UNIT 1 democracy and participation

1.1 Current systems of representative democracy and direct democracy.
• The features of direct democracy and representative
democracy.
• The similarities and differences between direct democracy and
representative democracy.
Advantages and disadvantages of direct democracy and representative
democracy and consideration of the case for Reform
1.2 A wider franchise and debates over suffrage.
• Key milestones in the widening of the franchise in relation To class,
gender, ethnicity and age, including the 1832 Great Reform Act and the
1918, 1928 and 1969 Representation of the People Acts.
• The work of the suffragists/suffragettes to extend the franchise. the
work of a current movement to extend the franchise.

1.3 Pressure groups and other influences. .4 Rights in context.

• How different pressure groups exert influence and how their methods
and influence vary in contemporary politics.
• Case studies of two different pressure groups,
highlighting examples of how their methods and influence vary.
• Other collective organisations and groups including think tanks, lobbyists
and corporations, and their influence on government and Parliament.
• Major milestones in their development, including the significance of
Magna Carta and more recent
developments, including the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equality Act
2010.
• Debates on the extent, limits and tensions within the UK’s rights-based
culture, including consideration of how individual and collective right
may conflict, the contributions from civil liberty pressure groups –
including the work of two contemporary civil liberty pressure groups.

1.1 Representative democracy works well. HFDYA

1.1 The UK should adopt more direct democracy. HFDYA
1.1 The UK democracy is in crisis. HFDYA
1.1 The democratic deficit needs to be addressed. HFDYA
1.1 The advantages of representative democracy outweigh the disadvantages. HFDYA
1.1 Westminster is unrepresentative. HFDYA
1.1 The UK democracy needs reform. HFDYA
 1.1 Direct democracy does not work well in the UK. HFDYA
1.1 The UK is facing a participation crisis. HFDY

DIRECT DEMOCRACY IS INEFFECTIVE

TYPES OF counter dismissal judgement

DIRECT DEMO

Referendums A01: Able to solve and legitimise
contentious and controversial issues -
BREXIT REFERENDUM
Results 51% for 49%Turnout 72%
Backbone of election campaign based on
brexit, salient issue
Relieving parliamentary gridlock and
there is evidence for the results to be
implemented into law, political suicide if
ignored
Gridlock in parliament re emerged as brexit simply said ‘
remain’ or ‘leave’ and not ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ also results still left
division being split in had and even nations such as scotland
outright being against it with 62% vote remain TYRANNY OF
MAJORITY - emerged as a byproduct of david cameron not
getting expected result - resigning after result released -
failed to advance political agenda and exacerbated the
contention and controversy
Continued uncertainty prorogations of parliament and other
issues which remained unresolved by referendums but rather
resolved by educated representative such as windsor
framework for NI trade issues
Direct democracy often fails produce final clear results and is
a tool used by representatives in power as they strategically
utilise it, instead when direct democracy is wanted, often it is
ignored and not given
And only allow referendums when confident of results as seen
w denial 2022 of scottish independence ref which westminster
denied as they knew results most likely be for independence
Argument can also be made of its ADVISORY NATURE -
means that it is possible for gov to manipulate the outcome if
they aren't happy w results

PLEASE OWN POLITICAL SUPPORTERS - ONLY HELD AT DISCRETION OF GOV

CAMERON, settle long standing
constitutional issue
Google said the search term ‘ what is the EU ?’is the second
most popular question searched in the uk following the shock
triumph of the leave campaign
Public largely uneducated, google search
Failure of making rationals decisions due to media twitter
factcheck uk, propaganda storylines w brexit benign made a
immigration issue w 2021 yougov 53% national news and 23%
social media
Rather than educated representatives who devote their days
to politics and will of nation
- not really the excersise of direct democracy
- Westminister gov pledged to PREVENT a second
scottish independence referndum despite the
widespread support for SNP
- Gov often choose to hold ref for own poltical
purposes rather than the public good
- David Cameron called eu ref to deal with electoral
threat pof ukip

Also dependent on issue beyond voted and for AV ref was

intense apathy with 42% turnout showing sometimes direct
democracy is not values and people would rather leave
political issues to their MPs

ead to EMOTIONALISED CAMAPIGNS DOMINATED BY

POPULISM
-arguments can become distorted and emotionalised
-referendums held on complex issues
-easy for populism to take hold

Petitions Invigorates the democracy, maintain
engagement directly and acts as force
against apathy
: → failure of public be educated or understand how uk
- uk parliamentary petition website got so
much traffic
-crashed multiple times during the first 24
hours of the petitions opening
- 800,000 signature meneigtis b vaccine
→ trump ban got 2 MILLION VOTES
-show that the vast amount of turnout
evidences people’s engagement in direct
democracy
- engage number of issues public feels
strongly about
-alternative forms of participation -
enhancing democracy as people express
their opinion and views
DIRECT DEMOCRACY IS EFFECTIVE
referendums
suggests that parties who are even
supported to be representing us can
easily refute what the public wants after
a referendum has taken place and even
date to resist the result of referendum
Liberal Democrat manifesto for 2019 -
revoke article 50 even after Britain voted
to leave EU in 2016 brexit referendum OF
-both sides accused of poor campaigning and misuse of facts
and figures
LEAVE CAMPAIGN bus vs a famous claim by George Osborne
part of what was labelled ‘ project fear ‘. That brexit will cost
4,300 per household
A01: “prevent Donald trump from making a state visit to the
United Kingdom “ almost 2 million signatures - but he still
came
democracy works, demonstrating how in practice petitions not
be viable as public often unaware of depth and importance of
their signature
GIVE POWER TO UNEDUCATED VOTERS
- politicians spend time becoming experts over
political issues
- Referendums give control over often extremely
complex and moral and political issues to voters
- Bestows democratic legitimacy voters often not well
equipped to make these decisions
-in reality a party alone has no real power to refute
referendum results
-if they try to they will be punished at general elections by not
gaining support of public 0 low vote share
2020 EU withdrawal act and the fact that Lib Dem’s only got
11.5% of the vote
-referendums purest form of democracy - gives it huge
legitimacy as seen with brexit referendum having 72% turnout
- A02:whilst petitions only need 100,000 to be
debated in parliament
- Most instances where it meets this threshold
actually makes no difference
- Barely real action being taken
- Parliament must consider other things - in this case
global relations
The petition asking the British government to revoke article
50 and reconsider its plan to exit the European Union
passed 6 million signatures a day and a half after Britain was
meant to have left the European
THERESA MAY DISMISSED this petition
-eventually EU withdrawal act was passed
-this evidence shows that our trustee system normally
always takes precedence over what really matters
-to what extent are petitions actually enforceable and change
laws?
Impact of referendums kept as they provide a stronghold,
clear answer and would be political suicide if ignored
history of British parliament they have never turned down the
result of a referendum
Successful referendums :
2014 scottish referendum where the 55.3% of Scots voted to
remain in the UK
 51%
Weak nature of direct democracy given it
is meant to just be advisory and
parliamentary sovereignty takes
precedence
petitions 6 million signed a petition to revoke article
50 in 2019
- even when mass of people ant
to voice their views through
petitions they aren’t always
listened to and instead ignored
-brexit result as will of the people was entrenched into law even
though it is only advisory
-attempts of other opposition parties and groups to manipulate
or reverse the outcome was futile
GAIN LEGITIMACY FOR IMPORTANT POLITICAL OR
CONSTITUTIONAL DECISION
- when controversial political or constitutional
decisions need to be made it is useful for
representatives to get the direct consent of the
electorate - this protects representatives in the
future from some of the political comeback if the
decision appears to be misguided
- AO1: Good Friday referendum in 1998 devolution for
NI
Reason for petition revoked is bc public already spoke in
referendum still direct democracy, as we see petitions in fact
very useful at raising awareness anf benign tool for public to
express views on issues they feel strongly about
-petition to accept more asylum seekers got only 450,000
signatures - less than this one
-but David Cameron still agreed to let 20,000 more Syrians be
resettled - and a further £100 million would be spent in
humanitarian aid
RAISE PUBLIC AWARENESS OF KEY ISSUES
- allow political parties and voters to focus entirely on a
single issue
- Widespread scrutiny of that issue and education
surrounding it
- SCOTTISH INDEPENDENT REFERENDUM IN 2014
- Allowed for robust debate on the issue of 16 year olds
→ 84% voted - 55% remain; 45% leave. As a result of the high
turnout, especially amongst the youth, In 2015, the Scottish
Parliament then legislated to give 16-17 year olds the right to
vote in Scottish local and parliamentary elections
- AO2 : this show that whilst referendums are advisory
in nature its status makes it practically a suicide
note for government to not implement its result
- DD has unparalleled legitimacy
- Works well when used to break parliamentary
deadlock and enhance political debate
SENSE PUBLIC MOOD
GIVES EQUAL SAY TO EVERY VOTER
- fptp does not give equal voting power across uk
- Votes cast in marginal seats have much more
weight than in safe seats
- Referendums counteract this problem
- The voice of every voter counts equally - gives final
verdict a greater mandate than that received as the
result of a general election
- In 2015 general election UKIP won 3.8 million votes
only secured one seat in parl
- 2016 referndum each vote counted equally
Direct democracy can be effective to fill in for the
shortcomings of our representative trustee system
AO1: snowdrop campaign - after the dunblane massacre in
1996 - saw 750,000 signatures very quickly handguns banned
in 1996 -
Quick and effective campaign due to public support and
shows that concentrated support on topics that improve
welfare and align with the attitude of the government and
agenda are usually taken aboard
 voting
REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY IS NOT EFFECTIVE
REPRESENTATION Constituency MP link
Strong connection in order to be voted due to
FPTP
Evidence - heathrow expansion with 8 tory MPs
toe party line
PARTICIPATION Yes lots of online participation on media w parties
and MPs
Jeremy corbyn and the youth on snapchat and
twitter 2.5million followers
28% young pp get news from facebook
ACCOUNTABILITY Held accountable in PMQs, MPs themeves able to
do show and it is live and public to watch
Voters can simply punish for not voting again - lib
dems suffering after not eliminating tuition fees in
con dem govt
NO DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT, HEALTHY DEMOCRACY
PARTICIPATION Participation crisis, not vote so weaker mandate
2019 GE - 67% turnout latest
This has been historical trend falling noticeably
from 2001 to 59% when previous 1997 was at 71%
Whips still very powerful
With only 24% MPs declaring support BREXIT
Issue of safe seats in FPTP make MPs unwilling to put
effort
Participation be misinformed and thus not valid,
cambridge analytica scandal, and factcheck uk twitter
change name
PMQs can be avoided and hide around question
Boris johnson constant avoiding of LIAISON committee
shows how accountability in representative society not
always guaranteed
The decrease turnout from 2001 and 1997 may be
explained by happathy w bair winning, already content
Being in 2005 reelected w a 167 seat majority
Turnout not sole indicator of political engagement, very
Low trust that MPs are even able to represent
IPSOS MORI RECORD 2016 -ONLY 21% OF POPULATION
BELIEVE POLITICIANS COULD BE RELIED ON TO TELL
THE TRUTH
MPs don't have our interest at heart
PARTY GATE SCANDAL, 2009 EXPENSES SCANDAL
Means there is apathetic nature
Ppl just leave politics in hands of MPs
Turnout very low
2019 = 67%
IPSOS mori 47% of 18-24 yr olds don't show up
Elements of parl can be unaccountable as a whole - the
house of lords is unelected thus has no accountability
→ issue as can be a tool of MP w their power of
patronage as seen johnson placing in allies and own
brother in
Social media active room for debate and facilitate
political awareness
→
E-petitions w 6mil in article 50 revocation
 - traditional yet w evolvement of time, become more lone
REPRESENTATION 2019 34% women and 10% e/m in house of
commons
If accurate would be 50% women and despite
e/m pop rising, it is not reflected in house of
commons
–. Even e.m may not share same experiences
such as rishi sunak who comes from wealthy
family and attended private school
LEVEL OF TRUST Loss confidence + interest in politics bc feel
unrepresented
Lack transparency
2006 cash for honours scandal
Fromer MP Byers secretly filmed being lobby
form that influence was like cab for hire’-
scandal
DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT, UNHEALTHY DEMOCRACY
PARTICIPATION Rise pluralistic democracy, can participate in
plethora of ways
No traditional methods anymore but range PP.
petitions
6 mil petition to revoke article 50
For salient issue brexit ref had 72% turnout
- click ocracy
The improvement is undeniable and more importantly
just bc MP dont look same as their constituents doesnt
means they cannot promote and reflect their needs
As same sex marriage passed 2010 w a majority of
heterosexual MPs
Still 87% feel rep by lab and con
–. Blair later steps down
So accountability maintained
But CPS says there is "insufficient evidence" to charge
anyone in relation to cash-for-honours allegations
against the Conservative party.
Cps = crown prosecution service
–.their involvement shows breaches, sleazes of MPs are
not taken lightly
Led to being stripped of their Commons passes and
reprimanded for breaching rules preventing
ex-politicians from cashing in on their privileged access
to parliament to make money as lobbyists.
Non trad methods rise bring complexities and
issues such as online fake news and even refs -
wording of Q
→ there has to be a equal knowledge and voting on
false assumptions or void campaigns
RIse of minority parties means greater representation
and more voices heard, support for dispersed
More multi party states. W policies being influenced
by minor parties such as green party and env
creating shift in overton window and tory manifesto
2019 of getting to 0 net emissions
Decline trust not due logn term social forces but
short term ones
Demoract not in crisis
All issues can be dealt w more connection between
ministers and electorate
–.l people trust restored by acts of legislation
Party funding act
FOI
MP recall act
Sense apathy m 2001 to 59% when previous 1997 was at
71% -
POLITICAL ABSENTEEISM form pol expression depicts
clear sense apathy, perpetual in participation crisis
 → greater amount participation gains more
democratic legitimacy
REPRESENTATION MP constunecy link
8 tory MP vote against party line against
heathrow expansion
ACCOUNTABILITY MP recall act allow public hold MP accountable
by 10% conceited voting for it
- MP fiona onasnaya faces w speeding change
so in prison for 28 which put MP recall act in
effect as her constituents in peterborough 2017
revoked her seat
VOTING BE COMPULSORY
IMPROVE PARTICIPATION Force participation leads higher turnout
2019 GE was 67% vs australia which in 2019
GE had 92% turnout
IM,PROVE REPRESENTATION Strengthen democracy by having.;; all voices
heard
Youth
IPPR think tank - found that 55% of 18-24 year
olds believe democracy serves them badly
In 2010 only 44% of 18-24yr olds voted
class DE
: East Ham constituency has been made a labour
safe seat since 1997 thus making the constituents
who wish to vote otherwise apathetic and
disillusioned as they cannot truly determine who
will represent them during general election
Fails often more than success
- creates feel of apathy
Isn paisley fail declare 2 luxury family holiday sri
lanka using governments money
- But survived as only 9.2% consitents
recalled
Impedes human liberty the right to not vote
- not voting can be a political move to show
discontent w parties
Russel brand being an advocate of this saying
'don't vote, demonstrate w al spotentny of london
rioters’
Real event of not voting as political move was in
2017 and 2022 french GE when ppl decided not to
vote due to the absence of a socialist candidate
The idea of compulsory voting has already been
rejected in HOC by our elected reps
As david winnicks, formed labour MP tried
introduce bill requiring voting but was rejected
Party whips r strong
In 2019 - 21 tory rebels kicked out of tory party by whips
for trying block johnson no deal brexit plan
Accountability can be avoided
2019 johnson avoid liaison committee simply not attend ,
avoiding scrutiny w yvette cooper saying this is
disgraceful. The Prime Minister is once again refusing to
answer questions at the last minute
Even w compulsory voting there is no guarantee it is
legitimate, ppl may spoil their votes
As UK spoiled votes is little 0.3% while austria has a
bigger 5% of spoiled votes
Also voting may be outdated, rather ppl choose engage
in petitions
Its up to politicians to represented and strengthen
political engagement as seen 2017 w 64% 18-24yr olds
turnout according IPSOS MORI, - which is one of hughes
turnouts among youth - this may be attributed to
corbuns engagement
1.2 The development of the franchise has been successful. HFDYA
1.2 The UK is a nation with universal suffrage. HFDYA
1.2 Contemporary debates on the further extension of franchise has been successful. HFDYA
EXTENSION OF FRANCHISE
prisoners Tough on crime view
Tough on crime view
Govt still against it 2011 in HoC - massive defeat
234 v 22
Under 16 In 2010 only 44% of 18-24 yr olds voted
Youth lack interest in politics either way
Conservatives in charge and still do not approve
Defeated in hol in 2015 as amendment already
brought up by lib dems = Liberal Democrat
spokesman Lord Tyler, who introduced the
amendment, said votes at 16 was “both rational
and right”
More detail to vote in eu referendum but was
defeated 303 to 253
Foreign nationals Undermined the rights of millions of labour voters who voted leave
Wld mean anyone with residency right sin uk can vote
ECHR found and declared this unlawful ,
taken to court
John Hirst case against the British govt
which saw European court of human rights
ruled that the UK's blanket ban on prisoners'
voting is unlawful and in violation of Article
3 of the First Protocol of the European
convention on human rights,
Howard league penal reform continues to
advocate for prisoner votes - arguing voting
is a civic duty rather than privilege
Yet this is not due to reason of feasibility but
rather not being in interest of tory party as
youth appeal more to labour and left wing
Continues fight for vote 16 with pressure
group vote 16
→ more engaged politics w the movements
creations of youth parliament w 600 young
MPs
And lib dems continues manifesto of 16-17
votes
Long term residents who worked and contributed to taxes
for many years cannot afford expensive fees to gain
Scotland 2020 prisoners w less than 12 month
sentences are eligible to vote in scottish parliament
Concession made such as friction in 2017 allow some
prisoners to vote on day
Currently civil prisons so those who failed pay fine or
debt and those on awaiting trial can vote
Success of 16 voting ins scotland, turnout 75% at
independence ref
Wales also allow 16yr olds to vote
→ continues attempt as about on board reduce voting
age and for franchisement
By representation of people bill young people
Sponsor by Peter Kyle Labour mp but Bill failed to
progress to second reading. 2017-2018
Representation of the People (Young People's
Enfranchisement) Bill
- much like suffrage movement lot sof momentum and
now govt support it is likely to occur as it has in other
developed bodies
Labour party - pledge to give the vote to millions of non uk citizens living
in britain - 2019 ‘everyone who has helped build our country has a say ‘
 Influence from outside of uk on uk policy and legislation
AO1: Brexit referendum 2016 was built on the anti immigrant
rhetoric - legitimised by the decision to ‘leave’ the EU - taking back
control does not entail ceding voting privileges to foreigners
RIGHT VOTE SHOULD NOT BE LOWERED
Education Citizenship education has been a compulsory
part of national curriculum in secondary
schools since 2002 - education has a direct
effect on political participation as it provides
individuals with knowledge- incentivising them
to engage with the political systems as they
learn importance of democrac
Responsibility 16-17 year olds at the ballot who hold many
responsibilities i
Combine w education
can engage in sexual relations , marry , pay tax , join
army - give them democratic right to influence
decisions that will define their future
citizenship and denied vote
EEA nationals pay more in taxes than they receive -
2018-2019 - contributed £22 billion to tax and benefit
system
Pressure group ‘3 million’ has rendered the UK’s decision to
deny vote for EU citizens a ‘breach of their human rights’ -
went as far as to launch a judicial review in 2019
State schools - level of education differs
depending on school so some may not be
fully informed and educated and this might
lead to misinformed votes , donkey voting or
just inc political apathy - misleading to
suggest all secondary schools prioritise
citizenship education
- politics is not a compulsory subject -
option - so to what extent are these children's
knowledge and information strong enough to
vote
- Not everyone has the same quality
or access to civic education. Local
authorities decide on the nature
and extent of the delivery of civic
education,
When resources are constrained, some
schools cannot afford to dedicate equal
amounts of time to civic education. This
results in a postcode lottery for young
people, and some will miss out on the
support they might need to exercise their
right to vote
Still need parental permission to do many things so
under influence of their parents - can change vote
-do not fully understand responsibilities of being an
adult
Extra 3 years in work training or university would be
beneficial in making a well informed decision
So by 18- vote properly,
16-17 year olds should not be given right to vote
-maintain and extend freedom of movement even with britain leaving the
eu
Attitudes to immigration to improve
Voting should reflect a citizens experience and understanding of a
particular national community
Profound impact on nature of citizenship
Could add at least 3 million votes
Lobby for liberal immigration
A report commissioned by reuters institute found that
the traditional news media no longer has a dominant
force in delivering political information towards young
people instead students often receive their political
news through social media tv shows an online
conversations- this shows how younger people are
receiving their political education through unreliable
sources meaning they may not be able to structure
well informed decisions in terms of voting
Political information from the online websites full of
bias and fake news e.g cambridge analytica and the
fact check website which turned out to be cons party -
means not a fair and unbiased source of poltical info -
may easily sway younger voters
Media sensationalises and demonises
- Theresa may , ed miliband - all victims of
media attacks -
Decisions heavily influenced by media as they are easily
influenced and malleable to extremist views + to think
emotionally and not practically -inc donkey voting - might just
vote whatever as younger generation have more apathy to
politics
Only 29% of 16-17 year olds working full time
Not taxpayers
Should be given vote once they've gained greater life

Participation 2014 scottish independence referendum - 74%
of 16-17 year olds voted - they have already
adopted this policy and i has shown great
impacts
Would be able to raise issues that persistently
impact young people
SUCCESS OF DEVELOPMENT OF FRANCHISE - YES
women 1928 great rep act - terms for men and women
equalised - both can vote at 21 - this addressed
all the concerns and movements of the
suffragettes who worked vigorously to have
women represented in a political setting
Then 1969 rep act - lower age 18
since it is a large civil responsibility and they will experience , are paying taxes and thinking independently
have a large impact on legislation
- extending the period where the person is unable to vote may
increase their desire to eventually vote when they hit 18
Would only create a marginally small may have adverse impacts on turnout
increase - voting age pop would only inc by Voter turnout amongs - 2010 GE was 44% so allowing
3% 16 -17 to vote also can compound the problem of youth
OVER salient issue of independence reason apathy - voter turnout has declined about 10%
for high turnout also likely influenced by 2-16-2019 in this group - thus dec legitimacy of gov
parents echo chamber
-if they do not engage in civic education - not
concerned with social and political issues -
then not likely to turnout ot vote , just
because it works in scotland may not work
here - in Scotland there is a house desire for
independence which might be what
encourages the youth to vote - may not be
the case in westminster
however when considering the nature of the moreover the fight for franchise - did not subsequently
fight suffragettes and suffragists fought in address the disparities between men and women in
order to obtain these rights means that whilst society
suffrage was granted it cannot be rendered a
‘successful’ development Gender based oppression persist
-slow progress as male politicians continued
to undermine women as ‘emotional’ and Development of female rights and representation still
‘irrational’ thus not being equipped with the insufficient
ability of engaging in political discourse
Women rep - 35% in parliament - 32% in 2019
Had to go through deaths and mass 2023 = 35%
oppression - development was strenuous and AO1:gender pay gap - currently 15%
difficult
→ emily pankhurst horse incident
→ 1912 suffrage attck attempt set fire to
theatre royal in dublin during packed
lunchtime
 Under 18s representation of the peoples act 1969 widened
franchise to include everyone over the age of 18
- incorporating all citizens in the uk who
considered legal adults into the electorate
votes at 16 pressure group scotland and wales have already extended their
however not fully successful as can be argued franchise to 16 year olds which has shown great youth
it should be further reduced to 16 years old - engagement and thus makes the system very
16-17 have many responsibilities - legal age to democratic - 2014 Scottish independence referendum
get married , for consent and enrol in army - 75% 16 year olds participated in the decisions -
-things such as tuition fees, closure of youth
services impact them
would increase youth interest and
participation in mainstream politics
They will pick up habit of voting
Receive political education in pshe as part of
mandatory teaching in curriculum

Refused representation of people bill for

youth 2017-18 did not pass to second reading
by 2 labour MPs → attempted twice spondoer
by peter kye

Representation of the People (Young People's

Enfranchisement) Bill

Private members bill

1.3 Pressure groups represent the public more than political parties do. HFDYA
1.3 Pressure groups have more influence on government decisions than political parties. HFDYA
1.3 Pressure groups are vital in a representative democracy. HFDYA
1.3 Pressure groups are only successful based on their status. HFDYA
1.3 Public campaigning is the most effective method for a pressure group to make any impact. HFDYA
1.3 The attitude of the government is the most important factor that contributes to the success of a pressure group. HFDYA
1.3 Pressure groups threaten/enhance democracy. HFDYA
1.3 Other collective organisations can influence government decisions. HFDYA
1.3 Think Tanks, Lobbyists and Corporations are detrimental for democracy. HFDYA
1.3 Organised groups enhance democracy in the UK. HFDYA
1.3 The UK is a pluralist democracy. HFDYA
1.3 The tactics they deploy are the most important reason for the success or failure of pressure groups. HFDYA
 ROLE OF PRESSURE GROUPS IN DEMOCRACY IS GOOD
PARTICIPATION Opponents of the view in question may suggest that PGs
exacerbate the disillusionment and apathy people already have
with politics as PGs are often perceived in a negative light due to
Over 40% of British their radical or extreme tactics. This can potentially hinder the
citizens are a UKs participation crisis further as displayed by the turnout
during general elections being consistently in the last decade
member of at least as unable to reach 70% - 2019 GE IS 67%
one pressure group
. 2004 fathers for justice’s hurled purple flour bombs at Tony Blair
during PMQs and later stunts involved nudist stunts in Marks and
Spencers on Oxford street
in 2019 8 activists part of the extinction rebellion sprayed fake
blood on the Treasury whilst on top of a fire engine and they held
banners saying “stop funding climate death” and insulate britain
blocking M25 blocking an ambulance from a children's hospital.
Animal Liberation Front is widely criticised by the media for the
direct action they take including removing animals from facilities
that conduct experiments on them or breed them. In their first
year of operation alone the ALF actions accounted for £250,000
worth of damage. This deters people from joining PGs and
participating in political process.
REPRESENTATION Proponents of the view may suggest that PGs provide little
benefit to our current system of democracy as they undermine
our democratically representative bodies and although they're
the Runnymede able to unite and represent people's concerns surrounding a
Trust The certain issue their influence is secondary and has little impact
especially if their objectives are not ideologically compatible
Runnymede Trust with the governments course of action.
are a pressure
This view is myopic and fails to acknowledge how a
minority of PGs use these methods and don't
usually take part in nonviolent action and these are
usually outsider pressure groups who do this
effectively to garner media attention, this can
actually mobilise support for them and enhance
participation as it allows the work of PGs to be put to
the fore and publicised sparking political debate.
in 2022 when 2 Just stop oil protesters through
tomato soup on Van Gogh's Sunflowers painting at
the National Gallery, this gained considerable media
attention allowing them to raise awareness to their
environmental cause and it ignited more political
debate as people asserted their opinions on the
matter. Furthermore, although these tactics appear
extreme they can be justified as it can help cultivate
true change as displayed how the Suffragettes’
militant approach and demonstrations such as
chaining themselves to govt buildings gained them
more support as seen in 1867 riots in Hyde Park.
Whilst there is some merit in this argument as PGs
lack legal authority and formal powers to create
changes to the law, thai argument overlooks the
power that pgs have shown to have in cultivating
true change despite this not being in the govt
interests which should be undermined to reflect the
overwhelming will of the people as they act as a
vehicle to enhance representation pressuring the
government into action.The most prudent example of
Instead it must be argued that PGs enhance our
democracy as it eradicates the democratic deficit by
increasing participation through unconventional and
unorthodox methods as they reflect the system of out
pluralist democracy by allowing a new avenue of
political participation as citizens are able to be active
contributors to our democracy by assert their opinions on
single issues beyond the traditional ballot box every few
years that require ideological affiliations and is something
many have become apathetic towards. The loose
structure and flexible nature of PGs & their online
presence means that supporters can participate
without spending too much time and attention
compared to PP where frequent engagement is needed.
The high levels of participation of these unorthodox
methods can be displayed by the high memberships of
GREENPEACE FOLLOWERS INSTAGRAM 4MILLION
National Trust has over 5 million members compared to
the conservatives who have 200k members.
38 degrees - environment PG → fully online 320,000 sign
petition against privatising land registry = LED GOVT
ABANDON PLANS FOR £1BN SELL OFF LATER
ANNOUNCING LAND REGISTRY WILL REMAIN A PUBLIC
BUT SEEN AS LOBBYIST
Instead it must be argued that PGs enhance our
democracy and provide another additional layer of
representation by amplifying the voices of minorities in
the UK who are often overlooked and
underrepresented by traditional democratic platforms,
this allows them to counter and constrain elitism through
minority representation.
group that focus on
promoting racial
equality in the UK.
The Runnymede
Trust aims to
ensure that the
voices of ethnic
minority
communities are
heard and that
policies are in place
to address the
challenges faced
by these group
ACCOUNTABILITY
Global Witness and
Nigerian Gas and Oil
Global Witness are a
UK-based pressure group
that investigated
corruption in the Nigerian
fossil fuel industry that is
dominated by
multinational corporations
– including many based in
Britain. They exposed
secret payments being
made to the Nigerian
Government to benefit
private businesses. They
put pressure on the UK
Government to press for
increased transparency in
efforts of the 2003 Stop the War Coalition which saw one of the
biggest demonstrations against the government with 1 million
protesters gathering in Hyde Park holding banners such as “No
War” and “Make tea not war” as they opposed the Us-led invasion
of Iraq.
However their efforts were obsolete as Blair ultimately had
support from parliament in a series of two votes, our
democratically elected and represented body especially due to
his 179 seat majority he had won, granting him a mandate and
allowing him to comfortably ignore the protests and remain
committed to the invasion in order to develop good relations
between labour and the US Republican party and overthrow
Saddam Hussein and eliminate threats of the use of WOMD.
This may suggest that PGs are unable to enhance our
democracy as their views can be disregarded if it doesn't align
with the govts objectives as they lack true authority thus it
must be argued that their influence is secondary and they act
as a nuisance challenging our democratically accountable
body, undermining this formal form of representation an
makeup of PGs are internally undemocratic as leaders are often
unelected, not subject to scrutiny and are thus accountable to
the public, furthermore the way they choose to influence the
government has little legal restrictions. For example the leaders
of the National Farmers Union are chosen indirectly by county
delegates rather than the overall membership. MPs are already
sufficient in enhancing our democracy by holding powerful
individuals and the government to account.
- MP Darren Jones from the Labour Party was able to hold
powerful individuals like Peter Hebblethwaite owner of P&O
Ferries to account for the mass firing over 800 workers to
account, he ended up paying large sums in compensation. They
may use this to suggest that the work of MPs are sufficient in
holding the government and Powerful individuals to account so
pressure groups are not necessary to enhance our democracy
but exacerbate its democratic and accountability elements. PG
efforts in accountability are unmatched by existing bodies.
this is how in 2009 the Gurkha Justice campaign w
petition signed by 250,000 and which receive
celebrity endorsement by actor Joanna Lumley who
was able to help pressure the govt to change its
policy and the campaign received widespread media
support on both sides which created negative
publicity for Gordon Browns govt, thus the pressure
group represented the views of many at large and
was able to secure change and its objectives as
residency rights for all Ghrukas were soon granted
highlighting how PGs play a significant representative
function enhancing our democracy as the will of the
people were reflected despite this not being in the
govts interests.
Whilst this view does have merit as MPs do play a
salient role in our democracy by holding individuals
to account, and whilst PGs may not have the internal
structures similar to parties this is beneficial as it
allows for flexibility with their methods and
Pressure groups supplant and further strengthen
our democracy as an external body which can hold
MPs and the govt to account. This is displayed by
how PGs are able to also scrutinise the govt serving
an accountability function. The most prudent
example of this is how in 2022 the publishing
company, BMJ owned by PG BMA (British Medical
Association- representing all UK doctors and medical
students), published a journal exposing how austerity
under the conservatives between 2012-2019 may
have caused an excess of 300,000 deaths in Britain.
This highlights that PGs acts a mechanism/ vehicle to
boost accountability and scrutiny thus enhancing our
democracy as they reveal vital information that would
have otherwise been concealed, allowing for greater
transparency between public and govt.
undeniable progress made by LGBTQ+ campaigns such
as Stonewall which was able to pressure the govt and
thus able to secure key legislation like the 2013 Marriage
Act which legalised homosexual marriages in the UK.
ALSO IN n the wake of the resurgence of the Black Lives
Matter movement following the death of George Floyd
the government issued an inquiry and publication of the
report of the commission on Race and Ethnic
disparities in 2020 which explored evidence on the
existence of racial disparities and it set out a new positive
agenda for change ensuring fairness for all and it
explored the barriers EM individuals face.
t acts as a platform of representation and it
compensated for the tyranny of majority seen in
traditional politics as they can cultivate substantial
change in unorthodox ways by airing the concerns of
marginalised groups and acting as a fulcrum for the
voice of many sectors whose rights are under threat,
dispersed power to
Instead the stronger argument is that pressure groups
supplement our democracy as they are able to hold
the government to account by forcing them to respond
to the will of the people and voters who demand
change at the fault of their poor policy making and the
government is accountable to them and rely on them for
their standing. This is demonstrated by how the
government had to respond quickly after the 1996
Dunblane Massacre in Scotland out of fear of losing the
next general election as the snowdrop campaign saw
750,000 signatures on a petition in favour of the banning
of handguns. The public revulsion at this event and
sympathy for the bereaved led to tremendous public
pressure on the govt and it captured the imagination of
the public, media and politicians and it led to the
banning of private ownership of handguns and it was
an immediate success in ensuring the govt are
accountable and respond to public will on issues.
 this area. Without the
efforts of Global Witness,
it is extremely unlikely this
issue would have got
traction.
PRESSURE GROUPS IS BAD
THEMES COUNTER
LEGISLATION [policy Bring issues to rise
formulation] Stonewall - same sex marriage act
The British Heart Foundation The BHF have
campaigned for policies to tackle obesity and
consequently to improve cardiovascular health.
They use detailed research from health
professionals to lobby the government. The
lobbying of the BHF was a key reason that the
‘sugar tax’ was introduced in 2018.
REPRESENTATION Represents minority groups whos voices not
heard GURKHA justice campaign success -
browne govt grant equal ighst residency to all
gurakh soldiers
DISMISAL
Only bc govt credits and makes policy bc pressure
group insider status
BAN section 28 govt
Pressure groups influence govt to change but govt
ultimate lawmaker
Only bc media attention - actress joanna lumey and
mass petition 250,000
Minority group gained representation due to
pressure placed on govt and fear nagtive publciity
but still ultamey govt act as
Other high pressure iraq stop war 2003 failed
OWN VIEW
ASH smoking debate and research BMA bc support
of pral in 2014 ACT ban smoking in cars w children
376 to 107
BMA - pressure govt increase spending on NHS by
3.4% in 2018
UNISON - trade union in Scotland - accepting the
pay rises after trade unions strikes - 6.5% pay rise to
health workers
EXAMPLE PG BEING IGNORED - IRAQ WAR
Misconception represent minority groups - typically
the most powerful pressure groups reflect wealthy
elite
CBI - wealthy many office to lobby ministers -
CORPORATE TAX CUT TO 19%
Favour eg - taxpayers alliance [another pressure
group]
 Interest of wealthy and taken on by conservative
govts

FACTORS OF SUCCESS PRESSURE GROUPS

RESOURCES Can fail even w resources howard league penal more membership means more money seen w howard RSPCA - more paid membership mean
reform league charge price money can go building office, hire workers for
research
Even w resources failure RSPCA employs 1600 people + supported by
50,000 london rally 2010 smashing window - tuition Example of a small but influential Pressure Groups thousands volunteers
fee protest Howard League for Penal Reform – The Howard League
for Penal Reform is a small pressure group that was NEU – In 2022/23 the NEU spent £68 million
established in 1866. In 2021/22 they spent £1.6 million from an income of £122 million
and have a staff of 22. Over the years they have been
able to have a disproportionate influence and have been
responsible for pushing for a number of policy changes
from the government:

RASHFORD head campaign w millions support in Gurkha soldiers

POPULARITY Still failure = 50,000 london rally 2010 smashing petitions public - FSM
window - tuition fee protest Hillsborough support group - 130,00
→ result as later november PM told there be £396 mil disclosure relevant documents
Stop war -2mil rpotests support for fsm christmas, easter and summer holidays
2020 oct MP vote against extending fsm through DUNBLANE MASSACRE 750,000 - BAN
holidays till easter 2021 Gurkha soldiers HANDGUNS

IDEOLOGICAL LIBERTY FAILURE By coalition the id cards were infact repealed Gives insider status essential pass legislation
COMPATIBILITY Liberty outsider plenty freedom success - challenge ASH ban smoking car w children
govt judicial review [id cards and INVESTIGATORY Stonewall - same sex marriage - sinc eblair
Examples of limit POWERS ACT’
influence despite Howard league penal reform - impartial
ideological compatibility still fail if gov completely against it e.g student organisation - supply home office w info
CBI – Whilst the CBI have protests - attacked prince charles car and lost PRISONERS, POLCIING, YOUITH CRIME
been close to the support - 2010 Data research - BMA
 Conservative Government,
they were often opposed
to the policies taken
forward after the EU
Referendum in 2016. In
particular, the CBI were
entirely opposed to any
notion of a no-deal Brexit
and believed that risking
this was not something that
should be considered. The
CBI were unable to have
the level of influence they
would have liked over the
Brexit proc

TYPES PRESSURE GROUPS V PARTIES

INSIDER political parties have greater ability to represent as they
get voted IN to parliament - they vote IN line with the
public’s interests - insider pressure groups can be
‘undemocratic ; - having undue influence over
government - without being elected =democratic deficit
AO1: UKIP (brexit party)-had the interest of the public - in
getting britain taking back their control and ultimate
sovereignty - remaining within britain supporting the
public’s desire to leave the EU after the 2016 ref
They gained 12.6% of the vote in the 2017 GE
amongst political parties in the House of Commons
there is a lot of animosity or adversarial politics which
means parties are usually trying to promote or protect
their agenda - which is unlike pressure groups who
enable debate on important issues and scrutinise gov
for genuine concern rather than because they have an
agenda
AO1: national farmers union is an insider group who
represent farmers - consulted by agricultural public bill
committee and gov regarding the replacement of CAP
Gives insider status essential pass legislation
ASH ban smoking car w children
Stonewall - same sex marriage - since blair
Howard league penal reform - impartial organisation - supply
homoffice w info PRISONERS, POLICING, YOUTH CRIME
Data research - BMA

-PG yield specialist knowledge unlike pp who are

generalists especially regarding the farming sector -
contributions to post brexit policy - beneficial

SECTIONAL trustee system means we vote for who we trust Will
represent us better in parliament
Ethnic minority rep - demonstrates political parties are
composed of and effectively represent marginalised
sections of society adequately
10% em in HoC
existence of party whips means that MPs struggled to
represent their constituency let alone an entire
demographic
Identity politics does not exist - being a member of
BAME doesn't mean your political beliefs resonate
with majority of BAME members
sectional pressure groups are devoted towards a specific section of
society - with no other obligations like MPs or political parties who
have to concern themselves with other topics .
Members of sectional pressure groups choose to become invested in
that specific section of society alone
 AO1: Kwasi kwarteng - extremely neo liberal policies and
privileges upbringing -called out by MP ruqa huq - she AO1: stonewall has had a historical focus on representing the interests
is wrong for this because assumes she shld have “ set of lgbtq - lobbying power has resulted in major influence regarding
characteristics of views “???? the equality

Rishis sunak controversy unrep, millinaire wife non dom

status to avoid tax

CASUAL rise of populist political parties - who can channel their
authority and influence to benefit a specific cause which
society is concerned with
AO1: GREEN PARTY - influence on gov - allows for the
public to be represented influence become so substantial
that ‘aggregation’’ occurred- as the Conservative Party
were propelled to adopt environmental policies such as
by 2030 stopping the use of petrol and diesel cars —>
environmental causes and concerns becoming policy
and legislation binds the entire UK to the cause and thus
greater success -
green party's existence was not the reason for con
taking closer interest in environment
Env protection has become salient issue - which is why
gov chooses to take action
-in order for issue to become salient it needs to yield
widespread concern - best amassed by PG
INSULATE BRITAIN
JUST STOP OIL
AO1: greenpeace has 3 million membership
pressure groups are more representative in not being bound by
ministerial conduct and thus can use any means necessary to
secure their specific interests and cause
Green Party fails to efficiently emphasise the governess of env deg and
since not in gov cannot take effective action
AO1: extinction rebellion - amassed widespread attention - using direct
attention as means of expressing their cause - gained mass public
support on issue of environment - unlike the Green Party

PG DO NOT yield this ability to legislate

Other collective organisations can influence government decisions (Agree)

Think-tanks are considered public policy organisations. Their
main role is to carry out research and develop policy ideas that
Think Tanks can be adopted by political parties and governments. Political
parties work closely with like-minded think-tanks in order to
develop policy.These groups contribute useful insights and
ideas to the political debate and so play an important role in the
political process
No cannot influence government decisions. Their roles are
relatively limited and can only be influential if their
respective ideologies are in power.
revocation of Clause 4 which was an ‘old labour’
Conservatives are in power meaning left wing think tanks such
as the Fabian society (British socialist organisation whose
purpose is to advance the principles of social democracy and
democratic socialism via gradualist and reformist effort in
democracies, rather than by revolutionary overthrow.) have
Hower in recent times. Parties have become less
ideological. This means that . eg: the
Conservative party today are no longer the
staunch neo-classical liberals as seen in the
Thatcherite party of the late 70’s as they now
have returned to their non-ideological
foundations and embraced pragmatic
approaches to policy. Similarly, Labour has
softened its views on free-market capitalism
and embraced many policies that were not
strictly socialist as seen by Tony Blair's
constitutional commitment to socialism. This
can even be seen in the modern Labour party
with Tony Blair’s u-turns over his manifesto
commitments/pledges which were more left
leaning. Both these major parties have switched
Instead it must be argued that TT can influence
government decisions.
Institute for Public Policy Research - IPPR is one of the
leading think tanks in the UK with major programmes
focusing on economic policy. Their work receives
considerable media attention and has had a big impact in
the past. A report published by them has directly led to the
development of child tax credits.
Furthemore, Iain Duncan Smith’s think tank Center for Social
justice not only wielded great influence on the conservative
government but he was even appointed as the Works and
Pensions Secretary in 2004 and he was also CP leader from
2001-3.
 almost no influence on government policies. Instead, think
tanks which align with the conservative party are more likely to
have influence such as The Institute of Economic affairs , a free
market think tank calling for things such as the privatisation of
the NHS and an internal market within it which has now
become an NHS policy as well as the privatisation of British Rail.
Thus the influence of think tanks depends heavily on who is in
power. Some think tanks and their policies are ignored due to
their ideological nature
Even if think tank policies are taken into consideration both the
opposition and govt must vote on it meaning that compromises
must be made and the original proposals of the think tank may
be diluted.
—-------------------------
Can be a forum for policy considered and developed away from
public scrutiny and tested before a party might adopt it as
official policy
E.g IEA - advised better NHS efficiency by opening an NHS trust
run internal market to allocate goods around the service
Lobbyists and their influence over government decision making
Lobbyists is limited as they are not always successful in achieving their
goals as politicians and the government consider many factors
before making decisions and may question the intent of
lobbyists before making policy that advances their cause. This
is because MPs and the government are supposed to serve
the purpose of representing members of their constituents
and aggregating their demands/ the entire of the UK rather
than individual lobbyists. Furthermore, MPs and ministers are
aware of the lack of transparency of the work of lobby-firms
raising a red-flag for the government. For this reason Parliament
passed the Transparency of Lobbying Act in 2014 which
mandated that all lobbying activities should be registered, thus
both laws and the government act as a check on the influence
that Lobbyists are able to have over government policy.
Lobbying - The act of trying to persuade those in power to
follow a particular course of action.
from ideology to pragmatism meaning that
ThinkTanks are able to wield influence over
government policy as the more open-minded
government may favour their policy decisions
despite it not adhering to the parties traditional
ideological background. Furthermore, the fact
that ideological think tanks are still able to have
an impact on government policies still displays
that they are able to impact government policy.
—-------------------
can manipulate data and their research might be
one sided in order to gain a certain decision by
the executive
IEA funded by the american tobacco industry
meaning their reports on smoking and health may
be well altered to play outcomes a certain way -
executive decisions wont be based on fact but on
corporation bias greed
However, many would argue that there still
remains a lack of transparency between lobbyists
and elected individuals which displays how
Lobbyists have much influence over government
policy. Since 2014, morally questionable activities
relating to lobbyists have occurred. In 2015, 2
former foreign secretaries Jack Straw and
Malcolm Rifkinf were secretly filmed offering to
provide access for cash to key political and
diplomatic figures for a fake firm. Rifkinf told the
fake company that he was able to provide ‘useful
access’ to every UK ambassador in the world for a
fee between £5000-8000.
Malcom rifkind - boasted to undercover
journalists that he earned £80,000 and had
access to British intelligence in retain for certain
EU law he had to support
Thus it can be said that not only do think tanks have an
increasing role to play in government policy , but their
members may also end up as direct members of existing
governments.
—---------------------------
RIFE CORRUPTION OF THINK TANKS
EA-free market tank with close links to Conservative Party -
main donors - British American tobacco - highly critical of
gov measures to restrict smoking bans , sugar tax etc
IEA - also found in 2018 that they were receiving US
lobbying funds to push hardline brexiters about free trade
deals with the US corrupting their neutrality in advising
executive about trading after brexit
Instead it must be argued that lobbyists yield much
influence over government decisions.They have been
criticised for enabling powerful interests to try to buy
influence.
Financier Lex Greensill was an unpaid adviser to PM David
Cameron and he helped lobby the PM to design a policy to
ensure lobbying firms such as Greensills own company
Greensill Capital, received their bills faster.
The Raptor alliance lobbied parliament to make their
cause of protecting racing pigeons, unable to gain public
support they called for a pigeon race between the HOC
and HOL in 2018 and a parliamentary group for pigeon
racing. The race was a success and Theresa May even
agreed to sponsor a bird.
An estimate of 2 billion pounds is spent by organisations on
lobbying in the UK. / 52 former ministers work for lobbying
firms.

Corporations Simply another platform of discussion but focusing on
the business sector
Corporations form up and formally advise the executive
on decision making - CBI - 151,000 businesses
registered as members - so what they say is voicing
opinions of those businesses also -
However corporations in our liberal uk economy have alot
of power
Undermine the democratic process by finally persuading
politicians to give a word or pass on a certain message -
efforts to get certain actions that benefit corporations more
-such abuses left with no consequence - setting the
precedent for it to happen again
CBI for 19% cut down corpotyation tax
This shows that lobbyists do wield a lot influence over
politics and sometimes have direct links and connections to
politicians.
businesses trying to secure exemptions from certain laws -
e. 2012 lobbyists - funded by British American tobacco —
campaign to persuade MPs to exempt local newsagents
keeping tobacco products behind closed shutters
**** campaign created by lobbyists to persuade public
opinion - persuaded 80 MPS and bypassed a law that
prevents tobacco companies directly trying to influence
elected individuals - shows potential danger of such
activities
Owen Paterson 2021 - caught being paid £1000,000 to
lobby for certain firms - caught out and eventually stepped
down
GREENSIL and cameron - lobbied favourable PPE contract - when
greensil had no experience
It was a political favour - Financier Lex Greensill was an unpaid
adviser to PM David Cameron and he helped lobby the PM to design
a policy to ensure lobbying firms such as Greensills own company
Greensill Capital, received their bills faster.
Robert jenrich - approached by a firm at a tory donor party and
pledged £10,000 to the party if jenrick sped up a housing
development planning law - (saved the firm £40 million on extra costs
)
Public / constituency opinion does not exist as money undermines
the sacred democratic process of legislation
 CREATION OF PLURALIST DEMOCRACY
pressure groups most of the pressure groups who find success are insider
pressure groups whose aims are ideologically compatible
with the gov - requiring the support of the gov in order to
succeed illustrates that we do not have a pluralist
democracy but instead one where power is centralised
within parl and gov
AO1: labour historical roots with the trade unions - 2014-58%
funding
think tanks think tanks yield political agenda?
So research used to prove a point and suit agenda -
democracy entails a plethora of diff political ideas
IEA-right wing tank - research supports conservative neo
liberal economics - contingent on ideological compatibility
with the gov -
→ IEA-free market tank with close links to Conservative Party
- main donors - British American tobacco - highly critical of
gov measures to restrict smoking bans , sugar tax etc
IEA - also found in 2018 that they were receiving US lobbying
funds to push hardline brexiters about free trade deals with
the US corrupting their neutrality in advising executive about
trading after brexit
lobbyists access to lobbyist firms is exclusive and inaccessible to
many people - anti ethical to nature of democracy -£2
billion a year spent on lobbying
MALCOLM rifkind told company -earning up to £8,000 -
promising useful access to every UK ambassador
insider status does not ensure that the gov or
parl will necessarily ensure their success -
starmers aim of maintaining a united party
image caused him to sack the shadow
transport minister - who supported the unions
on the picket line
-pressure groups realise they need to resort
to non electoral modes of appeal and
campaign to ensure their success and to
protect the rights of the people - UNITE 2021
- reduce how much they fund labour -
even if suiting gov political or economic
agenda - does not ensure their success
2022- chancellor of exchequer ignored
input from IEA
”transparency of lobbying non party
campaigning and TU administration act 2014
Ensures transparency in this political process
- elitists means of buying influence no longer
existent
role of pressure groups in our democracy in upholding a sense of
accountability and scrutinising the gov borough their influence and
pressure proves that we do in fact have a pluralist democracy
- casual pressure groups particularly dedicate their time to
a specific cause or set of values - which many in the
electorate feel are overlooked
- Employment of non traditional methods to gain Attention
- STOP WAR COALITION 2003-largest protest 2 million -
strain on Blair’s tenure
- Examining gov policies and scrutinising and holding them
to account ,engaging in poltical debate
majority of think tankers -non partisan or centrist - use their
political expertise and specialised knowledge to genuinely
scrutinise the gov but also to relieve item and effort for parties in
providing info
INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH - leading think tank -
report directly saw the development of CHILD TAX CREDITS - rep
of public + efficiency of democracy and achieving people’s will
proves we have a pluralist democracy
Blair internal think tank ‘strategy unit blair 2001
lobbyists do not have ulterior motives and instead are trying to use
their money and influence to benefit wider society
Marcus rashford 2020 lobbied gov for vouchers in the summer
holiday to give 1.3 million meals - 2022 endorsed by gov
Lobbyists use influence as means of rep specific sections and
marginalised groups of society
 1.3 Pressure groups are vital in a representative democracy. HFDYA
participation Extreme views deter individuals from participating
-AO1:extinction rebellion -radical protests , defacing
public buildings blocking roads
-participation in political affairs is intense - breaking law
Diverts attention from root cause
Expansion in types of pressure groups but decline in
memberships?
Less direct and effective mechanism of participation
-radical agendas frustrate gov and hinders democratic
process - violence and disobedience
Representation Represent a powerful minority force + exerts political
influence to the detriment of the majority of society - force
gov to act on their behalf -CBI - TRADE UNION - powerful
economic leverage -representing own interests
Concentrates power + creates elitism where only certain
wealthy high profile pressure groups
Insider pressure groups - unfair amount of power
E.g - NFU + BMA - alleged at times they have used their
insider status in an undemocratic fashion -pressure groups
can be accused of undermining parliament - may
influence the government more than democratically
elected representatives
Accountability Arent internally democratic
Not accountable or subject to scrutiny -little legal
restrictions on how they choose to influence the gov
Insider groups focus on pressuring civil servants and many
of the deals made between executive and PG bypass
parliament and avoid parliamentary scrutiny this
undermines parliamentary democracy
A01: - cash for questions - mp neil hamilton paid money
by ian greer associates to bring up questions in
Estimated 1.4 million school children across the world have
taken part in school strikes for climate change
-youth participation conventionally is low so this might be
encouraging them to participate in other ways
Young people are attracted to pressure groups - they appeal to
small causes and grassroots movements - every GE - turnout
has always been lowest in 18-24 band - apathy is high amongst
young - low representation means they are not politically active
- so voice issues elsewhere not through political parties
Pressure groups such as trade unions - represent the rights of
the minority who are overlooked and instead DESERVE greater
representation - tso it is good that they have powerful economic
leverage
If a pressure group has more supporters mps more likely to
listen to them as dont want to risk losing eleocrate support -
-guarantees most popular concerns and voices taken into
account
-ensures public policy represents public will and if fails to do so
gov held accountable
Electorate concerned with supporting single issues -
highlighted through greater membership e.g national trust 3.7
million - cons membership only 150k -
May participate in politics through pressure groups - an
alternate route to participation rather than traditional
-promote political debate and educate in the process - make
informed decisions - enhance democracy in non conventional
ways - reflective of evolving dynamic nature of politics
Manifesto aims are paused - so effective in stopping gov
agenda attracting discussion and attention to their cause
CBI- lowered corporate tax to 19% - BLM - fight against
racial; inequality
Promoting agenda of industries
Pg - ensure that issues important to the general public make it
onto the desks of MPs - and into debating chambers
- May act to restrict gov and authoritarian groups -for
instance many pressure groups campaigned against
the abolition of 10p rate of tax under gordon brown
AO1: gov had to respond quickly after the dunblane massacre
- out of fear of losing seats +electorate mandate
- - gov was to ignore concerns of TUC- trade union congress -
cost potentially 6 MILLION votes -
Petitions with 750,000 - handguns banned that year
 parliament - lost his seat
judicial review pressure groups delay the inevitable
-criminal justice and courts bill - grayling - attempting to
severely impede the ability of citizens to force the gov to
act within the law - pressure groups exploiting costly legal
procedures to delay legislation planning permissions and
deportation decisions
OPPOSITE ARGUE ^^^^^^^
participation young people are attracted to pressure groups they
appeal to small causes and grassroots movements
Every enteral election the 18-24 band always has lowest
turnout - as apathy is high amongst young - since
1979-2019 - average age of an MP IS 51 - no
representation means they are politically active
elsewhere - voice issues as political parties fail to do
so
an alternate route to participation rather than
traditional
-promote political debate and educate in the process -
make informed decisions - enhance democracy in non
conventional ways - reflective of evolving dynamic
nature of politics
1.4 million school children across the world have taken
part in school strikes for climate change
judicial review - important mechanism which helps provide
tools to pressure routes to
MILLER V DEXU
The Good Law Project are a pressure group that has used legal
action to challenge the government: 2019 – The Good Law
Project was part of the case in Miller vs Prime Minister to
challenge the prorogation of Parliament
they do not enhance democracy as their radical agendas mean it
frustrates gov and hinders democratic process through
democratic process - disobedience and violence
Manifesto aims paused- stopping elected gov from carrying out its
aims
TUTION SMASH WINDOWS 50,000PPL AND KING CHARLES CAR
2010
when rights of women ran the campaign to feature a women
on banknotes the threat of judicial review helped focus the
BOE mind
Judicial review is the only mechanism by which ordinary
people can challenge the lawfulness of decisions made by
public bodies
Save southall black sisters campaign 2008 - view fails to take
account of the unequal social economic and cultural context
which makes it difficult if not impossible for black and minority
women to access outside help or seek information about their
rights - pressure g use judicial review when recognising rights
are being infringed on and not advocated for - they are able to
gain back what was taken from them and important for their
own safety and to ensure their rights are being protected here
= allow participation and protection of marginalised groups ,
minorities outside of legislation
Enhances democratic function
fracturing uk rules and democracy and nearin anarchy as few
are accountable when protesting
Gov attempting to pass a police crime and sentencing
courts bill - hindering rights for protesters to be loud and
disturb workers - this case shows there is some public
appeal to curb the freedom pressure groups have - extinct
rebellion and insulate britain
Shows pg not seen as a democratic tool but as a nuisance -
increasing political activism - but not necessarily traditional
political participation or democracy Extreme views deter
individuals from participating
-AO1:extinction rebellion -radical protests , defacing public
buildings blocking roads
-participation in political affairs is intense - breaking law
Diverts attention from root cause
Expansion in types of pressure groups but decline in
memberships?
Less direct and effective mechanism of participation
representatio stronger rep - promote single issue
NFU - strictly represents farmers
n petition signed
BMA - only medics = he British Medical Association –
The BMA is made up of leading figures in the medical
profession. They are therefore able to offer significant
expertise on potential changes to the health system. For
example, the BMA have launched five reviews to the
handling of the COVID-19 pandemic that will help to
inform government policy in the future
Parties do not do this - focus on winning over larger
electorate and dont have time or resources to focus on
single issues - PGs campaign through petitions so issues
can be debated and brought into law
FEED ME BETTER CAMPAIGN - 2005 - 270,000
signatures for FSM - BLAIR quickly introduced these
BLMResearch in June 2020 indicated that
#BlackLivesMatter was used 3.7 million times per day. It
is the most popular hashtag ever used on social media.
NEU
judicial review Pressure groups using the uk judicial powers available to
citizens may be argued to support democracy as it is
used to keep our executive in check against them
breaching their own laws . The charity Howard league
who want prison reform successful won a judicial
review over children’s treatment in prisons . The ruling
forced prison change - showing judicial review is a
powerful tool used to hold public bodies to account
shielding democratic values
The campaign for lowering the voting age and women’s
rights came about through p actions
many petitions were rejected - 4.5 million signed a 2nd referendum
for EU withdrawal as result was a close call with 1% diff - largest
-democracy is degraded as voices are cut off by the executive -
as so many pressure groups are ignored and only a marginal
amount succeed
IRAQ WAR
however recent progress of the bill will cap pressure groups
accessing public donations to draft judicial reviews - the police
crime and sentencing act 2022 - it will this make it more difficult for
pg to use JR as a tool to curb actions by public bodies
Represent a powerful minority force + exerts political influence
to the detriment of the majority of society - force gov to act on
their behalf -CBI - TRADE UNION - powerful economic
leverage -representing own interests
Concentrates power + creates elitism where only certain
wealthy high profile pressure groups
Insider pressure groups - unfair amount of power
E.g - NFU + BMA - alleged at times they have used their
insider status in an undemocratic fashion -pressure groups
can be accused of undermining parliament - may influence
the government more than democratically elected
representatives
NFU
Examples of Lobbying by a Pressure Group
2010 – The NFU successfully lobbied the EU to ensure
mandatory country of origin food labelling.
2015 – The NFU successfully lobbied so that plant nurseries
would be exempt from business rates.
2022 – The NFU successfully lobbied to have Small
Woodlands qualify as Ecological Focus Areas in Scotland.
2023 – The NFU successfully lobbied to ensure rural
households receive additional energy help when they were
‘off-grid’
FAILURE A judge has refused permission for a judicial
review of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s
guidance on the Equality Act 2010 AS Judge throws out LGB
Alliance founder’s fight to ban trans women from women’s
single-sex spaces
overall limiting PG power in promoting democracy by
defending citizens and HR - this is also exacerbated by the
will to remove the ECHR by prominent tory cabinet mps and
change it to a british bill of rights = means that pg do not have
the same power to challenge public bodies as our rights may
change
Pg using judicial review - undermined power and sovereignty
of gov - power strike as it delays the inevitable and is costly,
lengthens court case and in the end it will make the decision

accountability If a pressure group has more supporters mps more
likely to listen to them as dont want to risk losing
eleocrate support -
-guarantees most popular concerns and voices taken
into account
-ensures public policy represents public will and if fails
to do so gov held accountable
1.3 Pressure groups have more influence on government decisions than political parties. HFDYA
Enforcing change In the uk it is governments who create legislation to
- - gov was to ignore concerns of TUC- trade union congress - cost
potentially 6 MILLION votes -
Therefore forced to listen to outside influence and unable to follow
through with manifesto commitments or own policy agenda - later
held accountable by public as their role as elected gov is to carry
out what the people want not small minority
There have been examples where gov legislation actually
that they want to make
LGB ALLIANCE ANTI TRANS
GOODFLAW PROJECT FIGHT TO Appeal LGB Alliance’s
charity status
To register as a charity, an organisation must be charitable: to
benefit people and not harm them. Do the LGB Alliance, who
seem to dedicate most of their output to denigrating trans
people, meet that legal threshold? We’re supporting action to
strip the organisation of its charitable status, and are awaiting
the outcome.
Criminal justice and courts bill - grayling attempting to
severely impede the ability of citizens to force the ov to act
within the law - pressure groups of exploiting costly legal
procedures to delay legislation planning permissions and
deportation decisions -
Arent internally democratic
Not accountable or subject to scrutiny -little legal restrictions
on how they choose to influence the gov
Insider groups focus on pressuring civil servants and many of
the deals made between executive and PG bypass parliament
and avoid parliamentary scrutiny this undermines
parliamentary democracy
A01: - cash for questions - mp neil hamilton paid money by ian
greer associates to bring up questions in parliament - lost his
seat
Pressure groups have been at the forefront of securing rights in
 promote and defend rights through parliament
Rights protection may be promoted and supported
by many but it is only through gov legislation
created through parliament that citizens rights
advance e/g HRA , equalities act
Plethora of legislation which has grown
considerably over time and protected and
defended citizens rights
Gov can erode human all major rights in the uk owe their existence to
rights legislation the right to vote equal pay sexual and
racial discrimination all arose via legislation - for
example the decriminalisation of homosexuality
and gay marriage may not have been passed but
for determined legislators
Governments have the power and ability to legislate
whereas pressure groups only have ability to
influence not create
laws the human rights act has revolutionised rights
protection in the uk
Pressure groups use this piece of gov legislation to
promote rights but without it they would be
ineffective
It is thus the government and policy Ian cs elected
to parliament that have the power and scope to
create legislation
imposes on human rights and pressure groups have had to step
in and highlight this - e.g gov trying to change HRA to a british
bill of rights
The British Heart Foundation The BHF have campaigned for
policies to tackle obesity and consequently to improve
cardiovascular health. They use detailed research from health
professionals to lobby the government. The lobbying of the BHF
was a key reason that the ‘sugar tax’ was introduced in 2018.
pressure groups help protect the rights of minority groups when
pressure groups raise the injustice faced by the minority groups
, they make the government act
Pressure was applied to the gov - key agent of change
The campaign for GAY RIGHTS WAS GARNERED BY GROUPS
SUCH AS STONEWALL AND LIBERTY
the uk - pressure groups speak up on behalf of others and
articulate their demands the campaign for lowering voting age
and women's rights came about through pressure group actions
gov legislation simply REACTS to public demand and
compiles with wells supported pressure groups
LIBERTY - success in Supreme Court - ruled a loophole unlawful
under EU law - which allowed employers to not provide equal
spousal provisions for same sex couples
Boris jhonson - trying to trigger article 50 without parliament
-departure of EUa would affect rights of uk citizens
INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL - throughout 2016 liberty
campaigned against what it believed to be a serious lack of
privacy safeguards in the bill - high court ruling - giving gov 6
months to rewrite core parts of the act which it found
incompatible w EU law
pressure groups force the gov to uphold rights by using
JUDICIAL REVIEW
May cases of ministers who undermined rights being taken to
court by pressure routes
E.g
Miller V DE x EU
The Good Law Project are a pressure group that has used legal
action to challenge the government: 2019 – The Good Law
Project was part of the case in Miller vs Prime Minister to
challenge the prorogation of Parliament. 2020 – The Good Law
Project bought legal action against the UK Government over the
way it had handled the procurement of PPE during the COVID-19
pandemic. The High Court ruled with the Good Law Project and
against the government whom they were critical of.
Pressure groups able to use variety of means to defend and
promote rights
having laws is not enough
Pressure groups help citizens access their rights and improve
clarity
The example of the FOL illustrates this well-pressure groups use
the act to uncover issues to bring to the public’s attention - the
existence of legislation is insufficient in protecting rights - it
needs pressure groups to help citizens access it
Freedom of information - seeks to strengthen the public's rights
under the freedom of information act 2000
 Worked to defend the FOI act from repeated attempts to
weaken it - gov proposed draft regulations to
1. Make it easier for public authorities to refuse FOI
requests
2. Moves to remove parliament and then mp’s expenses
from the legislation
3. Pressure to excuse cabinet papers from access

The FOI has opposed all these and all these initiatives have
largely been unsuccessful

1.3 Other collective organisations can influence government decisions. HFDYA

PGs cannot influence democracy and policy as they hold no legal abilities to
force the government to act on legislation . Their legitimacy gained from
general elections means they hold popular support and so do not have to
listen to PG advice or their campaigns - often does the gov ignore who
have great mass support
march over iraq with over a million
2nd referendum petition of 6 million
PG fail to overpower sovereignty of gov simply advisory and since
external cannot actually influence and change policy
however large pressure groups who have insider
status , gov support , public support , sufficient
resources and good methods can be successful
Migration watch uk - links with theresa may’s
gov = shared commitment to reducing
immigration
BMA - enjoyed great insider status with labour +
tory gov 2015-2016
stronger argument is that other organisations can influence policy
1990- violence of poll tax riots - in trafalgar square -
undermined weak MT - resignation in nov
Good quality research + stats
-need to be able to target local/national politicians likely to
support their cause !!
Some pressure groups can choose to obtain in civil disobedience
- create immediate publicity - disruption forces gov to listen
Trade unions - deploy industrial- action - strikes
UNISON - trade union in Scotland - accepting the pay rises
after trade unions strikes - 6.5% pay rise to health workers

Social media BLM can be harnessed to influence the gov -

thousands showing support for a cause / issue - LIBERTY =
prominent pressure group = influence GOV policy and decisions -
justice and security bill. Which was dismissed
think tanks they are not influential because the government will resist any attempt by
think tanks advising the executive on what to reform and what to keep -
Sovereignty overpowers the advisory bodies which are think tanks
British soft drinks- tried to impose a sugar tax
Think tanks have little influence on gov decisions because getting on
policy agenda is a complicated task -MPs have to consider constituents
and their interests , even the best think tanks miss key opportunities to
translate a persuasive idea into easily
Unpredictability of policy process - hard and requires cultivating right
connections
Need sufficient resources and persistence to continuously cultivate an
idea - wait for the right moment to mobilise an alliance of supporters
around it
Filtering and selecting - policymakers can be susceptible to actively
avoiding and ignoring information that contradicts their beliefs
Policy Exchange- David Cameron’s ‘favourite think-tank’, at least until its
report on the failure of regeneration of Northern English cities, which he
called ‘barmy’ and ‘insane’.
British soft drinks think tank - tried to impose sugar tax on firms but
executive ignored this
lobbyists lobbying is controversial and therefore it may not be as utilised by
governments when policy making for example , straw and rifkind were
secretly filmed offering to “provide access for cash” - to key political and
diplomatic figures for a fake firm , due to them being caught - the
government may not allow them to impact their decisions as it may be
considered controversial
Corporations Do not influence govt policy that much as those who try to through
think tanks are influential because they have
unique expertise and hold prominence in
advising gov in matters they are not informed or
experts in , more likely to follow guidance of
think tanks
Help gov make informed decisions on policy
DEMO- specialise in the development of social
policy - ensure govt is making decisions that
affect society equally
IEA - free market tank - close links to
Conservative Party - critical of gov measures to
restrict harmful activists such as smoking sugar
taxes - called for NHS to be replaced by private
system
however lobbyists still have a lot of power
especially with their insider status - in 2020 mr
Cameron tried to persuade ministers to allow
Greensil who employed him as an adviser - to
join calls with the corporate covid financing
facility - this would have allowed the company
to issue loans insured by the gov - the former
PM used private channels to lobby ministers
and former colleagues - he and his staff sent
45 emails texts and WhatsApp messages
concerning greensil
-can impact and influence those in power so can
get across concerns not on the political agenda
or given much attention to by parties
Most lobbying scandals become lost in
think tanks - allow policy to be considered away from public
scrutiny and can be tested before a party might adopt them as
official policy - it also saves the party time and resources as it can
delegate role of policy formulation
One of most influential think tanks = INSTITUTION FOR FISCAL
STUDIES - analysis of gov finances and tax - shake policy issues
Designing possible policy options to address a problem
Compare options and choose and advocate what is best for them
- means gov decisions will have better results and impact
Last labour gov - development of child tax credit - think tank -
institute for public policy research
lobbyists can aggregate change to gov decisions - exemplified
through raptor alliance who wanted to protect birds but unable to
gain public support -
Established a party for parliament for pigeon racing - success as
during PMQS - may agreed to sponsor a bird
This shows that due to insider status - able to have direct
influence on the policy making of gov
Many times corporations do lobby the executive and get away
 lobbying girls are caught out and fail to succeed passing favourable
actions
2021 - owen paterson = caught being paid £10,000 to lobby for certain
firms - caught and eventually stepped down
administration - greensil in 2020 - was a scandal
left with no consequences apart from marginal
scrutiny of cabinet members - no one was
resigned or charged
with it
Large corporations such as google starbucks amazon - so big
and influential that they qualify as a kind of sectional pressure
group on their own - proposed legislation which may hinder their
operation is avoided - and exc seek to emphasise the positive role
they play in the economy
-they employ a large number of people and account for a large
proportion of economic activity - this gives theme great insider
influence and effectively they have their own in house think tanks
and lobbyists -

AO1:
Successful resistance to for such companies to pay more in UK
taxes on their profits

Alcoholic drink has campaigned against price controls proposed

to reduce excessive drinking

Confectionery industry -resisted and toned down sugar taxes

1.4 Human Rights are adequately protected in the UK. HFDYA

1.4 The UK has a thriving ‘rights based culture’. HFDYA
1.4 Parliament are the defenders of Human Rights. HFDYA
1.4 The Human Rights Act is the most important rights protection legislation. HFDYA
1.4 Collective rights have always been placed over individual rights in the UK. HFDYA

LEGISLATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS NOT GOOD

1998 HRA Belmarsh case, held prisoners w no trial was
incompatible section 23 of echr - right over trial
DECLARED BE ACTING ULTRA VIRES
ALSO
Extremist Abu Qatada deportation blocked by UK
court appeal on belief he would've subject to trial by
torture in jordon - only deported by uk gov ONCE
IN theory parliamentary sov rules
As w belmarsh case in 2005 terrorism bill introduces to
allow convention w out trial and blair ensured keep tight
surveillance on the belmarsh prisoners
Also govt can in fact deport anyone w out judicial
oversight esp w bill, ac t which stops court interference w
migration and deportation issues
HRA constantly undermined by issues which
overpower it
So covid w lockdown
And terroism - the 2016 investigatory powers act
despite liberty numerous legal challenges against
it
Uk still has not banned conversion therapy, claims
 govt found sufficient assurance wouldn't be tortures Nationality and Borders Act 2022. People arriving illegally they will and commited to banning in 2018 yet 2023
are less able to make sequential appeals or spurious and no official ban despite stonewall and 81 other
judicial review charities against it and advocating

2000 FOI Put in effective use after hillsborruough disaster =
Hillsborough support group - 130,000 signatures to
disclosure relevant documents in 2011
Bodies can deny FOI
Hillsb was in 1989 and docs petition in 2011
stonewalling from govt where avoid giving response and
keeps in limbo = complaints of stonewalling have
increased by 70% in last 5 years
Still increased and urgent need for transparency -
matt hancock kissing affar exposed on cctv not by
documents and a mock press conference video
leaked at partygate

And legally An organisation can also refuse your Freedom

of Information ( FOI ) request if getting information will cost
more than £450, or £600 if the organisation is: a
government department, Parliament or part of the armed
forces

JUDICIAL REVIEW aw substantiates judicial review as an important part Data on Judicial Review – 2021 Total Number – 2,3000
of our constitutional balance of powers amongst the Given Permission to Proceed – 370 Refused Permission -
COURTS ACT branches - passing common law and further 870 Reached a Final Hearing - 430
commitment to the rule of law
-gives the court's power to award suspended and
prospective only crushing orders , maintains judicial
discretion
-importance of common law within our constitution -
a major source of power

A01: R V R 1991 - rape becoming criminalised in

marriage

COLLECTIVE V INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS

PRIVACY right to privacy is fundamental and substantial which is
why the UK gov has passed many legislation protecting
this right
AO1: DATA protection act 2018- protecting the rights of
the data subject - provides guidance and rules for org
and gov to use personal data
RIGHT PRIVACY ALSO KEY BY LAW LORDS = Naomi
campbell v mirror
→ LAW LORDS right PRIVACY above freedom
however when a salient issue arises -
there are mechanisms in other
legislation to break down such privacy in
order to protect the “COLLECTIVE”
-previous law becomes void at the will of
the gov when suitable
AO1: draft communications data bill 2012
- security services allow access to all
communication data - can collect and
store such data for 12 months
not only is there legislation which infringes on your right to privacy but there are laws which
enable the gov to explore and infiltrate your privacy
AO1:”snoopers charters” - “INVESTIGATORY POWERS ACT 2016” - law enforcement can
interrupt communications and everything we do online - also orders private companies to
store this information = extending uk state surveillance
-controversial act-which campaigners and rights PG have tried to weaken - claimed that
this act enables intrusive surveillance powers -
Could establish a precedent for authoritarian regimes abroad to justify their own breaking
of human rights
 expression of collective OVER mail leak photo of
campbell leaving narcotic addiction clinic
SALIENT Example of Parliament protecting rights Following the
7/7 Bombings in London the Labour government of
ISSUE Tony Blair responded to requests by the police to
extend the time period for which a person could be
Our constitution has detained without charge. This was made part of the
included long Terrorism Bill. Blair’s government wanted police to be
history of legislation able to hold terror suspects for 90 days without charge,
and sources which this is despite the normal period for which a person can
has laid out be held without charge being 24 hours (extending to 96
framework for a hours if permission is granted by a judge). As such,
range of civil 90-day detention was seen as a significant challenge to
liberties the right of Habeas Corpus. After a long debate the
Magna Carta 1215- House of Commons voted by 322-291 against 90-day
has established the detention, including 49 Labour MPs rebelling against
right of an individual their own Prime Minister. Instead, the Commons backed
to a fair trial and a 28-day detention period. This was Tony Blair’s first
reaffirmed the ‘rule ever defeat in the House of Commons as Prime Minister
of law’ that nobody and is a good example of Parliament standing up for the
is above the law - civil liberties of citizens.
thus everyone is
9/11 terror attacks and 7/7 London
Underground in 2005 - led to gov
measures that limited civil liberties in
interest of protecting wider community
2005 - blair gov proposed to extend
period a suspect can be detained
however UNCODIFIED CONSTITUTION -
the UK does not have a systematic and
formal bill of rights where individual and
collective rights are defined clearly
This is unlike the USA whose constitution
is both codified and entrenched and so
the gov cannot bypass individual rights
→ Potential examples where a government may have prioritised collective over individual
rights Snoopers Charter – In 2016 the Investigatory Powers Act was passed by Parliament.
This is commonly referred to as the Snooper’s Charter. This Act gives the Police and
Intelligence Services extensive powers to monitor the electronic records of British citizens.
Among other things the Act: • Allows the British intelligence services and the police to carry
out targeted interceptions of electronic communications. • Requires Internet Service
Providers to maintain the internet connection records of users for 12 months. • Allows the
Police and Intelligence Services to see these internet connection records with a warrant
and without the citizen concerned being aware. • Allows the Police and intelligence
agencies to hack into computers or devices when they need to access the data. Whilst the
government may see these things as essential to being able to keep the public safe, many
citizens see them as an excessive infringement on their right to privacy. A huge number of
public bodies have access to the data of private citizens, albeit with safeguards built into
the bill to prevent misuse. In this case the government has forced individuals to sacrifice
some of their rights to privacy in order to allow the intelligence services and the police to
better safeguard the safety of the public as a whole.
Facial Recognition – Another prominent example is the roll-out of facial recognition
technology by public authorities. This is technology that can detect someone automatically
through facial recognition. It can be used, for example, at a football match to scan the
crowd and search for anyone with a banning order or who is wanted by the Police. However,
such technologies may also be seen to interfere with the rights of law-abiding citizens who
are also having their data processed. In August 2020 the Pressure Group Liberty won a
court of appeal ruling against the way that South Wales Police were deploying facial
recognition technology
in the face of salient problems - the collective right is justified to prevail over the individual
one
Governments can do and regularly remove or restrict individual rights
AO1: coronavirus act 2020 - placed UK citizens in a national lockdown
-to protect our rights to security and healthcare
-protecting the collective in face of pandemic — substantially important
Codified constitution can threaten gridlock or a more strenuous process of undoing
changes - which in the Uk could have perpetuated the number of people contracting the
virus
accountable for
-individual rights
have been at the
cornerstone of our
constitution since its
creation

TERRORISM / equality act 2010 -contains 116 types - to legally protect
from discrimination in both society and the workplace
EQUALITY - upholds individual rights even for the
marginalised in society
AO1: 2019 counter terrorism act - allows
for unfair targeting and racial profiling
;makes provisions enabling persons at
ports and borders to be questioned for
national security
SERIOUS VIOLENCE REDUCTION ORDERS[is a civil order] - grants an unprecedented
power to the police to stop anyone subject to an SVRO regardless of suspicion -gov
admitted it will disproportionately affect young black men

STRONG GOVT CURTAIL CIVIL -subjecting young black men to surveillance and targeting by the police will only worsen
LIBERTIES the alienation of this marginalised group -
IN RESPONSE TO BLM
Police, Crime and Sentencing Act Racist police officers - giving more powers exacerbates this problem
(2022) – This bill was extremely
controversial due to a number of Right of freedoms against discrimination
provisions that critics say have curtailed
fundamental liberties. These include: •
Police will be able to set noise limits on
peaceful protests. • Police will be able to
set a start and end time on peaceful
protests. • There will be further limits on
peaceful protesting around the Palace of
Westminster. • The Police will have the
powers to ‘stop and search’ someone at
a protest even if they have no
reasonable suspicion of wrong-doing.
The House of Lords made 14
amendments to the bill in January.
However, these were subsequently
rejected by the House of Commons. As
such this is a good example of a strong
government passing measures that
arguably curtail civil liberties.

HRA PROTECTION IN UK]

LAW Parliament remains sovereign and so can
ignore the HRA or even repeal the HRA
2019 conservative party - trying to turn HRA
into british bill of rights - due to uncodified
nature of constitution
Successive governments have introduced
legislation which has removed rights
Although governments have introduced
statutes which enhance rights and define
them they can actively remove them when
it is politically convenient for the - hence
restriction of rights of movement and
assembly have been introduced
Rights not entrenched given that parl is
sovereign and free to change laws as it
wishes hence rights are not effectively
protected
Parliament has passed legislation which has
contravened fundamental human rights
such as the prevention of terrorism act 2005
- allows parliament to impose restrictions
on the movement and activities on
suspended terrorists
JUDICIARY SUCCESS JUDICARY
famous rights-based judicial review cases
Steinfeld and Keidan v Secretary of State
for International Development – In this
case a heterosexual couple sought a
judicial review of the decision to deny them
a civil partnership. The case went to the UK
Supreme Court who ruled the government
had acted ultra vires and the law was
amended to allow same-sex couples to get
a civil partnership.
However british bill of rights not passed
This was the exception rather than the rule parliament has to
be flexible and sometimes consider the collective right over
the individual right !!!
This was a temporary act in the face of the belmarsh
detainees scandal
This law was eventually replaced by the terrorism prevention
and investigation measures act 2011 -introduced some
changes and limitations to the previous act
Data on Judicial Review – 2021 Total Number – 2,3000 Given
Permission to Proceed – 370 Refused Permission - 870
Reached a Final Hearing - 430
LAW USED TO INFRINGE ON RIGHTS
Elections Act (2022) – The Elections Act of 2022 has made it mandatory
for voters to show Photo ID at General Elections. The Conservative
Government said that this was required to protect the integrity of
elections. However, after the 2019 General Election there were just four
convictions for electoral fraud. Critics of the law note that the people
who will be most affected by this measure are those from poorer
backgrounds who are unlikely to vote for the Conservatives anyway. It is
seen by many to be an attempt to limit a most basic civil liberty – the
right to vote and choose your government
judicial Review has grown significantly in the UK, particularly since the
introduction of the Human Rights Act (1998). However, in 2022 the
Judicial Review and Courts Act was passed that makes judicial review
harder to apply for.
—----------------------------
Courts themselves enforce and practices such laws so they hold a
substantial role in protecting the rights based culture within the UK - a
major source of our constitution are also ‘ common laws ‘ - which is the
creation of judicial precedents to correspond with our rights based
culture
- Most notable prevent miscarriages of justice specifically
against vulnerable groups through their role of interpreting
legislation
- R V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
2019 - 5 asylum seekers entering from the EU saw gov
immigration policy justify government's policy to search seize

PRESSURE - not always successful in their protection
of rights
GROUPS -Reliant on parliament and the executive to
support their cause or for the courts to rule
in their favour
- can raise awareness of rights violations
but their power is limited .
=rights are inadequately protected
-support is contingent on resources
finances and mass support - hinders their
effectiveness - most they can achieve is
influence
A01: liberty 2019 - loses high court
challenge to snoopers charters which they
argued lacked sufficient safeguards against
the risk of abuse of power
Liberty succeeded in persisting with their challenge of the
legislation and in 2022 judges agreed it was partially
unlawful - meaning the security services will no longer have
the power when carrying out criminal investigations to get
detailed information on us from telecom providers without
having first obtained independent approv
and retain data of migrants arriving by small boats
= court rendered UNLAWFUL and immigrants arriving to uk can claim
damages = £21 million in damages were paid back - in last 5 years -
sets a judicial precedent
Pressure groups are an alternative and additional voice for the
protection of rights in the UK in 1997 labour passed a range of statues
designed to enhance rights
Furthermore pressure groups such as liberty speak up for those whose
rights have been infringed we can therefore conclude that we have a
good protective set of rights in place
STONEWALL : sectional pressure group - successfully lobbied and
protected the human rights of a section of society LGBTQ+ members ,
their influence has become so substantial that Blair consulted them ,
and was majorly influential for the ‘marriage act 2013 ‘ - and in 2020
successfully secured an amendment to the equality act 2010 to enable
them to gain civil partnership