The Key To Effectiveness Of A Pressure Group Is A Large Membership Base Essay, Research Paper

A pressure group can be described as any organised group that does not put

up candidates for election, but seeks to influence government policy. Whilst

an organisation such as Friends of the Earth (FoE), with an income of almost

two million pounds a year can be described as a pressure group, so too, for

example, can the Upminster and Cranham Residents? Association (UCRA), which

relies solely on volunteers and whose only source of income is via advertisements

in its monthly bulletin. Both however have a certain impact on government policy.

Although FoE tackle much more serious and international issues than the UCRA,

the UCRA are more influential on government policy as they are in direct and

regular consultation with the government via the MP for Upminster. Whilst in

comparison with the job of the British government the UCRA fight for reasonably

trivial issues, yet are in their aims, much more successful than FoE.

From the above example it can be said that the key to the effectiveness of

a pressure group lies not in a large membership base, but in having the platform

by which to communicate with the government. However, the above two groups are

both insider groups. For an outsider group, achieving one?s aims is far more

difficult, but it is important to realise that under democracy, the majority

rule, and so therefore it can be said that a large membership base is important

in gaining public, and more significantly, government attention. Having said

that though, this does not necessarily mean that the larger a group, the more

likely they are of gaining government attention, portrayed by the fact that

petitions with thousands of signatures are often ignored by the government.

It is important though, to realise that the major advantage of a large membership

base is that it commands more attention, but having a lot of members is not

the only way to do this. Take for example, perhaps Britain?s most famous ever

pressure group, the Women?s Social and Political Union – the Suffragettes. This

was a group founded by a small family from Manchester and had very few members,

but because of their militant tactics and violent protest (smashing windows,

chaining themselves to railings, etc.), and moreover because they were women,

they instantly commanded a lot of public and government attention, and brought

the issue of female suffrage to the top of the political agenda.

However, whilst a large pressure group can attract a lot of publicity, not

all publicity works in favour of the group. To look again at the Suffragettes,

and to compare them to another famous group, the IRA, we can see that in spite

of the fact that they receive wide media and government attention, they are

portrayed to the people as thugs and terrorists, and the government cannot possibly

be seen to give in to this kind of violence. In this example, whilst the group

has managed to get the government to acknowledge them, this has had a detrimental

effect on achieving their aims, and so therefore it can be said that the large

scale of the two groups has been a disadvantage rather than an advantage.

The failure of the IRA, and the relative success of the UCRA shows us that

the likelihood of a pressure groups success lies in its links with the government.

This can also be seen in the civil rights movement in America. Whilst black

Americans made up a highly significant percentage of the population, Martin

Luther King realised that this paled in significance to the power of the government

that opposed them. He realised that the key to effectiveness lay not in attempting

to fight the government but simply trying to make them see sense, without having

an open confrontation. After all, it is ultimately the government that has the

final say, and a group that sets out from the start to threaten them is presumably

less likely to achieve its aims than a group who seeks government support rather

than government fear. However, it can be said that in a democracy the power

lies with the people and so therefore the larger the membership base the higher

the likelihood of success. Indeed due to political accountability a government

cannot afford to ignore a pressure group that constitutes a significant proportion

of the population. It is though, unlikely that a pressure group would have enough

power to play a major part in the results of an election. Therefore it is more

important to gain government links and whilst having a large number of members

goes a long way towards achieving this, it is not the only way and perhaps not

the best way. Evidence would suggest that the most effective way to achieve

one?s aims is quite simply to appeal to the government. In fact, the most influential

groups are those which represent strong producer interests, the rich and the

well resourced. By contrast, groups which represent the poor, the socially disadvantaged

or unfashionable minorities come off worst of all. Thus social inequalities

have continued to increase despite the efforts of groups such as Shelter, the

Child Poverty Action Group and the Low Pay Unit.

In conclusion, the key to effectiveness of a pressure group lies not in a

large membership base, but in securing government attention. Whilst a large

membership base helps to achieve this it is not the most important factor. It

is also important to realise that although a large pressure group does have

a certain amount of power, the government holds the ultimate power. Therefore

the key to effectiveness is in becoming an insider group, and therefore part

of the political infrastructure, not in trying to intimidate the government

into submitting to one?s demands, as, in the interest of sustaining governmental

legitimacy they cannot afford to do so.