Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
1.3 - Pressure Groups & Others: - Coggle Diagram
1.3 - Pressure Groups & Others:
Aims & Requirements
Pushing agenda
Raise awareness
Agent for change
Doesn't stand for office
Different types of Pressure Groups:
Pressure Group: Association with the purpose of furthering the interests of society, they are representative and influence gov policy, don't seek political power
Insider groups: able to consult with ministers/MPs - gov are legally required to consult with some insider groups for legislation making e.g NFU
Outsider groups: don't have close links with gov, use other tactics to influence gov e.g media e.g Greenpeace
Sectional groups: promotes interests of section of soc - tend to have restricted membership, permanent + strong contacts with gov e.g NFU, NEU
Causal groups: campaigns for particular cause - often campaign on behalf of other people (usually those who can't campaign themselves) - wide background of members
Why do people join pressure groups?
Pol parties don't represent them
Try to make change
Join union for workplace
Way to access politics
Be heard
Personal beliefs
Participation
Material benefits e.g money
Functions of pressure groups: GREATP
G
overning process: Key part in policy making + decision making
R
epresentative: represent interests or sections of soc
E
ducational: educate and inform public on important issues
A
mendments: scrutinise and amend legislation
T
ension release: outlet for people to express their views
P
olitical Participation: less intensive than political parties
Access points for pressure groups:
Established Westminster channels
Devolved assemblies
Social media
Used to be EU
Reasons for success for pressure groups:
Size: the more support, the more pressure they can put on decision makers
Finance: wealthy groups can afford expensive campaigns that reach lots of people - can empty lobbyists/sponsor pol parties
Strategic position of sectional groups: Industrial comps & Banking groups have lot of leverage over gov as they are vital to economy
Public mood: combination of public sentiment and strong campaigning can be extremely successful
Attitude of the gov: Both casual & sectional groups are bound to be more successful if combined with sympathetic gov
Insider status
Reasons for pressure group failure:
Lack of funds
Unsympathetic gov - HS2 Rebellion
Hyper-pluralism: too many groups/ too many ideas within group
Powerful countervailing groups e.g Big Tobacco - did eventually lose tv ads as public and gov sentiment changed
Cheque book membership: people may join group for amtierial benefits but less interested in the group
'Slacktivism': may be willing to like, forward online post, but no more than superficial engagement
Small membership: limited membership make it difficult to organise public demonstrations, raise funds, gain media attention
Outsider status: make it difficult to access people in power
Impact of social media on pressure groups:
Does have impact:
Online campaigning = cheap & easy
Easier to coordinate large event
More convienient
Doesn't have impact:
Market can be swamped with groups, difficult to stand out - Hyper-pluralism
To really be successful - group must be professional with expertises
Can easily lead to 'slacktivism'
Other methods of influencing gov:
New Social Movements: Broad movement - emerges quickly - in response to particular issue - may use mass demonstrations/ media campaigns - often as result of new/social media e.g BLM
Anti-Poll Tax Movement: late 80s - response to Thatcher's Poll Tax (flat rate of tax per head) - violence & damage to property + tax strike - campaign was successful, it was abolished in '91
Make Poverty History: early 2000s - aim: more aid for developing nations - links to Live Aid & Live 8 - absorbed into Global Call for Action Against Poverty - questionable success
Characteristics:
Rapid appearance
Instant followers
Narrow range
Temp
Civil disobidence
Informal organisation
Emotive
Think Tanks: gives advice and research findings to gov - some have political bias (centre for social justice and Duncan smith) - helps with policy making - e.g Chatham House: centre for policy research on international affairs (independent analysis)
E.g Blair created Sure Start Centres to give every child strong start to life - later commissioned research to gauge how this had affected academic achievement, teen pregnancy rates...
Conversely, some Govs choose to ignore research that may challenge their political ideology e.g benefits as part of solution rather than problem challenges New Right Conservative Govs who want to cut benefits
Lobbyists: far from neutral - promote particular issues to gov/MPs - BP employs lobbyists and pressure groups - industry worth around £2bn per yr
they now have to register their activities since 2014 - transparency imporved
Corporations: Industrial/Banking companies hold signify leverage over gov as they are vital to the economy e.g BP/Bank of England - can bring or sustain mass employment - can threaten relocation
can't campaign for candidates - but could in brexit, most for remain - didn't work - questions impact
Celebrities: can use status to promote causes/ attract media attention - Joanna Lumley & Gurkhas right to residency
Examples of Pressure Groups:
Stop the War Coalition 2003:
Organised biggest demonstration in British history - 1mill
Tony Benn spoke - large impact on public opinion - didn't change gov policy
Blair was able to pass the policy due to 167 majority after 2001 election
NFU (insider pp): gov required under Agriculture Act 1947 to consult on farming matter
Liberty:
Exposes infringements of HRA
Outsider pressure group
Directly engages with the public through online campaigns
Also seeks to directly influence decision-makers so works with MPs (Tom Watson) and lobbyists
Encouraged MPs to oppose identity cards - failed
Publishes reports and engages in consultations with the public to report its findings on how legislation could affect civil liberties
Has launched judicial reviews against the gov where they believe they have acted ultra vires - e.g raised £50,000 for legal challenge to gov's 2016 Investigatory Powers Act