The trouble with referendum-orientated democracy (as opposed to representative) is that you're basically handing the car-keys to whoever owns the media. It represents a shifting of the power-balance which is possibly not a good thing.
That anti-violence-against-children referendum we had here a while back was absolutely disgraceful... the phrasing of the question was so massively biased it was ridiculous - whoever was responsible should have been dragged out of parliament and pelted with pig-shit... but our media just meekly went along with it.
Which is not to say that "nothing needs to be done"... the display of dishonesty and incompetence we saw over s92a simply is not good enough... but I don't think shifting away from representative democracy is necessarily it. I think we need representatives that are actually... representing us, and not just kowtowing to corporate interests.
Here's a thing I wrote recently... has a whole load of laws from 1800s America regarding corporate lawhttp://www.genomicon.com/2011/04/a-few- ... revisited/
- Corporations were prohibited from making any political contributions, direct or indirect
- Corporations were prohibited from making charitable or civic donations outside of their specific purposes
- The act of incorporation did not relieve corporate management or stockholders/owners of responsibility or liability for corporate acts
- As a matter of course, corporation officers, directors, or agents couldn’t break the law and avoid punishment by claiming they were “just doing their job” when committing crimes but instead could be held criminally liable for violating the law
Which I'd boil down to:
Any CEO responsible for attempting to subvert democracy by bribing political parties, goes to prison.
There's some quite good ideas in that list though - worth a look