PAPER 1 UK POLITICS
Topics in this paper include
1. Democracy and participation
2. Political parties
3. Electoral systems
4. Voting behaviour and the media
5. Liberalism
6. Conservatism
7. Socialism
Any essay plans not covered - many can be found on the A level politics show on spotify (i
recommend this so much for more up to date examples) - since i took my a levels last year
and politics changes so much so fast, up to date examples are crucial for getting an A star
so i would see if any current examples can be used to support my points
and you can also message me - 07443008275 for any questions or help. I am also offering
tutoring for £15 an hour where we could cover any more essay plans of questions you have
in mind. I will also be happy to give you more up to date examples in lessons.
Democracy and participation
Evaluate the view that human rights are well protected/ poorly
protected
INTRO: in the UK political system, rights can be said to be strongly protected – however the
sovereignty of parliament which allows MPs in theory to suspend any HR is a concern. In
practice – MPs retain this ability, and the UK has a strong reputation for upholding HR. the
existence of rights-based pressure groups holds the government to account and make it
challenging to derogate from any HR based laws.
YES – new laws
POINT: rights are protected in the British political system because of governments ability to
create new laws which uphold citizens’ rights and the existence of strong HR based laws
EVIDENCE: equality act 2010 – set out the ensure the interests of all groups in society are
protected when government bodies pass legislation – as of 2010 all new buildings have to
have disabled access. Marriage acts the UK 2013 – promotes non-discrimination. April
2015 – legislation passed that ensured all companies with over 250 employers publish their
gender pay gap.
RELEVANCE: government is clearly frequently passing legislation that protects a broad
group of interests in society – rights are strongly upheld. Frequent passing of laws suggests
that UK adapts to laws to change in society
NO – parliamentary sovereignty
,POINT: parliamentary sovereignty – government has the power to create laws as fast and
easy as they can take them away. Arguably, the rights aren’t strongly protected because
citizens are reliant on parliament to uphold them
EVIDENCE: unentrenched nature of the constitution – easy for parliament to change the
laws. Parliament has derogated from citizens right as they took away the rights for prisoners
to vote breaching the rulings of the ECHR.
HOWEVER: it has never been in the interest of the government to restrict the rights and
actually have a strong global reputation for upholding them. . The UK has one of the best
records among the 47 signatories to the ECHR of compliance with the decisions of the body.
In cases where the UK has derogated from ECHR law, it could be perceived that they were
strengthening democratic rights. Such as after 9/11 attacks, uk Parliament worked with
anti-terrorism laws, whereby suspected terrorist was then allowed to be held arrest for up to
48 hours. Many argued this is in direct contradiction of protecting rights – however one could
argue that this is actually sacrificing individual rights for collective rights and further
protecting broarder rights.
YES: pressure groups
POINT: pressure groups strengthen the protection of rights – pressure groups can protect
minority groups and hold the government to account and create more transparency and
awareness over rights
EVIDENCE: the Howard league for penal reform – aims to protect the rights of prisoners in
the UK, and the rise of the media for example BLM
RELEVANCE: therefore, it is not only parliament upholding rights and the actions of
pressure groups can compensate for parliamentary sovereignty – by campaigning for justice
and protection of minority groups and socially unpopular groups that may not even be on the
government’s agenda like criminals
NO: the fact that pressure groups exist means that enough people do not feel confident that
their rights are strongly protected
EVIDENCE: groups feel that they have to campaign and hold the government to account
and compensate for parliamentary sovereignty. There are also limitations of pressure groups
were liberty failed to prevent facial recognition technology in 2018 despite campaigning
about it
HOWEVER: the fact that it is a pluralist democracy means there will always be the work of
groups with different perceptions. Where some may feel facial recognition is necessary
protection against the age of terrorism in 2018, and therefore feel they have a right to
protection.
YES:
POINT: judicial review – citizens can challenge decisions made by public bodies including
the government that they believe is unlawful
EVIDENCE: courts in the UK can protect the rights of individuals against the power of the
state, since judges are unelected and unaccountable, they are free to protect the rights over
an overbearing state where politicians may only go in the interest of the majority in order to
win re-election. As a result, parliament has changed the law in response to court decisions in
cases regarding civil partnerships and the police keeping DNA and fingerprints on file
,RELEVANCE: therefore, the UK has a great framework for the protection of rights with many
layers ensuring rights are well protected in the UK. The UK has one of the best records
among the 47 signatories to the ECHR of compliance with the decisions of the body.
NO:
POINT: judicial review can also be seeming to harm democracy through upsetting the
balance between individual rights and the need for effective government to deliver the public
interest as the body with a mandate to govern
EVIDENCE: in July 2020 the conservative government established an independent panel to
look at whether there was a need to reform the judicial review process to establish if there is
a right balance between the right of citizens to challenge executive decisions and the need
for effective and efficient government due to their decisions making it harder for the gov to
tackle terrorism and deport criminals and extremists
HOWEVER: this is largely irrelevant as judicial review only adds another layer of protection
to rights to ensure they are upheld by the law and holds the government to the account
necessary.
Conclusion:
- Rights are protected in the UK political system
- Despite legal loopholes that would suggest the UK is at risk from unprotected rights 0
generally the UK is align with the UDHR.
- Strong reputation on the global stage despite parliamentary sovereignty
Evaluate the view that neither individual right not collective
rights in the UK are adequately protected and guaranteed 2022
Intro: in the UK there are systems in place to protect both individual and collective rights.
These include legislation passed by parliament, the work of pressure groups in upholding
both individual and collective rights and the Human Rights act and the work of the courts in
upholding rights. However, although these do protect rights, to a certain extent, the fact
parliament is sovereign, the government can be strong enough to ignore pressure and
individual rights can be set aside in favour of the collective displays that rights are not
entirely guaranteed. Although both collective and individual rights have been upheld at some
times, the fact the government can and does restrain individual rights in favour of the
collective suggest that whilst collective rights may be protected in the UK, individual rights
are neither guaranteed nor protected.
NOT PROTECTED - legislation
POINT: parliament has also passed legislation to limit rights, particularly individual rights.
The fact that parliament is soveirgn means that it can legislate in any area, and therefore has
the ability to limit rights if it wishes, clearly rights are not guaranteed
, EVIDENCE: 2016 investigatory powers act which limited individual rights to privacy from
data collection online.
RELEVANCE: this suggest that individual rights are sometimes side-lined in the interest of
collective rights, infringing on individual right to privacy, a fundamental right would prove they
are not adequately protected and secure
YES PROTECTED
POINT: there is a vast body of legislation in the UK that has been passed by parliament to
protect individual rights.
EVIDENCE: this includes the 1998 HRA, which brought into UK law the ECHR. Th2 2010
Equality Act secured the right of individual freedoms from discrimination. These have been
successful in upholding individual rights, as seen in 2018 court case in which the supreme
court rules that the exclusion of heterosexual couples from civil rights legislation was
incompatible with the HRA, therefore upholding their individual rights to civil partnerships.
RELEVANCE: this would suggest that rights, particularly individual rights are well protected
in the UK, as they are protected in law
HOWEVER: the fact that the conservative party government are attempting to repeal the
Human Rights act for a Britain Bill of rights further demonstrates the fact that rights are not
guaranteed. Although the passing of the HRA protected rights, it cam be easily repealed due
to a conservative majority and parliamentary sovereignty. Clearly, parliament has both
upheld and threatened individual rights, therefore individual rights are not guaranteed since
they are seemingly up for debate since they are not fixed or stable and there is no guarantee
and subject to debate
NOT PROTECTED
POINT: a determined government can ignore the work of pressure groups and go ahead
with limiting collective and individual rights.
EVIDENCE: Many pressure groups spoke out against the 2012 police crime sentencing and
courts bill, suggesting that it limited the individual right to protest, however the government
was determined to complement the policy and did so in 2012 witht eh bill becoming law.
RELEVANCE: when the government wishes to limit induvial rights to maintain collective
rights, they will do so, even if they face extreme pressure from pressure groups.
YES PROTECTED
POINT: pressure groups in the UK work to protect and uphold the rights of both individuals
and the collective – they have substantial successes which shows that rights are well
protected.
EVIDENCE: seen by the work of Liberty a pressure group that has fought to uphold the
rights of individuals. In 2020 they represented a Welsh man in a court case where it was
tried the use of facial recognition technology in a public space breached his right to privacy.
Clearly, in this case liberty were successful in guarantee that his right to privacy was
protected. Furthermore, liberty have campaigned extensively against the 2016 investigatory
powers act,
RELEVANCE: suggesting that even when parliament fails to uphold individual rights,
pressure groups will play a role in pressuring parliament to reverse legislation or recognise
the infringement on individual rights
