Pressure Group Politics - The Rally Against Debt versus March for the Alternative

The anti-cuts umbrella group, the March for the Alternative, promoted by the trade unions, provided a successful, high-profile protest on March 26th., attended by upwards of 250 million people.  But it failed to have any impact on government policy.  Yesterday, a pro-cuts umbrella group, the Rally Against Debt, promoted by pressure group the Taxpayers’ Alliance, organised its own protest at Westminster.  Optimistic counts put the attendance at 350, with everyone having disappeared after a couple of hours.  But the government is indeed doing what Rally Against Debt want it to - pursuing cuts.  Can these two events cast light on the success and failure of pressure group tactics?  One of the groups involved in the March 26th. event, UK Uncut, achieved fame for its Fortnums sit-in.  They are now organising another day of action on May 28th. to protest the NHS changes.  Called the ‘Emergency Operation’ they will seek to turn banks into hospitals.  It could be entertaining, may well generate much publicity, but will it change much?  Isn’t the real impact on government coming from medical insider groups?

I have written at greater length here comparing the two events relating to cuts.  In terms of their impact on power, they might superficially seem to reinforce the notion of a more elitist structure.  The ‘outsider’ trade unions and their allies, including UK Uncut, may have been able to use their financial and organisational muscle to mobilise a quarter of a million people, but their impact on the course of government policy has been negligible.  The much smaller Rally Against Debt, meanwhile, may be mocked for the small size of its protest, but it counts influential pressure groups such as the Institute of Economic Affairs (whose director is a former Liberal Democrat), and the Taxpayers’ Alliance amongst its backers, attracted two Conservative MPs to speak to the small gathering, and can undoubtedly claim that the government is indeed pursuing its own beloved cuts agenda.  This, however, is misleading.  While government may indeed be seen as elitist, it is more because it is actually ignoring both ends of the pressure group spectrum on the issue of cuts.  They are not going to abandon the cuts, as demanded by the TUC, but they are not going as deep as the TPA would like either. 

More intriguing are the reasons behind an increasing willingness to halt the NHS reforms, and these may be more to do with the unrest of the medical profession than the protestations of Nick Clegg.  Political pluralism arguably operates in the ability of different groups to protest and gain some media profile, but in the one arena where it matters - influencing government - elitism is still triumphant