democracy and participation Flashcards

Question

How convincing are proposals for the reform of UK democracy? - Reform of the Westminster electoral system

Answer 1

Critics of FPTP claim that it discourages voting because it limits voter choice by over-rewarding the Labour and Conservative parties, making it much more difficult for other parties to gain representation. The replacement of FPTP with a proportional form of election would create a fairer connection between the votes a party receives and its representation in Parliament. If ‘wasted votes’ and ‘safe seats’ were eliminated, votes would carry more weight and voters would have a greater incentive to vote. - In the 2011 additional vote (AV) referendum, a large majority (67.9%) voted in favour of not replacing FPTP with AV. - The parliaments in Wales and Scotland are elected by the additional member system (AMS), which is a type of proportional representation. However, their voter turnouts suggest that the introduction of proportional representation will not necessarily provide an effective remedy.

Answer 2

In order to improve government’s legitimacy, 16 nation states enforce compulsory voting, although one of these is North Korea where only one name appears on the ballot. - The first country to introduce compulsory voting was Belgium, in 1893. It is an accepted part of Belgian life and in the 2019 federal election turnout was 90%. - Australia has required citizens to vote in national elections since 1924. In its 2019 federal elections, 92% of those eligible voted. Supporters of compulsory voting argue that when a high percentage of the electorate engage in the democratic process, a government’s mandate is significantly enhanced. Compulsory voting would address the decreasing voter turnout in the UK. Voters would be forced to engage with their civic responsibilities, encouraging a more politically educated and participatory democracy. However, compulsory voting is also highly controversial since critics claim that it gives the state too much power to coerce its citizens. According to some activists, the decision not to engage at any level with the voting process represents a powerful political statement of disapproval. Forcing people to vote also fails to address the reasons why people may choose not to vote. Although compulsory voting would increase voter turnout, critics respond that the extra votes might not necessarily be informed ones. This could degrade rather than enhance the outcome. Indeed, being compelled to vote might even reduce popular enthusiasm for the democratic process by making it seem oppressive. Most attempts to increase voter participation focus on the electorate as a whole. A closer inspection of the evidence reveals that lack of participation is primarily found among younger voters and lower social groupings (D and E). In the 2019 general election, for example, Ipsos MORI suggested that just 47% of 18–24-year-olds voted compared with a 74% turnout by those aged over 65. Political disaffection is also most common among less prosperous and marginalised social groups in deprived areas. In the 2019 general election, for example, the 30 constituencies with the highest turnout in the UK had much higher house prices and more university graduates living there than the 30 constituencies with the lowest turnout (Table 1.10). Attempts to encourage political participation should focus on the reasons why younger people and poorer people feel less connected with the political process.

Answer 3

yes * Political apathy is a problem in many liberal democracies. In the 2019 UK general election, turnout was 67.3% (in 1992 it had been 77.7%). Limited numbers of people voting can undermine the legitimacy of the result, especially if turnout falls beneath 50% . higher turnout would legitimise the poistion of parliemt. no in 2018, the Hansard Society estimated that 83% of higher (A/B) social groups were prepared to participate in politics, compared with 41% for less prosperous (D/E) social groups. Pupils eligible for free school meals are much less likely than other pupils to go into higher education, meaning your social class often reflects on you education. The votes of politically disengaged citizens will carry less weight than the votes of those who take their civic responsibilities seriously. Random voting could undermine the legitimacy of the result ------------------------------------------------------------ * The legal requirement to vote can have an importanteducative role. If people are required to vote, they will be more likely to inform themselves of the political choices open to them. no Not voting can be a positive decision to register dissatisfaction with the candidates or the process. Only 33.2% of the electorate voted for police commissioners in 2021, which may indicate that voters regard the post as insignificant. Forcing the public to vote for a choice they disagree with is an infringement of civic rights. ------------------------------------------------------------ * Compulsory voting does not have to force people to make a choice. In Australia, for example, the voter can spoil their ballot if none of the candidates appeals to them. They must, though, attend a polling station - this could register the publcis dissatisfaction with the politcians, wich is better than political opinions being unknown * The extension of the power of the state over the individual ought to be resisted since it limits our right to act in the way we wish. The British state has traditionally intervened as little as possible in the liberties of its citizens. National Citizen Service, for example, is voluntary. many argue that soverignity lies with the public, introudcing legilsation taht the public is not happy with could lead to outrage leading to overturning taht law.

Answer 4

Although the UK elects the Westminster Parliament on the principle of universal suffrage, there are still some sections of society who are denied the vote. Some of these are uncontroversial, such as members of the House of Lords who, as members of the legislature, already have their interests represented. Those declared mentally incapacitated are also barred from voting.

Answer 5

Support for lowering the voting age to 16 has significantly increased in recent years. The Votes at 16 Coalition was established in 2003 to bring together groups such as the National Union of Students and the BritishnYouth Council to campaign for a lowering of the voting age. In the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, 16- and 17-year- olds were allowed to vote. 16- and 17-year-olds can also vote in elections for the parliaments in Scotland and Wales. The Labour and Liberal Democrat parties endorse voting at 16, leaving the Conservatives as the only leading party opposed to this reform. The tactics of the Votes at 16 Coalition are twofold: 1 In order to generate mass enthusiasm for reducing the voting age to 16 it is important to win as much positive publicity as possible. Given young people’s active engagement on social media, Votes at 16 has established a major presence online. It also encourages school and college debates and its memorable slogan, ‘Engage, empower, inspire’, provides the movement with a coherent and powerful message of change. 2 Votes at 16 also seeks the endorsement of MPs and members of the House of Lords and lists on its website the names of all MPs and Lords who back the campaign, to show there is high-profile support for change. Although a significant number of MPs support lowering the age of voting, Jim McMahon’s Private Member’s Bill (2017–19) to lower the voting age failed because of lack of parliamentary time. The success of Votes at 16 is likely to depend on the election of a Labour government or a change of policy by the Conservative Party. The latter is unlikely because younger people are generally more left-leaning so there is no incentive for a Conservative government to support a change in the law.

Answer 6

yes * At age 16, young people can exercise significant responsibility: they can engage in sexual relations, marry, pay tax and national insurance and join the armed services, so it is irrational that they are regarded as not mature enough to vote. ‘That is the ridiculous situation we are in: we ask young people to pay tax to a government who spend it on the health service or going to war, but they do not have the ability to influence that government’ (David Linden MP) no Some of the claims about what people can do at age 16 are misleading. Parental permission is needed to join the army at 16 or 17 and, apart from in Scotland, parental permission is required to marry before 18 Young people are not regarded as responsible enough to be able to buy alcohol or cigarettes themselves until the age of 18, so it is disingenuous to claim that 16- and 17-year-olds are capable of exercising all adult responsibilities yes * The 2014 Scottish independence referendum demonstrated huge engagement by 16- and 17-year- olds. 75% of this age group voted and, according to Ruth Davidson, former leader of the Scottish Conservatives, ‘The democratic effect turned out to be entirely positive’. no * Voting turnout among 18–24-year-olds is lower than in other age groups, so allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote could actually compound the problem of youth apathy. The Isle of Man enfranchised 16- and 17-year-olds in 2006. In every election since then voter turnout among this age group has decreased: – 2006: 55.3% – 2011: 54.1% – 2016: 46.2% – 2021: 46% --------------- * Since 16- and 17-year-olds can vote for the Scottish and Welsh parliaments it is illogical that they cannot vote for the Westminster Parliament. ‘For our United Kingdom to be truly united ... we must have democratic equality’ (Jim McMahon MP). no * Although Scotland and Wales have reduced the voting age to 16, this does not mean it is the right thing to do. Very few countries allow voting at 16, so the UK is within the political mainstream by granting the franchise at 18. only 10 out of 230, officalluy allowe voting at 16 for officail seperate govrments, this is not including scotalnd and wales since they do not have one seperate goveremnt. ALSO : * We should beware of imposing adult responsibilities on children. According to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, children have the right to be treated as such. UK soldiers below the age of 18 cannot serve in combat because if they did, the UK could be accused of using ‘child soldiers’. Providing 16- and 17-year-olds with the right to vote would mean they should logically be able to engage in all adult activities, which conflicts with their rights as children

Answer 7

In the UK, prisoners are not entitled to vote. This is because they are regarded as having renounced the rights of citizenship for the duration of the time that they are incarcerated. - The question of whether prisoners are being denied a fundamental human right gained some publicity in two cases brought by John Hirst against the British government. Hirst’s claim, that although he was in prison he should be allowed to vote, was dismissed by the courts in 2001. However, in 2004 the European Court of Human Rights declared that the blanket ban on prisoner voting was contrary to Article 3 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights, which ‘provides for the right to elections performed by secret ballot, that are also free and that occur at regular intervals’. The British government was, therefore, in defiance of the European Convention on Human Rights. - Pressure groups such as Liberty and the Howard League for Penal Reform support prisoner voting. However, unlike voting at 16, there has been very little public pressure for a change in this law. When the issue was debated in the House of Commons in 2011 it also gained cross-party condemnation, with 234 MPs against prisoner voting and only 22 in favour. The Hirst cases raised significant issues concerning the extent to which the British government can act in defiance of the European Court of Human Rights. Since 2004 this had been a constant source of friction with the court and so, in 2017, the government offered to allow the small numbers of prisoners on day release the right to vote to resolve the problem. Scotland allows prisoners serving sentence shorter than 12 months to vote for the Scottish Parliament and in local elections. These concessions have generated little public interest, which suggests that extending to prisoners serving longer sentences is unlikely to generate enough public enthusiasm for the law to be changed. The public and their representatives agree that people who have been convicted of serious crimes have broken their contract with society and should be deprived of the rights of citizenship.

Answer 8

The development of Britain as a democratic nation state can be traced far back into history. Some historians have claimed that the Anglo-Saxon witan, an assembly of aristocrats who advised their ruler, represented a rudimentary form of democracy. More commonly, the origins of democracy are associated with King John (1199– 1216) being forced by his barons to sign Magna Carta (1215). Although the barons were mostly interested in protecting their own powers from the King, they also inserted a number of clauses to protect the rights of all freeborn Englishmen from the arbitrary rule of the monarch. The three most iconic clauses in Magna Carta state that: ‘In future no official shall place a man on trial upon his own unsupported statement, without producing credible witnesses to the truth of it.’ (Paragraph 38) ‘No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.’ (Paragraph 39) ‘To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.’ (Paragraph 40) Throughout the medieval period, Parliament acquired the right to grant money to the Crown since it represented the nation’s property holders, and Henry VIII (1509–47) used Parliament to provide his takeover of the English Church with legal validity. However, it was not until the early seventeenth century that Parliament began to assert the right to protect the liberties of the English people against the increasingly autocratic Stuart monarchy. Edward Coke, the chief justice of James I (1603–25), laid down in the Petition of Right (1628) the principle that the Crown is not above the law, and during the English Civil War, Parliament asserted its right to be the primary lawmaker against Charles I’s belief in the ‘divine right’ of the King to rule alone. The violence and instability of the Civil War unleashed new democratic movements such as the Levellers, who stated that all men had the same right to elect their government, but such radical ideas were stamped out during the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell (1653–58), who proved almost as unwilling as Charles I to accept the will of Parliament. Although Charles II accepted the Crown at the Restoration in 1660, his brother James II was suspected of trying to rule as a tyrant. Consequently, in the Glorious Revolution of 1688, James was overthrown and Parliament invited William of Orange to become King of England. William III’s agreement that he would cooperate with Parliament on the Bill of Rights (1689) is a key moment in the development of Britain’s constitutional monarchy. However, Parliament remained the preserve of the rich and powerful, and it was only in the nineteenth century that a number of acts of parliamentary reform gradually opened up the franchise. The Great Reform Act of 1832 enfranchised some members of the middle classes, while the Reform Acts 1867 and 1884 increasingly opened the vote to working-class householders in the boroughs and then the counties. In 1872, the Ballot Act made voting in secret compulsory, so protecting citizens’ right to vote in any way they wished. The Reform Acts of the nineteenth century had all been based on the principle that the right to vote depended on the ownership of property. Property owners had a stake in society and had thus ‘earned’ the right to vote. The principle of ‘one person, one vote’ was alien to these reformers and by the beginning of the twentieth century 40% of adult males could still not vote, as well as, of course, all women.

Answer 9

The suffragists, suffragettes, and the First World War Political reform has often been driven by popular pressure. In 1897 the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies (NUWSS), also known as the suffragists, was established by Millicent Fawcett to lobby Parliament to extend the franchise to women. The efforts of the suffragists were not sufficient for more militant women. In 1903 Emmeline Pankhurst established the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) under the slogan ‘deeds not words’. The suffragettes, as they were known, engaged in much more disruptive and even violent action to draw attention to their cause. When imprisoned, some went on hunger strike and in 1913 one suffragette, Emily Davison, was killed when she tried to run in front of the King’s horse in the Derby. At the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, the suffragettes suspended their activities. However, the sacrifices that both men and women made during the war changed the political atmosphere. Women performed vital war work in factories, and 80,000 served as non-combatants in the armed forces. In 1916 male conscription was introduced and almost 750,000 men were killed in combat. In 1918, in recognition of this, the Representation of the People Act allowed all men aged 21 and over, and women aged 30 and over who fulfilled a property qualification, to vote in general elections. As a result of age and other restrictions, only 40% of women got the vote in 1918, and they were almost entirely white and middle class. In 1928, a further Representation of the People Act extended the vote to men and women aged 21 and over, establishing universal suffrage.

Answer 10

In 1969 a third Representation of the People Act lowered the voting age from 21 to 18. This was in recognition of the new opportunities for and responsibilities of young people. The extension of university education, greater sexual freedom provided by easier access to contraception, and the increased earning potential of young people all made lowering the voting age to 18 relatively uncontroversial.

Answer 11

The UK is a pluralist democracy, which means that political power and influence are widely distributed so that different groups can compete to sway the government in their favour. In addition to voting in elections, members of the public can participate in the political process by supporting pressure groups and wider social movements, engaging in direct action or joining online campaigns. Think-tanks, corporations, charities, lobbying firms, professional bodies and religious movements can also put pressure on the government to act in a certain way. Table 1.11 explains how pressure groups are categorised.

Answer 12

Sectional/interest - Sectional pressure groups represent the interests of a particular group within society. For example, the Muslim Council of Britain specifically represents the interests of British Muslims and the National Union of Students (NUS) represents the interests of students. They therefore lobby government on behalf of these clearly defined social groups Cause/promotional - Cause pressure groups promote a particular issue. Pressure groups such as Friends of the Earth and Liberty, which campaigns on behalf of civil liberties in the UK, are cause pressure groups because their members are united by their shared interest in a specific cause. Members of these groups can be drawn from across society Insider - An insider pressure group has privileged access to government decision making. The British Medical Association represents doctors and so possesses specialist information that governments will wish to consult. The Howard League for Penal Reform is an impartial organisation that can supply the Home Office with important information concerning prison reform, policing and youth crime Outsider - Outsider pressure groups do not possess access to political decision making and may even be unprepared to work within existing political structures that they see as hopelessly compromised. A good example of this is Extinction Rebellion, which has carried out several disruptive high-profile protests to achieve public recognition

Answer 13

Insider status can be vital in the success of a pressure group. If political decision makers consider that it is to their advantage to consult with a pressure group, then the group’s influence will be guaranteed. As a result of their specialist knowledge, groups such as the British Medical Association (BMA), the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) and the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) can all be called upon to supply governments with specialised information to help them reach informed decisions. Whether a pressure group can claim insider status can also be determined by political circumstances. In the 1970s, trade unions in Britain were so powerful that Jack Jones, the general secretary of the Transport and General Workers’ Union (TGWU), was once called ‘the most powerful man in Britain’ for the influence he wielded with prime ministers. The interests of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) remain closely aligned with those of the Labour Party, so they are much more likely to exert influence under a Labour government. Conversely, pressure groups that represent big business, such as the Institute of Directors, or those that endorse tax cuts and small government, such as the TaxPayers’ Alliance, are generally more influential under Conservative governments. Given the growing significance of environmental issues, contemporary politicians have become more likely to consult environmental groups for specialist information. The House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee regularly consults with the Green Alliance, which provides advice on environmental protection. Similarly, the developing consensus in favour of LGBTQ+ rights has provided pressure groups such as the LGBT Foundation with increased influence within government, though trans people are still more marginalised. In 2021, for example, the Scottish government announced that it was consulting with LGBTQ+ groups over its plans to ban conversion therapy by 2023.

Answer 14

Wealthy pressure groups will have the financial resources to employ researchers, operate offices close to important points of government access and arrange meetings with members of parliament. The CBI represents 190,000 UK businesses employing nearly 7 million people. Its considerable wealth enables it to employ more than 100 policy researchers. The Institute of Directors, representing business leaders and entrepreneurs, is also very wealthy, enabling it to operate offices in 12 regions across the UK and the Isle of Man and Guernsey. Wealth does not guarantee success if a group’s interests do not coincide with those of the government. However, it does provide a pressure group with a powerful voice among decision makers.

Answer 15

Social media provide new opportunities for pressure groups to engage with the public. Groups such as Amnesty International, Oxfam and Friends of the Earth appreciate the importance of having a considerable influence online since this is where people increasingly access and spread ideas. Platforms like Facebook and Twitter and hashtag campaigns provide a valuable way of keeping the public informed of a pressure group’s activities while their websites usually provide opportunities to donate and sign online petitions, as well as giving up-to-date information on getting involved in national and regional campaigns. This way of mobilising public support has been called a ‘clickocracy’, since the internet enables the public to engage with pressure groups purely online. 38 Degrees, for example, was established in 2009 and provides a forum for its members to quickly choose and launch their own online campaigns. Its slogan is ‘People, Power, Change’ and it can focus public attention on local issues such as protecting green spaces or on national campaigns such as encouraging the government to introduce a drinks-container recycling scheme.

Answer 16

If a pressure group is connected to a famous name this will help it achieve popular recognition. One of the reasons why Live Aid (1985) and Live Eight (2005) were so successful was because they were very closely associated with the singer-songwriter Bob Geldof. In 2009, actress Joanna Lumley vocally supported the campaign for Gurkhas to be granted full rights of residency in the UK. Today actor and writer Stephen Fry provides a public face for the Mind mental health campaign for LGBTQ+ rights. Marcus Rashford has made use of his celebrity status as a professional footballer to campaign for all school children in households accessing universal credit to have free school meals.

Answer 17

Direct action Some pressure groups can choose to engage in civil disobedience to achieve their aims. This is a risky strategy, but it can create immediate publicity and even give rise to so much disruption that the government decides to back down or negotiate. In 1867, riots in Hyde Park demanding the extension of the franchise quickened the pace of parliamentary reform. In March 1990, the extraordinary violence of the poll tax riots in Trafalgar Square further undermined an already weakened Margaret Thatcher, contributing to her resignation in November and to her successor, John Major, swiftly abandoning the tax. However, the extent to which direct and disruptive action by movements like Extinction Rebellion and Black Lives Matter has furthered their aims is less certain. Trade unions can deploy industrial action such as limits on overtime and strikes. The extent to which they are successful depends not only on the disruptions they cause but also the strength of a government to withstand them. For example, the fact that most of British energy derived from coal in the 1970s gave the National Union of Miners (NUM) such huge coercive power that to end an NUM strike in 1972 the Heath government awarded miners a 21% increase in pay settlement. Given the decline in trade union membership, the coercive power of trade unions is significantly less than it was. However, industrial action can still be successful. In 2021, refuse workers in Glasgow achieved maximum publicity and disruption for their cause by having their eight-day strike coincide with the COP26 conference. During the Christmas period in 2022, rail and postal strikes together with the biggest strike by nurses in the history of the NHS were responsible for widespread disruption, demonstrating the continued significance of industrial action.

Answer 18

Motoring organisations and smart motorways - The Automobile Association (AA) and the Royal Automobile Club (RAC) were both highly critical of the Johnson government’s plans to introduce smart motorways. These are motorways on which the hard shoulder is removed to increase capacity. It is replaced with refugee areas (no more than 1.6 miles apart), which drivers should head for. According to both organisations, smart motorways significantly increased the risk to drivers. Campaign strategy and why it succeeded The tactics they deployed made the most of their professional expertise and insider status to directly influence policy making. In 2021, the RAC’s report on motoring survey showed that 54% of drivers believed that smart motorways made them less safe. According to the AA, smart motorways could leave stranded cars like ‘sitting ducks’. In 2021, the AA and the RAC, together with West Midlands police and Highways England, provided specialist evidence to the Transport Select Committee. On the recommendation of the committee, the government decided to delay building new smart highways for 5 years while their safety implications were assessed Marcus Rashford and free school meals When schools closed during the 2020 lockdown, children on free school meals were deprived of this provision. This naturally put an added financial burden on the poorest families. Manchester United footballer Marcus Rashford, whose mother had struggled to provide for him as a child, empathised with their plight Campaign strategy and why it succeeded Rashford determined to use his celebrity status to take action on behalf of these families. He worked closely with the charity FareShare to provide free meals and used his Twitter account to advertise businesses that were offering free meals. This generated considerable favourable publicity, which Rashford followed with an e-petition, ‘End child food poverty – no child should be going hungry’, signed by 1.1 million people. Pictures of Rashford with his mother sorting food parcels generated further positive coverage. As Rashford’s campaign gathered momentum, a growing number of Conservative MPs were also becoming highly critical of the prime minister. Consequently, in a series of climb-downs, the government announced that it would provide a £120 million ‘Covid summer food fund’ and a £170 million ‘Covid winter grant scheme’ for vulnerable families

Answer 19

A useful mnemonic to understand the factors that contribute to pressure group success is RIPE: l Resources l Ideological compatibility with the government l Popularity l Expertise A pressure group does not have to fulfil all these criteria to be successful. However, it will have to demonstrate at least one of them if it is to achieve its objectives. For example, the expertise of the BMA gives it guaranteed insider status under any government, while the considerable financial resources of the Conservative and Labour Friends of Israel enable them to cultivate influence at Westminster. The popularity of the Gurkha Justice Campaign persuaded the Brown government to provide all Gurkhas with the automatic right of British residency. The TaxPayers’ Alliance was particularly influential during the coalition government (2010–15) because its commitment to cutting public spending reflected the austerity measures of the chancellor of the exchequer, George Osborne. However, if a pressure group does not fulfil any of these criteria, then it is unlikely to be successful. Plane Stupid has opposed a third runway at Heathrow and Stop HS2 opposes the new high-speed rail link between Birmingham and London, but both have failed because they have not been able to persuade the government that they have a powerful enough case or significant enough support. The pressure group Life, which advocates limiting abortion rights, lacks the popular support and insider status necessary to achieve success.

Answer 20

Stop HS2 * In response to the decision to build a high-speed rail link between London and Birmingham, Stop HS2 was established in 2010. * Stop HS2 has organised several high-profile demonstrations and has cultivated cross-party support from several MPs whose constituencies are impacted by the project. * However, Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrats all support the construction of HS2. In 2013, MPs voted 399 to 42 in favour of building the first stage of the route. The vote in the House of Lords was 386 in favour and 26 against. * In 2020, an e-petition demanding a new parliamentary vote on repealing the HS2 legislation gained 155,253 signatures. However, strong parliamentary support for the London–Birmingham phase of HS2 has meant that the government could ignore calls for it to be scrapped. Stop the War Coalition * The Stop the War Coalition was founded in 2001 in response to the ‘war on terror’. As the Blair government prepared to invade Iraq, it organised the biggest demonstration in British history, in which as many as 1 million people marched through London to protest the war. * However, although the march was peaceful and made a powerful impact on the public, Blair remained ideologically committed to the invasion. His large parliamentary majority and the support of most of the Conservative Party also meant that when the House of Commons voted on military intervention in Iraq, he had a 179-vote majority. Therefore, Blair was safely able to ignore the protests and preparations for war continued. * The Stop the War Coalition continues to campaign against British military interventions. However, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has further reduced its influence, with Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer stridently condemning the Stop the War Coalition and demanding that Labour MPs completely disassociate themselves from it.

Answer 21

In 2020, in the United States the murder during police custody of George Floyd generated global outrage. In the UK, this led to several large Black Lives Matter protests during the summer of 2020, including the dramatic toppling in Bristol of a statue of Edward Colston, an investor in charitable works in Bristol whose considerable wealth derived from the slave trade. The act of ‘taking the knee’ is also closely associated with Black Lives Matter and during Euro 2020 (played in 2021), the England team ‘took the knee’ before each match to show their solidarity against racism. The passion, energy and enthusiasm of Black Lives Matter protests and demonstrations generated a powerful debate in the UK about the need to re-examine Britain’s colonial past, the pervasiveness of racism and the extent to which it is still tolerated. As a result, the Johnson government established a new commission on racial inequality and several companies, schools and colleges released statements condemning racism. In Bristol the Colston Hall changed its name to the Bristol Beacon and Colston’s Girls’ School became Montpelier High School. The government of Wales also announced that from 2022, it would be mandatory for Welsh schools to teach the history of ‘Black, Asian and minority ethnic people’. However, some still opposed BLM. From March 2020 to March 2021, racially motivated crimes increased by 12%, to their highest-ever level, while the then home secretary, Priti Patel, condemned ‘taking the knee’ as gesture politics and accused protestors who toppled and defaced statues of vandalism. While Black Lives Matter builds on a history of organising against racism and has encouraged the UK to confront the uncomfortable reality of ongoing racism, whether it has achieved the consensus necessary for real progress is more contentious.

Answer 22

The mental health charity Mind is committed to improving access to mental health treatment and helping those who suffer from mental health issues and those who care for them. Mind organises high-profile fundraising and awareness-raising events to put pressure on governments to support those with mental health issues. Its campaigns include #FundTheHubs to ensure anyone aged 11–25 can access mental health support when they require it. Mind also works closely with schools and colleges, helping those with mental health issues to appreciate that they are not alone and there is support they can access. One of Mind’s key campaign strategies is to use celebrity ambassadors to encourage outreach and a more open discussion of mental health. These include its president, Stephen Fry, and a wide variety of ambassadors such as the political strategist and writer Alastair Campbell, the comedian Ruby Wax and the singer-songwriter George Ezra. Mind works closely with MPs and peers, produces detailed responses to government legislation and is regularly consulted by the Health Select Committee. Mind shows how a pressure group can deploy a variety of effective strategies to achieve its objectives.

Answer 23

Pressure groups are not the only organisations that exert influence on government. Think-tanks are made up of experts in a particular field who produce ideas that can form the basis for government policy making. Some of them are closely associated with a particular political ideology that helps them to achieve insider status. For example, the Fabian Society is a centre-left think-tank whose reports enjoy a wide readership within the Labour Party. Its influence has also increased under Sir Keir Starmer because he is more open to its ‘soft left’ ideology than was his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn. On the right, free-market think-tanks, like the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Centre for Policy Studies, encourage a free-market/small state ideology, which is highly attractive within the Conservative Party. Not all think-tanks take an ideological stance. Chatham House provides highly respected impartial analysis of global politics, which politicians consult, and Demos is a cross-party think-tank specialising in the development of social policy. Such groups contribute useful insights and ideas to the political debate and so play an important part in the political process. The TaxPayers’ Alliance was established in 2004 to encourage small government and lower taxes. Its research papers and advice were particularly valued by David Cameron and George Osborne and its ideas were used to underpin the austerity programme of the coalition government (2010–15). Its Euroscepticism has also afforded it significant influence within the Conservative Party. However, think- tanks do not wield complete influence. Politicians decide whether they are going to accept their ideas and advice. The Johnson and Sunak governments’ readiness to engage in large-scale government projects at the cost of higher taxes went against the advice of the TaxPayers’ Alliance. This suggests the claims that think- tanks wield too much influence are exaggerated. They may have insider status, but whether their advice is taken will always depend on the ideological convictions of the party leadership. More controversially, major corporations and lobbying firms seek to influence decision making by cultivating links with politicians. Powerful companies, such as Apple, Facebook, Coca-Cola and Google, as well as the major interests such as banking, digital and media, all try to be as closely involved as possible in the decision-making process to advance their interests. In 2022, Meta, the owner of Facebook, appointed the former deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, as president of global affairs. Clegg’s insider understanding of politics made him a powerful force when representing Facebook in its dealings with governments. In the same way, the Church of England, academic bodies such as universities, and the Office of Fair Trading (which protects the rights of consumers) also seek to influence political debates in their favour. Lobbying firms can also represent the interests of groups in society who are prepared to pay for their services. They have thus been criticised for enabling powerful interests to try to buy influence. In a notorious case in 2010, three former Labour ministers, Stephen Byers, Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt, were suspended from the parliamentary Labour Party when investigative journalists offered them the opportunity to work for a fake consultancy firm for £5,000 a day and they accepted. In 2021, David Cameron was criticised by the Treasury Select Committee ‘for a significant lack of judgement’ after he utilised his government contacts when lobbying on behalf of financial services company Greensill Capital. Lobbyists respond that they are being unfairly criticised for a small number of scandals. In most cases they simply open up lines of communication between Members of Parliament and groups that want to make their case. They are necessary to democracy because they broaden the debate so that all sides are heard. Two examples may illustrate this: l The Raptor Alliance, which represents pigeon fanciers, is a tiny organisation whose members argue that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has been so successful in protecting birds of prey that they are now killing off racing pigeons. Unable to gain public recognition, lobbyists made their cause known in Parliament by encouraging the establishment of an All-Party Parliamentary Group for Pigeon Racing and in 2018 organised the first Lords versus Commons pigeon race since 1928. During Prime Minister’s Questions, Theresa May even agreed to sponsor a bird. l Lobbyists have also put forward the interests of gin drinkers. Since the Gin Act 1751, small-scale production had been forbidden to stop bootlegging. However, in 2008 lobbyists succeeded in having the Gin Act repealed and now boutique gin is becoming one of the UK’s most enterprising new exports.

Answer 24

yes Powerful businesses can employ high-profile figures to represent their interests. Since 2022, Sir Nick Clegg has been president of Facebook’s global affairs - * If the government’s views are incompatible, then wealth is unlikely to achieve influence. The TaxPayers’ Alliance was unable to stop the high spending of the Johnson government * Pressure groups can achieve insider status (Mind/the Howard League for Penal Reform) without significant financial resources if the government shares similar objectives ------ * Wealthy pressure groups like Friends of the Earth and Oxfam can commission reports that can be used to influence government policy * Social movements such as Everyone’s Invited and Black Lives Matter can encourage change without financial resources ---------- * The wealth of the Confederation of British Industry and Institute of Directors enables them to staff offices close to important centres of power no * Celebrity endorsement can be more important than wealth (e.g. Marcus Rashford and free school meals)

Answer 25

Civil rights encompass the rights that individuals and the public are all entitled to. Individual rights are rights such as the right to privacy and freedom of expression, which all individuals can claim. Collective rights are those which society can claim such as the right to be protected from violence, the right to a clean environment or the right to roam the countryside. Since the UK does not possess a codified constitution, the rights of British citizens have been determined and protected through constitutionally significant landmark events such as the signing of Magna Carta. In addition, judges have defined the nature of our civil rights in important common law cases, setting a judicial precedent to be followed in future disputes. Specific Acts of Parliament have further developed the rights that UK citizens enjoy. Therefore, the rights of the British public have traditionally been negative or residual rights. This means everything that is not expressly forbidden belongs to our rights, which means that they are not set out in one single document. Instead, they derive from our rights as citizens and key constitutional decisions and important case law such as the following: l Magna Carta 1215 This provides the foundation for British civil liberties by stating that the law should be impartial and that no free man should be convicted of a crime unless he has been fairly tried. l Bill of Rights 1689 By accepting the Bill of Rights, William III agreed to govern with the consent of Parliament, thereby establishing the principle of a constitutional monarchy bound by the law. Knowledge check 48 Define civil liberties. 49 What are negative rights? 50 What is the date of the Bill of Rights? 51 Which act established universal suffrage in the UK? l Somerset v Stewart (1772) Lord Mansfield stated that slavery within the UK was illegal since it had not been legislated for by an Act of Parliament and was unsupported by the common law. In his judgment he stated, ‘It is so odious, that nothing can be suffered to support it, but positive law.’ This far-reaching decision set the precedent for the elimination of slavery within Britain. l Entick v Carrington (1765) In a case involving trespass, Lord Camden lay down the principle that government officials ‘cannot exercise public power unless such exercise of it is authorised by some specific rule of law’. In short, the government can only act according to the law protecting the rights of citizens from despotic rule. l Representation of the People Act 1928 This established the principle of universal suffrage in the United Kingdom.

Answer 26

Since Tony Blair became prime minister in 1997, the approach towards British civil liberties has changed. Instead of primarily relying on common law decisions and constitutional conventions, there has been a greater emphasis on the codification of what the positive rights of British citizens are.

Answer 27

Although the UK was fully involved in the drafting of the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950, it did not accept that the convention would be binding on British courts. However, in 1998 the Human Rights Act was passed, which incorporates the European Convention fully into British law. The Act entered into force in 2000. As a result, British citizens now possess a clear statement of their civil liberties, which is enforceable in British courts. Before the Human Rights Act came into force, UK civil liberties were grounded in specific statute and case law. This meant that the rights that British citizens could claim were not widely known or understood. The Human Rights Act is significant because it clearly establishes the positive rights that we are all equally eligible for, such as the right to life and the right to a fair hearing.

Answer 28

This established a ‘right of access’ to information held by public bodies so long as it does not compromise national security. The Act, which came into force in 2005, provides the public with the opportunity to know more about the way in which public bodies such as the National Health Service operate, as well as being able to access information held about them. The MPs’ expenses scandal in 2009 was exposed because journalists were able to demand access to this information through the Freedom of Information Act.

Answer 29

Although several Acts of Parliament have legislated in favour of equality, such as various Race Relations Acts and the Equal Pay Act 1970, it was not until the Equality Act 2010 that an Act of Parliament established equality before the law for all citizens. This Act consolidates existing legislation and states that in public life, discrimination is illegal in nine recognised areas: l age l disability l gender reassignment l race l religion or belief l sex l sexual orientation l marriage and civil partnership l pregnancy and maternity.

Answer 30

As well as having rights, citizens have responsibilities that can be enforced by law, such as paying taxes and serving on a jury. Other responsibilities are not legally enforceable, such as voting, but they are expected of citizens. The public does not have the right to act in whatever way it wants and freedoms can be restricted if the government decides that these are likely to endanger the collective good of society. This is most likely to happen when there is a threat to national security. l The Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001 gave the government the legal power to imprison foreign terrorist suspects indefinitely without trial. l In 2005, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act limited the right of protest outside Parliament and created a new offence of inciting religious hatred. l The Terrorism Act 2006 extended the time for which terrorist suspects can be held without charge to 28 days and made ‘glorifying terrorism’ a crime. l In 2016, Parliament passed the Investigatory Powers Act, which authorises the retention of personal electronic data and its access for law enforcement. l In 2020, Ed Bridges and the pressure group Liberty brought a case against South Wales Police over whether it could use automatic facial recognition technology. In its judgment, the Court of Appeal ruled that more care should be taken in how the technology is used. However, the benefits to society are ‘potentially great’ and the threat to the individual’s privacy ‘minor’. l The Johnson government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 is designed to limit the impact of public protests and has thus generated significant opposition from civil liberties groups. l In the Queen’s Speech (2022) the Johnson government controversially committed to introducing a British bill of rights, replacing certain elements of the Human Rights Act, so that ‘there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government, strengthening freedom of speech’. l In 2022, the Johnson government controversially introduced a policy to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda rather than allow them to claim asylum in the UK. Designed to stem the flow of cross-Channel refugees and deter people-trafficking, the policy was condemned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, as ‘subcontracting our responsibilities’.

Answer 31

There is naturally going to be tension between our rights as individuals and the need to protect the collective rights of society, and so governments need to balance the needs of both. Especially since the terrorist attacks on New York, the Iraq War and the rise of extremist terrorist groups, several civil liberties groups, such as Liberty, have argued that the balance has shifted too far away from the individual to the government and that this has led to the erosion of individual civil liberties.

Answer 32

l In 2004, senior judges declared that the way in which international terrorist suspects were being held by the government was ‘discriminatory’ according to the European Convention on Human Rights. In the face of this legal challenge, the government released the detainees from Belmarsh Prison. l Attempts by the government to deport Abu Qatada, an Islamist preacher who had entered the UK illegally, to face trial in Jordan were stopped for 8 years on the grounds that the evidence used against him might have been acquired through torture. This would have breached Articles 3 (freedom from torture) and 6 (right to a fair trial) of the Human Rights Act and Abu Qatada was not deported until 2014 when Jordan pledged that no such evidence would be used against him. l In 2010, the Supreme Court declared that same-sex relationships could provide grounds for claiming asylum in the UK if the claimants were from countries where same-sex relationships were persecuted. Dismissing the argument that they could hide their sexuality, Lord Hope stated, ‘To compel a homosexual person to pretend that his sexuality does not exist or suppress the behaviour by which to manifest itself is to deny his fundamental right to be who he is.’

Answer 33

Although the Human Rights Act has provided judges with significantly more power in protecting civil liberties, it is no different from any other Act of Parliament in that it can be suspended or repealed. It does not, therefore, represent a higher law, as would be the case if the UK had a codified constitution. As a result, Parliament remains the supreme law-making body and so can still enact legislation even if it conflicts with the European Convention on Human Rights on the principle that no parliament can bind its successor. For example, even though the Blair government accepted the release of the Belmarsh detainees following the High Court ruling, it quickly introduced legislation to keep them under close surveillance through control orders. This means that judges have less power to protect the civil liberties of UK citizens than do judges in liberal democracies that have a codified constitution and where judges can strike down legislation if it conflicts with the law of the constitution. Therefore, civil liberties pressure groups are especially important in alerting the public to any erosion of their civil liberties, as well as raising awareness of the ways in which minorities may still be discriminated against.

Answer 34

Amnesty International Amnesty International, established in 1961, campaigns to ensure that all human beings enjoy the rights set out in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and associated declarations on human rights. Its methods combine public activism with targeted lobbying of representatives to increase awareness of human rights abuses. For example, Amnesty International organises ‘Challenge’ events to raise funds and awareness. It also uses modern technology to increase pressure on governments. Its Pocket Protest is an SMS action network, which enables members to instantly support a petition on behalf of a political prisoner. Its website provides information about ways in which human rights are being abused throughout the world together with ways in which supporters can express their solidarity with threatened and persecuted groups and individuals. However, Amnesty International also seeks to achieve as close a relationship as possible with political decision makers. Members are encouraged to lobby their MPs, as many did in support of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, an Iranian-British woman imprisoned in Iran for allegedly seeking to topple its government. When her husband, Richard Ratcliffe, undertook a 21-day hunger strike outside the Foreign Office from 24 October to 13 November 2021, Amnesty widely publicised the event, urging MPs and peers to attend a Westminster Hall and House of Lords debate advocating action on Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s behalf. On 16 March 2022, she was released and returned to the UK. Although high-level negotiations played a role in her release, powerful lobbying on her behalf kept pressure on the government to act. Amnesty International’s research papers are also widely circulated among MPs and ministers in the UK. For example, it produces research briefings on pressing issues such as the rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, as well as exposing human rights abuses in China and Myanmar and showing how the rights of minority groups in the UK need to be respected. Liberty Liberty is committed to fighting unjust attempts to undermine civil liberties in the UK through a combination of insider and outsider tactics. Its policy experts and lawyers lobby MPs and peers to vote against legislation that would negatively impact on civil liberties. Its professional research papers are also widely consulted at Westminster, and the group regularly provides evidence for parliamentary select committees. In addition, Liberty organises campaigns that publicise ways in which civil liberties are being threatened. These have included demonstrations and online petitions against limits to public protest and increased police powers of stop and search. Liberty also uses the courts to protect civil liberties. In 2020, it supported Ed Bridges’ case against the South Wales Police that it had breached Article 8 of the Human Rights Act when it stored biometric data about him secured by automatic facial recognition surveillance. When the Court of Appeal ruled that South Wales Police’s use of automatic facial recognition required greater care in its implementation, Megan Goulding from Liberty welcomed the judgment, stating, ‘Facial recognition is a threat to our freedom – it has no place on our streets.’ However, the argument that governments are undermining civil liberties is rejected by many politicians, who argue that some restrictions are necessary to protect the collective good of the nation. Also, the fact that only a few Acts, such as the proposed introduction of identity cards, have generated much public outcry suggests the public may well accept that their collective good does require limitations to be put on their individual liberties. It is also important to appreciate that, as the representative of the public interest, Parliament itself can protect civil liberties. l In 2005, the Blair government’s attempt to increase the time that a terrorist suspect could be imprisoned to 90 days was defeated in the House of Commons by 323 votes to 290, with 49 Labour MPs voting against their government. l In 2008, the Brown government’s attempts to increase the number of days’ detention to 42 from 28 was defeated in the House of Lords and the proposed legislation was subsequently shelved. l The coalition in 2010 committed itself to the repeal of identity cards as an infringement of civil liberties.

Answer 35

Several Conservative politicians have signalled that they favour replacing the Human Rights Act with a British bill of rights. A popular criticism is that Article 8 (the right to a family life) has made it very difficult to deport ‘foreign criminals’, leading to Philip Hollobone MP’s claim that the Human Rights Act prioritises ‘the rights of bad people over the rights of good people’. Supporters of a British bill of rights also argue that it would provide a clearer statement of the responsibilities that the individual owes to society as well as explicitly recognising parliamentary sovereignty over what constitutes a right. In 2021, Dominic Raab, Boris Johnson’s justice secretary, announced plans for a British bill of rights to sit alongside the Human Rights Act, which, he argued, would stop ‘spurious elastic interpretations of human rights’ by restoring ministerial jurisdiction in contested cases.