Explain Three Forms Of Representative Democracy In The UK
Democracy & Political Participation
Series
(b)
Explain
the main features of the
UK’s
democratic system. 10
25
5
(b) Explain three forms of democratic participation.
10
25
(a) What is meant by legitimacy?
5
(b) Explain three strengths of representative democracy.
10
(c) How democratic is the UK?
25
(a) Apart from voting in elections and referendums, describe two ways of participating in politics.
5
(b) Explain the arguments in favour of lowering the voting age.
10
(c) To what extent would the wider use of referendums improve democracy in the UK?
25
(a) Outline the key features of a referendum.
5
(b) Apart from referendums, explain three ways in which democracy in the UK
could …show more content…
be improved.
10
(c)
To
what extent does democracy in the UK suffer from a ‘participation crisis’? 25
(a) How does a referendum differ from an election?
Jan 2012
5
(c) Assess the arguments in favour of the greater use of direct democracy in the
UK.
Jun 2011
25
(a) Define direct democracy.
Jan 2011
10
(c) To what extent is there a ‘democratic deficit’ in the UK?
Jun 2010
(b) In what ways has political participation declined in the UK in recent years?
(a) Define liberal democracy.
Jan 2010
5
(c) Evaluate the effectiveness of the various ways in which participation and democracy could be strengthened in the UK.
Jun 2009
Marks
(a) What are the main features of representative democracy?
Jan 2009
Exam question
5
(b) Explain the arguments in favour of making voting compulsory.
10
(c) How effectively does representative democracy operate in the UK?
25
Pressure Groups
Series
5
(b) Explain the methods used by pressure groups to influence government.
10
(c) To what extent do pressure groups promote pluralist democracy?
25
(a) What is meant by pluralism?
Jun 2009
Marks
(a) Using examples, distinguish between sectional and promotional pressure groups. Jan 2009
Exam question
5
(b) Why is it sometimes difficult to distinguish between pressure groups and political parties?
10
(c) To what extent have pressure groups become more important in recent years? 25
(a) Using examples, distinguish between insider and outsider pressure groups.
(b) Explain three political functions of pressure groups.
10
25
5
(b) How and why do some pressure groups use direct action?
10
(c) To what extent are the largest pressure groups the most successful ones?
25
(a) Using examples, distinguish between promotional and sectional pressure groups. 5
(b) How and why do pressure groups seek to influence public opinion?
10
(c) Is pressure group politics in the UK better described as pluralist or as elitist?
25
(a) How do pressure groups promote functional representation?
Jan 2012
5
(a) Outline two differences between pressure groups and political parties.
Jun 2011
25
(c) To what extent do pressure groups undermine democracy?
Jan 2011
10
(a) Distinguish between elitism and pluralism.
Jun 2010
(b) Explain the reasons why the success of pressure groups may be limited.
(c) To what extent do pressure groups promote political participation in the UK?
Jan 2010
5
5
(b) Explain three factors which may restrict the influence of a pressure group.
10
(c) Are pressure groups becoming more powerful, or less powerful?
25
Jason Tran
Democracy & Political participation
What is democracy?
A society/political system where people are able
to make/influence decisions and where the government is accountable to the people.
Derives from Greek words demos and kratis – ‘rule by the people’ Abraham
Lincoln
“government of the people, by the people, for the people” Political equality – each citizen has a free and equal opportunity to influence decisions
Legitimacy
The idea that a government or political institution has the
DEMOCRATIC RIGHT hold
political power
Is the UK Government legitimate?
YES
NO
House of Commons = elected
Electoral System = unfair and distorts political representation House of Lords seen as a widely recognised political influence with varying expertise
House of Lords = unelected
Parties are elected with a clear mandate
PM’s power = legitimate as it is acknowledged that
they are the supreme policy maker
Jason Tran
Direct Democracy
1. People themselves make important decisions –
NO ELECTED/APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVES
2. People are directly involved in political decision making – all are consulted
3. People
‘are’ the government and
‘make’
the policy decisions
The UK uses referendums:
An important decision is put to the people; involves a single question with YES/NO answer
In UK, results of referendum is not binding on government/parliament
Parliament is sovereign
But it would be in their best interests to do so
Other forms of direct democracy
Initiatives
Held in UK at a local level – very rare. Groups of interested citizens organise a petition on a specific issue. If enough signatures = referendum MUST be held
Public Consultations
Local authorities ask community what decisions should be made, i.e. funding – this is increasing with Central Government – internet = higher usage?
Here it’s the
people who are taking the initiative, not the government
Petitions
Not binding, but they are influential. Large number of citizens may sign a petition on a particular issue.
UK parliament – petitions are often not debated or influential.
In Scotland (Scottish P) – they have a special committee to consider petitions
Is a Direct Democracy good?
YES
NO
Purest form of democracy – people follow laws they make themselves; legitimate
Direct democracy = majoritarianism =
‘tyranny
of
the majority’ – oppresses minorities
Disperses power widely among population – no concentration Many decisions = too complex for people to understand Decisions = more acceptable to the population
Distorted by wealthy groups who influence debate
Prevent decision makers from making mistakes
Requiring too much participation = population becomes politically
‘fatigued’ = apathy grows
Increases popular participation – enhancing democracy Increased awareness = political education; citizens = knowledgeable & better informed
Jason Tran
Representative Democracy
1. People elect individuals to act on their behalf – a
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
POLITICAL REPRESENTATIVE
Free, fair and regular elections
UNIVERSAL
Elected representatives can be accountable to the electorate
Governments & heads of state are elected by the people
SUFFRAGE
Political parties to represent different political beliefs
Political associations & pressure groups operate freely and represent various causes beliefs & interest groups
Is a Representative Democracy good?
YES
NO
Elected/appointed reps = have superior experience and judgement to general population
May not accurately represent opinions of wider population Representatives can make rational judgements
Party representation = prevents reps from acting independently – lobby fodder
Reps = accountable = behave responsibly
Representative democracy – easily turn into
‘rule by elites’ – no dispersion of power
People can’t be continuously involved, so delegate power to reps – more practical
Potential for elective dictatorship
Reps have to listen to the interests of all – not just the majority – avoids
‘tyranny
of majority’ Consensus politics means that choice between parties = limited- not what individual wants
Does the UK have a representative democracy?
YES
Regular free elections. All adults can vote/stand for office – but is FPTP fair?
Elected representative assemblies: National (UK
Parliament’s
HoC);
Regional
(Scottish
P)
&
Local
(Councils)
NO
Elections = unfair; some parties over represented
HoC = narrow social demographic (gender, etc.)
House of Lords is unelected – members are appointed/hereditary peers
Constituency sizes = uneven
Parties are free to operate and represent various political opinions
The 2005 – 2010 Labour government was elected yet only had 35% of the popular vote; we have a participation crisis – damages legitimacy
Governments at all levels = accountable
Some pressure groups are more powerful than others; varying powers is not reflective of size/popularity Every individual is represented by an MP, a regional assembly member, and a local councillor
Government is not accountable enough
Jason Tran
Referendums
Government = divided on an issue; resolve by
Convention: Any
giving people the final say
constitutional change can only be made if approved via referendum
Why hold a referendum? Since it’s the electorate
Good to secure the
deciding what’s happening,
consent of the public –
future governments may
particularly where it may
decide not to reverse decision
involve taxation
Almost to an extent entrenching the change
Referendums in the UK
Year
Area
Question
Circumstances
Outcome
1975
National
Should the UK remain a member of the European Community
New Labour = divided on issue
Large YES
1997
Scotland
Should Scotland have its own
Parliament with significant powers?
Constitutional
Change
Large YES
GOOD
1997
Scotland
Should a new Scottish Parliament have the power to vary income tax slightly from the level charged in the rest of Britain?
Issue on tax
Large YES
GOOD
1997
Wales
Should Wales have an elected assembly with modest powers?
Constitutional
Change
Narrow YES
GOOD
1998
Northern
Ireland
Should the Belfast Agreement (also known as the Good Friday
Agreement) be approved in order to bring peace and power sharing to
Northern Ireland government?
Securing approval after years of conflict Large YES
1998
London
Should London have an elected mayor and assembly?
Constitutional
Change &
Taxation
Large YES
2011
Wales
Should the Welsh Assembly have more powers?
Constitutional
Change &
Taxation
Large YES
National
Should AV (the alternative-vote electoral system) be adopted for
Westminster elections?
Divided on issue &
Constitutional
Change
Large NO
2011
Turnout
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
Jason Tran
Why has the use of referendums increased since 1997?
Greater interest in constitutional reform – this means electorate consulted more
Referendums are a way of
‘entrenching’
reform
– Labour would be able to make decisions and
Conservatives
can’t reverse without popular consent
(particularly
for devolution) Electorate = better informed of politics; so can now make more informed judgements – internet has helped Should we have more referendums?
YES
People are becoming used to be consulted more on key issues
NO
Too
many votes; ‘voter fatigue’ will be the outcome = low turnout and results = less legitimate
VOTER APATHY/POLITICAL CYNICISM
Internet & social media has meant people know more and can vote appropriately
Has been a fall in participation – referendums will involve people politically; enhances direct democracy Potentially means reduced government power – government has less control on outcome
Less elitist – reduces potential of elective dictatorship Highly politically motivated tabloid press = reduce rational arguments to emotional appeals
Referendums can be seen as a public opinion poll on the government than the issue.
In 2010, coalition government had AV voting system referendum- outcome = NO; and this was on basis that Lib Dems proposed the referendum
Ill informed decisions by poorly educated and those who lack political experience
Makes population more active between elections = increased turnout
Referendums weaken Parliament – undermines
Parliamentary sovereignty
If a party = divided on an issue; the public have the final say
We vote in a government so that they make policies and are accountable for their actions; referendums allow them to dodge responsibility
Used for local issues – no
‘one
size fits all’ as it
doesn’t work COSTLY – money could be better utilised
Jason Tran
Variations of Representative Democracy
Liberal Democracy
A democracy that conforms to liberal political principles – emphasis on rights & liberties, strong constitutional framework & rule of law.
Is
a response to the ‘tyranny of the majority’ – there is too much power in the hands of a dominant majority. A Liberal Democracy would protect the interests of everyone.
System of ‘checks and balances’ – having different branches: the legislature, the executive, the judiciary
Strong sense of constitutionalism – Ensuring separation of powers; system of checks and balances and protection of rights
Germany is an example
A tolerant society – diverse beliefs/ideas are allowed to flourish as long as they don’t threaten state/others freedoms.
The US is an example
Separation of powers – prevent corruption between different branches of government
Pluralist Democracy
Conforms to the criteria of liberal democracy but in addition:
Large number of different political parties
Wide variety of political associations and Pressure Groups = tolerated and can participate in political processes
Power is widely dispersed; people have high influence
Parliamentary Democracy
Parliament is sovereign and has ultimate political power
Laws will only be enforced if legitimised by Parliament
Government is drawn from Parliament
Parliament ensure the geographical representation of all parts of the UK
The UK is an example
This kind of democracy is unique to the UK – It is similar to a liberal democracy but parliament is the central body and the source of all political power
Jason Tran
Is the UK a liberal democracy?
YES
NO
SORT OF
There are regular free elections
No codified/entrenched constitution Elections are FPTP – but seen as unfair Government is accountable to
Parliament
House of Lords = unelected & democratically illegitimate
Right are protected, but
Parliamentary Supremacy = can be set aside
Parties and PGs are tolerated
Prime Minister has prerogative powers No separation of powers between the legislature and executive
There is free media
Unelected head of state (The
Queen)
There is an independent judiciary
Rule of Law applies
Jason Tran
Political Participation
Voting in
Being informed – i.e.
elections/referendums
through the media
Standing for office
(local, regional or national) Ways of participating Attending debates
Joining a political party
Joining a pressure group ..
Strong representation by MPs of individuals and constituencies
Free political parties and PGs
Government has a clear mandate to govern; made accountable
Rule of law
Devolution = powers decentralised
Judiciary = politically independent
Some undemocratic institutions: House of
Lords and Monarchy
Prerogative powers of PM = not subject to law Sovereignty of Parliament = Government is dominant UK Parliament can overturn common law rights Elections are free and held regularly
One person = one vote
PGs have access to various levels of government Referendums are held to get decisions made Elections = unfair and undemocratic; FPTP = distorts representation
Parliament is weak in calling government to account; excessive government control?
Smaller parties under-represented
Two-party system: little choice
Consensus politics – little to choose from
All adults are allowed to participate in the political process
Freedom of association, belief and thought
Increasing variety of Pressure Groups
Turnout is low – (60 – 65% at general elections); usually above 75% in 90s
Young turnout = low; falling below 40%
Party membership is falling; 2 million in
1980s to 300k in 2010
Disillusionment with politics, with parties and politics – non-voting
Not all can vote (unenfranchised) –
Members of HoL, imprisoned convicts & mentally incapable
Political participation Political institutions What’s bad about the UK democracy Political processes What’s good about the UK democracy Jason Tran
How can we improve democracy in the UK?
Method
Impact
Improving Democratic
Processes
Improving Democratic
Participation
New chamber = too much legitimacy
Recreates a HoC
Introducing a codified constitution
Reduces power of government
Reduces flexibility of political system
Making the European Convention on Human
Rights binding on the UK Parliament
Reduces power of Parliament
Taking UK out of the EU or reclaiming powers surrendered UK loses benefits of being EU member
Granting further powers to devolved governments The break-up of the UK?
Constituency sizes more equal
Improving Democratic
Institutions
Introducing an elected second chamber to replace HoL
Population changes = difficult to do
Introducing proportional representation for general elections = more representative
Jeopardises strong decisive governments; eliminates the doctrine of the mandate – coalition government does not have a clear mandate
Coalitions = more common
Proportional rep = introduces too many small extremist parties
Strengthening
Parliament’s
ability to control
government i.e. increasing legislative powers
Weakens government and slows down processes of government
Introducing system for recalling – or
‘unelecting’ MPs who are unsatisfactory
Slow – recall attempts for trivial reasons?
Potentially
Granting votes to 16+ and bring young people into political process – improve political education 16 – too young; judgement = ineffective
Introduce compulsory voting – force people
= results more legitimate
Compulsory voting = infringement on liberty Forces people with little/no political knowledge to vote = affected/influenced by uninformed voters
Using more referendums to determine political issues – widen participation
Voter
‘fatigue’
Using digital/internet based democracy
Trivialises politics
E-petitions = widespread fraud?
Excludes those who don’t use
computers/internet
Jason Tran
Why is participation declining?
The Public
Growth of individualism and materialism = people are more concerned about themselves and less concerned with larger society
The Media
Media focus on ‘hypes’ such as scandals, incompetence, policy failure = shows politicians in bad light = political disillusionment/cynicism
The Politicians
Growth of consensus politics – traditional ideologies no longer the case but more of a
‘middle
England’
Digital Democracy?
YES
NO
Higher participation – convenient; positive impact on participation; Electoral malpractice; allegations of corruption – identity fraud
Ease of organisation – referendums = cheaper
‘Virtual’ democracy Digital divide – hard for those without access to internet or
‘new’
forms of tech to participate
–
increases inequalities in politics
Lowering the voting age?
YES
NO
In line with other activities allowed at 16 – leave education, enter full-time education, have sex, join army, get married etc.
Preserve childhood – should focus on school, education and personal development without
‘weighty
political matters’ Views are currently marginalised; with the lowering of voting age- youths have a say = government = more legitimate as it represents greater demographic
Immature voters – at 16, most are in full time education and continue to live with parents; most 1618 have a
‘lack’
of political knowledge
Increase turnout
Young people easily influenced
Jason Tran
Pressure Groups
What is a Pressure Group (PG)?
Organised group of people united by a common interest/cause who seek to influence and change the policies/views of the government.
They may also want to influence views of the general public
Insider Groups (WYN GRANT)
Outsider Groups (WYN GRANT)
Campaign vigorously in order to raise their profile and become insider groups in the first place. In a strong position to be consulted by government.
Publicity stunts = legal
Not usually invited by government. Adopt a variety of campaigning methods = attract media attention. Influence public opinion and build up support. Publicity stunts = illegal
Protective Groups
Promotional Groups
Trade unions – protect rights of members and protect their interests
Advertise and fight for a cause
Ultra-Insider Groups or Core Insiders
Regularly consulted by government i.e. CBI (Confederation of British Industry)
Some don’t fall into a category
– i.e. NSPCC: campaigns against child cruelty as well as representing the interests of children in danger
Jason Tran
Insider status
Desirable because it allows groups to exert direct pressure on those who make the policies
How do you gain insider status?
Close relationship with government department/ministers
Those in PG are representatives on permanent policy-advising committees
May have links with a political party, i.e. Labour and unions
Example
What they do
British Medical Association (BMA)
Advised coalition government on NHS reform issues
National
Farmers’
union
(NFU)
Issues on farm subsidies and agricultural policy
Confederation of British Industry (CBI)
Reports regularly to government on the state of British business
Outsider status
No special links to government = exert influence indirectly in mass media/public opinion campaigns
Example
What they do
Greenpeace
Specialises in acts of disobedience i.e. destroying GM crops
Plane Stupid
Uses civil disobedience – obstruct plans to expand airports
Summary distinguishing the difference
Insider Groups
Outsider Groups
Access to policy makers
Limited access to policy makers
Often low profiled
High profile
Mainstream goals
Radical goals
Strong Leadership
Strong grass-roots
Jason Tran
Functions of Pressure Groups
Representation
Function Explanation
Provides a mouthpiece for groups and interests that are not represented by political parties. PGs =
Alternative functional representation.
Typical Method
Seek insider status
But – PGs have low level of internal democracy, express views of leaders, not members.
Seek to be involved in development of policy
Speaking up for minorities such as Age UK and victims of problems with pensions
Seek to influence party policy makers
N/A
Publicity stunts
Cultivating
‘expert authority’
– getting views of specialists
Organise large demonstrations But PGs = biased and subjective
Internet campaigns & epetitions
Using celebrities
Appeals to the courts to establish whether rights have been threatened
Education
Political
Participation
Protective PGS – safeguard interests/rights of members 40 – 50% of UK citizens belong to at least 1 voluntary association. Many carry out activities such as petitions, marches, demonstrations = tend to be attractive to young people
Tendency
for
‘chequebook groups’
– members participate by merely funding PG.
Maintaining websites, commenting on government policy using high-profile academics, scientists/celebs to get viewpoints across.
Policy
Formulation
BMA offers latest advice to GPs in running their practices Greenpeace – Constantly measure levels of radioactive pollution around UK nuclear power plants
PGs = not policy makers but do participate in policymaking process. PGs = vital source of information to governments through policy networks
Small amount of insider PGs = small amount involved in policy making.
i.e. Stonewall (gay rights)
Give evidence to parliamentary select & legislative committees
Celebrities
Mass civil disobedience
Give evidence to parliamentary select & legislative committees
Policy
Implementation
But – PGs should not influence policy? = not elected = non-accountable National
Farmers’
Union
(NFU)
– works for Department for Rural Affairs = involved in implementing policies related to farm subsidies, disease control & animal welfare. PGs too close to government = danger to independence
& policy implementation = unfair political leverage
Jason Tran
The difference between a Pressure Group and a Political Party
Pressure Group
Political Party
Try to influence government policy BUT do not seek to win electoral power/form a government
Want to have their candidates elected as MPs to form government and run the country
Want to gain power
Focus on a single issue i.e. Human Rights/Animal
Welfare
Focus on a range of issues
(Or a narrow range of issues)
Why is might be hard to distinguish between the two:
Some parties are so narrow in their aims that they look more like PGs – i.e. UKIP focuses a lot on issues such as the EU, mass immigration and devolution; Also BNP focuses a lot on immigration and anti-multiculturalism PGs often transform themselves into parties – i.e. Green Party and UKIP
Parliament
On Ministers & Civil Servants
Parliamentary lobbying – seek to contact sympathetic/well-placed MPs and give them expensively produced information packs (influencing them).
Ministers
=
heart of ‘core executive’ – they develop policy = where power lies
Stalk
the
‘corridors
of power’ Direct Action
Strikes, blockades, boycotts and sit-ins = Direct Action
May take the form of Civil disobedience = to make a point Ways in which PGs can exert their influence Political Parties
Government = formed by leading party in HoC – influence party policy = influence government policy
Notably influencing through funding & donations
Commonly = Labour Party & Trade Unions for funding & votes
Political Parties, Elections & Referendums Act (2000) – parties now have to reveal where funding comes from – i.e. wealthy foreign individual donations = banned.
Public Opinion
Adopted by outsider groups. Influence government indirectly by pushing issues up the political agenda by getting a high level of public support. Geared towards getting media attention i.e. F4J activists dressing up as
Batman/Spiderman and climbing onto balcony of
Buckingham Palace in 2004.
Jason Tran
Pluralism vs. Elitism
Pluralism
PGs =
Good for democracy
New Right
PGs =
Bad for democracy
Elitism
PGs =
Bad for democracy
Society is made up of many diverse views and interests and there are many pressure groups to represent this
PGs interfere with governing
PGs support the views of the hands of the few rich and powerful Essential to democracy to represent all interests & views
Governments are elected on the principle of the doctrine of the mandate PGs run by small elite similar to government Every time a decision is made = satisfies one group but disappoints another
Government should be left alone to get on with it
Inequalities between PGs = unfair as some have more power than others – some dominate political environment Inequality = OK because all views eventually represented
PGs = unelected & unaccountable
Government = not neutral – biased in favour of rich, powerful
Government = neutral arbiter – has no bias
The government listens to PGs and acts on their concerns
Why do pressure groups use direct action?
Pressure groups turn to direct action to advance their cause as other non-direct methods having failed or not being available.
At times pressure groups need the media spotlight and direct action is a method of achieving this
Often outsider groups turn to direct action as they do not have the privileged enjoyed by insider groups
The failure or exhaustion of conventional or legal routes may cause direct action (illegal action) as a last resort, the illegal activity of the protestors against the hunting ban broke the law in frustration
Jason Tran
What determines a PG’s success? Factor
Resources &
Wealth
Factor explained
If PG has lots of wealth = lots of influence; why does the government always listen to
Tesco, BP, Barclays, BT etc.
Businesses possess expertiseallow formulation of effective policies Large PGs = govt. listens (political leverage) because they represent a lot of the public opinion
(members have an electoral impact) More members = more funding – but has led to chequebook participation Size
Large = allows more effective protests, marches and demonstrations But, not always the case – CBI is more powerful than TUV despite
TUC having 7 million members.
PG Example
Evidence of success
Countryside Alliance – organised mass demonstrations in London
The anti-fox hunting legislation in 2004 was
‘watered
down’
WWF - aims to achieve mass membership and gets funding from members, but campaigning is left to the full-time professionals
BUT SIZE SOMETIMES DOES
NOT HELP – Stop the War
Campaign
didn’t work; Student protest for tuition fees didn’t work Small groups can influence through expertise and specialist knowledge. Insider Status
Able to directly impact views of government; established in government circles
Legislation introduced to deter and reduce smoking Save
England’s
Forests
Campaign used a variety of tactics, including a huge epetition, celebrity campaigners, demonstrations and MP involvement Tactics
Action on Smoking and
Health; CBI
Cancellation of government’s plans to sell off large quantities of publicly owned forest in 2010
Confederation of Business
Industry
Govt. is to reduce corporation tax on company by 14% over 4 years If Government agrees with aims/goals of PG = likelier to be successful Sharing the same agenda
Ideological outsiders describe groups that have aims/goals that clash with that of government
Traditionally, business groups = influential under Conservative government and trade unions under Labour
Jason Tran
Make Poverty Historycampaign group of 90s – experienced little opposition Lack of opposition PGs may fail/succeed depending on the strengths/weaknesses of opposing forces
BUT - Action on Smoking and Health campaign was countered in 80s and 90s by a well-funded tobacco lobby that made major donations to the
Conservative Party.
Govt. committed to raising foreign debt relief and increase overseas aid
Favourable circumstances ASH (Action on Smoking and Health)
Ban on smoking in public places in England and
Wales secured by ASH in
2006
Celebrity involvement 2005, Jamie Oliver put issue of school meals on political agenda government allocated more resources to improve quality of them
British
Bankers’
Association
(BBA)
Strategic
position
Government feared that large banks might move away from Britain
PGs with high public support = greater political influence
Public Support
Governments have to calculate how much electoral damage is caused by not complying with the
PG’s
demands
Represented many powerful banks and campaigned against banking reform.
Diluted plans to limit banks’ awards of excessive bonuses and high salaries
Public support is not always reflected in political influence. Stop the War Campaign marches in 2003 failed to have any impact on
Blair’s
government to participate in Iraq War
N/A
Jason Tran
The Importance of Pressure Groups
YES
NO
An increase in numbers = A result of splitting an issue i.e. PRO abortion and ANTI abortion groups
Increased in number and range
Too many groups = dilute messages – overwhelms political stage
Membership has increased more than membership to political parties.
Since 1980s party membership = declined; but membership of PGs = growing
Size and membership = important
BUT Political parties hold real power
PGs only influence
= uphold representation function
Profile is constantly in the media and people are more aware of them
Seek political change and redress through PGS first
Achieved notable successes
Greater media profile and increased public awareness – information overload; may produce passive involvement (people think they can participate just by viewing media information)
Government has the final say and puts its own interests first
Far more PGs have failed than have been successful
- Stop the War Campaign 2001 = failed
Do Pressure groups enhance democracy?
YES
NO
Pressure groups represent groups and causes that have been ignore by political parties
PGs undermine authority of elected officials and
Parliament
Help disperse power – prevent concentrations of power The
‘politics
of self-interest’ – Present public with overbiased/false info.
Educate and inform public about important issues
Too powerful = hyperpluralism; hold up governmental processes – too obstructive
Help with governing process – informed advice given
Pressure groups lack legitimacy – not democratically accountable PGs are a way of participating in politics, especially since participation = declining
Wealthy or influential PGs have more influence
Leadership = elitist not reflect accurately views of members Insider groups have too much power; NFU and BMA
Series
(b)
Explain
the main features of the
UK’s
democratic system. 10
25
5
(b) Explain three forms of democratic participation.
10
25
(a) What is meant by legitimacy?
5
(b) Explain three strengths of representative democracy.
10
(c) How democratic is the UK?
25
(a) Apart from voting in elections and referendums, describe two ways of participating in politics.
5
(b) Explain the arguments in favour of lowering the voting age.
10
(c) To what extent would the wider use of referendums improve democracy in the UK?
25
(a) Outline the key features of a referendum.
5
(b) Apart from referendums, explain three ways in which democracy in the UK
could …show more content…
be improved.
10
(c)
To
what extent does democracy in the UK suffer from a ‘participation crisis’? 25
(a) How does a referendum differ from an election?
Jan 2012
5
(c) Assess the arguments in favour of the greater use of direct democracy in the
UK.
Jun 2011
25
(a) Define direct democracy.
Jan 2011
10
(c) To what extent is there a ‘democratic deficit’ in the UK?
Jun 2010
(b) In what ways has political participation declined in the UK in recent years?
(a) Define liberal democracy.
Jan 2010
5
(c) Evaluate the effectiveness of the various ways in which participation and democracy could be strengthened in the UK.
Jun 2009
Marks
(a) What are the main features of representative democracy?
Jan 2009
Exam question
5
(b) Explain the arguments in favour of making voting compulsory.
10
(c) How effectively does representative democracy operate in the UK?
25
Pressure Groups
Series
5
(b) Explain the methods used by pressure groups to influence government.
10
(c) To what extent do pressure groups promote pluralist democracy?
25
(a) What is meant by pluralism?
Jun 2009
Marks
(a) Using examples, distinguish between sectional and promotional pressure groups. Jan 2009
Exam question
5
(b) Why is it sometimes difficult to distinguish between pressure groups and political parties?
10
(c) To what extent have pressure groups become more important in recent years? 25
(a) Using examples, distinguish between insider and outsider pressure groups.
(b) Explain three political functions of pressure groups.
10
25
5
(b) How and why do some pressure groups use direct action?
10
(c) To what extent are the largest pressure groups the most successful ones?
25
(a) Using examples, distinguish between promotional and sectional pressure groups. 5
(b) How and why do pressure groups seek to influence public opinion?
10
(c) Is pressure group politics in the UK better described as pluralist or as elitist?
25
(a) How do pressure groups promote functional representation?
Jan 2012
5
(a) Outline two differences between pressure groups and political parties.
Jun 2011
25
(c) To what extent do pressure groups undermine democracy?
Jan 2011
10
(a) Distinguish between elitism and pluralism.
Jun 2010
(b) Explain the reasons why the success of pressure groups may be limited.
(c) To what extent do pressure groups promote political participation in the UK?
Jan 2010
5
5
(b) Explain three factors which may restrict the influence of a pressure group.
10
(c) Are pressure groups becoming more powerful, or less powerful?
25
Jason Tran
Democracy & Political participation
What is democracy?
A society/political system where people are able
to make/influence decisions and where the government is accountable to the people.
Derives from Greek words demos and kratis – ‘rule by the people’ Abraham
Lincoln
“government of the people, by the people, for the people” Political equality – each citizen has a free and equal opportunity to influence decisions
Legitimacy
The idea that a government or political institution has the
DEMOCRATIC RIGHT hold
political power
Is the UK Government legitimate?
YES
NO
House of Commons = elected
Electoral System = unfair and distorts political representation House of Lords seen as a widely recognised political influence with varying expertise
House of Lords = unelected
Parties are elected with a clear mandate
PM’s power = legitimate as it is acknowledged that
they are the supreme policy maker
Jason Tran
Direct Democracy
1. People themselves make important decisions –
NO ELECTED/APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVES
2. People are directly involved in political decision making – all are consulted
3. People
‘are’ the government and
‘make’
the policy decisions
The UK uses referendums:
An important decision is put to the people; involves a single question with YES/NO answer
In UK, results of referendum is not binding on government/parliament
Parliament is sovereign
But it would be in their best interests to do so
Other forms of direct democracy
Initiatives
Held in UK at a local level – very rare. Groups of interested citizens organise a petition on a specific issue. If enough signatures = referendum MUST be held
Public Consultations
Local authorities ask community what decisions should be made, i.e. funding – this is increasing with Central Government – internet = higher usage?
Here it’s the
people who are taking the initiative, not the government
Petitions
Not binding, but they are influential. Large number of citizens may sign a petition on a particular issue.
UK parliament – petitions are often not debated or influential.
In Scotland (Scottish P) – they have a special committee to consider petitions
Is a Direct Democracy good?
YES
NO
Purest form of democracy – people follow laws they make themselves; legitimate
Direct democracy = majoritarianism =
‘tyranny
of
the majority’ – oppresses minorities
Disperses power widely among population – no concentration Many decisions = too complex for people to understand Decisions = more acceptable to the population
Distorted by wealthy groups who influence debate
Prevent decision makers from making mistakes
Requiring too much participation = population becomes politically
‘fatigued’ = apathy grows
Increases popular participation – enhancing democracy Increased awareness = political education; citizens = knowledgeable & better informed
Jason Tran
Representative Democracy
1. People elect individuals to act on their behalf – a
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
POLITICAL REPRESENTATIVE
Free, fair and regular elections
UNIVERSAL
Elected representatives can be accountable to the electorate
Governments & heads of state are elected by the people
SUFFRAGE
Political parties to represent different political beliefs
Political associations & pressure groups operate freely and represent various causes beliefs & interest groups
Is a Representative Democracy good?
YES
NO
Elected/appointed reps = have superior experience and judgement to general population
May not accurately represent opinions of wider population Representatives can make rational judgements
Party representation = prevents reps from acting independently – lobby fodder
Reps = accountable = behave responsibly
Representative democracy – easily turn into
‘rule by elites’ – no dispersion of power
People can’t be continuously involved, so delegate power to reps – more practical
Potential for elective dictatorship
Reps have to listen to the interests of all – not just the majority – avoids
‘tyranny
of majority’ Consensus politics means that choice between parties = limited- not what individual wants
Does the UK have a representative democracy?
YES
Regular free elections. All adults can vote/stand for office – but is FPTP fair?
Elected representative assemblies: National (UK
Parliament’s
HoC);
Regional
(Scottish
P)
&
Local
(Councils)
NO
Elections = unfair; some parties over represented
HoC = narrow social demographic (gender, etc.)
House of Lords is unelected – members are appointed/hereditary peers
Constituency sizes = uneven
Parties are free to operate and represent various political opinions
The 2005 – 2010 Labour government was elected yet only had 35% of the popular vote; we have a participation crisis – damages legitimacy
Governments at all levels = accountable
Some pressure groups are more powerful than others; varying powers is not reflective of size/popularity Every individual is represented by an MP, a regional assembly member, and a local councillor
Government is not accountable enough
Jason Tran
Referendums
Government = divided on an issue; resolve by
Convention: Any
giving people the final say
constitutional change can only be made if approved via referendum
Why hold a referendum? Since it’s the electorate
Good to secure the
deciding what’s happening,
consent of the public –
future governments may
particularly where it may
decide not to reverse decision
involve taxation
Almost to an extent entrenching the change
Referendums in the UK
Year
Area
Question
Circumstances
Outcome
1975
National
Should the UK remain a member of the European Community
New Labour = divided on issue
Large YES
1997
Scotland
Should Scotland have its own
Parliament with significant powers?
Constitutional
Change
Large YES
GOOD
1997
Scotland
Should a new Scottish Parliament have the power to vary income tax slightly from the level charged in the rest of Britain?
Issue on tax
Large YES
GOOD
1997
Wales
Should Wales have an elected assembly with modest powers?
Constitutional
Change
Narrow YES
GOOD
1998
Northern
Ireland
Should the Belfast Agreement (also known as the Good Friday
Agreement) be approved in order to bring peace and power sharing to
Northern Ireland government?
Securing approval after years of conflict Large YES
1998
London
Should London have an elected mayor and assembly?
Constitutional
Change &
Taxation
Large YES
2011
Wales
Should the Welsh Assembly have more powers?
Constitutional
Change &
Taxation
Large YES
National
Should AV (the alternative-vote electoral system) be adopted for
Westminster elections?
Divided on issue &
Constitutional
Change
Large NO
2011
Turnout
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
Jason Tran
Why has the use of referendums increased since 1997?
Greater interest in constitutional reform – this means electorate consulted more
Referendums are a way of
‘entrenching’
reform
– Labour would be able to make decisions and
Conservatives
can’t reverse without popular consent
(particularly
for devolution) Electorate = better informed of politics; so can now make more informed judgements – internet has helped Should we have more referendums?
YES
People are becoming used to be consulted more on key issues
NO
Too
many votes; ‘voter fatigue’ will be the outcome = low turnout and results = less legitimate
VOTER APATHY/POLITICAL CYNICISM
Internet & social media has meant people know more and can vote appropriately
Has been a fall in participation – referendums will involve people politically; enhances direct democracy Potentially means reduced government power – government has less control on outcome
Less elitist – reduces potential of elective dictatorship Highly politically motivated tabloid press = reduce rational arguments to emotional appeals
Referendums can be seen as a public opinion poll on the government than the issue.
In 2010, coalition government had AV voting system referendum- outcome = NO; and this was on basis that Lib Dems proposed the referendum
Ill informed decisions by poorly educated and those who lack political experience
Makes population more active between elections = increased turnout
Referendums weaken Parliament – undermines
Parliamentary sovereignty
If a party = divided on an issue; the public have the final say
We vote in a government so that they make policies and are accountable for their actions; referendums allow them to dodge responsibility
Used for local issues – no
‘one
size fits all’ as it
doesn’t work COSTLY – money could be better utilised
Jason Tran
Variations of Representative Democracy
Liberal Democracy
A democracy that conforms to liberal political principles – emphasis on rights & liberties, strong constitutional framework & rule of law.
Is
a response to the ‘tyranny of the majority’ – there is too much power in the hands of a dominant majority. A Liberal Democracy would protect the interests of everyone.
System of ‘checks and balances’ – having different branches: the legislature, the executive, the judiciary
Strong sense of constitutionalism – Ensuring separation of powers; system of checks and balances and protection of rights
Germany is an example
A tolerant society – diverse beliefs/ideas are allowed to flourish as long as they don’t threaten state/others freedoms.
The US is an example
Separation of powers – prevent corruption between different branches of government
Pluralist Democracy
Conforms to the criteria of liberal democracy but in addition:
Large number of different political parties
Wide variety of political associations and Pressure Groups = tolerated and can participate in political processes
Power is widely dispersed; people have high influence
Parliamentary Democracy
Parliament is sovereign and has ultimate political power
Laws will only be enforced if legitimised by Parliament
Government is drawn from Parliament
Parliament ensure the geographical representation of all parts of the UK
The UK is an example
This kind of democracy is unique to the UK – It is similar to a liberal democracy but parliament is the central body and the source of all political power
Jason Tran
Is the UK a liberal democracy?
YES
NO
SORT OF
There are regular free elections
No codified/entrenched constitution Elections are FPTP – but seen as unfair Government is accountable to
Parliament
House of Lords = unelected & democratically illegitimate
Right are protected, but
Parliamentary Supremacy = can be set aside
Parties and PGs are tolerated
Prime Minister has prerogative powers No separation of powers between the legislature and executive
There is free media
Unelected head of state (The
Queen)
There is an independent judiciary
Rule of Law applies
Jason Tran
Political Participation
Voting in
Being informed – i.e.
elections/referendums
through the media
Standing for office
(local, regional or national) Ways of participating Attending debates
Joining a political party
Joining a pressure group ..
Strong representation by MPs of individuals and constituencies
Free political parties and PGs
Government has a clear mandate to govern; made accountable
Rule of law
Devolution = powers decentralised
Judiciary = politically independent
Some undemocratic institutions: House of
Lords and Monarchy
Prerogative powers of PM = not subject to law Sovereignty of Parliament = Government is dominant UK Parliament can overturn common law rights Elections are free and held regularly
One person = one vote
PGs have access to various levels of government Referendums are held to get decisions made Elections = unfair and undemocratic; FPTP = distorts representation
Parliament is weak in calling government to account; excessive government control?
Smaller parties under-represented
Two-party system: little choice
Consensus politics – little to choose from
All adults are allowed to participate in the political process
Freedom of association, belief and thought
Increasing variety of Pressure Groups
Turnout is low – (60 – 65% at general elections); usually above 75% in 90s
Young turnout = low; falling below 40%
Party membership is falling; 2 million in
1980s to 300k in 2010
Disillusionment with politics, with parties and politics – non-voting
Not all can vote (unenfranchised) –
Members of HoL, imprisoned convicts & mentally incapable
Political participation Political institutions What’s bad about the UK democracy Political processes What’s good about the UK democracy Jason Tran
How can we improve democracy in the UK?
Method
Impact
Improving Democratic
Processes
Improving Democratic
Participation
New chamber = too much legitimacy
Recreates a HoC
Introducing a codified constitution
Reduces power of government
Reduces flexibility of political system
Making the European Convention on Human
Rights binding on the UK Parliament
Reduces power of Parliament
Taking UK out of the EU or reclaiming powers surrendered UK loses benefits of being EU member
Granting further powers to devolved governments The break-up of the UK?
Constituency sizes more equal
Improving Democratic
Institutions
Introducing an elected second chamber to replace HoL
Population changes = difficult to do
Introducing proportional representation for general elections = more representative
Jeopardises strong decisive governments; eliminates the doctrine of the mandate – coalition government does not have a clear mandate
Coalitions = more common
Proportional rep = introduces too many small extremist parties
Strengthening
Parliament’s
ability to control
government i.e. increasing legislative powers
Weakens government and slows down processes of government
Introducing system for recalling – or
‘unelecting’ MPs who are unsatisfactory
Slow – recall attempts for trivial reasons?
Potentially
Granting votes to 16+ and bring young people into political process – improve political education 16 – too young; judgement = ineffective
Introduce compulsory voting – force people
= results more legitimate
Compulsory voting = infringement on liberty Forces people with little/no political knowledge to vote = affected/influenced by uninformed voters
Using more referendums to determine political issues – widen participation
Voter
‘fatigue’
Using digital/internet based democracy
Trivialises politics
E-petitions = widespread fraud?
Excludes those who don’t use
computers/internet
Jason Tran
Why is participation declining?
The Public
Growth of individualism and materialism = people are more concerned about themselves and less concerned with larger society
The Media
Media focus on ‘hypes’ such as scandals, incompetence, policy failure = shows politicians in bad light = political disillusionment/cynicism
The Politicians
Growth of consensus politics – traditional ideologies no longer the case but more of a
‘middle
England’
Digital Democracy?
YES
NO
Higher participation – convenient; positive impact on participation; Electoral malpractice; allegations of corruption – identity fraud
Ease of organisation – referendums = cheaper
‘Virtual’ democracy Digital divide – hard for those without access to internet or
‘new’
forms of tech to participate
–
increases inequalities in politics
Lowering the voting age?
YES
NO
In line with other activities allowed at 16 – leave education, enter full-time education, have sex, join army, get married etc.
Preserve childhood – should focus on school, education and personal development without
‘weighty
political matters’ Views are currently marginalised; with the lowering of voting age- youths have a say = government = more legitimate as it represents greater demographic
Immature voters – at 16, most are in full time education and continue to live with parents; most 1618 have a
‘lack’
of political knowledge
Increase turnout
Young people easily influenced
Jason Tran
Pressure Groups
What is a Pressure Group (PG)?
Organised group of people united by a common interest/cause who seek to influence and change the policies/views of the government.
They may also want to influence views of the general public
Insider Groups (WYN GRANT)
Outsider Groups (WYN GRANT)
Campaign vigorously in order to raise their profile and become insider groups in the first place. In a strong position to be consulted by government.
Publicity stunts = legal
Not usually invited by government. Adopt a variety of campaigning methods = attract media attention. Influence public opinion and build up support. Publicity stunts = illegal
Protective Groups
Promotional Groups
Trade unions – protect rights of members and protect their interests
Advertise and fight for a cause
Ultra-Insider Groups or Core Insiders
Regularly consulted by government i.e. CBI (Confederation of British Industry)
Some don’t fall into a category
– i.e. NSPCC: campaigns against child cruelty as well as representing the interests of children in danger
Jason Tran
Insider status
Desirable because it allows groups to exert direct pressure on those who make the policies
How do you gain insider status?
Close relationship with government department/ministers
Those in PG are representatives on permanent policy-advising committees
May have links with a political party, i.e. Labour and unions
Example
What they do
British Medical Association (BMA)
Advised coalition government on NHS reform issues
National
Farmers’
union
(NFU)
Issues on farm subsidies and agricultural policy
Confederation of British Industry (CBI)
Reports regularly to government on the state of British business
Outsider status
No special links to government = exert influence indirectly in mass media/public opinion campaigns
Example
What they do
Greenpeace
Specialises in acts of disobedience i.e. destroying GM crops
Plane Stupid
Uses civil disobedience – obstruct plans to expand airports
Summary distinguishing the difference
Insider Groups
Outsider Groups
Access to policy makers
Limited access to policy makers
Often low profiled
High profile
Mainstream goals
Radical goals
Strong Leadership
Strong grass-roots
Jason Tran
Functions of Pressure Groups
Representation
Function Explanation
Provides a mouthpiece for groups and interests that are not represented by political parties. PGs =
Alternative functional representation.
Typical Method
Seek insider status
But – PGs have low level of internal democracy, express views of leaders, not members.
Seek to be involved in development of policy
Speaking up for minorities such as Age UK and victims of problems with pensions
Seek to influence party policy makers
N/A
Publicity stunts
Cultivating
‘expert authority’
– getting views of specialists
Organise large demonstrations But PGs = biased and subjective
Internet campaigns & epetitions
Using celebrities
Appeals to the courts to establish whether rights have been threatened
Education
Political
Participation
Protective PGS – safeguard interests/rights of members 40 – 50% of UK citizens belong to at least 1 voluntary association. Many carry out activities such as petitions, marches, demonstrations = tend to be attractive to young people
Tendency
for
‘chequebook groups’
– members participate by merely funding PG.
Maintaining websites, commenting on government policy using high-profile academics, scientists/celebs to get viewpoints across.
Policy
Formulation
BMA offers latest advice to GPs in running their practices Greenpeace – Constantly measure levels of radioactive pollution around UK nuclear power plants
PGs = not policy makers but do participate in policymaking process. PGs = vital source of information to governments through policy networks
Small amount of insider PGs = small amount involved in policy making.
i.e. Stonewall (gay rights)
Give evidence to parliamentary select & legislative committees
Celebrities
Mass civil disobedience
Give evidence to parliamentary select & legislative committees
Policy
Implementation
But – PGs should not influence policy? = not elected = non-accountable National
Farmers’
Union
(NFU)
– works for Department for Rural Affairs = involved in implementing policies related to farm subsidies, disease control & animal welfare. PGs too close to government = danger to independence
& policy implementation = unfair political leverage
Jason Tran
The difference between a Pressure Group and a Political Party
Pressure Group
Political Party
Try to influence government policy BUT do not seek to win electoral power/form a government
Want to have their candidates elected as MPs to form government and run the country
Want to gain power
Focus on a single issue i.e. Human Rights/Animal
Welfare
Focus on a range of issues
(Or a narrow range of issues)
Why is might be hard to distinguish between the two:
Some parties are so narrow in their aims that they look more like PGs – i.e. UKIP focuses a lot on issues such as the EU, mass immigration and devolution; Also BNP focuses a lot on immigration and anti-multiculturalism PGs often transform themselves into parties – i.e. Green Party and UKIP
Parliament
On Ministers & Civil Servants
Parliamentary lobbying – seek to contact sympathetic/well-placed MPs and give them expensively produced information packs (influencing them).
Ministers
=
heart of ‘core executive’ – they develop policy = where power lies
Stalk
the
‘corridors
of power’ Direct Action
Strikes, blockades, boycotts and sit-ins = Direct Action
May take the form of Civil disobedience = to make a point Ways in which PGs can exert their influence Political Parties
Government = formed by leading party in HoC – influence party policy = influence government policy
Notably influencing through funding & donations
Commonly = Labour Party & Trade Unions for funding & votes
Political Parties, Elections & Referendums Act (2000) – parties now have to reveal where funding comes from – i.e. wealthy foreign individual donations = banned.
Public Opinion
Adopted by outsider groups. Influence government indirectly by pushing issues up the political agenda by getting a high level of public support. Geared towards getting media attention i.e. F4J activists dressing up as
Batman/Spiderman and climbing onto balcony of
Buckingham Palace in 2004.
Jason Tran
Pluralism vs. Elitism
Pluralism
PGs =
Good for democracy
New Right
PGs =
Bad for democracy
Elitism
PGs =
Bad for democracy
Society is made up of many diverse views and interests and there are many pressure groups to represent this
PGs interfere with governing
PGs support the views of the hands of the few rich and powerful Essential to democracy to represent all interests & views
Governments are elected on the principle of the doctrine of the mandate PGs run by small elite similar to government Every time a decision is made = satisfies one group but disappoints another
Government should be left alone to get on with it
Inequalities between PGs = unfair as some have more power than others – some dominate political environment Inequality = OK because all views eventually represented
PGs = unelected & unaccountable
Government = not neutral – biased in favour of rich, powerful
Government = neutral arbiter – has no bias
The government listens to PGs and acts on their concerns
Why do pressure groups use direct action?
Pressure groups turn to direct action to advance their cause as other non-direct methods having failed or not being available.
At times pressure groups need the media spotlight and direct action is a method of achieving this
Often outsider groups turn to direct action as they do not have the privileged enjoyed by insider groups
The failure or exhaustion of conventional or legal routes may cause direct action (illegal action) as a last resort, the illegal activity of the protestors against the hunting ban broke the law in frustration
Jason Tran
What determines a PG’s success? Factor
Resources &
Wealth
Factor explained
If PG has lots of wealth = lots of influence; why does the government always listen to
Tesco, BP, Barclays, BT etc.
Businesses possess expertiseallow formulation of effective policies Large PGs = govt. listens (political leverage) because they represent a lot of the public opinion
(members have an electoral impact) More members = more funding – but has led to chequebook participation Size
Large = allows more effective protests, marches and demonstrations But, not always the case – CBI is more powerful than TUV despite
TUC having 7 million members.
PG Example
Evidence of success
Countryside Alliance – organised mass demonstrations in London
The anti-fox hunting legislation in 2004 was
‘watered
down’
WWF - aims to achieve mass membership and gets funding from members, but campaigning is left to the full-time professionals
BUT SIZE SOMETIMES DOES
NOT HELP – Stop the War
Campaign
didn’t work; Student protest for tuition fees didn’t work Small groups can influence through expertise and specialist knowledge. Insider Status
Able to directly impact views of government; established in government circles
Legislation introduced to deter and reduce smoking Save
England’s
Forests
Campaign used a variety of tactics, including a huge epetition, celebrity campaigners, demonstrations and MP involvement Tactics
Action on Smoking and
Health; CBI
Cancellation of government’s plans to sell off large quantities of publicly owned forest in 2010
Confederation of Business
Industry
Govt. is to reduce corporation tax on company by 14% over 4 years If Government agrees with aims/goals of PG = likelier to be successful Sharing the same agenda
Ideological outsiders describe groups that have aims/goals that clash with that of government
Traditionally, business groups = influential under Conservative government and trade unions under Labour
Jason Tran
Make Poverty Historycampaign group of 90s – experienced little opposition Lack of opposition PGs may fail/succeed depending on the strengths/weaknesses of opposing forces
BUT - Action on Smoking and Health campaign was countered in 80s and 90s by a well-funded tobacco lobby that made major donations to the
Conservative Party.
Govt. committed to raising foreign debt relief and increase overseas aid
Favourable circumstances ASH (Action on Smoking and Health)
Ban on smoking in public places in England and
Wales secured by ASH in
2006
Celebrity involvement 2005, Jamie Oliver put issue of school meals on political agenda government allocated more resources to improve quality of them
British
Bankers’
Association
(BBA)
Strategic
position
Government feared that large banks might move away from Britain
PGs with high public support = greater political influence
Public Support
Governments have to calculate how much electoral damage is caused by not complying with the
PG’s
demands
Represented many powerful banks and campaigned against banking reform.
Diluted plans to limit banks’ awards of excessive bonuses and high salaries
Public support is not always reflected in political influence. Stop the War Campaign marches in 2003 failed to have any impact on
Blair’s
government to participate in Iraq War
N/A
Jason Tran
The Importance of Pressure Groups
YES
NO
An increase in numbers = A result of splitting an issue i.e. PRO abortion and ANTI abortion groups
Increased in number and range
Too many groups = dilute messages – overwhelms political stage
Membership has increased more than membership to political parties.
Since 1980s party membership = declined; but membership of PGs = growing
Size and membership = important
BUT Political parties hold real power
PGs only influence
= uphold representation function
Profile is constantly in the media and people are more aware of them
Seek political change and redress through PGS first
Achieved notable successes
Greater media profile and increased public awareness – information overload; may produce passive involvement (people think they can participate just by viewing media information)
Government has the final say and puts its own interests first
Far more PGs have failed than have been successful
- Stop the War Campaign 2001 = failed
Do Pressure groups enhance democracy?
YES
NO
Pressure groups represent groups and causes that have been ignore by political parties
PGs undermine authority of elected officials and
Parliament
Help disperse power – prevent concentrations of power The
‘politics
of self-interest’ – Present public with overbiased/false info.
Educate and inform public about important issues
Too powerful = hyperpluralism; hold up governmental processes – too obstructive
Help with governing process – informed advice given
Pressure groups lack legitimacy – not democratically accountable PGs are a way of participating in politics, especially since participation = declining
Wealthy or influential PGs have more influence
Leadership = elitist not reflect accurately views of members Insider groups have too much power; NFU and BMA