Example Essay UK Politics - do pressure groups always undermine democracy?
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment