Democracy notes

Unit 1

Democracy

What is a liberal democracy?

A liberal democracy is a type of democracy where there is an emphasis on the protection of individual rights and liberties, where the rule of law is strictly adhered. Some aspects of a liberal democracy include:

·       The government is accountable to the people to ensure that it is acting in the interests of the people and not a small minority.

·       A liberal democracy enjoys free and fair elections

·       Peaceful and orderly transfer of power from one government to the next

·       Information is freely available to all citizens

·       Losing parties accept democratic legitimacy of winning parties

·       Rights and liberties of citizens are taken into account and protected

·       Powers of government are controlled and limited either by law or by elected institutions (or both)

·       Variety of beliefs, opinions, cultures and lifestyles are tolerated

To what extent is the UK a liberal democracy? (25)

Free and fair elections

Positive points

·       Elections in Britain are free of corruption

·       An independent Electoral Commission oversees elections to ensure they’re conducted honestly

·       All adults (age 18+) have the right to vote and stand for office

Negative points

·       FPTP, used for general elections, is arguable unfair as many votes are wasted (50.7, 53% million in 2010) and candidates are elected with a very small amount of the votes, its become normal for MP’s

·       Minor parties have very little chance of winning seats due to the plurality aspect of FPTP

·       Over 50% (383) safe seats exist

Rights and liberties of citizens are taken into account and protected

Positive points

·       Human Rights act 1998 – sets out and enforces the rights and liberties of citizens, an example of a basic human right is the right to life and the right to an education

·       Britain has signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights

·       Britain enjoys freedom of speech

Negative points

·       Edward Snowden’s leaks in 2013 prove that the British GCHQ and American NSA are conducting mass surveillance programs on millions of citizens worldwide. Millions of peoples human rights have been violated – ‘the right to privacy’

·       When national security is at stake, Parliament can set aside rights and liberties of citizens

Information is freely available to citizens

Positive points

·       Britain enjoys freedom of information and speech, little to no evidence exists to suggest the government controls the media, although some newspapers are owned by political parties such as the Daily Mail by the Conservatives

·       Freedom of Information Act 2000 enables citizens to freely access information, this was used in 2009 by the Telegraph in the expense scandal

Negative points

·       If requested information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 is a potential threat to national security, it will remain classified.

·       During times of warfare or when national security is at stake, the government may implement censorship in the media and manipulate the news, but this is something that is common in all democracies.

Tolerance over a variety of beliefs and cultures

Positive points

·       Britain is a proud multi-cultural society, often admired abroad for its tolerant politics and culture

·       Pluralist society, a variety of pressure groups co-exist

Negative points

·       Pressure groups are not necessarily treated equally as some are insiders (British Medical Association) and others are outsiders (Greenpeace)

·       Growing terrorist threats, migration, asylum seeking have placed such tolerance under considerable strain. With the exacerbating Syrian civil war, David Cameron has allowed only the most venerable to seek refuge in Britain

Accountability

Positive points

·       Parliament consistently forces the government to be constantly accountable, requiring ministers to justify their actions and where necessary, accept criticism

·       Prime Ministers Question every Wednesday in the House of Commons allows the Prime Minister to be accountable

·       Select committees are set up to investigate government departments

Negative points

·       Prime Ministers Question isn’t fair, the prime minister knows the questions beforehand and thus, has time to rehearse

·       Perhaps Parliament does not have enough time, expertise or technical backup to undertake this task effectively

Representative and Direct democracy

Direct democracy

A term that describes a political system or circumstances where the people themselves make key political decisions, it flourished briefly in ancient Athens.

Direct democracy isn’t really feasible today. Many more important decisions have to be made and the population is considerably larger than what it was in ancient Athens where the voting strength may have just been below 10,000 citizens.

To a certain degree, direct democracy involves any form of direct consultation between the government and its citizens. The current Conservative-Liberal Democracy coalition for example, invited public participation in deciding how public expenditure might be reduced. Similarly, many local authorities regularly consult members of their community typically to discuss how their expenditure and services should be used.

Downing Street has developed a system of e-petitions whereby the Prime Minister’s office accepts and responds to email campaigns on any significant issue. If the petition gets 100,000 signatures, the issue can be debated in the House of Commons. So, in some respects, Britain is becoming a consultative democracy.

                                              

Advantages

·       Considered to be more democratic because people have a direct impact on political decision making

·       A wider section of society’s viewpoints are voiced

·       Stops a small minority ruling in their own interest as seen by Saddam Hussein in Iraq between 1979 and 2003

·       No distinction between state and civil society (no need for pressure groups), thus reducing conflict

·       Enhances democratic legitimacy of government

Disadvantages

·       Only suitable for small states

·       Decision making is too time consuming as everyone is required to voice their opinions

·       Representatives are arguably better because they are experts in their field, not just ordinary people

·       A mass audience can be swayed easily by passionate speeches

·       Can lead to tyranny of the majority whereby the interests of the majority are given a higher preference to those of the minority and therefore the minorities lose

Representative democracy

A political system where most decisions are made by elected representatives rather than the people themselves. It also means that citizens are represented by individuals and associations, who communicate their demands and interests to the decision makers, represent people.

Representative democracy in the United Kingdom is often described as a parliamentary democracy. This is because Parliament dominates the political system and because representation occurs traditionally through Parliament. The main features of a Parliamentary democracy include:

1.     Parliament is the source of all political authority. It is impossible to exercise power without the sanction of Parliament. Even the Prime Minister who enjoys many powers inherited by the monarchy can only use these powers if they’re supported by Parliament

2.     The government of the UK has to be drawn from Parliament. Its members must be members of either the House of Lords or Commons. This ensures that members of the government can be made directly accountable to Parliament

3.     The government constantly makes itself accountable to Parliament. It also means that ministers must report to Parliament on the progress of policies and the results of government actions

4.     Parliament is the guardian of the government’s electoral mandate. It is Parliament’s task to ensure that the mandate is not abused and if the government goes against their mandate, Parliament has the right to veto their actions

5.     Parliament is expected to represent the national interest

Advantages

·       Only suitable for large states

·       Representatives are free to concentrate on political and they’re professionals

·       Decisions can be made quickly because there are less people to hear from

·       Link between people and government is maintained through constituencies

Disadvantages

·       People becoming disinterested in politics, lowers political participation and its evident from the low turnout at the polls

·       Representatives are only judged or held accountable at a general election which is every five years

·       Parties impose their views on their members first, meaning your representative often acts in the interests of the party’s wishes not yours

·       Representatives are free to pursue their own interests and thus, may be unsympathetic to public opinion

·       Tyranny of the minority

Referendums

A popular vote whereby the electorate are given the opportunity to have an impact on political decisions. It is Parliament who decides when a referendum will be held and what the question will be.

List of referendums held in the UK:

YEAR	LOCATION	QUESTION	YES	NO	TURNOUT
2011	National	Should the system of the Alternative Vote be adopted for UK general elections?	32.1%	67.9%	42.2%
1998	London	Are you in favor of the government proposal for a Greater London Authority made up of an elected mayor and a separately elected assembly?	72.0%	28.0%	34.1%
1997	Wales	Do you agree that there should be a Welsh Assembly?	50.3%	49.7%	50.1%
1997	Scotland	Do you agree that there should be a Scottish Parliament?	74.3%	25.7%	60.3%

Advantages

·       Enhances legitimacy of government as decisions are made by the people, or because the people have a direct impact on decision making, subsequently enhancing democracy

·       Reduces voter apathy because people will come to realise their decision has an impact on politics, thus increasing political participation

·       Perhaps the only chance people have to stop the government from making unpopular decisions and only chance for public to express their views because general elections are only every 5 years

·       Some issues may have too much of an impact on peoples lives that the peoples input is required before any decision making is made

Disadvantages

·      Decisions into the hands of the public can prove to be catastrophic. The public are usually ill informed on the issue in question and may not know what they’re actually voting for, the issue can also be too co mplex for the majority of voters to understand

·      Public can easily be influenced by the media and passionate speeches by politicians to vote in a particular way

·      Agenda setting – Parliament decisions everything, when the referendum will be held and what the question will be

·      Yes or no answers lead to oversimplifying political issues

·      If the government gets the wrong answer, they can simply have another referendum

·      Expensive

Pluralism

Pluralism is a form of democracy and, in its broad sense, is a belief in, or commitment to diversity or multi policy (the existence of many things). A pluralist system is one in which any candidate who wishes to stand for free lections is free to do so. Power is widely distributed in society; it’s not just situated in the hands of a ruling elite. Typically in a pluralist state, there will be pressure groups and a wide range of political parties.

Quangos

Since it was coined in the 1970’s, ‘quangos’ has become a highly emotive term. For many, it is a byword for wasteful bureaucracy, patronage and lack of democratic accountability. It is no surprise that politicians from all sides have regularly called for reductions in their number, expenditure and influence. However, achieving this has proven to be difficult.

·       There are 766 quangos/NDPB’s (non-departmental public body) sponsored by the UK Government

·       The number has been falling: there was 790 in 2008 and 827 in 2007. The number of quangos has fallen by over 10% since 1997

·       Staffing and expenditure of quangos has increased. They employed 111,000 people in 2009 and spent £46.5 billion, o which £38.4 billion was directly funded by the Government

The Conservatives have pledged to abolish quangos “that do not perform a technical funcition or a function that requires political impartiality, or act independently to establish facts”. David Cameron has said “there are too many, and they waste too much money”. The other parties have made similar pledges.

Quangos have numerous roles such as delivering public services, giving advice or regulating behavior. They are advisory bodies, which give independent expert advice to ministers on a range of matters and are watchdogs, which set standards and regulate behaviour.