Pressure groups can provide representation and remedy shortcomings in the representative government, they articulate interests and advance views that are ignored by parties and so in particular can provide a voice for minority groups and issues. They promote debate and discussion enabling new concerns and issues to reach the political agenda thereby facilitating social progress and preventing social stagnation. Consultation with affected groups is surely a rational way to make decisions in a free society enabling intensity of feeling on issues to be gauged.
However there are many problems with pressure groups that could lead us to conclude that they undermine democratic government. Firstly they advance minority interests against those of society as a whole thus distorting the political process; Secondly they entrench political inequality by strengthening the voice of the wealthy and privileged as the rich upper class are better placed to promote their cause. There is also ‘unequal competition’ between business and labour groups the former enjoying control of economic resources, a public status and level of access to government that the latter cannot match.
The idea that influences commensurate with the size of the group is seriously flawed as small, tightly knit associations, for example the BMA often have a degree of influence entirely out of proportion to their democratic weight. The insider-outsider distinction demonstrates that there is no true equality of access. Some groups enjoy privileged respectable relations with government and are often consulted on policy whilst others have top rely on media and public opinion to get government to listen to their views. Neo-pluralism highlights the privileged position that business groups enjoy in the western world, whilst acknowledging that this seriously compromises the claim that such societies are democratic.
‘Insider’ pressure groups work behind closed doors exerting influence through negotiations and are in no way subject to public scrutiny. This makes the policy process closed and more secret so that it is difficult to know whether it is actually the groups that are running government. With reference to accountability Professor Finer said that ‘through this secrecy’ lobbies became ‘faceless, unidentifiable; in brief, anonymous.
Pressure groups can make society ungovernable by blocking government initiatives and making policy unworkable. There are some areas where policy implementation would be impossible without co-operation and this power of veto cannot support democratic government if the policy has been introduced by government and approved by parliment. All of whom have been elected as legitimate representatives of the people of Britain.
The strength of single-issue pressure groups raises a number of questions about democracy. Too much focus on one issue pushes others from the agenda, which can lead to debate that dominates politics, focusing attention on one issues to the detriment of others which could be as important.
Democracy is not about responding to the demands of any one groups but arriving at a balanced judgement, which takes account of all perspectives to make a decision that is best for society as a whole. Whilst I acknowledge the valuable expertise of they have to offer and the representation they provide I feel that due to the unavoidable inequality of access and influence, the fact that they are anti-parlimentary democracy and are totally unaccountable to the public that they serve only to inhibit the process of democratic government.
