democracy and participation Flashcards

1
Q

what is representative democracy.

A

A form of
democracy in which voters
elect representatives to
make political decisions
on their behalf. These
representatives are then
held accountable to the
public in regular elections.

In a representative democracy, elected politicians are made accountable to the
electorate in regular elections. This means that the voters retain sovereignty because
they decide whether or not to renew the mandate of their representatives.

a politician should not be a delegate simply carrying out the will of others. Instead, when making decisions, they should weigh up the feelings of the people they represent with their party’s manifesto and their wider understanding of an issue. In
other words, representatives should act according to their best judgement rather than only following the voters’ wishes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

advantages of representative democracy.

A

The main advantage of representative democracy is that government is carried out by
professional politicians who are required to be well informed about political issues.
They are more likely to make politically educated decisions than most members
of the public, who may be swayed by emotion and may not fully understand the
complexities of a question. For example, before a parliamentary bill is enacted, it
will have been drawn up by ministers and civil servants, been debated in both
the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and been further analysed in
committee stage when amendments may be added to it.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

who is edmand burke

A

In his speech to the electors of Bristol in 1774, Edmund
Burke (1729–97) explained, ‘Your representative owes you,
not his industry only, but his judgement and he betrays
instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.’
Given that Burke was a known opponent of slavery, and
the wealth of Bristol’s merchant class was founded on
the slave trade, this was a courageous statement that,
if elected, Burke would act according to his conscience
rather than do what his electors would like him to do. His
support of the American revolutionaries similarly put him
at odds with most of his constituents. His justification
of his right to choose his own position is often used
to underpin the principles on which representative
democracy is based.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Disadvantages of representative democracy.

A

Critics of representative democracy, as it operates in the UK, argue that MPs
represent a metropolitan elite that does not represent the more traditional values
of the population. This can mean that MPs can be disengaged from the public
and so do not adequately represent their interests. For example, in the 2016 EU
membership referendum 52% of the public voted to leave the European Union,
whereas 74% of MPs had been in favour of remaining.

. In 2021, Owen Paterson resigned as an
MP after he was criticised by the Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards for
lobbying on behalf of companies that employed him. The same year Sir Geoffrey
Cox MP, the former Attorney General, was also criticised for earning £900,000
for legal work he undertook in addition to his MP’s salary. Although no conflict of
interest was found, some suggested that this was an excessive amount to earn when
his primary job was to represent his constituents.

Critics also claim that the Westminster Parliament is highly unrepresentative because
it is elected through first-past-the-post (FPTP). As a result the Conservative and

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How unrepresentative is the Westminster Parliament?

A

Female
Minority ethnic
LGBTQ+
34%
10%
7%
Privately educated 29%
51%
14%
2.7% (estimated)
7

The social background of MPs is much more middle class than it was in the
parliament elected in 1945. Eighty-five per cent of MPs also attended university
and 19% graduated from either Oxford or Cambridge. Some argue that MPs do
not need to share the same characteristics as a group to represent their interests. For
example, legislation advancing LGBTQ+ rights has been passed by predominantly
heterosexual parliaments.
A powerful criticism of UK representative democracy is that it is least likely to
engage the poorest and most marginalised in society. 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. Only 2% of
homeless people were registered to vote in 2018.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what is direct democracy.

A

A form
of democracy in which
citizens themselves, rather
than their representatives,
make political decisions.
The most significant
modern example of direct
democracy is a referendum.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

types of direct democracy - referendums

A

Referendums - Referendums enable the public to directly express their views on single issues. In 2014, in
the Scottish independence referendum, 55.3% voted in favour of Scotland remaining in the UK and 44.7% voted in favour of independence. In the EU referendum in 2016, 52% voted in favour of leaving the EU and 48% voted in favour of remaining

Providing the public with a direct choice can
help to settle controversial issues. Since the
public have voted directly, the result can claim greater legitimacy than a decision reached by their representatives. However, critics note that referendums require a detailed understanding of issues, which the public may lack. The ongoing debate over Scottish independence and the UK’s relationship with the EU also suggests that referendums do not conclusively resolve contentious issues

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

types of direct democracy - electronic petitions

A

If a petition on the government website reaches 100,000 signatures it will be considered for debate either in Westminster Hall or the chamber of the House of Commons. This does not mean
that legislation will have to be forthcoming.
However, it does mean that Parliament has to engage with issues the public feel strongly about. In 2021 several important issues were raised by e-petitions such as making it a legal requirement for night clubs to search guests on entry

In 2020, England footballer Marcus Rashford’s #EndChildFoodPoverty gained over 1.1 million signatures, generating huge public enthusiasm and persuading the government to commit to free school meals for low-income families during school holidays However, e-petitions can also raise false expectations and consume parliamentary time. There are issues on which Parliament cannot
legislate (an e-petition to revoke Sir Tony Blair’s knighthood gained more than 1 million signatures but was rejected because knighthoods are bestowed by the monarch) or will not legislate (a petition demanding Article 50 be revoked so that the UK would remain in the EU gained 6.1 million
signatures in 2019). The publicity e-petitions
generate is nonetheless important in informing and progressing public debate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

types of direct democracy - election of the leaderhsip of ploitical partys.

A

All the main political parties now allow their
members to decide who the leader of their party will be. This is a significant power since it may determine who the prime minister will be. In 2022, Liz Truss defeated Rishi Sunak for the leadership of the Conservative Party by 57% to 43%. In 2020, Sir Keir Starmer was elected leader of the Labour Party with 56% of the vote of party members

Supporters argue that this makes the leadership accountable to the whole party. This is an especially powerful argument in the Labour Party, which sees itself both as a political party and as a popular movement. Critics claim it gives too much influence to party activists, who are generally more radical than the electorate. For example, Labour Party members re-elected
Jeremy Corbyn as leader in 2016 by 61.8% even though Labour MPs had previously passed a vote of no confidence in him by a staggering 172/40 votes. Although Liz Truss’ policies proved very popular with Conservative Party members they were hugely divisive among Conservative MPs, leading to political chaos and her resignation after only 45 days in office

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

types of direct democracy - recall of mps act 2015

A

If an MP has been imprisoned, suspended from the House by the Committee on Standards or convicted of making false expenses claims then a recall petition signed by a minimum of 10% of
their constituents can trigger a by-election.
In 2019 the Peterborough MP Fiona Onasanya was sentenced to a three-month jail term for perverting the course of justice. 25% of registered voters demanded her recall and she did not contest the subsequent by-election.

In 2019 Chris Davies was convicted of making fraudulent expenses claims. 19% of the registered electors of Brecon and Radnorshire signed a recall petition. Davies contested the subsequent by-election, which he lost

Power of recall makes MPs accountable to their constituents in matters of serious misconduct or illegal behaviour. However, the circumstances in which it can be activated are so extreme that
critics argue its impact has been negligible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

advanatages of direct democracy

A

Supporters of direct democracy argue that it engages the public and makes politicians
more responsive to what people really think. This creates a closer connection
between the public and political decision making. By providing the public with more opportunities to make decisions it creates greater engagement in the political process, encouraging a more politically educated and civically involved citizenry. A greater use of direct democracy ensures that our representatives are kept better informed of developing public attitudes through referendums, consultative exercises
and electronic petitions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Disadvantages of direct democracy

A

Critics of direct democracy respond that referendums dangerously simplify
questions to a binary ‘yes/no’ when the issues are much more complex than that.
For example, the UK’s departure from the EU raised highly complicated issues such
as the UK’s relationship with the EU customs union and the EU single market, and the border status of Northern Ireland. None of these issues was addressed in the 2016 referendum, which posed only this question: ‘Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?’

A direct democracy can challenge the Burkean principle that representatives should act according to their conscience, not the wishes of their constituents. A high-profile example of this is Theresa May, who supported Remain in the 2016 referendum but went on to lead a government committed to withdrawing from the EU.
Direct democracy does not balance conflicting interests or protect the rights of
minorities. This is why Clement Attlee referred to referendums as ‘a device of
demagogues and dictators’. Direct democracy can also encourage the public to vote on issues on which they are not sufficiently knowledgeable to make well-informed decisions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

is the uk suffering a participation crisis? - public trust in mps.

A

When Neil Kinnock became an MP, his father told him, ‘Remember, Neil, MP stands
not just for Member of Parliament but also for Man of Principle.’ Unfortunately,
over the years a number of MPs have not lived up to these high standards.

In 2009, MPs collectively were held up to contempt and ridicule over allegations that they were overclaiming on their expenses. A perennial criticism is that MPs can exploit
their public position for private gain.

In 2010, a former Labour minister, Stephen
Byers, was secretly filmed telling a consultancy firm that he was like ‘a cab for hire’.

In 2021, Conservative minister Owen Paterson resigned as an MP after the House
of Commons Standards Committee suspended him for 30 days for ‘an egregious case of paid advocacy’.

Media interest in such stories has done much to damage the credibility of Westminster and fuel voter disengagement. In 2021, according to a YouGov poll, 80% of those surveyed believed there was a fair or significant amount of corruption in UK politics, with just 1% saying there was no corruption.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

is the uk suffering a participation crisis? - voting turnout.

A

Voting is one of the most obvious and important ways of engaging in politics.
Between 1964 and 1997 the average turnout in general elections was 74.5%.

  • Voter turnout dramatically decreased to just 59.4% in 2001 when the Blair
    government seemed almost certain of being re-elected given its strong record
    on governing competence and William Hague’s uninspiring leadership of the
    Conservative Party.
  • In the next four general elections more pressing issues were at stake and so voting
    steadily increased, reaching a high point of 68.7% in 2017.
  • However, the average turnout in general elections from 2005 to 2019 was
    65.7%, which was 8.8% less than from 1964 to 1997. This suggests a concerning
    downward trend.

Significantly, political engagement is least likely from the most socially disadvantaged.
For example, in the 2019 general election, 68% of A/B voters voted, but only 53% of
D/E voters.

Three of the five constituencies with the lowest turnout in that election were in Kingston upon Hull, where 45% of neighbourhoods are among the most
deprived 10% in England. This suggests a crisis of engagement among the most
marginalised social groupings.

Historically, the turnout in national elections in the UK has been considerably
higher than that in US presidential elections. However, in the 2020 US presidential election the turnout was 67%, which was equivalent to the UK general election in 2019. Voter turnout in recent UK general elections has also been noticeably lower than in several other European democracies where voting is not compulsory and yet turnout is consistently high. This suggests that UK politicians should not be complacent about voter participation (Table 1.4).

Devolved governments, elected mayors and elected crime and police commissioners
provide the public with greater opportunities to engage with the political process at a regional or local level. However, recent voter turnout at such elections indicates that the problem of voter engagement is not confined to Westminster. For example, turnout in elections for the devolved parliaments is no higher than for the Westminster Parliament and in the case of the Welsh Parliament (Senedd Cymru) is significantly lower.

turnout in welsh parliment - 2021 46.5
turnout in scottish parliment. 2021
63.5

Although there has been a slight increase in voter turnout for elected mayors, they
have not succeeded in generating significant enthusiasm from the electorate (Table
1.6).

Police and crime commissioners were elected in 2021 with, on average, a
turnout of just 33.2%, although that was considerably higher than the 15.1% turnout
in 2012 when they were introduced.
Table 1.6 Turnout in mayoral elections
Election
2021 London
2021 Bristol
2021 West Midlands
2021 Greater Manchester
Turnout (%)
42.2
41.2
31.2
34.7

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

is the uk suffering a particpaton crisis? - party membership.

A

The membership of political parties (Table 1.7) is also significantly lower than it was in the 1950s. In 1953, for example, the membership of the Conservative Party was 2,806,000 and the Labour Party 1,005,000. This does not necessarily indicate a participation crisis, since voters are less likely to fully identify with one party because of partisan dealignment and therefore have less motivation to join one.

Party
Labour
Conservative
Liberal Democrat
Scottish National Party
Membership
430,000
200,000
98,000
119,000

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

is the uk suffering from particpation crisis? how it is not

A

However, other evidence suggests claims of a participation crisis are exaggerated.
When issues are sufficiently important to the public they can still vote in very
large numbers.

The Scottish independence referendum in 2014 recorded an 84.6% turnout. There was also an increase of 7.6% in voting from the first to the second referendums on the UK’s membership of the EEC/EU (Table 1.8).

Referendum Turnout (%)
1975 EEC
referendum
64.6
2016 EU
referendum
72.2

The public may also be choosing to participate in politics in different ways.
Parliamentary e-petitions can generate huge support, as evidenced by the 6.1 million people who signed the Revoke Article 50 and Remain in the EU petition in
2019.

Given that voters are increasingly disengaged from traditional party politics,
e-petitions provide a fresh way of public participation.
For example, in 2021, Parliament debated a variety of e-petitions ranging from the protection of hedgehogs to revoking the television licence.

The hundreds of thousands who marched in London in 2019 to demand that the
UK remain in the EU, and the 100,000 who joined protests in Glasgow during
the COP26 climate change conference in November 2021, further demonstrate the
strength of political activism. Black Lives Matter has stimulated a powerful debate
about racism in the UK, highlighting how social movements can encourage intense
political dialogue, especially among young people.

Pressure groups such as Amnesty International, which campaigns on behalf of political prisoners, and the environmental pressure groups Friends of the Earth
and Greenpeace continue to engage large numbers of the public. Online pressure groups such as 38 Degrees and Change.org further encourage participation by
presenting an accessible mechanism to create and sign online petitions.

The public also has a significant online engagement with politics. The biggest Twitter account in the UK in 2021
was BBC Breaking News, with 10 million followers more than the singer/songwriter Harry Styles. In 2022, the UK prime minister Twitter account had 5.8 million followers,
and politicians with radical agendas generate considerable enthusiasm. Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had
2.4 million followers and former UKIP/Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage had 1.6
million followers on Twitter.

It should be acknowledged that in a democracy the legitimacy of government derives from the vote of the public. Others forms of political activism and engagement are important but should not be seen as a replacement for voting.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

In what ways is UK democracy in need of reform?

A

Critics of the UK’s system of representative democracy argue that radical steps need
to be taken to re-inspire enthusiasm for the democratic process. Trust in politicians
and political party membership has declined and the turnout in general elections has substantially decreased (Table 1.3). New ways need to be found to make
politics relevant to the public. This is vital because if voting trends remain low,
the legitimacy that elected politicians can claim will be significantly reduced. For
example, in 2021, no mayoral election gained more than a 50% turnout, while the
Welsh Parliament (Senedd Cymru) was elected on just a 46.5% turnout.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of
UK democracy?

A

Critics suggest that there are several ways in which politicians could be made more
responsive to the public. The USA has a tradition of initiatives whereby voters can
exert influence over the direction of public policy, and a related model could enhance
the participatory nature of UK democracy. Various proposals could encourage
greater accountability and address claims of a democratic deficit and so lead to an
increase in participation. All are controversial, however.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of
UK democracy? - poeples referendums

A

Claims that politicians are insufficiently accountable to the public could be addressed by greater use of direct democracy so that the people themselves are able to make choices. These could include more referendums. Currently, referendums are called by the government when it decides that the people need to legitimise an important decision
such as whether the UK should leave the EU (2016). Consequently, critics claim that
the public are being asked to vote on issues only when the government wants them to.
Other ways of determining when a referendum is called might engage the public more.

For example, according to the constitution of the Republic of Ireland (1937), any
proposed constitutional change has to be endorsed by the public in a referendum.
Therefore, the legalisation of same-sex marriage (2015) and abortion (2018) were
both endorsed by the public in a referendum. However, this model can lead to
democratic overload. From 2000 to 2022, Ireland has had 19 referendums. The
average turnout has been only 48.4% (compared with the 67.3% turnout in the
2019 UK general election), which hardly suggests that referendums have energised
democracy. Equally, some of the referendums, such as whether the age limit for
presidential candidates should be reduced to 21 (2015), could be seen as insufficiently
pressing for a public debate.

In Switzerland, if 100,000 citizens sign a petition demanding a new law then this
must lead to a referendum. A referendum on whether to accept a law that the
legislature has passed can also be held if 50,000 signatures are secured. Supporters
claim that this gives Swiss voters unparalleled influence over their lives and in turn could provide a powerful way of reinvigorating UK democracy. However, critics warn that this model could create a conflict between the immediate priorities of the public and the long-term objectives of government. In 2021, Swiss voters rejected
the government’s proposals for new green taxes to help it meet its Paris Treaty carbon
commitments, leaving its environmental policies in disarray. Referendums are also
a majoritarian form of democracy with no safeguards for the rights of minorities.

In 2009, the building of minarets in Switzerland was legally banned as a result of a referendum, and in 2021, a ban on face coverings in public was endorsed in another
referendum, which then became law. We need to be cautious about extending the
use of referendums since they have the potential to be used in a divisive and populist fashion that could undermine rather than enhance liberal democracy.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of UK democracy? - electronic petitions.

A

The introduction of electronic petitions means that the Westminster Parliament now includes an element of direct democracy enabling the public to raise issues that they believe need resolving. The Scottish and Welsh parliaments also use electronic petitions as a way of keeping the public engaged with their representatives. As a result, parliamentary debate is now more focused on issues important to the public.

This is firmly within the tradition that Parliament should provide all citizens with the opportunity for redress of grievance whereby wrongs done to the individual may be resolved. Some critics suggest that electronic petitions could be more powerful if they automatically trigger a parliamentary vote. However, this would provide the government with much less time to fulfil the legislative programme on which it has a mandate to govern. It could also bog Parliament down further, debating and voting upon issues that our representatives have already decided upon. For example, in 2021 electronic petitions demanded, among other things, that work on HS2 be stopped immediately and that student tuition fees be reduced from £9,250 to £3,000. Although e-petitions can be important in encouraging redress of grievance, it is also important that they not be used to try to reopen issues on which our representatives have already legislated or decided

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of
UK democracy? - power of recall

A

The Recall of MPs Act 2015 enables voters to trigger a by-election if 10% of them sign
a petition. However, the circumstances when this can happen are quite extreme —
an MP would need to have been sentenced to prison, suspended from the House of
Commons for at least 10 days or convicted of making false parliamentary allowance
claims by the parliamentary committee on standards. Broadening the criteria on which power of recall could be demanded to include issues connected with policy
making would weaken the influence of party whips and make representatives more
responsive to their constituents. In the USA, for example, 19 states have policy-
based recall provisions. In 2003 the governor of California, Gray Davis, was recalled over his failure to balance the budget. In 2021, Gavin Newsom, another Democrat governor of California, survived Republican attempts to recall him over claims he had mishandled the state’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Critics point out that ‘policy recall’ could be used for political advantage by opposition
parties as some suggest has been the case in California. Providing voters with an
opportunity to dismiss representatives whom they believe have not represented their interests would also undermine the Burkean principle that MPs should act according to their conscience. If MPs could be recalled because their decision conflicted with their constituents’ wishes, then Parliament could be deprived of independent- thinking MPs and replaced by mere mouthpieces of their constituents. This could undermine the reputation and authority of Parliament.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of
UK democracy? - Further devolution

A

In order to encourage greater democratic participation, it has been suggested that
more power should be devolved from Westminster, thereby giving people greater
self-determination. The Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Parliament (Senedd Cymru)
and elected mayors show how decision making can be brought closer to the public.
However, turnout in these elections suggests that providing another layer of
government is not that effective a way of energising political involvement. There
is also little enthusiasm for an English Parliament and when, in 2004, voters in the
North East were given the opportunity to elect their own regional assembly, only
22% voted in favour of it.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of
UK democracy? - house of lords reform

A

The House of Lords is unelected and unaccountable. Its membership is appointed and there are claims that this can encourage political cronyism. For example, during

his premiership (2019–22), Boris Johnson appointed 86 new life peers, the majority
of whom were Conservatives, including the former Conservative Party treasurer
Peter Cruddas, who is a major donor to the Conservative Party (Table 1.9). In one of
his last appointments as prime minister he controversially appointed Harry Mount,
author of The Wit and Wisdom of Boris Johnson, to the House of Lords Appointments Commission (HOLAC), which vets all nominations. Making the Lords an elected chamber would make Westminster fully democratically accountable. The danger is that an elected Lords could become a rival to the Commons, potentially creating constitutional gridlock, which would be unlikely to make representative government more popular. Given public lack of trust in MPs and concerns about low electoral turnout for elections to the House of Commons, it is also difficult to see how providing another elected chamber at Westminster would encourage greater voter participation.

Conservative
Crossbench
Labour
42 (51%)
17 (20%)
13 (16%)
Non-affiliated 11 (13%)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of
UK democracy? - digital democracy

A

Supporters of digital democracy argue that facilitating voting and encouraging
electronic political discussion will lead to greater political engagement and higher
turnout. Digital democracy is, however, problematic.

  • Voting on your mobile phone at your convenience would likely encourage more
    voting, but it would also mean that voting was no longer carried out in secret and
    so the possibility of voter manipulation would increase.
  • Allegations of cyber-interference in Western elections by Russia indicates that
    electronic voting is more open to fraud than traditional voting.
  • The way in which politicians and activists use social media can encourage
    populist sloganeering rather than informed political discussion.
  • The standard of debate on social media indicates that activists and politicians can
    use this as much to bully as to engage in considered debate.
  • The banning of President Trump from Twitter in 2021 also raises the important
    question of whether media companies should be allowed to determine who is
    allowed on their social platforms.
25
Q

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

A

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.
26
Q

How convincing are proposals for the reform of
UK democracy? - compulsary voting

A

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.

27
Q

Debate
Should voting be made compulsory?

A

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.
28
Q

Contemporary debates on the further extension of the franchise.

A

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.

29
Q

Contemporary debates on the further extension of the franchise - votes at 16.

A

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.

30
Q

Debate
Should the age of voting be reduced to 16?

A

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

31
Q

Contemporary debates on the further extension of
the franchise - prisoner voting

A

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.

32
Q

Widening the franchise and debates over
suffrage - Historical perspective

A

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.

33
Q

The suffragists, suffragettes, and the First World War

A

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.

34
Q

Representation of the People Act 1969

A

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.

35
Q

Pressure groups and other influences

A

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.

36
Q

Pressure group categorisation

A

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

37
Q

What factors help pressure groups to
achieve success? - insider status

A

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.

38
Q

What factors help pressure groups to
achieve success? - wealth

A

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.

39
Q

What factors help pressure groups to
achieve success? - social media

A

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.

40
Q

What factors help pressure groups to
achieve success? - celebrity leadership

A

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.

41
Q

What factors help pressure groups to
achieve success? - direct action

A

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.

42
Q

2 Two successful UK pressure group campaigns

A

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

43
Q

Why are some pressure groups more successful
than others?

A

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.

44
Q

Examples of two pressure group failures

A

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.

45
Q

Case studies of a social movement and a
pressure group - blm

A

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.

46
Q

Case studies of a social movement and a
pressure group - Mind

A

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.

47
Q

Lobbyists, think-tanks, business and professional
bodies

A

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.

48
Q

Debate
Wealthy groups are most likely to achieve influence with
the government

A

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)
49
Q

Rights in context - Human rights and civil liberties

A

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.

50
Q

The development of a rights-based culture
since 1997

A

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.

51
Q

The development of a rights-based culture
since 1997 - humans rights act 1988

A

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.

52
Q

The development of a rights-based culture
since 1997 - the freedom of information act 2000

A

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.

53
Q

The development of a rights-based culture
since 1997 - equality act 2010

A

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.

54
Q

Civic responsibility and the restriction of civil liberties -

. Following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, DC
in 2001 and on London in 2005, several Acts of Parliament were passed to protect
the public from further attack:

A

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’.

55
Q

The balance between collective and individual rights

A

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.

56
Q

Supporters of the Human Rights Act therefore argue that it is vital because it defines
and protects the positive rights to which all individuals are entitled:

A

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.’

57
Q

How effectively are civil liberties protected in
the UK?

A

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.

58
Q

The aims and strategies of two
civil rights pressure groups in
the UK

A

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.

59
Q

A British bill of rights?

A

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.