Unit 6: Democracy & Political Participation Flashcards
Franchise
Those who are eligible to vote in elections
Suffrage
The right to vote
Timeline of who could vote and when? Why?
- Pre 1832 - upper class land owning men (less than 4% of pop) - based on amount of land
- 1832 Great Reform Act - upper and middle class men (300,000 more people, 5.6% of pop) - based on value of property not land because of mid class campaigns
- Representation of the People Act 1918 - all women over 30 and men over 21 - women could divorce husbands and keep own property, WWI meant people thought that lower classes fought hard so deserved the franchise - Lloyd George PM
- Representation of the People Act 1928 - all citizens over 21 (5 million more women) - NUSEC led by Eleanor rathbone - campaigned peacefully for equal pay and equality in franchise
- Representation of the People Act 1969 - anyone over 18 - since WWII, 18 year olds got more employment and financial independence - 1965 Lately committee said 18 year olds were more physically developed, more mature and better informed due to TV
Which 4 acts expanded the franchise?
- 1832 Great Reform Act
- Representation of the People Act 1918
- Representation of the People Act 1928
- Representation of the People Act 1969
Debates on suffrage in the UK: gender?
-Women were traditionally seen as ‘the weaker sex’, both physically and mentally.
-They were not considered to have sufficient education or intelligence to be trusted with the vote.
-Opponents of women’s suffrage in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries argued that women were too emotional to vote rationally.
-Traditionalists felt that a woman’s place was in the home, tending to her family. Politics would distract her.
Debates on suffrage in the UK: class?
-The wealthy elite who held the franchise before 1832 worried that their power would be reduced if people from other classes had the vote.
-There were fears that working-class men were too poorly educated to understand political issues.
-Some feared the working class would support socialism, threatening the economic welfare of other classes.
-The contribution and sacrifice of working-class men during the First World War meant that denying them the vote could no longer be justified.
Debates on suffrage in the UK: ethnicity?
There were (and are) no ethnic qualifications for voting in the UK.
Debates on suffrage in the UK: age?
-Younger people were not seen as having sufficient political education, independence or maturity. People aged 18 to 20 years old only received the vote in 1969.
-Young women aged 21 to 29 were denied the vote in 1918, despite their contribution to the war effort. They were considered more emotional and unstable than older women.
Today, there is a campaign to give 16- and 17-year-olds the vote.
-16- and 17-year-olds were allowed to vote in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, as it was recognised that the referendum result would affect the rest of their lives. They had a higher turnout than 18- to 24-year-olds.
-16- and 17-year-olds can vote in elections for the Scottish Parliament and councils. They will soon be able to vote in Welsh local elections.
-The Labour Party, the Scottish National Party (SNP), the Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party all support the Votes at 16 campaign, as does the Electoral Reform Society.
Suffragettes vs Suffragists (with key definitions)
Suffragettes
-Violent
-Got arrested
-Suffragettes - women members of the groups that were violent and aggressive and indulged in acts of violence to draw peoples attention to their cause
Suffragists
-Peaceful
-Sent letters
-Signed petitions
-Suffragists - generic term that’s includes not just women but also men who supported the cause of womens suffrage - behaved in a peaceful manner and sent letters to their elected representatives to raise voice in their support
Who led the Suffragists? What was their official name?
Millicent Fawcett
National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies (NUWSS)
What did the suffragists do? With examples?
-Millicent Fawcett felt that any violence or trouble would persuade men that women could not be trusted to have the right to vote.
-Using patience and putting forward logical arguments
-Women in 1900 could hold responsible posts in society, such as sitting on school boards, but were not trusted to vote.
-If parliament made laws and if women had to obey those laws, then women should be part of the process of making those laws.
-As women had to pay the same taxes as men, they should have the same rights as men
-hoped that when Herbert Asquith became prime minister, his government would give women the vote as he promised this. However, once in power, Asquith changed his mind
-Process was very slow -> Women became angry;both Fawcett’s sister and daughter joined more militant organisations known as the Suffragettes
-Convinced some Members of Parliament that women should have the vote -> most men in Parliament believed that women simply would not understand how Parliament worked and therefore should not be given the vote.
Who led the Suffragettes? What was their official organisation?
Emmeline Pankhurst and Christabel and Sylvia Pankhurst
Mary Richardson
Women’s Social and Political Union WPSU
What did the suffragettes do? With examples?
-1905 - Christabel P and Kenney interrupted a meeting to ask Churchill if women should have a right to vote - got out a banner which had ‘votes for women’ on it and military sashes - shouted at them to answer the q - thrown out and arrested
-Burned down churches as the Church of England was against them
-Vandalised oxford street - broke all windows
-Chained themselves to Buckingham palace - royal family was against them
-Refused to pay tax
-Arrests gave more publicity than paying a fine and going away silently - wanted to get arrested - Annie Kenney repeatedly arrested
-Attacked politicians as they went to work and fire bombed homes - used letter bombs on them
-Emily Davidson first martyr - threw herself under a horse at Epsom
-Refused to eat on prison and went on hunger strike, the gov was afraid they’d become martyrs so prison governors force fed them
-1913 - blew up Lloyd George’s house
-WWI 1914 - Pankhurst made them stop using violence and support the gov as much as they could - got them the vote
What was the Cat and Mouse Act? Who did it have an impact on?
No force feeding to let them get weaker - when they were weak, they were released but didnt die so they couldn’t take part in violent protests - if they partook again, they’d be arrested and cycle would repeat - impacted suffragettes
Who got involved with suffragettes?
Women of all classes
White colour workers
Teachers
Actors
Writers
Young radicals
Educated women - first generation uni educated
Suffragettes moto?
‘Deeds not words’
How many suffragettes arrested in 5 years?
Over 1000
Who were the chartists?
Mass movement driven by the working class after the failure of the 1832 reform act that didnt extent the vote beyond those who own property in Black Country - the centre of the working class movement
What was the 1838 Peoples Charter? What demands?
-1838 Peoples Charter drawn up by LWMA
-6 demands: all men to have the vote, voting should take place by secret ballot, parliamentary elections every year, equal constituency sizes, MPs should be paid, property qualification of becoming MP should be abolished
When did the chartists present petitions? What happened to them?
-Petition presented in 1839 before the house with over 1 million signatures - rejected, second petition in 1842 signed by 3 million but rejected - led to unrest
When was the final petition? When did the popularity of the movement decline?
-1848 - final petition - presented by leader Feargus O’Connor - connections with radical group which used violence - authorities feared disruption so military forces were on standby - it was rejected but understood didn’t happen
-1842-1857 - when the chartists declined
What was the legacy of the chartists? How many demands met?
-Legacy: reform acts passed in 1867 and 1884
-1918 - 5/6 demands met - parl elections not every year
What 2 debates are there on extending the franchise to prisoners?
- Extending franchise to prisoners
- Extending franchise to 16 year olds
ECHR ruling on franchise and prisoners?
-In 2005, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that denying prisoners the right to vote violated their human rights. This followed a legal challenge by John Hirst.
-However, the UK government did not comply with the ruling.
-In 2017, the Conservative government announced plans to allow a small number of prisoners (around 100) to vote - only those on home curfew
-Greens & MT v UK & Firth & Others v UK & McHugh & Others v UK - repeated the ruling
Prisoners should get suffrage?
-Not all rights removed when you go to prison
-Mauer - just because they committed a crime, it doesnt mean they dont have an ability to choose which party - coutnries that gave them the right, haven’t increased in aggressive party numbers - there hasn’t been a rise of aggression or a terror state
-Behan and ODonnell - doesnt prevent murder but actually makes it harder to rehabilitate as prionsers feel discriminated and disconnected and alienated from others - this leads to repetition in crimes
-Easton - disproportionate - if you murdered someone and if you pickpocketed, you get same punishment - it also has no relation to punishing them for their crime - so why is it there - and arbitrary - only affected if you happen to be in prison during a general election
-Right to vote is fundamental in society
-85,000 affected by the pointless human rights violation
-Prison guidance suggests we should give prisoners a good life
Prisoners should not get suffrage?
-Rights forfeiture theory - you the privilege of vote so this can be removed
-Those who commit crime against society shouldn’t have a say in how it is run
-Might help prevent crime if they roemove right to vote
-May undermine principle of justice if they remove vote right
-Roger Clegg - only those who are loyal to the nation should be able to vote - as they dont obey the law - don’t deserve this
-Despite consequences, taking right to vote away is deserved - justified consequence
What can 16 year olds do?
-Become member of trade union
-Pay income tax and national insurance
-Consent to sexual relationships - can have children
-Obtain tax credits and welfare benefits
-Change their name by deed poll
-Get married
16 year olds should get suffrage?
-88 year olds people who have gone insane are able to vote - not mentally equipped
-What you vote for affects the rest of your life - more ‘rest of your life’ for younger people - bigger stake
-Should’ve voted in Brexit referendum - its their future
-More informed due to social media than they used to be
-Voting expresses opinion about something that may affect future, education and place in the earth
-Views and opinions of children having a voice in society
-Scotland - have right to vote in referendums
-Isle of Man, Austria, Brazil, Ecuador, Slovenia (if employed), Argentina (compulsory after 18)
-They have a lot of adult responsibilities
-Right to vote is a sign of citizenship
-everyone susceptible to media influences - elderly influenced by right wing the Sun and we are influenced by social media
16 year olds should not get suffrage?
-Not trusted with adult things
-Generational divide - voice should count equally as much as old people - they think about the future of their children
-Poeple want to take away right to vote from bigoted old people, so the young shouldn’t have it
-Being more informed doesn’t relate to their ability to vote well?
-Can’t sent off to fight, so shouldn’t get suffrage
-More emotional
-More susceptible to propaganda and lies - more time on social media
Democracy
A system where power is held by the people
Types of democracy?
- Liberal democracy
- Majoritarian democracy
- Parliamentary democracy
- Presidential democracy
- Direct democracy
- Representative democracy
- Pluralist democracy
Which system of democracy does the UK use?
UK democracy = representative democracy - the citizens of the UK elect representatives to sit in parliament, who govern on their behalf in the legislative and executive - there are elements of the parliamentary democracy
Liberal democracy
In this system, the right to vote will be widespread and representatives will act in the interests of everyone in society.
Majoritarian democracy
The will or desires of the majority of the population are the prime considerations of the government.
Parliamentary democracy
Parliament stands as the highest form of authority. The executive branch will be drawn from, and accountable to, the people’s representatives in parliament.
Presidential democracy
The executive will be elected separately from the legislative body and is therefore chosen by and directly accountable to the people.
Direct democracy
This refers to any occasion when the citizens are directly involved in the decision-making process.
Representative democracy
This describes any system where the people transfer the power to make decisions to an elected representative.
Pluralist democracy
A system of government where there is competition between different groups who represent popular concerns to the government of the day.
More detail into direct democracy?
-This term refers to systems where citizens are directly involved in political decisions that affect them.
-In modern democratic states where direct democracy is prevalent, it is usually seen in the form of referendums or initiatives.
-In the UK, direct democracy can also be seen through petitions.
Advantages and disadvantages of direct democracy?
-seen as the ‘first best’ or purest form of democracy - the people have full power
-Improves participation & public engagement
-Increase legitimacy of the actions of the government or legislative
-Increases political education - people may be motivated to learn more about politics so they can make the right choice
-It works e.g. Switzerland
-The tyranny of the majority - minorities may be overlooked
-Impractical. No modern country uses direct democracy completely.
-Undermines elective representatives who may be better educated on the issues and make a better say
-Emotional responses - people likely to be subject to propaganda rather than make an educated decisions
-Populist outcomes
-Voter apathy
More detail into representative democracy?
-This describes any system where the people transfer the power to make decisions on their behalf
-Democracy decisions to an elected representative.
-Used by nearly all Western democracies.
-The nature of representation can take many forms – eg. trustee, mandate theories.
-In the UK, representatives are chosen on a national level by choosing a parliamentary democracy.
-In the UK, representatives are also chosen on a local level.
Advantages and disadvantages of a representative democracy?
-Elected representatives tend to have expertise and experience that many voters may lack
-With more regular involvement in the decision making process, elected representatives may be more likely to consider issues rationally, objectively and with long-term national interests in mind.
-Along with elected office come expectations of responsible behaviour and accountability.
-Elected representatives may be swayed in their decision-making by party loyalty or other allegiances - not direct representatives?? - for example, the whip
-Elected representatives may place personal, subjective views over the effective representation of their constituents
-The UK’s general elections do not produce accurate translations of votes to seats.
What are the traditional forms of participation?
-Voting in referendums, local and general elections
-Protests and marches
-Petitions
-Strikes or industrial action
-Membership of political parties
-Standing as a candidate
-Campaigning or canvassing for your party
-Join pressure group
-Write to MP
What are the modern forms of participation?
-E-petitions
-Following political accounts on social media, forwarding or sharing content
-Organising and participating in protests organised over social media
-Boycotting goods, businesses etc.
-Has led to slacktivism - lacks nature of democratic participation
How many members are there of each main party?
Tory - 130,000
Labour - 300,000
SNP - 60,000
Lib Dem - 90,000
Green - 60,000
Reform UK - 200,000
How many vote in local elections? How many voted in 2024 general election?
Just over a third of electorate vote in local elections
Around 60% voted in 2024 general eleciton
What factors affect turnout?
-Type of eleciton - voters are likely to turnout to eleciton they value
-Political apathy - voters believe that elections do little for the political process and so are less motivated to vote
-Value of the vote - some votes are less valuable than others e.g. if you live in a constituency with a safe seat, your vote potentially doesnt mean as much
What is electoral volatility?
-Documented in recent years that there is an increase in volatility of voters - more likely to switch parties through their lives and from one election to another or completely disengage with political parties altogether - partisan dealignment
-Caused by increasing disillusionment with the political process and the main political parties - the effect of this is that social class has become a less reliable indicator of voter behaviour - class dealignment
-Increased support for smaller parties with specific focuses e.g. nationalists in Scotland may vote for SNP, or single issue parties e.g. Greens who specifically focus on green politics
-Doesn’t signify fall in political participation - may help with voters apathy in some cases - affect membership numbers
There is a participation crisis?
-General election turnout was 84% in 1950 with a 61% turnout in 2005 - fewer are turning out to vote in general elections - national votes are also decreasing like in 50% of people voted in Scottish Parliament elections in 2011 and 34% in European Union election 2014 - low turnout can allow small extremist parties to gain greater share of vote - less accountability
-Party membership in the 1950s, labour had 1 million members due to trade union affiliation and conservative had 2.8 million - 1983, only 3.8% if pop was a member, less than 1% are currently members - labour is increasing again - reduces funds of parties and have limited choice - less scrutiny on government
-End of cooperation - Thatcher distrusted group activity and tended to favour individual and free market policies - weaken d trade unions - less group activity especially in trade union - workers have a weaker voice to raise concerns - decline in number of those willing to hold gov to account
-Partisan dealignment
-Disollutionment increased since 2009 expenses scandal and 2020 partygate
-Political apathy among 18-24 year olds
-Slacktivism
There isn’t a participation crisis?
-Increasing turnout in general elections since 2001-2017 - people are increasingly engaging and participating - Scottish independence and Eu referendums got high tunrout showed that opinion is divided and the issue is one that people care about, they vote
-Some parties seen increase in membership like greens - newer parties are gaining traction - 13 different parties with multiple independents
-Election turnout isn’t always lower - schemes like labours £1 membership to make it more inclusive under Corbyn have allowed for more participation
-Shift away from more traditional modes of participation in favour of those focused on social media - citizens participate in different ways
-Social movements and less structured campaign groups focus on extinction rebellion - largest pressure groups have millions of members - thosudands of them - nature of participation has changed - oxfam or extinction rebellion
-Internet & social media - more participation in campaigns to share info - instead of raising awareness through protest or petition, it is now cheaper and easier to get involved due to the internet - e.g. ‘justice for 96’ campaign promoted and encouraged people to participate by signing an online participation to reopen the inquest into hillsborough disatser - ‘occupy’ movement used social media to coordinate supporters to occupy London in 2011 - online petitions count under this - ‘no thanks Nigel’ organised over internet
What is a pressure group? Some examples?
A collection of individuals with common interests who try to persuade and influence the government’s policies and ordinary individuals to raise awareness of an issue they are campaigning about, such as through lobbying, marches, petitions etc. e.g. extinction rebellion, the Fawcett society, just stop oil, green peace, national education union
Differences between political parties and pressure groups?
-Different to a political party because they dont run for eleciton, they put pressure on political parties - dont want to be part of gov
-No membership of pressure groups
-Political parties want to gain power through winning elections but presure gorups want to influence them
-Pressure groups use lobbying etc. but parties use legislation and campaigns
-Pressure groups focus on a key issue but parties often look at all species policy in general
What are the 2 types of pressure groups? Examples?
- Sectional - campaigns on behalf of their section or profession e.g. British Medical Association or National Union of Rail
- Casual - campaigns on behalf of other people who can’t campaign for themselves e.g. PETA or RSPCA or Oxfam
Why do people want to join pressure groups?
-If they are unhappy with policy of the government
-If they are passionate about a certain issue that they feel is overlooked
-If they want to increase representation of issues or of oppressed groups
-If they want to participate
-If they want to achieve change - there may be benefits that will come out of them in the long run
-If they feel that their participation is needed
How do pressure groups fight for change?
Petitions
Marches
Demonstrations
Social media
Lobby
Research and publish reports
Give evidence at hearing
Publicity stunts
Strikes
Bring cases to court
How is the internet good for pressure groups?
-It can help them gain traction more easily
-An online campaign can be cheaper and spread information and raises awareness especially if it goes viral
-Internet makes it easier and cheaper to coordinate large groups or events
-Internet gives people an easier and more convenient means of participation
How is the internet bad for pressure groups?
-Marketplace can be swamped with groups - difficult to stand out - if a campaign goes viral, there is no way of guaranteeing that people will understand the message behind it
-To be successful, a group needs a professional website and expertise - expensive
-The Internet can lead to slacktivsim - ‘liking’ something ≠ engaging in the wider issue - less likely to get involved in the group - liking and reposting an edit about about climate change, but have you donated money to the cause, raised awareness, pressurised local mp etc.
What are Extinction Rebellion? Aims? Methods? Successes? Failures?
-Describe themselves as an international, non-violent, civil disobedience movement - life on earth is in crisis and facing mass extinction
-Aims: are to get governments to declare a climate and ecological emergency and take immediate action
-Methods include: protests (eg. London 2020), disrupt transport services (eg. gluing themselves to carriages on trains in London in 2019)
-Success: promote themselves well (poll suggested 73% of British public said they heard of them), applied pressure to UK government, which has set a goal to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 (later reduced to 2030), their branch just stop oil was able to make the govenrment stop giving out more oil and gas licenses
-Failures: 19% of the 73% agreed with what the pressure group has done - quite unpopular
What are Greenpeace? Aims? Methods? Successes? Failures?
-2.9 mil members
-Aim: to ensure the ability of the earth to nurture life in all its diversity - focus on climate change, forests, oceans
-Methods: used to use direct action and now use insider methods to achieve goals
-Success: 2011 campaign to stop tuna fishing using methods that kill many fish at once, resulted in UK supermarkets providing clear label on tuna products and stop purchasing tuna caught using unsuitable methods by 2014, then moved worldwide
-Failures: failed to prevent cairn energy in 2011 from exploring gas reserves on Greenland, attacked Greenlanders for eating whale meat
What are RMT Union? Aims? Methods? Successes? Failures?
-the union of rail, maritime and transport and it was founded in 1990 - Its members are concentrated in London transport, particularly network
-Aims and Methods: until 2004 the union was apart of the Labour union (inside status’s), 2009, the union put up anti Eu to create its own left-wing party candidates for election of the European Parliament, lobbies key politicians and consults with them to secure a transport for London into adopting its politics
-Successes: The importance of the Olympics and the international spotlight on London put pressure on London Underground and the government, the union’s large membership covered a vital sector of the London economy (Underground transport), which meant it could effectively close the Tube during the Olympics.
-Failures: The strikes failing to gain public support A lack of public sympathy over the issue the commitment to the programme of closures by Transport for London, the mayor of London (at the time) and the government, the court case being rejected
Reasons why pressure groups are successful?
-Enhance Democracy – They allow citizens to participate in politics beyond elections, strengthening pluralism.
-Representation – They give a voice to minority or marginalized groups that may be ignored by political parties.
-Expertise and Information – Many provide specialist knowledge to the government, improving policy-making.
-Government Accountability – They scrutinize policies and decisions, holding politicians accountable.
-Public Awareness – Campaigns raise awareness of social, environmental, and economic issues.
-Encourage Participation – They engage people in political activism, increasing political engagement.
-Insider status - like the RMT union, they are likely to directly influence policy
Reasons why pressure gorups aren’t successful?
-Undermine Democracy – Wealthier and more powerful groups (e.g., corporate lobbyists) may exert disproportionate influence, creating inequality.
-Lack of Accountability – Unlike elected politicians, pressure groups are not accountable to the public.
-Can Promote Self-Interest – Some groups prioritize their own goals over the wider public good.
-Disruptive Tactics – Some use extreme methods (strikes, protests, or even illegal actions) that disrupt society.
-Government Inefficiency – Too much pressure can slow down decision-making and lead to policy gridlock.
-Elitism and Insider Influence – Some groups (especially business interests) have privileged access to decision-makers, reducing fairness.
-There are too many that it limits their power??
What are the other types of organisations that could increase participation?
- Think tanks
- Lobbyists
- Corporations
What is a think tank? Successes? Failures?
-A group that was formed with a specific purpose of formulating and developing policy ideas e.g. The Fabian Society, Left-leaning policies on social justice, welfare, and labor rights, linked to the Labour Party, advocating progressive economic policies for example, the stance on universal basic income.
-Successes: they offer an alternative that is based on focused and academic research rather than partisan ideals, the use think tanks increased under Blair to develop third way policy ideas, Adam smith institute focuses on free market, or they can focus on a genera idea such as Reform which aims to better public services
-Failures: privately funded by a group, they typically align themselves with a party as they must work with gov of day (this may give insider access but their influence could be ignored), persuade the gov to adopt policies (not compulsory)
What is lobbying? Successes? Failures?
-Process of meeting with key political figures to persuade them to support your aims, there are professional lobbying firms who employ people who have contact with political figures e.g. Uber and Boris Johnson (2015–2017) while he was Mayor of London, influencing transport policies in the company’s favour - opposition to Transport for London’s stricter licensing rules
-Successes: meetings add personal element, a ministers friend representing your interests can provide an advantage
-Failures: access doesn’t guarantee desired outcome, no prof that it works as there is no way to measure this, the growth of lobbying in UK and the size of lobbying industry in US suggests it is effecitve
What are corporations’s role in politics? Successes? Failures?
-Develop practical legislation with the government, gov consults coroporaiton on policy ideas to make sure they are practical
-Successes: exert pressure on those in charge to gain an advantage, or may control a key sector of the economy to do this, may pressurise government to give them more favourable legislation through threatse.g. NIssan or Ford said that they would relocate elsewhere which would increase unemployment, banks may also threaten to relocate from London to elsewhere in country which would decrease strength of economy and employment
-Failures: the threats can be quite misleading, involves rich corporations too strongly, their campaigning doesnt always work e.g. HSBS campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU as leaving would threaten jobs and wages and economic stability, abuse system for their own gain e.g. Tesla and Meta in the US
What could be done to improve democracy in the UK?
- Compulsory voting
- Reform of voting system
- Reform of Lords
- Recall of MPs
- Reform of Commons
- Reform monarchy
- Codifying constitution
- E democracy
Strengths of compulsory voting as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-Fines of 20-50£ could encouraged voting - could be used to improve education
-None of the above option could encourage voting
-Worked in Austrialia - turnout is 96% in most elections - increased legitimacy
-May be more inclined to join pressure group of party - improved education
-The right to vote and forcing voting undermines a British value
-May lead to miseducation and selecting candidate at random
-Forced voting could lead to public apathy and resentment
Strengths of reform of voting system as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-Proportional voting system such as single transferrable vote or closed party list could distribute votes fairly, end safe seats and reduce number of wasted votes
-Greater engagement if they believed their vote mattered
-2015, conservatives won majority of MPs with 36% of vote, UKIP got 1 MP with 4 million but SNP got 53 seats with 1.5 million votes
-Can be confusing and more complicated than FPTP
-Proportional systems can lead to extremism parties gaining seats and weaken link between representative and constituency
-Alternative system did not increase turnout
Strengths of reform of lords as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-Removing hereditary peers would improve legitimacy
-Fully or partially elected House of Lords - improve democracy representation and give second chamber greater authority with the commons
-A second elected chamber could mirror the commons
-Second chamber could lead to gridlock with nothing being passed or decided
-House of Lords would reduce in the number of experts and increase professional politicians, losing evidence and expertise that currently informs legislation
-No longer as impartial
Strengths of greater recall of MPs as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-A system recalling MPs was introduced before 2015 general election but it remains quite limited
-Recall would make MPs more responsive to the demands of their constituents for fear of being recalled and removed
-Ensure that all MPs would work harder
-Continued prospect of being recalled and defeated might hinder MPs in the other aspects of their role
-Undermines Burkean representation and the idea that MPs should be able to use their judgement and not follow wishes of constituents
-System of recall that is tougher may lead to MP simply acting as a spokesperson for constituency
What is recall?
Voters enabled to to remove an elected representative between elections by signing a petition
Strengths of reform of commons as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-PMQs could be made less adverbial
-Members of select committees could be elected by whole house
-Could bestow more power on speaker to control behaviour
-To introduced more modern technology for questioning and scrutiny could make them more open to public
-Traditional elements of the commons are popular and do not face serious calls for reform
-Issues over adversarial nature of poltics would need to be tackled fundamental level not reforming parliament
Strengths of reform of devolved system as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-Would answer West Lothian question
-Further deviation through regional assemblies or an English assembly or parliament could leave Westminster as a federal gov to oversee national affairs such as foreign relations and defence
-EVEL which were created to answer the question were divisive, complex, unnecessary - couldve created two types of MPs - would be undermined principle of the legislative chamber
-No demand for English devolution
-Proposition of devolution to northeast was rejected in 2004 by 77.93%
Strengths of reform of monarchy as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-Elected head of state with an elected monarchy or presidency would be more democratic
-Currently popular and has limited power
-Unelected hereditary monarchy is undemocratic
-Unpopular reform
-Cost of president is higher than monarchy
-Elected head of state would have more power and authority - rivalry to parliamentary sovereignty
Strengths of codifying the constitution as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-Would prevent the easy changing of the lives of the people
-Entrenched rights, increasing education
-Sovereignty transferred to codified constitution not elected parliament
-Greater power to unelected judiciary which is unaccountable
-Entrenched constitution would be too hard to reform
Strengths of e democracy as a method of improving democracy? Weaknesses?
-Could make it easier to vote
-Could make it easier to question government
-Would reduce costs and access info easily
-Would allow public to give their thoughts on legislation before its passed
-Would be difficult to monitor and ensure free votes - risk of hacking
-Undermine roles of MPs
-Disadvantage those with no access to internet, increased risk of partisanship
-Would undermine legislative role of parliament and risk a tyranny of the minority
Partisan dealignment
Individuals become less partisan in terms of their support for a particular politicalparty - leads to swing voters - don’t replace this partisan support
Why is there partisan dealignment?
-Social class is becoming less important in party support - it used to be that working classes supported labour
-Age impacts voting - Labour wins among that young typically, every decade older, voters are 9% more likely to vote Tory - 47 years old, youre more likely to vote Tory than Labour - the young is influenced by environment - the biggest group that voted Labour, Lib Dem and green was 18-24 and 70+ is mainly conservative (in 2024, 41% of 18-24 voted labour but in 2017 under Corbyn it was 60%)
-Media - those who vote a certain way, follow that type of media e.g. guardian is left wing and the sun is right wing
-Different circumstances impact party support - such as size of family and relationship status
-Partisan realignment has occurred
Partisan realignment
Individuals change their support in parties and become partisan with it
Crossover between Conservative and Labour?
Net zero by 2050
Both support nuclear deterrent - Trident
Both dont want to rejoin EU
