Critically examine the ways a pressure group contributes to representative democracy (25 marks).
Critically examine the ways a pressure group contributes to representative democracy (25 marks).
In a representative democracy the people vote for whom they wish to represent them (in making decisions etc.), thus handing over these responsibilities to someone else, in the hope their views will still be put across. In the UK we vote for MPs to represent us and in some ways, this makes the representatives accountable for us, the electorate. Many people though, are unsatisfied with their representation and join pressure groups with the aim to get their voices heard. In this essay I will examine whether or not this contributes to representative democracy.
One way in which pressure groups seem to be bad for representative democracy is that they are sometimes said to be harming it. An example of this can be seen clearly from the BMA and the smoking ban. Doctors in the BMA seemingly had complete control over the smoking ban which is something that should have been decided by the government. When MPs made suggestions that there should maybe be “smoking” and “non-smoking” sections inside buildings, the BMA threatened to withdraw their support if they did not go back to the original plan to ban smoking entirely inside. Some people say that the only people with power should be government. But on the other hand, pressure groups can help to provide expertise to the government. Insider groups (those accepted by government, and often working closely with them e.g. the NFU) allow different groups from society to get their voices heard in government, where changes can actually be made.
Another way in which pressure groups seem to be a bad thing for representative democracy is that sectional groups are only open to certain people in society e.g. the NUT is only open to teachers as the BMA is only open to doctors. This isn’t supporting representative democracy because it is limiting membership to certain people. Despite this, promotional, insider and outside groups have mainly
In a representative democracy the people vote for whom they wish to represent them (in making decisions etc.), thus handing over these responsibilities to someone else, in the hope their views will still be put across. In the UK we vote for MPs to represent us and in some ways, this makes the representatives accountable for us, the electorate. Many people though, are unsatisfied with their representation and join pressure groups with the aim to get their voices heard. In this essay I will examine whether or not this contributes to representative democracy.
One way in which pressure groups seem to be bad for representative democracy is that they are sometimes said to be harming it. An example of this can be seen clearly from the BMA and the smoking ban. Doctors in the BMA seemingly had complete control over the smoking ban which is something that should have been decided by the government. When MPs made suggestions that there should maybe be “smoking” and “non-smoking” sections inside buildings, the BMA threatened to withdraw their support if they did not go back to the original plan to ban smoking entirely inside. Some people say that the only people with power should be government. But on the other hand, pressure groups can help to provide expertise to the government. Insider groups (those accepted by government, and often working closely with them e.g. the NFU) allow different groups from society to get their voices heard in government, where changes can actually be made.
Another way in which pressure groups seem to be a bad thing for representative democracy is that sectional groups are only open to certain people in society e.g. the NUT is only open to teachers as the BMA is only open to doctors. This isn’t supporting representative democracy because it is limiting membership to certain people. Despite this, promotional, insider and outside groups have mainly