PRESSURE GROUPS

Conventionally, political parties are the bodies which are regarded as providing the mechanism through which people’s interests are represented in the political system. They also function as a means of political communication, in that individuals can express their own views to politicians by becoming members of political parties and can represent their party’s viewpoint to others in the community.

Pressure groups can be seen as providing an additional form of representation within the political system and an additional channel of political communication.

The difference between political parties and pressure groups is as follows:

> Political parties are aggregates of interests, organised on a territorial basis. Their main aim is to attain political power in central and local government.

> Pressure groups are based on interests or issues and causes and are organised on a functional basis. Their main aim is to influence the decisions of those who have political power, but not to seek it for themselves.

With the smaller political parties - for example, the Green Party - which have little likelihood of attaining any political power, the distinction is somewhat blurred as they may act very much like pressure groups for much of the time.

Pressure groups are sometimes referred to as interest groups or lobbies.

TYPES OF PRESSURE GROUP

SECTIONAL GROUPS

Sectional groups are also known as PROTECTIVE, DEFENSIVE or INTEREST groups. They represent and defend the interests of particular sections of society - often economic interests, but also consumer and professional interests. Examples include:

> the CBI, the House Builders' Federation, the Engineering Employers' Federation.

> trade unions, the TUC.

> the Consumers' Association, the AA, the RAC.

> the Law Society, the BMA, the RIBA.All of these bodies have other functions - i.e. they do not primarily exist as pressure groups - but they do act as pressure groups when the interests of their members are in some way at stake.


CAUSE GROUPS

Cause groups are also known as PROMOTIONAL groups. These are usually formed for a specific purpose - to promote a particular cause or campaign on a particular issue. In this sense, they have no other function apart from their role as pressure groups. Examples include:

> CND, ASH, Friends of the Earth, Lord's Day Observance Society, the Howard League for Penal Reform, Shelter, Greenpeace, etc.


Inevitably, this neat categorisation does not cover every possible type of pressure group activity. For example, churches are not normally regarded as pressure groups, but they may intervene in the political process on what they regard as important moral issues.

Pressure groups can also be categorised according to their STATUS and METHODS rather than their aims.


INSIDER GROUPS

Insider groups are those which are regarded as legitimate by the government and are consulted on a regular basis.

Insider groups generally have a better chance of influencing policy because they are likely to be consulted in advance - for example when government is considering a policy initiative, when it issues a Green or White Paper, when the legislation is being drafted, etc.

Examples of insider groups include the National Farmers' Union, the CBI, the professional associations and trade associations with detailed knowledge of their area of interest.


OUTSIDER GROUPS

Outsider groups are those which are not closely involved with decision makers and which find it more difficult to get their voices heard.

They are more likely to be protest groups, which use campaigning methods to influence public opinion and to draw attention to their arguments. They are, however, less likely to influence policy because they do not usually become involved in the debate until government has already decided its position.

Examples of outsider groups include CND, the Motor Cycle Action Group, the various animal welfare protest groups, etc.

There is some overlap with the sectional/cause division of pressure groups - many sectional groups are insiders; many cause groups are outsiders. But there are exceptions - trade unions were regarded as outsiders by the Conservative government, while cause groups such as the Council for the Protection of Rural England can have insider status.

PRESSURE GROUP METHODS

Pressure groups may try to influence decision makers directly - for example, ministers and civil servants; the may try to influence opinion formers - for example, MPs and the media; or they may try to influence public opinion.

Which route they take will depend on a number of factors, including:

> the resources available to them

> whether or not they are an insider or outsider group.

Their tactics will vary according to what they are trying to achieve at any particular time.


Ministers and civil servants

Pressure groups are likely to be at their most effective when policies are being drafted, are at their discussion stage or are in a detailed implementation stage. Therefore insider groups which have contacts with senior civil servants and ministers will be able to have a major input into new legislation.

The contacts may be formal - involving official discussions with ministers and detailed negotiation with civil servants - or more informal, involving an exchange of views and opinions. These contacts may be enhanced by 'social' connections, such as public school or university friendships, trade union relationships, etc.

It is not only the groups which gain from this process: the government gains also, by finding out useful information which would not otherwise be available to it and by gaining cooperation from organisations which may be required to put new measures into operation.

The implementation stage of legislation offers a further opportunity for pressure groups to exert influence. This is mainly concerned with the details, but much legislation does not become operative until secondary legislation (in the form of statutory instruments) is issued by the appropriate minister, and it is possible for groups to enter into detailed negotiations on points of concern to their members or even to delay for a considerable period.


Members of Parliament

This is one of the biggest and most rapidly growing areas of pressure group activity. In recent years there has been a significant increase in the number of professional lobbyists, who will work on behalf of pressure groups or commercial organisations in influencing the views of MPs. And pressure groups have traditionally aimed much of their effort at MPs and members of the House of Lords to seek a voice for their points of view.

The methods used to influence MPs include the following:

> paid consultancy posts for MPs to represent a particular commercial interest in Parliament - for example, tobacco companies, drug companies, the drinks industry

> appointments to boards of companies

> detailed briefings on issues relevant to the group, provision of information, even ready-made speeches

> "expense account" perks - meals, trips, etc

> provision of research assistants for MPs

> promotion of Private Member's Bills - some important pieces of legislation have come from Private Member's Bills, including Abortion Law Reform, the abolition of capital punishment, etc

> Select Committees - pressure groups can give evidence to these committees and have an influence on the final report which is delivered to Parliament

> The House of Lords provides an opportunity for pressure groups to secure detailed amendments to legislation. On occasion, the Lords may even reject a piece of legislation, delaying it and forcing the government to think again.


Public opinion

Many pressure groups, especially cause groups which do not have insider status, have to resort to other methods of influencing the decision making process. This can be by influencing public opinion with the intention that, in time, this will in turn influence opinion formers and decision makers.

The methods of influencing public opinion include

> letters to the Press
> Press releases
> public meetings
> petitions
> marches, demonstrations, etc.


Direct action

Direct action may be taken, both as a means to make something happen or (more usually) not happen and to draw the issue to the attention of the public. For example:

> Greenpeace has conducted many actions against whaling ships, nuclear installations, oil rigs, etc

> animal rights groups have used extreme violence and intimidation against individuals, companies and property to oppose scientific animal testing

> environmental protesters have attempted to stop the building of new roads and airport runways (Manchester)

> fuel protestors attempted to block motorways and oil refineries to object to increases in fuel prices

> the Countryside Alliance have used high-profile events, including invading the House of Commons chamber, to oppose the ban on fox-hunting

> the “Fathers for Justice” group has used stunts to publicise their cause.

In general, these actions are less effective in achieving their immediate aim than in putting the issue on the political agenda.


The courts

Increasingly, pressure groups have sought to use the courts as a means of challenging the decisions of the executive. For example:

> the Countryside Alliance challenged the fox-hunting ban in the High Court and Court of Appeal

> the Law Lords ruled the government’s detention of foreign terror suspects without trial was unlawful

The European Court of Human Rights has also proved to be very useful to pressure groups, both in reversing decisions of the executive, in embarrassing the government and in enforcing changes in policy or practice.

> the McLibel Two won a case against the government on the grounds that they had not had a fair trial because of the operation of the libel laws

> the Countryside Alliance is taking a case to the ECHR arguing that their human rights have been infringed because hunting is banned.

FACTORS AFFECTING PRESSURE GROUP SUCCESS

It is often difficult to measure the success or otherwise of pressure groups. For some cause groups, the problem of measurement is straightforward – either nuclear weapons are or are not banned, the Newbury by-pass is or is not built – but for most groups, especially sectional groups, the situation is not so clear-cut.

Most pressure groups have a variety of goals and make a variety of compromises as part of their on-going negotiations and campaigning. For some groups, success may just be ensuring that rival groups do not achieve some of their objectives.


Nature of the pressure group

Pressure groups vary enormously in size, composition, knowledge and status:

> Size - in general, the bigger and more representative the group, the more influence it is likely to have.

> Social composition - those groups with membership drawn from those with public school and Oxbridge backgrounds are likely to have very good contacts within the decision making elite. § Knowledge - those groups with a great deal of information who can advise and inform decision makers are more likely to attain insider status.

> Status - the more important a group is in society - for example, those with high professional standing – the more likely the government is to take notice of its opinions.


Relationship to political parties

A pressure group with a close relationship to a political party may use it to its advantage. But this is a two-edged weapon - if the opposing party is in power, the group's influence is likely to decline sharply. The trade unions found this between 1979 and 1997. A better tactic might be to play one party off against another.


Resources

A group's resources include

> its financial resources - clearly the greater they are, the more a group is able to pay staff, produce material, advertise, lobby etc.

> its ability to employ full time staff - a group cannot be successful (except perhaps briefly) without staff who can research their case, negotiate with civil servants and others, and present an argument to the media, the public and decision makers.

> the commitment and skill of its members - this can, to some extent, compensate for lack of other resources; for example, the efforts of their members have been largely responsible for ensuring the high profile of groups such as Amnesty International, Greenpeace, etc.

> its representativeness - it is especially important for a sectional group which claims to speak for a particular section of the population that a high proportion of the eligible membership actually belong to it and/or support its stand. Similarly, the bigger the membership of a cause group, the more it is able to claim it is speaking for a substantial part of public opinion.


Political culture

This is the extent to which pressure group activity is regarded as legitimate. In Britain, it is generally accepted that pressure groups have a role to play in the political process.


Opposing groups

These can cancel each other out - or at least reduce the impact of each other's activities. Obvious examples might be the pro- and anti-abortion campaigns or the pro- and anti-hunting groups.


Attitude of the government

This is the extent to which decision making is open to influence. Under the Conservative government from 1979, particularly under Mrs Thatcher, there was less likelihood of pressure group influence being successful - the government often pressed ahead on its convictions regardless of outside opinion, for example over NHS reform.

The election of the Labour government in May 1997 was seen by many as opening up the political system to greater influence by pressure groups.

In general, governments will be more receptive to pressure on policies which they favour, and from groups which share their basic values. For example, the Institute of Directors gained significant influence during the Conservative years. Governments are also more likely to be open to influence on issues which are peripheral to their main policies rather than central to them.

GROWTH OF PRESSURE GROUPS

Although pressure groups are generally regarded as a modern phenomenon, they have a fairly long history. In the 19th century, for example, the Chartists and the Anti-Corn Law League were very significant pressure groups. However, the main growth of pressure groups has been in the second half of the 20th century.

There are a number of reasons for this:

> the growth in the scale and role of government, for example, through the welfare state, economic intervention, etc. There are now many more reasons and opportunities to influence decision making

> governments themselves have found it useful to consult with appropriate bodies when preparing new legislation, etc.

> it has been argued that political parties have become less effective and less representative; they have failed to represent adequately all of the many different interests in society - pressure groups have filled that gap

> the combination of economic, social and educational change has created an articulate middle class who are both willing and able to become involved in political and pressure group activity

> there has been a long term trend of declining party membership matched by a growth in the membership of campaigning organisations, noting that many of the individuals who join campaigning organisations find traditional parties unattractive

> the growth of a 'dominant' party system has meant that, to effect change, it has become more necessary to influence decisions within the governing party, rather than waiting for a change of government to bring about the desired change.

HOW PRESSURE GROUPS ARE CHANGING

There have been a number of important changes in relation to pressure group activity during the 1980s and 1990s.


Increase in the number of pressure groups

Although it is difficult to quantify exactly, there is little doubt that the number of pressure groups has increased significantly in the last two decades and the number of people who are members of pressure groups has also increased. Within the overall increase in the number and significance of groups generally, there has been a particular increase in cause groups, especially those connected in some way with the environment.

Reasons suggested for this trend have included:

> increased leisure time, both in terms of the shorter working week and more early retirement, has increased the number of people with time to devote to such activities

> higher educational standards have increased the numbers of people with the organisational skills to contribute to pressure groups.

> changes in gender roles have removed many of the barriers to participation by women in pressure group activity.

> membership of political parties has declined. It has been argued that this reflects the failure of the political parties adequately to reflect the needs of different groups of people in society, and that cause groups offer a more promising route for bringing about political change.

> when most material needs have been met, as they have for many people in the consumer society, then some people become more concerned with wider issues such as the environment.


The end of 'corporatism'

'Corporatism' refers to the close relationship between the government and economic interest groups (trade unions and employers' organisations) in decision making on economic matters. This was specifically rejected by the Thatcher government, and contacts with trade unions virtually ceased in the 1980s, while contacts with the CBI also declined. The new Labour government has begun to develop closer relationships with business, though it is still keeping the unions at arms’ length.


An increase in professional lobbying

Professional lobbyists are people who, usually for a large fee, will act on behalf of companies or organisations by lobbying ministers, civil servants and MPs to get their views and interests known. The numbers of such lobbyists has increased and by the early 90s there were more than forty firms trading as parliamentary consultants.

This practice has raised a number of issues and concerns:

> there has been concern expressed about the purchase of influence by those with the resources to do so.

> this has been counter-balanced somewhat by fact that much lobbying is expensive but ineffective, often focusing on those with relatively little influence.

> the major concern has been about the role of MPs in the professional lobbying business. Many MPs, mostly Conservatives, were paid parliamentary consultants, acting for a variety of organisations or lobbying groups. Some used their positions as MPs to gain information that was commercially valuable to their clients and some even accepted "cash for questions" (and were later disciplined by the House of Commons).

> The Nolan Committee was established to make recommendations on the conduct of MPs. This has now prevented MPs from acting as consultants for lobbyists and requires detailed registration of interests.


Increased importance of Europe

With the creation of the Single European Market in 1992 and the steps towards integration taken with the Maastricht treaty, the most important decisions in many key areas of policy are now taken in Brussels. These include trade policy, competition policy, environmental policy and agricultural policy. Many decisions are now taken by qualified majority votes, so that Britain no longer has a veto in these areas.

As a result, many sectional groups and some cause groups (if they can afford it) have begun to find ways of exerting influence on decisions taken in Brussels. This includes working with Europe-wide organisations looking after their particular area of concern or direct lobbying in Brussels. Some cause groups are also using the European courts to advance their own particular case.

PRESSURE GROUPS AND DEMOCRACY

Some political scientists and politicians have taken the view that pressure groups are non-democratic, or even anti-democratic, in the sense that they intervene in the political process based on electoral accountability. Others take the view that pressure groups actually enhance the democratic process, keeping decision makers and legislators in touch with changing trends in public opinion between elections.

Problems of pressure group activity

> Political representation is based on elections in which every person's vote is of equal value. Pressure groups exist to give greater weight to the views of a particular group - hence undermining the validity of the citizen's vote.

> Democracy is based on the idea that the will of the majority should prevail; if a pressure group is successful, it can be seen as frustrating the wishes of the majority.

> Pressure groups vary enormously in wealth and influence: some are rich and powerful (business organisations, trade unions), others operate on very few resources (for example, the Child Poverty Action Group). And some interests in society are not represented by any pressure groups whatsoever (for example, the unemployed or the homeless).

> It can be argued that some pressure groups are not representative of their members anyway - for example, the AA claims to speak on behalf of motorists, yet there is no mechanism for the AA to find out the opinions of its members, most of whom join simply for the breakdown cover.

Benefits of pressure groups

> The many different interests in society cannot all be encompassed within the two (or three or four) party system. Pressure groups enable sections of society outside of the political parties to have their say.

> Pressure groups can compensate for the inadequacies of the electoral system: geographical representation is supplemented by functional representation.

> Pressure groups enable individuals to participate in the political process at any time, not just every four or five years at elections.

> Pressure groups enable specific interests to be identified and articulated which the political parties may be unwilling or unable to promote.