Rating

5.0(2)

Take a practice test

Democracy & Participation

Democracy – a system of government where the citizens exercise power by voting

Direct Democracy – the direct and continuous participation of citizens in the government (Athen’s model)

Representative Democracy – the indirect government by the people, through representatives elected by the people

Advantages + Disadvantages:

Features of Democracy:

Positive features of UK Dem;→Free media that challenges gov. policy, exposes politicians’ misdeed →Independent judiciary separate from other branches, uphold laws + personal freedoms → Devolved gov’s, power given to local gov’s enables local + relevant decisions→ Free + fair elections, largely free from corruption, opportunities to vote in referendums (aspects of D.D)→Range of political parties, large choiceo Universal suffrage

Negative features of UK Dem;→ Minority underrepresented due to FPTP→HOL lack democratic legitimacy (unelected)→ Lack protection of rights, EU convention of HR incorporated into UK law 1998 but inadequate at giving rights to citizens→Control of media by wealth (Murdock group owns multiple news outlets i.e Sun, Times) + business interests has mass control despite being one company→ Many don’t participate/vote

Franchise:

Franchise – the right to vote in public, political elections

o 1832 Great Reform Act (abolished rotten boroughs, created seats for urban areas such as Manchester)

o 1918 Representation of the People Act (all men over 21 and women over 30, got rid of plural voting)

o 1928 Equal Franchise (both sexes vote at 21)

o 1948 Representation of the People Act (end of plural voting)

o 1969 Representation of the people act (voting age reduced to 18)

For voting age 16;→Currently have no say over policies that affect them i.e tuition fees – not represented→ Allowed to vote in Scottish referendum→ Parties currently aim policies at older voter so Citizenship education compulsory since 1997 so arguably better educated than older generation→ Can be independent, have a job, married and paying taxes.→ Their generation will live with the long-term effects of political decisions	For compulsory voting;→ Greater legitimacy, MPs held to account by all constituents→ Increase participation and turnout (Australia have 95% turnout)→ Make government more representative as higher proportion of electorate contributed to result→ Forces people to address political issues (better political education)→ Raise money through fines→ No variation in types of elections
Against voting age 16;→ Not developed political views→ Could lower overall turnout (18-24 turnout is lowest currently)→ May not be mature enough to consider future effects of decisions→ Parties may construct frivolous policies to attract younger voters→ Already other ways to get involved i.e youth parliament→ Political education differs in quality school to school→ Politicians should already represent the views of all their constituents regardless of whether 16-year olds can vote	Against compulsory voting;→ Give media more power to influence→ Abuses people’s freedoms→ Donkey voting (everyone voting for same thing)→ Outcome of election decided by ill-informed voters leading to extremist parties gaining power→Costs money to enforce→Doesn’t solve problem of political engagement, doesn’t mean people are happy with political system, masks it→ Access to polling stations for vulnerable people→Take longer for result to be reached + cost money enforcing and chasing fines

For voting age 16;→Currently have no say over policies that affect them i.e tuition fees – not represented→ Allowed to vote in Scottish referendum→ Parties currently aim policies at older voter so Citizenship education compulsory since 1997 so arguably better educated than older generation→ Can be independent, have a job, married and paying taxes.→ Their generation will live with the long-term effects of political decisions

For compulsory voting;→ Greater legitimacy, MPs held to account by all constituents→ Increase participation and turnout (Australia have 95% turnout)→ Make government more representative as higher proportion of electorate contributed to result→ Forces people to address political issues (better political education)→ Raise money through fines→ No variation in types of elections

Against voting age 16;→ Not developed political views→ Could lower overall turnout (18-24 turnout is lowest currently)→ May not be mature enough to consider future effects of decisions→ Parties may construct frivolous policies to attract younger voters→ Already other ways to get involved i.e youth parliament→ Political education differs in quality school to school→ Politicians should already represent the views of all their constituents regardless of whether 16-year olds can vote

Against compulsory voting;→ Give media more power to influence→ Abuses people’s freedoms→ Donkey voting (everyone voting for same thing)→ Outcome of election decided by ill-informed voters leading to extremist parties gaining power→Costs money to enforce→Doesn’t solve problem of political engagement, doesn’t mean people are happy with political system, masks it→ Access to polling stations for vulnerable people→Take longer for result to be reached + cost money enforcing and chasing fines

Participation:

Yes, participation crisis:→ Voter turnout has declined at general elections (since 1997 turnout has been below 71% with 2001 59%)→ Since 1983 party membership has declined (3.8% to 1.6%) particularly in main parties →By-elections and second order elections have lower turnouts than general elections→ Apathy/hapathy and the belief their vote won’t make a difference due to party similarity, safe seats (in 2010 G.E, 59% seats safe) and FPTP

No participation crisis→ Pressure group activity has increased (i.e Extinction Rebellion + Tuition Fees)→More access to political information via social media; greater engagemento E-democracy/ petitions increased engagement (i.e 2nd EU referendum petition has 6 million signatures)→ Party membership of smaller parties has increased since 2010→ Turnout for non-general elections voting has increased (i.e EU/ Scot Independence) on single issue votes

Types of pressure groups:

Promotional -Types of pressure groups that have a specific goal or aim to achieve
Section - Types of pressure groups that represent a section of society.
Outsider groups - Types of pressure groups that use the media to get attention due to lack of close contact with parliament.
Insider groups- Types of pressure groups that have a close relationship with parliament and so manages to easily achieve their aims.

Sectional (/interest) groups;→ Promote interests of an occupation or another group in society ie. Trade unions representing their members in negotiations with employers→ Restricted membership to those who meet specific requirements i.e National Farmers Union is open to those working in agricultural industry to achieve agricultural policies which bring security of income to farm families, provides professional representation- Recent campaign, trying to ensure a free trade in agri-food goods with the EU market after Brexit whilst maintaining regulatory control, avoid ‘no deal’ scenario- Successes, lobbied to obtain funding for Anaerobic Digestion plant on farms, farmers can apply for a £400,000 loan to do so, as it allows to save money on energy, positive environmental outcomes	Cause groups;→ Promote a particular goal or drawing attention to an issue→ Membership open to anyone who sympathises with their aims i.e Client Earth, made up of lawyers and environmental experts to fight climate change using the law to protect the planet- Recent campaign, Brexit, trying to assure gov. maintains strong legal protection as a ‘no-deal’ scenario suggested gov. departments are underprepared in maintaining promised environmental protections- Successes, 2009, lobbied EU commission to reject UK gov’s request for an extension on improving air quality in the most polluted areas, the group’s appeal to S.C was successful, and gov. found breaching law
Social movement;→ Similar to cause groups but more loosely structuredo Seek to achieve a singular objectiveo Usually politically radical i.e 2006 – 2010 ‘camps for climate action’ protests against the expansion of Heathrow airport
Outsider groups;→ Not consulted by the gov, they’re unlikely to seek dialogue, objectives usually far from political mainstream ==i.e animal rights protesters who try intimidating testing laboratories such as Animal Liberation Front (often use militant strategies)→ Resort to less discreet methods to draw attention to concerns as they lack contacts, petitions, email campaigns, demonstrations i.e Extinction Rebellion and publicity stuntso →Black Lives Matter UK obstructed flights at London city airport in 2016 to draw attention to that ethnic minorities are unproportionally affected by pollution	Insider groups;→ Relies on contact with ministers and civil servants to achieve their aims, negotiate quietly behind the scenes, sometimes even given input on draft legislation→ National Farmers Union able to give specialised knowledge in return for influence on policy→Can also choose to lobby MPs and brief them on issues of concern or give evidence to committees

Sectional (/interest) groups;→ Promote interests of an occupation or another group in society ie. Trade unions representing their members in negotiations with employers→ Restricted membership to those who meet specific requirements i.e National Farmers Union is open to those working in agricultural industry to achieve agricultural policies which bring security of income to farm families, provides professional representation- Recent campaign, trying to ensure a free trade in agri-food goods with the EU market after Brexit whilst maintaining regulatory control, avoid ‘no deal’ scenario- Successes, lobbied to obtain funding for Anaerobic Digestion plant on farms, farmers can apply for a £400,000 loan to do so, as it allows to save money on energy, positive environmental outcomes

Cause groups;→ Promote a particular goal or drawing attention to an issue→ Membership open to anyone who sympathises with their aims i.e Client Earth, made up of lawyers and environmental experts to fight climate change using the law to protect the planet- Recent campaign, Brexit, trying to assure gov. maintains strong legal protection as a ‘no-deal’ scenario suggested gov. departments are underprepared in maintaining promised environmental protections- Successes, 2009, lobbied EU commission to reject UK gov’s request for an extension on improving air quality in the most polluted areas, the group’s appeal to S.C was successful, and gov. found breaching law

Social movement;→ Similar to cause groups but more loosely structuredo Seek to achieve a singular objectiveo Usually politically radical i.e 2006 – 2010 ‘camps for climate action’ protests against the expansion of Heathrow airport

Outsider groups;→ Not consulted by the gov, they’re unlikely to seek dialogue, objectives usually far from political mainstream ==i.e animal rights protesters who try intimidating testing laboratories such as Animal Liberation Front (often use militant strategies)→ Resort to less discreet methods to draw attention to concerns as they lack contacts, petitions, email campaigns, demonstrations i.e Extinction Rebellion and publicity stuntso →Black Lives Matter UK obstructed flights at London city airport in 2016 to draw attention to that ethnic minorities are unproportionally affected by pollution

Insider groups;→ Relies on contact with ministers and civil servants to achieve their aims, negotiate quietly behind the scenes, sometimes even given input on draft legislation→ National Farmers Union able to give specialised knowledge in return for influence on policy→Can also choose to lobby MPs and brief them on issues of concern or give evidence to committees

Are right’s protected?

Yes, rights protected;→ Judicial reviews enable scrutiny of gov. legality, way of protecting citizen rights, a check on legislation to make sure it complies with HRA→ Increase in judicial reviews i.e 4,240 in 2000 to 15,600 in 2015, successes include high court ruling 2008 to allow Gurkha soldiers to live in the UK→ Due to public and parliamentary opposition, gov 2005 proposals to extend the period an uncharged terror suspect could be held from 14 to 90 days, defeated in commons

No, rights not protected;→ Judges cannot force legally parliament to make changes in its legislation if it infringes the HRA→ Judicial reviews place too much power in the hands of unelected, unaccountable judges→Human rights can be seen eroded in times of heightened security concerns as the gov. and public tend to put safety of society above the individual i.e post 9/11 when ministers claimed they could hold foreign terror suspects indefinitely on the grounds of national emergency in 2

Evaluate the view that the Labour Party has moved decisively away from New Labour. (Old Labour).

Argument: Labour Party formed in 1900 to represent socialism and trade unions. 1918

constitution set out aspirations to achieve social democracy such as Clause IV. Economy, welfare

and foreign policy as factors. Direction – moved decisively away under Corbyn but Starmer

appears to be moving back towards New Labour ideas and principles, however, given the reactive

nature of politics recently and the fact that there has not been a manifesto under Starmer it is

difficult to say. In addition, Starmer has made a concerted effort to take on the left of the party as

exemplified by the removal of the whip from Corbyn. However, the movement away from New

Labour cannot be described as decisive given the manifesto of 2019.

P1:Economy - New Labour centrist, courted votes from middle England –comfortable with

capitalism, the free market as a means to greater prosperity and individualism, privatisation

(dropped Clause IV).

Agree – moved away under Corbyn, much more critical of the impact of Capitalism –

nationalisation of rail, utility companies and Royal Mail, #FortheMany advocated taxing higher

earners at 50%, closing loopholes and increasing corporation tax along with Shadow Chancellor

McDonnell , National Investment bank so more Keynseian than New Labour.

CA:

Disagree –

Starmer – supports nationalisation of railways and a windfall tax on energy companies which is a

popular policy but not in other cases so some movement from New Labour

Reeves as Shadow Chancellor is cautious and does not want Labour to be seen as the party of tax

and spend which has been problem in relation to valence for Labour so more like New Labour.

MC: Movement away under Corbyn but now looks to be moving in a more centrist, New Labour

direction.

P2: Social/welfare

Agree: New Labour – social justice to ensure that everyone has a decent standard of living – tax

credits, more emphasis on individualism, ‘a hand up and not a hand out’ , 50% target for

universities, ‘education, education, education’ but introduced tuition fees, introduced a national

minimum wage

Corbyn 2017/19 abolition of tuition fees, comfortable with borrowing money for social spending,

favour a significant increase in the minimum wage to £15 P/H

CA: Disagree – Rayner not enthusiastic about the abolition of tuition fees as she feels that the

middle class will still benefit more, would prefer a focus on early years education – similar to New

Labour’s policy of Sure Start nurseries. Final policies remain to be seen. Favour a more modest minimum wage of £10 than the left of the party but this may increase in line with the cost of living crisis

MC: Although there appears to be disagreement on the level of the minimum wage and tuition

fees Labour has been relatively consistent in their fundamental commitment to social justice and

the importance of education.

P3: Foreign/defence

Agree – New Labour were committed to the ‘special relationship’ with the USA and international

organisations such as NATO and the EU. Prepared to get involved in Kosovo and the Iraq War.

Supported the Trident nuclear deterrent.

Corbyn – critical of US imperialism, continued opposition shown to Blair’s decision over the Iraq

War, unenthusiastic about the EU and NATO, internationalist, against Trident However,

supported Remain, NATO membership and Trident as it was official party policy.

CA:

Disagree – Starmer -Pro – EU in principle but accepts Brexit, pro NATO, pro-Trident, Socialist

Campaign Group MPs (such as Diane Abbott) were initially critical of NATO’s role in the Ukraine

conflict in conjunction with the Stop the War Coalition but had to withdraw their statement when

Starmer threatened to withdraw the whip. Tis shows support for NATO similar to New Labour.

MC: Official policy remained and remains similar to New-Labour although those on the left of the

party held and hold different views.

Conclusion: moved decisively away under Corbyn but Starmer appears to be moving back towards

New Labour ideas and principles, although, given the reactive nature of politics recently and the

fact that there has not been a manifesto under Starmer it is difficult to say. On the economy in

particular, Starmer is keen to move away from Corbyn’s policies towards more centrist ones of

New Labour in order to increase the credibility of Labour in advance of the next election.

However, the movement away from New Labour cannot be described as decisive given the

manifesto of 2019.

Old Labour ideas – if you need them –Created NHS and welfare state (Attlee 1945-51) highly progressive taxation, nationalisation, Keynesian economics to keep unemployment low, free education, NATO – created in 1949 when Attlee was PM, EU membership (Wilson applied in 1967)

Home

Politics Essay Plans