong 香港 2nd consultation

This submission to the 2nd consultation was made on 12.1.2015.  And here's the 1st one to the 1st consultation.

(See also 2014-11, 2013-16/13/11.)

2014-14: Preferendum preferably (Village)

Ireland. Yet again, abortion is on the agenda.  Another referendum? Or a preferendum?  The article is in Village magazine, Oct. 2014: http://www.villagemagazine.ie/index.php/page/2/ 

See also 2014-13, for a Village article on China.

2014-13: China/Taiwan 2014 lecture tour

With lectures from 2013 shown in bold, the 2014 China lecture tour included:

13th Oct  Lánzhōu North-West Normal University (see photo)

21st Oct  Xúzhōu Zhōngguó kuàngyè University (2 lectures)

23rd Oct  Tiānjīn Nánkāi University (see 'Practical Examples' in right-hand menu)

6th Nov    Táiběi, National Taiwan University

3rd Dec    Nánjīng University

9th Dec    Xúzhōu University again (see 'Practical Examples')

15-25th Dec  Běijīng International Studies University (12 lectures)

29th Dec  Zūnyì University

有也两个网址：  http://zfxy.nankai.edu.cn/newsview/anounce/7240

和  http://finance.sina.com.cn/hy/20131227/101617772165.shtml

(See also 2015-1, 2014-11 and 2013-13/11.)

2014-12: Scots' referendum + 6-option survey

And the winner was... devo-max.  It wasn't on the ballot paper; it got just a handfull of spoilt votes; but it won! The director's observation report to the Electoral Commission is attached.  In its post-referendum report, the EC ignored our observations, so we published a further comment on 21.12.2014.

The deBorda report of the 6-option survey we commissioned is here, while the joint deBorda/TNS report is here.  In addition, this comment was published in The Guardian on 10.9.2014, and two days later, an edited version of this letter - they removed the 'ads' - was in The Irish Times. 

(See also 2014-12, 2013-15, 2012-13/10/1 and 2011-1.)

2014-11: A Democratic China?

Just published and available free online 

A Democratic China?

Many are the criticisms of those who feel that the one-party state in China is inadequate, and many are the calls, especially from abroad, for reform. But would a democratic China ― as per a western interpretation — be an improvement? In tackling this question, this paper concentrates on voting procedures: those used in elections and those (which may or may not be the same) used in decision-making. This article first looks at the USSR, Eastern and Central Europe, and then briefly at Africa. Next, it considers what could go wrong if a standard, western, multi-party democracy was to be adopted in China. And finally, it offers a more inclusive polity.

(See also 2015-1, 2013-16/13/11.)

2014-10: Hospital for Incurable Protestants

Tommy Sands held his superb Music of Healing event in Rostrevor on Thursday 24th July.  Among a host of lovely people, the director's autobiography was duly launched! 

2014-9: Rosie Hackett

On 20th May, a new bridge was opened in Dublin, a Borda count decision-making process was celebrated, and an article was published. 

(See also 2013-12.)

2014-8: Crimes in Crimea; done in Donetsk.

This article is in the Apr/May edition of Village Magazine; and on 5th May, a more general article appeared in TMS (Transcend Media Service).

(See also 2014-5/6/7.)

2014-7: Crimea, referendum, The Guardian.

Letter published on 18th Mar.  "The fact that the options presented to the Crimean electorate do not include any 'Ukrainian options' (Two options but only one possible outcome, 15 Mar) means that today's referendum is no more or less democratic than our own AV v FPP referendum, in which there were no proportional representation options.  As in Crimea, so too in the UK the powers-that-be have total control over the choice of ballot. Sadly, international rules on the conduct of referendums do not recommend multi-option voting.  Hence those Crimeans who might otherwise have wished to vote for a compromise, or even just the status quo, [were] not allowed a free choice." 

See also 2014-5/6.

2014-6: Crimea, referendum.

The BBC does not (yet) talk about multi-option decision-making.  Here's my latest letter to them: 

Referendums, a brief history:

year;    state    question;    outcome;    consequence.  

1988; Yugoslavia; maintain the state; vetoed by Slovenia; impasse.  

1990 (pre war); Slovenia; secession; 89% yes; war.  

1991; USSR; maintain the state; 78% yes; the opposite - the break-up of the Soviet Union.  

1991 (pre-war); two ballots, one in Croatia and one in the Krajina; secession and no secession; Orthodox and Catholic boycotts but 93% and 90% yes; war.  

1991 (pre-war); Kosovo; independence; Orthodox boycott but 99% yes; not recognised by EU for 8 years, then war.  

1991 (post-war); Nagorno-Karabakh; independence; Azeris in exile but 99% yes; no peace.  

1992; (pre-war); Bosnia, secession, Orthodox boycott but 99% yes, war.  

1992; (post-war), South Ossetia, independence, yes, more war.  

1999; (post-war), Abhazia, independence, Georgians in exile but 97% yes; no peace.   

2006; two more polls in South Ossetia; the Ossetians boycott one and the Georgians the other; another war.  

Oh and by the way: 

1972; Northern Ireland; the border; Catholic boycott but 97% yes; more 'troubles'.

The referendum is a blunt instrument.  In effect, it often disenfranchises those who might otherwise want to vote for compromise - the Yugoslavs, for example.  It is divisive, that or it exacerbates existing divisions.  It is inconclusive: in Russia - in Chechnya Tatarstan etc, - referendums are not allowed, for such ballots could lead to 'the break-up of the Federation.  (They call it matryoshka nationalism' : just as inside every Russian doll, matryoshka, there is another smaller one; so too, in every majority, there is a minority: UK, Ireland, Northern Ireland...) 

The question in Crimea does not have to be either/or.  A multi-option referendum could allow for compromise.  Newfoundland had a three-option constitutional ballot in 1949; Singapore also had three in 1962; twenty years later, Guam had six.

(See also 2014-5.)