Unit 3: 45 Marker - Model Answer on Liberalism

To what extent are liberals divided over the role of the state from mattbentley34

Unit 3: How to approach essays on ideology

How to approach essays on political ideology from mattbentley34

More on Anarchism

Marxist Revisionism and Anarchism

Marxist Revisionism and Anarchism: Marxist Revisionism and Anarchism Marxist Revisionism Dictatorship of the Proletariat Marx:

Anarchism An Overview

Anarchism An Overview: Anarchy and Prison Reform Nineteenth and early Twentieth century anarchists were first-hand acquaintances with the Prison system Political, ...

ANARCHISM

ANARCHISM: All governments should be abolished. Power and Authority. Power: the ability to compel obedience, often by force. ... Authority: the right to command, and thus ...

What is Anarchism

Anarchism from Christopher Rice

Criticisms of all major ideologies

Critiquing quotes guide

It should be relatively easy to find quotes that reflect ideological issues and explain why each ideology is valuable. You also need to be aware of the pitfalls and criticisms of ideologies. Some ideas are outlined here; see if you can identify any key thinkers that have inferred that they agree.

Liberalism

Most often criticised by the more right wing groups (conservatives/nationalists etc), though of course, socialists and anarchists also find flaws with this ideology. Perhaps because of its naturally centralised position, liberalism seems to be snubbed by many political writers, as well as endorsed by others.

 Conservatism

Usually criticised for being opposed to progression and elitist, conservatism tends to be most venomously attacked by left-wing thinkers. Socialists in particular clash with this ideology in numerous ways.

Anarchism

The legitimacy of anarchy as an ideology has been questioned by some, and critiqued by many. The majority of ideological views include some form of structure; with disagreements over whether there is a hierarchy or centralisation within power structures. Anarchy dispels any notion of order or control over the individual, which is why it conflicts so much with other ideologies.

Socialism

Socialism, as a left-wing ideology that supports the maintenance and equality of every member of society as a whole, tends to clash most with ideologies that focus on the importance of the individual (conservatism/anarchism).

Fascism/ Nationalism

Fascism is widely recognised by many as a radical strain of nationalism. Not accepted by all as a fully developed ideology, but more as one single value lacking reasoning and ideas for political structure, fascism receives a range of criticisms. 

Anarcho-Syndicalism

A Homage to Catalonia

Assessment week questions

Assessment week - Questions

Why did Marx believe that capitalism was doomed to collapse? (15) June 10

How and why have socialists endorsed collectivism? (15) June 11

Distinguish between economic liberalism and social liberalism. (15) June 11

Distinguish between negative and positive freedom. (15) June 12

On what grounds have conservatives justified private property? (15) June 13

‘Liberals support equality, but only a qualified form of equality.’ Discuss. (45) Jan 08

Why did socialists believe in gradualism and why did gradualism fail? (45)

To what extent does modern liberalism depart from the ideas of classical liberalism? (45) Jan 10

To what extent do conservatives support tradition and continuity? (45) Jan 13

Unit 3: Socialism and Karl Marx

Excellent video which highlights Marxism, what he wished for society and the reasons socialism did not happen the way it was predicted to.

Unit 3: Socialism - Lesson 4 - 5

Lesson 4--the-roads-to-socialism from mattbentley34

Lesson 5--roads-to-socialism-and-fundamentalist-socialism from mattbentley34

Unit 3: Socialism explained - Lesson 1 - 3

Lesson 1--introduction-to-socialism from mattbentley34

Lesson 2--collectivism-and-equality from mattbentley34

Lesson 3--equality--class-politics-and-common-ownership from mattbentley34

Unit 3: Conservatism - useful presentation

conservatism traditional and new right from sarahbutterworth

Unit 3: Paradox of the New Right

Paradox linking task from mattbentley34

Why is there a paradox within conservatism mark scheme from mattbentley34

do it again

http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz?from=SUr6mZuTf

Do It

http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz?from=SUr6mZuTf

What is Conservatism

Conservatism from jrwv

Unit 4: The many facets of multiculturalism

Looking through the proposed new specs for Politics A level made me think again about my understanding of multiculturalism as an ideology, and reminded me of a great BBC News article from several years ago that was published following a speech by then Prime Minister David Cameron who argued that multiculturalism had "failed".

A super task for students would be to read this article and identify as many different definitions/understandings of the term "multiculturalism" as they can, before deciding individually, and collectively (you can use different voting systems here if you like!), which definition they prefer.

Unit 3: Liberalism Model Answer

Distinguish between positive and negative freedom 15 from mattbentley34

Unit 3: Liberalism explained

Liberalism from Kevin Ken Ganchero

Unit 3: What is Liberalism?

Unit 3: The History of Liberalism - Video

Prefect Job Descriptions

Prefect job-descriptions from mattbentley34

Russia Trip

Draft russia february 2017 Dubai British School from mattbentley34

BREXIT - The Results

Okay, so we all know the result of the EU referendum by now. We've had a couple of days to get used to the outcome but, if you're anything like me, trying to understand how the contest was won or lost still seems like a minefield. Asking your students to analyse the economic outcome of the referendum, at this stage, could be a difficult question. Let's be honest, no-one knows for sure what is going to happen!

If you want a resource to start a discussion with your students, here's a quick lesson starter. It uses the analysis of the voting decisions compiled by Lord Ashcroft, available here. Ashcroft's poll asked over 12,000 people their decision whilst attaining a wealth of information about each individual, including their age, gender, socio-economic group, preferred racial grouping, stated religion and normal voting behaviour.

The resource asks students to 'guess' what was the majority preference for each category of the polled groups (either 'Leave' or 'Remain'). It then asks them to guess the percentage of people who went with that majority view (tip: the percentage must be over 50!).

Give each of your students the task sheet which can be downloaded from here. Run the activity in conjunction with the Powerpoint that is downloaded from here. The Powerpoint file includes the results which can be revealed. Students can work out their score - who can get closest to the maximum score of 36!

Your subsequent plenary could ask students about why they think the categories voted differently.

BREXIT - Post Result Debate

Guys, thought you might find this interesting...feel free to get involved and leave comments on this forum.

BREXIT Explained

BREXIT - A step by step guide and what the main parties are saying

Click here for a step by step guide to the main issues

Click here to find out what the main parties are saying.

BREXIT Debate - Cameron Vs Farage

Take a look at the debate below.....especially questions asked by the audience

Unit 4: BREXIT

Useful article on why we should leave....click here!

Also, read this article.....I want an objective debate! Click Here

The BREXIT debate - 23rd June 2016

All,

You will prepare an argument for and against the UK staying in the EU. This will then be debated during P1 on Thursday (the day of the referendum) in front of your year group.

The format will be as follows:

10 minute presentation from either side.
10 minutes of questions from either side.
10 minutes of questions from the floor.
5 minutes of voting.

Your debate should focus on the key issues of sovereignty, immigration, trade and the economy.

You will be working with the Y12 economists. 2 people from either side will represent your point of view. Your presentation can involve slides and video etc...but it will only last 10 minutes.

Your team should also spend some time working out questions your opponents may ask and come up with potential answers.

The results will be released during P2.

AS Revision examples

This blog post contains some of the key examples and events from UK politics over the last 18 months, along with suggestions of how to link them in with key topics from the syllabus for both Units 1 and 2.

2015

January

• George Osborne announced that tackling terrorism is a top priority for the British government following the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in France – a good example of government policy being responsive/reactive, rather than all stemming from a manifesto. This example also illustrates the Burkean view of representation and an advantage of parliamentary democracy – the government is able to make quick decisions without consulting all members of the electorate
• The UK’s main broadcasters announced that they will include more party leaders in the televised debates for the 2015 General Election, signalling that the two-party model is perhaps in decline, and that the views of the UK’s devolved regions needed greater recognition

February

• David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband all signed a cross-party, non-partisan agreement to reduce climate change, demonstrating that there may no longer be fundamental ideological differences between parties
• Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the Conservative MP, announced that he will not contest his seat in the 2015 General Election following cash-for-access concerns; he also resigns as Chair of the Parliamentary Security and Intelligence Committee

March

• Membership of the SNP passed the 100,000 milestone, indicating that the Scottish independence referendum has enhanced feelings of nationalism and created a desire for further devolution
• David Cameron announced that he will not have a third term in office as Prime Minister. Whilst there is no constitutional requirement for the PM to step down after two terms (in the style of a US President), this perhaps signals a new convention in the UK’s uncodified constitution, especially given that Tony Blair also chose to step down before a general election.

April

• The UK’s Supreme Court ruled that the government must take urgent action to reduce air pollution, demonstrating stronger separation of powers and potentially some politicisation of the UK’s judiciary
• The 2015 General Election returned a surprise victory for the Conservatives, who gained a narrow and unexpected majority giving them 331 seats. The other surprise success was the SNP, who gained 56 of 59 seats in Scotland inflicting a heavy defeat on Labour. Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage all resigned as leaders of their parties (although Farage later backtracked). This is a great example of the Lib Dems being punished/held to account in the election for their failure to meet the promises from their 2010 manifesto (e.g. abolishing tuition fees for university education), and for party leaders to shoulder responsibility for their party’s (lack of) success.
• The 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta was celebrated – the Magna Carta is one of the ancient documents that still provide some basis to the UK’s uncodified constitution

May

June

July

• George Osborne delivered his first Conservative budget, which included hefty cuts to welfare spending – this could be seen as a return to the more traditional Conservative ideology, unhampered by the constraints of coalition government. However, in a traditionally “un-Tory” policy, he introduced a National Living Wage (eventually introduced in April 2016). Slightly later in the month, Mr Osborne also launched a review into which departments would face significant spending cuts of up to £20bn, again in line with the traditional Tory ideology of reducing the size of the public sector.
• Laughing gas (nitrous oxide) is banned for “recreational use” in the London Borough of Lambeth, showing the power of local councils to deploy secondary legislation and by-laws.
• A free vote was held in the Commons on the issue of “right to die” – MPs voted 330 against (118 in favour) allowing terminally ill people to end their own life with assistance. Free votes are typically held on when the issue involves morals or does not “fit” with a particular ideology.
• Jeremy Corbyn was elected as Labour leader, arguably with more support from rank-and-file grassroots Labour members than the parliamentary party
• Michael Meacher, the Labour MP for Oldham West and Royton, died, prompting a by-election (which is subsequently won by Labour)
• Parliament passed an “English Votes for English Laws”, in an attempt to address the so-called West Lothian question in which Scottish MPs were able to vote on issues such as education and healthcare which only affected English constituencies. This is regarded by many as a way of improving representation for English constituents
• The government suffered an embarrassing defeat in the Lords over its proposed cuts to tax credits. Whilst the Lords can, at best, simply delay legislation (because of their “secondary” chamber unelected position) this defeat signals an end to Tory control of the Lords. The introduction of more life peers – especially peers chosen by the Lib Dems during their time in coalition government – means that the Tories no longer have a majority in the Lords, making Lords defeats more likely. Unsurprisingly, George Osborne backs down from the cuts in his December “Autumn Statement”.

August

September

October

December

• The use of e-petitions to assess public views resulted in MPs and whether to ban Donald Trump from the UK, after more than the necessary minimum 100,000 signatures were received. This is evidence of the growing importance of social media and technology in encouraging political participation.
• Jeremy Corbyn reshuffled his shadow cabinet in an attempt to provide a stronger and more cohesive Official Opposition, that shared the same left-wing views as himself. Some Labour MPs find the moves worrying, leading to Labour MPs Jonathan Reynolds and Stephen Doughty resigning in protest at the sacking of Pat McFadden as shadow Europe minister. This is taken as evidence of greater ideological divide within the Labour party, and leads some to question to effectiveness of the Opposition in holding the government to account.
• David Cameron announced that a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU will be held on June 23rd. Boris Johnson, along with other senior Tories including Michael Gove, announces that he will defy David Cameron’s view that Britain is “Stronger in Europe” and campaign for Brexit. This shows major divisions in the Conservatives, and seems to contravene the Doctrine of Collective Cabinet Responsibility. At the same time, the Civil Service is effectively prevented from providing support and assistance to the Brexiters because of the view that the Civil Service must be “politically neutral” yet support the government’s position
• Iain Duncan Smith resigned as Minister for Work and Pensions, claiming that the Treasury forced him to sanction cuts to welfare payments that he fundamentally disagreed with. In line with the Doctrine of Collective Cabinet Responsibility, ministers need to publicly support government policy or resign.
• The infighting in the Labour party continued – Naz Shah (MP for Bradford) was suspended (i.e. had the whip withdrawn) as a result of apparent anti-Semitic comments he had made on Facebook. Within days, Ken Livingstone was suspended from the party when he spoke out in support of Naz Shah. Some analysts argued that the internal issues in the Labour party prevented them from acting properly as the Opposition, and that this was giving David Cameron too much power.
• Evidence of Britain’s increasingly multicultural society increases as Labour’s Sadiq Khan is sworn in as the first Muslim Mayor of London – within days he shares a platform with David Cameron for the Remain campaign, indicating cross-party collaboration between some members of each party. Mr Khan won the Mayoral election in spite of highly negative campaigning by the Conservatives, who tried to argue that he had links with radical Islamists.

Unit 2: Is the Lords currently too powerful?

There's some useful analysis on the extent to which the Lords has power in Parliament (great for the Unit 2 paper!) in this article from the BBC.

A few weeks ago, Ministers were arguing that the elected Commons was being undermined by the unelected Lords, and were planning legislation to prevent peers in the Lords from overturning government legislation - this came about following the government's defeat on cutting tax credits in the Lords in October.

However, critics of the proposed move said that this would tilt the balance of power too much in favour of the government, and reduce the ability of the Lords to act as an effective check on government power. Ultimately, the Constitution Committee recognised that a 6 week review into this highly politicised debate was not really a good enough basis for fundamentally changing the UK's constitution and balance of power.

This meant that when the Queen gave her speech to Parliament last week at the State Opening there was no mention of any legislation that might curb the powers of the Lords to veto legislation.

But is the Lords getting more militant? If we look simply at the numbers then it certainly appear to be the case. In the 2015-2016 parliamentary session there were 60 defeats inflicted by the Lords on the Commons. However, this isn't necessarily that uncommon. In Labour's 2005-2006 session, they lost on 62 occasions, and 88 occasions in 2002-2003. You can find the details of defeats here on the Parliament website.

I think we need to look beyond the numbers, though. Labour suffered so many defeats partly because at the time the Lords was still dominated by the Conservatives. Now, however, the Tories are in a minority in the Lords. There are many more Lib Dem peers in the Lords (chosen by Nick Clegg during his time as Deputy PM), and many of them are responsible for some of the defeats. There are 109 Lib Dem peers out of 807 Lords - this is around half the number of Labour peers - and it gives the Lib Dems much more power in the Lords than they have in the Commons with only 8 of the 650 MPs.

It's also worth looking more broadly at the nature of the Lords as it currently exists. It's not clear that tweaking the rules on what they can vote on is actually the answer here. Maybe something more fundamental - like an elected chamber, or at least partially-elected - would be more useful. Although based on the evidence of gridlock in the US system, maybe this would cause even less legislation to be passed.

AS Politics - You heard it here first!

Click here for interesting piece on betting sites Vs opinion polls

Unit 1: Model Essay on electoral system

Example UK Politics Essay: Discuss the view that the electoral system for Westminster should change to proportional representation?

In simple terms, a proportional representation system is one in which the proportion of seats allocated to a particular party is the same as the proportion of votes won by that party. Each vote, therefore, carries equal weight, and typically there is a need for a multi-member constituency. Elections for the House of Commons currently use the “winner take all” approach of First Past The Post, which has been criticised for failing to represent the views of significant minorities and preventing smaller parties from having much influence in Parliament, thus ensuring a continued two-party system. Proportional representation can take a number of forms (and is already used in some parts of the UK) e.g. Single Transferable Vote in the NI Assembly, Additional Member System in the Scottish Parliament, and the Closed Party List for elections to the European Parliament. It will be argued in this essay that whilst proportional representation may enhance some elements of representative democracy, it may actually lead to more fragmented and unstable government and is therefore not desirable in the UK’s Westminster elections.

One of the strongest arguments in favour of a move towards proportional representation is dissatisfaction with the current FPTP system. The FPTP system, because of single-member constituencies can result in the existence of so-called safe seats (estimated by the Electoral Reform Society to be 368 seats of the total 650 constituencies ahead of the 2015 General Election). Indeed, 225 constituencies have not changed hands since before 1950, despite big changes in cultural attitudes and the UK’s demography. In a safe seat, such as David Cameron’s Witney constituency which has been in Tory hands since 1910, any voters who identify with the non-majority party may feel that there is no chance of their view being represented, and this can in turn reduce voter turnout andpolitical participation (accentuated by voters who tend to identify with the dominant party in a particular safe seat and feel that there is no need to turn out at all because their chosen party will win regardless of their vote). However, there is actually scant evidence available to suggest that voter turnout is higher in proportional systems. In the UK, devolved elections typically have lower turnout despite using a range of proportional representation systems. The 2014 European elections only had a turnout of 35.6%, worse than the (still poor) turnout across Europe of 42.6%.

This situation may be worsened in a winner-take-all system as a result ofgerrymandering e.g. the controversy over the Boundary Commission’s recent review ofconstituency boundaries which seemed to protect Tory seats over Labour and Lib Dem seats. This said, previously safe Labour seats in Scotland were lost to the SNP in the 2015 General Election, showing that the FPTP system can lead to different outcomes if there is enough consensus amongst voters that a change is needed.

There are other valid reasons for moving away from FPTP and towards an alternative proportional system. Whilst safe seats are an issue at one end of the spectrum, at the other end is the concern that a “winner” can be produced with a tiny mandate e.g. the SDLP candidate for South Belfast winning with just 24.5% of the vote in 2015, and in total 8 MPs won seats having won less than 35% of the votes cast. Also, many parts of the country may become electoral deserts, in which some parties who feel that there is little chance of them winning decide against putting forward a candidate at all – thisreduces voter choice and undermines democracy. A proportional system would address these issues, and many politicians believe that some sort of reform to the electoral system is necessary.

As mentioned in the introduction, a range of proportional representation electoral systems are currently in use across the UK. The Closed Party List for elections of MEPs tothe European Parliament is arguably the most proportionally representative system of the methods used, and elects MEPs in 12 UK multi-party constituencies. In the 2014 European Election, UKIP won the popular vote in the UK with 26.6% of the vote (24 seats) – the first time that a party other than Labour or Conservatives have won a popular vote in the UK since 1906 (Labour won 24.4% and 20 seats, and the Conservatives 23.05% and 19 seats). This is evidence that, in multi-party large constituencies, smaller parties that represent the views of significant numbers of constituents can win a number of seats. One concern with the use of proportional representation as an electoral system is that it can allow more extremist parties to gain power, thus potentially destabilising the political system. However, in the 2014 European Parliament elections there were 20 parties that received some share of the vote but still not enough to award them seats – this included far-right parties such as the BNP and Britain First. It is true that this means some voters will not have their views represented, but when they are a tiny minority this is probably good in terms of preventing tyranny by the minority.

As mentioned earlier, turnout in this 2014 European election was low. One reason for this is that UK voters are used to the single-member constituencies used for Westminster, in which they have a named specific representative in the Commons who can address the interests of their constituents. PR systems weaken this link between constituents and their representative, arguably reducing the strength and quality of representative democracy in a particular area. For example, in multi-member constituencies, constituents may not know who to approach, and their representatives may not have good local knowledge if they are representing a much larger geographical area. The UK’s House of Commons has more representatives per person than in any other modern democracy, and a move to PR could weaken that important and unique link.

The inevitable result of using a more proportionally representative system for Westminster is the increased likelihood of coalition government. Coalition governments can sometimes take time to form e.g. it took around a week for Cameron and Clegg to form a government. In the meantime, there is effectively a power vacuum, and no Parliament – this reduces the quality of representation. Arguably a week is not a long time, but in some countries such as Germany and Greece, coalition governments take much longer to form. Furthermore, whilst coalition government can lead to greater compromise and conciliation between parties in relation to policy-making, it can also slow down the policy-making process if there are strong internal disagreements (e.g. in the Tory-Lib Dem coalition there were different views on electoral reform, university tuition fees, military intervention overseas and so on). This makes government less effective and reduces the desirability of proportional representation.

Coalition government also means that the governing group have no clear mandatebecause their combined policies, such as the Coalition Agreement, have not met with the direct approval of the electorate at the ballot box via a manifesto. Furthermore, the compromises reached between different parties may actually lead to voter anger if they feel that their views are even less likely to be represented e.g. the Lib Dem climbdown over the abolition of university tuition fees (a key manifesto pledge) leading to “punishment” of the Lib Dems at the 2015 General Election, effectively removing them almost completely from the Commons. This has resulted in instability in the political system at Westminster, with the Lib Dem’s position as 3rd most populous party being taken by the SNP, which only has Scottish interests at heart.

Overall, whilst the current FPTP system for Westminster elections certainly has its flaws, stable government and a close link between MPs and their constituents are key strengths that would be lost if the UK moved towards a more proportional system.

Unit 1: Pressure Groups - Model essay

Example Essay UK Politics - do pressure groups always undermine democracy?

Whilst pressure groups may undermine the normal method of political participation in the UK’s representative democracy, their existence may strengthen pluralist democracy. This is achieved by pressure groups encouraging the general public to participate in politics and improving the government’s policy-making through better information and scrutiny.

However whilst some pressure groups certainly do lead to a more democratic outcome in the UK, others may do little to improve democracy because of elitism and an overly-narrow focus resulting in “tyranny by the minority”. It will be argued in this essay that, overall, pressure groups do not generally undermine democracy.

The most well-known pressure groups are usually those that have engaged in direct action, often using controversial “civil disobedience” stunts which hit the news headlines e.g. the UK Cannabis Campaign’s Hyde Park “smoke out” in 2013, or Plane Stupid’s campaign to prevent a 3rd runway at Heathrow in which 13 campaigners shackled themselves together on the north runway in July 2015, or New Fathers 4 Justice members climbing respected buildings dressed as superheroes.

These single-issue causal pressure groups arguably undermined democracy by breaking the law – law which has been passed by elected representatives in the House of Commons – and causing significant disruption to other law-abiding citizens in prime examples of tyranny by the minority. More recently, critics of groups that use disruptive direct action by narrow-interest low-membership groups argue that such activity hinders and may prevent joined-up government, since the UK government has to balance a number of demands.

However, the campaigners involved were trying to ensure that their views were heard; cannabis smokers, for example, may feel that they are under-represented in the Commons (where it would be fairly scandalous for an MP to admit that they smoked cannabis) and certainly under-represented in the “interest areas” represented by peers in the House of Lords. Representative democracy, as it works in the UK, does not necessarily allow all people to have their views and opinions represented, and so direct action by pressure groups perhaps enhances pluralist democracy (a system in which there are numerous centres of political power).

 Many pressure groups or lobbying organisations ensure that issues important to the general public actually make it onto the desks of MPs and into the debating chambers of the Commons and Lords, potentially changing the law. There are countless historical examples of this in the UK, for example the Suffragette movement which ultimately led to universal suffrage (which clearly enhanced rather than undermined democracy!). Another example would be the All Britain Anti-Poll Tax Federation which led to the abolition of the deeply unpopular poll tax in 1990, thus changing the law in line with the will of the majority of Britons and, according to many people, reducing the impact of Thatcher’s so-called elective dictatorship and restoring effective representative democracy. The action of the pressure group in this particular case helped to hold the government to account in the lengthy period between elections, ensuring that the elected representatives continued to act according to their mandate and not beyond, in accordance with the delegate model of representation rather than the trustee model.

However, the ability of a pressure group to actually influence government policy depends not only on the wide support of the general public but also on the availability of so-called access points to politicians. For example, the Countryside Alliance had more sympathy within the Tory-Lib Dem coalition than they had under the 1997-2010 Labour government. This said, MPs are technically not allowed to accept money from a lobbying organisation to ask parliamentary questions, table motions or introduce bills – this was reaffirmed by the 2014 Patrick Mercer Panorama Fiji cash-for-access scandal.

Another way in which pressure groups enhance rather than undermine democracy is through their wide and extensive membership. The classic example is that there are now more members of the RSPB than there are paid members of political parties. Even if people feel that that there is no party that particularly represents their interests (something that seems to be increasingly the case given the UK’s class de-alignment in relation to political parties in the UK) they can usually identify with a pressure group and may participate in politics through pressure groups rather than through more traditional routes.

Another upshot of this high membership of pressure groups is that it can give a weighting to the different items on the government’s mandate following an election, because different groups can express interest in particular areas e.g. UK Uncut’s pressure on the government to reduce the extremity of austerity cuts.

However, many of the best-known pressure groups are the large groups with a strong corporate identify e.g. the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has a very recognisable panda logo, and Oxfam also has a strong high street presence. These groups attract a significant amount of money and therefore can be really influential, perhaps overly so in some cases. For example, back in 2010 the WWF was criticised for claiming that 40% of the Amazon rainforest was at threat from global warming and that certain chunks needed rapid protection, resulting in the WWF attempting to claim $60bn in “carbon credits” for protecting an area of rainforest that actually wasn’t at threat. Furthermore, many pressure groups are not considered internally democratic, and this may limit participation by the public. For example, the leaders of the National Farmers Union are chosen indirectly by county delegates rather than by the overall membership.

This said, though, many groups operate efficiently and this allows them to achieve their other aims of improving information and holding the government to account. Despite some incidences of pressure groups providing incorrect information, many pressure groups help to educate and inform the public and the government on important issues. The Confederation of Business Industries (CBI) has a Public Services team which advises the government on modern business techniques for achieving better efficiency (which reduces the need for drastic austerity measures).

Whilst the CBI has been criticised by the Vote Leave campaign for the upcoming EU Referendum for being too political in strongly supporting the case to stay in the EU, the CBI has carried out significant research on this important issue. This should ensure that British citizens will be able to participate more effectively in the direct democracy of this referendum. Whilst there are some cases in which pressure groups have disrupted effective democracy in the UK, for the most part pressure groups can enhance rather than undermine democracy.

Unit 2: Constitution & Constitutional Reform

Here's a quick multi-choice quiz on the Constitution and its reform for your AS students. It takes the form of one of our favourite activities here at tutor2u - the Confidence Based Dance Off! The concept is aimed at getting students to think a little more carefully before calling out their answers. Before declaring their answer to each question the student must also decide how confident they are with their response (either high, medium or low). They are awarded points (or deducted points!) based upon whether they are correct or incorrect and the level of confidence they expressed.

You can get your students to complete this quiz on their own or in small teams. There are 6 questions in this resource. Perfect as a quick classroom starter for your next revision session.

Revision quiz on constitutional reform from mattbentley34

Unit 1: Essay - Discuss the extent to which the UK’s version of representative democracy could be improved

This is an essay from another syllabus, hence why it is so long. However, the salient points remain the same.

Representative democracy, or indirect democracy, refers to the election of officials/lawmakers to represent the views of the electorate in parliament. In the UK, we elect our MPs, our MEPs, our local councillors, and in some parts of the country a Mayor (e.g. London). Whilst there are clear benefits to having a system of representative democracy in the UK, there are two key problems. Firstly, the UK’s electoral system doesn’t always ensure that everyone is properly represented. Secondly, once in power, there is no guarantee that our elected representatives will actually make policies or legislate in a way that is satisfactory to most of the electorate. Both of these issues will be discussed below.

Representative democracy is effectively the opposite of direct democracy (a system in which each individual has the right to initiate policy themselves). Representative democracy is usually regarded as an essential feature of a large society because it allowslegislating and executive decision-making to be carried out more efficiently by a small number of people, many of whom are experts in that job. This means that policy can be formulated really quickly if necessary (e.g. terror legislation post 7/7), and it also allows the electorate to “get on with everyday life” rather than everyone spending swathes of time on political matters. Furthermore, representative democracy in the UK allows the electorate to have easy access to their MP (e.g. through the regular constituency clinics usually held on Fridays across the UK).

The first argument against the effectiveness of the UK’s system of representative democracy is that the system does not necessarily allow everyone to be properly represented. There are a number of reasons for this.

Firstly, the First Past the Post electoral system for MPs means that smaller parties often gain little traction and cannot win enough votes to gain a seat in Parliament. For example, in 2015, the candidate standing for the SDLP in South Belfast won the seat with only 24.5% of the vote – this means that 75.5% of those who turned out to vote in South Belfast are not represented by the person or party to which they were most closely aligned. Therefore many of the votes cast in these types of constituency are effectively wasted votes. We can see this is not a new problem by examining both the share of votes won and the share of Commons seats won by the Tories throughout the 1980s and 90s. In 1979 the Conservatives won 43.9% of the votes and 53.4% of the seats, compared with the 1983 result of 42.4% of the votes and a huge 61.1% of the seats, and then in 1992 winning 42.3% of the votes (i.e. hardly any different to 1983) but a huge change in the proportion of seats at 51.6%.

However, it is difficult to see how the electoral system could easily be changed. FPTP is the most common electoral system globally for legislatures chosen in a representative democracy. The British public rejected the proposal for an AV system in a 2011referendum. Furthermore, alternative systems of more proportional representation (e.g. Germany’s) may result in uneasy coalitions which generate little meaningful policy thereby making representative democracy less effective and efficient. An alternative is for political parties to manipulate the shortlists for election candidates. The Labour Party has, in the recent past, used all-women shortlists to help increase the number of women in parliament. However, this technique is actually quite unpopular with voters – a 2014YouGov poll showed that 56% of the British public are opposed to the AWS system.

Secondly, voter turnout in the UK can be very low. The turnout for General Elections is usually reasonably high compared with other elections, but this rate remains stubbornly below the level prior to 1997 i.e. 66.1% at the 2015 General Election, compared with 77.7% in 1992 and 76% in 1979. There are a number of possible explanations for low turnout, but with regards to this question in particular, perhaps many voters feel that they are not adequately represented by their MP (different ethnicity, different educational/family background etc). Young people may feel that their MP is “out of touch”, and may be more likely to participate in democracy through e-voting (which currently doesn’t exist in the UK) or through protests/pressure groups. However, turnout varies hugely depending on the type of election. For example, national turnout was just 31% in the 2012 local elections (although this hides large disparities between council wards), and 34.2% in the 2014 European elections for MEPs.

One way of improving turnout could be to make voting compulsory (as in Australia), but the downside is that some members of the electorate do not actually want to vote or would be happy to vote if only there was a candidate that they found appealing. Another method could be to change the voting day from Thursday or extending the voting period to being longer than one day in order to improve convenience of voting – but this is difficult in practical terms due to polling stations often being in buildings that are needed for other purposes such as nurseries. The government could also invest into making it easier to vote electronically rather than physically attending a polling station or posting a postal vote. Finally, making it easier to register as a voter could also help – the change from household to individual registration has been blamed for poor turnout amongst young people who were previously often registered by their parents but can no longer rely on this. Movements such as Operation Black Vote (OBV) may also help encourage turnout amongst black and ethnic minority voters – OBV has been credited this Spring with helping Sadiq Khan to victory in the London mayoral election.

The second broad way in which representative democracy could be improved would be to improve the accountability of represented officials and ensure that they actually represent the interests of the people who voted them into power. There are various reasons why representatives may not actually do what we expect them to. One reason is a lack of effective scrutiny, due to, perhaps, weak Opposition (i.e. discord and disagreement in the Labour party following Corbyn’s election as party leader), or overly theatrical Question Times that are about cheap shots and not true scrutiny of the government (although politicians are increasingly held in check by social media responses to their performance). However, the increasing professionalization of Select Committees (e.g. paying the Chair an amount equivalent to that of a Minister) has gone some way to improving scrutiny, as has the use of the FOI Act by the media (e.g. the Telegraph’s investigation into the MP expenses scandal)

Another reason is that it can be quite difficult to actually remove a representative such as an MP from office until the next election. However, the Recall of MPs Act 2015 goes some way to redressing this issue, although the introduction of this new legislation was not without its controversies – Labour MP Geraint Davies said that there was a risk of the process being misused by groups with a vested interest and this could actually undermine representative democracy. Nonetheless the Bill became an Act.

However, maybe we should take note of the words of theorist Edmund Burke on representative democracy – he argued that we should trust the expert opinions of our representatives even if we happen to disagree with them. He wrote “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion”.

Clearly, the UK’s version of representative democracy is not perfect. However, it seems difficult to come up with ways in which it could be easily improved – efforts to enhance representative democracy are often unpopular with the electorate, or unnecessarily expensive / time-consuming. Maybe the increasing use of social media may help.

Unit 3: EU for beginners!

Click here to access a simple and easy to follow piece on all things EU.

Useful for your studies, but also for the upcoming Brexit vote!

Unit 1 & 2: Revision Videos

Many thanks Mr Dale for posting these short but informative videos....excellent for revision....

Unit 1 & 2: Democratic deficit & electoral turnout.

More recent data from the Electoral Reform Society (a pressure group in themselves) showing a disturbing trend in terms of voting turnout. Click here for the article.

Obviously this is useful for any question on electoral systems, democratic deficit, representation, legitimacy etc.

Question to think about: Why do some areas of the UK (Hull for example), experience a lower turnout than others?

Unit 2: House of lords using their powers

Click here to read about the latest example of the Lords defeating the government. This time on the issue of child refugees.

Unit 1: Labour party policy and divisions

Thanks to Stefan for this article on the divide over policy in the Labour Party.

Unit 2: Power of back bench MP's

Click here for article that highlights that Conzservative MP's still have power when it comes to policy. However, one might argue, that Osbourne is trying to keep MP's happy before the EU referendum in June!

Just seen this on facebook.....

Unit 1 & 2: All things EU

Click here to access several presentations and articles on the EU and BREXIT.

Useful to give some context to questions on democratic deficit, strength of Prime Minister, parliament etc.

Unit 2: Explain 3 considerations that are taken into account when choosing life peers (10 Marks)

In order to restore the balance of party support in the Lords to close to that
of the Commons, reflecting the popular will. (Malcolm Pearson - UKIP)

In order to reward donors for their support for the governing party(ies). (Lord Levy Music Industry exec - Labour)

As a reward for a career as a loyal party supporter. (Andrew lloyd-Webber - Conservative)

An individual might represent a significant section of society. (Jane Campbell - Disabled Right activist - cross-bencher)

A ‘worthy’ citizen might be able to contribute effectively to the legislative
process. (Elizabeth Barker - Lib Dem - Charity Work)

In order to reflect the more diverse nature of society. (Mohamed Sheikh - Promotes ethnic issues - Conservative)

Simply as an honour.

· Any other cogent reason

Examples from the real world should be credited, but are not essential for a good
answer.

Unit 2: Parliament - how it works and its effectiveness

As parliament from aquinaspolitics

Unit 2: Functions of the House of Lords

The house of lords – functions from aquinaspolitics

Unit 2: Model Answers

Excellent resource, looking at Unit 2 questions and possible answers.

Unit 2 model answers from Matthew Bentley

Unit 1 & 2: More Devolved powers to Holyrood!

New powers for the Scottish Parliament could be in place shortly after the Holyrood elections in May, according to Scottish Secretary David Mundell. He was speaking to MSPs after a deal was reached on the fiscal framework underlying increased devolution.

Click here for the full article.

Questions for discussion: How does this effect parliamentary sovereignty, legitimacy, representation, authority, power, democracy?

Unit 3: Another introduction to Anarchism

Unit 3: An Introduction to Anarchism - Part 1

A useful (if a little dull) presentation on Anarchism.

Unit 2: The EU Debate - will it weaken government

There are lots of news articles on the latest EU issue. Click here for a piece from the BBC that discusses how the split within the cabinet could affect the power and effectiveness of Cameron, the executive and indeed, government.

Useful application marks for questions on the effectiveness of cabinet, government, parliamentary sovereignty, prime ministerial power etc etc

There is lots more on the BBC. Please make sure you are keeping abreast of the situation.

All Politics students

See below for the latest Politics Review magazine, available in library now. Lots in it (as always) for all students, both AS and A2.

Politics review from mattbentley34

Unit 2: Prime Minister or President

Prime minister from aquinaspolitics

Unit 3: Marxism and Communism

Here is the presentation from today. It by no means explains each area of Marxism in a clear way, but it does give you the key areas that you must understand.

Marxist and communist analysis from mattbentley34

Unit 3: A brief introduction to Marxism

Unit 1 & 2: Holyrood in the news again

Click here for an article on the financial arrangements to accompany the Scotland Bill. Useful when discussing devolution and constitutional affairs. 

Unit 1: Scottish Parliament - AMS

Thank you to Stefan for this article on Scottish politics. It explains how the Scottish electoral system works and has some excellent examples.

Unit 1: Political Participation - lots of examples

Thank you to me, for finding this article on political participation. Really useful when answering questions on this topic.

How to form a political party

Click here for your step by step guide to form a political party....exciting times at DBS!

Unit 2: The House of lords - What do they do?

The work of the house of lords politics review 2014 from mattbentley34

Unit 2: Revision Cards - took me ages!

Unit 2 Revisions Cards from Matthew Bentley

Unit 2: UK Constitution - End of topic summary

Two ppt's that explaing everything about the UK constitution, using examples that will help your analysis.

Constitution from meddelton

Summary of constitution in uk end of topic from Matthew Bentley