Unit 1 revision booklet Flashcards

Question

# 8 The factors influencing the power of Pressure Groups

Answer 1

- Size of membership (Make Poverty History, RSPB) - Government support (League Against Cruel Sports or Child Poverty Action Group under Labour Party, CBI under Conservatives). Trade Unions will have less influence under Conservative governments for example. - Insider Status (NFU) - Financial resources (WWF, Amnesty Greenpeace) - Organisation (e.g. Fuel Lobby, XR) - Strategic position (NFU, any public service unions such as nurses and teachers) - Backing of public (e.g. ‘Hacked Off’) - Celebrity Support (e.g. Bono with Make Poverty History, Hugh Grant & ‘Hacked Off’, Marcus Rashford and ‘Fair Share’)

Answer 2

- Some groups possess both characteristics. E.g. The Terrence Higgins Trust carries out work on behalf of people with HIV and AIDS (interest/sectional). It also promotes activities which are linked to public health and awareness about AIDS (cause/promotional). - Some groups contain members with both sectional and promotional motivations. E.g the group aimed at stopping development at Dunsfold may contain ‘NIMBY’s and environmentalists. - Some groups may mask their sectional motivations by adopting the language of a promotional group e.g. CBI may attract more positive media attention if it is seen to embrace arguments which embody the economic development of the country as a whole rather than the sectional concerns of businesses.

Answer 3

- The people cannot be regularly expected to consider and make important decisions. They have neither the time nor the interest. Therefore representatives can do so on their behalf. - Representatives have the time and hopefully expertise to consider political issues rationally. MPs often come from professions with high levels of analytical skills required, such as lawyers and doctors. - Representatives have a role in educating the public about political issues. - Representatives can ensure that the interests of different sections of society are taken into account in political decisions. Taking into account the views of minorities is easier as a representative of an entire constituency. - Representatives can be held accountable for their decisions to ensure democratic outcomes. This can happen at election time, or in extreme cases, through recall petitions signed by 10% of constituents. - Representatives can ‘aggregate’ demands of the people, making them more coherent and developing logical political programmes.

Answer 4

- Representatives, and parties, may distort the demands of the people to suit their own political ends. - The people may fail to respect the decisions made by their representatives. They cannot be removed from office normally until the next election. E.g. 7 Labours MPs voted against triggering article 50 in February 2017 despite being from constituencies that voted Leave in the Brexit referendum - The idea of the electoral mandate is flawed in that voters are only presented with a manifesto, the whole of which they must accept or reject. Voters cannot express preferences within various election manifestoes. - Representatives do not make themselves accountable enough between elections. - Today, when the public is better informed and has access to a wide range of independent information, they are able to make key decisions for themselves. E.g 24 hour news media/social media etc. - Representatives may make decisions purely for electoral advantage (e.g. tax cutting, expenditure raising), even though such decisions may be unwise.

Answer 5

- We are all represented equally by an MP who will take up our grievances in Parliament. Philip Davies (Conservative MP for Shipley) for example states he will always put constituency interests before those of his own, following the delegate model of representation. - However, many MPs simply ‘toe the party line.’ Also, both Houses of parliament are not socially representative, with a lack of women and members of ethnic minorities. BME MPs make up 10% per cent of the 2019 parliament, compared to roughly 14 per cent of the population as a whole. There is also a heavy middle class bias, with 29 per cent of MPs in 2019’s Parliament having been privately educated, compared to roughly 7% of population. - The elected Parliament and assemblies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland use fairer systems and give fairer representation. The FPTP system at general elections distorts representation. E.g. in 2015 the SDLP won Belfast South with just 24.5% of the vote! - We have many pressure groups with active support and memberships who represent effectively the many interests and causes in society. However, sometimes, wealthy vested interests dominate and so representation is again distorted. It could also be argued that minorities are under-represented. - Although it is not elected, the House of Lords does contain members who represent various sections of the community. E.g Lord Dannatt (former head of the British Army), Lord Sugar (businessman) etc. There are representatives of different industries, causes, voluntary organisations, worker groups, NHS patient groups, professions and occupations etc. However, peers are unelected, and some sections of society are overrepresented, such as the 26 CofE Bishops.

Answer 6

- We could argue that government itself is not representative enough. Although it is accountable through Parliament and at elections, it may not be responsive enough to the demands of the public and may not represent public opinion accurately. This may be especially true when there is no general election imminent. - There is a strong argument that local government is not representative. Turnouts at local elections are notoriously low and local party cliques may not be representative and operate in their own interests. Turnout at the local elections in 2019 was 35%!

Answer 7

- Membership of political parties has been falling dramatically – from a high of about 2 million in the early 1980s to under 500,000 in 2012. - Parties are finding it increasingly difficult to recruit candidates for election at local level. - Election turnout has been falling to 69% at the previous election in 2019. This is potentially reflective of ‘contentment culture’ because of economic success in Britain, or broader disillusionment with political parties and the political system. - As the main parties have become less ideologically polarised we have seen the growth of partisan & class dealignment and loss of identification with parties. Less people voting for the two main parties or voting on class lines (see voting behaviour).

Answer 8

- Party membership of the Labour Party has seen a huge rise under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn since 2015 people. With over 300,000 people joining as a direct result of his leadership campaign in 2015. - Partisan Dealignment is arguably in reverse as a result of the return to two party voting in the 2019 general election, with Labour and the Conservatives receiving 82% of the vote combined, up from 66% in 2015. - Turnout in 2019 also improved on the 2015 figure, increasing to 697%, suggesting ‘voter fatigue’ is not overly significant despite the election being held only two years after the previous one, and one year after the Brexit referendum. The referendum itself had a turnout of 72.2%. - We have seen rises in pressure group membership and activity. There has also been the rise of ‘new social movements’ which involve large amounts of people being mobilised in a cause.e.g anti-Iraq war movement and the ‘Occupy’ movement in 2011. E-petitions, introduced by the Coalition have attracted thousands of signatures on issues from Europe, to the Hillsborough disaster and the death penalty. A petition to ban Donald Trump from the UK in 2015 received 586,000 signatures and was debated in parliament. The most recent People’s vote march in March 2019 attracted over 1 million people to central London to campaign for a second referendum. - Government itself is also involving more people in the policy making processes with citizens’ forums, juries, focus groups etc. Local authorities also regularly consult members of the community about their services. The introduction of new Police and Crime Commissioners in England and Wales also increases democracy in public bodies, namely the police.

Answer 9

Direct democracy is a form of democracy that is based on the direct, unmediated and continuous participation of citizens in the tasks of government. Advocates of direct democracy make the arguments that it is the most genuine form of democracy, it helps to educate the population, it cuts out the need for a potentially corrupt political elite and that it is the most legitimate form of democracy. However, under analysis, many of these arguments are not as strong as they might seem at first.

Answer 10

- Point) Direct Democracy is considered to be the most genuine form of democracy. Its advocates argue that it is the only pure form of democracy, as it ensures that people only obey laws that they make themselves. Popular participation in government is the very stuff of freedom: it is how the people determine their collective destiny, their ‘general will’. Meanwhile Representative Democracy means that there is a gulf between government and the people. This is potentially expressed by the popularly held view amongst Brexiteers that the current parliament is a ‘Remain parliament’ working against ‘the Leave supporting public’ - Direct Democracy is also considered to be a great promoter of personal education and development. Advocates argue that direct democracy creates better informed, more participative and more knowledgeable citizens. In this sense it has educational benefits. Direct and regular popular participation in government encourages people to take more interest in politics and to better understand their own society – both how it works and how it should work. For example, one could argue that the recent Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty played a significant role in educating the Irish population about the complex issue of EU membership and, in so doing, enabled them to better play an active role in shaping their own futures. The Scottish Independence referendum in 2014 was seen as a civilised debate based on facts, and a pre-prepared plan of what an independent Scotland would look like. - Direct democracy is potentially our saviour from the professional class of politicians who have arguably blighted our democracy in recent years. This is because it reduces, or removes, the public’s dependence on self-serving professional politicians. Recent events in the UK, such as the ‘cash for honours’ scandal and the MPs’ expenses scandal in 2009 would bolster the case for doing away with this ‘political elite’ who seem increasingly distant from the public in whose name they are supposedly acting. Elected MPs do not always represent the view of the people in any event! This could be the counter argument with the referendum on the EU – demonstrating how out of touch the MPs were!

Answer 11

- However, one must bear in mind that at times Direct Democracy can constitute the ‘tyranny of the majority’ or the, ‘rule of the 51%’. Advocates of representative democracy tend to argue that the quality of a democracy should not be judged on the ease with which the majority can get their way but rather on how it treats its minorities. In this sense direct democracy can feel decidedly undemocratic to those who are not a part of the majority view. This has widely been expressed by the People’s vote campaign for a 2nd referendum on Brexit, as they argue Theresa May’s push for a hard Brexit, completely ignores the pro-Remain 48% in the UK. - However, there is a risk in exaggerating the potential educational benefits of participation in direct democracy. It is not always the case that citizens understand the true complexities of the issues upon which they are voting and, anyway, it can seem simplistic to reduce their decision to a simple ‘Yes / No’ verdict. In the case of the Britain leaving the EU it could be argued this was the case. The press played a particularly important role in the Brexit campaign with emotive headlines such as the Sun headline, ‘Queen backs Brexit’, not based on evidence or facts about Eu membership. - However, critics of direct democracy argue that the public as a whole generally lack political knowledge and are not capable of seeing the broader picture and of taking a more considered view. Certainly, paid politicians are employed to look at issues in a great deal of depth and have teams of researchers to help and inform them. They are therefore perhaps best placed to act in the broader national interest than the sum total of voters in a direct democracy, who might be more inclined to vote in a prejudiced fashion because they don’t have all the information to hand.

Answer 12

Representative democracy is a limited and indirect form of democracy operating through the ability of representatives to speak for, or act on behalf of, the people. Advocates of representative democracy argue that it is by far the most efficient form of democracy, it means that decisions are made by an informed political class, it still allows for the voice of the people to be heard (albeit mediated) and it has led to the development of party politics which enhances voter choice. However, under analysis, some of these arguments are not as strong as they might seem at first.

Answer 13

- Representative democracy is the most efficient form of democracy because decisions often need to be taken quickly and decisively. Population sizes of many states run into the millions and this means that, whilst consulting the people directly may seem an attractive option, in most cases this is simply infeasible. By employing representatives of the people in legislative assemblies representative democracies are therefore a solution to this problem. - Secondly, advocates of representative democracy argue that the public as a whole can sometimes lack political knowledge and are not capable of seeing the broader picture and of taking a more considered view. It might also lead to ‘rule by the 51%’ or ‘the tyranny of the majority’. This is why, under representative democracy, paid politicians are employed to look at issues in a great deal of depth and have teams of researchers to help and inform them. They are therefore best placed to act in the broader national interest than the sum total of voters in a direct democracy, who might be more inclined to vote in a prejudiced fashion because they don’t have all the information to hand. There is also the capacity that representative democracy has to put forward a more nuanced viewpoint than would be the case with a simple ‘Yes/No’ under direct democracy. The recent compromise on prisoners’ voting rights in the light of an HRA ruling is a good example of this. - It can further be argued that Representative Democracy still means that the public’s voice is heard through the continuous mediation and aggregation of their views. In countries like the UK which maintain the constituency link between representatives and their constituents, representatives are compelled to listen to their constituents and keep communication channels constantly open if they want to be re-elected at the next election (e.g. Jeremy Hunt, the MP for SW Surrey holds regular constituency surgeries). This means that there is a degree of accountability and transparency to representative democracy that should not be underestimated. It is also the case in representative democracies that the votes of all representatives are a matter of public record. This helps constituents effectively hold their representatives to account.

Answer 14

- Despite this, critics of representative democracy argue that the only way to ensure that people obey laws is if they have made them directly themselves: it is how the people determine their collective destiny, their ‘general will’. Representative Democracy, however efficient, can mean that there is a gulf between government and the people. This is particularly the case when the Government makes decision which are not perceived to have a mandate from the people e.g. the Labour government’s decision to go to war in Iraq. - However, critics of representative democracy say that it has led to a ‘spadocracy’, the development of an elite political class who have lost touch with the people they supposedly represent. They would say that elected representatives have blighted our democracy in recent years (e.g. ‘Cash for Honours’ and the MPs’ Expenses Scandal) and that elected MPs do not always represent the view of the people in any event! On Europe, for example, there is a chasm between the views of MPs (broadly in favour of integration) and the views of the public (broadly against). The rise of the career politician, such as David Cameron, Ed Balls and Ed Miliband, who become special advisors, then MPs and then high level ministers or even PM just adds to this sense of disconnect between the people and their politicians. - However, one must bear in mind that the constituency link is not an altogether foolproof mechanism for ensuring the mediation and aggregation of the public’s views. For example if an MP has a safe seat (e.g Bootle in Liverpool), or is intending to retire at the next election, he or she may have less incentive to consult with their constituents. In this sense representative democracy can sometimes mean constituents feel quite distant from their representatives and that their voices are not heard. There is also no guarantee that MPs will follow the delegate model, i.e. going with the majority opinion in their constituencies, once in Parliament. Kate Hoey, formerly the Labour MP for Vauxhall in South London, is a hard Brexiteer, but had a heavily Remain constituency.

Answer 15

- Declining turnouts at all levels of elections. 35% at the 2019 local government elections. Hovering around the 65-70% mark at UK general elections. Wider political apathy which renders questionable the democratic framework. - A deficit in political education as the wider public lack interest and knowledge in the political system. - The continuation of one House of Parliament, the House of Lords with undemocratic credentials and no sign of real reform. - An unfair voting system which creates an ‘un-democratic’ outcome for Westminster elections (no sign of change since the vote for FPTP in 2011). - Pressure groups with ‘elite’ status who may pursue narrow sectional interests which disadvantage the majority of the population.

Answer 16

- Reforms have taken place to develop democracy such as devolution across the UK, the Constutional Reform Act of 2005, giving increasing independence to the House of Lords, Freedom of Information Act, Recall of MPs etc. - New systems of Proportional Representation have been introduced in these devolved regions, including AMS in Scotland and Wales, as well as STV in Northern Ireland. - Widespread pressure group membership and activity ensure that there is no ‘democratic deficit’. - Human/civil rights are protected and have been developed. - Turnout, although not high, is in line with many other western democracies, and saw a slight increase in the 2019 general election, from 66% in 2015 to 69% in 2019. Turnout at Brexit Referendum was 72%. - Popular and real choice exists at election times for the voting public, with multiple parties standing across the UK, especially in the devolved regions. The UK is currently in a period where the two main parties, the Conservatives and Labour, are vastly different in terms of policy and ideology.