« November 2011 | Main | April 2012 »
March 2012
03/04/2012
03/03/2012
Higher: Study Theme 3E - The Politics of Development in Africa
Picture credit: Cliff1066™
Sami Yusuf has released his new single - Forgotten Promises - to help the UN World Food Programme (WPF) provide assistance to drought-affected people in the Horn Of Africa.
A Global Graveyard for Dead Computers in Ghana
Corruption
The influence of corruption on the development in Africa, is profound. For many governments, the main aim of the people running the country is helping themselves rather than helping the people of their country. Corruption has had, and continues to have a disatrous effect on development.
People at the top of government can and do plunder resources coming into government. Government resources are siphoned off by those in control of government and used to enrich those in control. People at lower levels of government can plunder resources too by not providing services they are paid to provide, charging for services which they should provide, and by taking goods, e.g. medical supplies or trucks, which should be used for government service.
Angola
Manuel Vicente, as a member of Angola's ruling party - the People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) - became a very rich man by raiding Angola's public assets. In 2008 Manuel Vicente, as chair of the board and director-general of the Angolan state oil company Sonangol, restructured the company and its main subsidiaries for his personal benefit. Essentially Vicente did a business deal with himself when he illegally transferred a percentage of Sonangol Holdings into his own name and becoming a private shareholder of nearly all the multi-million dollar deals Sonangol carried out.
Kenya
Following an internal investigation, Finance Minister Uhuru Kenyatta reported that over 4.2 billion shillings - about $46 million - was missing from the Ministry of Education. The money had been stolen from President Mwai Kibaki's landmark initiative to provide free primary education for every Kenyan. Those at the Ministry of Education have mantained their innocence but have been criticised by anti-corruption chief Patrick Lumumba for having done nothing to rout out the thieves in the months since the charges were made; the missing funds were first reported in November 2010.
Corruption puts Kenya's educational funding at risk
Liberia
The hunt continues for the millions and possibly billions believed pilfered by Charles Taylor, former president of Liberia. UN investigators also believe Taylor extracted money from companies that operated in Liberia. Records show how the country's largest timber company sent tax payments to Taylor's private account rather than the national treasury. The estimates of hidden wealth stolen from Liberia run as high as $3 billion.
Hunting for Liberia's missing millions
Zimbabwe
Despite UN estimates that up to 75% of Zimbabweans need food aid and unemployment at more than 90%, a small elite have become very wealthy, for example, vice president Joyce Mujuru and her husband. Gideon Gono, the reserve bank governor, has been accused of dishing out the country's revenue that is kept at the central bank "willy nilly to individuals within the party, to Mugabe and his family without any accountablility".(John Makumbe, associate professor of politics at the University of Zimbabwe)
Zimbabwe elite seeks to evade sanctions
Zimbabwe's Diamond Production Draws Scrutiny
Corruption Perceptions Index 2010 Results
Conflict
War and conflict hamper development in many ways. Money and resources are diverted away from services to fund the war. People are displaced from their land unable to grow crops reducing productivity.
Foreign Investment
China, India, South Korea and Saudi Arabia are some of the countries that have been negotiating deals to acquire farmland in Africa to grow crops for export.
The ultimate crop rotation: Wealthy nations outsource crops to Ethiopia's farmlands
Higher: Study Theme 3C - The United States of America
Picture credit: JamesHenry
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Immigration
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
Obama's immigration policy takes effect
Obama signs law to militarize US-Mexico border
Download The Economics and Policy of Illegal Immigration in the US
THE US POLITICAL SYSTEM
Picture credit: no known copyright restrictions
The Executive Branch
The US President has the power to recommend legislation to Congress. Watch President Obama's speech to a joint meeting of Congress to urge them to pass the American Jobs Act.
Obama's American Jobs Act Speech
The President can veto legislation approved by Congress. Congress voted to ban the CIA from using harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding. President George W Bush vetoed this legislation. Congressional approval of the bill fell far short of the 2/3rds majority needed to override the presidential veto.
Bush announces veto of waterboarding ban
The President can openly support or criticise the Supreme Court in a bid to seek to influence the way its decisions are received. Obama criticised the court's decision on election campaign funds in his State of the Union address in 2010. The court ruled corporations could use their money to run adverts supporting or opposing political candidates.
Obama finds enemy on court bench in battle over election campaign funds
The President has the power to nominate justices (Senate confirms appointments). Presidents may seek to alter the balance of thinking of the court. President Obama has made two appointments to the Supreme Court. Obama has chosen liberals - Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan - to replace liberal justices so the appointments retain the balance of power rather than alter it. Broadly speaking 4 of the 9 justices can be described as liberal (Sotomayor, Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer) and 4 can be described as conservative (John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. The 9th justice - Antony Kennedy - is a swing voter. He sometimes votes with the liberals and at other times votes with the conservative justices.
Elena Kagan is sworn in as Supreme Court judge
Presidents are elected every 4 years. If the electorate are unhappy with the performance of the President, they can vote the President out at the next election. However, the President's power can be curbed after two years as the electorate can elect a House of Representatives and enough Senators to prevent the President from making laws they do not like. (See below under 'Elections' in the Legislative Branch section)
THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
A power of the legislative branch is to reject or amend legislation supported by the President. Obama called on the House of Representatives to raise the US debt limit without conditions in order to avert a financial default. Congress did eventually pass the bill but with concessions to cut spending.
House Republicans reject US debt limit bill
US Senate passes bill to raise debt ceiling
US avoids default as Obama signs debt bill into law
Congress can override a presidential veto if a 2/3rds majority is secured in each House. George W Bush vetoed the 2008 US Farm Bill, which would have expanded the public nutrition programmes for poor Americans, e.g. food stamps, which is the largest anti-hunger programme in the USA. Both Houses voted to override the presidential veto.
House overrides Bush veto of US farm bill
Elections
The timing of elections, as set down in the US Constitution, was designed to allow the balance of power to change quickly. Representatives - Congressmen and women - are elected every 2 years. Senators are elected every six years, but every 2 years one third of the Senate is up for election. If the electorate are unhappy with the work of a Democrat President they can elect a Republican controlled House of Representatives and Senate. This is one of the many checks and balances built into the Constitution to prevent any one group becoming too powerful.
Following elections in 2008, both the House of Representatives and the Senate were controlled by the Democrats and a Democrat President - Barack Obama - was elected. In the mid-term elections in 2010, the Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives but managed to retain a small majority in the Senate. This will make it harder for President Obama to push through his political agenda.
Q&A: US Mid-term Elections 2010
2010 General Election: US Senate
2010 General Election: US House of Representatives
THE JUDICIAL BRANCH
Understanding the federal and state court system in the US:
Understanding federal and state courts
The Supreme Court has the power to declare Acts of Congress unconsitutional and therefore unlawful. The court interprets the meaning of disputed sections of the constitution and as a result has a great deal of power in areas of national disgareement and dispute. The Supreme Court can also declare executive actions unconstitutional.
In 2005 two federal courts challenged the legality of (former) President Bush's actions in relation to his approval of unauthorised spying on American citizens since 9/11.
Supreme Court justices are appointed for life. Justices are therefore unlikely to be cowed by public critiscism - even from the President. Justices are likely to be in their posts long after the President (maximum of 8 years) who appointed them due to their life-tenure. This supports the principle of the separation of powers as justices are therefore free of partisan politics.
Also, past justices have turned out to hold very different views from the Presidents who appointed them.
Picture credit: LaMenta3
POLITICAL PARTIES AND THEIR SUPPORT
Download Political Party Support Homework 1
Presidential Election 2004 Results Map
Presidential Election 2008 Results Map
National Exit Poll Presidential election 2004
National Exit Poll Presidential Election 2008
PARTICIPATION AND REPRESENTATION IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM
Picture credit: hjl
Participation
Participation in politics by US ethnic groups is largely measured by voter registration and voting levels. Traditionally, ethnic minority groups had much lower registration and voting levels than whites. However, recently the gap between Whites and Blacks has been significantly reduced and a record number of Hispanics turned out to vote in the 2010 congressional elections.
In 2000 Whites had the highest registration rates with 72% of Whites registered to vote. Although Black registration rates did increase by 4 percentage points, Black registration was still lower than Whites at 68%. Hispanic registration rates were lower still at 57% and remained unchanged from the 1996 Presidential Election. API registration rates actually went down from 1996 to 2000 by 5 percentage points to 52%.
In the 2000 Presidential Election Whites had the highest level of voter turnout with 62%. Black voter turnout was significantly lower at only 57% with Hispanic and API voter turnout at a mere 45% and 43% respectively.
In 2008 74% of Whites were registered to vote. Although 4 percentage points lower than Whites, Blacks had their highest registration rates at 70% whereas Hispanic and Asian registration levels were much lower at 59% and 55% respectively.
In 2008 Blacks voted at higher levels than they ever had in any other Presidential Election. Voter turnout for Whites was 66%, 65% of Blacks turned out to vote while Hispanic and Asian turnout rates were much lower and similar at about 49%. In relation to the 2004 President Election the voting rates for Blacks, Hispanics and Asians were up by about 4% points while the White voting rate decreased by 1%. Of the 5 million additional voters in 2008, approximately 2 million were Black, 2 million Hispanic and 600 000 Asian.
Hispanics made up 7 percent of voters in the 2010 congressional election, the highest percentage for a nonpresidential election. Hispanics made up 6% of voters in 2006. Blacks also increased their share of the electorate, going from 11 percent in 2006 to 12 percent in 2010 (a figure not dissimilar to the record high in 1998).
Native Americans under-participate in national politics in the US due to the existence of their own Tribal Governments. However, Native Americans have made some political impact at national level though pressure groups. They have campaigned over issues such as the return of traditional tribal lands and a share in profits where these areas have been exploited by mining companies. Also, In 1992 Ben Nighthorse Campbell became the first Native American to be elected to the Senate (he served from 1992-2005). Tom Cole was elected to the House of Representatives in 2002 and is an enrolled member of the Chickasaw nation. He is currently the only Native American serving in Congress.
Representation at federal level
Although ethnic minority groups have made significant political progress over the years, the numbers of congressmen and women are still disproportionate in terms of the percentage of the population they make up. For example, according to the US Census Bureau, Blacks made up 13%, Hispanics 16% and Asians 5% of the US population in 2010. However, while 44 African Americans were elected to the House of Representatives (a record number) in the 112th Congress this only makes up 10% of the House whereas Blacks make up 13% of the total US population. No Blacks were elected to the Senate.
The difference is even more marked for Hispanics. Thirty-one Hispanics were elected to the House of Representatives and 2 in the Senate in the 112th Congress. Hispanics make up 5.7% of the total membership whereas they make up 16% of the US population. Hispanic senators are Robert Menendez (Democrat - New Jersey) and Marco Rubio (Republican - Florida).
Despite only making up 0.2% of the total US population Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders have 2 senators (2%) in the 112th Congress. Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye are both Democrat senators for Hawaii.
Download Membership of congress 111th Dec 2010
Download Membership of congress March 2011
African, Hispanic and Asian American members of Congress
Picture credit: Pete Souza
Ethnic minorities have made significant progress at the highest level of federal government. Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States and the first Black man to hold the post.
Obama wins US Presidential Election
Obama appointed the most ethnically diverse cabinet in US political history. Less than half of Obama's cabinet consists of white men. Blacks appointed to cabinet or who hold posts that have the status of cabinet rank include: Eric Holder (Attorney General), Lisa Jackson (Environmental Protection Agency), Ron Kirk (US Trade Representative), and Susan Rice (Ambassador to the UN). Hispanic appointments to cabinet include: Ken Salazar (Secretary to the Interior)and Hilda Solis (Secretary of Labor). Steven Chu (Secretary of Energy) and Erin Shinseki (Secretary of Veterans Affairs) are Asian Americans.
Representation at State level
While there are more African Americans and Hispanics in state legislatures than any time in American history, ethnic minorities are still under-represented. For example, in 2011 only 3% of state legislators were Hispanic, 9% Black, 1% Asian and 1% Native American/Alaskan. Eighty-six percent of state legislators are Caucasian (white) whilst they only made up 72% of the total US population (2010).
However, the inequality is less marked in some individual states. For example, 40% of state legislators in New Mexico are Hispanic whilst 46% of the New Mexico population is made up of Hispanics. In Alabama 23% of legislators are Black whilst Blacks make-up 26% of the state's population. This means that Hispanics are under-represented by only 6% in New Mexico and Blacks by only 3% in Alabama rather than by 13% if looking at the national picture.
Legislator Demographics: State by State
In the 2010 mid-term elections, New Mexico voted in their first Latina governor - Republican Susana Martinez - and Nevada Republican - Brian Sandoval - won the governor's race and became Nevada's first Hispanic governor.
Representation at Local Government level (county/city)
Blacks and Hispanics have not made sufficient political progress at county level. While the number of Hispanic county officials increased by 43% from 1996 from 358 to 512 in 2007, Hispanics still only made up 3% of county officals in 2008. Six percent of county official posts were filled by Blacks in 2008.
Many ethnic minority elected officials serve in states that are traditional centres of their respective populations. For example, Hispanic mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, of Los Angeles where Hispanics make up 47.7% of the population. However, in some cities where African Americans are a minority, Blacks have done well. For example, in January 2008 Michael R Coleman began his third 4 year term as mayor of Columbus, Ohio, as mayor. Whites make up 64% of Colombus whereas Blacks only make up 26%.
Government Responses to Inequalities in Participation and Representation
National Voter Registration Act (NVRA)
The National Voter Registration Act (also known as the "Motor Voter Act") 1993 was introduced 'to enhance voting opportunites for every American.The Act has made it easier for all Americans to register to vote and to maintain their registration' according to the US Department of Justice.
The aim of the NVRA was to ensure ballot access for the general public and historically under-represented populations, including poor people. The Act requires states to provide opportunities for people to register to vote at the same time they apply or renew a driver's licence, at offices that adminster public assistance such as food stamps and unemployment insurance, and by mail.
About the National Voter Registration Act
The NVRA has had varying degrees of success.
The two year period following the implementation of the Act (1995-1997) witnessed one of the largest registration increases in American history. Also, high levels of registration have been sustained since the introduction of the Act. Voter registration increased in the 2004 election compared to the 2000 Presidential election. More than 174.8 million voters voted in 2004 compared to only 162.3 million in 2000. This was an increase of nearly 12 million.
However, the overall percentage of voters may be down, depending on population growth, despite raw figures increasing. For example, while the actual number of registered voters increased from 2000 to 2004, the rate of growth did not keep up with the growth rate of the voting age population. As a result, the percent of the voting age population that registered actually decreased from 78.9 percent in 2000 to 78.5 percent in 2004.
Voter registration increased significantly during the two years leading up to the 2008 elections. The total number of voters reported to be eligible and registered for the November 2008 elections was at least 189 million, an increase of more than 17.5 million from the 2006 elections. It was also an increase of about 16.6 million voters from the last presidential election in 2004.
However, the NVRA does not appear to be able to sustain high levels of registration and voting rates during non-presidential elections. For example, the number of registered voters decreased during the two years leading up to the 2010 elections after the strong surge in voter registration that occurred prior to the 2008 Presidential election.There were approximately 186.9 million registered voters reported for the November 2010 elections, a decrease of nearly 3.6 million registered voters from the 2008 elections.
The introduction of the opportunity to register to vote whilst applying for (or renewing) a driving licence appears to be successful. Motor vehicle agencies and the federal mail-in registration voter forms accounted for 59 percent of all new registrants and updates in 2007-2008.
However, the number of people registering from public assistance agencies was only 961, 644, making up only 1.6 percent of new registrants and updates, in 2007-08. This was a 63 per cent decline compared to the first federal election after the NRVA took effect (1995-1996). In many states public assistance offices have simply stopped offering voter registration services, which negatively affects certain groups such as those on low income. For example, in 2008 only 48% of family members (aged 18-24 years) who had a family income of less than $10 000 registered to vote. This compares with 82.3% of family members with an income over $150 000 who registered to vote. Also, 77.0% of those with a bachelor's degree voted compared to only 39.4% of those without a high school diploma in the 2008 Presidential election.
One group that has made huge advances, which has been traditionally under-representated in the political system, as a result of the NVRA is minorities. For example, in 2008 the electorate was the most ethnically and racially diverse in US history. The 3 biggest minority groups - blacks, Hispanics, and Asians - each accounted for unprecedented shares of the presidential vote. See below:
Dissecting the 2008 Electorate: Most Diverse in US History
However, as a result of the drop-off in voter registration at public assistance offices independent voter registration drives, such as those run by ACORN, have increased. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - a coalition of low-income groups - has worked in recent years to increase voter registration. During the 2008 presidential campaign, the community organisation came under harsh attack from Republicans who said Acorn engaged in fraud when it launched a massive voter-registration drive in minority communities, which typically support Democrats and ended up voting overwhelmingly for President Obama. The group's opponents said registration cards were filled out with such names as Mickey Mouse and other imaginary voters.
Acorn said less than 2 percent of its 1.3 million voter applications were fraudulent, stemming from canvassers who sought to boost the number of forms they turned in. Independent analysts said any actual impact on the election was negligible.
Also,the Obama campaign ran a huge registration drive for likely Democrats. It added more than 30 000 people to the voter roll in Florida alone.
Voting Rights Act
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibited discrimination based on race. Prior to this Act many states used various methods to prevent people of colour from voting including flawed literacy tests (how many bubbles does a bar of soap have?), intimidation, threats and even violence. This Act has been extended and renewed in 1985 and 2006.
Section 2 of the Act bars the use of voting practices or procedures that discriminate against minority voters such as districting plans that dilute minority voting strength. Section 5 of the Act requires federal "preclearance" before certain states can make changes in existing voting practices or procedures.
In 1982, Congress amended the Voting Rights Act, which granted minority voters the right "to elect representatives of their choice." Using its power under the Voting Rights Act, the Justice Department encouraged the creation of "majority-minority" districts - districts where a minority group makes up the majority of the population.
Following the 1990 census, redistricting throughout the US increased the number of African-American and Hispanic majority districts. After the 1992 elections, the number of African-American members of the House of Representatives jumped from 26 to 39. Largely as a result of new "majority-minority" districts, Alabama, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia elected black congressmen for the first time since the turn of the century. The 112th Congress returned a record number (44) of black Congressmen/women.
The Voting Rights Act has undoubtedly provided equal opportunities to participate in the voting process and ensured fair representation for minorities. See below for case studies of the impact of the Voting Rights Act:
Real Stories of the Impact of the VRA
However, there are criticisms of "majority-minority" districts. One argument is while the number of black Democrat representatives has increased it has led to a reduction in black influence in Congress. With district boundaries being redrawn that group blacks in "majority-minority" districts they can no longer influence outcomes in neighbouring white districts. This means fewer white Democrats are elected who relied on the black swing vote in their district to win their seat. More white Republicans are elected that have no interest in black issues because there were no black voters in their district.
As states' congressional and legislative boundaries are redrawn to account for population trends in the 2010 census both parties (Democrats and Republicans) will be keen to maximise their prospects in the 2012 elections. For example, three of the four voting members of the Washington State Redistricting Commission appeared to endorse a congressional district where ethnic minorities (chiefly Asian Americans, African Americans and Latinos) would make up a majority, when the first proposed maps were revealed in September 2011.
Minorites and groups representing minorities have argued they have not received adequate representation and pressed for the creation of a new congressional district in King County. The district proposed by minority voting groups would be a majority-minority seat.
While both of the Commission's Republicans situated a majority-minority district in King County only one of the Democrats did. Democrats may be torn between core supporters - minority voters - and the need to solidify Democrat districts in advance of the 2012 elections.
Panel unveils redistricting maps
US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 2012
Check out the people seeking the Republican nomination for the 2012 presidential election:
Republican candidates - 2012 Presidential Election
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITIES
Picture Credit: philcampbell
Download Income and % below poverty line by race
Wealth gaps rise to record highs between Whites, Blacks, Hispanics
US unemployment rate for blacks projected to hit 25 year high
Blacks suffering disproportionately in US economic-jobs crisis
Download Education and Unemployment by race 2010
Drop-out rates of High School students by race, 1980-2009
Hispanic Poverty Rate Highest in New Supplemental Census Measure
Childhood Poverty Among Hispanics Sets Record, Leads Nation
Hispanic College Enrollment Spikes, Narrowing Gap with Other Groups
Hispanic Household Wealth Fell by 66% from 2005 to 2009
Picture Credit: Grand Canyon NPS
The State of Native America: Very Unemployed and Mostly Ignored
Download Different Race, Different Recession - American Indian Unemployment 2010
Racism in Sport
In 2002 the National Football League (NFL) responded to years of criticism and the threat of legal action over the low percentage of African American head coaches employed by the professional league. The NFL voluntarily implemented a policy called 'The Rooney Rule' whereby every NFL team interview at least 1 minority candidate upon the vacancy of a head coaching position. However, the extent to which 'The Rooney Rule' is being followed has been questioned.
Minority NFL assistants question if 'Rooney Rule' is being followed
Higher: Study Theme 2 - Wealth and Health Inequalities
Social Issues Peer Teaching Presentations
Download Benefits for the Elderly
Factors Affecting Health
Picture credit: catlovers
Diet
According to the Scottish Health Survey 2010 "much of Scotland's poor health record can be attributed to its unhealthy eating habits...excess consumption of saturated fat, salt and sugar, and low consumption of fruit and vegetables are all risk factors associated with 1 or more of cardiovascular disease, cancer, hyptertension, type 2 diabetes and obesity."
Social class and diet
Fruit and vegetable consumption is higher among managerial and professional households. Consumption of fruit and vegetables decreases as household income decreases. Fruit and vegetable consumption is highest in the highest income quintile.
There is also a significant link between household income and children's consumption of fruit and vegetables. As with income the link between fruit and vegetable consumption and the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) is evident.
Picture credit: Frankie Roberto
Disadvantaged groups in society are more likely to eat more unhealthy food than others.
Look at 2.3.1 Socio-economic differences in diet in the Growing Up in Scotland report below:
Picture credit: Like_the_Grand-Canyon
Intakes of Non-Milk Extrinsic Sugars (NMES) - sugars added to food and drink, table sugar and those present in fruit juices - were higher in those living in less affluent areas. More high sugar foods such as soft drinks are consumed in less affluent areas.
See chart 3.9 Percentage contribution of food groups to NMES by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile in children in Scotland, 2006 for more details:
Food and Drink in Scotland: Key Facts 2010
However, children from all socio-economic backgrounds are suffering the effects of unhealthy diets. Some children have even been diagnosed with suffering from the 17th Century disease rickets, which is caused by low levels of vitamin D.
The Middle Class Myth of Heathly Eating
Poor not the only ones with poor diet
Middle class children suffering from rickets
Picture credit: Tobyotter
However, there does not appear to be a link between income and obesity in England.
Obesity is associated with chronic conditions such as type II diabetes, coronary heart disease and some cancers. Obese women are almost 13 times more likely to develop type II diabetes than non-obese women, whilst obese men are nearly 5 times more likely to develop the disease.
England
The groups with the lowest levels of obesity are poor men and rich women. While women in higher household income quintiles have lower levels than those in the poorest, this is reversed for men. Men in the richest fifth household income quintile have higher percentages of obesity than those in the poorest.
When looking at social class and obesity there is very little difference in the percentages of men from social classes I-IIINM and those from social classes IIIM-V who are obese. The differences are more pronounced between women of different social classes with about a 5 percentage point difference. However, there is no obvious link between social class and obesity. Figures can be found on The Poverty Site:
Scotland
Using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation, among women, higher levels of raised waist-hip ratio (WHR) and waist circumference (WC) - waist-based measures of obesity- are associated with increasing area deprivation. For example, the prevalence of raised WHR rose steadily and significantly from 36.0% in women living in the least deprived areas to 51.4% in those living in the most deprived areas. Similarly, the prevalence of raised WHR was 53.4% among women in the 15% most deprived areas compared with 39.3% of women in the rest of Scotland. Among men, those in the least deprived group were least likely to have raised WHR.
Premature Death - The Poverty Site
Picture credit: Tobyotter
Child Obesity in Scotland
The prevalence of overweight and obesity did not vary significantly by socio-economic classification. Boys in the lowest income households were more likely to be obese than boys in all other income households. There was no clear pattern for girls.
Area deprivation was significantly associated with obesity in children by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. Children in the most deprived quintile were more likely to be obese than those in the least.
Boys and girls in the most deprived 15% of areas had a higher prevalence of obesity, unhealthy weight and overweight including obesity than children in the rest of Scotland. However, while these findings follow the pattern that would be predicted, the differences are not statistically significant.
However, for both boys and girls, parental BMI was found to be significantly associated with child obesity. Children had significantly higher odds of being obese if they had a parent who was obese.
Gender and Diet
The diets of men tend to be poorer than those of women. For example, in 2008/09 men's diets exceeded the recommended percentage of total fat. For example, the total energy derived from total fats (35.5%) in men's diets exceeded recommended levels by 0.5% whereas the percentage for women was 34.7. Men also consume more saturated fat than women. Saturated fat makes up 13.0% of food energy in men's diets compared to only 12.6% for women.
Low consumption of fruit and vegetables is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and other illnesses. The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends eating at least 5 varied portions of fruit and vegetables a day. Men are less likely to eat the recommended daily intake of fruit and vegetables than women. For example, only 20% of males in Scotland in 2010 met the daily intake compared to 23% of women.
Smoking
Picture credit: indi.ca
Cigarette smoke contains about 4000 different chemicals which damage the cells and systems of the human body. These include at least 80 chemicals that can cause cancer. From US studies, compared with nonsmokers smoking is estimated to increase the risk of men developing lung disease by more than 22 times and women developing lung cancer by 12 times. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), cigarette smoking in adults causes heart disease and stroke.
Smoking and Social Class
Smoking kills regardless of class
Smoking Statistics by Socio-economic group
Smoking and Gender
According to the Scottish Health Survey 2010 smoking rates were almost identical between men (26%) and women (25%) although female smokers smoked fewer cigarettes per day than male smokers (13.1 compared to 14.8 respectively).
Physical Exercise
Picture credit: RambergMediaImages
The health benefits of a physically active lifestyle are well documented and there is abundant evidence that regular activity is related to a reduced incidence of chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, obesity and type 2 diabetes. Increased physical activity and the associated increases in physical fitness can reduce the risk of illness and premature death in overweight and obese people regardless of weight loss.
According to recommendations on physical activity adults aged 19-64 should engage in at least moderate activity for a minimum of 150 minutes a week. In 2010 39% of adults met the physical activity recommendations. The proportions of adults with low activity levels who took part in less than 30 minutes a week remained steady - 31% in 2010 and 2008 and 32% in 2009.
Physical Exercise and Social Class
Those living in the most deprived quintile were least likely to have met the activity recommendations (38% of men and 28% of women). However, among men there was no clear relationship between Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintile and meeting the recommendations as the proportion was highest for those in the 3rd quintile (51%) and similar in the remaining quintiles (at between 44-46%). This absence of any significant social class gradient can be attributed to a number of factors such as relatively high levels of activity in manual occupations and the tendency for more deprived groups not to have access to cars, thus tend to walk more. For women, a clearer pattern was evident: at 39%, those in the least deprived quintile were the most likely to have met the recommendations, the proportions then dropped and levelled off in the middle quintiles to around 32% before dropping to 28% in the most deprived quintile. (Scotland, 2008)
Proportions of those meeting physical activity recommendations declined with lowering income. For example, 50% of men and 40% of women in the highest income quintile households met the recommendations compared with 35% of men and 28% of women in the lowest income quintile. (Scotland 2008)
Physical Exercise and Gender
Men are more likely than women to meet the physical activity recommendations every year. In 2010 45% of men and 33% of women met the recommendations.
Alcohol
Picture credit: tpetriep
After smoking, drinking is the second biggest risk factor for cancers of the mouth and throat. People who develop cirrhosis of the liver - often caused by too much alcohol- can develop liver cancer. Women who drink more than 3 units a day increase their risk of breast cancer. Too much alcohol is likely to be a cause of heart disease and stroke. A 20 year study found Scottish men who drank more than 5 units a day were twice as likely to die from a stroke compared to non-drinkers.
Alcohol and Social Class
According to the Scottish Health Survey 2010, adults in more socio-economically disadvantaged groups tended to be more likely to be non-drinkers or ex-drinkers than their more advantaged counterparts, and were less likely to drink outwith the recommended limits. For example, 60% of men in the highest income households drank outwith the guidelines compared with 43-44% in the three lowest income groups. 46%-49% of women in the two highest income groups drank outwith the guidelines compared with 29% in the lowest income group.
Similar patterns were evident with area deprivation. For men, the prevalence of drinking outwith the guidelines was highest among those living in the least deprived areas (54%) and lowest in the most deprived areas (45%). The figures for the intervening quintiles ranged between 47% and 49%. Among women, 44% of those in the least deprived quintile drank outwith the guidelines compared with 34% in the two most deprived quintiles.
Women: the hidden risks of drinking
Wealthy Areas Head Alcohol Tables
Alcohol and Gender
Mean weekly alcohol consumption among adult males was 16.0 units and women mean weekly consumption was 7.6 units in Scotland in 2010. Twenty-two percent of men and 18% of women drank in excess of recommended weekly limits. Forty-three percent of men compared to 33% of women drank more than the recommended regular daily amount (4 units for men and 3 units for women) while 26% of men compared to 16% of women drank more than twice the recommended daily limit.
Gender
Women live longer than males. Based on statistics covering 2008-2010, life expectancy is 75.8 years for men compared to 80.4 years for women in Scotland. One advantage women have over men is they tend to develop cardiovascular disease (like heart attack and stroke) later than men. For example, in the age group 45-54, 2,739 men died of coronary heart disease in the UK in 2008 compared to only 590 females. In the age group 55-64 1,742 women died of coronary heart disease compared to 6,317 males.
Risk factors for coronary heart disease include smoking, poor diet, and being over-weight or obese. See above.
Factors Affecting Income and Wealth
Education
What will determine if they go to university? Their postcode
How much is your qualification worth? average wages compared
Income
Income Inequalities - The Poverty Site
Unemployment
Middle classes hit hard by recession
Middle class unemployment nearly three times higher than last year
Download Jobseekers Allowance Claims by occupation
Ethnicity
Due to higher levels of unemployment and low pay, ethnic minorities suffer from income and wealth inequality. For example, the unemployment rate for Black and Asian workers rose from 10.2% in October-December 2007 to 13% in the same period in 2010, a figure nearly twice as high as Whites. The unemployment rate for young Blacks and Asians rose from 20.1% in 2007 to 30.5% in 2010 while the rate for young Whites is 16.4%.
Around two-fifths of people from ethnic minorities live in low-income households, twice the rate for Whites. There are big differences within this according to ethnic group. For example, 20% of Whites live in low-income households compared to 30% of Indians and Black Caribbeans, 50% of Black Africans, 60% of Pakistanis and 70% of Bangladeshis. Low pay is one factor which contributes to low incomes. Low pay is much more prevalent among most minority ethnic groups. For example, up to half of Bangladeshi workers, a third of Pakistanis and a quarter of black Africans were paid less than £6.50 per hour in 2006 compared with a fifth of the other ethnic groups.
As some ethnic groups are disproportionately represented in sectors where a high proportion of employees are low paid this can explain to some extent the reason why so many ethnic minorities suffer from low pay and subsequently from low income. For example, about 1/4 of employed Ethnic Minorities work in the 'Distribution, Hotel and Restaurant' industry sectors. Twenty-five percent of Pakistani men primarily work as taxi drivers in Britain.
A 2010 report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (Is Britain Fair?) revealed Black and Asian groups earn less than White British people with the same qualification level. Also, Black male graduates earn 24% less than White British male graduates.
Furthermore, 60% of Black and Asian households do not have any savings. This compares to only 33% of White households that have no savings. In 2009 the average White household had £221,000 in assets compared to only £76,000 in Black Caribbean households, £21,000 in Bangladeshi households and £15,000 in African households.
Britons from ethnic minorities believe top professions closed to them
Half of young black people unemployed, says report
A bleak future for black and minority ethnic British workers says TUC conference
Download How_fair_is_britain_ch11
Download Assets, Equality and Ethnicity
Case Study - Social and Economic Inequalites and The Elderly
Picture credit: Abdulsalam Haykal
Ageism
One social factor pressure groups and charities representing The Elderly frequently raise concern about is age discrimination. An Age Concern study, Still Hungry to be Heard, reports malnutrition affects people in later life more than anyone else. The report posits people are admitted to hospital with malnourishment and nothing is done about it or people become malnourished in hospital because they did not get food they could eat or they did not get help to eat the food provided. For example, malnutrition affects 23% of people under 65. However, this increases to 32% for those aged 65+. The difference is even more pronounced when looking at the 80+ age group. Those who are aged 80+ who are admitted to hospital are twice as likely to become malnourished as those under aged 50.
Download Age Concern Still Hungry To Be Heard
An investigation has found elderly patients are being condemned to an early death by hospitals making secret use of "do not resuscitate" orders. The orders record an advance decision that a patient's life should not be saved if their heart stops. The investigation found these orders are being routinely applied without the knowledge of the patient or their relatives. A charity for the elderly said this practice was 'euthanasia by the backdoor' with the notices being placed on the files of patients simply because they were old and frail.
Elderly patients are being condemned to an early death by hospitals
Sub-standard Housing
Another social factor where some elderly people experience inequality is housing. Nearly 1 in 3 of the oldest households in England (where the oldest person is aged 75+) live in housing which has failed the official decent homes standard. One in eight of those 75+ housholds live in housing which fail the decent homes standard because of sub-standard heating and insulation. Across Britain 10% of households headed by an individual aged 60-69 and 7% of households headed by an individual aged 70+ reported sub-standard housing (leaks, dampness, etc) in 2004-06. Those that live in poor housing face multiple knock on effects to their health and well being.
Ill Health
Ill health and death rates increase in the older population in cold weather. There is a strong relationship between poor insulatation and heating of houses, low indoor temperatures and excess winter deaths. While deaths from hypothermia are rare, cold weather and poor heating can contribute to the deaths caused by circulatory diseases and repiratory diseases. There were 24,430 excess winter deaths of people aged 65+ in the UK in 2010/11. The average daily excess winter deaths of people aged over 65 is 202 - that is over 8 per hour.
The proportion of people with a Limiting Long-term Illness (LLTI) or disability increases with age. Eleven per cent of men and 12% of women aged 16-24 reported a LLTI condition compared to 48% of men and 55% of women aged 75+.
Heart and circulatory diseases are the largest causes of mortality in adults over 65 in England and Wales. Nearly 21% of men aged 65-74 and 28% aged 75+ report ever having had ischemic heart disease. For women the figures are 10.0% and just over 19%. Elderly women and men have slightly higher obesity levels. Thirty-four percent of women aged 65+ are obese whereas only 28.1% of women aged 16-64 are reported as being obese. Thirty-one percent of men aged 65+ are classed as obese whereas only 26.6% of men aged 16-64 are. A large number of later in life men and women do not meet the recommended physical activity levels. Male proportions meeting the physical activity levels fell from 66% of those aged 16-24 to 10% aged 75+. Forty-five percent of women aged 35-44 met the recommended levels but this dropped off to only 7% of women aged 75 and over.
Poverty
Many elderly people suffer from economic inequalities. A large number of elderly people live below the poverty line. For example, according to Later Life UK 1.8m pensioners (16%) live below the poverty line (a weekly income of £124 for single pensioners and £214 for a couple). Of these, 1 million (8%) live in severe poverty (below the 50% median line). Eight percent of pensioners are in persistent poverty (below the poverty line for at least 3 out of the last 4 years in the UK).
Download Later_Life_UK_factsheet[1]
Fuel Poverty
Furthermore, figures for the UK in 2011 show 4.8 million people aged 60+ living in fuel poverty. Fuel poverty is defined as when a household needs to spend more than 10% of its income on fuel to maintain an adequate level of warmth and to meet its other energy needs, e.g. lighting and cooking. Thirty-six percent of people aged 60+ in Great Britain sometimes stay or live in just one heated room of their home to save money. People in later life in the UK are more likely to worry about the cost of heating in the winter than in comparable European countries. They are also more likely to turn off heating, wear outdoor clothing inside and go to bed early to save on heating costs. Read about the physical effects of the cold in the health inequalities section above.
Download Fuel Poverty - state of the nations 2011
Wealth Inequalities
Wealth is accumulated (and used througout the lifecycle) and age differences need to be seen in this context. The pattern of wealth and age is 'hump-shaped' as people accumulate wealth during the working years and draw on it in as they get older as pensioners. This notwithstanding, pensioners risk losing all their assets, including their homes under the current care home system. Pensioners must fund the cost of care themselves, unless they have less than £23,250 in assets including their homes. At least 20,000 people a year have to sell their house to pay for care.
20 000 a year sell homes to fund care
Twenty-eight per cent of pensioner couples have less than £1,500 in savings. For single male and single female pensioners the figure is 40. Over a quarter (26%) of single female pensioners have no savings at all. For single male pensioners it os 28% and for pensioner couples it is 17%.
However ...
It would appear the work place is becoming less ageist. There has been a trend of people leaving the workplace later. For men, the estimate of average age of withdrawal increased from 63.8 years in 2004 to 64.5 in 2009. For women, it increased from 61.2 years in 2004 to 62.0 years in 2009. Also, the unemployment rate for people aged 50+ is lower than the 16-24 age group. For example, 4.8% of people aged 50+ are unemployed compared to 22.3% in the 16-24 year group.
Almost a half (44%) of all retired households occupy dwellings with 2 or more bedrooms than is required. Whereas, female-headed households with children are more likely to reside in over-crowded or sub-standard housing.
By the time people enter later life they have accumulated wealth through years of income/saving and the purchase of property. For example, elderly people tend to have a higher than average wealth. The median wealth for Great Britain overall is £204,504. While the median wealth for 16-24 year olds is £12,900, £65,900 for those aged 25-34 years and £174,900 for 35-44 year olds, the median wealth for 55-64 year olds is £416,100 and £306,000 for 65-74 year olds.
Download How_fair_is_britain_ch12[1]
Women are much more likely to be low paid than men throughout their working lives. This often translates into lower income in retirement as well. Women, particularly those who have been lone parents, are susceptible to poverty in later life as they are less likely to have been able to build up savings and pensions. For example, 10% of male employees earn less than 60% of the median hourly wage compared to 17% of women in the UK.
Case Study - Early Childhood Education and Care
Download European Commission Communication on Early Childhood Education and Care
'Postcode lottery' over childcare in Scotland
The Principles of the Welfare State
Picture Credit: no known copyright restrictions
Following the creation of a welfare state in the 1940s UK citizens became entitled to a safety net from 'the cradle to the grave'. The problems of want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness (the 5 giants identfied by Beveridge) would be tackled through a system of social insurance and health care.
The idea of universalism is one of the founding principles of the Welfare State. The state would look after each individual from the 'cradle to the grave'. Should a person fall out of work, be sick, become old, or require housing then that citizen would have the right to state help.
The Welfare State would be funded through National Insurance Contributions from the working population. This was a form of social insurance, based on the same principle as car or home insurance. So long as there were more paying in than claiming out, the state could provide welfare services. Individuals who needed social security benefits would receive them as a matter of right because he or she would have contributed to the national insurance fund. The principle of flat-rate contributions underpinned the original concept of the Welfare State.
The Welfare State was based on collectivist principles. The collectivist approach means the state (the government, local authorities) - rather than the individual or the private sector - has responsibility for the welfare of its citizens. In contrast, individualists argue it is down to each person to look after their health and welfare, and that of their family. Individualists prefer private providers of services such as health and education. They believe competition between service providers saves money and is more efficient.
Are the founding principles of the Welfare State still being met?
The principle of universalism has come under threat. Instead of universal benefits there has been an expansion of means-tested benefits. A means test is where all the factors in an applicant's financial circumstance are taken into account when deciding whether a person qualifies for a benefit. For example, working and child tax credits are means-tested. They are awarded on an annual basis after an assessment of income with more benefit going to those on the lowest incomes.
However, under Labour tax credits were near universal benefits. They were targeted at all but the richest 10% of families with children. For example, in 2010, 5.7 million families with 10.1 million children between them received tax credits. The Labour government liked to call this 'progressive universalism'.
Another universal benefit which will end soon is child benefit. The Coalition Government will stop paying child benefit to everyone from January 2013. Child benefit was created in 1942 in recognition of the fact women (no matter what their social class) had little or no money to call their own when bringing up children. Beveridge thought it was an absolute necessity to provide women with a source of funds. Today, child benefit totals £20.30 a week for the first child then £13.40 for each subsequent child. Under the Coalition government's welfare reforms, child benefit will be phased out when someone in a household has an income of more than £50 000. The benefit will fall by 1% for every £100 earned over £50 000. Therefore, those earning more than £60 000 will lose the entirety of their benefit.
Facing a child benefits dilemma
However, the Coalition government plans to scrap the means-tested Pension Credit introduced by Labour. Pension Credit is a means-tested top-up scheme for over 60s on low-incomes. The Coalition government intends to introduce a flat-rate universal retirement pension worth around £140 a week. The universal flat-rate would benefit women and carers who are disadvantaged by the current system as many do not clock up enough national insurance contributions to qualify for the full state pension.
The contributory principle has also been undermined by changes made to benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability. Incapacity Benefit took on an element of means-testing and was reformed when Labour was in government into a more work-focused benefit with rates and penalties designed to keep people looking for work. For example, the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) requires individuals to undergo a Work Capability Assessment to show their illness/disability does limit their ability to work. They are required to take part in work-focused interviews with a personal adviser. Making ESA a discretionary payment the state will only pay after a series of means-tests is not consistent with the social insurance principle.
Furthermore, controversial Coalition government welfare reforms will time restrict the payment of contributory Employment and Support Allowance. Currently there are two types of ESA: contributions-based ESA and income-based ESA. Individuals who have paid enough National Insurance Contributions (NIC) qualify for contributions-based ESA. Those who have not paid enough NIC receive income-based ESA. This is means-tested and takes into account household income, pension, and any savings of £6000 or more. From October 2013 new claimants will only be able to receive contributory ESA for a maximum of 12 months. (Income-based ESA will be replaced by Universal Credit). Again, this is not consistent with the principle of social insurance.
However, the SNP government in Scotland has adopted a collectivist approach consistent with the original principles of the welfare state. Legislation has been introduced to ensure young people get access to healthy and nutritious food at school, encouraging healthy eating habits from a young age. Local authorities have been enabled to provide free school lunches to all P1-P3 pupils.
The introduction of a cap on benefits appears to conflict with the collectivist principle of the welfare state. The Welfare Reform Act 2012, introduced by the Coalition government, which received Royal Assent (was passed) on 8 March 2012 caps the total amount of benefit that can be claimed in a year. This means an individual is only entitled to state help providing it costs under £26 000 a year.
However, the abolition of prescription charges in Scotland is in-line with the collectivist approach, which has been pursued by the SNP government. The Scottish government has gradually reduced prescription fees from £6.85 per item in 2007 to £3 in 2010-11, and was free from April 2011. According to the SNP government, the policy has restored the NHS to its founding principles - healthcare that is free at the point of delivery and based on clinical need, not the ability to pay.
The Coalition government's controversial Health and Social Care Bill, which gained Royal Assent in March 2012, has been widely criticised and opened up the government to claims it is going to privatise the NHS. The reforms are more in tune with an individualist approach (preferring the involvement of the private sector in delivering services) rather than a collectivist one.
A concern is all hospitals will become Foundation Trusts further down the line. These will effectively be commerical bodies whose main objective will be to make a profit. At the moment, 3.5% of elective operations (such as hip and knee replacements) are done by the private sector. In other areas of health care, especially mental health, the role of other providers is much more pronounced. In total, £1 of every £20 spent in the NHS goes to a non-NHS provider. The reforms will expand this.
The reforms remove the cap on private patients being treated by NHS foundation hospitals. NHS foundation hospitals in England will be free to use almost half their hospital beds and theatre time for private patients. The worry is waiting lists will get longer if more capacity is used for private patients. If hospitals are in financial dificulty they may make up the deficit by taking on more private patients.This could lead to hospitals competing for patients from other areas, which may result in local hospitals shutting down. The treatment of chronic and complex conditions may be given a reduced priority as they are often more expensive.
However, there are no such plans to move towards privatisation of the Health Service in Scotland. Nicola Sturgeon, the Health Minister in Scotland, said "the NHS in Scotland will remain a public service, paid for by the public and accountable to the public. There will be no privatisation of the NHS in Scotland." Although, she is worried the Scottish Budget could be hit by the reforms. She argues if up to 49% of beds in each hospital in England are taken up by private patients, hospitals will get more of their money from private patients. This could lead the UK government to reduce the amount of public finance available for health, including in Scotland.
No privatisation of the NHS in Scotland says Sturgeon: 'not now, not ever'
To what extent have recent governments effectively met the health and welfare needs of UK citizens?
Income (Want)
Between 1998/99 and 2008/09 child poverty declined across the UK. Before housing costs, 26% of children in England and 28% of children in Scotland lived in relative poverty in 1998/99. A decade later this had reduced to 22% and 21% respectively. Support for families introduced by the Labour government in the form of tax credits contributed to the reduction in children living in poverty. For example, the child tax credit is paid on top of Child Benefit and to the main carer in the family. It is made up of a number of elements including a family element, a baby element, a child element and a disabled child element. Currently the family element is worth £545 per annum to families who qualify.
However, in 2009/10 the poverty rate for working age adults without dependent children has increased. Twenty percent of working age adults without dependent children are in poverty - this is the highest since 1997 and an increase of 5% in a decade. This group tends to be in deeper poverty than other population groups with more than half of working age adults without children who are in poverty having incomes below 40% of the median.
Health (Disease)
There has been a significant improvement in health in some areas since the Labour government launched its programme to tackle health inequalities following the Acheson Report. There has been an improvement in infant mortality rates. Infant mortality rates have reduced from 5.6 per 1000 births in 1995-1997 to 4.7 per 1000 births in 2005-07. The Labour government introduced improved access to ante-natal and post-natal care through creating more accessible primary care, for example, with walk-in centres and the expansion of Sure Start.
However, while health improved in some areas overall, the differences in health between different groups subbornly remained. Levels of infant mortality still vary according to social class. At 4.8 deaths per 1000 births, the rate of mortality was 1/3 higher among infants whose parents were from from manual occupational classes compared to 3.6 per 1000 deaths from non-manual classes. Overall, 1300 infant deaths were registered in non-manual classes and 1200 in manual classes in 2009.
Tackling Inequalities in Child Health Presentation
Education (Ignorance)
The introduction of Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) has had a significant impact. This allowance helps young people aged 16-19 from low-income families stay on at school or attend college after compulsory education. In the academic year 2010-11, 34, 780 school pupils and college students received EMA payments in Scotland. Following the initial Scottish pilot and review in East Ayrshire, it was found participation rates increased by 7% overall but by 9% among young people from low income families. The SNP government in Scotland has decided to retain the EMA but the coalition government scrapped the scheme in England in January 2011.
However, despite a number of Scottish Government initiatives some groups of young people continue to under-achieve in education, such as Looked After Children. For example, the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 began in 2005. Its aim was to create a stronger, better system for supporting children's learning, including looked after children. However, the average tariff score (for qualifications gained) for looked after children who left school during 2009/10 was only 67 compared to 372 for all school leavers.
Housing (Squalor)
The SNP government has introduced a number of schemes to help people get on the property ladder. One such scheme under the Low-cost Initiative for First Time Buyers (LIFT) is the New Supply Shared Equity (NSSE) scheme. It is aimed at helping people on low incomes who want to own their own home but who cannot afford to pay full price. Under a shared equity scheme the buyer pays for a majority share in the property (usually 60%-80%) and the Scottish Government pays the rest. Between 2005/06 and 2009/10 LIFT provided a total of 7,268 properties. Over this five year period around 16% of households housed through LIFT were local authority or registered social landlords (RSL) tenants, which freed up 1,130 homes for new lets.
However, the Scottish Government has been criticised for reducing funding for social housing. Housing charities condemned government plans to reduce spending in affordable housing by 50% over 2 years saying the government would be unable to meet its flagship manifesto commitment of 30,000 new socially rented homes over 5 years. As of October 2011 over 120,000 households across Scotland had been waiting on local authority housing lists for a year and over 81,000 of these had been stuck on waiting lists for over 2 years.
Employment (Idleness)
The introduction of the National Minimum Wage (NMW) was successful in getting people into work. Labour introduced the NMW in 1999; it is the hourly rate below which adult workers in most sectors of the British economy must not be paid. One of its aims was to improve incentives for people to actively seek paid work in the labour market thus improving employment levels. Since the introduction of the NMW employment has grown. Despite the recession employment was still much higher in September 2010 than in March 1999 prior to the introduction of the NMW. The number of employee jobs has increased by 1.1 million and the number of employees has risen by 1.4 million.
However, Labour's New Deal programmes for helping people into work were limited in their success. The New Deal programmes targeted different groups of people such as the New Deal for Young People and the New Deal 25-Plus. They provided employment subsidies and training grants for employers who took on previously unemployed people. Job seekers had to fulfil certain criteria, e.g. attend training, or their benefits were cut. In 2007, ten years after Labour was elected, youth unemployment was higher than when Labour was elected (up by 18,000) and higher still since the New Deal for Young People started (up 70,000).
Who should be responsible for health and welfare provision?
Collectivists argue the state should be responsible for the health and welfare of its citizens. The creation of a welfare state is a way in which the state can provide a guaranteed minimum standard of life and insurance against the hazards of poverty, illness and social deprivation. For example, the welfare state in Britain was based on the principles of universalism with flat-rate contributions giving 'cradle-to-the-grave' coverage. Collectivists stress the importance of fairness and equality in society.
Individualists argue it is down to each person to look after their health and welfare, and that of their family. Individualists prefer private providers of services such as health and education. They believe competition between service providers saves money and is more efficient. Individualists stress the importance of self-reliance and the need to avoid a 'dependency culture'.
Whilst a collectivist approach to health and welfare provision would be more closely associated with a socialist/social democratic party and a more right-wing/right-of-centre party with the individualistic approach, Britain's Welfare State has remained intact regardless of whether it has been a Labour government or a Conservative government in power. A raft of benefits and services are still provided on a collectivist basis such as the NHS, Statutory Maternity Pay, Statutory Paternity Pay and Statutory Sick Pay.
The Labour government (1997-2010) did reform the welfare state pursuing a 'third way' approach to the provision of health and welfare. In 2005 David Blunkett, the then Labour government's Work and Pensions Secretary said " ... The welfare state of the 21st Century ... [It] must embody the mutual acceptance of self responsibility and the acceptance of responsibility for the well-being of others..."
David Blunkett on the welfare state
The 'third way' approach to health and welfare meant individuals had to take responsibility to help themselves or lose out on help from the government. It was a 'tough love' approach adopted from America. Individuals would no longer be able to access certain benefits without giving something in return. For example, Labour's 'Welfare-to-Work' programme gave further support to people to get back into work, for example, training and work experience, but if they failed to accept the help or to actively seek work their benefits were cut.
However, the coalition government has radically reformed the welfare state placing even greater responsibility on the individual to look after themselves financially. Changes made under the Welfare Reform Act 2012 will mean even if people are in work they will have to try to increase their earnings and/or their hours until they move off benefits altogether (35 hours a week on the National Minimum Wage). Claimants will be required to regularly demonstrate the actions they have taken to improve their prospects of moving into better paid work or face a sliding scale of cuts to their benefit.
When in power the Labour government played a key role in protecting children from the worst excesses of poverty. It retained Child Benefit as a universal benefit and introduced tax credits - which were near universal. for example, the family element of Child Tax Credit was not withdrawn until the annual family pre-tax income exceeded £50,000.
However, the coalition government is further reducing universal benefits in favour of means-tested ones and decreasing the income levels at which certain benefits can be accessed. This will increase the onus on parents to support their families without government assistance. Child benefit will cease to be a universal benefit from January 2013. Also, the income limit to qualify for child tax credit is being cut. Child tax credits will be removed from any family with one child who earn more than £26,000 - down from the current £40,000 level.
David Cameron's 'Big Society' emphasises the role of individuals and communities in mending 'Broken Britain'. Cameron believes Britain needs people to take more responsibility and government action can only ever be part of the answer to solving society's problems. The 'Big Society' is the government's vision of a society where individuals and communities have more power and responsibility and use it to create better neighbourhoods and local services. Labour leader, Ed Miliband, has said Cameron is undermining the concept of the Big Society due to spending cuts. Various charity figures have suggested the scale of local authority cuts could kill off the idea before it gets started - by destroying existing voluntary groups.
Big Society is my mission, says David Cameron
However, the SNP government in Scotland has used a collectivist approach to help tackle social and economic problems north of the border. The introduction of free school lunches for P1-P3 and the abolition of prescription charges demonstrates the SNP (which is a social democratic party) still believes the state has a key role to play in the provision of health and welfare services.
Overall, the major political parties and most UK citizens believe in a mix of collectivism and individualism - that health and welfare provision is the responsibility of both the government and the individual. However, the balance between what the state should do and what should be left to the individual is likely to vary depending on the party in power.
Higher: Study Theme 1D - Electoral Systems, Voting and Political Attitudes
Picture credit: DemocracyIntl
Electoral Systems
STV
How to vote in the Scottish Local Council Elections
The 2012 local election results in Scotland (using STV) demonstrate how proportional electoral systems like STV do not produce majority administrations. For example, out of 32 councils only 9 councils were won outright. For example, the SNP won outright control of Angus and Dundee. Labour controlled 4 councils - Glasgow, North Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, and West Dunbartonshire. While another 3 were controlled by independents. However, the vast majority of councils returned a No Overall Control result. This is in comparison to the local elections in England where they still use FPTP. Labour won 61 councils outright with the Conservatives in second place controlling 42 of the councils.
Scottish Council Election Results 2012
English Council Election Results 2012
Regional Party List
Britain uses the Regional Party List to elect Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). Parties present lists of candidates and seats are awarded according to their party's share of the vote. In Britain, seats are allocated using the d'Hondt system of Proportional Representation (PR). This is the same way List MSPs are elected to the Scottish Parliamentary elections.
Advantages of PL
The Party List system is a pure form of proportional representation (PR) so it guarantees a high degree of party proportionality. This means the % of votes a party wins will be similar to the % seats it wins. For example, in the South East region in Britain there are 10 MEPs elected. In the 2009 European elections the Conservatives won 34.8% of the vote and won 4 seats (40%) and UKIP won 18.2% of the votes and was awarded 2 seats (20%).
More women and minorities are likely to be elected in using the Party List system. As the List system tends to have large multi-member constituencies it provides more opportunities for women and minority groups to gain representation. For example, in 2009 33% of UK MEPs were women in comparison to only 22% of women MPs in 2010.
Measures that can increase the representation of women can be more easily introduced using a system such as the Party List. With closed party lists 'zipping' can be used to increase the number of women MEPs elected. For example, the Liberal Democrats use 'zipping' in European elections where those selecting the candidates on the list are required to alternate male and female candidates.
Every vote has equal value when using a system like the Party List. Small constituencies lead to safe seats where the same party is all but guaranteed election each year (often due to the political leanings of the people living within a small area). As the PL system uses large constituencies, there are no safe seats. For example, for the European election the UK is split up into only 12 large regions for voting purposes.
Disadvantages of PL
The link between the representative and a regional area is lost using the PL system. This means people may not even know who their MEPs are or how to contact them to put forward their views. For example, Scotland is one constituency. The 6 MEPs elected in Scotland must represent over 5 million people.
There is little choice for voters to have a say in which candidate is elected. The power lies in the hands of the party leaders. For example, British elections to the European Parliament use closed party list votes. Voters vote for the list as a whole. Candidates are elected in the order they appear on the list (decided by the party leadership). This means the voter has very little voter choice except choosing a party.
The Party List system does not tend to produce socially representative candidates. As candidates are elected by party leaders they are likely to put 'safe' candidates near the top of the list at the expense of traditionally under-represented groups. For example, all MEPs from the Scotland region, bar one, are white and male.
The Party List system can lead to coalition government. Coalitions can lead to a fragmented Parliament and produce unstable multi-party governments. Although UK MEPs will join EU political groups in the EU Parliament - such as the centre-right EPP (European People's Party) - the diversity of parties represented as a result of the PR PL system can be seen in the 2009 UK results. For example, UKIP won 13 seats the same as Labour whilst the Greens, the SNP and the BNP all won 2 seats each.
Social Class
In the 1950s and 60s social class was a very important factor in influencing voting behaviour. In the past where you lived and what you did for a living had a direct impact on your vote. If people lived in traditional working class areas like Glasgow there was a strong Labour following. Whereas people from a more affluent, upper-middle class background tended to vote Conservative. Today however, the social classes are less distinct and a reduction in traditional working class jobs has led to more fluid voting.
The 2010 election showed that many people do still vote in accordance with their class so social class still influences voting behaviour to an extent. For example, 39% of AB voters and 39% of C1 voters voted Conservative in 2010 while 40% of DE voters voted Labour. But there are more people willing to vote out with their class and to vote for third parties. For example, there were more working class people (C2 voters) voted for Conservative than for Labour in 2010. Thirty-seven percent of C2 voters voted Conservative compared to only 29% voting Labour. Just 2/3rds (66%) of the votes in Great Britain were cast for either the Conservatives or Labour.
Traditional working class areas still align themselves with Labour, especially in General Elections. For example, in 2010 Labour won the most seats in Scotland and received strong support in and around Glasgow. Labour won the Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill constitency with 66.6% of the vote and Glasgow East with 61.6% of the vote. However, Labour suffered significant losses in working class areas with high unemployment in the 2010 election. Labour support fell disproportionately in working class seats which suffered from above average rises in unemployment by as much as 7.9% compared to 4.9%.
2010 Election Results Scotland
Does social class influence how people vote?
The Media
TV Debates
The 2010 General Election was the first ever campaign to feature televised debates between the 3 main party leaders - Gordon Brown (Labour), David Cameron (Conservative) and Nick Clegg (Liberal Democrat). An audience of just under 10 million watched the 90-minute politics programme on TV. In the first debate Nick Clegg was the winner. He performed well by talking directly into the camera and calling audience members by their name.
Instant polls showed Clegg as the clear winner and some polls showed the Lib Dems in the lead in party polls. Within 24 hours of the debate the Lib Dems claimed to have received £120 000 in small donations and over 100 000 Facebook users - more than the party's entire membership - had joined a group dedicated to supporting a Lib Dem victory. The weekend following the 1st debate Clegg enjoyed a personal approval rating of 72%.
When it became clear the Lib Dem surge, as a result of the TV debate, was not a temporary blip, the Conservative Party responded by changing their list of target seats. They removed most of the Lib Dem seats and added 14 new Labour ones in an attempt to compensate for the expected Lib Dem surge come election day. The Conservatives also pulled a Party Election Broadcast (PEB) on the failures of Brown's government, replacing it with one, produced at very short notice, on the theme of 'change'. It was filmed in Cameron's back garden with him talking directly to the camera.
Newspapers
The Conservatives won support of 6 out of 10 national dailies and 5 out of 9 Sunday papers. Labour lost the support of the Guardian, the Financial Times and Rupert Murdoch's papers. Labour was left with the Mirror as its only ally - the worst press showing the party had received since 1983. Considering the declining circulation figures of the Mirror, the picture was even bleaker still in terms of positive press coverage for Labour. Labour's share of the total circulation of national dailies was just 13% in 2010, lower than at any time since 1945, and a massive decline from the 75% it received in 2001.
Partianship and circulation of national daily newspapers in 2010
|
Name of paper |
Preferred result |
Circulation (2005 in brackets) 000s |
Readership (2005 in brackets) 000s |
|
Mirror |
Labour victory |
1,240 (1,602) |
3,425 (4,657) |
|
Express |
Conservative victory |
666 (884) |
1,577 (2,132) |
|
Sun |
Conservative victory |
2,956 (3,098) |
7,761 (8,825) |
|
Daily Mail |
Conservative victory |
2,096 (2,278) |
4,934 (5,740) |
|
Daily Star |
No preference declared |
823 (735) |
1,577 (1,965) |
|
Daily Telegraph |
Conservative victory |
683 (868) |
1,905 (2,181) |
|
Guardian |
Liberal Democrat (but vote tactically to keep Conservatives out) |
289 (327) |
1,147 |
|
The Times |
Conservative victory |
507 (654) |
1,773 (1,655) |
|
Independent |
Liberal Democrat (but vote tactically to keep Conservatives out) |
188 (226) |
671 (643) |
|
Financial Times |
Conservative victory |
387 (132) |
434 (453) |
Adapted from Table 14.1, Labour No More: The Press, 'The British General Election of 2010' by Dennis Kavanagh and Philip Cowley.
'Labour's lost it' was the headline from the Sun declaring its switch to the Conservatives in 2009. The Sun gave over more coverage to the election than in 2005 and had a two-pronged strategy: firstly to have a sustained attack on Gordon Brown and secondly, to take every opportunity to promote 'Cam the Man' as the people's champion. Gordon Brown, according to the Sun, had sunk to the 'nation's zero'. Brown was regularly ridiculed as incompetent, a grotesque 'waster' of taxpayers' money, 'deceitful' and 'dithering'. Brown was the 'Prime Sinister', according to the paper following the first TV debate. Whereas the Sun became David Cameron's cheerleader in the national press. He was 'the change we need' following the Conservative's manifesto launch, the 'Cam back kid' in the TV debates, and 'Iron-man Cam' on the election trail. Also, on election day the Sun used the iconic Barack Obama 'Hope' poster to depict the Tory leader under the headline 'Our Only Hope ...in Cameron we trust.'
The press often seemed marginalised during the 2010 campaign. The 2010 General election was most definitely a television election. It was defined by the TV debates and 24-hour broadcasting generally provided the key moments. Sky news broke the 'Bigotgate' story. [On a visit to Rochdale during the election campaign, Gordon Brown engaged in a discussion with Gillian Duffy, a pensioner, who had heckled him. However, once Brown got into his car to leave he forgot his radio mic was still switched on. His subsequent conversation with his aide was picked up by Sky whereby he called Mrs Duffy a 'bigoted woman'.] The Press generally followed, rather than set the agenda (which was done largely by the TV debates). More significantly, even though the Conservative-supporting press commanded 74% of total national daily circulation, it failed to deliver a clear majority for David Cameron.
An Ipsos-MORI poll of voting behaviour by newspaper readership showed that the national readership swing from Labour to Conservative was 5%, the same as the electorate as a whole. This shows the press was simply in tune with the mood of the country. However, there was a very high swing of 13.5% to the Conservatives among Sun readers. It may have been down to the paper's high proportion of readers from social classes C2 and DE; at 7% these groups switched to the Conservatives by a larger than average national swing. But, given the Sun's huge readership and its willingness to flex its political muscles, its significance in influencing this group of voters cannot be ignored. The Sun did not win or lose it; but Cameron, like Blair before him, had good reason to be grateful to Rupert Murdoch's support.
The Influence of Social Media
The 2010 General Election was the first election held in the social media age. The Guardian's Charles Arthur wrote an article, '2010: The first social media election', in which he analysed the potential impact and influence of social media in the 2010 election.
- Research had found that people were more likely to be influenced by talking in the pub (32%) than by social media (19%) but social media was having a significant impact on Liberal Democrat voters and the young.
- The internet had a growing role in informing people prior to the election with almost half the population going on-line to get information about candidates and parties.
- Parties embraced social media with an eagerness that suggested the parties thought social media could make a difference.
- Social media users cannot be herded; if attempts were made to direct their thinking it was likely to backfire.
- Social media is an echo chamber rather than influencing votiong behaviour. People tend not to engage with others whose views disagree with their own.
- Facebook could make a difference simply through increasing the number of people who vote, especially young first-timers. The Democracy UK facebook page led to 14,000 voter registration forms being dowloaded.
- Social media provides realtime feedback to any political event - it can amplify the impact of an event, it can spread suppressed information and humourous rejections of the offical line. Paul Mason, BBC Newsnight economic editor said it has "the potential to partially or completely neutralise the ability of the corporate media to transmit the dominant ideology". For example, there was an explosion of tweets saying everything was "Nick Clegg's fault" before the second TV debate when the Mail, Express and Telegraph suddenly found anti-Clegg stories for their morning papers.
- Tweets and facebook pages do not generally give much detail about where people live and so whether it is worth parties trying to persuade you to vote for them.
2010: The first social media election
Higher: Study Theme 1B - Decision-making in Central Government
Picture credit: World Economic Forum
The Powers of the Prime Minister
Traditionally, the Prime Minister (PM) has been seen as primus inter pares or ‘first among equals’. This means that they are simply a minister who takes the lead within a body of ministers (the Cabinet) who share the same rank and importance in advising the monarch. However, the Prime Minister has a number of powers which can be executed in the name of the monarch and are subject to very few checks and balances. Some of the powers of the PM are:
Power of appointment
The PM has the power to appoint individuals to important positions within government and public life. This is sometimes called the power of ‘patronage’ as the PM will be able to reward friends and allies as their ‘patron’. Of particular importance is the Prime Minister’s ability to ‘hire and fire’ within government. MPs and Lords have the chance of being appointed government ministers and further promotion to and within the Cabinet. This gives the Prime Minister a great deal of power and influence over all colleagues within his/her political party as many will be keen to be seen as allies to aid their chances of career progression.
Majority Party Leader
The Prime Minister is appointed due to the fact that s/he is leader of the largest party in the House of Commons. Being leader of the largest party brings power within Parliament. The MPs responsible for ensuring that their party wins the votes in parliament are called the party whips. The chief whip is the most senior whip and reports directly to the Prime Minister. Therefore, it is the Prime Minister who instructs the chief whip as to the wishes of the Cabinet. This means that backbenchers will be indirectly instructed how to vote by the Prime Minister.
Cabinet Chairperson
The PM, as chairperson of the Cabinet, chairs the meetings and will normally decide which issues will be placed on the agenda for discussion. By chairing the meetings the PM will be able to influence the discussion by deciding how much time is allocated to each issue and will ‘sum up’ the mood of the meeting, with votes very rarely being taken.
Use of the monarch’s prerogative powers
The Prime Minister is able to make use of the monarch’s prerogative powers. These powers are enacted in the name of the monarch but, by convention, the decisions are taken by the Prime Minister. These powers include the decision to engage in armed conflict and go to war.
The Power of Dissolution is no longer a power of the UK PM. The Fixed-Term Parliaments bill received Royal Assent on 15 September 2011. Parliaments were previously limited to a maximum of 5 years, but the Prime Minister could choose to call a general election at any time. The bill sets five-year fixed terms but allows the PM to alter the date by up to two months.
Fixed-term Parliament bill 2010-11
Peers end deadlock over fixed-term parliaments
The Cabinet
What is the Cabinet’s role?
The Cabinet is the formal body that has responsibility for overall direction and implementation of government policy. This means that the Cabinet:
Proposes legislation
The Cabinet discusses white papers by government departments prior to publication. Major policy issues may be discussed in some detail if it has an impact on the strategic direction of the government. The Cabinet also agrees the time which will be allocated to legislation in parliament and this is then published by the Leader of the House, who is a senior member of the Cabinet. The time available to complete the legislative process of various Bills going through parliament may be very short and the Cabinet will decide on the priorities.
Ensures co-ordination
Many of the policy areas being worked on by individual government departments will have an impact on others. For example, the Department for Children, Schools & Families may work on healthy eating initiatives and this will have an impact on the work being undertaken in the Department of Health. Therefore, it is important that government work is co-ordinated. The Cabinet is responsible for this, although much of this will be undertaken in Cabinet committees.
Supervises the administration of policy
The Cabinet considers the likely practical problems of implementing government proposals by consulting with special interest groups within parliament and with pressure groups outwith parliament.
Makes decisions
As the senior decision making body within government, the Cabinet is a forum for discussion on areas of disagreement. This may be of particular importance where different departments have competing interests. The Cabinet will make final decisions on areas of disagreement and will try to find consensus. Furthermore, the Cabinet may be of the view that some matters are too important to be left to the Prime Minister and individual departments alone. However, this will depend on the personalities who take up positions in Cabinet and the personality of the Prime Minister.
The role of a Cabinet minister
Key points about the role of a Cabinet minister
In addition to being a member of the Cabinet, Cabinet ministers also have various important roles as senior individuals within government. These relate to the ongoing and day-to-day work of the Cabinet minister and are outlined below. All of these roles demonstrate that while the Prime Minister has a great deal of power, other individuals within the Cabinet also play an important role within the UK political process.
Head of department and individual responsibility
Cabinet ministers are head of their own government department. They have individual responsibility for the performance of their department and are accountable to Cabinet and parliament. They will report back to Cabinet on the progress they are making and will take responsibility within Cabinet for any mistakes made. However, the extent of a Cabinet minister’s individual responsibility is subject to debate. Many Cabinet ministers are personally aware and involved in only a small proportion of the workings within their department. Therefore, the Cabinet minister rarely takes responsibility for administrative mistakes.
For example, in 2007 Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs – a government agency – lost the personal and bank details of 25 million people. The agency was within the control of the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, who was under some pressure to resign. However, this was resisted due to the fact that this was an administrative error rather than a policy error on the part of the minister or the government. Furthermore, if it had been a major policy error on the part of the government then it can be argued that the government as a whole is responsible due to collective responsibility. This means it is rare for individual Cabinet ministers to resign as a result of individual responsibility.
However, Cabinet ministers are still ultimately responsible for the performance of their department and on rare occasions, when it is felt that the specific department is performing poorly, the Minister will be held responsible. For example, in 2006 then Home Secretary Charles Clarke MP was sacked. One of the factors contributing to his loss of office was the fact that 1,000 foreign prisoners were released rather than deported. Cabinet ministers are also in charge of departmental strategy and decisions but work will be delegated to other Ministers in the department such as junior ministers.
Participation in the work of the Cabinet
Cabinet ministers attend cabinet meetings and are members of its committees. Committee membership is not restricted to a minister’s own specific policy remits. For example, in 2012 the Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove MP, was a member of the Home Affairs Committee of the Cabinet and would be expected to contribute to policy discussions and decision in this area. All Cabinet ministers are able to contribute to all areas of policy at full Cabinet meetings.
Makes legislative proposals
Cabinet ministers will be heavily involved in writing green papers, white papers and Bills. While they personally will not write the Bill (staff will do this), it is with their authority and they will be expected to personally approve all official departmental publications. This gives the Cabinet minister a chance to show s/he has mastered his/her brief and demonstrate that good progress is being made with the work of the department. As part of the scrutiny process for the legislation they propose, Cabinet ministers will appear in front of Parliament committees to explain legislative proposals and answer questions. General committees are established for each Bill making its way through parliament and Cabinet ministers will be invited to these committees to discuss the proposals. Cabinet ministers will also take opportunities to support and promote their department’s legislation more informally through discussing the merits of their legislation with backbenchers and encouraging them to support it.
Accountable to parliament
Cabinet ministers answer questions at Question Time on the work of their department. This allows backbenchers to scrutinise the work of the department, while at the same time, allowing the Cabinet ministers the chance to defend the work of government and demonstrating collective responsibility. They will also participate in debates on Bills introduced by the government that are within the responsibility of their department.
Cabinet ministers may also be called to give evidence to select committee investigations on subjects that fall within the remit of their department.
Collective responsibility
All Cabinet ministers must publicly support and vote for the decisions taken at Cabinet, even if they disagree or were absent. If they are unable to do this then they are expected to resign. While this is a limit on the power of individual Cabinet ministers, it is also a reminder that government within the United Kingdom operates on a collective basis and the support of all members is necessary for the success of the government.
The Civil Service
The role of the civil service
In addition to the political element of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Executive branch of government in the United Kingdom has a non political, un-elected element: the civil service. The civil service supports the government of the day by helping it develop and implement policies and by administering the public services for which the government is responsible.
There are over 400,000 civil servants in the UK who work at various levels in the service of ‘the crown’. Examples include people who work at government agencies and bodies such as the Child Support Agency and the Student Awards Agency for Scotland. However, through reform of the civil service, much of this work is now carried out at ‘arms length’ from the government.
Senior civil servants are very much involved in the work of government. Theoretically, this simply involves administering the decisions made by the government. However, the government also relies on senior civil servants to assist in policy development and assistance in the running of government.
The main roles of senior civil servants
Policy advice
Senior civil servants are knowledgeable in the field they are working in. They will often have specialised in a particular department for some time and will have built up a wealth of knowledge. They are also professionals and are skilled at researching and disseminating a large amount of information. They must be politically neutral and not allow their own political views to influence their advice. For this reason, they must not be active in a political party.
Running of departments
Government ministers are extremely busy. In addition to their departmental responsibilities, they have duties within the Cabinet and as major figures within their party they are called on to speak at events and contribute to party policy development. Further commitments will require time to be spent in their own constituencies and personal lives. This means that ministers require a lot of organisational support. Civil servants are therefore involved in dealing with correspondence, diary organisation and any administration in relation to the minister’s government duties.
Implementing policy
When decisions have been taken by government (and where relevant agreed by parliament), it is up to senior civil servants to plan the implementation of the decisions. A great deal of planning and preparation will normally be undertaken while a Bill is making its way through the process of being written within a department and then agreed by Parliament and much of that planning will be concerned with how the proposal could be implemented. It is up to senior civil servants to work out the detail of these plans and see them through into action. For example, when the Department of Health planned a ban on smoking in public places, the civil service would have worked out how this could be enforced at the same time as the planning and writing of the Bill was taking place.
The role of special advisers
A controversial addition to the civil service has been the appointment of special advisers. These are people directly appointed by the Prime Minister or other Ministers and they are allowed to be party political, i.e. they are often active supporters of the governing party. Special advisers are well paid and are very influential with ministers as they share the same political views. This gives them power within departments and there have been concerns that special advisers are leading to a politicisation of the civil service. The main concern is that they are gradually reducing the impartiality of the service and blurring the lines between the career civil servants (those who stay regardless of party in government) and the temporary special advisers (who lose their jobs when their party loses power). There have been accusations that special advisers have been able to instruct career civil servants in the work they are doing. For example, elected Prime Minister Tony Blair appointed Labour Party supporter Alistair Campbell to the post of Director of Communications and he was able to give instructions to press officers within the civil service.
Can civil servants exert influence?
An important question that is often asked is whether the civil service is able to exert influence on the political process within the UK. Some people argue that senior civil servants have excessive influence over their government ministers.
Civil Servants must be politically neutral. In order to influence, it is necessary to give an opinion. Civil servants must be impartial and should not take sides or allow their own political views to influence their work. This would limit their influence as they would not be free simply to advance their own views, for example, by openly supporting or opposing party policies. On the other hand, senior civil servants have made a career in this environment and will know how to give their views without jeopardising their position, for example, by presenting evidence that supported their view point.
Furthermore, it could also be argued that, since there are now more special advisers who are allowed to be partisan, the civil service is becoming politicised anyway. For example, Labour doubled the number of special advisers, which suggests that political impartiality is decreasing. However, civil servants would refute this. The Constitutional Reform and Government Act turned the Civil Service Code into law, which guarantees civil servants remain free from political influence. Plus MPs on the Public Administration Select Committee confirmed that the 'probity, honesty, and integrity' of Government officials is the key value of the Civil Service.
Senior civil servants must work as directed by their ministers or they could lose their job, limiting their influence. Civil servants are accountable to their minister (who in turn is accountable to Cabinet and parliament) and if they do not work as directed they could be disciplined. For example, Martin Sixsmith was a senior civil servant in the Department of Transport and was sacked by Cabinet minister Stephen Byers after a disagreement. However, the minister also relies on civil servants to be supportive of their ideas and be successful in implementing their policies. This gives the civil servants more influence with the minister as s/he will want his/her policies to be a success in order to work for re-election.
The work a senior civil servant does in terms of policy development and research may allow the civil servant to have an element of influence over these areas. In addition to research and report writing, senior civil servants co-ordinate the production of speeches, bills and answers to parliamentary questions. This allows them to put particular emphasis on policy areas/policies which they are interested in and support. For example, government minister Nigel Griffiths famously complained that the civil servants in his department tried to have too much influence. He was later sacked in a re-shuffle. This demonstrates that ministers have concerns about civil servants, and that on occasion and in certain situations, they have considerable influence. However, Ministers are increasingly aware that criticism from parliament can harm their career prospects. Former Home Secretary John Reid was criticised by parliament over the number of people absconding from jail. He launched an investigation into his own department and branded it ‘unfit for purpose’. This demonstrates that ministers are aware they must have control over their department and must limit excessive influence over them by senior civil servants.
Due to their permanent status senior civil servants may be able to use their knowledge of the department to exert influence over their minister. Traditionally many civil servants built up a long length of service in a specific department. Following many years of work in the same job, they will often have many contacts and a lot of knowledge and information. This is in complete contrast to the minister who may be in a department for a short period of time. For example, John Reid MP held eight Cabinet jobs in government in nine years – four in one year. In situations such as this, the ministers may rely on civil servants to guide them for a large part of their time in the department, which increases the civil servants’ influence. However, today senior civil servants tend not to stay in the same post for such long periods of time, with around 2 years being the norm. On occasion ministers will outstay their senior civil servants. For example, Gordon Brown filled the role of Chancellor of the Exchequer for over nine years and would have known as much about his department as many of the civil servants.
A further aspect that increases the influence of senior civil servants is their education and training. Many are trained, educated professionals who are focused full time on their brief and have a great deal of expertise and knowledge. Ministers may not have a background or any experience in the policy area for which they are a minister. This means that civil servants could be selective in the facts given to the minister and this, therefore, allows them additional influence. On the other hand, parliament as a body of over 600 MPs and many peers, will also contain members with expertise in many different areas and therefore this acts as a balance against the influence of the civil servants. The fact that ministers are accountable to parliament will therefore limit the influence the civil servants have in this respect.
Senior civil servants may, through the old boys network, collectively exert power over government ministers. Many senior civil servants come from the country’s ‘social elite’, with a high proportion having been educated privately and having attended Oxford or Cambridge universities compared to the population as a whole. The main concern is that senior civil servants will have access to networks of associates within the civil service who will co-operate with each other to ensure they have a lot of influence. However, Some people now consider this concern to be out of date as the selection process for employment within the civil service has become more transparent and accessible. Plus there are more SCS who have not been privately education than those who have. For example, only 45% of SCS have been privately educated.
Senior civil servants may have influence over their ministers due to their adminsitrative responsibilities. SCS are in charge of the day-to-day running of ministerial offices. This means that they are able to control the flow of information to the minister and will be in charge of organising the minister’s diary. In this respect, senior civil servants can act as ‘gatekeepers’ to the minister, being able to control who gets to see and meet with them. However, with the emergence of special advisers in recent years, most ministers will have one who will take a strong interest in the diary commitments and will ensure that the minister’s political preferences are acted on. This can lead to a clash between the priorities of special advisers and those of permanent career civil servants.
Higher Bitesize The Civil Service
Parliament (House of Commons and House of Lords) as an arena for conflict, co-operation and decision-making; functions; organisation and procedures for business
House of Commons
Scrutiny of the Executive
Question Time
Download A brief guide to Parliamentary Questions
House of Lords
The UK Parliament is bi-cameral, meaning that it has two chambers (House of Commons and the House of Lords). The work of both houses is similar: legislating, scrutiny of the government and debating important issues. The House of Lords is the second chamber of the UK Parliament but unlike the House of Commons it is not elected and its members (peers) are not required to seek re-election or re-appointment. Membership of the House of Lords was previously a mixture of hereditary privilege (titles being handed down from generation to generation) and appointment (selection) for life although this situation has been undergoing a period of change. The House of Lords Act 1999 abolished the right to vote in the House of Lords purely because of heritage. All life peers continue to have voting rights but less than 100 hereditary peers have voting rights and they have been elected by their colleagues.
The main functions of the House of Lords
As part of the UK Parliament, the House of Lords has similar functions to the House of Commons. However, as an unelected body, there are some important differences. The main functions of the House of Lords are:
Legislation
The House of Lords is sometimes known as a revising chamber, as it makes an important contribution to improving legislation that has already made its way through the legislative processes in the Commons. Many amendments are introduced by the government in the Lords. One advantage the Lords has over the Commons is that peers have more time to properly scrutinise legislation. A lot of an MP’s time is taken up by other demands; the same is not true for a peer in the House of Lords. In this respect, the House of Lords can make an effective contribution to the legislative process.
However, due to legislation in the form of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, the Lords can only block legislation approved by the Commons for up to one year; furthermore, there are rules to ensure that the will of the elected body prevails if the Bill is re-introduced. Indeed, this mechanism was used to ensure the Hunting Act 2004 was passed without the consent of the House of Lords. Lords may not reject Money Bills and can only delay them for a month.
Ministers will use privilege rule to force through welfare reform
The Salisbury Convention is a further limit on the ability of the Lords to influence legislation; this dictates that the House of Lords will not block government legislation that was included as a commitment in that party’s winning manifesto. In other words, as the government holds a majority in the Commons it has a mandate from the electorate to enact these aspects of government policy.
Scrutiny of the government
It is the duty of parliament as a whole to monitor the work of the government by holding it to account for its actions and the decisions it makes. The House of Lords contributes to this scrutiny role in a number of ways. Similarly to the House of Commons, members of the House of Lords have the opportunity to question government ministers about their work. Many government departments will have ministers who are members of the Lords as well as ministers who are MPs from the Commons. The government ministers who are Lords will be available to answer questions on the work of government. The House of Lords spends around 40% of its time scrutinising the work of government.
Similar to the House of Commons, the House of Lords have select committees, which scrutinise the work of the government. Select committees can force ministers to answer questions. Their power lies in the ability to embarrass the government of the day. The reports the committees produce can attract publicity. The House of Lords have 4 select committees: European, Constitution, Science and Technology and Economic Affairs. The Lords select committees have a wider remit than those in the Commons, they undertake a more detailed examination of issues and take longer over their deliberations. Membership of Lords select committees are based on expertise.
Providing independent expertise
Many members of the House of Lords have been appointed as peers due to a contribution they have made in an area of public life. For example, many peers will have made an outstanding contribution working in a specialist field, such as education or medicine, over many years. This means that the House of Lords as an institution holds a great deal of experience and expertise. This is very useful in the process of formulating public policy and legislation and also in ensuring that informed debates take place in the Lords chamber.
Influences on the decision-making process in the UK: the extent of these pressures, their impact and legitimacy
Pressure Groups
Pressure groups are organisations that bring people together to campaign on issues that reflect the views of their members. Pressure groups seek to influence decision makers and ensure they take account of their demands by using a variety of methods.
Types of Pressure Groups
Most pressure groups fall into one of two categories: cause or interest.
Cause groups
Cause groups, which are also known as promotional groups, represent a belief or principle. They seek to act in the interests of that particular cause. Usually, membership is not restricted at all as anyone can join. For example, Greenpeace seeks to improve the environment across the world. Anyone can be concerned about the environment and, therefore, anyone can support or join Greenpeace. Many cause groups campaign for vulnerable sections of society such as children, the elderly or the homeless.
Interest groups
Interest groups, which are also known as sectional groups, represent a certain section of the community. Their function is to look after the common interests of that section and membership is normally restricted to that section. For example, the TUC represents workers in trades unions and the CBI represents business organisations. Therefore, interest groups have closed meembership. Only secondary school teachers are able to join the Secondary Schools' Teaching Association (a trade union for teachers). The SSTA works on behalf of its members to ensure the best working conditions and pay.
Some pressure groups are more successful than others. Often this can be down to whether a pressure group has insider or outsider status.
Insider groups
Insider groups enjoy a close relationship with decision makers in government. They will have access to policymakers such as civil servants, ministers, or MPs. Some insider groups may contribute to the policy formulation process for party manifestos or will be invited to contribute to the early consideration of legislative proposals.
Many insider groups hold this position as they are well organised, well financed and have access to a great deal of specialist knowledge that can be useful for the government. Furthermore, some insider groups have a membership that is central to achieving the government’s aims. For example, a pressure group representing healthcare workers would be influential in the development of health policy as it is its members who are in the position to deliver on the policy and influence whether it succeeds or fails.
It is often the case that some pressure groups would naturally enjoy a close relationship with a certain political party. For example, while Labour is in power, trades unions enjoy a position of influence as insider groups. This is because they share many of the values of the Labour movement and party. However, when the Conservatives are in power the trades unions will have a lot less influence and may become outsider groups, depending on the political circumstances.
While insider groups benefit from having a close relationship with the government, this also places restrictions on the methods they are able to use to influence public opinion; they may lose their status as insider groups if they are seen to behave in an unreasonable way or be overly critical of the government. Therefore, insider groups ‘play by the rules’. They stay within the law and would normally be prepared to keep discussions confidential if required.
Outsider groups
Outsider groups are so called because they operate outside the formal political process. Outsider groups need to force themselves onto the political agenda as they do not enjoy access to government. Many outsider groups want radical change in policy, and as such, are seen to have little in common with the government or parliament.
Like insider groups, some outsider groups are well financed due to large donations from supporters. However, other outsider groups have limited funds and poor organisational structures as they tend to attract a small, but committed, membership base.
Outsider groups tend to focus on the media and public opinion in order to achieve their aims. While they are aware that the government may not share their concerns on a particular issue, the government will take notice if it is obvious that the media and public opinion is being affected by the work of a pressure group. Outsider groups use methods that produce media attention and, as such, may include a willingness to break the law.
The methods used by pressure groups
Pressure groups will use a variety of methods to try to influence the government. The methods selected will depend on their status (as discussed above) but also their relationship with the media. For example, if a pressure group knows it has a good relationship with the media, it may use less drastic methods than if it struggles to gain media attention.
Demonstrations
Demonstrations include marches, protests and rallies. In 2011 thousands of students marched through central London to protest against rising tuition fees. The student protest was organised by the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts. The demonstrations were not effective as the coalition government pressed on with the decision to allow universities in England to charge students up to £9000 a year. Likewise in December 2011 tens of thousands of people joined rallies around the UK when a public sector strike over pensions disrupted schools, hospitals and other services. The government did not change its mind and from April 2012 public sector workers' pension contributions increased.
However, some marches have had a degree of success. For example, approximately 225 000 people took to the streets in Edinburgh in July 2005 as part of the Make Poverty History (MPH) campaign. The aim of the campaign was to press the G8 leaders to drop African debt and to establish a fairer trade system. While Germany and Italy did not meet their commitments and not all of the money pledged was 'new' money, the campaign was able to claim a measure of success. It demonstrated the symbolic importance of protest and played a key role in keeping the issues on the political agenda and raising public consciousness.
Petitions
A petition involves members of the public signing their name against a statement they agree with; this can be used to demonstrate how many people feel strongly about a given issue. The more publicity a petition gets the more likely it is to be successful. An example of a petition gaining publicity was in 2007, with a petition against road congestion charging appearing on the Prime Minister’s website. This petition received almost 2 million signatures and had the backing of the British Drivers Association pressure group. The petition’s presence on the Prime Minister’s official website and the receipt of so many signatures meant that the issue became very well publicised. However, the petition itself did not force the government to abandon plans for road charging.
Lobbying
Parliament and Whitehall is the main arena for decision making in the UK. Whitehall is where government power lies. Insider groups, such as the Howard League for Penal Reform and the British Medical Association, are often consulted by Ministers and these groups actively seek meetings to discuss various issues of mutual interest. However, there is often no need for such groups to lobby parliament as having close relations and effective influence within government means that the need to attract the attention of back bench MPs becomes less significant. Some less influential groups may have less direct contact with the government and may wish to build support among MPs and Lords. Lobbying parliament, especially if there is a large group, is likely to receive media coverage. If MPs become involved with a particular cause, this will probably gain at least some media attention.
Furthermore, some pressure groups employ professional lobbyists. Lobbyists are people with professional influence who make a living out of building links with decision makers including MPs, Lords, senior civil servants, and increasingly special advisers. While the use of professional lobbyists can be effective, there have been negative media stories about ‘cash for access’, and pressure groups may wish to avoid being associated with this.
Bell Pottinger: pressure on David Cameron to curb secret links with lobbyists
Direct Action
Direct action involves presure groups taking matters into their own hands. It may involve publicity stunts or more seriously breaking the law as they try to tackle the issue themselves. The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) has staged regular protests outside Huntingdon Life Science because this medical reseach facility tests medicines on animals. They have sent death threats to workers and the facility's director has been assaulted. It has changed nothing and has led to the government stepping in to ensure the facility was able to continue financially. However, some anti-vivisection groups have had some success. The Save the Newchurch Guinea Pigs campaigned for 6 years to close a farm that bred guinea-pigs for research. The pressure group took direct action and various illegal activities to achieve their aim. These included vandalism, theft, intimidation and the grave robbing of one of the owners deceased relatives. The farm closed in 2005 but 4 members of the group were sent to prison.
The role of the media in influencing the legislative process and holding the Executive and its members to account
The Press is playing an increasing role in policy - not only reporting on - but also creating and leading on single issue campaigns. Andy Coulson (former deputy editor, then editor of the News of the World) was the driving force in sustaining pressure for the introduction of 'Sarah's Law' - the right of parents to discover whether their children were at risk from paedophiles living in their neighbourhoods. The Home Secretary at the time, John Reid, promised to study 'Megan's Law' in the US - the first of a series of initiatives which culiminated in March 2010 with the government decision to give all parents the right to check whether people with access to their children were sex offenders.
Sarah's Law to be rolled out nationally
'Sarah's Law' backing demanded
Tories back plan to extend 'Sarah's law' sex offender checks
The media can also use its power and role to hold politicians and organisations to account. The News of the World released the story of British troops beating up unarmed Iraqi civilians in 2006, which prompted a government inquiry.
Blair promises Iraq 'abuse' probe
An investigation by The Telegraph newspaper exposed the MPs' Expenses scandal. A number of MPs resigned or lost their seats as a result. For example, Jacqui Smith, the former Home Secretary, claimed expenses for her family home in Redditch while designating her sister's home in London as her main residence. Conservative MP David Heathcoat-Amory repaid nearly thirty thousand pounds in expenses which included more than 550 sacks of manure for his garden.
The Media provides an essential check on all aspects of public life. Politicians who aspire to high office have their character and policies closely scrutinised by journalists and broadcasters. For example, Nick Clegg, leader of the Lib Dems, after the first televised leaders' debate, had serious questions asked about payments paid directly into his personal bank account by three party donors.
However,
Labour's policy on Europe was constrained by needing to keep the support of The Sun. In 2004 the News of the World called Prime Minister Blair a 'traitor' for refusing a referendum on the new European Constitution. Lance Price - former Downing Street Adviser to Tony Blair - alleges Murdoch approved the word and one of Murdoch's trusted aides told Blair he would not get the support of News International papers unless Blair made a u-turn. Subsequently, Blair made the u-turn and conceded the Euro Scepticism parts of the press had forced his hand.
Successive governments have introduced business-friendly approaches towards the needs of media proprietors in order to receive favourable coverage and treatment. For example, Labour's long-standing commitment towards attempting to increase media diversity by tackling abuses within the sector were dropped. Blair and Brown both looked the other way when confronted by the aggressive and often anti-competitive business practices of News Corporation.
The appointment of Andy Coulson helped steer the Conservative's Party's policies towards News International's commercial interests. In 2008 Cameron pledged that a future Conservative government would continue to support self-regulation of newspapers through the Press Complaints Commission (PCC). Also, Cameron supported the expansion of paristan audio-visual content on-line and the curbing of the BBC, especially its free on-line presence, which went down well with the Murdochs.
Cameron indicated his government would cut the number of quangos and reduce the scope of their influence. The media regulator Ofcom was singled out as a prime example of an 'unaccountable bureaucracy'. This came 10 days after BSkyB accused the regulator of 'unwarranted intervention' when it demanded BSKyB offer film and TV channels to other providers at lower prices.
The Conservatives under Cameron tailored their policies to chime with The Sun's political agenda. The Sun 'proud to be the Forces' paper mounted campaigns on behalf of the troops. Both Blair (PM at the time) and Brown (Chancellor) were being targetted by The Sun for failing to provide suffcient support for the armed forces. Conservative party leader Cameron said the Conservatives were putting together a 'Forces' manifesto and would consider whether to suspend income tax for Service personnel while on operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The extent to which politicians court the Media, especially the Press, suggest they fear the trouble newspapers can cause and is recognition of their political clout. In 2008 the Independent's front page broke the story about Conservative leader David Cameron holding private talks on Murdoch's luxury yacht when it was moored off a Greek Island. After drinks on board Cameron attended a dinner party. Recently, Prime Minister David Cameron revealed he had 75 contacts with the Media, of which more than a 1/3 were with representatives of News International.
In April 2012 Adam Smith, special adviser to the Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, resigned when it was revealed by the Leveson Inquiry he had passed confidential information to News Corp. News Corp had detailed and ongoing contact with the Culture Secretary's office during the highly sensitive bid process of the takeover of BSkyB. Smith claimed he had done so without the authorisation of the Culture Secretary but Labour called for Hunt's resignation for breaking the ministerial code of contact.
Leveson Inquiry: Adam Smith resigns as aide to Jeremy Hunt
In early May 2012 The Independent on Sunday revealed David Cameron had attended a secret meeting with one of Rupert Murdoch's senior executives. The meeting was arranged by Frederic Michel (whose numerous emails to Adam Smith have put pressure on the Culture Secretary to resign). The previously undisclosed meeting in November 2009 shows how Mr Cameron was being courted by News Corp executives beyond the Murdoch family, as the company was gearing up for its bid to takeover BSkyB. The meeting in early November was just weeks after The Sun ended its support for Labour and backed the Conservative Party. Mr Cameron had also recently met James Murdoch at the George Club in London to discuss The Sun's suport for the Conservatives. The secret meeting shows the extent to which Mr Cameron was engaging with News Corp executives.
IoS exclusive: Revealed - Cameron's secret summit with News Corporation
Testimony from Rupert Murdoch at the Leveson Inquiry highlighted a discrepancy in the number of times Cameron was supposed to have met Murdoch. Rupert Murdoch disclosed he had met the Prime Minister on at least five more occasions than David Cameron had previously admitted.