How democratic is the UK

Question 1

What is a peaceful transfer of power?

Answer 1

Those who lose power by democratic means accept the authority of those who have won. If not, politics breaks down and non-peaceful conflict is likely to take over

Question 2

Positives of the UK in transfer of power

Answer 2

• The UK is remarkably conflict free - a product of the FPTP system, as it ensures a majority.
• For example, Tony Blair won a 197 seat majority in 1997.

Question 3

Negatives of the UK in transfer of power

Answer 3

• Debatable what would happen if the parties don’t wish to work together and compromise, especially when there is no majority.
• Possible that the monarch will have to step in - seen as a negative as they’re an unelected head of state, creates a constitutional crisis.
• Few formal rules on how future coalitions should form.
• Since 2010, there hasn’t been many strong majority governments (Cameron-Clegg coalition in 2010-15 and a Conservatives-DUP Supply and Demand in 2017-2019).

Question 4

What are free elections

Answer 4

• All adults are free to vote and stand for office = known as ‘universal suffrage’.
• If significant groups are excluded, like women, the elections aren’t truly free and democracy is flawed.
• Implies there is a secret ballot, if not, votes can be bought, sold and voters can be coerced to vote in a certain way.

Question 5

Evaluation of the UK’s free elections

Answer 5

• All over 18 year olds can vote, including 16 year olds in the Scotland 2014 referendum. There is little electoral fraud and strong legal safeguards exists.
• Debate on introducing compulsory voting = ‘solve’ low turnout, increase political literacy and consider all voter’s needs. However, or allow ill-considered judgements, voters retain a right to not vote, doesn’t deal with the root causes of political dissatisfaction.
• From the 2023 local elections, people must carry ID.
• Prisoners cannot vote in the UK. The House of Lords peers, the head of state, the judiciary and the Prime Minister are not elected. However, the House of Lords Act 1998 by Labour did reduce the number of hereditary peers to 96.

Question 6

Fair elections

Answer 6

• Narrow definition = All have one vote of equal value, suggesting there are safeguards in place to avoid electoral fraud and ballot rigging.
• Broad definition = concerns the electoral system used - how fair and whether the outcome should be proportional.

Question 7

Positives of the UK in fair elections

Answer 7

• Proportional systems in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland means that for every vote gained, it results in a seat.
• Voting is every five years because of the Fixed-Term Act.
• Included European parliamentary elections but because of Brexit - no longer exists.

Question 8

Negatives of the UK in fair elections

Answer 8

• Voting is every five years, compared to four years in the USA.
• FPTP produces a disproportionate result, favouring some parties (two-party system of Tory/Labour) and MPs can win despite not gaining a majority.
• 2015 = UKIP party won over 12% of the vote but only secured one seat. In contrast, the SNP secured 56 votes from a 4.7% vote share, indicative of the importance of voting concentrations.
• In instances when a govt wins an enormous majority, the inferiority of the Lords allows an ‘elective dictatorship’, whereby the govt’s majority is so large that they can pass almost any bill with ease (e.g Blair’s 1997 majority facilitated Britain’s fast-tracked plunge into the Iraq war).

Question 9

Widespread participation in politics

Answer 9

A well-informed and active population can prevent government from becoming too dictatorial.

Question 10

Positives of the UK in widespread participation

Answer 10

• Extensive membership of often free and active pressure groups like Extinction Rebellion and the British Medical Association.
• Growing level of e-democracy, using Change.Org, to tackle current issues.
• Membership of the Conservative, Labour and the Liberal Democrat parties has increased to around 1.7% of the electorate in 2019, compared to a historic low of 0.8% in 2013.
• 2001’s turnout was so low because people were happy with the Labour Govt, but they voted to demonstrate their anger in 2005 because of Blair leading the UK to the Iraq war in 2003.

Question 11

Negatives of the UK in widespread participation

Answer 11

• Election turnout falling, especially among the youth (76% in 1970, 59.4% in 2001 and 68.7% in 2017). Likewise, party membership fell from 4.12% in 1980 to 1.08% in 2016.
• Despite some party membership (Labour, SNP and UKIP) and electoral turnout recovering considerably post 2015, it is still considerable less than in the 1950s.
• Not all pressure groups are often listened to - whether because of size, finance, methods or insider or outsider status. Additionally, the influence of PGs is damaging because they are unelected, unaccountable and can result in tyranny of the majority.
• People possibly have stopped participating in elections or other forms because of apathy.

Question 12

Freedom of expression

Answer 12

• Freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas.
• Independent information is vital for democracy, otherwise it will lead to dictatorship.
• Implies a free media and no govt censorship or interference - the development of the internet has helped tremendously, allowing free access for all.

Question 13

Positives of the UK in freedom of expression

Answer 13

• The press and broadcast media are free of government interference, maintaining political neutrality and free access to the internet - unlike China, Russia and N. Korea.
• The public are able to openly criticise the government, whether by protests or speaking to MPs directly.

Question 14

Negatives of the UK in freedom of expression

Answer 14

• Much ownership of the press is in the hands of a few large powerful companies, such as News International, possibly having a political bias.
• Some state the BBC doesn’t maintain this political neutrality, taking a left-wing stance.
• Recent aims to adapt anti-strike laws: In Jan 2023, after the barrage of strikes, the govt attempted to say unions could be sued if they do not provide minimum levels of fire, ambulance and rail services.

Question 15

Freedom of association

Answer 15

• Linked to freedom of expression. It means the freedom to form parties or pressure groups, provided their aims and methods are legal. Because they are such vital vehicles for representation, if they didn’t exist, or were suppressed, democracy would be almost impossible to sustain.

Question 16

Evaluation of the UK in freedom of association

Answer 16

• There are no restrictions on legal organisations.
• However, some associations are banned, but this is because they are based on terrorism or racial hatred. For example: Al Qaeda, Irish Republican Army and Loyalist Volunteer Force.

Question 17

Protection of rights and liberties

Answer 17

• Linked to freedom of expression and association.
• Must be firmly safeguarded, implying that there should be some kind of enforceable ‘Bill of Rights’ or ‘Basic Law’ to protect it in such a way that the state cannot erode them

Question 18

Negatives of protection of rights and liberties

Answer 18

• Previously strong due participating in the ECHR, enforced by the European courts (codification as the ECDHR is set externally). After Brexit, the UK doesn’t have to accept European Courts’ judgement and can leave the ECHR. It may lead to erosion of rights.
• As parliament is sovereign, human rights are at the mercy of a Govt with a strong majority in the Commons - e.g sending illegal immigrations to Rwanda.
• Successive UK govts introduced legislation that has diluted protections for civil liberties and fundamental rights in national security/counter-terrorism, immigration and socio-economic entitlements (e.g Belmarsh case 2004).
• Brexit is posing further challenges, by in particular removing the safety blanket for certain non-discrimination, migrant and labour rights formerly provided by EU law.

Question 19

Positives of the Protection of Rights

Answer 19

• Human Rights 1998, common law and other statutes passed by Parli play an important role by imposing important legal constraints upon public authorities.
• EXAMPLE = Equality Act 2010 prevents public authorities discriminating on the basis of race, sex, disability and other grounds of equal treatment.
• EXAMPLE = 2005 ban on prisoners voting was declared unlawful.
• EXAMPLE = Abu Qatada’s deportation to Jordan was blocked due to the fear that evidence obtained under torture would be used against him.
• Protected by the HOL and the judiciary, holding the govt to account on potentially harmful policies and the judiciary can pass declaration of incompatibility. EXAMPLE = HOL twice refused to pass the govt’s welfare reform bill cutting £30 pounds a week from the benefits of ill and disabled people.
• Generally strong institutional framework for protecting rights, extending beyond the courts – including the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, and the Joint Committee on Human Rights in Parliament.

Question 20

The rule of law

Answer 20

• All citizens must be able to access the courts and they should be treated equally under the law, and that the government should be subject to the same laws as its citizens.
• Requires that judges be appointed through a process that is not controlled by the government of the day, and have security of tenure (cannot accountable to politicans for their rulings who may pressure them to deliver certain rulings).
• No independent judiciary is dangerous as it makes it more difficult for citizens to defend themselves against unfair or disproportionate state action, eroding other facets of democracy.

Question 21

Positives of the UK in the rule of law

Answer 21

• Independent and neutral judiciary - in 2005 removed Law Lords from the unelected HOL - politics have no influence on decisions.
• Upheld strictly by the judiciary - the right to judicial law review underpins this.
• The law can be changed to keep up with the changing society (no constitution)

Question 22

Negatives of the UK in the rule of law

Answer 22

• Debates on how to implement the principle concern the balance between rights protection and the freedom of state action, particularly to safeguard security and uphold public order (e.g 9/11 attacks and restrictions of peaceful protest introduce by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act).
• Access to justice, meanwhile, can threatened by administrative reforms. Deep cuts to legal aid were long criticised, including by the House of Commons Justice Committee, for making the courts less accessible to low-income group.
• The JAC (a select committee from the government) chooses who is a suitable candidate to be appointed to the judiciary, rather than elected = political interference.
• Cannot truly be held accountable as they are unelected and they aren’t often representative of society (white males from a similar wealthy background).

Question 23

Limited government and constitutionalism

Answer 23

• Countries with limited govts have fewer laws about what individuals and businesses can and cannot do. In many countries, a written constitution is used to spell out the powers and limitations of govt power. The opposite of a limited govt is an authoritarian one.
• Without this, democracy is at risk as there are no firm limits to govt power, as otherwise, the govt may set aside democratic principles for its own purposes, often in times of warfare and emergency.

Question 24

Positives of the UK in limited government and constitutionalism

Answer 24

• No constitution means that the law can be changed rapidly in response to a major event, such as 9/11 and the COVID-19 pandemic - unlike USA.
• Parliament and the courts ensure the government acts within law - held accountable by select committees, PMQ and votes of no confidence.
• For example, Theresa May attempting to leave the EU with prerogative powers and Boris Johnson progueing Parliament.

Question 25

Negatives of the UK in limited government and constitutionalism

Answer 25

• No codified UK Constitution - vague limits to government power and parliamentary sovereignty means the government’s powers could be increased without a constitutional safeguard.
• Lacls checks and balances.
• Perogative powers of the prime minister are extensive and arbitrary, based on convention and not written down.
• Can lead to erosion of rights by changing the constitution (organic - changes over time).
• Belmarsh case 2004

Question 26

Devolution

Answer 26

The process of transferring/decentralising governmental power from the Centre (Westminister) to the nations and regions of the United Kingdom.

Question 27

Positives of the UK in devolution

Answer 27

• More power given to each nation, depending on the extent the referendums voted in favour , with their own form of governing bodies - greater freedoms and flexibilities at a local level to improve public services for their area.
• Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly, and Greater London and Local Authorities.

Question 28

Negatives of the UK in devolution

Answer 28

• Asymmetrical devolution = unequal balance of power given to Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales:
• Might encourage further devolution - potential independence from England for Scotland.