1. UK democracy and participation

Direct democracy

Direct democracy is a system in which citizens themselves make political decisions rather than electing representatives to do so on their behalf.

Decisions in direct democracy

Decisions in a direct democracy are made by majority vote.

Participatory governance

Direct democracy is considered the most participatory form of governance as it allows all citizens to have a direct voice in shaping laws and policies.

Direct democracy in the UK

While the UK is primarily a representative democracy, certain major decisions are made through direct democratic methods such as referendums, petitions, and public consultations.

Referendum

A referendum is a public vote in which citizens decide directly on a specific political issue, policy, or constitutional change.

2016 UK European Union referendum

In 2016, 33 million citizens voted on whether to remain in or leave the EU, with 51.89% voting to leave, directly shaping UK policy and leading to Brexit.

2011 Alternative Vote referendum

Over 19 million people voted against replacing the First Past the Post (FPTP) system with the Alternative Vote system.

Online petitions

Online petitions allow citizens to raise issues or propose actions by collecting digital signatures on the official UK Parliament petitions website.

Democratic impact of online petitions

Only petitions supported by the Backbench Business Committee can reach debate, highlighting a partial form of direct democracy.

Influential online petition

In 2017, a petition signed by over 1.6 million people opposed a state visit by US President Donald Trump.

Rallies and protests

Rallies and protests are collective demonstrations where citizens express support or opposition to government actions or policies.

Effectiveness of protests

Governments are not obliged to act on protests, and their effectiveness depends on political context, public sympathy, media coverage, and government willingness to respond.

UK protest against government policy

In 2017, thousands protested in London against austerity measures, criticising government spending cuts.

2010 student protests

The significance of the 2010 student protests is not provided in the excerpt.

Advantage of direct democracy regarding transparency

Direct democracy increases transparency by allowing citizens to see exactly how decisions are made and voted on, reducing suspicion of hidden political agendas and promoting open governance.

Strength of government legitimacy in direct democracy

When citizens make decisions directly, the resulting policies reflect the explicit will of the people, giving the government a strong democratic mandate and enhancing perceived legitimacy.

Encouragement of political cooperation in direct democracy

When citizens know their participation has a real impact, they are more likely to engage constructively in politics, fostering cooperation, shared responsibility, and civic unity.

Direct democracy as the "purest" form of democracy

It involves no intermediaries between the electorate and decision-making. Citizens express their views directly, meaning outcomes reflect the unfiltered will of the people.

Promotion of political education in direct democracy

Citizens must engage with issues to vote meaningfully, which raises public awareness and understanding. For example, the 2011 AV referendum educated voters about alternative electoral systems.

Equality among voters in direct democracy

Each person's vote holds equal weight, unlike in representative systems where constituency size can affect vote value. Every vote directly influences the final decision, ensuring political equality.

Practical disadvantages of direct democracy

It is expensive, time-consuming, and logistically complex in large nations. For instance, the 2016 EU referendum cost £142.4 million. Continuous direct voting could paralyse government efficiency.

Manipulation of referendum question design

Question phrasing can bias voters. The 2016 EU referendum changed from "Yes/No" to "Remain/Leave" because "Yes" questions tend to favour the affirmative side, showing how wording can influence outcomes.

Media influence on direct democracy

Media coverage shapes how issues are framed, influencing public perception. Biased or emotive reporting can sway votes based on fear or ideology rather than informed reasoning.

Irrational choices in direct democracy

Many voters lack detailed knowledge on complex issues and may vote emotionally or reactively. For example, some Brexit voters later claimed they misunderstood the full consequences of leaving the EU.

Representative democracy

Representative democracy is a system where citizens elect individuals to make political decisions on their behalf. These representatives are accountable to voters and expected to act in the public's best interests.

Representation in the UK

The UK is divided into 650 constituencies, each electing one MP to the House of Commons. MPs act as representatives of their area, making and scrutinising laws on behalf of their constituents.

Importance of general elections in representative democracy

General elections, held every five years (unless called early), provide citizens with the opportunity to renew or withdraw consent for their representatives, ensuring government accountability and legitimacy.

Accountability of MPs to constituents

Through elections, debates, and public scrutiny, MPs must justify their actions. Failure to represent constituents effectively can result in electoral defeat or party sanctions.

Purpose of Prime Minister's Question Time (PMQs)

PMQs allows MPs, especially the opposition, to question the Prime Minister on policy and national issues. It increases transparency and demonstrates executive accountability within representative democracy.

Debates in Parliament

Debates in Parliament reinforce democracy.

Parliamentary debates

Allow representatives to discuss and challenge policies publicly, ensuring that multiple viewpoints are heard before laws are passed.

Example of MPs representing constituents over party

MPs Ken Clarke and Anna Soubry defied their party by voting for Parliament to have a say on any final Brexit deal, prioritising constituency interests over Conservative Party unity.

Benefit of representative democracy in terms of expertise

Representatives often have greater political knowledge, experience, and access to expert advice than the average citizen, allowing them to make informed decisions on complex issues.

Protection of minority interests in representative democracy

Representatives can ensure that minority groups' rights and needs are considered, preventing the tyranny of the majority that can arise in direct democratic votes.

Practicality of representative democracy

Enables large-scale governance without constant referendums, allowing consistent, efficient political operation.

Low participation levels in representative democracy

Low turnout undermines legitimacy, as elected representatives may not truly reflect public opinion.

Descriptive representation

Means Parliament mirrors the population's social characteristics (e.g., gender, ethnicity, education).

Substantive representation

Occurs when MPs advocate for groups or causes regardless of personal background.

Self-interest weakening representative democracy

Representatives may act for personal or political advantage rather than public good, undermining trust.

Delegate model of representation

Delegates act strictly according to their constituents' wishes, expressing their views directly.

Trustee model of representation

Trustees act on their own informed judgement, believing they know what is best for constituents.

Similarities between direct and representative democracy

Both give citizens a say in governance, rely on public mandates for legitimacy, and aim to reflect popular will.

Differences in decision-making between direct and representative democracies

In direct democracy, citizens decide policies themselves, while in representative democracy, elected officials make decisions on behalf of many voters.

Value of each vote in direct vs representative democracy

In direct democracy, all votes carry equal weight; in representative systems, constituency size can distort equality.

Mandate in a democracy

The authority granted by voters to representatives or the government to implement policies promised during an election or referendum.

Expression of a mandate in direct democracy

Through direct votes, where the people's collective decision becomes a binding instruction for government action.

Expression of a mandate in representative democracy

Through election results, where winning parties claim a mandate to enact their manifesto promises.

Democratic deficit

A situation where democratic principles are not upheld, leading to a lack of representation or accountability.

Low Voter Turnout

Declining turnout weakens the legitimacy of election results. Since 1997, UK turnout has fallen sharply in many elections—only 35.6% in the 2014 EU elections—showing disengagement from formal politics.

First Past the Post (FPTP)

FPTP exaggerates seat numbers for major parties and disadvantages smaller ones, leading to unrepresentative outcomes. For example, a party can win a parliamentary majority with under 40% of the popular vote.

Safe Seats

Safe seats are constituencies where one party is almost guaranteed victory, discouraging voter participation and leaving opposition voters feeling unrepresented, deepening the democratic deficit.

Flaws of FPTP

In Belfast South (2015), the winning candidate received only 24.5% of votes, illustrating how fragmented results under FPTP can produce MPs without majority local support.

House of Lords

Most peers are appointed or hereditary, meaning they lack direct public accountability. This unelected influence over legislation reduces the democratic legitimacy of UK governance.

UK Supreme Court

As an unelected body, the Supreme Court can overturn legislation or government actions through judicial review, exercising significant power without direct electoral mandate.

EU Membership Criticism

EU laws were binding on member states, limiting parliamentary sovereignty. For example, freedom of movement rules prevented the UK from independently restricting EU immigration.

Brexit Argument

Many argued that leaving the EU would restore parliamentary sovereignty, enabling UK voters to hold decision-makers directly accountable for laws affecting them.

Electoral Reform

Electoral reform involves changing the voting system to improve fairness. Critics of FPTP argue for systems like the Alternative Vote or Proportional Representation to make outcomes reflect votes more accurately.

House of Lords Reform

Reform advocates claim an elected second chamber would enhance accountability and better represent the public, replacing inherited and appointed peers with directly elected senators.

Online Voting Benefits

Online voting could reduce costs, make participation easier, and engage younger voters who are less likely to attend polling stations, potentially raising turnout and inclusivity.

Online Voting Risks

Concerns include cybersecurity, vote manipulation, and loss of secrecy. While it could increase convenience, ensuring integrity and trust would be challenging.

Compulsory Voting

Compulsory voting legally requires citizens to vote, with penalties for abstention. Australia uses this system, achieving around 95% turnout, increasing representativeness of election outcomes.

Arguments for Compulsory Voting

It could ensure higher turnout, strengthen legitimacy, and encourage political engagement by making participation a civic duty rather than an option.

Arguments Against Compulsory Voting

Forcing citizens to vote may infringe on individual liberty, lead to uninformed voting, and distort results by prioritising quantity over quality of participation.

Lowering Voting Age to 16

Proponents argue that 16-17-year-olds pay taxes, can marry, and serve in the army, so they should have parliamentary representation. They are also educated about citizenship and politics in school.

Votes at 16 Coalition

It is an alliance of groups such as the National Union of Students and British Youth Council campaigning to lower the UK voting age, highlighting generational exclusion from democracy.

Political progress on votes at 16

The 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum allowed 16-17-year-olds to vote, and Scotland extended this right to all Scottish elections in 2015, setting a precedent for reform.

Political parties supporting votes at 16

All major UK parties support lowering the voting age except the Conservative Party, reflecting generational divides in party support bases.

Argument against major reform

The UK already provides multiple channels for accountability—such as elections, media scrutiny, and pressure groups—making extensive constitutional or electoral reform unnecessary.

Role of pressure groups

Pressure groups represent diverse interests, educate the public, and hold government accountable, helping to fill representation gaps left by party politics.

Role of the media in democracy

The media scrutinises government actions, exposes wrongdoing, and informs the public, enabling voters to make informed judgements and keeping politicians accountable.

Media scrutiny as a democratic safeguard

By investigating and exposing corruption, bias, or policy failures, the media ensures that politicians remain under continuous public examination.

UK election participation levels

UK voter turnout is broadly similar to other Western democracies, suggesting that while reform debates exist, the system still achieves a comparable level of engagement without compulsory voting or systemic overhaul.

Franchise or suffrage

The franchise or suffrage refers to the right and ability to vote in elections. Expanding the franchise means increasing the proportion of the population eligible to vote, reflecting democratic development.

UK franchise before the Great Reform Act of 1832

Before 1832, only about 400,000 men could vote. Voting rights varied by borough and property ownership, and many industrial cities like Manchester lacked representation, while 'rotten boroughs' with few inhabitants had MPs, creating deep inequality.

Problems in the pre-1832 electoral system

The system was dominated by property-owning elites, with inconsistent rules between boroughs. Wealthy individuals could vote multiple times, while many working-class men and all women were excluded, making reform urgent.

Changes made by the 1832 Great Reform Act

It abolished many rotten boroughs, redistributed seats to urban areas, extended voting rights to middle-class men such as small landowners and shopkeepers, and gave representation to new industrial towns, although property requirements still excluded most working men.

1918 Representation of the People Act

It gave all men over 21 and some women over 30—those who were married, property owners, or graduates—the right to vote, enfranchising millions and marking the first inclusion of women in UK general elections.

Reason for passing the 1918 Act

The wartime coalition government faced pressure to enfranchise soldiers who had fought without owning property, and to reward women for their contribution to the war effort, making reform both moral and politically necessary.

1928 Representation of the People Act

It granted equal voting rights to all adults over 21 regardless of gender, creating universal suffrage and fulfilling decades of campaigning by suffragists and suffragettes.

1969 Representation of the People Act

The 1969 Act lowered the voting age from 21 to 18, recognising social and cultural changes in attitudes towards adulthood and extending full political rights to younger citizens.

Changing conceptions of adulthood

The cultural revolutions of the 1960s redefined adulthood as beginning earlier. Young people were working, marrying, and serving in the military at 18, so enfranchisement aligned law with social reality.

Main aims of women's suffrage campaigns

Women sought equal voting rights with men, arguing that exclusion was unjust and undermined democratic values. Their activism changed public attitudes and forced suffrage onto the political agenda.

Methods used by suffragettes

The Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU) adopted militant tactics such as arson, vandalism, and hunger strikes, drawing attention to their cause and demonstrating the urgency of reform.

Government response to suffragette militancy

The Liberal government imprisoned suffragettes, who then went on hunger strike and were force-fed. Public sympathy grew as the government's harsh treatment appeared unjust, fuelling support for reform.

Suffragist approach to women's suffrage

The National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies (NUWSS) used peaceful, lawful methods such as petitions, lobbying, and cross-party cooperation. Their moderate stance built political credibility and long-term influence.

Effectiveness of suffragettes vs. suffragists

Historians debate this. Some argue suffragettes' militancy alienated politicians and delayed reform; others believe it raised awareness. Many agree suffragists' peaceful pressure was essential to legislative success.

Votes at 16 campaign

Advocates argue 16- and 17-year-olds should vote because they can work, pay tax, marry, and serve in the military, making them subject to laws without representation—contradicting democratic fairness.

Criticism of lowering the voting age

Opponents claim teenagers lack maturity and life experience to make informed political choices. They point to low youth turnout to argue extending the vote may not increase engagement.

2008 private member's bill on voting age

MP Julie Morgan introduced a bill to reduce the voting age, but it ran out of parliamentary time. Despite this, the debate raised awareness and gathered cross-party support.

Scotland's votes at 16 initiative

In the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum, 16- and 17-year-olds were allowed to vote, showing that young people could engage responsibly. In 2015, Scotland extended this right to all its elections.

Role of pressure groups in democracy

They allow citizens to influence policy outside elections, representing diverse causes and ensuring minority interests are voiced, thus complementing representative institutions.

Insider pressure groups

Insider groups work closely with government, advising and influencing policy directly, while outsider groups exert pressure externally through public campaigns, protests, or media engagement.

Examples of insider pressure groups

The Confederation of British Industry (CBI), National Farmers Union (NFU), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) all advise government directly on policy issues.

Why insider groups avoid extreme demands

To maintain government access and credibility. Moderation ensures continued consultation and influence over legislation, making cooperation more effective than confrontation.

Examples of outsider pressure groups

Fathers4Justice campaigns for fathers' rights, Plane Stupid opposes airport expansion, and Occupy highlights inequality. These groups rely on media and public support rather than government cooperation.

Sectional vs. promotional pressure groups

Sectional groups represent specific interests, while promotional groups advocate for broader causes or ideals.

Sectional groups

Defend specific social or occupational interests (e.g., BMA, House Builders Federation).

Promotional groups

Campaign for broader causes benefiting society as a whole (e.g., Greenpeace, Stop HS2).

Main functions of pressure groups

They represent members politically, scrutinise government policy, educate the public, mobilise citizens, and help prevent majority dominance by protecting minority voices.

How pressure groups educate the public

They raise awareness of social, environmental, and political issues. For example, Greenpeace informs the public about climate change, influencing both citizens and policy makers.