Democracy and Participation Flashcards
Evaluate the view that representative democracy is superior to direct democracy.
Intro: reject or agree with statement
1: direct democracy more democratic, purest form of democracy, power rests with the people, brings about a popular vote which secures greater legitimacy.
Example: 2016 EU referendum was one of the greatest democratic exercises in British political history – more than 33 million people voted.
However: 1. Can lead to “tyranny of the majority”, simply ignoring interests of the minority, in which minorities are placed at a disadvantage with either discrimination against them or possible restriction on their freedom. The public are insufficiently responsible to protect minorities rights against discrimination.
Example: there would be a chance for civil liberties to be ignored, as many of the population agree with the death penalty, the complete halt of immigration and are anti-gay marriage. Scotland voted to remain in the EU referendum but had to leave as part of the UK, deepened divides.
2: Encourages popular participation, The public is constantly encouraged to participate due to there not being anyone else to put the burden onto Citizens are involved all the time instead of every 4 years, will target the UKs participation crisis that is currently happening
However: Some issues too complex for the ordinary citizen to understand – make ill-informed decisions. Although it could be argued that having to participate in decision making encourages citizens to learn more about political topics and issues such as the workings on the EU, the significance of UK’s membership of the EU etc, and therefore voters feeling less ignorant and apathetic towards issues, the public may find some agreements too complex to properly comprehend. Many uninformed people are easily swayed by peers or the media. They listen to short term considerations and cannot be trusted to make important policy decisions that will affect the wider population.
Representatives can develop expertise to deal with matters the public cannot.
Example: on economic matters, EU constitutional laws, taxation etc.
The Electoral Reform Society found that many voters in the EU referendum felt confused about the information they received during the campaign.
Yvette Cooper MP is chair of high-profile Home Affairs select committee which focuses on immigration, crime and civil rights.
3: Avoids delay and deadlock within the political system as it gives greater legitimacy, quick and obvious result
However: 2. Impractical for large populations, emergency decisions should be made quickly by a handful of people
Also, constant participation may over-strain the public’s desire to participate, leading to voters fatigue, Representative democracy has the advantage of creating a balance of everyday working life and putting time into the political culture. Representatives have the time to deal with a variety of complex matters, public can continue with everyday life, practical.
Example: Scottish independence referendum in 2014 had 85% turnout compared to the general election in 2019 that had 67%.
Conclusion: representative better than direct democracy.
Evaluate how democracy could be improved in the UK by lowering the voting age to 16.
1: Matches with other aspects of citizenship available at that age, 16 year olds an work, can join the army, can get married yet are not allowed to vote
However: there is still an argument that people become adults legally at 18 years old, so a lot of what a 16/17-year-old can do is still restricted, so this would not change anything.
2: The voices of 16–17-year-olds are somewhat marginalised, so politicians may be more likely to act on their needs and interests if they could vote.
However: As they are still young they can be easily influenced to vote a specific way, such as the people around them or the media affecting what they view.
3: More likely to have better knowledge of issues than some older people, it has become more common for the younger generations to have more extensive knowledge about politics today compared to the voting range 65+, so what they vote fore may be a more informed and practical decision.
However: Young people less likely to vote than any other age group, decreasing turnout, it has been found that the percentage of young people voting is still dramatically decreasing, perhaps due to an apathy towards the government.
Example: 43% of 18–24-year-olds voted in 2015 general election.
Using the source, evaluate the view that pressure group activity supports democracy and participation.
Intro: pressure group activity does support democracy and participation.
1: They provide a different means of political participation, encouraging political activity outside the traditional political system. Pressure groups increase political access points to democracy and allow people to involve themselves in the political debate. Participation is crucial for democracy and pressure groups act to extend and improve it.
Example: when the BLM protests were happening in over 150 locations, over £1 mill in donations was raised.
However: Influential pressure groups may distort information in their interests. Pressure groups are not accountable as politicians are, so can easily lie or mould information to suit them and then gain more followers.
Example: In 2016 Greenpeace published photos of a devastated forest claiming the damage was done by company ‘Resolute’, but the forest had actually been ruined in a fire.
2: Most of the time pressure groups are able to call the government to account, critiquing their responses to issues.
Example: In 2011, Greenpeace launched a campaign to stop harmful tuna fishing methods, led to government action in which they announced to provide clearer labelling on tuna products.
Example: Justice4Grenfell pushed for a public inquiry into Grenfell Tower fire, which then led to the publication of the effects of the policy.
However: Some pressure groups are elitist and concentrate power in the hands of too few people, wealthy pressure groups may have more unfair advantages when working with the government. Also, there are some insider pressure groups that have an unfair amount of power within government.
Example: NFU and BMA have been alleged to have used their insider status in an undemocratic manner.
3: Promote and protect interests of minority groups. Many believe that conventional politics doesn’t work in bringing about change or any results for minorities, so pressure groups represent the views of minorities and people who feel they aren’t listened to.
Example: Muslim Council of Britain provided evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee report on radicalisation to challenge misrepresentations of Islam.
Example: Howard League fights for better prison conditions for prison inmates.
Conclusion: Overall, pressure groups are ultimately good and supportive of democracy and participation.
Evaluate the view that think-tanks, lobbyists and pressure groups have little impact on government decisions.
Intro: There are two types of pressure groups: insider and outsider. Think tanks and lobbyists are insider pressure groups since they achieve their aims by intimately working with the government. In the UK, think tanks and lobbyists have influenced government decisions, but the role they play has been diminished as a result of public unease (in the case of lobbyists) and the general de-ideologization of established political parties (in the case of think tanks).
1: Thinktanks have made impact. They are made up of experts from different backgrounds who share the same political philosophy and organize in the form of a think tank to create various policies on other issues from a shared political standpoint. They have more time and expertise and may, thus, create consistent policies on several issues from a shared political standpoint.
Example: Iain Duncan Smith was the founder of the Center for Social Justice. Not only did his group have a great influence on the government, but he was late even appointed in 2004 as the Works and Pensions Secretary.
Thus, it could be said that think tanks not only have an increasing role to play in government policy, but their members may also end up as direct members of existing governments.
Many MPs are also involved with think tanks.
However: Their role is sometimes ineffective and relatively limited.
Example: Today, because the Conservatives hold most of the power, left-wing think tanks, such as the Fabian Society and the Institute for Public Policy Research, have almost no influence on government policies.
They are also quite removed from the actual legislative process, meaning they lack proper routed to enact any change in government.
2: Lobbying remains a large and active business with almost 2 billion pounds spent by corporations per year. Not only do these corporations seek, through lobby firms, to voice their concerns to the government, but so does the government consult with lobby firms to assess the impact legislation may have on key industries.
Example: The lobbying group Stonewall has enjoyed success. In 2001, under the Sexual Offences (Amendment), they forced the government to reduce the age of consent for homosexuals to 16, equal to that of heterosexuals. In 1999 they challenged the ban on gay people in the armed forces. They won and the government immediately suspended discharging homosexuals and within months changed the law.
Another way it can be seen that lobbyists do have significant impact, politicians have often switched between being in office and working as lobbyists for corporations (known as the ‘revolving door’).
Example: In 1996, 53% of MPs felt the lobby consultancies in general were ‘very’ or ‘quite effective’.
However: The government is often inclined to pursue its own interests of big decisions.
Example: whilst lobbyists such as Best for Britain aimed to persuade MPs to back a referendum on a Brexit deal, yet it still went ahead.
Moreover, The lack of transparency in the work of lobby firms has raised a red flag for the public. In 2014, the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act was passed, which mandated that all lobbying activities are registered. This could be seen to have put a check on lobby groups.
3: Pressure groups are seen to exert considerable amounts of influence on government decisions. Large public support and media attention can force the government into changing a decision or altering legislation if they want to remain in government the following election.
Example: An online petition, called the Save the Forests campaign, fought against the plan to sell public forests, and the government abandoned plans after 500,000 signed.
However: There is no binding element to pressure groups. There is no necessity for the government to follow the advice or wishes of these pressure groups.
Example: Despite being a large social movement, especially in 2020 where it was estimates 10 billion people attended protests and/or signed petitions, no real change was made. No new laws were passed and police brutality continued.
Conclusion: Overall, although there have been rare instances of think tanks, lobbyists and pressure groups having success and impacting government decisions, this is only a small amount. So it is fairer to argue that they only hold little impact and significance.
Evaluate the view that it is the media not pressure groups that has the greater influence on governments.
Intro:
1: The media’s power is more invasive and
further reaching than pressure groups. Media is constant and provides larger numbers to a cause.
Example: Both twitter and facebook create viral trends and movements that the public join, building a global audience
Example: Both the #MeToo movement and #BLM
Media’s global outreach ensures that its coverage and narratives impacts a large spectrum of individuals influencing governmental decisions across boarders.
However: Yet could be said that specialised pressure groups exert significant influence on governments policies and practices through targeted campaigns and lobbying efforts.
But, lack influence over gov if their views/motivations do not align with that of the majority gov.
Fails to enhance democracy as, if a pressure group represents a minority viewpoint, it is likely to be ignored by a government who seek electoral success
Example: COUNTRYSIDE ALLIANCE FAILS TO PREVENT PASSAGE OF 2004 HUNTING ACT
2: Newspapers/The Press are highly influential means of media for electorate. 48% of pubic believe the press are influential in their voting behaviour.
Example: ‘ITS THE SUN WOT DID IT’ 1992 CONS VICTORY.
THEN BACKED LABOUR IN 1997.
However: Whereas, pressure groups have few direct access points inside the political system, thus decreasing influence on gov. The only significant way to affect the government is by having insider access/privilege.
3: TV and TV Debates (the presidential station of UK Politics) are highly influential forms of media.
Example: 9.6 MILL WATCHED FIRST TELEVISED LEADERSHIP DEBATE IN 2010 - BOOSTED YOUGOV POLL RATINGS BY 30% FOR LIB DEMS.
INFLUENTIAL AMONG YOUNGER VOTERS, WITH 35% AGREEING LEADER DEBATES AND TV HAD INFLUENCE IN 2017.
However: It could be argued that pressure groups also only exert influence when they use media. Instead, E-petitions are a fast-growing form of participation, gaining greatly in popularity since official government petitions were introduced with the requirement that any petition gaining 10,000 signatures would receive a government response and any receiving 100,000 signatures would be considered for a parliamentary debate.
Example: in 2007, a plan for new charges on roads was debated yet was dropped after an E-petition received 1.8 million signatures.
Conclusion: media has more influence.
Using the source, evaluate the view that UK democracy is in crisis.
Intro: this is wrong and a misjudgement. The source poses arguments that political participation is decreasing, as is turnout and trust in politicians, as well as arguing the new political institutions have had little impact. The point regarding trust in politicians has slight merit however the others do not hold merit when examined in light of the evidence at hand.
1: Levels of trust in government and confidence in the political system are lower than they were a little more than a decade ago. This is important as it has encouraged a lack of faith in politicians as leaders. Democracy has suffered at the hands of this, as the close bond between MP and constituent has somewhat been corrupted.
Example: sleaze allegations.
However: The decline in trust and turnout is not due to long-term social forced, but to short-term political ones.
Thus with new governments and individuals in power, it is natural for these short term examples of ‘sleaze’ to fall into the background.
This is corroborated by the source, stating that ‘the remedies for any ‘crisis’ largely lie in the hands of the politicians themselves’- indicating it is not as widespread as the entire UK political system.
Media and the public generally scrutinise MPs and check their credibility.
2: Electoral turnout has fallen sharply, as seen by events such as the 2001 general election.
However: Yet, people are still engaged in politics, for example there is a great deal of political engagement and activity on social media.
Example: electoral turnout has improved steadily since 2001, In 2019 it was 67% indicating a strong recovery.
Example: The Scottish independence referendum in 2014 recorded 84.6% turnout, and an increase of 7.6% in voting from the first to the second referendums on the UK’s membership of the EEC/EU.
Also, people are now often engaged in pressure groups and e-petitions.
The claims of crisis are in accurate given the rising turnout. Intervention is not required, so the UK is not in ‘crisis’.
3: The introduction of new political institutions since 1997, designed in part to restore people’s trust and confidence, appears to have had little impact. Thus the attempted remedy has not worked and UK democracy is still suffering in a ‘crisis’.
However: But, the establishment of the Supreme Court in 2009 has strengthened the distance between the three branches of government: judiciary, executive and legislature. The is important for democracy as it enables the branches can scrutinise and check each other, preventing one branch from overriding the will of the people.
Conclusion: The UK is not in a democratic crisis.
Evaluate the extent to which compulsory voting and lowering the voting age may be
the best ways to improve participation in the UK.
1: Lowering the voting age
- widens franchise
Example: successful in Scottish Independence Referendum
turnout among younger voters increasing
However:
- over 18s may not be educated and susceptible to influence
- turnout among 18-24 year olds very low
- younger people may be more easily influenced by social media or older people.
2: Compulsory voting
- people would be forced to vote
- increase turnout
- encourage people to become educated which leads to other methods of participation e.g. pressure groups
- sabotages civil liberties a the right to vote also includes the right not to
- people would become irritated especially if their view isn’t heard as only the larger party would be favoured.
However:
- increase in spoilt ballots as a way to rebel or avoid consequences of not voting
- resented among population- basic right not to vote.
3: Reforming the voting system
- easier registration
- online voting
- voting at supermarkets or post offices
easier for people to vote- do not have to go out of their way and inconvenience themselves
- online voting could encourage young people to vote
However:
- long time to implement
- could be confusing
- online voting more susceptible to fraud
Evaluate the view that citizens can no longer feel confident that their rights in the UK are secure and established.
Intro: rights upheld relatively well, although, ultimately parliament is sovereign and can suspend or remove protections of rights.
1: One way that rights are secured in the UK is through the judiciary.
- constitutional reform act 2005- ensured independence from government- ministers have no influence over appointments and judges have security of tenure.
- ensures ECHR is upheld- can question government legislation by making a declaration of incompatibility
threat of this usually enough to ensure lawmakers do not contradict ECHR
Example: Belmarsh case, nine terrorist suspects held without trial in Belmarsh Prison were released on the grounds that the law on which their detention was based discriminated illegally between foreign nationals and UK subjects (2004).
However:
- parliament ultimately sovereign and can ignore declarations of incompatibility
- these declarations are also very rare, only three between 2010 and 2015 (total as of July 2022 was 46, 10 overturned on appeal)
- ministers can have some influence over appointments
- judges cannot overturn legislation
2: The ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) is also a form that protects rights.
- gov can create legislation to overrule rulings made by ECHR e.g. prevention of terrorism act 2005
- gov can ignore rulings of ECHR
- gov can pull Britain out of agreement
However:
- it successfully entrenches human rights
- successful in overruling government in most cases
3: The Human Rights Act also secures rights.
- not strictly binding on parliament- can be repealed at any time
- individual rights in HRA can be suspended in favour of collective rights e.g. Anjem Choudary
- members of Conservative party advocate for replacing HRA with a British Bill of Rights (has become a more well-known idea with Rishi Sunak currently)
However:
- the act entrenches ECHR- rights therefore protected in law
- rights safeguarded as terms set by an external body
Evaluate the view that the actions of pressure groups have been more significant than gov legislation in defending and promoting rights in the UK.
