One example of better governance would mean developing our legislative framework such that the people are provided the opportunity to be more involved. Referendums are a likely answer, though it is important that people understand what referendums are and the process which could be followed. Certainly one would be well advised to avoid the California model, it has been an disaster. The Swiss model on the other hand has been a shining success that has worked well for over a century. What is the Swiss model and how could it work here? The OBA could be reading and borrowing liberally from the Guidebook to Direct Democracy for ideas. Here’s a short summary example of how Bermuda could be approaching it (with parathensis for party specific examples).

Start with an initiative to institute a new law. It could be a law (policy or position in the case of the party) to resolve any issue (eg. gambling) of which the initial trigger can come from individual voters (party members) or interest groups. These individuals would file a petition to start an initative which has the support of a certain minimum number of signatures. An initiative could also be triggered by parliamentary (or caucus) representatives.
Work out a preliminary draft. Appoint a bi-partisan committee (or interested party members) composed of those who have interest in the initiative law to put together the preliminary draft. Put this draft out for consultation and request formal opinions and proposed changes from related organizations and interest groups. On the basis of the feedback, revise the draft and send it to a national council (Caucus) for review and consideration.
Debate the draft. In parliament, open the draft for debate (within the party, perhaps assign groups to openly debate the draft in a town hall format) and request a formal opinion to be compiled by each side to be presented alongside the original draft. Revise the draft according to the opinions gathered and resubmit for debate. Continue revising and resubmitting and if after three rounds of debate there are still differences seek to call an agreement conference comprised of members of each side to seek a compromise solution. Put the final solution to a national council vote.
Seek open public feedback. For issues triggered by parliamentary (or caucus) representatives, make the law (party policy or position) subject to an optional referendum by setting a reasonable timeline (100 days?) for the people to petition for a binding referendum to be held on it. For issues triggered originally by petition, make a referendum a binding requirement. Ensure constitutional changes are binding to decision by referendum regardless of the source.
If supported or unopposed put the new law into force. If 100 days pass without enough people petitioning for a referendum or a referendum being called and the majority approves it (or their is not enough turnout) then put the new law (policy or position) into force. If a referendum is held and the majority oppose it, scrap it.
The important factor is to provide a binding means for the public to start an initative and have it put to a referendum. This gives the people faith that they can require our leadership to address and resolve an issue by way of referendum. It also gives people the faith that any new law can be placed under the requirement to be put to a referendum. It also provides a valid process that can avoid the pitfalls of people simply petitioning for “free beer” or against any and all tax increases without consiquence while empowering any individual or group to feel like they have a say. Further it provides people a valid means to petition against a new law to which the people disagree with. Other requirements such as big budget expenditures crossing a certain threshold could also be required to be supported by way of a referendum. Such a structure would go a long way to offering “something genuinely new — an alternative WAY of government”. It'd be far more encouraging than a new name and new lead for the same old boring play.

Those interested in knowing more would be wholly encouraged to read the Guidebook to Direct Democracy, it is a relatively short read which covers the history, successes, implications and successful implementation of direct democracy in Switzerland.

Source: http://www.21square.com/2011/09/people-have-lost-confidence-in-our-leadership.html