Essay Help – Evaluate the view that think-tanks, lobbyists and pressure groups have little impact on government decisions

The answer to this question is that it depends on whether they are insider groups. So, for example, some pressure groups more naturally have links to members of government than others and the same is true of lobbyists and think tanks.

Let’s take a look at each group one by one and consider how they might have a impact of government decisions.

Think Tanks

One of the more vocal and impactful think tanks in recent years has been the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA). The IEA are a right wing think tank advocating for free market, neo liberal policies. There were particularly prominent in influencing the Thatcher governments of the 1980s to privatise previously state-run industries, so much so that the journalist, Andrew Marr called them the ‘most influential think tank in modern British history’. Their influence waned during the New Labour years but has returned to prominence during the Conservative government between 2010-2024 and have been advocating for less, rather then more, regulation of the economy. Their impact on government decisions is difficult to assess, however. Groups such as the IEA have been influential in promoting certain ideas and getting debate started but we cannot tell how far government decisions have been taken because of them. There is no doubt that many of Liz Truss’ economic policies aligned with those of the IEA, but whether she was led by the IEA or her own natural instincts just happened to match those of the IEA is hard to gauge.  However, most think tanks just don’t have the access or the financial power to impact government. For example, left wing think tanks such as the Fabian Society will have had no impact on government decisions during the period of Conservative government. Moreover, whilst think tanks such as the Taxpayers Alliance and the Adam Smith Institute are well funded and can get their message out via briefing papers or conferences, most think tanks do not have the money to do so. Therefore, whilst think tanks can have an influence, this influence is usually limited to just a small number of groups and is hugely dependent on an alignment of views with the government. Given that government ministers will only listen to think tanks with whose view they already align, we might question how much influence they can have in impacting government decisions.

Lobbyists can have an impact on government decisions. In an earlier blog we explained how the Premier League gave £41,000 worth of tickets to government ministers as well as £4,000 worth of tickets to watch Taylor Swift perform at Wembley to Keir Starmer. It might be entirely coincidental that the government is currently pushing the Football Governance Bill through Parliament. However, a cynic might suggest that by offering hospitality to members of the incoming government, the Premier League will have an opportunity to gain access to the key decision makers and be able to state their case against the bill. The previous government also found themselves troubled by lobbying. The downfall of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister began when he tried to get his colleague Owen Patterson of the hook for lobbying. Whilst continuing his activities as an MP, Patterson was also acting as a consultant for Randox Laboratories and Lynn’s Country Foods. Patterson was later accused of meeting officials at the Food Standards Agency and Department for International Development with whom he was promoting the interests of Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods. This was against Parliamentary rules. Similarly, former Prime Minister David Cameron lobbied on behalf of Greenhill Capital, a firm that was paying him a substantial sum of money to do so. Cameron was said to have used private channels to contact those in government on behalf of Grenshill. For example, he sent 9 WhatsApp messages to the then Chancellor, Rishi Sunak regarding the firm. However, a counter point to make might be that for every lobbying group pushing one agenda, there is a counter lobbying group pushing an alternative view. For example, whilst lobbyists from the tobacco industry were lobbying the government against a ban on smoking, there were counter lobbyists from health groups who were lobbying to support the ban. As a result what we often find is that lobbyists merely cancel one another out.

It is often assumed that pressure groups have the most impact upon government decisions, but this is not really the case. By and large, most pressure groups just do not have the required access to government to make a difference. For example, major pressure groups such as extinction rebellion have had little influence because they have had no contact with government ministers. Some of the more impactful pressure groups have used celebrities to drive media endorsements and thereby force the governments hand and this has been somewhat successful. Most notably, FareShare which won the support of the footballer Marcus Rashford was able to force the government to fund free school meals during school holidays, whilst Surfers Against Sewage were helped by the support of the former rock start, Fergal Sharkey. The most important pressure groups tend to be trade unions, and this is particularly the case when Labour are in power. This was seen with the impasse between the conservative government and BMA over pay rises for junior doctors and nurses. Within weeks of the Labour Party coming to power in 2024, they had negotiated with the junior doctors and agreed to 22% pay rise across two years. Once again, the most important element is insider status. Whereby, a pressure group has insider status they are likely to impact government decisions. A final example to demonstrate the importance of insider status was seen over the decision about whether to open schools during the Covid outbreak. One group, UsForThem, which opposed Covid safety measures in schools, won the support of 17 Conservative MPs and were therefore able to secure meetings with civil servants from the Department of Education. This is in comparison to another group, Parents United Against Unsafe Schools who wanted to keep school shut. This group did not meet with anybody from the Department for Education. For context, UsForThem had 9,600 members whereas Parents United Against Unsafe Schools had 23,000. It was not the public support, but the support of Conservative MPs that was most influential on governmetn decision making in this case. Once again, pressure groups can impact governmetn decisions, but only if they have insider status.