Pressure Groups - n/a PDF

Preview

Summary

n/a...

Description

Pressure Groups: Pressure group = an organised group of people which try to influence a specific area of policy without seeking to hold power itself Why do people confuse pressure groups with political parties?    

MPs often represent pressure groups too  e.g – Tom Brake and SOS! Some pressure groups adopt a broad range of policies  e.g – CBI – transport, taxation, unemployment, education, EU etc Some pressure groups have a formal structure and leadership elections  e.g – Trade unions – NUT, UNITE, FBU Some pressure groups field candidates to gain publicity  e.g – save Kidderminster hospital in 2001 election

Functions of pressure groups: 









Representation  Pressure groups look after the interests of sections of the public/community as a whole (e.g – National Farmers Union – worked with the government when the foot and mouth disease crisis engulfed the UK) Political education  Pressure groups seek to raise awareness among the public of politically important issues (e.g – the need to reduce carbon emissions) Advising  Pressure groups are often called on to share their expertise and inform the government on key matters, leading the government to make decisions more wisely (e.g – the RSPCA inform the government on animal welfare matters) Participation  Pressure groups offer another way in which ordinary people can take part in politics and make a contribution to democracy Tension release  Pressure groups can offer a way for discontented citizens to express their feelings without resorting to violence (e.g – 2003 Stop The War!) Difference between pressure groups and political parties:

    

Political parties: Try to win power and form a government Must behave responsibly and democratically Must make themselves accountable for their decisions Have a formal organisation with a clear hierarchy Adopt policies across the full range of government business

    

Pressure groups: Do not try to hold governmental power May act illegally (F4J) Do not have to be accountable for their decisions Often have a looser organisation and structure Have narrow goals, concentrating on one policy area or issue

Classifying pressure groups:

 





Sectional groups Represent a specific section of society Selfishly serve the interests of its members Also known as ‘interest groups’ Examples:  CBI  UNITE  FBU



Promotional groups Represent the whole community



Insider groups ‘Inside’ the decision making process



Outsider groups ‘outside’ the decision making process



Altruistically work for the good of society



Regularly consulted by the government



Are not consulted by the government



Also known as ‘cause/issue groups’







Examples:  Greenpeace  Liberty  RSPCA



Their representatives sit on policy advisory committees Examples:

Put pressure on the government in other ways Examples:

 CBI  British Medical Association  Shelter



 Greenpeace  Plane Stupid  Animal Liberation Front

A dual function group represents both a section of society and an issue.

Trade Unions tend to switch depending on which party is in power

[NUT]

NUT become ‘insiders’ under LABOUR] CBI become ‘insiders’ under CONSERVATIVES

Why are some pressure groups ‘outsider’ groups?   



They choose to be  Helps them to recruit specific types of members Their tactics may be illegal and therefore not deemed suitable by the government They may be a young group  Not yet established a name for themselves (e.g- countryside alliance) Their aims may be completely different to the government  (e.g- Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament 1960s+1970s)

New Social Movements:       

Mass movements with thousands of followers Appear very quickly Loose, informal organisation Concerned with one narrow issue Usually temporary, especially after success Use flamboyant action, including civil disobedience Examples:  Occupy! Movement, London – anti-capitalism campaign (failed)  Stop The War! – anti-war coalition (failed)  Anti-poll tax movement, 1990 (succeeded)

Methods used by pressure groups: 











Lobbying MPs – PGs lobby MPs on a specific issue or pay them a retaining fee (e.g – the league against cruel sports, hunting bill 2004) WHY? Hope MP will raise their issues in parliament, chosen MPs may submit a Private Members’ Bill n the PGs issue DISADVANTAGE there is so little time for PMBs, only a handful of MPs get this chance Influencing political parties – may try influencing a party through funding it or providing it with information on key matters (e.g – trade unions and Labour) WHY? Hope that when the party wins power, it will put these ideas into practice DISADVANTAGE if a pressure group ties itself too close to a party, it may put people off supporting Using the courts – pressure groups may support a particular case at court about which they feel strongly (e.g – Liberty backed Diane Pretty’s fight to die with dignity in 1998 - failed) WHY? If the case is won, it might overturn a government decision DISADVANTAGE can take a long time and needs funding (expensive) Publicity campaigns – pressure groups use protests, petitions, educational material and advertisements to influence public opinion (e.g – NSPCC and RSPCA use hard-hitting adverts on TV to create sympathy for their cause) WHY? They hope to reach a wide audience and educate the public, building support and funding their cause DISADVANTAGE can be costly and publicity stunts can backfire, losing support (F4J climbed Tower Bridge and caused traffic disturbances) Direct action – pressure groups use demonstrations, strikes and civil disobedience (e.g - NUT strike in 2011) WHY? They hope to draw media attention and put pressure on the government DISADVANTAGE can be arrested and public may turn against you Seeking insider status – pressure groups can actively seek links with the government (e.g –RSPCA are regularly consulted on animal welfare matters by the government) WHY? By achieving this status, they hope to influence the government at the policymaking stage DISADVANTAGE becoming an ‘insider’ group can alienate its members Are pressure groups good for democracy? Ways in which PGs ENHANCE democracy  PGs often represent groups and causes that have been ignored by parties  Help disperse power more widely, preventing dangerous concentrations of power  They help educate and inform the public about important issues  They provide ways in which people can participate in politics

Ways in which PGs do not support democracy  PGs undermine the authority of elected officials and parliament  If they are too powerful, they may create ‘hyperpluralism’ which can hold up the process of government by being too obstructive  Those that engage in civil disobedience threaten order in society and subvert democracy  Pressure groups are not democratically accountable

Do pressure groups strengthen PLURALIST democracy? Pluralist view Pressure groups are good for pluralist democracy, having multiple pressure groups helps to disperse power  All PGs have a chance of success – regardless of the amount of resources a PG has, by selecting the right tactics, they can succeed and achieve aims – use ‘outsider’ strategies to put pressure on the government (e.g – BDA in 2008 got 1.8 million signatures on a petition against road tolls despite being a very small pressure group)  PGs defend the interests of minorities – pressure groups protect the interests of minority groups who are often ignored by big parties (e.g – C.O.R.E campaign for racial equality)

Elitist view Power in the UK is concentrating unfairly in the hands of a narrow and exclusive elite, pressure groups hinder the fair distribution of power  PGs with more resources succeed – some prssure groups have a better chance of success because they have more resources (most successful PGs have money and insider status) (e.g – CBI)





Competition between PGs – pressure groups compete and balance each other, preventing one from becoming more dominant (e.g – CBI vs. Trade Unions)



Some PGs are not internally democratic – in some PGs, members do not elect their leaders, and therefore may not have influence on the aims of their group (e.g – the chairman of the FA is appointed) Insider PGs have more chance of success – some PGs have an advantage because they have ‘insider’ status so they have more opportunity to influence government policy (e.g – CBI and the current coalition)

Factors which prevent Pressure Group success:    

Outsider status – they have less opportunity to shape policy in the early stages (e.g – Stop the War! 2003 held massive demonstrations but was unable to end the war in Iraq) Tactics – selecting the wrong tactics can lose a PG the support of the public (e.g – Fathers 4 Justice publicity stunt on Tower Bridge) Strong opposition – PGs with a strong opposition group find it harder to achieve their goals (e.g – CBI vs. Trade Unions) Which party is in power (e.g – Trade Unions find it harder to influence Conservative governments)

Factors that make pressure groups more likely to succeed: 

Size – the government is more likely to listen to PGs who represent large groups  Big groups have public opinion on their side (e.g – the AA has several million members)  Big groups have more voting power (e.g – 2005 election campaign, Age Concern called for pensions to be protected – the main parties made commitments to do this in their manifestos as the elderly are more likely to vote)  Big groups usually have more finance (e.g – the RSPCA gets most of its finance from members – funds campaigns, lobbying and research)

COUNTER EXAMPLE: Stop the War! – 1 million people demonstrated in London but did not achieve their aims because as an outsider group, their aims were too different to the governments 

Wealth – Pressure groups with money can spend it on…  Donations to a political party (e.g – trade unions donate to the Labour party)  Media and publicity campaigns to attract public support (e.g – 2012 the Fire Brigades Union anti-austerity cuts advertisement in the Metro paper)

COUNTER EXAMPLE: Trade Unions were unable to influence Blair’s Labour government – because he wanted to maintain the support of business leaders 

Insider status – insider groups have more opportunity to influence government policies in the early stages (e.g – RSPCA used its insider status to push for the ban on hunting with dogs)



Lack of opposition – most pressure groups have an opposition, those who don’t, have a greater chance of success (e.g – Age Concern don’t have an opposition group)



Organisation and leadership – well co-ordinated groups can take direct action effectively (e.g – September 2000 Farmers for Action and other groups blockaded UK oil refineries in protest at rising fuel prices – 2 months later Brown (Chancellor) froze fuel duty)



Tactics – well chosen tactics can allow even a small group to have a big impact (e.g – Snowdrop campaign used the first e-petition [driven by the Dunblane massacre])

COUNTER EXAMPLE: Fathers 4 Justice lost support because of their publicity stunt

The importance of pressure groups: Have pressure groups become more important in recent years? YES  New technology:  Easier for NSM’s to appear and recruit members  Easier for them to coordinate direct action  Increased access points:  Gives pressure groups more opportunities to influence decision makers  Membership to PGs has increased far above that of parties, helping participation (especially true of the younger generations)  Co-operation between PGs:  PGs are working together to put pressure on decision makers  Occupy Movement  European Medical Association

NO  Government are still the key decision makers:  The government chooses which PGs to listen to  Elections:  Elections are still dominated by political parties  PG membership does not influence how people vote  Many PGs fail  Occupy  Stop the War  NUS  Some pressure groups have become less powerful  Trade unions – Thatcher government restricted power and Blair’s’ government didn’t reverse this  Multiple PGs balance each other  Multiple PGs restrict the power that they can have  Different PGs representing similar aims can split their movement, weakening it (Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth)...