Evaluate the extent to which direct democracy, rather than representative democracy

should be used in the UK

P1: Direct democracy

participation-

direct democracy is better bc participation falling with representative democracy-2019-

67% compared to high turnout of 1979s, 76% in 1979- lowest 2001

counter point:

-direct demo increases participation-there was a 72.2% turnout for Brexit- and
engagement, but undermines the motivation-
-Countries such as Switzerland shows frequent referendums lead to apathy and
disinterest, with the average turnout for national votes was 46%.

- Therefore even tho high turnout with direct demo, exceptions perhaps due to its more
emotive, identity based nature as it relates to immigration laws etc. 1997 welsh
devolution vote barely above 50%.

rep demo better at increasing partcip(demo) in long term-

representative govt also allows for 'joined-up govt' where individual policies are decided
not in isolation but with full consideration of potential knock-on effects for other areas of
policy. Wider use of referendums would undermine joined-up govt. approtate bc knock
on effects on other policy areas such as fishing, immigration and trade. general public
more likley to partcip in an elections of representativse every 5 yea
s

years.p2:legitimacy of decisions

In a representative democracy, important policies that affect the general public can be
passed without their direct input. For example, snoopers charters, supported by 6% of
people yet became law in 2016, enabling increases the power of intelligence agencies by
obliging internet companies to store information about customers' browsing history. -
people should have say on things that affect their privacy. Therefore, in a direct
democracy individual decisions backed by the public can be passed, rendering them more
legitimate .

cp: .however, representative democracy allows parliament to implement policies that are
necessary but unpopular - the kinds of things that would not secure support if put to a
public ballot.- (positive evidence of snoopers charer- eg. increased power of intelligence
agencies could increase security of people in the uk- protect them) these policies have
more legitimacy in the wider scheme of the constitution
direct democracy would not allow thse necassary unpopular polcieis to pass

p3: Direct democracy makes everyone equa ltraditional representative democracy has a
tendency towards elitism, where those returned to the legislature are drawn from a narrow
range of social backgrounds and those from different backgrounds or with less centrist
views are not properly heard. 29% of mps went to private school (2019) comapred to
only 7% of uk popularotion-the Direct democracy has the potential to allow people to
participate on a level playing field.

cp:elected representatives are often better informed than the general public. They have
access to relevant research and are able to educate themselves on the merits and demerits
of a particular course of action before casting their vote in parliament. It is nonsensical to
leave key decisions to the broader public... most mps are passionate about their consist,
for exmaple jeremy hunt frequently visits his consits of south west surrey to listen to
local [Link]: Direct democracy within a representative democracy corrects 5
year unaccountably of mps and elitist untouchability, inreasing equality for
misrepresenting constis, Recall of mps act 2015 if 10% of consist sign to remove a mp
found guilty of wrongdoing and call a by election- however still

Is the UK in a democratic deficit

P1:
turnout
2019- 67% compared to high turnout of 1979s, 76% in [Link] vital that turnout is high
in general elections so that the resulting government and other elected officials have a
legitimate mandate to enact the policies in their [Link] of Political apathy or
disengagement - 2012 police and crime commissioner election had record low turnout of
15%- undermining the notion of democratically elected and accountable police officials.

cp: rise of informal politicssocial media has enabled people to to exchange political views
and participate in online campaigns for particular issues that relate to them more than
broad party manifesto, for example in 2007 i.8m people sign petition to stop road
charging. last two decades, iraq war, 100ks demostrators, fox hunting and tution fees.
rather than a democratic deficit, sign of people turning to new methods of expression bc
coventional polticis has let them down and a reflection of a increasingly consumerist
society, online petitions, more protests etc allows people to show poltiical engangement
without having to vote- can choose between diferent options

p2:

because of electoral systemFPTP used for westminster electionukip won 12.6% of the
vote but 1/650 seats in hoc, while snp won 4.7% of vote and 56 sweats- demonstrates
unfairness of electoral system as people votes do not translate in parliament given a
party's support is not concentrated in geographical areas- since fptp means you win based
on the number of seats you win in separate areas- unfair overrepresentation-
undemocratic- leads to gov being formed by party majority of people did not want- in
most general elections occurs eg. 2019 landslide despite 56.4% of people not voting for
them-- demo def bc creates govs most people don't vote for

cp: elections, including fptp are free of corruption, charge and fair in the ukevidence=
universal suffrage(gives right to vote)for citizens over 18 w few exception- electoral
commissions make sure elections aren't in favour of a party of candidate- furthermore
devolution of certain powers allows certain regions of the uk to choose their own
electoral system. For example, scotland and wales parliament with ams, that utilizes fptp
for constit votes and additional members are elected through a party list- ensures the
result is more proportional to the number of votes cast- therefore these electoral system
mean there isn't a democratic deficit as the bodies represent the views of the people in
that region
p3: house of lordshouse of lords unelected and completely undemocraticthe pm appoints
members of the house of lords, can appint sibilings sucha as jo johnson (appt by boko)
frinds and donors as legislators for life enabling corruption cronyisn. For exmaple,2021
now there are 81 more con lords than lab where 2010- 22 more labour- shows have gov
can pack lords w its supporters diminshing scrunity -undemocratic bc doesnt allow other
representatives of citizens views to critizise gov legislation and make sure peoples voices
are heard.- unelective dictatorship

cp:However, it could be argued that the house of lords does not represent a demo deficit
since it is one branch, uncontrolled bya single party(that in commons can be elected w
only 35% of the vote)- if there were two elected chambers with majorties then there
would be no unbiased checks and balances. - means peers have a more impartial view in
public interest as they have no party loyalty,also arguesthat in the lords, interests outside
the pary system are represented- more democratic since a greater range of peoples views
are represented.-wider More party representational than FPTP (over 100 Lib- Dem MP's),
more likely to stick up for minority rights and personal liberates.

op: even though acts such as 2014 hol rerforms act allows principle of resig and
explusion in some circum removes undemocratic unaccountably and dictatorship of
peers, furthermore the house of lords still has less power than the democratically electoin
hoc:By the Salisbury convention of 1945, the Lords were forbidden from rejecting any
bill passed by the Commons that fulfilled a promise in a party's election manifesto. so
democracy [Link]: but does not show signs of becominh more democratic, nick
cleggs bill which would ensure 80% of memebrs of hol elected by 2025 was rejected
after a tory rebellion in 2012 when 91 torymps defieid a three line whip to vote againsdy
the measure.- likley to keep uk undemocratic in the long term unless radical changes are
made

Evaluate the extent to which the UK can be said to suffer from a participation crisis.
turnoutlow

election turnout.

-2019- 67% compared to high turnout of 1979s, 76% in 1979.-2001- 59% gen election,
lowest
-it its vital that turnout is high in general elections so that the resulting government and
other elected officials have a legitimate mandate to enact the policies in their manifesto.
-2012 police and crime commissioner election had record low turnout of 15%- -
undermining the notion of a participation crisis that undermines the authority of
democratically elected and accountable police officials.s

cp: other turnout

However, turnout is high in critical votes referendums Scot ref turnout 84%, Eu ref
turnout 72%. ,
-although could be because on more emotional/identity based, not an increase in general
participation-however, i
f low electoral turnout is a result of hapathy- HAPATHY' - the idea that voters may
abstain from voting as a result of happiness with (as opposed to indifference towards) the
way in which they are being governed. not a crisis people are not participating, perhaps a
sign of a healthy polticail system people are satisfied with. ,
and higih [Link] turnout in 2001 and 29% of those who described themselves as 'satisfied
with democracy' did not cast a vote at the 2005 general election whereas 59% who were
'dissatisfied with democracy' still turned out.

high ref turnout shows people are still willing to vote on make or break issues.

op: Therefore, participation crisis in general elections where manifestos do not appeal to
voters, but this is partially offset by high participation in referendums.-arguably general
elections more important bc set out more legislature for 5 years.

p2:declining party membership

Party membership -

good indicator of participation - is a an all time low. less an 2% of the electorate belongs
to one. Tories 150,000 2016, 1950s over 3m

cp: labour membership increased recently,

- During and after Corbyn's leadership election, there was a large 200k on 6 May 2015
(the day before the 2015 general election) to 388,407 in 2016.
, greens increased by over 50k 2013-2019 but small anyway

opinion: this was mostly due to corbyn leadership style, and membership decreasing
under starmer, greens only a small party with marginally smaller increases in
membership, overall declining membership and willingness to partcipatie in polticial
system.

p3: Pressure groups

not a parcip crisis:

the sharp decline in individual party membership in the last 30 years has been matched by
the steep rise in pressure group [Link] 2012 the Royal Society for the Protection
of Birds had more than twice as many members as the three main UK parties
[Link] party membership is waning alternative forms of political
expression...are all on the rise'.- people do not feel represented by broad manifestos so
seek to participate in other groups which hold beliefs more specific to them- result of a
rise in consumerism and choice, not a fall in participation

cp: People join but dont do anything, checkbook activism, degree of activity is different,
nothing to do with government policy- specific goals - membership enough not enough -
eg. occupy movement not enough people to make a change as a political

eval:

. crisis in an electoral participation crisis- changing nature of participation means it is

increasing but in pressure groups, protest movements, consumer [Link] pace
after 2000, with low turnouts in 2001, 2005 and 2010 general elections and a rise in 'the
politics of protest' over duel duty, fox hunting, globalisation, the Iraq war and govt
spending [Link]: whether or not a decrease in electoral participation is a bad
thing depends on whether it is a result of complacency 'hapathy', which highlights the
human nature of leaving a good thing be, which is not a crisis , or apathy which shows
how the mainstream political parties being unable to relate voters on issues that are
important to them. the rise in pressure group membership and simultaneous decline in
party membership show people are dissatisfied with the values and manifestos proposed
by the leading parties, and perhaps this is a result of the fptp system crowding out minor
parties with more specific views eg. green party, therefore the uk is suffering from a
participation crisis to a great extent .

Evaluate the extent to which compulsory voting and lowering the voting age may be the
best ways to improve participation in the UK
comp voting and lowering voting age -
both do not increase quality of participation, can both increase turntout, althogh comp
voting increase tunrout to a greater extent than lwoering voting age since most young ppl
disinterested in polticsi- both undermine legitmacy of gov

Lowering voting age may encoruage those young ppl already policitcally inclined to vote,
not rlly encoruage ppl to get into politicls, onaly way for that to happen in politics putting
more effort to relate to younger people, not likely to incerase overall electoral
participation as most young people not interested in polticis.

p1: Compulsory voting

increase turnout- 2019- 67% compared to high turnout of
1979s, 76% in 1979. - fix partic crisis - more votes cast

cp: not meaningful participation- bc does not mean people will automatically become
more engaged in politics- increase the number of ill-thought out and unconsidered. Some
people will be voting simply because of their desire to avoid a fine, as opposed to
participating more purposefully in the democratic process. participation crisis can only be
fixed with enthusiastic, willful voting since the crisis itself was created apathy and loss in
faith in political system, so not going to fix it just by increasing turnout- also perhaps
undermines gov legimtacy as less people genuily support them due to increasing number
of unmeaninglful ballots as a result of compulsory voting.

op:comp voting is likley to increase electoral particpation but the quality of this
participation would not be increasing, therefore not an overall improvement

p2: - .

lots of intelligent, educated 17 year-olds are denied the right to vote, and no restrictions
are applied to ignorant and poorly-educated adults. For example, young conservatvies
and young labour include under 18s passionate about polticis, this increased turnout
without having to force people to vote would mean government has a more legitimate
voting base to enant manifesto whilst increasing participation.
However, perhaps only those that study politics are interested in politics, and they have
completed education yet, so not fully informed- this could decrease overall turnout as less
enthusiastic about voting- undermining the legitimacy of elected governments and the
quality of participation would be decreasing as l.

p3:
coudl be argued lowering voting age better than comporlsry voting in increasing
paritcipation:
lower voting age increase turnout better because no chance of illegitimate results from
forced, illthout out votes
cp: however lowering voting age will lower electoral participation greater than
compulsory voting and hinder government legimitacy the vmost, since there is no way to
prove a lack of quality in votes as long as they are cast properly. and in the mainstream,
participation is viewedd as mainly throguht the lens of election turnout as easily
comaprbale with other countries.

Evaluate the view that citizens can no longer feel confident that their rights in the UK are
secure and established
intro: human rights, or natural rights, are rights that individuals are naturally entitled to.
These rights are absolute, universal and fundamental. They also form the basis of
individual protection against government intrusion. These areas include the Judiciary,
parliament HRA(human rights act) and the FOIA(freedom of information act)

P1: collective security vs individual rights

liberty

since 9/11- gov has introduced anti terrorism that has limited the freedom of the
individual- ministers argued necessary to suspend the guarantee of liberty- 2 week pre
charge- no longer to have any permanent protest within , belmarsh case
cp: only for terrorists , not for dropping litter!, ppl who are suspected don't ness deserve it
until charged, but potential consequences of leaving them at their liberty are large- doesnt
matter if you infringe upon a n indiv rights on a fairly temporary basis if the collective
right to security is protected

p2: privacy

yes: snoopers charters infringes on rights- only 6% of people

cp: unpopular but necessary , keeping people safe from hackers

p3: right to assemble

bryan haw: had a house outside parliament protesting against iraq

cp: his hosue was destroued and ruined by police- infringes upon right to protest-

HRA-The Human Rights Act 1998 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which
received Royal Assent on 9 November 1998, and mostly came into force on 2 October
2000. Its aim was to incorporate into UK law the rights contained in the European
Convention on Human Rights.-Legislation has to comply with HRA-Example of
effectiveness can be seen in 2004, when a law that prevented a gay partner from
inheriting a council flat was struck down under the HRA.-Strong legal protection for core
civil and political rights via HRA-Citizens can access rights through UK courts-

BUT, Act isn't entrenched and thus can be replaced unlike the US Bill of Rights
(1791).-Act cannot overturn primary legislation in parliament

Evaluate the extent to which pressure groups have become more powerful in recent years:
(30 Marks)
P1:
size
Social media has played a huge a role in allowing PG to reach mass audiences,
Greenpeace over 3.5 million followers, PETA over 1.5 million followers.- having more
members can claim to represent public opinion - so more influential-Under pressure from
Greenpeace in 2020(outsider group_,with 4.5 m uk members(participants) the UK
government announced it will ban sales of new petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2030
— a full decade earlier than planned, specific goal with more gov support as parties are
trying to seem greener in order to appeal to voters.

CP: Largely slacktivism, doesn't amount to serious change, depends on whether pressure
group opinion in line w gov or important in gov agenda, eg. royal soceity of birds three
times large memership than polticail party membership but no serious changes made in
terms of birds protections.
op: depends on whether what pressure group representing is higih on gov agenda, eg,,
climate chane more relecant and under more public attention

, Size, however, is usually secondary in importance to economic power (the CBI is more
powerful than the Trade Union Congress, for instance, despite being much smaller in
membership)

P2: funding

As traditional political participation declines, PG have seen more funding and

professional management, E.G the RSPCA employs over 1,600 people with money to
advertise and do large scale campaigns. More organisation with more members seen
through successful collaborations such as 2004 RSPCA, LACS and IFFAW momentul in
passing ban hunting with dogs.

CP: Such events aren't necessarily through PG, public opinion was already in their
favour, plus opposing groups become bigger and more powerful. E.G Forest V
BMA.,Although it can help raise awareness for cause, if funding of opposing groups also
increases the extent to which they become more powerful relies completely on public
opinion

P3:
more participation increase success- not resources

Less interest in traditional political par, particularly in youth through large scale
demonstrations,r Snowdrop Campaign 750k signatures-

CP: Too idealistic and outsider to impact real change, spotlight often fades/public lose
interest.
high paricipation in BLM protests- not poweful- priti patel deployment of more police
officers

power depnds on whether in line w gov views

Evaluate the extent to which pressure groups widen the distribution of political power
rather than concentrate it. [30]
Overall argument: insider groups concentrate power, outsider groups widen it but not
effectively since they tend to hold more unpopular opinion and gov not usually agree.

P1:

Pressure groups
Help to bring attention to issues which are not salient enough to be on gov. agenda but
still important. E.G Gurkha campaign. which fought for Gurkhas who fought for the uK
to gain the same rights as their British and Commonwealth counterparts, downing street
petition supported by 250k people

CP:
However, Joanna lumley, celebrity was the reason it got as much publicity and awareness
Only outsider groups can
However insider groups with little or no public awareness/support vast influence -
particular over areas of specialist policy. National Farmers Union links to Defra-
instrumental in securing unpopular 2013 badger cull., discouraged important public
awareness on animal rights

P2: Outsider pressure groups can increase participation when in line with gov views

Help to raise more political participation, particularly groups dissatisfied with trad.
system.

For example thousands .camps outside st pauls to protest corporate greed influence over
gov that causes economic inequality- inspired more demos in wall street ny-
CP:

despite raising awareness fail to impact real change or truly strengthen democracy,-
failed to have long lasting results bc gov authorities tough stance-

erect tents evicted four months after protests began- could not increase participation in
the anti capitalist movement any longer- bc not in line with gov who had implemented
spending cuts (worsening economic inequality prior to protest)
leads to polarisation and sways of slacktivism + virtue signaling.

However, could be argued their inability to effectively increase distribution of political

power was due to inherent gaols- hostility toawrds capitalism w no strcuteu or specific
propals.
Under pressure from Greenpeace in 2020(outsider group_,with 4.5 m uk
members(participants) the UK government announced it will ban sales of new petrol and
diesel cars and vans by 2030 — a full decade earlier than planned, specific goal with
more gov support as parties are trying to seem greener in order to appeal to voters.

P3: Work to empower groups in society, BMA (insider) representing core societal groups
distributing power- ban on smoking for cars in children), core group of the british youth,
empowering their rights to health

.CP:

These insider groups represent a minority and have huge influence on gov.
undemocratic.- not supported by and influence the majority (NFA)- eg. against 2% shift
in money given to those to own/rent farmalnd to new entrant farmers, saying it reps a bad
deal for farmers- even tho samll famrers say NFU depdensd interst of rich incmubents
ove small struggling and hopegul farmers , ironic that vice preseident of union has 1.3k
heacyre far mon prime land, takes at least 250k in public fundsfrom taxpaprt- selfish to
lemant 2% transfer of this money to young people breaking into farming.

Evaluate the view that think-tanks, lobbyists and pressure groups have little impact on
government decisions
lobbyists being more successful than think-tanks and pressure groups, whose success
depends on whether the current government's ideology and agenda are in line with their
proposals, meaning their impact on government decisions is smaller.

p1:pressure groups have a variable impact, but it is overall fairly small. This is because
they generally only succeed if the government agrees with their objectives to begin with
or if their proposals are not controversial. For example, the British Medical Association
(BMA) campaigned from 2011 (when the government had no anti-smoking legislation
planned) to ban smoking in cars when a child is present was implemented by the
government in October 2015. This had received widespread public support and was also
supported by the government, after the BMA's initial campaign to ban smoking cars in
any circumstances was dropped as the government and many others saw this as an
unnecessary breach of liberty. Therefore, this shows that pressure groups can influence
government decisions, but that the government can easily refuse and control pressure
groups' demands.

cp:outsider groups that do not agree with the government's pre-existing agenda find it
very difficult to impact government decisions. For example, the People's Vote's campaign
for a second referendum on the UK's EU membership received support from around 50%
of the public during 2019 according to opinion polls, and held a protest march attended
by an estimated 1 million people in London. However, this substantial support was
ignored by the Conservative government, seeing as it disagreed with their agenda of the
UK leaving the EU and their voter base did not support this proposal. This shows that
even pressure groups with great public support can still have no impact on government
decisions if their government opposes them and if it would mean the government loses
favour with its voter base. Therefore, pressure groups have little impact on government
decisions overall as they can be ignored no matter their level of public support.

p2:, think-tanks have little impact if the government disagrees with their proposals

eft-wing think-tanks, such as the Fabian Society which advocated for a form of Basic
Income, have their proposals ignored by the right-wing Conservative government. This
shows that think-tanks with a different ideology to the government are generally unable
to impact its decisions.

cp:or example, the Centre of Social Justice was set up by Conservative MP Ian Duncan
Smith in 2004 and came up with the idea of Universal Credit. This was implemented in
2013 after Ian Duncan Smith became Work and Pensions Secretary. This shows that
think-tanks with similar views to the government, in this case wanting to reduce people's
dependence on state benefits, can impact government decisions with the implementation
of their proposals, and are also listened to if they are linked with a key individual in the
government. Therefore, think-tanks can have some influence, if they agree with the
current government's ideology and agenda, but are generally ignored otherwise. This
means the view they have little impact is true to some extent.

p3:Lobbyists, however, can be very influential. This is because they are individuals or
companies paid for their knowledge of the best contacts in government to influence
legislation by communicating its potential effects on their clients, which include
companies such as Pret a Manger. Their expertise at communicating their clients' point of
view means that the government does often listen to them.

cp:cannot be completely sure of the scale of their influence potential effects due to a lack
of transparency, although the large sum of £2 billion being spent on lobbying per year
suggests it is very effective. Furthermore, scandals such as the 'Cash for Cameron'
scandal, where it was found Conservative party donors could pay £250,000 per year to
have dinner with David Cameron and potentially influence government policy, suggest
that paying to influence government decisions is effective and lucrative. Therefore,
lobbyists definitely have the potential to have a great impact on government decisions,
although the lack of transparency means we cannot know how much exactly.

Apart from referendums, explain three ways in which democracy in the UK could be
improved

changing the Westminster voting system from FPTP to some form of proportional
representation: At the moment, the voting system for Westminster is extremely
disproportional which limits democracy in the political system. The system over
represents larger parties and those with more geographically concentrated support, rather
than having a reliable link between popularity and chance to have power. In 1951, the
Conservatives formed a majority government but won fewer votes than Labour. A more
proportional system would be better. For example, in the 2011 Scottish Parliament
election, using AMS, although Labour won almost half the constituency seats on the
basis of 32% of the vote, its overall representation in the Scottish Parliament was
'corrected' by the distribution of party list seats
- Lowering the voting age to 16: This would enhance democracy because, at the moment
a whole sector of society (the youth) are being ignored. The lack of political
representation for young people between 16 and 18 means their needs, views and
interests are routinely marginalized. Lowering the voting age would give greater attention
to issues such as education, drugs policy and, generally, social morality. In Cuba,
Nicaragua and the Isle of Man, the voting age in 16. According to ICM's survey, 75% of
16 and 17 year olds voted, compared with 54% of 18-24 year olds and 72% of 25-34 year
olds.
-Introducing the use of e-democracy: This means there is easier participation. It is
therefore positive impacts on participation rates and political education
Evaluate the view that UK democracy is suffering from a participation crisis (30) Theme
1 – Decline in Turnout Theme 2 – Emergence of E-Democracy Theme 3 – Decline in
Party Membership Theme 1: Decline in Turnout Theme 2: Emergence of EDemocracy
Theme 3 – Decline in Party Membership AO1: 1979 GE Turnout was 76% compared to
2010 Turnout of 65.5% AO1: Over 6 million people signed e-petition calling for 2nd EU
referendum. AO1: Membership of the three main parties in 1980: 1,693,000 but has
decreased majorly to 400,000 in 2016. A02: This shows greater voter apathy towards
government as 2010 GE - less of reaction towards gov incompetence as both elections
came after the economic crisis. Possibly due to lack of faith/belief in current/alternative
leaders. As a result of this lower turnout may make it harder for a future government to
implement laws/ create change as their mandate isn’t strong and can be called into
question. A02: Shows people still have an interest in politics but possibly choose to
interact through different methods Use of petition Suggests party dissilutionment
petitions due to a potential dislike for political leaders/parties? As a result of this, it can
be implied, the UK isn't in a participation crisis but the way in which people participate is
changing. A02: This suggests general disillusionment with party politics which may stem
from lack of trust between people/parties. Maybe due to scandal? – e.g., party gate. This
lead to... further weakened chance of minority parties winning election as due to reduced
income in membership – campaign less effective? -> further disadvantage on top of
FPTP. E- However, turnout has recovered in recent years. 2014 Scottish Indy Ref –
turnout of 84.5% and included 16–17- year-olds for first time. 2016 EU Ref – 72%
turnout a record high for a UK-wide referendum. This shows that the public does want
the chance to have their say but the significance in which their vote has may play a part in
E: However, E-petitions can be argued to be a form of ‘weak’ participation – not legally
binding and lack tradition. A01: E-petition to prevent Donald Trump from making a state
visit to the UK which received close to 2 million signatures was debated in parliament yet
was still invited for a state visit. This demonstrates how eE- Membership of Pressure
Groups has increased. Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 whether they decide to participate or not. This means that
people may only decide to vote after a showing of government incompetence petitions
can drag parliament into unconstitutional debates which lack major importance to the
country. This means that parliamentary time is wasted on issues which only a minimum
of 100,000 signatures are required. 0.1% of the country. As a result of this, it can be
argued that e-petitions are undemocratic as they represent a small section of society,
rather than the population as a whole. Therefore.... Evaluate the view that the UK
democracy is in crisis (30) Theme 1: Nature of FPTP - 2 party system Theme 2: UK
frequent use of direct democracy: e-petitions/referendums Theme 3: Lack of participation
A01: Generally, creates a majority gov of one of the main two parties (2 party system).
Blair went 8 years in the Commons without defeat. A01: Tony Blair use of referendums
in 1997/1998: Scottish Parli, Welsh Assembly, Northern Irish Assembly A01: Turnout
decreased from 76% in 1979 to 65.5% in 2010. A02: This means that minority parties
aren’t represented, and A02: Electorate are given greater power and they have A02: This
is significant as... Decreased turnout enables Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 votes are wasted. Due to this,
tactical voting may be encouraged as they have little faith their candidate will win.
Therefore, the electorates power is undermined as they have ‘fewer choice’ due to the
unreality of their favored candidate winning. Shows a potential ‘elective dictatorship’
where government can do as they wish due to their majority. Arguably why Blair was
able to create such constitutional reform. direct input into policy making process. As a
result of Blair devolution -> gives the rest of the UK greater representation and enables
their local issues/questions to be considered/dealt with. ->may lead to greater relationship
between p governing parties' mandate to be questioned. Especially if the government
finds itself with a weak majority. A coalition may have to be formed (2010) which may
create inefficient rules due to conflict of interests between two leaders. E.g., 2011 AV
Referendum: Nick Clegg in favor of AV as it would mean fairer votes whereas Cameron
described AV as "undemocratic, obscure, unfair and crazy". This leads to watered-down
policies and legislation that aren’t as effective/comperehensive as they potentially
could've been due to the need for compromise or in some cases where parties are unable
to agree on policy at all. As a result, parties will find it harder to fulfill their manifesto
promises and voters use of ‘power’ in their votes is wasted. A03: However, FPTP
generally ensures a majority government which enables swifter passage in law. A01:
Tony Blair’s 179 seat majority was a key reason in why he was able to create such
constitutional reform such as: the HOL Reform Act, HRA Act 1998... A03: However, it
can be argued that the powers given aren’t significant. Example - Scotland proposal for 2
nd Independence Referendum blocked by Supreme Court. This shows Scotland isn’t
satisfied with the level of power they hold, probably due to the frequency in which they
find E- However, turnout has recovered in recent years. Example - 2014 Scottish Indy
Ref – turnout of 84.5% and included 16–17-year-olds for first time. 2016 EU Ref – 72%
turnout a record high for a UK-wide referendum. This shows that the public does want
the chance to have their Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 This shows how FPTP enables a government to easily fulfill
their manifesto promises as there a majorly reduced chance of their bills being blocked in
parliament. Especially with the use of party whips and adherence to CMR. This means
that the winnings party’s votes aren’t wasted, and potential legislation mentioned in their
manifesto may have played a huge part in their voting decisions. As a result of this, there
is reduced conflict between the government and their voters as they their proposals/bills
blocked. E.g. Gender Recognition Bill This leads to Scotland having a greater desire of
independence whereby they have greater control over their legislation and have better
ability to preserve Scottish culture which has been majorly underrepresented in
Westminster. As a result, the breakup of the UK is more likely. say but the significance in
which their vote has may play a part in whether they decide to participate or not. This
means that people may only decide to vote after a showing of government incompetence
and that GE’s with low turnouts may be a factor of voter ‘hapathy’ Evaluate the extent to
which social factors determine voting behavior (30 marks) Theme 1: Ethnicity Party
Leadership (political factor) Age A01: 70% of BAME voters voted for Labour in the
1997 election. A01: “I don’t think other people would share the view there is mountous
chaos” A01: 2010 GE only 30% of 18– 24-year-olds voted conservative in comparison to
44% of over 65-year-olds. A02: This shows how B.A.M.E voters felt represented by the
party's ideology and manifesto policies. This is because Labour has often been seen as
having greater commitment to healthcare, education, and social welfare which may be
particularly important for ethnic minorities who may face challenges accessing these
services. As well as this, the labour party is more willing to engage with A02: This
showed... James Callaghan to be out of touch, delusional and suggested a lack of
responsibility on his behalf taking into consideration the state of the country The Sun
newspaper capitalized on his interview and formed the famous headline ‘Crisis, What
Crisis?’ which was clearly a more exaggerated translation of what he said, but many took
it as his actual words. This further emphasizing the idea of A02: This demonstrates how
due to the natural accumulation of money with age, younger people sympathize with
leftwing Labour policies as they are newly employed, thus lacking in wealth and
indifferent to conservative economic policies. This means that young voters are more
unlikely to vote for the Tories on the basis of rational choice (voters make a logical
judgement on what is in their own best interest) Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 and represent ethnic minority
communities, with a greater number of ethnic minority MPs and a stronger emphasis on
diversity. In contrast to Conservatives who have been viewed as being less supportive of
multicultralism and diverisity. This is supported by the ‘Windrush Scandal’ - In which the
conservative government were involved in wrongly deporting/ denying the rights of
commonwealth citizens who has arrived in the UK before 1973, known as the windrush
generation. The scandal exposed the government’s harsh immigration policies, which
failed to recognie the contributions and rights of ethnic minorities. Callaghan's lack of
responsibility and dispassionateness As the media if a key source of political information
from the public and is generally perceived to be valid, Callaghan's/Labour’s
incompetence were highlighted to a mass audience. As a result, there was a consensus of
the country that there was need for change which led to not only a loss of voters for
Labour but loss of their position as government. Whereas older voters who are more
likely to be financially established will perceive conservative policies as being more
favorable towards them as they tend to aim to protect individual aim and interests. As a
result of this, the grey vote (the way those aged 65+ vote in elections) is more likely to go
towards the conservative party. E – However, this point is flawed because Labour had
shown a diversion from their traditional policies. A01: ‘New Labour’ rebrand meant
abandoning commitment to nationalism, the use of high taxes to boost government
spending. Moving more towards centre ground. E- Incompetent governments often
survive A01: An example of an incompetent government in the UK that survived is
Theresa May’s Conservative government. Despite numerous setbacks including losing
‘big beast’ cabinet minister Boris Johnson and a failed brexit deal, the government
managed to survive servive plural votes of no confidence both within her party and the
commons. Also clung onto power through forming a coalition with the DUP. This shows
how despite the idea that Theresa May was very democratic in referal to her cabinet, she
had a tight grip on the Conservative party and was E - Point is flawed due to
disproportionality of voting between young and old members of the electorate A01:
18–24-year-olds had the weakest turnout with 44% in contrast to voters 65 and over with
the highest turnout of 76% This means that it isn’t necessarily valid to make an
assumption that younger age typically leads towards a preference towards the Labour
Party as less than half of 18-24 year olds in the electorate are represented The low
participation of young citizens in general elections stems from a disillusionment of party
politics and the use of social media and e-democracy Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 able to maintain her leadership
despite showings of incompetence. E.g through heavy use of party whips which would
lead to greater backing of PM through the way they vote due to fear of suspension. As
well as this, the fact that the Conservative party were able to remian in power
demonstartes the idea that there weren’t viable alternatives for leadership and that
changing leadership during such a critical time would have been more damaging. This
point is strengthened by the fact that the most realistic alternative if the Conservative
party were to be removed from Gov are the Labour Party due To the FPTP which
perpetuates a 2 party system. They can be argued to not have been an appropriate option
due to claims of anti-semitism within the party and by the at the time leader, Jeremy
Corbyn. as a way of participating Being young in age doesn’t necessarily mean
individuals aren’t in higher income jobs or weren’t born into or inherited financial wealth,
giving them less of a reason to vote for Labour. Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 Evaluate the factors that
determine the success of pressure groups in the UK. (30) Theme 1: Practical
Achievability Theme 2: Insider Status Theme 3: Finance – Celebrity Endorsement A01:
Snowdrop Campaign - Dunblane Massacre: in less than a year the Firearms
(Amendment) Act 1997 was passed. Just Stop Oil A01: BMA- contributed to the
introduction of smoking in enclosed public spaces in 2007 and the 2014 Children and
Families Bill amended to ban smoking in cars where children were present -> passed in
2015. A01: Joanna Lumley – Gurkha campaign: Gurkhas fought for a country that were
denied the right to settle and retire in the UK. From 2004, Blair changed legislation A02:
Implies Snowdrop’s campaign aim of banning handguns in the UK was practically
achievable due to speed of acknowledgement and change. Helped by UK’s uncodified
constitution – meaning all needed for change in legislation is parliamentary majority in a
vote, and the public receptivity of issue. (Valence issue) On the other hand, A02: Shows
how insider status enables PGs to create implementation of policy with ease compared to
outsider groups. -> suggested by time in which bill was presented and passed. A02:
Publicity created may create greater support/membership size due to celebrity influence.
Making methods such as marches/disruption/civil disobedience more effective, applying
greater pressure to gov. This means that PGs gain quicker acknowledgement from
government and communication between gov and the PG. As a result, more influencial
E- However, it can be argued that civil disobedience is a greater determining factor.
Example – Poll Tax Riots in Central London 1990 against Thatcher’s introduction of
Community Charge -> John Major announced its abolition in 1991. E- . However, such
status does not guarantee success Example - In 2015 and 2016, despite the BMA’s insider
status, junior doctors went on strike over a disagreement with the government over a new
contract. Whilst the dispute was A03: However, large demonstrations/memberships aren’t
always effective. Example – Stop the War Protest against Iraq War had estimated
attendance of 750,000 (largest demonstration in UK ever). However, failed to stop
invasion Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 This shows how the public’s method of showing disapproval
over the newly introduced policy was effective; potentially due to harm it caused: 113
injured causing government to interfere. Significance of event suggested by the fact that
Margaret Thatcher resigned 8 months after the riots. + Major (Thatcher’s succeeder) who
was a part of Thatcher’s cabinet abolished the tax within 1 year of its introduction.
ultimately resolved, with both sides claiming victory, This shows... that insider status
does not guarantee success, and that insider groups sometimes have to resort to outsider
tactics This means, insider groups may find the same difficulty (in terms of time they
influence gov policy) in creating change as outsider pressure groups + may have to risk
their relationship in aim for influence As a result, it can be argued there is an exaggerated
inequality of influence between insider/outsider This shows how pressure
groups/campaigns are destined to fail if they don’t identify with the interests of
government – as clear disfavour of public wasn’t enough to switch gov plans. This means
that only insider groups which share a symbiotic relationship are likely to be influential
Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818
Evaluate the extent to which pressure groups enhance democracy (30) Theme 1: Lack of
influence over gov Theme 2: Educate Public on politicial isuues/ inform public on policy
and activity of an elected gov Theme 3: Inequality of Influence A01: Million March of
750,000 protesting against Iraq 2003, but due to Blair’s desire to establish good relation
with US republican party and Labour’s 412 seats, Operation Telic went ahead. A01:
RPSCA – educational campaigns and newsletters essential part of operation A01:
RSPCA employs over 1,600 staff and gets national attention through full page ads – puts
pressure on gov through ability to influence public opinion. Insiders often used by gov to
implement animal policy. A02: Shows... With a representative democracy the influence
of pressure groups is always secondary to the priorities of an elected gov. Means that...
gov are only receptive to governments who share their outlooks and aims even despite the
public receptivity or consensus of an issue, As a result, only those with insider status and
have a symbiotic relationship with government find A02: This means … a highly
educated electorate is ensured and enshrines principle of gov by experts This leads to ..
electorate making better decisions and are more effective at holding government to
account -> government being more repsonsive As a result of this, nation are less
vulnerable to the consequences of ill-informed decisions. E.g Brexit: led to shortage of
workers in retail, hospitality, goods research. A02: This shows... financial resources are a
prerequisite for pressure group influence. This means smaller minority groups with
smaller memberships -> unable to generate great sums, and are therefore relegated to a
treatment of indifference by gov. This leads to.. For some pressure groups a failure to
represent minority interests and their influence is limited As a result, this can lead to
policies that benefit only a particular interest group at the expense of the wider society. E
– They hold the government accountable E- many pressure groups spread
hateful/discriminative messages. A01: EDL- a far right organization generally opposed to
Islam, reported that Muslim men in Yorkshire had been trying to abduct young girls E- E-
Pressure groups enhance pluralist democracy as they offer ensure minority views are
amplified. Example – Howard leauge for penal reform has only 3000 members but was
able to effectively represent rights of Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 which was later revealed to be
false by police. This shows how pressure groups may use illegal methods such as
misinformation to achieve their goals and create a false perception of a specific section of
society. This leads to exacerbated polarization and creates a more divided society by
promoting extreme views and hindering compromise. As a result, prisoners when
government was forced U turn removal of legal aid for prisoners. This shows... Minority
pressure groups do not need substantial membership to be influential. Instead, it’s a
requirement for them to have strong political leverage and expertise. This means that they
can articulate their positions with much clarity and precision. This leads to better ability
to raise awareness of important issues, mobilize public opinion (with media playing key
part), and ultimately being able to influence policy outcomes/ Evaluate the view that the
HRA is effective at protecting rights in the UK. (30) Theme 1: Gives rights to the ‘wrong
people’. Theme 2: Has made rights more accessible Theme 3: Potential introduction of
British Bill of Rights? A01: Abu Qatada – a man who came to the UK illegally on a
forged passport suspected of being involved in radical Islamic A01: Previously before the
HRA act, cases had to be taken to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
After, A01: Cameron’s Conservative Party mentioned a proposal to replace the HRA with
a British Bill of Rights in their 2015 Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 terrorism. Deportation was
blocked due to risk of being put on trial based on torture evidence cases could be taken to
British courts. manifesto. A02: Shows... HRA seems to protect underserving individuals
and prioritize the rights of individuals over the rights of society. This means the public
may be exposed to further danger or potentially that coming from a particular country
gives greater advantages in claiming human rights in comparison to others. A01: This
means that claiming rights have been made more convenient for UK citizens especially as
process of claiming rights in Strasbourg could take years. This leads to more people
claiming rights due to reduced journey time As a result, victims receive justice and those
who hold individuals against their rights are more likely to be held to account A01:
Shows the belief of government that HRA is inadequate/not protecting rights at
maximum potential. Possibly due to previous overturned decisions? (Abu Qatada) ->
therefore, should be replaced. (Easy to do as HRA isn't fully entrenched – undermining
its effectiveness) E- However, HRA helps to support equality and nondiscrimination.
HRA prohibits discrimination on grounds such as race, gender, sexual orientation, and
religion. E- However, HRA may create potential conflict with parliament sovereignty E:
However, introduction of British Bill of Rights may be to satisfy ‘Eurosceptics’ ->
maintain voters/power. Also, to kill off a key piece of New Legislation. -> suggesting
intentions come from a sense of rivalry rather than for sake of improvement. Evaluate the
extent to which UK general elections are lost by the incumbent government rather than
won by the opposition (30) Theme 1: Government Theme 2: Election campiagns Theme
3: Lost by PM Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 Incompetence themselves, not government A01: 1979 Labour:
Economic Criris. Winter of Discontent: Widespread strikes by private and public sector
trade unions demanding pay rises greater than the PM wishes. - 1.5 million striked. James
Callaghan “I don’t think other people would share the view that there is mountainous
chaos”. A01: Conservative placed emphasis on tv broadcasts – suggested by partnership
with advertising company Saatchi and Saatchi A01: Chillcot on Blair - “things were
decided without reference to cabinet”. Blair went forward with Iraq war despite Stop The
War Protest (750,000 people). A02: This showed... James Callaghan to be out of touch,
delusional and suggested a lack of responsibility on his behalf taking into consideration
the state of the country The Sun newspaper capitalized on his interview and formed the
famous headline ‘Crisis, What Crisis?’ which was clearly a more exaggerated translation
of what he actually said, but many took it as his actual words. This further emphasized
the idea of Callaghan's lack of responsibility and dispassionateness A02: Through this
method -> enabled conservatives to spotlight failures of Callaghan’s gov to a mass
audience Effectiveness – stems from how they can reach those who are both politically
engaged and not through TV. As a result, would’ve been a huge influencing factor in
voting decisions. Especially bc of economic crisis UK was in. Shows how Blair’s
government was a prime ministerial government in which decisions were made on basis
of PM’s interests. The fact that Blairs views differed to the rest of both his cabinet and the
public - Supported by fact that 85 Labour MP voted against Iraq War. - didn’t oblidge to
CMR Blair lack o This ultimately, lead to Labour' E- Conservative's exploited
situation/nature of the UK constitution effectively A01: Margaret Thatcher in 1979 put
forward a motion of no confidence and was lost by the Labour government by one E –
However, it can be argued that the inflation, recession and unemployment UK suffered
from make an obvious decision for the public to be made. The issues of the country were
all valence issues – issues which E- Scandal - 4 A02: Ruined perception/reputation from
public. Came at a time where UK was suffering from economic crisis - ‘Black
Wednesday’ where value Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 vote. 311 to 310. This demonstrates how Thatcher was
effectively able to hold the government/PM to account and her acknowledgement of the
ease in which it could be done through a vote of no confidence. Especially due to the
government incompetence which was shown and the current state of the country. This
lead to a swift change in government as the result mandated a GE which was won by the
Conservative party. This provides a greater sense of stability and unity within government
as a vote of no confidence typically follows a period of political instability/uncertaincy,
which cause concern among the public. As a result, the government have a renewed
mandate and can effectively carry out its functions. the nation generally has consensus
on. Labour’s position in government was held in place by their pact with Liberals had
ended -> they were bound to lose of pound fell by 4.2% As result, may have caused
greater annoyance/anger among public and been an influencing factor in voting decisions
-> playing huge part in victory of Labour (large majority) In 1997 GE. Evaluate the
criticisms that have been levelled against the use of UK referendums (30) Theme 1:
Issues too complex Theme 2: Devolution Theme 3: Referendum question Downloaded by
Jai Patel (6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 for public to
understand biased A01: As part of Boris Johnson’s campaign, he used a bus stating that
the UK sends the EU £350mil a week which could be used to fund the NHS. A01: During
Blair’s tenure as PM, he placed emphasis on the use of referendums to decentralize power
from Westminster. e.g- Scottish Devolution Referendum 1997: 74% yes A01: FPTP to
AV electoral reform referendum – 42.2% turnout, 67.9% voted no A02: Electorate being
uneducated creates easy influence of political parties on public. - Johnson £350m claim
turned out to be untrue The public is less aware of the consequences of their decision, and
are easily swayed by the information – many voters voted leave for ‘dislike’ of
immigration and the idea of ‘independence’ not taking into consideration the economic
issues leaving would have. A02: This ensures greater representation for Scottish citizens
and allows for their local concerns to be taken into consideration. E.g adopted AMS
system ensuring fairer votes As a result of this, the break up of the UK is made less
likely. As well as this, the Good Friday Agreement led to stoppage of most of violence of
the Troubles -> safer environment A02: Low turnout could suggest lack of interest or
‘hapathy’ among change in electoral system. However, the choice of AV as replacement
may have been made purposefully to reduce the chance of change. - many are uneducated
on AV. Cameron described AV as ‘undemocratic, obscure, crazy and unfair’. Can be
suggested choice of ref may have been to falsely give off the idea of democracy, ‘people
power’ when the result was already pre-determined. However, referendums can settle
long standing and controversial issues. A01: Good Friday Agreement which ended the
Troubles on Northern Ireland and set up the power-sharing agreement between nationalist
and E – Still accelerating demands for independence Referendums give an equal say to
every voter/counteract the unrepresentativeness of FPTP. A01: In 2015 GE, UKIP had
won 3.8 million votes (12.6%) but had only secured one seat in Parliament. Downloaded
by Jai Patel (6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 republican
communities. This is a method in which a decision can be a made on controversial issues
with high legitimacy, since they involve the participation of the electorate and the
decision taken is considered to be the will of the people. This leads to higher
participation, as people can exercise their ‘power’ through having direct input into the
policy making process. This means that there is a greater mandate to fulfill the promise of
the referendum as referendums are not legally binding. As well as this, it democratizes
the process and makes it more representative. This demonstrates the inproptionality in
voting power that FPTP creates. This leads too... unrepresentative positioning and
decision making of MPs. As with FPTP it is possible to win with less than 50% of the
popular vote. In contrast, with referendums the voice of every voter counts equally. This
gives the final verdict a greater mandate than that received as the result of a General
Election. Evaluate the view that the merits of alternative electoral systems outweigh the
merits of FPTP. (30 marks) Theme 1: FPTP Disproportionality Theme 2: Supplementary
Vote ensures greater legitimacy Theme 3: Single Transferable Vote help promote the
views of underrepresented A01: in 2015 UKIP and the A01: SV – in SV system voters
A01: Supported by that fact that Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 Green Party between them only won 2 seats, despite polling
around 5 million votes. rank their 2 favourite candidates based on preference, nominating
a first & second choice. For a candidate to win outright following following first round of
voting, they must gain 50% of the first preference votes, if no candidate achieves 50% in
first round, all bup top two candidates are eliminated from the race and their second
preference votes are located e.g 2021 London Mayor Election Sadiq Khan of the Labour
Party was re-elected, winning 40% of first preference votes and 55% in a run-off against
Bailey. the STV system allowed smaller parties and independent to gain seats e.g. People
Before Profit Party (only formed in 2005) gaining a seat A02: Unrepresentative – as
party’s votes aren't concentrated, minority voters don’t have voice/ votes are wasted.
Could be bigger problem if residents live in areas without a mayor arguably causing
further underrepresentation Could lead to... tyranny of the majority/ elective dictatorship
whereby due to a large majority a party has in parl they can what they want with ease.
A02: This shows how... election success is justified to a greater extent/ implied to be
more democratic because over half of the votes are needed to win. In comparison to
FPTP whereby a party can win with less than 50% of the popular vote, and therefore their
political decisions aren’t symbolic of the will of the public. This means that the elected
candidate have a stronger mandate to govern and make decisions on behalf of the voters.
As well as this, it means that votes aren’t wasted strengthening/emphasizing the
electorates democratic power as they have have greater choice. This leads to increased
motivation to appeal to a Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 broader range of voters, including those who may initially
support another candidate instead of solely relying on their core base – which is often
seen with FPTP where parties emphasize retaining safe sates. E- However, it can be
argued this disproportionality is essential considering FPTP generally generates a
majority gov -> tf, easier to create change/fulfill mandate. E- Takes long time to
announce results A01: 2016 Mayor of London election had major delays in annoucning
results. The first announcement of the first round results indicated that Khan was
leading.[5] However, this count was later retracted, and official results were delayed
pending counting errors that reportedly misattributed "hundreds" of votes. This casued
major criticism from public/media. This shows... how the complexness of the system
lengthens the time in which election results are announced and may create a risk of
distorted results. This means... that results are less transparent and there is greater
possibility of confusion and uncertaincy amongst the public. This leads to... more people
questioning the fairness of the election process, leading to a loss of trust in the election
outcome. As well as this, quick cannoucnement ensures a However, it can create
problems of accountability. Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 smooth transition of power and enable elected officials to begin
their duties promptly. (significant in case of incompetent government? Bad perception
from public) Evaluate how far the Labour party has remained true to its traditional
principles (30 marks) Theme 1: Used to favour state regulation now prefer a free market
Theme 2: both movements embodied the idea of social injustice Theme 3: Welfare was
universal now targeted to those who need it A01: Tony Blair signed Private Finance
Initiative contracts for several public infrastructure projects such as hospitals and schools.
Which involve the private financing of public projects. One of the most significant PFI
projects was the construction of the National Health Service hospital in Dudley. A01:
Every adult will be entitled to six years of free study under Labour plans for a radical
expansion of lifelong learning, as part of its vision for a cradleto-grave national education
service. Under Labour’s proposals, any adult without A-level or equivalent qualifications
would be able to study for them for free at college A01: Labour promised to introduce a
£1 billion Youth Guarantee to provide young people with access to education, training or
employment opportunites. They also promised to work with employers to create more
jobs and apprenticeships for young people. This demonstrates how Labour have
acknowledged the significance of privatised businesses and potentially due to the fact that
it may reduce government spending in the short term (good when economically unstable),
and gives business more of a profit incentive. This demonstrates...how Labour still
emphasize the idea of equality of chance in various areas of life. This means... that there
is greater chance of financial growth of individuals that become more skilled in their
chosen/potential professions This demonstrates that there is a reocgnition that certain
groups of society face greater challenges or barriers than others in accessing the benefits
and opportunities of society and therefore may require additional support to overcome
these challenges. Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 This means that business tend to be more efficient as they have
a greater motive to cut costs and develop products/services to the level demanded by
consumers. This leads to a better standard of product that a cuonsumer recieves and as a
result, the government will achieve improvements in economic welfare. In contrast, who
can contribute to the economy effectively. This leads to... individuals being likely to
experience social mobility where individuals can achieve success based on their own
merit, regardless of their background or upbringing. As a result, social cohesion is
promoted in which there is greater involvement between social groups. This means that
social inequality is addressed and social justice is provided through the necessary
resources and assistance. E- However, under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, the party
has begun to shift back to nationalisation. A01: This is demonstrated through his 2019
policies such as bringing energy utilities, railways and infrastructure into government
control and wishing to implement free, state-issued broadband to all A02: This shows
similar recognition of Corbyn to Old labour leaders that nationalisation enables the
government to have greater control over key sectors such as utilities and transportation.
This can ensure that these esseantial services are provided in an efficient and affordable
manner with the government (who have large access to finance) accountable for the most
important sectors. This leads to greater stability and means that essential services are
accessible to all E- E- Remained true to principle of collectivism A01: The Climate
Change Act 2008 set out emission reduction targets that the UK must comply with
legally. It represents the first global legally binding climate change mitigation target set
by a country Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link])
lOMoARcPSD|61466818 regardless of their income or location Evaluate the view that
short term considerations now dominate peoples short term behavior Theme 1: Party
Leadership (Short Term) Theme 2: Age (Long Term) Theme 3: Ethnicity Winter of
Discontent: Widespread strikes by private and public sector trade unions demanding pay
rises greater than the PM wishes. - 1.5 million striked. James Callaghan “I don’t think
other people would share the view that there is mountainous chaos” 2010 GE only 30%
of 18–24- year-olds voted conservative in comparison to 44% of over 65- year-olds A01:
70% of BAME voters voted for Labour in the 1997 election. This showed... James
Callaghan to be out of touch, delusional and suggested a lack of responsibility on his
behalf taking into consideration the state of the country The Sun newspaper capitalized
on his interview and formed the famous headline ‘Crisis, What Crisis?’ which was clearly
a more exaggerated translation of what he said/further emphasized the idea of Callaghan's
lack of responsibility and dispassionateness As the media if a key source of political
information from the public and is generally perceived to be valid, many took the Sun’s
headline to be his actual words and Callaghan's/Labour’s incompetence were highlighted
This demonstrates how due to the natural accumulation of money with age, younger
people sympathize with leftwing Labour policies as they are newly employed, thus
lacking in wealth and indifferent to conservative economic policies. This means that
young voters are more unlikely to vote for the Tories on the basis of rational choice
(voters make a logical judgement on what is in their own best interest) Whereas, older
voters who are more likely to be financially established will perceive conservative
policies as being more favorable towards them as they tend to aim to protect individual
aim and interests. As a result of this, the grey vote (the way those aged 65+ vote in
elections) is more likely to go A02: This shows how B.A.M.E voters felt represented by
the party's ideology and manifesto policies. This is because Labour has often been seen as
having greater commitment to healthcare, education, and social welfare which may be
particularly important for ethnic minorities who may face challenges accessing these
services. As well as this, the labour party is more willing to engage with and represent
ethnic minority communities, with a greater number of ethnic minority MPs and a
stronger emphasis on diversity. In contrast to Conservatives who have been viewed as
being less supportive of multicultralism and diverisity. This is supported by the
Downloaded by Jai Patel (6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 to a
mass audience. As a result, there was a consensus of the country that there was need for
change which led to not only a loss of voters for Labour but loss of their position as
government. towards the conservative part ‘Windrush Scandal’ - In which the
conservative government were involved in wrongly deporting/ denying the rights of
commonwealth citizens who has arrived in the UK before 1973, known as the windrush
generation. The scandal exposed the government’s harsh immigration policies, which
failed to recognie the contributions and rights of ethnic minorities Evaluate the view that
elections in the UK are no longer stable and predictable (30) Theme 1: Generally,
produce a strong majority government Theme 2: Incompetent governents survive Theme
3: Nature of FPTP favours 2 party system (predictable) A01: 1997 GE: New Labour had
won a 179-seat majority A01: An example of an incompetent government in the UK that
survived is Theresa May’s Conservative government. Despite numerous setbacks
including losing ‘big beast’ cabinet minister Boris Johnson and a failed Brexit deal, the
government managed to win the 2019 election with an 80 seat majority. A01: This means
that a party has greater legitimacy and provides a party with a stronger mandate as a large
majority demonstrates how the electorate have placed their trust on the party and how
they This demonstrates how the consensus of the need for dismissal/removal of
government after multiple showings of government incompetence wasn’t applied to the
Conservative government. A02: This demonstrates how the main 2 parties: Labour and
Conservatives tend to dominate elections and happens as a result of the fact that smaller
parties votes typically aren’t concentrated in a constituency. Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 are likely to support their
decisions. As well as this, their majority reduces their reliance for support from other
parties or the need to make compromises. This leads to swift passing of legislation as the
party has the numbers to vote it through parliament and also, that ensures that a party can
make more bold and far-reaching decisions as they have greater control over the direction
of policymaking. Therefore, the potential of their legislation is hindered by the thoughts/
interests of opposition members. As a result of this, a party will find it easier to fulfill
their manifesto promises, ensuring that the votes they received fulfill their purpose and
value. Preventing annoyance among voters. The fact that the Conservative party were
able to remain in power arguably means that there weren’t viable alternatives for
leadership and that changing leadership during such a critical time would have been more
damaging. This point is strengthened by the fact that the most realistic alternative if the
Conservative party were to be removed from Gov are the Labour Party due To the FPTP
which perpetuates a 2 party system. They can be argued to not have been an appropriate
option due to claims of anti-semitism within the party and by the at the time leader,
Jeremy Corbyn. 2 party system may foster a climate of polarization – creating increased
hostility between the two major parties, hindering effective governance and cooperation
As well as this, itshis means that minority parties will struggle to have influence on
legislation and political decisions. As well as there being a lack of representation in
government towards those who identify with the winning government's ideology – which
can be more than 50% of people as with FPTP a party can win despite receiving less than
50% of the popular vote. This leads to limited choice whereby voters are ‘restricted’ to
choosing one of the 2 main parties for their votes to have any value. E – However, it can
be argued …. as opinion polls in recent times have been wrong to a large extent A01: In
the lead-up to the election, most opinion polls consistently predicted a close race between
the Conservative Party and the Labour Party, with several polls indicating a possible hung
parliament or a slight advantage for Labour. However, On the election day, However,
point is flawed James Callaghan However, there have been anomalies to the general
outcomes of FPTP. A01: Conservatives won 306 seats 24 short of majority leading to
Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition. A02: Downloaded by Jai Patel
(6263@[Link]) lOMoARcPSD|61466818 the Conservative Party, led by
David Cameron, secured a clear victory, winning an outright majority of 331 seats in
comparison to Labour’s 232. This demonstrates unpredictability as the purpose of
opinion polls is to provide an indication of the likely voting patterns and preferences of
the electorate. This suggests a volatile shift in public opinion during the election
campaign period and inability of the polls to capture this. Maybe a result of growing
partisan dealignment