0
Outsider pressure groups have none of the advantages of insider groups. They cannot expect to be consulted during the policy-making process, nor can they expect to gain access to ministers and civil servants. Rather, they have to work outside the governmental decision making process and, therefore, have fewer opportunities to determine the direction of policy. In the 1980s, CND was excluded from any consultation process with the government because its aim was unacceptable to the Conservative government of the time. An extreme example of an outsider group is the Irish Republican Army (IRA), which seeks a united Ireland but has been considered an illegitimate organisation by the British government. It was considered anti-constitutional because its violent indirect method - terrorism - was unacceptable in a democratic country. Outsider groups adopt different strategies and can be further subdivided in to two categories. The first are outsider groups aiming for insider status. They do this by waiting for a different political climate, such as a change in government. If such a change materialises, they might immediately gain insider status. Outsider groups hoping for a change in political climate often work closely with the opposition in Parliament and, generally, their strategy is to abide by the 'rules of the game'. Alternatively, groups seeking insider status may be new groups with little experience, resources and expertise. Decision makers might support their aims but do not consult them because they are thought to have little to offer. In addition there is a category of outsider groups that do not aim for insider status because they are ideologically opposed to the political system. By definition, such groups have no interest in gaining access to governmental decision makers.
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Blake
Maxine
ViviAdd your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why do some groups use insider methods while other groups use outsider methods?
some groups do not want insider status as they may oppose govt all together or feel they will have to compromise their beliefs e.g ALF. however some groups are unable to gain insider groups this could be because of the methods they practice or their beliefs. governments generally do not like to be associated with controversial groups for instance groups associated with euthanasia. other groups may be unable to gain insider groups because their beliefs do not coincide with the beliefs of the government, this means that a groups status may change depending on simply who is government. so in answer to your question some groups choose outsider methods simply because of their beliefs and others may have to use outsider methods such as consulting opposition parties as they are unable to become recognised as legitimate by the government.
How are pressure groups unrepresentative?
crocidiles
TO what extent have pressure groups become more important in recent years?
It could be argued that pressure groups have become more important in recent years. Membership to pressure groups, and the amount of them, has increased significantly. This has occured at a time where party membership has declined. Another increase in activity has been seen with the advent of the human rights act, which allowed the campaign group liberty to exert a high degree of influence. In the modern era, it is easier for pressure groups to broadcast their aims to the eneral public. They can therefore gain support quickly via cyberactivism, and co-ordinate protests easily on national and international scales. Supportin this is the fact that over 95% of pressure groups have a website. Politicians have often recognised the importance of outsider pressure groups, and sided with them for personal gain. Hazel Blears, for example, sided with a group tryin to ensure her local maternity unit remained open, whilst simultaneously supporting the government that tried to close it. On the contrary, despite the increase in membership, pressure groups fail to wield any more power than they have in the past. The anti war demonstrators failed to influence parliament despite their large size. The recent success of the Gurkha Justice Campaign achieved its aims only with extremely significant support, such as high public sympathy, a high profile celebrity and an extensive media campaign. Furthermore, insider pressure groups continue to dominate influence on policy. Groups which are practically unheard of such as The Howard League have insider status despite a low membership. Minorities are seldom represented, as they are usually silenced under the weight of large, wealthy groups like the CBI. Overall, there are a balanced rane of arguments to suggest that whilst pressure groups have become more popular, their importance and ability to influence policy has remained stagnant.
Who among the following talks of pseudo pressure groups?
duverger
Why are some pressure groups more influential than others?
IntroductionA pressure group is an organization whose members seek to influence policies of public bodies or employers. They seek to do so, either to protect interests of members (e.g. Trade Unions, NUT) or promote a cause (e.g. Greenpeace or RSPCA). Not all pressure groups are as successful as others, and there are many reasons for this.One of the most important factors affecting the success of a pressure group is what constitutes success? There are varying degrees of success, dependent on the pressure group involved, ranging from a change in legislation to more localised change. For example, a pressure group campaigning against a local bypass, does not necessarily want legislation banning all bypasses. As a result the measure of the groups success would be the prevention of the bypass being built. However, there are certain areas which will affect the success of pressure groups.Relationship with decision making bodiesOne important area which determines pressure group success is the relationship with the government, or relevant authority (e.g. local council or European Union). Insider pressure groups (such as the BMA, or Police Federation), or pressure groups with regular contact within decision making bodies, are more likely to be able to directly influence policy. Insider pressure groups are often consulted on legislation in their 'area'. They therefore have a chance to influence legislation and 'steer' it in a direction supported by the group. Outsider pressure groups (such as the ALF and CND) are unlikely to be able to take advantage of this influence of legislation since there are generally not involved within legislative procedures. This is often due to 'unreasonable' demands or violent/illegal methods of protest.Relationship with the Media/PublicThe pressure groups relationship with the media can greatly affect the success of a pressure group, particularly outsider pressure groups. Pressure groups with the support of the media, and the wider public, have more chance of pressurising the government, or the decision making body, to follow the pressure groups advice. This is even more likely when the pressure group is trying to influence the government. This is because the government is accountable to the general public and if the government goes against public opinion on an important issue then this will have electoral consequences. For example, if the Labour Government (1997) had refused to pass the amendment to the firearms act, campaigned for by Snowdrop, for the 4 years of their first term then it is possible that considerable pressure would have built up, possibly leading to their removal from office. This shows the importance of the media and public opinion to the success of a pressure group. This could be crucial to the success of pressure groups which aim to provide information to the general public. Without the support of the media they would be unlikely to be able to gain sufficient coverage to empower the public. The support of a celebrity, such as Bob Geldof and the Live Aid campaign, can also increase the chances of a pressure groups success. Leadership of the pressure group is very important, and celebrity leadership can enhance the public image of the pressure group.Financial FactorsThe financial situation of a pressure group is another factor that can greatly affect the success or failure of the pressure group. This does not just include the funds available to the group, but also the ability to exercise financial power. A pressure group that is able to impose financial 'sanctions' on their targets is more likely to have success. An example of this in action is the September 2000 fuel protests. These eventually led to a reduction in fuel tax, due to the pressure placed upon the government. The funds which the pressure group has available are also important in the success of pressure groups. Without suitable funds pressure groups are unlikely to be able to successfully campaign. For example the Make Poverty History campaign would not have been able to raise the awareness of poverty in the way that they have, if they have not had a reasonable amount of money.ConclusionThe success or failure of pressure groups depends upon the criteria for success or failure. There are, however, certain factors which can lead to success or failure. Of these, the most important would be the relationship with decision making bodies. Without a good relationship a pressure group is unlikely to be able to reach any meaningful success.
