• nouben@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    141
    ·
    4 months ago

    On france, we currently have one with 2.1M signatures, gov still said nope (petition against reintroduction of dangerous pesticide, backed by sciencists community)

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Milk poured all over the streets of Paris worked well for the dairy farmers to the best of my knowledge. Imagine the fucking smell two days later.

        The French are first class protesters.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It compells the government to talk about it.
        That’s it.

        “so what shall we do about that petition then?”
        “tell them to shove it?”
        “great ! Good work everyone, let’s have lunch.”

    • garbagebagel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      Only need 500 (out of 40mil) + one MP sign off for the government to legally have to respond in Canada. They don’t have to say yes but they have to officially acknowledge you at least. I was pretty surprised by how low that threshold is.

      • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        ·
        4 months ago

        I read that as the governments response was no. Not that they didn’t respond.

        The government in the UK will respond if 10,000 signatures and will debate in parliament if 100,000 signatures.

    • copd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      why are you including infants amd people without the right to vote in your figure?

      there’s less than 48mill who can vote btw

  • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    4 months ago

    The purpose of online petitions is to provide a means for people to psychologically discharge their righteous anger at something and need to be heard about it, by “doing something”, with a “something” which the politicians can safelly ignore.

    It’s a lot harder to ignore large demonstrations and even harder to ignore people activelly campaigning at the grassroots level in their electoral circles to make specific asshole politicians loose their seats, so best have the plebes citizens discharge their anger on some automated online straight-to-trash People’s Will recorder.

    • then_three_more@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      4 months ago

      The petition to reverse Brexit got something like 4 million signatures. Response: LOL No.

      Brexit it’s referendum because the Tories were scared of loosing power to Frog Face Faeage’s party. So they did a bit of appeasement.

    • filcuk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      That just proves the point. The politicians will do what serves them best, regardless of what’s good for the people or the country.

  • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.worldBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    4 months ago

    Scotland stopped voting Labour into power over a decade ago. If only England had the balls to do it too. Torys and Labour, two sides of the same corrupt coin. Come England, youre better than that. Starmer is a tory cunt. Vote greens, or Libdems, or anyone else buy those two corrupt scum parties.

  • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 months ago

    Pretty much - we all put our names to them, but they do nothing.

    The best option is to organise writing campaigns to your local MP and indicate that this is the decider on your vote.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    What if there was a law that said once something had enough signatures, it needs to be put to a vote?

    The only issue I can think of is the threshold being too high and authenticity of the signatures.