British Influence - A Pressure Group Spotlight

British Influence

In recent years support for pressure groups has been on the rise, so much so that some have become fully fledged political parties, take the Green Party for example. Pressure groups stand for a vast array of issues, from environmental problems to immigration, however they all have one similar goal, get their voices heard by government. Pressure groups are traditionally well organised groups of people that shared the same ideology and wish to influence the policies and actions of the government, so that eventually they align with the groups views.

One pressure group I have researched is 'British Influence'. This pressure group stands for the idea that the UK should remain a member of the European Union. The group was founded in 2012 by Peter Wilding and was actually once part of another group called 'Nucleus', however in 2012 they decided to re-launch themselves as 'British Influence' in order to trump up popular support. The pressure group has the benefit of being cross-party meaning that its members are from both sides of the political spectrum, thereof the group is not opposed to Conservative or Labour view points. 

One action which the group uses is various campaigns, the most recent one being 'Our Biggest Market', these are put forward to small business leaders that wish to remain in the European Union. The campaigns are the pressure groups main way of increasing their presence and support. However they are not their only way of gaining support, they also publish a daily email ('Europe Watch') which contains news and view on Britain's relationship with the EU. The group has even gone as far as to publish a manifesto which included contributions from various MPs, Peers, former diplomats and business owners. This was titled 'Better off in a Better Europe'. The British Influence also give backed up reasons as to why Britain is best off in the European Union. For example they give a simple, yet detailed explanation of 'The Common Security and Defence Policy' put in place by the EU. This works like NATO yet would be initiated if an operation that did not require the US or NATO arose. Overall the points this group make are well researched and backed up, the simplistic way they explain certain issues only help covey a positive sense of persuasion. 

The British Influence pressure group can be best described as a 'Promotional Group'. This can be clearly seen as their membership is open to all and they seek to advance particular ideas and principles. The fact that they accept members from the left and the right ensures the group is far from sectional. Its difficult to tell whether or not the pressure group has/is being successful in its approach, the British public are still split on whether or not to remain in the EU therefore the party still requires further campaigns to bridge this divide. I guess in 2017, when the referendum is held, it will clearly show whether or not British Influence group has affected the public and the government.

To what extent are the current ideas of the Labour Party and Conservative Party similar and different?

To what extent are the current ideas of the Labour Party and Conservative Party similar and different?

The Labour Party and the Conservative Party are said to be the two major parties in the United Kingdom, they in turn create adversarial politics in the UK and are often seen scrutinizing on another's policies. The Labour Party has always been slightly to the left of the political spectrum (Under Corbyn's leadership they're shifting further left) and wishes to edict a socialist manifesto, whereas the Conservatives have always been to the right of the political spectrum and wish to put in place policies centred around the upper and middle classes. Already its clear to see these two parties don't seem very similar, but how true is this?

To begin with lets examine what these two parties agree on. To begin with both Parties wish to increase funding for the NHS, the Labour Party, who created the Welfare State and NHS, wish to put this in place immediately via taxation. Where as the Conservatives will increase funding but this will be achieved over time (8 billion by 2020). Additionally both parties agree that migrants should wait a particular number of years before they are allowed to claim benefits, the Conservatives want this to be 4 years whilst Labour thinks it should 2 years, it seems that the two parties agree on certain policies, but have conflicting ideas on the time scale or way of getting it achieved. When discussing the environment both parties seem to have similar ideas , both parties agree that renewable energy should be increasingly funded and that the UK should produce 0% emissions by 2020/2030. Furthermore both Labour and the Conservatives wish to build 200,000 new houses across the UK and ensure that first time buyers are helped in gaining a property. 

Now on the other hand lets look at the various policies they disagree on. Firstly Defence, the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn wish to dismantle the Trident Nuclear Arsenal, in order to promote 'Global Nuclear Disarmament' , the Conservative Party however have the opposite idea, they see the necessity of a Nuclear Deterrent and wish to keep and upgrade Trident in order to promote security. Labours stance on environmental issues also differs to that of the Conservative Party, Labour wishes the Badger culling as well as hunting with dogs. The Conservatives do not wish to outlaw this tradition and instead attempts to focus on creating a zero emissions UK, clearly at the expense of animals. In terms of Law and Order in the UK the parties differ in authoritarian elements. For example many of the Conservative policies wish to cripple the rise of extremism, they plan to create banning orders for extremist groups as well as 'Extremism Disruption Orders' if people are caught spreading 'Poison'. The Labour Party on the other hand is very liberal in its approach and only wish to overhaul the extremist prevention programme, in a hope to reduce the spread of extremism. 

Overall the policies of the two parties mainly disagree and conflict with one another, only a small number of said policies are similar and even then the finer details offer differ (e.g time taken to implement or the way of achieving said policy). The two parties stick closer to their affiliated sides of the spectrum, the Conservatives want to promote British values whilst not putting the economy at risk, where as Labour wants to aid the working class in as many ways possible. Considering Corbyn is taking Labour back to its hard Socialist roots its likely that adversarial politics will continue, unchanged for years to come. 

Does Jeremy Corbyn align himself more with traditional socialism or is he a social democrat?

Does Jeremy Corbyn align himself more with traditional socialism 

or is he a social democrat?

Jeremy Corbyn appeared suddenly on the modern political scene, despite years of political activity in the late 20th century, his strong persona and engaging character allowed him to win the position of Labour leader in 2015. Yet his policies seem extremely left wing when compared to those of previous labour leaders, after all Tony Blair had tried to incorporate some key elements of capitalism when forming New Labour (Social Democracy). However upon closer inspection his beliefs and ideas should be examined further, are they traditional Socialist policy, or are they in fact that of a social democrat.

To begin with Jeremy Corbyn is a strong critic when it comes to the current conservative government and its actions, especially those which concern social inequality and poverty in the UK. As he stated in one of his previous speeches 'We're a rich enough country, therefore everyone should have a home.' His traditional socialist views shine through when discussing industries and businesses that were once owned by the government and are now privatised, he feels that the renationalisation of public utilities and sectors is key to an effective nation. He also believes the UK should disarm its nuclear arsenal (Trident) similar to that of South Africa in the 1990's, he feels it would bring greater peace to the world. He also believes in the creation of a 'National Education Service' , which would be similar to the NHS, Corby hopes it will end the charitable status of schools. This policy only reinforces the socialist idea of a 'Welfare State' and proves that Corbyn , at heart, is a die-hard socialist that hopes to forge a better Britain.

Moving away from his policies, his ideas all seem to sway towards the left side of the political spectrum. For example Corbyn does want the United Kingdom to remain together, yet he implied that he was a 'Socialist not an Imperialist' and would respect Scotland or Northern Ireland decision to break away and become autonomous regions.His Socialist ideas and views when it comes to foreign affairs are his downfall, his various comments have upset important international figures including the Lithuanian ambassador, Corbyn seemed to think that Eastern European nations were being dragged into NATO by the US which the Lithuanian's disagree with. The Lithuanian ambassador stating 'Our countries were not, as he seems to believe, forced or lured into NATO as part of an American global power grab. We were pounding on the door of the alliance, demanding to be let in, because we feared that Russia might one day become what it is now: a threat.' His Socialist alignment may cause him to sympathise with Russia over the Ukraine crisis in particular, and may only delay an international resolution.

Overall I feel that from the evidence and research I've done Jeremy Corbyn is a strong left-wing Socialist, who adopts only a few social-democratic polices. His stance on a lot of important political issues seem to contrast that of the conservative party and he lacks the incorporation of capitalist elements into his policies, therefore making his Labour party different when put side to side with Milibands or Blair's Labour party. This far-left agenda may be his attempt at turning Labour back into the socialist party of old, and may even be successful at drawing back old voters that felt betrayed by 'New Labour'. I personally feel that his rise to the position of Prime Minister would sever international ties and leave the UK without the power to exert its influence and power across the globe. His hesitance to incorporate major capitalist ideas are likely to cause tension not just within his own party but for the entire political scene.