Category: Law & Politics

Must We Always Obey the Law?

Post author By mrcsbradford
Post date 15th Mar 2023
No Comments on Must We Always Obey the Law?

This long-read article was written by Adam Zhang for the Northeastern University London essay competition, and received a finalist position.

Estimated read time of essay: 12 minutes

Before we can answer the question, it is important to first understand what the law is. Laws are defined by the Collins Dictionary as “a rule or set of rules, enforceable by the courts, regulating the government of a state, the relationship between the organs of government and the subjects of the state, and the relationship or conduct of subjects towards each other” [1]. Laws define the political, economic and social factors of the environment we live in.

So what is the purpose of such pieces of legislation?

An important reason for why it exists is that it protects basic human rights through the legal system. When charged with an offence, before any proceedings, a citizen is guaranteed a public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal, and is entitled to access legal representation, and will be granted the presumption of innocence, which is the maxim of “innocent until proven guilty”. They cannot be unlawfully detained or arrested and are guaranteed a trial to determine their innocence, or guilt. As a result, it is made certain that citizens are treated fairly, since power can be given to the accused to contest the state/prosecution’s decisions effectively in a trial, which means that they can only be prosecuted if they had solid reason and evidence to do so. Such rights are enshrined in the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), which merged the European Convention of Human Rights with British law, with Article 6, the right to fair trial, and Article 5, the right to liberty and security [2]. Thus, a basis is provided for the individual to uphold and defend their position against unfair treatment, whether it may be infringements on other articles of the HRA, such as the prohibition of torture and slavery and the freedom of expression, as well as on other areas of law such as criminal, employment and family law, no matter the circumstances.

The Human Rights Act is a fundamental example of the importance of law, but there is also another key function, namely maintaining the economy. According to John Maynard Keynes [3], the government has the responsibility to maintain economic growth and low unemployment. Therefore, it needs the law to do so. This can be achieved using taxation, made mandatory under the law by statute such as the Finance Acts[4]. The subsequent tax revenues contribute to the government budget maintaining the public sector, which employs around 1/6 of the UK workforce [5], including nurses and police officers, but also the maintenance of key infrastructure, like ports, airports and motorways. Additionally, it can be used to help businesses in less economically developed areas, in the form of subsidies. An example of such policy would be the government’s new “levelling up” scheme, which plans to allocate £3.1 billion pounds [6]to communities across the country to help them recover after the Covid-19 pandemic, under Section 50 of the UK Internal Markets Act [7]. Although it could be argued that sometimes these funds are allocated inefficiently, with the recent strike action over pay being a prime example [8], the law is nonetheless vital in maintaining the government’s ability to help the economy, since without taxes the government would have no funds for wages in the first place.

However, the economy is only one facet of society in which the law must be implemented – the political aspect is also tremendously important. This is because laws protect the parliamentary democracy that gives power to the people to make important decisions, rather than a small collective of individuals. Arguably one of the most crucial pieces of legislation in this regard would be the Bill of Rights 1689 [9], which laid down the foundations of our modern parliamentary system. It removes the power of the monarch to levy tax and to issue excessive fines or punishments, as well as most importantly to stop them from suspending or making laws without Parliament’s approval. The Act also safeguards freedom of elections, the freedom of speech of MPs in debate and proceedings and the right to petition the government. This way, power is given to parliament, to run the country in the interest of the people, without the fear of interference from undemocratic elements such as the monarchy or the military. And so, the law is critical in providing a voice for ordinary citizens. Without it, we would not have a say in the most decisive political flashpoints, such as Brexit, the cost-of-living crisis [10] or the windfall tax on energy companies [11].

Finally, it cannot be ignored that the law stands up for the individual as well. There is plenty of public legislation protecting citizens’ civil rights, such as the Race Relations Act 1965 [12], which outlawed discrimination based on “grounds of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins”, or the Representation of the People Act 1928 [13], which gave votes for women, as well as the 1967 Sexual Offences Act, which “decriminalised” homosexual acts [14], though gay marriage was not to be legalised until the passing of the Marriage Act 2013 [15]. On top of this, the law also provides regulation of private, domestic affairs. Such was the case of R V R [16], where in 1991, the House of Lords ruled that it was illegal under English criminal law that a husband could rape his wife. The defendant had attempted to appeal his conviction on the grounds of an imaginary “marital rape exemption” under common law but was rejected by the Court of Appeal. One of the court judges, Lord Chief Justice Lane, stated that “a rapist remains a rapist subject to the criminal law, irrespective of his relationship with his victim”, and described the grounds of appeal as “common law fiction” [17]. Hence, it was removed as part of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 [18].

Therefore, these points lead to a theoretical answer – citizens must always obey the law. If it provides civil liberties, maintains the economy and protects our human rights as well as our democracy, then it seems in our best interest to do so, as not only do we help ourselves, but the whole of society as well.

However, the case of Gard and Others V United Kingdom highlights a key limitation of the law. It demonstrated that in some situations, obedience to legislation transcends political, economic, or human rights justifications, because sometimes there is simply no better outcome whether the law is obeyed or not.

Charlie Gard, a young infant, was born on the 4^thAugust 2016, with a rare mitochondrial disease, MDDS. It meant that he could not respire properly or use his arms or legs – he relied on a ventilator at all times, meaning that he was required to stay at Great Ormond Street Hospital, where care could be provided. In January 2017 began suffering deadly seizures, and his doctors felt that it was time to end his life support and begin palliative care, to the opposition of his parents. For them, there was still hope of Charlie’s survival – they had consulted an American neurologist named Michio Hirano, who was working on a potential cure named nucleoside therapy. However, Dr Hirano felt the chances of success were only a “theoretical possibility” [19], owing to the treatment’s highly experimental nature.

Charlie’s parents were not willing to give up on young Charlie’s life, and so the case was brought to the High Court by GOSH. They ruled in favour of GOSH, citing the Children’s Act 1989 [20], with Section 1 stating that the “child’s welfare shall be the court’s paramount consideration”, or in other words, because it was in Charlie’s best self-interests to not receive the nucleoside therapy, as its experimental nature may cause more harm than good. The case was then subsequently brought to the Court of Appeal, then Supreme Court, until finally it reached the European Court of Human Rights, where the decision of the High Court was upheld each time [21]. On the 27^{th of} June 2017, Charlie was moved to hospice, and on the following day his mother declared that he had passed away [22].

Though the law had been obeyed, the result was extremely polarizing for many [23]. Even though placing Charlie into palliative care may have been the best way forward for him, it could be argued that the decision should have been up to his parents. It makes perfect sense if they did not wish to follow the guidance of the courts, as it would be emotionally shattering to give up the life of their child, especially if there was even the smallest chance of recovery.

But no system is perfect, and it goes without saying that with all the benefits that the law can bring, it is undeniable that as a country, we must still obey the law. If the government or the people did not uphold the law and went against the Human Rights Act or NHS Act 1946 [24], Charlie’s parents would not have been able to contest their decision in a court of law for such a long time, and GOSH wouldn’t have had the funding from tax revenues to keep Charlie alive on a ventilator. If you disagree with a law, you should not disobey it – from R V R, we can see that laws can be changed, but only using correct procedure like using the rights that the law gives you to argue your case in court or for example, by creating a petition to get an amendment passed through parliament. This way, the order of society is respected, and as aforementioned, not only the individual but the whole of society has something to gain.

Tags law, Long Read

Law & Politics Social Sciences

What would have to change about ‘democracy’ in order to restore faith in democracy among young people?

Post author By mrcsbradford
Post date 15th Mar 2023
No Comments on What would have to change about ‘democracy’ in order to restore faith in democracy among young people?

This long-read article was written by Joshua Inglesfield for the Northeastern University London essay competition, and received a finalist position.

Estimated read time of essay: 12 minutes

What would have to change about ‘democracy’ in order to restore faith in democracy among young people?

Young people – who I shall class as anyone aged 16-24 (taking the 18-24 grouping used by Parliament and extending it to include those who may be enfranchised in the future) – are the future of democracy, and thus it is critical that they have faith in its operation; lest we fall into the enclave of authoritarianism. An increasing number of protests worldwide and a surge in populism signals that youth are tired of democracy’s inefficiency. Populist success can be seen worldwide – from the historic city of Rome where you can find the newly elected far-right Fratelli d’Italia, to Orban in Budapest, across the Mediterranean to Syriza in Greece – the list goes on. Correlations drawn with figures showing that 55% of Italian youth no longer believe that democracy ‘is the best form of government’ – 7% higher than the average for European youth [1] – demonstrates that the rise of ‘Fratelli d’Italia’ is alongside a growing lack of faith in democracy. This is no coincidence and is happening across the globe. Thus, it is clear a solution is needed.

Direct democracy would appear to be the perfect solution to loss of faith in democracy among youth – the turnout for the 2016 Brexit referendum being 10% higher than that for the 2017 election among 18-24 year olds [2] is evidence enough that youth prefer a form of direct democracy. Not only would this give young people the impression that they could make a tangible difference, but it would also reduce this notion of ‘democratic disconnect’ [3] – the alienation of young people from democratic processes. Youth also have a lack of trust in governments – with such a process young people will be confident that governments will no longer be able to ‘sell’ policy decisions to the highest bidder through party donations to as great an extent. Further to this, Colin Crouch argues that; ‘democracy requires the formal mechanisms of citizen participation but also proof of genuine political agency’- which in the eyes of young people is not being fulfilled, seeing little ‘political agency’ (actual actions) taking place with regards to their concerns. Consequently, we can conclude that young people would, by Crouch’s argument, be seeing a failure and consequently be having a lack of faith in democracy, due to this perceived absence of ‘political agency’– a situation Crouch labels a ‘post-democracy’ [4]. Such an implementation would deal with the perceived lack of action alongside strengthening ‘citizen participation’ and so increase faith in democracy. But there is a significant drawback to this suggestion. Imagine you wake up to a notification on your phone – notice of the 2^nd referendum this month. Before you can even consider the proposition you must go to work, cook dinner, and go to the supermarket. 349 minutes [5] – the average amount of ‘leisure time’ per day for Britons – is all you have left. 349 minutes dwarfed by the amount of time Public Bill Committees spend inspecting a bill, and certainly too little time to properly understand the subject of the referendum. This is the constraint of time. The average person simply does not have enough of it to consider the wider implications of their vote, nor how the policy enacted by the referendum might fit in with existing policy. Consequently, their voting behaviour will become a lottery, an impulse on the day rather than a considered vote. So, while direct democracy may seem inviting, once realised the population would find themselves confused, overwhelmed, and not able to make a decision to benefit even themselves. Thus, if this were to take place the number of referendums would have to be strictly limited, and be on larger, more straightforward questions such as capital punishment.

The voting age is a hotly disputed topic in British politics. For years groups such as the Electoral Reform Society [6] have campaigned for the voting age to be lowered to 16 – mentioning arguments such as increasing political participation for generations to come [7] – but few cite increasing faith in democracy as the primary argument. The Electoral Reform Society’s argument is a valid one – they argue that if you “don’t vote, you are less likely to vote in future” [8] – and that by enfranchising these new groups we could encourage greater lifelong participation. This would have the additional benefit of increasing faith in democracy, increasing involvement and again reducing a democratic disconnect to youth– with Dr Foa and Dr Mounk writing that in the UK young people are less likely to vote for the often-anti-democratic populists when ‘mobilised to vote’ [9] – which here would be enfranchising 16- and 17-year-olds. An additional argument for lowering the voting age being the solution to declining faith in democracy among young people is the idea that when youth are not directly involved in democracy, they lose faith in it [10]. This action would therefore seem to fulfil all criteria to increase faith in democracy among youth – but there is an obvious drawback – nothing has changed for the currently enfranchised youth. Such a change would therefore do nothing to deal with the current decline in faith in democracy among the ages 18-24, a dangerous risk given that these are the ages which are already propelling extreme populists to power in nations such as Greece. Far from ameliorating the situation, this would risk escalating it. The youth ignored by such a reform may feel further alienated and see another failure of democracy to criticise, one that risks pushing the democratic disconnect to an irretrievable state of separation between democracy and young people.

First Past The Post (FPTP) – a voting system which suppresses the votes of millions. That is, from a critic’s perspective – but the fact is that FPTP’s nature ensures that only two large parties can ever realistically hold government, a feature which while does produce strong majoritarian governments (usually – 2010 Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition is a notable exception), results in smaller parties receiving almost no seats. But why is this a problem regarding faith in democracy? If we take the argument that the principal reason for loss of faith is not seeing action, would not FPTP be the obvious choice, empowering a strong government to take decisive action without being hindered by Parliamentary squabbles or half-baked coalitions? Those arguments certainly hold some water; however, the issue of representation must be raised. One of the issues young people are most concerned with is climate; so many may support the Green Party; but despite getting 2.7% of the vote share across the UK in the 2019 general election, they only received approximately 0.15% of seats available [11]. Thus, many young people who voted for a party that would pioneer their beliefs have been left unrepresented. This feeling of being unrepresented will likely lead to dissatisfaction and a lack of faith in democracy, as the problem lies in the very essence of democracy, the voting system. The clearest solution would be proportional representation – as used by 40 European nations [12]. Such a system would ensure that smaller parties pioneering the views of minorities or smaller groups such as young people are heard and would allow for greater political pressure to be applied for tangible action. Critics, however, would argue that it gives opportunity to potentially dangerous populist parties such as Syriza, or even extremist ones as seen with the rise of the Nazi party under proportional representation, portraying it as a vile breeding ground for hate. However, it is necessary to note that in modern democracy this is rarely the case to such an extent, with parties such as ‘Alternative for Germany’ [13] being kept out of government – in fact, it almost seems as if FPTP is the envy of populists at present, leading to Trumpism and pro-Brexit populist groups rising to power and succeeding [14]

To conclude, young people will need to see a change to the very structure of democracy to prevent further decline in faith in democracy – with it being imperative that these changes are not superficial PR stunts but tangible changes. What is needed is a two-fold implementation – With this in mind, I would suggest that what is necessary for the UK is the simpler change of increasing the number of referendums to involve youth to a greater extent in democracy, and the more structural change of shifting to proportional representation as a system to give the silenced minority parties a voice. These two implementations would allow for an increase in participation in democracy, which in turn would lead to an increase in faith in it as young people see their policy aspirations manifest into tangible change. Thus, as Aiden Correia writes; ‘democracy is about providing everyone with a voice. The youth are willing to talk; governments just need to start to listen’ [15] – through the measures outlined above we can fight the democratic apathy of young people before it spills over into antipathy.

[1] TUI Stiftung/YouGov. (2017). “Young Europe 2017: The Youth Study of the TUI Stiftung.” www.tui-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/All-results-TUI-Stiftung_European-Youth.pdf .

[2] Stephan Mashford/89 Scotland. (2020). “Youth turnout – How does the UK compare to other European nations?” https://89initiative.com/youth-turnout-uk-europe/ .

[3] Foa, R.S., Klassen, A., Wenger, D., Rand, A. and M. Slade. (2020) “Youth and Satisfaction with Democracy: Reversing the Democratic Disconnect?” https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Youth_and_Satisfaction_with_Democracy-lite.pdf .

[4] C. Crouch. (2004). Post-Democracy. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press

[5] ONS. (2017). “Leisure time in the UK: 2015” https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/satelliteaccounts/articles/leisuretimeintheuk/2015 .

[6] Electoral Reform Society. (2017). “Background on Votes at 16” https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/latest-news-and-research/parliamentary-briefings/votes-at-16/ .

[7] Electoral Reform Society. (date not disclosed). “Votes at 16” https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/campaigns/votes-at-16/ .

[8] Electoral Reform Society. (date not disclosed). “Votes at 16” https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/campaigns/votes-at-16/ .

[9] R.S. Foa/Y. Mounk. (2019). “Youth and the populist wave” https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0191453719872314 .

[10] A. Correia. (2021). “The necessity of youth support in sustaining democracy” https://diplomatmagazine.eu/2021/11/20/the-necessity-of-youth-support-in-sustaining-democracy/ .

[11] BBC News. (2019). “Election 2019 Results” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2019/results .

[12] M. Palese/Electoral Reform Society. (2018). “Which European countries use proportional representation?” https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/which-european-countries-use-proportional-representation/ .

[13] L. Drutman. (2022). “10 Ideas to Fix Democracy – Abolish Two-Party Systems” https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/07/10-ideas-fix-democracy/ .

[14] L. Drutman. (2022). “10 Ideas to Fix Democracy – Abolish Two-Party Systems” https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/07/10-ideas-fix-democracy/ .

[15] A. Correia. (2021). “The necessity of youth support in sustaining democracy” https://diplomatmagazine.eu/2021/11/20/the-necessity-of-youth-support-in-sustaining-democracy/ .

Tags Long Read, politics

FTRP Law & Politics Social Sciences

Has financial background and race impacted the crime rates in the UK for the past 10 years and why, and what are the ways to fix it?

This long-read article was written by lower-sixth former Zion Kim, and shortlisted for the 2020 Fifth Form Transitional Research Project. The following provides a short abstract to his full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: 2 minutes
Estimated read time of essay: 12 minutes

When I was writing this FTRP project, it was during a time when every social media platform, every news site was flooded with ‘facts’ or posts about racial injustice, and racism in the police force. There was especially a huge outrage due to the death due to police brutality of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Eliah McClain. However all these cases being American, I wanted to find out how serious of a problem this issue was in the UK. I had watched John Boyega’s speech and thought that if I was going to do an FTRP that I was interested in, I should do it on how ethnicity and financial backgrounds effect crime rates in the UK.

The moment I started my research, there was already a clear indication that there were more minorities being arrested in comparison to those of white ethnicity, the most ethnicity that was being arrested the most often being black. Not only this, but although it may seem as if the problem of racial prejudice has started to improve, data showed that whereas the proportion of white inmates in youth offender institutions overall decreased in the past decade, the proportion of black inmates had been experiencing an increase. This was not the only problem, as I also found out that those who were earning very low wages in comparison to the average, were much more likely to be victims of crime. So what could be the reason to all this imbalance?

Upon further research, I realised that this was not an easy question to answer. There was no straightforward answer, there were many causes and many problems that led to a simple answer. One of the main causes was the fact that households with lower income were often underfunded by the government, and that most minority ethnicities had a lower income in comparison to the white ethnicity. My research indicated that poor funding, poor education and many other factors eventually led to many financially struggling individuals, many of a minority ethnicity committing crimes and being charged. This was made no better with the police force being predominantly white, which could lead to more tensions due to difference in race.

However, what would be really useful would be to look at what can be done to improve the situation, as feeling down about the problem would not make anyone feel better. Although I wasn’t able to find the best solution to this problem, some things that the government could try to do would be to encourage higher employment rates in the education sector and the police force.

To conclude, I would say that my project showed that there is a grave problem that needs to be addressed: ethnic minorities are at a disadvantage in face of the UK’s law enforcement and system. There are many causes to this, however what we can do to help solve this is something that everyone can have a think about.

To view Zion’s full article, follow this link below.

“Has financial background and race impacted the crime rates in the UK for the past 10 years and why, and what are the ways to fix it?” By Zion Kim Download

FTRP Law & Politics Social Sciences

How can sport reduce the problem of overcrowding in British prisons?

Post author By Alex Jones
Post date 9th Jul 2021
No Comments on How can sport reduce the problem of overcrowding in British prisons?

This long-read article was written by lower-sixth former Barney Doyle, and shortlisted for the 2020 Fifth Form Transitional Research Project. The following provides a short abstract to his full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: 2 minutes
Estimated read time of essay: 12 minutes

Britain has a crippling overcrowding problem in prisons costing billions of taxpayers’ money. Two thirds of prisons are overcrowded leading to increases in levels of violence and poor mental health amongst inmates. This leads to longer prison sentences exacerbating a catastrophic problem. However, in my FTRP I propose a solution that is unorthodox but potentially very effective in reducing rates of reoffending and hence prison overcrowding.

There are many well documented benefits to physical and mental health from regular participation in sport – such as reduced risk of coronary heart disease and stroke, type 2 diabetes, different types of cancer, reduced risk of depression, dementia, etc. Also, sport teaches lessons that are invaluable in life in general like:

Teamwork
Tenacity
How to receive instructions – for example from captains or coaches

There are also reports of how sport helps to reduce crime in communities all around the world. For example, crime dropped by over 10% in Chicago when the Chicago Bears played American Football with potential offenders occupied by watching the game rather than committing crime. The chief custodial officer of New Zealand has spoken of the significance of participating in sport in prison saying it is ‘A great way of establishing a community spirit’.

Regular participation in sport has also been shown to have the potential to reduce the number of re-offending prisoners. Inspired by Project Alcatraz, a project in Venezuela using rugby to help prisoners in some of the toughest prisons in the world, I created a programme for newly released prisoners in the UK. Project Alcatraz has been extremely effective at reducing the reoffending rate in Venezuela and I describe this successful project in my report. My proposals involve setting up a network of support groups using over 60 rugby and football teams to help provide ex-prisoners with counselling, food, courses in various trades, transport to and from games and free kit. Arguably most importantly, my proposals would provide a support network of people all going through the same experiences and challenges who are able to offer advice and help when it could matter the most. In addition, I detail the costs of running this programme and demonstrate how it could be not only self-funding but in fact save the Government tens of millions of pounds every year.

In my report I explain how sport is not only one approach, but in my opinion the best way to reduce the 18,000 people overcrowded in British prisons today.

To view Barney’s full article, follow this link below.

“How can sport reduce the problem of overcrowding in British Prisons?” By Barney Doyle Download

Arts & Humanities FTRP Geography Law & Politics

USA vs New Zealand: To what extent do their national flags represent their population?

Post author By Alex Jones
Post date 9th Jul 2021
No Comments on USA vs New Zealand: To what extent do their national flags represent their population?

This long-read article was written by lower-sixth former Matthew Kassir, and shortlisted for the 2020 Fifth Form Transitional Research Project. The following provides a short abstract to his full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: < 1 minute
Estimated read time of essay: 12 minutes

For centuries, flags have formed a major part of our national identity, a symbol for which we belong to and believe in. As times changes, so do nations, and this report looks at two topical, yet different flags, namely those of the United States and New Zealand; assessing to what extent these flags still accurately represent their population, and whether a change is due?

Arguably, The Star-Spangled Banner is one of the most compelling symbols of national pride in this world, with the rich history it entails, and its projected message of ‘the American dream’; the post-colonial flag, historically, has been synonymous with the strong patriotism of its citizens. However, as we see more controversies shroud the nation every year, in relation to racial and ethnic equality, Americans demand change – a change so drastic that a new symbol of their nation is vital?

On the other hand, this report examines the flag of New Zealand, looking closely at the referendum in 2016, and how even though all roads led change for the pre-colonial symbol, 56% of voters decided this outdated and possibly discriminative flag should still represent their national identity. Whether that be due to respect for their fallen soldiers, or even the economic cost of changing it, the report will ask why the flag has not changed, and if it realistically ever should?

To view Matthew’s full article, follow this link below.

“USA vs New Zealand: To what extent do their national flags represent their population?” By Matthew Kassir

Independent Learning Assignment Law & Politics Social Sciences

Brown and Blue: An Assessment of British Indian Voting Behaviour

Post author By Jackie Zhang
Post date 3rd May 2021
No Comments on Brown and Blue: An Assessment of British Indian Voting Behaviour

ONE EDITORIAL USE ONLY. NO SALES. NO ARCHIVING. NO ALTERING OR MANIPULATING. NO USE ON SOCIAL MEDIA UNLESS AGREED BY HOC PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICE. MANDATORY CREDIT: UK Parliament/Jessica Taylor Handout photo issued by UK Parliament of Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak during Questions to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the House of Commons, London. PA Photo. Issue date: Tuesday September 15, 2020. See PA story COMMONS Treasury. Photo credit should read: UK Parliament/Jessica Taylor/PA Wire NOTE TO EDITORS: This handout photo may only be used in for editorial reporting purposes for the contemporaneous illustration of events, things or the people in the image or facts mentioned in the caption. Reuse of the picture may require further permission from the copyright holder.

This essay was written by upper-sixth former Omeet Atara, and shortlisted for the 2020 Independent Learning Assignment. The following provides a short abstract to the full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: 3 minutes
Estimated read time of essay: 90 minutes

In the last decade there have been radical changes in UK politics, with Brexit and Bojo becoming household names. However, behind the apparent shift towards the Conservative Party the role of the British Indian Community has been vastly understated. Since 2010, the British Indian vote has shifted rapidly towards the Conservative Party with over 30% of British Indians switching towards them. Hence, this psephology change has gone a long way to enabling the Conservative Parties success.

However, we must ask ourselves why this change as occurred? In my ILA, I argue that fundamentally, the shift has occurred due to changing policy within the Conservative Party, historical deterioration, and active political strategy. Using personal heritage, a range of literature and media and first-hand interviews with leading political figures such as Lord Popat, Lord M Desai and Chris Grayling MP I construct an overall picture of British Indian Voting Behaviour.

1.4 million British Indians are currently settled in Britain, and they all stem from historical immigration. Indians have to come to Britain since the 1700s and the formation of the East India Company. They began as sailors, however, then cooks and academics came over to supply the British with India cuisine. My ILA traces this heritage, through partition, immigration from Uganda and Kenya in the 1960s and 1970s then the Thatcher, Blair and Cameron years looking at immigration policy and how this affected the Indian diaspora. This combines with personal heritage, as my maternal grandfather travelled as an illegal immigrant in 1968, to escape the brutality of Jomo Kenyatta and then my father to escape Idi Amin in 1982. The hundreds of thousands of British Indians who have came to Britain in the period 1960-1990 are distinctly loyal to the political party which allowed them in country. I also explore how geographical location has affected generations to come, particularly South Indian workers coming to Britain in the 1940s, working in unionised jobs in the North.

However, there have been generation loyalty decline, with later generations being far less loyal to the party which originally “let them in.” This when policy from the Conservative Party has begun to appeal to the British Indian voters. From the surveys I conducted it was clear that, firstly British Indian voters are overwhelmingly voting on rationality, and often the rational policy which benefits them is from the Conservative Party. Economically, British Indians are on average the wealthiest race which often means they support the low tax policies. Culturally and Socially, they believe in harsh punishment and law and order, something which also aligns with the Conservative Party. In my ILA, I explore Cultural, Social, Education, Economic, Political and Foreign policies and the vast majority of British Indian interests align with Conservative Party Policy.

Finally, I explored the directives of both major political parties. Kashmir is a deeply contentious issue, and the Labour Party have moved away from the Indian Government stance of non-interference. This angered many British Indians; how felt they could not support the Labour Party. One the other hand, the Conservative party has represented British Indians at the top level of Government, with 4 Cabinet Ministers having Indian heritage. Alongside this, the formation of the Conservative Friends of India has also involved the Indian communities in Britain within the Conservative party.

I end my piece with my own political theory I developed based upon this research. Targeted Seat Theory is the idea that appealing to cultural politics within a seat is the most effective way to win seats. By using the majority interests and representing this on a local level you gain a significant vote proportion. This was seen in my case study, Harrow East.

Overall, my ILA combines Politics, Anthropology, Sociology, History, Geography and Economics to create the picture of a British Indian voter. From this, I begin to work out how parties in the modern era have appealed to voters and then develop a wider political theory. The change I explore has gone unnoticed behind the bluster of sensationalist politics for too long and has crucial role in determining who the Government is.

To view Omeet’s full article, follow this link below.

“Brown and Blue: An Assessment of British Indian Voting Behaviour” By Omeet Atara

FTRP Law & Politics Social Sciences

Why did ‘Workington Man’ vote Conservative? An analysis of the factors contributing to the fall of the ‘Red Wall’

Post author By Jackie Zhang
Post date 2nd Feb 2021
No Comments on Why did ‘Workington Man’ vote Conservative? An analysis of the factors contributing to the fall of the ‘Red Wall’

This essay was written by lower-sixth former Dominic Stagg, and shortlisted for the 2020 Fifth Form Transitional Research Project. The following provides a short abstract to the full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: 1 minute
Estimated read time of essay: 16 minutes

Throughout modern British electoral history, the useof political stereotypes to identify potentially decisive voters has become increasingly common within the mainstream media, and influential in dictating the way in which political parties’campaign. In the 2019 UK General Election, this trend manifested itself as ‘Workington Man’-an older, white man who traditionally supported the Labour Party but voted ‘Leave’ in the EU Referendum in 2016. The Conservative Party’s substantial victory was characterised by the supposed fall of the Labour Party’s ‘Red Wall’, a term used to describe traditionallyLabour-supporting constituencies based in North Wales, Northern England,and the Midlands, regions in which ‘Workington Man’ is concentrated. This would therefore suggestthat‘Workington Man’was extremely significant in shaping the outcome of the election.

However, whilst the significance of ‘Workington Man’ was undoubtable, the reasons that caused this momentous shift from Labour to Conservative remain less obvious. It is true that the 2019 election was dominated and polarised by Brexit, yet the root causes of the breaking down of inherent social, political, and economic barriers between ‘Workington Man’ and the Conservatives would appear to be more complex and deep-rooted. Therefore, in this essay, I sought to gain a greater insight into the various short-term and long-term factors that contributed to ‘Workington Man’s’ disenfranchisement from the Labour Party, that ultimately caused the majority of such an electorate to vote Conservative in 2019. These are divided into three similarly important sub-sections: Brexit, in both its exaggeration of growing social polarisation and, more profoundly, in the way it offered political empowerment, as well as cultural issues and economic issues. I concluded that 2019 marked the culmination of the interaction between these separate but overlapping factors, a point in which ‘Workington Man’ and the Conservatives became politically aligned. Furthermore, I argued that ‘Workington Man’s’ reasons for voting Conservative were rooted not just in the Conservative’s appeal, amore recent phenomenon arising from both Brexit and the Conservative’s cultural shift, but also in a feeling of marginalisation from the Labour Party that can be traced much further back.

To view Dominic’s full article, follow this link below.

“Why did ‘Workington Man’ vote Conservative? An analysis of the factors which contributed to the fall of the ‘Red Wall’ in the 2019 UK General Election” By Dominic Stagg

Arts & Humanities FTRP Geography Law & Politics Social Sciences

Why did the UK withdraw from Singapore and Malaysia and what were the consequences for the region?

Post author By Jackie Zhang
Post date 18th Jan 2021
No Comments on Why did the UK withdraw from Singapore and Malaysia and what were the consequences for the region?

Gardens by the Bay is a nature park in Singapore

This essay was written by lower-sixth former Alexander Downey, and shortlisted for the 2020 Fifth Form Transitional Research Project. The following provides a short abstract to the full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: 2 minutes
Estimated read time of essay: 12 minutes

When Harold Wilson took over as Prime Minister in 1964 from Alec Douglas-Home, he inherited a country riddled with financial difficulties. Macmillan’s supposed “Age of Affluence” left a remarkable balance of payments deficit of £400 million. The economic downturn was the trigger for calls for a review and a change in the way money was being spent and invested in foreign affairs and the military when the number of Brits at home who needed financial support grew.

Ever since the end of the Second World War Britain’s influence on the world stage had been in decline along with her empire. This led to Wilson taking the decision to continue with the post-war consensus idea of focusing on becoming a political power in Europe and adapting a role there rather than a worldwide role. Part of this meant reducing military commitments around the world, the term “East of Suez” was coined to refer to all British military bases and territories in the Eastern hemisphere, this included Malaysia and Singapore.

This region had a rather unique political situation due to the unique way in which Malaysia and Singapore were linked as well as Malaysia’s internal divisions. Following the decision to give independence to Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak, and Borneo forming the Federation of Malaysia, the internal politics of this new country were chaotic to say the least. The Malaysian-Chinese population were discriminated against by the Islamophilic regime leading to violent protests, Britain then feared they would be drawn into a Vietnam style conflict, especially when Singapore separated itself from the Federation forming its own sovereign state. The political tensions along with Britain’s changing international role were important factors in the decision to withdraw from Malaysia and Singapore.

However, one can argue that the role of pressure groups in the UK were more important as they emphasised Britain’s changing role and the dangerous political atmosphere of the region at the time. Whilst the importance of the pressure groups is often overlooked, the main point they pushed was the economic situation and the cost of having military bases in the Eastern hemisphere, Wilson was aware of this, so the importance of the pressure groups was much less than the economic situation at home at the time. The consequences for the region have been, in the long run, intrinsically positive. Malaysia’s economy in particular initially suffered an economic downturn but both countries are now amongst the most powerful Southeast Asian economies and continue to grow.

To view Alexander’s full article, follow this link below.

Why did the UK withdraw from Singapore and Malaysia in 1971 and what were the consequences for the region? By Alexander Downey

Arts & Humanities FTRP History Law & Politics

To what extent does Mao Zedong deserve his reputation as one of history’s most notorious dictators?

Post author By Jackie Zhang
Post date 12th Jan 2021
No Comments on To what extent does Mao Zedong deserve his reputation as one of history’s most notorious dictators?

This essay was written by lower-sixth former Austin Humphrey, and shortlisted for the 2020 Fifth Form Transitional Research Project. The following provides a short abstract to the full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: 2 minutes
Estimated read time of essay: 11 minutes

Mao Zedong was Chairman of the People’s Republic of China from 1949 to his death in 1976. Mao was a Communist revolutionary, described as having an ‘emphatic aura’ and ‘exuding overwhelming power’. He is known globally as an infamous killer, responsible for the deaths of millions, but can he be compared to the likes of Hitler or Stalin? Another question to consider is what makes a notorious dictator, and due to these factors we can determine whether or not Mao deserves his reputation.

Firstly, we can examine the death toll of Mao. In 1958, Mao’s ‘Great leap forward’ killed approximately forty million people, by forcing peasants to stop work on farms and begin production of steel. Mao took over all agriculture in China, with no farming experience. He demanded that farmers kill sparrows, to stop them eating the crops. However, the sparrows were only eating pests, thus improving crop yields. Hence Mao’s arrogance and ignorance caused one of the most devastating famines in history.

To compare Mao’s numbers here, we should look at Pol Pot, the former dictator of Cambodia. Pol Pot killed only two million people, which seems inconsequential compared to Mao. However with perspective, Pol Pot is responsible for the death of a quarter of his while country, while Mao only 6%. Therefore one reason for the extraordinarily high number of deaths is just because China’s population was so much greater than other nations’: 670million.

Just examining the number of deaths may not be as important as analysing the intent behind them. Whilst the number of people Mao killed was almost double what Hitler and Stalin killed together, his primary intention was to increase China’s industry to make it a world superpower. This highlights Mao’s noble intentions whilst in power.

On the other hand most would agree that Adolf Hitler’s intentions were horrific. When he murdered eleven million people in death camps, he singled out groups in society as second class humans, then purposely slaughtered them. Therefore, as death by ill-judgement is not the same as death by ill-intent, Mao doesn’t deserve to be compared with the likes of Hitler, who set out with the aim of genocide.

Mao wasn’t completely innocent of malicious aspirations. In 1956 he launched ‘The Hundred Flowers Campaign’, which was an opportunity for everyone to present ideas on how to improve China. After a few months, the campaign stopped and anyone who criticised the government was persecuted. Many people, including former deputy chief of MI6 and British diplomat in China at that time: Sir Gerry Warner, believe that ‘The campaign was a deliberate attempt to flush out those who opposed Mao and Communism’.

In conclusion, there are many ways to judge notoriety, the most important of which I believe is intent. Therefore due to Mao’s mass number of killings, but honourable intention on the whole, he deserves his reputation as one of history’s most notorious dictators, but falls short of the notoriety of those who intended to harm others.

To view Austin’s full article, follow this link below.

“To what extent does Mao Zedong deserve his reputation as one of history’s most notorious dictators?” By Austin Humphrey

Independent Learning Assignment Law & Politics Social Sciences

Pot-Luck Politicians, A Parliamentary Chamber from Sortition

Post author By Jackie Zhang
Post date 12th Nov 2020
No Comments on Pot-Luck Politicians, A Parliamentary Chamber from Sortition

This essay was written by upper-sixth former Tom Welsh, and a finalist for the 2020 Independent Learning Assignment. The following provides a short abstract to the full essay, which can be found at the bottom.

Estimated read time of abstract: 2 minutes
Estimated read time of essay: 1 hour

Sortition is the random selection of individuals, and in this paper I sought to understand its political application in legislatures before providing a potential application in the United Kingdom via a third House of Parliament. The motive being sortition’s inherent equality and true representativeness.

In order to do so, an investigation of sortition’s use in history was made, before its role in political theory was considered. I then briefly looked at its current application in both juries and citizens’ assemblies, before considering sortition’s hypothetical applications and existing use outside of the United Kingdom.

Once the theory was covered, I then took to explaining the functioning of the existing UK government before looking at current UK political participation in both formal methods (elections and referenda) and informal (social movements and pressure groups).

Having discussing the underlying theory, and the use-case it was being applied to, a substantial portion of my paper attempted to outline a comprehensive description of why I believe sortition’s best application would be as an addition to the existing Parliament given the important role that both the existing Houses of Parliament play. That is not to say that I felt the chamber from sortition would have a small role to play – far from it.

I then ended the paper with an overview of some of the potential issues that such an implementation might entail, with an attempt also being made to explain how they might be dealt with and why if they cannot, on balance, that is of little concern in any case given the many positives associated with sortition. Furthermore, if you have an interest in either Plato or Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the absolute ending of the paper comes in the form of a synthesis of both, achievable, in my opinion, through sortition.

If I gone some way to perhaps intriguing you about my, perhaps controversial, proposition then do consider giving my ILA a read. In fact, even if I haven’t – undoubtedly it is not easy in a short abstract to fully convey the true nature of a piece of work – maybe consider giving it a read in any case. A word of warning though, perhaps read the paper one chapter at a time, as I apologise it is not exactly short. Nonetheless, if you do choose to read the full work, thank you. Yet more importantly, I hope I cause you, even if you disagree with my conclusions, to reconsider your own political views – indeed if you don’t already have any, that is fine too!

To view Tom’s full article, follow this link below.

“Pot-Luck Politicians A Parliamentary Chamber from Sortition” by Tom Welsh