TO what extent have pressure groups become more important in recent years?

It could be argued that pressure groups have become more important in recent years. Membership to pressure groups, and the amount of them, has increased significantly. This has occured at a time where party membership has declined. Another increase in activity has been seen with the advent of the human rights act, which allowed the campaign group liberty to exert a high degree of influence. In the modern era, it is easier for pressure groups to broadcast their aims to the eneral public. They can therefore gain support quickly via cyberactivism, and co-ordinate protests easily on national and international scales. Supportin this is the fact that over 95% of pressure groups have a website. Politicians have often recognised the importance of outsider pressure groups, and sided with them for personal gain. Hazel Blears, for example, sided with a group tryin to ensure her local maternity unit remained open, whilst simultaneously supporting the government that tried to close it.

On the contrary, despite the increase in membership, pressure groups fail to wield any more power than they have in the past. The anti war demonstrators failed to influence parliament despite their large size. The recent success of the Gurkha Justice Campaign achieved its aims only with extremely significant support, such as high public sympathy, a high profile celebrity and an extensive media campaign. Furthermore, insider pressure groups continue to dominate influence on policy. Groups which are practically unheard of such as The Howard League have insider status despite a low membership. Minorities are seldom represented, as they are usually silenced under the weight of large, wealthy groups like the CBI.

Overall, there are a balanced rane of arguments to suggest that whilst pressure groups have become more popular, their importance and ability to influence policy has remained stagnant.