Paper 1 - UK Politics + Core Political Ideas

REF ~ More democratic (PRO)

Referendums are direct democracy, its purest form, enhancing public participation in the political process

They also often increase participation, with some of the highest levels of political participation being witnessed in referendums.

E.g. 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum 85% of electorate

Often people see politicians as out of touch, many voters took the 2016 EU Referendum as a vote against political elites - all major political parties except UKIP campaigned for remain - showed that representatives often disagreed with voters

REF ~ Undermine parliamentary sovereignty and representative democracy (CON)

Suggests that elected representatives not suitable to fulfil their role, arguably leading to a question around the importance of elections

E.g. Switzerland - Several referendums a year and low turnout in general elections as a result

When referendums need amending in parliament, MPs enacting their role are accused of stifling the will of the people and breeds distrust amongst the electorate. E.g. Brexit

REF ~ Entrench change and prevent unwanted change (PRO)

People’s vote gives a policy more legitimacy, and prevents a successive government from simply passing legislation to reverse it - politically difficult - limits government’s ability to act as an elective dictatorship, fostering a more stable political environment

E.g. 1997 Devolution Referendums - Labour government wanted to entrench the change of devolution which was opposed by Conservatives

REF ~ Held for political party self-interest (CON)

Often referendums are only done as a vote would struggle to pass in parliament due to party divisions and potential rebels, therefore warranting a people’s mandate to unite the party

E.g. 1975 EEC Referendum - Was held to unite the divided opinions on the EEC amongst Labour

REF ~ Heal divisions in society (PRO)

Change enforced through direct government legislation is almost guaranteed to upset one group in a conflict - a vote of both groups can help to unite them or at least quell the violence

E.g. 1998 Good Friday Agreement - led to a power-sharing executive between Unionists and Nationalists

REF ~ Outcomes lack clarity and increase divisions (CON)

Binary nature of referendums may not reflect the complexity of public opinion - and most political debates warrant more than a simple yes or no answer

Typically very small margins between votes arguably leading to increased conflict over a controversial result

E.g. 1997 Welsh Devolution Referendum - 50.3% vs 49.7%

Electoral Systems ~ Define Types (NOT PR)

Single Member Plurality Systme (FPTP)

Used in Westminster and English/Welsh Local Elections

Voter chooses one candidate who requires a plurality to win the seat

Supplementary Vote

Used in mayoral elections

Voters have two preferencfes, if no candidate gets more than 50% of the vote on the counting of first preference, all except top two candidates are excluded

Second preference is then added to remaining two candidates

Electoral Systems ~ Define Types (PR)

Additional Member System

Used in Scotland, Wales, and Germany

1 vote for constituency Member and one for party list

Constituency member decided on plurality, party list voted allocated proportionally

Single Transferable Vote

Used in NI Assembly and Israel

Voters rank all candidates in order of preference

Successful candidates require a minimum quota to be elected

Multi-member consituencies - 5-7 MPs

Electoral Systems ~ Overly benefits LAB & CON (FPTP)

All PMs since 1945 have been Lab or Con

FPTP requires parties to become more broadchurch and moderate to gain a plurality - most votes to ideological parties are wasted

E.g. 2024 Election

LAB - 24k votes per MP

REF - 823k votes per MP

Both parties reluctant to change system as they benefit from it, all small parties call to reform the system

Undemocratic as it limits people’s true choice

Electoral Systems ~ FPTP keeps extremism at bay

The requirement for a winning party to be moderate has kept a majority of the electorate content as well as has kept extremism at bay

E.g. 2018 Swedish GENELEC - Sweden Democrats gained similar share (18%) but gain 62 seats - Post-2022 now the 2nd largest party in Rikstag

UK - BNP faced little success in genelec yet gained 2 seats in EU Pt 2015

Still fails to prove FPTP is democratic as even if a party is extremist, it still stifles the will of the electorate to prevent them from gaining power.

Electoral Systems ~ PR better reflects people’s vote

Due to PR systems more proportionally allocating seats based on vote, it is more democratic and people are more likely to vote how they truly believe rather than tactically

E.g. 2015 Genelec in Scotland vs 2016 Scottish Pt Election

2015 - SNP 50% of popular vote but 56/59 seats

Con, Lab and LD had 47% yet only 3 seats

FPTP prevents true democratic choice as parties are unlikely to put as much effort into campaigning in Scotland due to the dominance of the SNP

2016 - SNP 46% vote = 49% seats

Con, Lab and LD 51% vote = 48% seats

Electoral Systems ~ FPTP produces strong, working governments

FPTP creates govts with strong majorities able to act decisively

Since 1945, all bar one govt has been single party and 18/20 have had a majority - can deliver the will of the public

E.g. Brexit took a prolonged period because of a weak majority under May - 2019 Johnson got a maj of 80 seats was able to pass Brexit within a matter of months

Electoral Systems ~ FPTP Majorities create elective dictatorship

Due to party deference and payroll vote, a majority in pt gives near complete power to the govt

Coalitions created under PR would allow for more political debate from a greater proportion of the political spectrum and therefore electorate.

Also increases debate through a strengthened opposition who has a more proportional seat share

E.g. Coalition govt showed compromises made by having two parties in govt - cutting income tax for those earning under £10k

Electoral Systems ~ PR Coalitions lack accountability

In a coalition govt, voters are less able to outline which govt is at fault for a certain policy

FPTP single-party govts have clear-cut accountability for party at fault for a policy

E.g. Coalition - voters of the LDs were unsure who to blame for the trebling of tuition fees - Eventually losing LDs place as third largest party in 2015

PG ~ Government sympathy:

Most crucial factor affecting a group’s influence on policy, as if the two bodies share an ideology, the government can more easily adapt their policy to appease the pressure group. This often leads to increased collaboration and support for the group's causes.

Think Tanks ~ Tax-Payer Alliance - ideologies align with Conservative policies and often granted unofficial opportunities to meet officials. - Influenced Osbourne to introduce the 2-year freeze on public sector pay in 2010 Budget

Pressure Group ~ Trade Unions - Generally make up a majority of Labour party funding and align with their values of solidarity with the working class. Current Labour govt introduced pay rises for teachers, doctors, train drivers + ‘Employment Rights Act’, includes 6.7% minimum wage increase

PG ~ Resources:

Economic resources; group’s importance to the economy; public appearance; expertise.

Economic power most crucial factor - wealth demands high-level of success and large membership giving group a high public profile - Also gives power to hire more qualified individuals who bring in experience and networks

“Revolving door” - Government/Parliament officials leave jobs and are shortly hired by an organisation requiring lobbyists of government

Corporations ~ Nissan - Produce 1/3 of cars in the UK and 80% of those pre Brexit were shipped to the EU - Vital economic importance and high profile in manufacturing gave them meetings with top govt officials inc. PM, promising compensation should Brexit damage their profits

Pressure Groups ~ CBI - Represents over 200,000 UK businesses and generates £25mil per year - Benefit from high membership and importance to the economy, PMs and Chancellors attend annually. 2023 Budget - CBI campaigned on reforming childcare, after govt announced working parents could access 30 hours free childcare a week

PG ~ Membership:

Larger memberships typically = greater funding for the group, plus a more well-grounded claim in representing public opinion, as well as more power behind them in the case of direct action

Lobbyists ~ The Portman Group - A collection of roughly 20 alcohol-based producers in the UK, great impact on the British economy, as they dominate the market and pay out large amounts of tax. 2007 Labour government went against professional advice of 17 experts to pull their support from an increase in alcohol prices.

Pressure groups ~ Mumsnet - Largest membership of over 8mil, makes it a key target for governments and parties. Successfully persuaded the NHS to reduce the number of free samples offered of formula to encourage breastfeeding.

Party Systems ~ UK as a predominant party system

A system in which there are several parties but only one gets most of the votes, seats, winning election after election

E.g. Japan - Liberal party largest party since 1945

UK:

2/3 20th Century was spent with Conservatives in Government

1979-1990 ~ With good majorities

2010-2024

However

No single party has reached a majority of the popular vote

Labour and Conservatives have both spent similar amounts of time in govt since 1945 (31 vs 49)

Party Systems ~ UK as a two-party system

A system in which there are several parties but two get most of the votes, seats, and alternate between who is in power.

E.g. USA - Power has been between just Democrats and Republicans for decades

UK:

Labour and Conservatives normally hold 50+% of the votes

Have most of the seats - 2024 82%

2017-2024 return of the two-party system

But could argue 2024 suggests a switch to a multi-party system

Party Systems ~ UK as a multi-party system

A system with several parties that have a roughly equal share of the votes and seats - coalition govts

E.g. Italy - roughly 20 parties at a time in parliament

UK:

Increasing amount of smaller parties gaining relevance - especially in regional elections

LibDems in govt 2010-2015

2017-2019 Confidence and Supply agreement with DUP

LibDems in govt with Labour in both Scotland (1999-2007) and Wales (2001-2003)

SNP in Scottish govt since 2007

Plaid Cymru in govt with Labour in Wales (2007-2011)

2025 Council elections swept by Reform

Opinion polls showing growing support for the Green Party

Party Funding ~ Equality of Opportunities (Reform System)

Reforming the system could provide equality of resources among parties and give greater choice to the electorate - strengthening democracy

Under current system, donors disproportionately donate to the larger parties - LAB + CON

30th May - 4th July 2024 ~ Labour received over £9mil in donations, millions more than other parties combined - Same with CON in 2017 & 2019

Could argue that donations don’t equal success (Reform got equal 1.5mil to LDs) but reformed system would allow for purely popularity based voting

Party Funding ~ State system would favour governing party (Current System)

If a state-funded system were introduced, it would be catered to favour the governing party that introduces it.

Evidence - Lack of reform under previous govts apart from Blair govt - Limit on undeclared donations and ban on foreign citizens donating

Reforms could render party memberships useless, or encourage parties to pander to the state funding them rather than the electorate

Party Funding ~ Corruption (Reform System)

Evidence has shown that large donations to parties can lead to great deals of influence in the govt, albeit unclear as most deals and lobbying is made under the table in off-the-record meetings

Consistent spike in donations to party at top of the polls in run-up to election - becomes a bidding war for influence in govt

E.g. Cash for peerages scandal - 25 Labour donors received peerages - £1mil per peerage

E.g. Zia Yusuf £200k to RefUK became party chairperson

Party Funding ~ Cash for Peerages improves HOL (Current System)

Many would say that prolific donors gaining peerages improves the HOL

Many donors are incredibly successful individuals specialised in their field - arguably exactly what is looked for in peers

E.g. Lord Sainsbury - Donated £2mil+ to LAB in run up to 2024 GE and gained a peerage - Immensely successful in supermarket business

Party Funding ~ Current systems undermines “one person one vote” (Reform System)

Some would argue that the large sums donated by wealthy individuals gives them so much influence that it undermines a key part of democracy - “one person one vote”

Potentially can swing the hand of an election

E.g. Study from Warwick Uni showed 104 donors donated over £45mil in 2019 alone

Party Funding ~ Donations don’t swing the election (Current System)

Many would say that donations cannot sway the election to such a degree that it undermines democracy

Party donations almost always reflect popularity, one could argue that parties don’t win because they receive donations but rather receive donations because they are winning.

E.g. 9mil surge in donations for Labour in two months before election only reflected opinion polls

Only serve to emphasise the popularity of parties amongst the public

Rights ~ Types of Rights defined

Natural Rights - Rights derived from human nature, universal as they apply to all people, and don’t derive from the laws of a specific society. Often simply referred to as Human Rights

Civil Rights - Based on a society’s customs, laws, and parliamentary statutes. Conferred upon citizens of a particular state

Individual Rights - Belong to an individual person, regardless of what societal group you belong to

Collective Rights - Belong to a group in society or society as a whole. Collective rights in UK are protected through Equality Act 2010

Rights ~ Parliamentary Sovereignty (Unprotected)

Sovereignty = Pt can change the law with just an act of pt, revoking or changing how our rights are protected

Constitution is uncodified and therefore flexible, leaving our rights unable to be protected securely

Acts of pt are enshrined into law, so judges must uphold them otherwise they fail their role of upholding law.

E.g. 2022 Nationality and Borders Act - Removed Shamima Begum’s citizenship, deeming her a “significant threat to national security” leaving her stateless

Rights ~ MPs Constituents’ Grievances (Protected)

MPs can use the parliamentary function of debate (PMQs) to highlight their constituents’ grievances, with some able to sway parliamentary opinion on a certain issue.

E.g. MP Chris Mullin’s consistent campaign criticising the unlawful imprisonment of the “Birmingham Six”, in pt and media eventually led to a change of heart and their release

Despite Mullin example, most would say that MPs aren’t overly connected to their constituents and lack the ability to sway the position of other MPs, especially if governing party has a large majority

Rights ~ ECHR is codified (Protected)

Institutions such as the ECHR can challenge governing legislation, and is an independent body of any government or nation

Human Rights are codified in the convention

E.g. Rwanda Plan - Last minute rejections by ECHR blocked the deportations based on the migrants’ individual cases.

Adds an extra layer of protection beyond simply government and parliament

Rights ~ ECHR verdicts not legally binding (Unprotected)

Despite the ECHR’s benefits, it lacks legal sovereignty over a nation, in the UK’s case it cannot undermine Pt’s sovereignty

E.g. 2010 ruling that blanket ban on prisoner voting was unlawful - Govt simply ignored the ruling as public opinion wasn’t adding pressure, and no action has been taken on the issue since

ECHR has the resources to protect our rights but not the authority

Rights ~ Public, media and PGs (Protected)

Can potentially influence govt to reconsider issues regarding human rights, as parliamentary sovereignty can of course only be retained through a content electorate

Can reflect changing public opinions on contentious issues such as Abortion or Homosexuality.

E.g. 2014 Coalition Govt introduced same-sex marriage despite having no mention in CON manifesto

Rights ~ Media, Public and PGs (Unprotected)

Whilst these groups can influence the govt to protect and grant new rights, they can also do the opposite

E.g. Increasingly hostile stance on immigration - Migration Watch has been campaigning for lower immigration since 2001

Conservatism ~ Pragmatism

Decisions should be made based on practical experience and what has worked in the past, rejecting theory or ideology (dogma)

Prefer an evolutionary approach to governing over a revolutionary approach

TRAD ~ Deeply Pragmatic

ONC ~ Support gradual reform to avoid unrest and maintain social cohesion

NR ~ Reject pragmatism in favour of strong ideological commitments (e.g. neoliberal economics

Conservatism ~ Tradition

Accumulated wisdom of past generations, customs, and institutions

Provides stability and a sense of identity

Provides continuity and guidance in uncertain times

TRAD ~ Strong emphasis on tradition: authority and continuity

ONC ~ Supports it as a unifying force, maintaining social hierarchy

NR ~ Values some traditional institutions, especially moral ones (Nuke Fam) (Anti-Permissiveness), but not so much in economics

Conservatism ~ Human Imperfection

Humans are naturally flawed, limited in capacity to act rationally

People therefore crave order, security and authority

People are selfish & sinful, requiring guidance from authority, as we cannot fully understand the world’s complexities

Religious principles such as of altruism and compassion help to curb inherant human principles

TRAD ~ Central belief

ONC ~ Believe we require guidance through paternalism

NR ~ Sees us as more capable economic agents, but not rational morally

Conservatism ~ Organic Society

Society is independent and naturally hierarchical

The individual is part of a greater whole

State + society aren’t artificial constructs but rather emerge naturally (Human Nature)

Society is like a plant - growing in a way that can never be wholly predicted or controlled

Change to conserve - change should only be to retain the natural order in society

TRAD + ONC ~ Support and enshrine concept

NR ~ More libertarian individualistic beliefs that empower the individual

Conservatism ~ Paternalism

Acknowledgement of society’s hierarchy and that those in power have a role to provide for those who can’t help themselves

TRAD ~ Authoritarian Paternalism - the State makes decisions for people’s own good

ONC ~ Benevolent Paternalism - The powerful and wealthy have a duty to support the poor (Noblesse Oblige)

NR ~ Rejects paternalism - argue it creates dependency and undermines individual responsibility

Conservatism ~ Libertarianism

Emphasis of freedom, autonomy, and minimal state interference - particularly in the economy

TRAD ~ Prefer state intervention to maintain order

ONC ~ Supports a mixed economy and welfare, rejecting economic libertarianism (Keynesian Economics)

NR ~ Fully embraces libertarianism in economic policy (Laissez-Faire Capitalism)

Atomism - society is made up of self-interested, autonomous individuals

Conservatism ~ Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

Tradtional - called for almost total obedience to an absolute govt and large state

Human imperfection - left to their own devices, people would devolve into chaos, only a strong obeyed state “Leviathan” can balance this human innateness

Sacrificing liberty for social order is desirable

Without law and order there exists “a war of all against all”

Conservatism ~ Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

Traditional

Rejects abstract principles in favour of the lessons of the past

Empiricism - criticised the French Revolution for ignoring lessons of the past, arguing that the introduction of unestablished principles would lead to chaos or tyranny

Organic Society - tradition represented the passing down between generations of the accumulated and tested wisdom of the past

Change to conserve - important to protect society from ideological liberalism and socialism

Conservatism ~ Michael Oakshott (1901-1990)

One Nation

Human Imperfection - we are fallible and limited in understanding and thus require guidance

Pragmatism - Rejection of ideological, dogmatic policies - advocating for gradual evolution of the state to oppose radical change

Believed theories like socialism and liberalism are too rigid for a complex and unpredictable world

The State is like a “ship at sea, bound for no port, but only concerned with staying afloat”

Conservatism ~ Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

Foundational thinker in New Right

Objectivism - promotes rational self-interest, reason, and individualism as moral virtues

Freedom - Strong supporter of free-market capitalism, minimal state interference

Believed the role of govt should be limited just to protecting individual rights (defense, law, order)

Conservatism ~ Robert Nozick (1938 - 2002)

Libertarian philosopher

Libertarianism - rooted in individual liberty, opposed to taxation for redistribution

Self-ownership - everyone owns themselves (bodies, abilities, labour) - we cannot be used as a mean to someone else’s end

Minimal state - limited to protecting rights, enforcing constructs and ensuring justice

Liberalism ~ Individualism

Individual has responsibility for their own actions, and are rational

Therefore our right to make our own decisions should be protected.

Individual = end in itself rather than a means to an end

The state should not intervene of harm the individual, reject paternalism or state-intervention

Believe every individual has the ability to achieve their own success in society - meritocracy

Liberalism ~ Freedom

Individuals have a right to freedom up until that freedom permits them to cause harm to others - The Harm Principle

The State’s role should solely encompass ensuring our own individual liberty

A capitalist system is the best way to ensure freedom of choice and expression

Liberalism ~ The State

The State is a “necessary evil”

We should restrict the power of the State to ensure individual liberty.

Reject paternalism as it doesn’t consider individuals as rational

State should be limited through constitutional govt, an independent judiciary, and supporting the rule of law.

Liberalism ~ Human Nature

Classical - Humans are sufficiently moral and capable that ehy need only negative liberty if they are to self actualise

Negative liberty - Free to act as you wish as long as you don’t infringe on the rights of other

Self-actualise - the process of realising and fulfulling one’s potential

Modern - humans are moral and capable but unequal social structures mean that they need both negative and positive liberty

Positive liberty - freedom to achieve one’s potential and act on one’s free will, not just the absence of interference

Liberalism ~ Society

Individuals should be trusted to enjoy complete liberty as long as they do not use their freedom to inflict harm on others

Individual liberty thus comes with responsibilities

Classical - Formal equality is sufficient for allowing all individuals to thrive in society

Modern - Society should be based on the principle of equality of opportunity

The State should legislate to protect the rights of women

Any inequalities should be arranged so that they give the least advantage

Liberalism ~ Economy

Capitalism is the most effective and efficient economic system

Classical - Laissez-Faire capitalism is best for preserving individual liberty

Wealth and property are created by individuals

Taxation should be kept to a minimum to avoid infringing on the natural right to property

Modern - Wealth and property are created by collectives

Keynesian economics and redistributive taxation are required to ensure equality of opportunity

Liberalism ~ John Locke (1632-1704)

Classical Liberal

Society, state and govt are based on a voluntary, theoretical contract - right to overthrow govt

Social Contract Theory - we expend some of our liberties for the protection of govt, judiciary etc

Consenting to govt is in our best interest

Limited govt should protect “life, liberty, estate”

Argue that the state of nature “would be peaceful”

Liberalism ~ Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797)

Classical Liberal

Supporter of meritocracy, believing that intellect should govern

Argued women are taught to be subordinate and are restricted from self-actualising, therefore require equal access to education

Equality of Opportunity accessed through education

Liberalism ~ John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)

Classical Liberal

Harm Principle - Liberty should only be curbed when it begins to harm others

Tolerance - The popularity of a view does not define its correctedness

Freedom of thought and religion

Liberalism ~ John Rawls (1921-2002)

Modern Liberal

Raised in abject poverty

Everyone should be guaranteed a life worth living

Those who benefit from injustice cannot think of what it is like - Veil of Ignorance

Society cannot be equal if we would not be fully content living in any part of it

Liberalism ~ Betty Friedan (1921-2006)

Modern Liberal

Society continues to undermine the rights of women, being housewives mean women lose the right to self-actualise and act as individuals

There must be a greater ideal of life than just being at home

Socialism ~ Human Nature

Upbeat, optimistic view

Progressive - human nature can change

Human Nature has been diluted by time and the circumstance of capitalism - corrupts us - remove it and humans become happier and more fulfilled

Humans naturally seek: solidarity, fraternity, comradeship

Socialism ~ Society

We are products of (shaped by) the society we are born into

We are based on a society → Society is based on economics - capitalism

Capitalism creates the class-based society which corrupts our human nature

Industrial-revolution led to socioeconomic classes

Socialism emphasises a limiting of inequality and a need for social justice

Class defines our potential and life choices

Class-inequality grants some individuals with greater opportunity to exploit their potential

Socialism ~ State

Equality, fraternity and collectivism require a strong state

Strong state needed to bring about socialist goals of equality, redistribution and social justice

State must not be monarchial, theo- or aristocratic

Must be democratic with a redistribution of political and economic power

Most socialists believe the state is key in delivering the wanted outcomes

Marxists - state will wither away at the end of history

3rd Way - Sceptical of the state

Socialism ~ Economy

Economic inequality is based on inequality between the classes

Removing inequality requires tackling the economic structure - more common ownership, workers’ rights, redistribution of wealth

Laissez-faire capitalism leads to increased unfairness and social justice

Collectivism - focus on the needs of society of a few individuals

Society becomes more fraternal and cooperative = more efficient economy

Fundamentalists - Capitalism must be abolished to prevent exploitation, alienation, oppression

Revisionists - Capitalism itself can be reformed and worked with to bring about socialist principles

Socialism ~ Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels

Classical Marxist

Social class is essential to socialism

Historical Materialism - the economic system has an influence on all aspects of society, along with social factors can explain the development of a society

Dialectical Change - Development is the result of two forces that oppose each other - Class conflict

The cycle with only change when communism is brought on at the end of history (history = the cycle of dialectical change)

Revolution is inevitable when the proletariat gain class-consciousness and conflict between them and the bourgeoisie intensifies

Human will achieve full potential in a communist society where production and leisure is balanced as production is no longer solely for profit.

Socialism ~ Beatrice Webb (1858-1943)

Democratic Socialist

Inevitability of Gradualness - Socialism will be established successfully and quickly through democratic methods by demonstrating the benefits to the working classes through logical arguments

Growth of state power is necessary to socialism

Opposed revolution and instead claims the state would expand as more services are created and maintained

Socialism ~ Rosa Luxemburg (1871-1919)

Revolutionary Socialist

Rejected gradualism - not possible in a system that actively oppresses the working classes

Reforms would not fully remove the capitalist system

A proletarian revolution is key in overthrowing capitalism

Class consciousness would naturally come about through the growing struggle to reform the system by the working class - key in starting the revolution

Socialism ~ Anthony Crosland (1918-1977)

Revisionist - Social Democrat

The capitalist system has changed and Marx’s argument that oppression of working class will bring on the revolution no longer applies in the 20th Century

The elite had become socialist managers who care about the happiness of their workers

Capitalism has improves the living standards of both classes

Democratic govt could use state powers to manage the economy in a way that creates economic growth, providing the govt with greater funds to bring about socialist principles through democratic reform

Anthony Giddens (b. 1938)

Third Way

Rejection of state intervention in the economy

Free market = most efficient system, emphasising equality of opportunity

Places importance on responsibility and community over class conflict

Role of state is to invest in infrastructure and education, not to intervene in the economy

State should invest in infrastructure to provide job opportunities - encouraging people to gain employment rather than live off state benefits