Sunday, 23 April 2017
Units 1 & 2 - Marginal Seats
Click here to access a recent BBC article discussing the potential marginal seats in the 2017 General election.
Wednesday, 19 April 2017
Monday, 17 April 2017
Unit 1: Essay on Pressure Groups
Extended student essay with examples (some amendments)
Why Are Some Pressure
Groups More Successful Than Others?
A Pressure Group is best
defined as an organization which seeks to influence decision-makers in relation
to an issue or policy. Unlike political parties, pressure groups do not usually
stand for elected office.
Note – Over half of the 61 ‘new’ political parties that registered with the
Electoral Commission in 2006 were, in all but name, single-issue pressure
groups e.g. Respect. There
are two types of pressure groups, an insider pressure group, or an outsider
pressure group. An insider pressure group is one which has the backing of the
government and is involved in parliament, for example
Trade unions are favoured by the Labour
party, along with education groups or pro Europe groups. An outsider pressure group is one
completely outside the governmental ‘circle’, such as ALF (Animal Liberation Front). Whereas, when the Conservatives are in power business groups like the Institute of Directors (IOD) or
the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) find
favour.
Pressure groups set out to
achieve their goals through a variety of tactics, for example, Fathers 4 Justice- a small PG- Fathers 4 Justice (or F4J) began as a fathers’
rights organization in the United Kingdom. It became
prominent and frequently discussed in the media following a series of
high-visibility stunts and protests often in costume. Fathers 4 Justice was
founded in the UK by Matt
O'Connor, a marketing consultant and father. Following separation from
his wife in 2000, O'Connor became a prominent critic of UK family law after
a court barred him from seeing his young sons outside of a contact centre.
F4J's stated aim is to
champion the cause of equal parenting, family law reform and equal contact for
divorced parents with children. It is well-known
for its campaigning techniques of dramatic protest stunts, usually dressed as
comic book superheroes and frequently scaling public buildings, bridges and
monuments.
Stunts have included
supporters storming courts dressed in Father Christmas outfits, clapping the Government's
‘Children’s Minister’(Margaret Hodge) in handcuffs, and most notably group
member Jason Hatch climbing onto
Buckingham Palace dressed as Batman. On 19 May 2004, a major alert was caused when two members of the group
threw purple flour bombs at Tony Blair during Prime Minister's Questions at the
House of Commons. On 27 September 2005,
protester Guy Harrison scaled The Houses of Parliament unveiling a banner
stating "Does Blair care? For Fawkes sake change family law."
Impact: Fathers 4 Justice's main
impact remains upon media coverage and legal treatment of
fathers' rights issues in the UK. The use of high-profile and disruptive stunts
has garnered significant UK media coverage. The political aims of the group are
as yet
un-achieved, A significant, unintended result of the F4J campaign has been the
exposure of flaws in security at high-profile British institutions, resulting
in security enquiries or reviews at Buckingham Palace and the House of Commons.
It is often hard
to measure the amount of success achieved by some pressure groups as the government
claims credit for acts made from p.g’s.- for example, prior to the 1960’s none
of the major parties had any policy on
conservation or ‘green issues’ , yet when the Ecology Party(PG) showed signs of public support
for such matters all three parties developed such policies which are so
prominent today.
The specific membership of each pressure group (size and status) plays a large part in how
successful the group turns out to be. Organizations such as the AA and RAC have huge numbers
of motorists (10 million voters +) to protect, so any issues involving
road-building or petrol prices or the current HS2 dispute require extensive
consultations of such bodies by the government. Whereas, some PGs with small
membership, and with huge expertise such as
IOD (Institute of
Directors) will be consulted on many
economic matters by various governments.
Government support
for pressure groups is valuable, as each group may receive better treatment
from a particular party such as rural
groups like the Countryside
Alliance
– an insider group for the Conservative party whilst the Pensioner groups, such as Help the Aged, being consulted by the Labour party.
Some sectional groups
may have special status, as the members could play a huge part in influencing
decision-makers, for example, CBI (Confederation
of British Industry) and the TUC (Trade Union Congress) have
a large influence in a wide variety of areas because of who they represent,
that is, employers and employees respectively. These groups command respect
from governments because, on the whole, they act responsibly and have authority
due to the fact that they are chosen democratically and elected by their own
members to their positions. So they can legitimately reflect the views of
their members whereas the vast majority of other PGs are criticized because
it is usually the active members of the group who determine their actions and
frequently do not reflect the body of opinion of their membership – this is
what leads to internal friction in some PGs.
The resources that
a PG has can play a large part in their success or otherwise, for example, the RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) not
only has more members than each of the three major political parties, but also it has:
The invaluable support
of almost 18,000 volunteers.
Resources available for
charitable purposes in 2010 was £94.7 million.
200 nature reserves
covering almost 130,000 hectares, home to 80% of our rarest or most
threatened bird species.
A UK headquarters, three
national offices and nine regional offices.
A local network of 175 local
groups and more than 110 youth groups.
and most importantly, immense public support.
The availability
of funds, however, does not always guarantee success, for example, both Shell and BP
(hugely successful oil corporations) could not avoid adverse media and
public anger when a number of oil pollution accidents (Niger delta, Nigeria
(Shell)- ‘world capital
of pollution’/BP Gulf of
Mexico) occurred despite spending enormous amounts of money on PR. Likewise,
trade unions have huge financial resources (member subscriptions), but often
suffer poor public and press coverage e.g. NUM
(National Union of Miners)
The internal
organization of pressure groups is sometimes the driving-force behind the
actions undertaken to help their cause. Many PGs are internally
undemocratic- in many PGs officers are
appointed, not elected, so there is a lack of accountability to members. In
many PGs key decisions are not taken by the members, but by a central committee or board which in
itself is unelected.-Neil McNaughton suggests
that the BMA and the AA are poor in consulting their
members over policy and actions. Thus
the organization of many PGs reflects ELITISM rather than PLURALISM. Wyn Grant reinforces this opinion with his suggestions
about the organization of Greenpeace.
|
Greenpeace is a hierarchical
organisation that allows little democratic control over the direction of
campaigns. -- It has a strictly bureaucratic
internal structure.
– a
small group of people has control
over the organisation at the national and international level.
– Local action groups are
totally dependent on the central body.
– the rank and file is excluded
|
A more recent series of populist movements –
called Social Movements or Protest
Movements – have come to prominence over the last thirty years. Social
movements
are a far looser
structure than PGs in organization.
|
Social
movements are any broad social alliances of people
who are connected through their shared interest in blocking or affecting
social change. Social movements do not have to be
formally organized.Modern social movements became possible through the
wider dissemination of literature and increased mobility of labor due to
the industrialization of societies (
Technological Age)
Social movements based upon two characteristics: (1) who is
the movement attempting to change and (2) how much change is being
advocated. Social movements can be aimed at change on an individual
level (e.g. Alcoholics Anonymous)
or change on a broader, group or even societal level (e.g., anti-globalization).
Social movements can also advocate for minor changes (e.g., tougher
restrictions on drunk driving; MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) or
radical changes (e.g., prohibition). A distinction is drawn between social movements and social movement
organizations (SMOs).
A social movement organization is a formally organized component of a
social movement. But an SMO may only
make up a part of a particular social movement. For instance, PETA (People
for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) advocates for vegan lifestyles along
with its other aims. But PETA is not the only group to advocate for vegan
diets and lifestyles; there are numerous other groups actively engaged
toward this end Thus, the social movement may be a
push toward veganism (an effort with numerous motivations) and PETA is an
SMO working within the broader social movement.
|
Examples of Social Movements
The Countryside Alliance in 1998 organized a massive demonstration in London, proving their preparedness, and amount of organizational skills.
The Fuel Lobby in 2000 is a fine example
of logistical organization. The internet provided a great
ally, as through it the group organized a huge protest in a very short space of
time. Organization is important as it
can influence a huge number of people, and can help with a
protest or demonstration as it puts the word out about the cause.
The countryside
alliance in the 1990s declared a massive demonstration on March 1st 1998, 300,000 protesters gathered in London, however, fox- hunting was still banned, however the cause raised
a significant amount of awareness for their campaign. The fuel tax protest
movement in 2000, blockaded petrol refineries to create widespread panic, this
did not seem to affect the policy, and had less of an effect than the
‘countryside alliance’.
However, pressure
groups can face opposition from the government or any other group of some sort.
Examples of conflicting groups include the animal rights campaigners vs. the fur trade. Also, Transport 2000 vs. the motor -car
industry.
In conclusion, the
question ,’Why are some pressure groups more successful than others’ is in fact
very hard to judge and answer. This is because
the media is a big influence on the coverage of an issue, rather than the pressure group itself. Also, if
many pressure groups campaign on a singular issue, where does the credit
go to, therefore it is hard to measure a pressure groups success. The
membership of each pressure group consists of the size, the social class
of members and the strategic importance of the membership. Membership is important
as it shows the public what type of people are getting affected by the cause at
hand, it could familiarize the public with the issue. Pressure groups resources
consist of finance, organization and its tactics. This means that the pressure
groups long term future is secured, which could be seen as success, as the
group has survived for some time. The external environment consists of
government support, public opinion and opposition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)