Understand Politics
Page 14
NGOs may be a component of social movements. Examples of social movements include the peace movement, the women’s movement, the environmental movement, the animal rights movement and the anti-capitalist movement.
Social movements tend to be loosely organized in comparison to pressure groups and NGOs and their focus of concern is often broader. Rather than concentrate on one specific policy area, their prime concern is to instil new moral values within society to underpin the reforms they wish to promote. This may bring them into conflict with public authorities or with other organizations that oppose their views. They may, however, embrace the activities of pressure groups and NGOs whose specific aims are compatible with this overall objective. We would, for example, place the British Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament under the umbrella of the peace movement.
Social movements typically operate outside mainstream political institutions and their tactics are thus dominated by non-conventional forms of political activity. This is frequently carried out on an international stage rather than being confined to any particular country.
The environmental movement is an important example of a contemporary social movement. It has succeeded in bringing together a range of groups engaged in counter-cultural protest (such as new age travellers) and those opposed to hunting, live animal exports, motorway construction and pollution. These seemingly disparate, single-issue bodies are united by a social vision that rejects the culture of advanced capitalist society. All stand opposed to what they view as an alliance of developers, business, the construction industry and government. They have utilized tactics of protest and direct action to project an alternative vision to a modern industrial society which emphasizes environmental considerations over the pursuit of wealth and profit. All are concerned with man’s damage to the planet and are opposed to materialism and consumerism.
Question
Conduct your own study of pressure groups by listing four examples and indicating the goals which these organizations seek to further.
The role of pressure groups
Pressure groups seek to influence policy makers. Their actions are thus directed at politicians, civil servants and, in some cases, the general public. The complex and lengthy nature of the policy-making process provides wide scope for group activity.
A major concern of pressure groups is to persuade policy makers to consider their views and then to act upon them. This involves inducing policy makers either to adopt a course of action which they did not initially intend to embark upon or to abandon a measure which they had originally decided to introduce. If a group succeeds in getting its views acted upon, it may also become involved in further stages of the policy-making process. These include participating in the formulation of policy to achieve the objective(s) which the group successfully placed on the political agenda. Pressure groups may also be concerned with the implementation of that policy and with monitoring it to ensure that the desired aims are achieved.
* * *
Pressure groups and the private sector
Our discussion of pressure groups is primarily concerned with their influence on central government policy making. However, pressure groups frequently direct their activities towards alternative targets, such as the practices adopted by commercial organizations. Indeed, a number of Greenpeace activists see business rather than politics as the best arena within which to further environmental aims.
One example of this was the activity mounted in 1995 by Greenpeace against the decision by the Shell Oil Company to sink a disused oil rig, Brent Spar, in the North Atlantic. Adverse publicity coupled with boycotts against Shell’s products organized by other environmental groups resulted in the company’s agreeing to examine alternative ways of disposing of its unwanted property.
* * *
Political parties and pressure groups
* * *
Insight
Unlike political parties, pressure groups do not seek to control all aspects of government policy but only those areas that are of interest to them.
* * *
The key words for us to consider here are ‘control’ and ‘influence’.
Political parties normally seek control over the policy-making process. They may achieve this through their own efforts or in combination with other political parties. They contest elections in the hope of securing power so that they can carry out the policies contained in their election manifestos. Such policies cover all aspects of public affairs and the party seeks to exercise control over a wide range of issues.
Pressure groups, however, wish to influence those who control the policy-making process. They do not normally have an interest in the overall work of government but only in those aspects of its operations which are of concern to the group and its membership. In order to pursue their aims, groups usually possess a degree of autonomy from both government and political parties. Thus, while a pressure group seeks to exert influence over a relatively narrow aspect of policy making, a political party wishes to control the overall direction of public affairs.
One further distinction between political parties and pressure groups concerns the manner in which they seek to cultivate support. Political parties concentrate their activities on the general public, hoping to convince voters to support them in election contests. Although campaigns directed at the public may form one aspect of pressure group campaigning, the tactics at their disposal are more diverse. Influence may be sought at all levels of the decision-making process.
Classification of pressure groups
* * *
Insight
There are two main types of pressure group – sectional groups that promote the self-interest of their members, and promotional groups that advocate changes they regard as beneficial to society regardless of whether their members will directly gain from them.
* * *
Various ways may be adopted to classify the pressure groups which are to be found within liberal democratic political systems. One method is to differentiate according to the relationship which exists between the objective put forward by the group and its membership. This provides us with two broad categories into which groups might be placed.
SECTIONAL GROUPS
These are groups in which the members have a vested interest in the success of their organization. They stand to benefit materially if the aims of the group are adopted by policy makers. Such organizations are sometimes referred to as ‘interest’ or ‘economic’ groups. The membership of sectional groups tends to be narrow and restrictive, drawn from people with similar backgrounds. In the UK, examples include employers’ associations (such as the Confederation of British Industry), professional bodies (such as the British Medical Association) and labour organizations (such as the Transport and General Workers’ Union). American examples include the American Bar Association and the American Medical Association.
PROMOTIONAL (OR CAUSE) GROUPS
These are organizations in which the members are united in support of a cause which does not necessarily benefit them materially. They tend to view the work of the group as a moral concern and their aim is to change social attitudes and values. The aims of promotional groups may be designed to benefit specific groups (especially minorities, whose needs are often ignored by policy makers) or to be directed at an issue affecting society as a whole. Membership of promotional groups is open to all who share their objectives: members are typically drawn from a wide range of social or occupational backgrounds and are united solely by their common support for the cause advocated by the organization.
* * *
Episodic groups
Pressure group activity is not confined to organizations which are specifically established to advance an interest or a cause. It may also be performed by bodies whose existence is concerned with other functions but which may, on occasion, act in the capacity of a pressure group and seek to exert influence within the policy-making process. The term ‘episodic groups’ is sometimes used to refer to groups which function
in this way.
The Catholic Church in Ireland is an example of a body which sometimes acts as a pressure group. The Roman Catholic bishops played a prominent role in the 1995 referendum campaign opposing a change in the Irish Constitution to permit divorce.
In Britain, chief constables and senior members of the judiciary have sometimes made public pronouncements designed to influence the approach adopted by policy makers to the operations of the criminal justice system, and in America the Pentagon sometimes performs a role akin to that of a pressure group on behalf of the military establishment.
* * *
Questions
With reference to your own study of pressure groups, identify whether the groups you have selected for study are cause or interest groups.
Explain how you have reached your conclusions regarding classification.
The activities of pressure groups
* * *
Insight
Pressure groups may seek to directly influence the executive, legislative or judicial branches of government or they may pitch their appeal to the general public hoping that the force of public opinion will be brought to bear on policy makers and induce them to adopt the demands put forward by the group.
* * *
Pressure groups operate throughout the machinery of government. In this section we examine the main areas which form the focus of group activity.
THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT
This consists of both ministers and civil servants. Some pressure groups have the ability to liaise constantly with, and be consulted by, these key policy makers.
The relationship between groups and the executive branch of government may be constructed in a number of ways. Some have a permanent relationship with government departments. Members representing a group may be appointed to joint advisory committees, which are mechanisms through which the concerns of a pressure group can be made known to the relevant government department. In France, the access of some groups to government departments is institutionalized through advisory councils. These are composed of representatives of interest groups, technicians and prominent personalities appointed by the government and are attached to individual ministries. Alternatively, some pressure groups enjoy regular access to civil servants and they may also be involved in discussions on appointments to bodies which are responsible to a department. In some countries, contact is secured through the ‘old boy’ network, in which former ministers or civil servants secure jobs in organizations which may benefit from the contacts in government possessed by such former public officials.
Groups in this position are termed ‘insider’ groups. This denotes the close relationship and regular consultation which some groups enjoy with key members of the policy-making process. It is a desirable position to occupy in a country such as the UK where political power is centralized in the executive branch of government, although it is of equal importance in some federal countries such as Australia. The relationship between the UK National Farmers’ Union and the former Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food was an example of such an ‘insider’ relationship.
Other groups may secure influence through their relationship with the political party that forms the government. This was the case in the UK between 1964 and 1970 when leading trade unionists were frequently invited to Downing Street to discuss industrial affairs over ‘beer and sandwiches’. This politically fashioned link with the ministerial component of the executive is not permanent and may alter when the government changes. This was the case in the UK after 1979 when Conservative administrations adopted a more hostile attitude to the trade unions than had been the case when Labour governments were in power.
THE LEGISLATURE
There are a number of ways whereby pressure groups may seek to exert influence over the legislature. A major mechanism is that of lobbying. This describes communication between someone other than a citizen acting on his or her own behalf and a government policy maker with the intention of influencing the latter’s decisions.
Lobbying was originally directed exclusively at legislators but has subsequently extended to the executive branch where politicians and bureaucrats are made the subject of this activity. Its aim is to ensure that lawmakers are fully briefed and are thus in a position to advance the interests of the pressure group when issues which are relevant to it come before the legislature for discussion or resolution. The importance attached to this activity is much influenced by the independence of action which legislatures possess. Pressure groups may devote relatively little attention to such bodies if they believe them to be dominated by the executive branch of government.
Much lobbying is carried out by pressure groups. Some employ full-time lobbyists to promote their interests while others hire lobbyists on a temporary basis when they wish to advance, or secure the defeat of, legislation that is relevant to their interests. The influence that they are able to exert over policy makers is derived from their being regarded as an important source of information. In the United Kingdom parliamentary lobbyists (or parliamentary consultants) provide political advice and analysis which may be sought by commercial companies or by other governmental organizations. The most influential lobbyists are those who have established regular contacts in the legislative or executive branches of government and in this sense they act as a conduit to power.
* * *
Iron triangles
In America, some pressure groups enjoy considerable power from the relationship that they have constructed with both the executive and legislative branches of government.
The term ‘iron triangle’ has been used to describe the close links (governed by ties of interdependent self-interest) that exist between an interest group, the government department or agency concerned with the interests espoused by that organization and the Congressional committee charged with responsibility for that policy area. Each element of the ‘triangle’ provides services, information or policy for the others.
This arrangement provides some groups with a powerful position from which its interests can be advanced. In 1997 a representative of an American consumer group alleged that the Food and Drugs Administration (which regulated the American food industry) was so closely associated with the biotech/pharmaceutical/agri-business complex that it could be described as their Washington branch office. Although a close working relationship between an agency and groups representing industries does not necessarily constitute improper influence, iron triangles have also been argued to be responsible for decentralizing and fragmenting the policy-making process to the detriment of the exercise of central control by the executive and legislative branches of government. In more recent years, the autonomy of such ‘sub-governments’ has been challenged by alternative centres of power (such as issue networks).
* * *
Lobbying seeks to influence the content of public policy and also to manipulate public opinion. It is conducted by a variety of activities, ranging from personal approaches to policy makers to bribery.
In America lobbying is big business. In 2005 over 32,000 lobbyists were registered in Washington DC, three times the number employed in 1995. The expenditure on lobbying (especially by business and commercial interests) has grown from around $800 million in 1996 to $2.2 billion in 2005, and this activity provides a lucrative form of employment for former members of Congress. In 2005 a report by the organization Public Citizen estimated that since 1998 43 per cent of the 198 members of Congress who had left government for private life were registered to lobby.
Pressure groups may voice their concerns to the legislature through ways other than lobbying. In the Fourth French Republic (1946–58) some groups such as the trade unions and farmers’ associations enjoyed permanent membership of specialized legislative standing committees. In both the UK and America, investigations conducted by the legislature provide a mechanism for the articulation of group interests, while in Germany the committee system utilized by the Bundestag secures pressure group influence over legis
lation.
THE JUDICIARY
Pressure groups may turn to the courts to secure the adoption of their aims, usually by challenging the legality of legislation. This approach was crucial to the American civil rights movement. Organizations such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People used this mechanism in their fight against segregation practised by a number of the southern states. A landmark in education was reached in 1954 when the Supreme Court ruled (in the case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka) that segregation in schools was unconstitutional and thus illegal throughout the entire country. In more recent years, American consumer and environmental groups have turned to the courts to advance their concerns.