Petitions: Serious Change or Just a Laugh? Exploring the E-Petitions Phenomenon in the UK

Throughout history, the act of petitioning governments has been a powerful tool for citizens seeking change, from the abolition of slavery to more humorous campaigns like renaming raccoons as ’Trash Pandas.’ As the UK Parliament celebrates the 10th anniversary of its e-petitions system, recent surveys show that 57% of people reported signing a petition in the last year. This reflects a continued enthusiasm for making voices heard, even as joke petitions flood the system.

The launch of the e-petition site in 2006 invited both serious and absurd proposals, like making Jeremy Clarkson Prime Minister, which quickly gained over 50,000 signatures. Legislative changes are infrequent, with only a handful of petitions reaching 100,000 signatures necessary for parliamentary debate. However, successful cases like Finn’s Law demonstrate the potential effectiveness of well-supported petitions. The campaign for Finn, a police dog injured in the line of duty, garnered 130,000 signatures in 11 days and culminated in legal protection for service animals.

Despite some notable successes, only five petitions have surpassed 1 million signatures in the last decade, with significant public backlash against government actions being reflected in petitions against Donald Trump’s visit and calls to reverse Brexit. These illustrate the multiplying frustration with the government, yet often do not bring immediate change, leading some citizens to view the system as a dead end for public engagement.

As opinions blur between serious calls for change and spoof campaigns, critics argue that the system is broken—like Sam Grossick, who ironically uses the primary petition system to urge its own closure. In contrast, advocates like Jamie Stone argue that this system fosters direct democratic engagement beyond elections. Ultimately, the tradition of blending serious petitions with tongue-in-cheek humor continues to thrive, reflecting both the creativity and frustration of the British public in addressing societal issues.