UK politics plans
Democracy and Participation
Source
1. (2023) Evaluate the view that the UK has a democratic deficit?
2. (Sample 2017) Evaluate the view that UK democracy is in crisis
3. (mock paper) Evaluate the view that pressure groups have little
influence in the UK
Essay
1. (mock paper) Evaluate the view that rights in the UK are poorly
protected
1. Rights are well protected through the constitutional changes made
over time
But – Parliamentary sovereignty enables parliament to disregard new
human rights legislation if they want
2. Rights are protected through legal courts e.g. Supreme court and ECHR
+ other parts of a plurality system e.g. Pressure groups
But Supreme Court and ECHR rulings are not binding on parl + there
have been accusaitons of increasing judicial politicisation + Gov does
not have to act on pressure group demands
> Judges only uphold law = if law is changed or doesn’t protect rights
the SC cant really do much about it
> Judges can only refer back issues to parl for reconsideration
3. Human rights are based on lasting common law and tradition
But The constitution is uncodified = most common law is not
enshrined in statute law = rights can be easily ignored
Representative vs Direct Democracy – this would be an easier question, as
the options are more narrow. This would likely overlap with referendums or
other forms of democracy, but could also be synoptic content in paper 2.
2. “Evaluate the view that representative democracy is ineffective in the
UK”
J = Has some faults but is not ineffective
1. Representative democracy can lead to public disengagement/ or a
democratic deficit
> e.g. Voter turnout has been steadily decreasing
Low = 2001 turnout of 59%
> Turnout is especially low for local and regional elections
, = Concerning for democracy as the gov isn’t being properly scrutinised
and cannot hope to represent the whole country if they aren’t voting =
can’t tell what the people actually want
But – Different forms of political participation are still present
> Not voting is also a right and signals the general political climate e.g.
in 2001 many were happy with the gov = didn’t vote > people should
be allowed to be involved in politics as much as they want – not all
want to be involved in time consuming voting or be educated on it =
by not having representative democracy we have more informed
decisions that have had more time spent on them
> + participation has been increasing since 2001 – with people turning
out to issues they feel strongly about e.g. Scottish independence ref =
84% and Brexit ref = 72%
+ there are also many different ways of political participation e.g.
increased participation in E-democracy (petitions > Hillsborough) and
pressure groups
= still want to participate just in diff ways
2. It is hard to hold representatives to account in between elections
> Con haven’t held an election for 5 years despite the public desire for
it being strong and general opinion polls showing that they are not
widely supported > can be argued they are unfairly/undemocratically
holding on to power
> it is hard for people to properly show their opinion on an MP between
election e.g. the defections > do Labour voters really want Natalie
Elphicke in the party? + the people who voted for her are being
betrayed
But – MPs can still be scrutinised and held to account e.g. through the
opp
> Media scrutiny helps to keep MPs in line
+ If an MP behaves badly it is embarrassing for the Party and could
harm their popularity = likely they would take action
> Recall of MPs act 2015 means that if an MP has broken certain rules
etc. or gets 10% petitioning them they can be recalled = by-election
e.g. Dec > Peter Bone MP lost his seat as recall petition triggers by-
election
3. Representatives may not act in constituents best interests and could
be unrepresentative of minorities
> Diff parties have diff ideological views t/f con inherently help the
older and richer more whilst labour help workers – reflected in who
, votes for them > they help who will win them the most votes > but
that means some of the population can be unrepresented at times
> It is also a thin line to walk between ignoring constituency desires
and following the party line > who are they meant to represent the
most – or is it the trustee model?
But – MPs are more likely to be more representative of minorities than
direct democracy
> MPs can be held to account in elections, by the media etc. and are
expected to make fair judgements of situations and represent the
whole community
> But in direct democracy there is no one to hold voters to account =
they are more likely to follow their own interests and ignore the
minority > leading to tyranny of the majority e.g. Brexit
Concl – ultimately representative democracy is the most effective
method of democracy we could have in the UK – aside from it simply
being less time consuming and more practical can be more
representative of the whole community. Whilst it can be argued that
representative democracy reduces political involvement and it less
easy to hold to account, in reality it enables people to be involved in
politics how they want and can still be held to account - arguably more
than direct democracy.
3. “Evaluate the view that increasing Direct Democracy would have a
positive impact on UK democracy”
1. It will result in increased political participation
> Political participation has been at a low e.g. 2001 gen elec = 59%
turnout > democratic deficit
But > It is impractical – people don’t have the time to learn about
every issue and go out to vote for everything + it is expensive
> The cost of the EU referendum was c. £130m.
> MPs can dedicate their whole time to voting etc. = makes more
sense for the amount of law etc. we have
+ No demand for it
(Not guaranteed increase (Switzerland - only just over 40%)
2. It would be legitimate > the purest form of democracy
> The majorities voice would be clearly heard and followed up on
But > It can lead to tyranny of the majority = ignoring the minority
> Representatives are more likely to take into account the minority
> As the majority don’t face any scrutiny they are more likely to only
vote for things that benefit them – ignoring the rest of the population
who are stuck with it
, e.g. Brexit
3. Can decrease political deadlock = there would be clear and quick
answers
> issues e.g. Rwanda can get delayed etc. Leading to a slow political
system
But > The public can be easily swayed by emotional appeals and do
not have the same level of education on the issues as MPs
> Laws would be more likely to be not well thought out
Concl – whilst it is good for legitimacy to increase direct democracy
ultimately it isn’t practical and there is no demand – would likely cause more
issues than solve them.
4. “Evaluate the view that Representative Democracy in the UK no longer
gives the people any real power”
Real power = The genuine ability of the people to influence political
decisions and outcomes through their participation in the democratic
process.
1. Plurality system = many ways for people to participate in politics
> e.g. increased use of E-democracy and membership of pressure
groups, protests etc. > e.g. Palestine Israel protests
But > Arguably there is a democratic deficit d/t low voter turnout
Low = 2001 turnout of 59%
> Turnout is especially low for local and regional elections
= Concerning for democracy as the gov isn’t being properly scrutinised
and cannot hope to represent the whole country if they aren’t voting =
can’t tell what the people actually want
+ Parliament doesn’t necessarily listen to the will of the people
through PGs and E-democracy e.g. Iraq
2. It is hard to hold representatives to account in between elections
= Can’t ensure that they are following the people’s will = in between
elections the people do not have much of an impact
> Con haven’t held an election for 5 years despite the public desire for
it being strong and general opinion polls showing that they are not
widely supported > can be argued they are unfairly/undemocratically
holding on to power
> it is hard for people to properly show their opinion on an MP between
election e.g. the defections > do Labour voters really want Natalie
Democracy and Participation
Source
1. (2023) Evaluate the view that the UK has a democratic deficit?
2. (Sample 2017) Evaluate the view that UK democracy is in crisis
3. (mock paper) Evaluate the view that pressure groups have little
influence in the UK
Essay
1. (mock paper) Evaluate the view that rights in the UK are poorly
protected
1. Rights are well protected through the constitutional changes made
over time
But – Parliamentary sovereignty enables parliament to disregard new
human rights legislation if they want
2. Rights are protected through legal courts e.g. Supreme court and ECHR
+ other parts of a plurality system e.g. Pressure groups
But Supreme Court and ECHR rulings are not binding on parl + there
have been accusaitons of increasing judicial politicisation + Gov does
not have to act on pressure group demands
> Judges only uphold law = if law is changed or doesn’t protect rights
the SC cant really do much about it
> Judges can only refer back issues to parl for reconsideration
3. Human rights are based on lasting common law and tradition
But The constitution is uncodified = most common law is not
enshrined in statute law = rights can be easily ignored
Representative vs Direct Democracy – this would be an easier question, as
the options are more narrow. This would likely overlap with referendums or
other forms of democracy, but could also be synoptic content in paper 2.
2. “Evaluate the view that representative democracy is ineffective in the
UK”
J = Has some faults but is not ineffective
1. Representative democracy can lead to public disengagement/ or a
democratic deficit
> e.g. Voter turnout has been steadily decreasing
Low = 2001 turnout of 59%
> Turnout is especially low for local and regional elections
, = Concerning for democracy as the gov isn’t being properly scrutinised
and cannot hope to represent the whole country if they aren’t voting =
can’t tell what the people actually want
But – Different forms of political participation are still present
> Not voting is also a right and signals the general political climate e.g.
in 2001 many were happy with the gov = didn’t vote > people should
be allowed to be involved in politics as much as they want – not all
want to be involved in time consuming voting or be educated on it =
by not having representative democracy we have more informed
decisions that have had more time spent on them
> + participation has been increasing since 2001 – with people turning
out to issues they feel strongly about e.g. Scottish independence ref =
84% and Brexit ref = 72%
+ there are also many different ways of political participation e.g.
increased participation in E-democracy (petitions > Hillsborough) and
pressure groups
= still want to participate just in diff ways
2. It is hard to hold representatives to account in between elections
> Con haven’t held an election for 5 years despite the public desire for
it being strong and general opinion polls showing that they are not
widely supported > can be argued they are unfairly/undemocratically
holding on to power
> it is hard for people to properly show their opinion on an MP between
election e.g. the defections > do Labour voters really want Natalie
Elphicke in the party? + the people who voted for her are being
betrayed
But – MPs can still be scrutinised and held to account e.g. through the
opp
> Media scrutiny helps to keep MPs in line
+ If an MP behaves badly it is embarrassing for the Party and could
harm their popularity = likely they would take action
> Recall of MPs act 2015 means that if an MP has broken certain rules
etc. or gets 10% petitioning them they can be recalled = by-election
e.g. Dec > Peter Bone MP lost his seat as recall petition triggers by-
election
3. Representatives may not act in constituents best interests and could
be unrepresentative of minorities
> Diff parties have diff ideological views t/f con inherently help the
older and richer more whilst labour help workers – reflected in who
, votes for them > they help who will win them the most votes > but
that means some of the population can be unrepresented at times
> It is also a thin line to walk between ignoring constituency desires
and following the party line > who are they meant to represent the
most – or is it the trustee model?
But – MPs are more likely to be more representative of minorities than
direct democracy
> MPs can be held to account in elections, by the media etc. and are
expected to make fair judgements of situations and represent the
whole community
> But in direct democracy there is no one to hold voters to account =
they are more likely to follow their own interests and ignore the
minority > leading to tyranny of the majority e.g. Brexit
Concl – ultimately representative democracy is the most effective
method of democracy we could have in the UK – aside from it simply
being less time consuming and more practical can be more
representative of the whole community. Whilst it can be argued that
representative democracy reduces political involvement and it less
easy to hold to account, in reality it enables people to be involved in
politics how they want and can still be held to account - arguably more
than direct democracy.
3. “Evaluate the view that increasing Direct Democracy would have a
positive impact on UK democracy”
1. It will result in increased political participation
> Political participation has been at a low e.g. 2001 gen elec = 59%
turnout > democratic deficit
But > It is impractical – people don’t have the time to learn about
every issue and go out to vote for everything + it is expensive
> The cost of the EU referendum was c. £130m.
> MPs can dedicate their whole time to voting etc. = makes more
sense for the amount of law etc. we have
+ No demand for it
(Not guaranteed increase (Switzerland - only just over 40%)
2. It would be legitimate > the purest form of democracy
> The majorities voice would be clearly heard and followed up on
But > It can lead to tyranny of the majority = ignoring the minority
> Representatives are more likely to take into account the minority
> As the majority don’t face any scrutiny they are more likely to only
vote for things that benefit them – ignoring the rest of the population
who are stuck with it
, e.g. Brexit
3. Can decrease political deadlock = there would be clear and quick
answers
> issues e.g. Rwanda can get delayed etc. Leading to a slow political
system
But > The public can be easily swayed by emotional appeals and do
not have the same level of education on the issues as MPs
> Laws would be more likely to be not well thought out
Concl – whilst it is good for legitimacy to increase direct democracy
ultimately it isn’t practical and there is no demand – would likely cause more
issues than solve them.
4. “Evaluate the view that Representative Democracy in the UK no longer
gives the people any real power”
Real power = The genuine ability of the people to influence political
decisions and outcomes through their participation in the democratic
process.
1. Plurality system = many ways for people to participate in politics
> e.g. increased use of E-democracy and membership of pressure
groups, protests etc. > e.g. Palestine Israel protests
But > Arguably there is a democratic deficit d/t low voter turnout
Low = 2001 turnout of 59%
> Turnout is especially low for local and regional elections
= Concerning for democracy as the gov isn’t being properly scrutinised
and cannot hope to represent the whole country if they aren’t voting =
can’t tell what the people actually want
+ Parliament doesn’t necessarily listen to the will of the people
through PGs and E-democracy e.g. Iraq
2. It is hard to hold representatives to account in between elections
= Can’t ensure that they are following the people’s will = in between
elections the people do not have much of an impact
> Con haven’t held an election for 5 years despite the public desire for
it being strong and general opinion polls showing that they are not
widely supported > can be argued they are unfairly/undemocratically
holding on to power
> it is hard for people to properly show their opinion on an MP between
election e.g. the defections > do Labour voters really want Natalie
