Unit 1: Democracy & Participation
1. Which form of democracy is the best? (Examine functionality and fairness of both
types of democracy and compare. Make use of reference to political parties,
electoral systems and voting behaviour.)
Direct Democracy= a form of government in which policies and laws are decided by a
majority of all those eligible rather than by a body of elected representatives.
Representative Democracy= is a type of democracy where elected delegates represent a
group of people
Direct democracy is good Direct democracy is bad
Public engagement, the public makes its own Tyranny of the majority , vote which has majoritively
decisions.It encourages more political won is the winner. This means that minority groups
participation because people themselves don’t have decision making.
choose. Purest form of democracy giving it a
high legitimacy E.g. EU Referendum, leaving a large number of
people unsatisfied.
E.g Brexit 2016
Other places like Switzerland uses direct Furthermore, difficult to phrase the question, ‘yes or
democracy no’, no seems worse. E.g. Brexit
More referendums like Scotland 1997 and Wales
1997 allowed devolution to be created - name
keys examples of how this was good E.g having
its own electoral system & the white paper 2006
Citizens become educated on key political Public may not be knowledgeable on every or less
issues and concerns. It ensures constituents are likely to be as politically informed as a
kept better informed of developing public representative.
attitudes.
E.g. Some information may be skewed during the
E.g. Referendum of Brexit educated individuals Brexit campaign Boris Johnson miscalculated the
on the decisions involved while choosing their figure for how much money the UK sends to the EU
outcome. E.g. through the gov website or groups every year.
handing out pamphlets
Petitions Can also challenge the Burkean Principle that
representatives should act according to their
conscience, not the wishes of their constituents.
E.g. May supported the Remain in the Referendum
however went on to lead a govt committed to
withdrawing from the EU.
Direct democracy increases turnout, people are If groups are minorities it may decrease their
more likely to engage in the political process if chances of voting as they may feel their views will
they believe their opinions will make a difference not account.
E.g. Good Friday Agreement E.g. May feel like they should only vote for major
topics rather than minor ones.
Representative democracy is good Representative democracy is bad
,Most people do not have the time so they can It discourages participation.There can be a lack of
elect a representative on their behalf. And can trust between the representative and citizens,
protect the rights of all citizens especially especially if they do something wrong - which means
minority groups. there is a mistrust in how they are being represented
in Parliament
E.g. The Heathrow expansion was favoured by
lots of MPs however even after May placed a 3 E.g Boris Johnson and Partygate - lost a lot of trust
line whip, MPs of the tory party went against the John Major and
bill as it affected their constituents. (2016 IPSOS MORI- least trusted professions is
MPS, with 21% of public believing they are reliable)
Representatives can be made accountable. Powerful pressure groups and representatives can
Whereas people as a whole cannot. Regular establish a self-perpetuating westminster bubble,
elections allow the voters to decide whether to which disconnects representatives from the import
renew the mandate of their representative. issues their constituents face.
E.g. Fiona Onasanya, Petersborough E.g. in 2021, Owen Paterson resigned as an MP after
- Recall of MPs act he was criticised by the Commissioner for
Parliamentary standards for lobbying on behalf of
companies that employed him.
Govt is carried out by professional politicians Elected through FPTP therefore very unrepresented
who are required to be well informed about because 2 parties dominate the system at the
political issues. They are more likely to make expense of smaller parties, which struggle to gain
politically educated decisions then the public who appropriate representation even when they have
may be swayed by emotion polled highly.
E.g. Before a bill is enacted it has to go through E.g. UKIP 12.6% of the vote in 2015 only 1 seat
several rounds of debate.
Civil rights= right to citizenship, voting, granted by government - more in relation to
government
Human rights = protection of life and liberty - ones that are inherent to the human being -
e.g free speech
Pressure groups have the greatest impact on Pressure groups DO NOT have the greatest
protecting civil and human rights in the UK impact on protecting civil and human rights in
the UK
Fight for specific communities in society and for Government has done it already, pressure groups
them to achieve their rights. They can protect are unnecessary. Legislation can protect minority
minority rights. rights, amendments can be added and debated to
protect rights.
E.g. In The Gurkha Justice Campaign, Joanna
Lumley fought for the right of British Citizenship for E.g Human Rights Act 1998.
Gurkhas in 2009, petitions was signed by 250,000 Equality Act of 2010 = all protected
people Characteristics from discrimination
Alfie’s campaign for medicinal use of cannabis - Need government support. Difficult for pressure
groups to achieve change, they can influence
E.g. Huge campaign that got PM May’s attention change but it is down to the govt to implement it
, E.g Amnesty International
- Abu Hamza
- Abu Qatada
EVAL: Unlikely the govt won’t listen as it would give
them a poor public outlook.
Public can hold parliament to account to protect Govt does not have to listen to PG’s
their rights. A form of scrutiny
E.g. Iraq war - stop the war movement was ignored.
E.g. Leverson enquiry - into news of the world Blair ignored the pressure groups although it was
hacking private phone lines. Some pressure the largest protest in London.
groups are demanding a second Brexit
referendum. EVAL: did lead to him gaining large amounts of hate
and distrust.
Referendums are GOOD for Uk politics Referendums are BAD for UK politics
Democratic renewal: Referendums involve Undermines Parliament’s role: In the UK, we
the people directly in decision-making on have had a long tradition of electing
important issues; it is the purest form of representatives to Parliament to debate and
democracy. Given that trust in politicians is consider complex decisions on our behalf.
abysmally low because of scandals, hypocrisy Putting a black-and-white yes/no decision to
and broken promises, putting major questions the public undermines this vital process and
to the people is a way of restoring trust in damagingly simplifies intricate debates which
democracy. This may encourage higher the public may not fully understand. It also
turnout [percentage of eligible voters who confuses the location of power in the UK –if
actually vote], since ‘every vote counts’. [For Parliament wants to do one thing, but the
comparison, typical General Election turnout is people have voted for another, then what
between 60-70%) should be done.
Entrenches major reforms: Before a Used as political tools: Governments choose
government embarks on major, radical whether or not to call referendums and often
changes to the country’s constitutional do so based on whether it will benefit their
[political] structure, they should put the party or not rather than whether it is good for
matter to a referendum to (i) make sure it is the country as a whole
something that the people actually want and E.g. Tony Blair (LAB) did not hold a
(ii) entrench (establish) successful reforms referendum on the 2007 Lisbon Treaty, which
more strongly. These reforms could always be transferred significant powers from the UK
to the EU. This was perhaps because he was
undone by a future government, but not
without having another major public debate
E.g. the 1997 referendum approving Scottish
devolution passed by a 74-26% margin,
showing this was clearly something that
Check on ‘elective dictatorship’: Clearly it Risk of low engagement: With some
would be ridiculous to run the country exceptions, most referendums have
, entirely by referendums, but referendums exceedingly low turnout. This damages the
stop a government from doing whatever they legitimacy of the decision –if not that many
want in the 5 years between elections. The people engaged with the issue, then how can
practise of holding referendums stops the result be deemed a valid endorsement of
governments with majorities from making national or regional policy? It is also possible
major decisions without consultation that the over-use of referendums could lead
E.g. In 2004, Labour wanted to create a to voter apathy –people becoming
North East England regional assembly (a bit disengaged with politics because it is too
like the London Assembly). A referendum onerous
was held in North East England, which failed
78-22 (largely because people there didn’t E.g. the Welsh Assembly creation
see the point of a regional assembly with few referendum (1997 - passed) had a turnout of
proper law-making powers). Labour then only 50.1%; the London Mayor and Assembly
scrapped the plans for creating a North East creation referendum (1998 - passed) had an
England regional assembly even lower turnout of 34.0%
Voting age reduced Voting age not reduced to 16
At the age of 16, young people can exercise Young people are not regarded as responsible
significant responsibility, they can engage in enough to be able to buy alcohol or cigarettes
sexual relations, marry, pay tax and national themselves until the age of 18, so it is
insurance, so it would be irrational that they are disingenuous to claim that they are responsible
regarded as not mature enough to vote. for exercising all adult responsibilities.
Influence participation especially as critics argue Most 16- and 17- year olds are still in part time
the UK is in a participation crisis. The 2014 education, They are thereafter much less likely to
Scottish independence referendum engagement be paying taxes and so do not have the same
by 16- and 17- year olds. 75% of this age group stake in society as older people.
turned out to vote.
The introduction of citizenship lessons into the They have a few adult life experiences on which
school curriculum means that young people are to base their voting decision. They are thus more
now better informed about current affairs and so likely to be manipulated into voting a certain way
can make educated political decisions. by social media or peer pressure.
Voting should be compulsory Voting should NOT be compulsory
Voting is a civic responsibility, like jury service. If The public has a right to choose whether or not to
citizens are not required to fulfil the duties of vote in an election. It is up to politicians to
citizenship, then the civic engagement that mobilise public enthusiasm by providing reasons
democracy relies upon maybe lost to vote. This could therefore remove the incentive
for politicians to engage with the public
Political apathy is a problem in many liberal The votes of politically disengaged citizens will
countries. In the UK 2019 general election, carry less weight than the votes of those who
turnout was 67.3%. Limited numbers of people take their civic responsibilities seriously. Random
voting can undermine the legitimacy of the result. voting could undermine the legitimacy of the
result.
