Premier Paula Cox’s tabling of the Referendum Act last Friday is a welcome step towards widening public participation in critical decisions about Bermuda’s future.And assuming the legislation passes, it is right that gambling should be one of the first issues to be decided by referendum.That’s not to say that parliamentarians should have no say in issues like gambling, or that all issues should be decided by referendum.And there are risks. In some places, notably California, the use of ballot propositions has shackled the legislature, and made governance nearly impossible, especially on financial matters when governments are mandated to fund certain services and are legally barred from raising taxes to pay for them.Referendums also beg the question of whether legislators are elected to govern and to act on behalf of their constituents, or if they are simply delegates who must do as their constituents order.Referendums mean that legislators must do as they’re told. On the face of it, that may seem fine, but some issues are too complex to be decided by a simple yes or no vote.But referendums can be useful on questions over social issues, which may be complex in their detail, but are founded on straightforward moral questions or on issues that are often deemed to be “conscience votes”.Gambling is one of them. While the forms of gambling are varied, most people are either for or against it. Thus, it is a simple question to be decided, even if it is preceded by detailed and serious debate.Capital punishment is another question which can be decided and was decided by referendum, even though it was later abolished in the House of Assembly, admittedly on a conscience vote. Independence, of course, is another one, as are other constitutional changes.In that sense, it is right that gambling will be the first question to be decided by referendum. It is to be hoped that it will settle this vexed question for some time, and it is right that the voting population should have some say in it.The Referendum Bill also contains an important check, in that 50 percent or more of eligible voters must take part for it to be valid.Because the turnout for a referendum is often lower than it is for a general election, this is a critical safeguard.One way to ensure that this happened would be to have referendum questions decided at general elections. Arguably, this would leave too long a gap, but it would assist with participation.Nor does the Act contain a provision for the public to get a question on the ballot. This means that all referendum questions would be determined by the House of Assembly, which must still pass an enabling Act. If, instead, there was a means for a sufficient number of the public to bring forward a referendum, for example, by means of a petition, that would be a great example of voter participation.To be sure, some care would have to be taken this was not a frivolous exercise, but if the number of signatures on a referendum petition was set high enough, that would get around that problem.Even so, this is a welcome move towards giving voters more say over how they are governed.