Evaluating Influences on Law Making | OCR A-Level Law
For Specification H418
OCR A-Level Law | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 45 minutes
Evaluating influences on law making A-Level Law revision moves beyond identifying who can influence Parliament and asks whether those influences improve the creation and reform of law. For OCR H418, you need to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of political influences, public opinion, the media, pressure groups, lobbyists and the Law Commission. This builds directly on the different influences [Influences on Parliament] and Law Commission reform [The Law Commission], with a particular focus on developing the AO3 analysis needed for examination questions.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Analyse advantages of different influences on Parliament.
Analyse disadvantages of different influences on Parliament.
Compare the effectiveness of different influences on law making.
Assess the impact that political, public and specialist influences can have on legal reform.
Develop focused evaluative arguments suitable for OCR AO3 questions.
Revision Notes 📚
What does OCR require you to evaluate?
OCR specifically requires knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of influences on law making.
The relevant influences are:
political influences
public opinion
the media
pressure groups
lobbyists
the Law Commission
OCR only requires the operation of these influences to be understood in outline. For this lesson, the priority is therefore not lengthy description. You need to analyse whether each influence makes law reform more democratic, informed or effective, and identify limitations on its impact.
If you need to revise how these influences operate before evaluating them, return to influences on Parliament [Influences on Parliament].
How to turn description into evaluation
A common weakness is to identify an influence without explaining why it is beneficial or problematic.
For example:
Description: Public opinion can influence Parliament.
Evaluation: Public opinion can make law making more democratic because it allows people to express concerns about issues that matter to them. However, it may be difficult to identify one genuine public view in a diverse society, so apparent public opinion may not represent everyone.
The second response is stronger because it develops both the benefit and its limitation.
A useful AO3 pattern is:
Identify the influence.
State the advantage or disadvantage.
Explain why it matters.
Develop the consequence for law making.
Where useful, provide a counterpoint or supported example.
Political influences
Political influence includes the role of the government and its policies.
Advantages of government policy
A major advantage is democratic legitimacy.
A government has been elected and can claim a mandate to pursue the policies on which it was elected. If its manifesto promised reform in a particular area, introducing legislation to fulfil that promise can be seen as responding to the electorate.
This means government influence can support democracy because:
election → mandate → government policy → proposed legislation
A government is therefore not simply an unelected organisation lobbying Parliament. Its political authority comes from the electoral process.
Disadvantages of government policy
The government cannot implement every possible reform.
OCR identifies two important limitations:
there is limited parliamentary time
some matters receive greater priority than others
This means a useful reform may receive little attention if it is not high on the government's political agenda.
Government influence can therefore create an imbalance. Proposals closely connected to government priorities may progress, while other reforms can struggle to receive parliamentary time.
Assessing the impact
Government policy can potentially have a particularly significant impact because government proposals form an important part of Parliament's legislative work. However, this can also mean that law reform is influenced heavily by current political priorities.
The strength of political influence is therefore also its possible weakness:
A government has democratic authority to pursue its programme, but its control over priorities may leave less room for reforms that are not politically urgent.
Private Members' Bills and political influence
The specification requires knowledge of Private Members' Bills, which you studied in types of Bill [Types of Bill].
OCR's 2024 mark scheme also accepts them when evaluating influences on law making.
Advantages
Private Members' Bills allow individual Members of Parliament to raise issues that may not form part of the government's main legislative programme.
They can:
allow MPs to raise matters affecting their constituents
support greater participation in democracy
provide a route for more specialised or less politically controversial issues
raise the profile of an issue even if the Bill does not ultimately become law
This can broaden law making beyond the government's immediate priorities.
Disadvantages
Their impact is limited by parliamentary time and government support.
The wider parliamentary process gives relatively little time to Private Members' Bills and government control of parliamentary priorities can make successful reform difficult.
The opportunity to raise an issue is therefore not the same as the power to ensure that it becomes law.
Public opinion
Public opinion can place pressure on Parliament to address issues which concern members of society.
OCR-supported examples include public campaigns or movements such as Sarah's Law, #MeToo and Black Lives Matter, as well as the use of a referendum on the major issue of Brexit.
Advantages of public opinion
The central advantage is that it gives the public a voice.
Law affects society, so allowing public concerns to influence the legislative agenda can make law making more responsive.
Public opinion may:
bring neglected issues to political attention
show politicians that an issue matters to voters
encourage debate
increase pressure for a legislative response
This supports democratic participation between elections.
Disadvantages of public opinion
A major difficulty is deciding what "public opinion" actually is.
OCR highlights the problem of representing opinion in a diverse pluralist society. Different sections of society may hold very different views.
A loud or highly visible campaign therefore does not necessarily represent the whole population.
The influence may also be connected closely with media coverage, creating a further problem if the public receives an incomplete or unbalanced presentation of the issue.
Assessing the impact
Public opinion can be powerful in bringing an issue onto the political agenda, particularly where public concern becomes widespread.
However, its effect is indirect. Public concern can create pressure, but Parliament still determines whether legislation will follow.
The impact of public opinion can therefore be described as agenda-setting rather than law-making.
The media
The media can bring political and legal issues to public attention.
It can also reinforce other influences, particularly public opinion and pressure-group campaigns.
Advantages of media influence
Media coverage can:
increase public awareness
draw attention to issues that may otherwise receive little publicity
give campaigns a much wider audience
place pressure on politicians to consider an issue
This may be particularly useful for causes that would otherwise struggle to gain political attention.
OCR examiners identified successful evaluation of influences as including discussion of their ability to generate legislative responses to marginal causes.
Disadvantages of media influence
OCR specifically recognises that the media do not always provide a balanced view.
If an issue is presented selectively, the pressure subsequently placed upon Parliament may not be based upon a complete picture.
Media attention may also give some issues greater prominence than others, regardless of whether those issues are necessarily the most important candidates for legal reform.
Assessing the impact
The media can be highly effective at amplifying another influence.
For example:
campaign → media attention → greater public awareness → political pressure
Its impact is therefore often strongest when combined with public opinion or pressure-group activity.
Its major limitation is that publicity should not automatically be treated as proof of balanced or representative public concern.
Pressure groups
Pressure groups attempt to influence political decisions on particular issues.
OCR gives Fathers for Justice and Stonewall as examples when evaluating this influence.
Advantages of pressure groups
Pressure groups can offer something beyond general public opinion because they may develop:
specialist research
expertise
detailed knowledge of the issue
sustained campaigning
This can help politicians understand matters that require specialist information.
Pressure groups also give people a method of participating in political debate outside elections.
Even where a campaign does not immediately result in legislation, it may still raise the profile of an issue.
OCR's material illustrates that different pressure groups can experience different levels of success, with Fathers for Justice used as an example of raising an issue's profile and Stonewall identified as having experienced greater success.
Disadvantages of pressure groups
Influence does not guarantee reform.
Some groups have limited success, so significant campaigning can occur without producing legislative change.
This means the effectiveness of pressure groups can vary considerably.
A campaign may raise public awareness while still being unable to secure sufficient political support or parliamentary time for legislation.
Assessing the impact
Pressure groups may be especially valuable when they combine public participation with expertise.
Their impact can nevertheless vary. Raising the profile of an issue may itself be important, but this is different from successfully securing legislation.
A useful judgement is therefore:
Pressure groups can influence the agenda and provide expertise, but their ultimate impact depends upon Parliament and the political response to their campaign.
Lobbyists and special interest groups
Lobbyists attempt to persuade political decision-makers to support particular interests or proposals.
OCR's 2024 mark scheme refers to special interests such as trade unions, business interests, donations and lobbying.
Advantages of lobbying
Lobbyists and special interest groups may possess useful expertise.
Where legislation affects a particular sector, those involved may understand its practical effects and provide information to decision-makers.
This can make law making better informed.
Disadvantages of lobbying
The major concern identified by OCR is the possibility of undue influence because of funding relationships.
Individuals and organisations do not necessarily possess equal financial resources or political access.
This creates a possible conflict between:
valuable specialist input
excessive influence by wealthy or powerful interests
If financial power gives some interests greater access than others, the resulting influence may appear less democratically legitimate.
Assessing the impact
Lobbying demonstrates why influence itself is neither automatically good nor bad.
Specialist input may improve Parliament's understanding of a proposal. However, the same access becomes problematic if influence depends heavily upon money, donations or privileged relationships.
The key issue is therefore expertise versus undue influence.
The Law Commission
The Law Commission is another influence specifically required by OCR. Its role and methods are covered fully in the Law Commission [The Law Commission].
Advantages of the Law Commission
OCR identifies several important advantages:
a high level of legal expertise
detailed research
carefully considered reports
a strong reputation with Parliament
This makes the Law Commission different from influences based mainly on publicity or political pressure.
Its recommendations can be based upon sustained legal analysis rather than immediate political popularity.
This may make it particularly valuable for complicated areas of law reform.
Disadvantages of the Law Commission
The Commission cannot ensure that its recommendations become legislation.
OCR identifies difficulties caused by:
lack of political will
lack of legislative or parliamentary time
A carefully researched proposal can therefore remain unimplemented.
This demonstrates an important limitation on expert-led law reform:
Expertise can identify a need for reform, but expertise alone cannot make Parliament act.
Assessing the impact
The Law Commission has the advantage of expertise and careful research, but its practical influence ultimately depends on politicians.
Its impact can therefore be described as high-quality but dependent.
The quality of a proposal may be strong, while its chances of becoming law remain influenced by the political agenda.
Comparing the influences
The influences have different strengths and weaknesses.
Influence | Main advantage | Main disadvantage | Potential impact on law making |
Government policy | Democratic mandate | Competing priorities and limited parliamentary time | Can place reform directly onto the political agenda |
Private Members' Bills | Allows MPs to raise specialist or constituent concerns | Limited time and dependence on political support | Can secure change or at least raise an issue's profile |
Public opinion | Gives the public a voice | Difficult to identify one representative view in a pluralist society | Can create significant political pressure |
Media | Increases awareness and publicity | Coverage may be unbalanced | Can amplify campaigns and public pressure |
Pressure groups | Can combine campaigning with expertise | Success varies and campaigning does not guarantee reform | Can raise the profile of marginal or specialist issues |
Lobbyists | Can provide specialist information | Funding relationships may create undue influence | Can give particular interests direct political influence |
Law Commission | Strong legal expertise and detailed research | Depends on political will and parliamentary time | Can provide carefully developed proposals for reform |
OCR's 2024 mark scheme uses precisely these kinds of contrasts when assessing evaluation of influences.
Which influences have the greatest impact?
There is no single answer that must always be reached. Different influences operate in different ways.
However, you can construct a supported assessment.
Democratic influence
Government policy and public opinion have strong claims to democratic legitimacy.
Government has an electoral mandate.
Public opinion allows people to express concerns between elections.
Private Members' Bills allow individual MPs to raise issues.
However, a majority government may prioritise its own programme, while apparent public opinion may not represent everyone.
Expertise
The Law Commission, pressure groups and lobbyists can contribute expertise.
Law Commission reports offer detailed legal analysis.
Pressure groups can develop specialist research.
lobbyists may explain the interests of affected sectors.
However, expertise does not guarantee influence, and lobbying raises particular concerns if financial resources produce disproportionate access.
Ability to gain attention
The media and pressure groups can be effective at raising the profile of issues.
This can ensure that marginal causes are heard, but publicity is not the same as legislation.
Overall assessment
The most effective law reform may result when different influences interact.
For example:
expert research + campaigning + public awareness + political support → greater possibility of parliamentary action
No individual influence can guarantee reform because Parliament ultimately decides whether legislation is enacted.
The strongest evaluation therefore recognises the difference between:
influencing the agenda
providing expertise
creating political pressure
actually securing legislative change
Evaluating influences versus evaluating Parliament
Do not confuse this lesson with evaluating the legislative process [Evaluating the legislative process].
They answer different questions.
Evaluating influences asks:
Is government influence democratic?
Is public opinion representative?
Does media coverage help or distort debate?
Do pressure groups provide expertise?
Can lobbying produce undue influence?
Does the Law Commission successfully turn expertise into reform?
Evaluating Parliament asks:
Is the parliamentary process democratic?
Is it too slow?
Is there sufficient scrutiny?
Does government dominate the legislative timetable?
Some ideas overlap, particularly parliamentary time and government influence, but the focus of your answer must match the question.
Building a strong OCR AO3 paragraph
OCR's examiner report shows that students gain more credit from a smaller number of well-developed evaluative points than from a long list of brief statements.
A strong paragraph might follow this pattern:
Point: Pressure groups can improve law making by providing specialist expertise.
Development: A group campaigning in one area may conduct research and develop detailed knowledge which generalist politicians do not possess.
Impact: This can give Parliament useful evidence when considering whether reform is needed.
Counterpoint: However, pressure-group success varies, and specialist knowledge does not ensure that Parliament will give the proposal legislative time.
Judgement: Their contribution may therefore improve the quality of debate even when they do not directly secure legislation.
That is analysis. Simply describing what a pressure group does is AO1 and will not fully answer an evaluative question.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Mandate | Democratic authority claimed by an elected government to pursue its stated policies. | Evaluate the democratic strength of government influence. |
Pluralist society | A society containing a variety of different views, interests and values. | Explain why identifying a single genuine public opinion can be difficult. |
Expertise | Specialist knowledge of a particular legal or practical issue. | Analyse advantages of the Law Commission, pressure groups or lobbyists. |
Undue influence | Influence that may be considered excessive or disproportionate. | Evaluate concerns about lobbying and funding relationships. |
Political will | The willingness of politicians to support and devote time to a proposal. | Explain why expert recommendations may still fail to produce legislation. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Do not spend most of an AO3 answer describing the influences. In the 2024 influences question, candidates at all levels sometimes included unnecessary AO1 instead of evaluating the advantages. Stronger responses moved quickly into analysis.
Examiner hint: Use a range of influences, and give each a distinct evaluative point. The strongest 2024 responses considered different advantages rather than repeating the same general claim about democracy. Examiners particularly praised developed discussion of democratic participation and bringing marginal causes to political attention.
Examiner hint: Avoid bald advantages such as "pressure groups are democratic" or "the Law Commission has expertise". Develop why the point matters and what effect it has on law making.
Examiner hint: Read the exact focus of the question. Some students answered the 2024 question by discussing advantages of the parliamentary law-making process, rather than advantages of the influences on law making. Those are different topics.
Examiner hint: Keep your answer proportionate. OCR stated after the 2024 examination that around four well-developed evaluative points could achieve Level 4. Extremely long answers containing many additional points gained no extra credit and could damage time management.
Examiner hint: A conclusion is not required or credited for these 12-mark AO3 Section A questions. Use your time to develop the evaluative points themselves instead.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Describing influences rather than evaluating them
Why this is incorrect: An AO3 question is testing analysis and evaluation, not simply whether you know what pressure groups, lobbyists or the Law Commission are.
How to improve: After every point, ask: Why is this an advantage or disadvantage for law making?
Mistake: Evaluating the parliamentary process instead
Why this is incorrect: A question about influences is not asking generally whether Parliament is an effective law maker.
How to improve: Make the influence the subject of every paragraph: "Public opinion is beneficial because...", "Lobbying may be problematic because..."
Mistake: Treating publicity as proof of successful law reform
Why this is incorrect: Media or pressure-group activity can raise the profile of an issue without producing legislation.
How to improve: Distinguish between influencing attention and securing legislative change.
Mistake: Assuming public opinion always represents the majority
Why this is incorrect: OCR identifies the difficulty of establishing representative opinion in a diverse pluralist society.
How to improve: Balance democratic participation against the problem of competing views.
Mistake: Assuming expertise automatically leads to reform
Why this is incorrect: The Law Commission may produce detailed expert reports, but political will and parliamentary time are still required.
How to improve: Use the counterpoint: quality of recommendation does not guarantee implementation.
Mistake: Saying lobbying is always beneficial or always corrupt
Why this is incorrect: OCR recognises both sides. Specialist interests can provide expertise, but funding relationships may also create undue influence.
How to improve: Evaluate the tension between informed law making and unequal political influence.
Mistake: Writing a long conclusion instead of developing paragraphs
Why this is incorrect: OCR's 2024 examiner report states that conclusions are not required or separately credited on these Section A AO3 questions.
How to improve: Spend the time developing approximately four strong evaluative points.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Identify one advantage of political influence on law making. [1]
Question 2
Explain one disadvantage of relying on public opinion as an influence on Parliament. [2]
Question 3
Explain one advantage and one disadvantage of media influence on law making. [4]
Question 4
Analyse why pressure groups may be valuable influences on Parliament even when they do not secure legislation. [6]
Question 5
A national organisation employs specialists to research proposed legal reforms and regularly meets politicians to explain how legislation would affect its members. The organisation also makes substantial political donations.
Analyse one advantage and one disadvantage of this form of influence on Parliament. [6]
Question 6
Analyse the effectiveness of the Law Commission as an influence on law reform. [6]
Question 7
A proposed reform has widespread public support and extensive media coverage. An expert body has also produced a detailed report supporting change. However, the government has decided that other legislation will receive priority.
Analyse what this situation demonstrates about the effectiveness of different influences on law making. [8]
Question 8
Discuss whether different influences on Parliament improve the effectiveness of law making. [12]
Answers and Indicative Mark Scheme
Question 1 [1]
One mark for a valid advantage, such as:
government policy has democratic legitimacy because an elected government has a mandate to pursue its manifesto
individual MPs can raise issues through Private Members' Bills
Question 2 [2]
Award credit for identifying and explaining a relevant disadvantage.
For example:
Public opinion can be difficult to identify accurately because society contains many different and competing views, so a highly visible campaign may not represent the population as a whole.
Question 3 [4]
Indicative content:
Advantage:
media coverage can raise awareness of an issue
increased attention may create political pressure and help marginal issues reach Parliament
Disadvantage:
media coverage may not provide a balanced view
this can distort apparent public opinion or give disproportionate attention to particular issues
Higher marks require development of both sides.
Question 4 [6]
Indicative content:
pressure groups can provide research and specialist expertise
this can improve Parliament's understanding of an issue
campaigning can increase public awareness
groups can bring marginal or specialist causes onto the political agenda
even unsuccessful campaigns may raise an issue's profile
however, raising awareness does not itself guarantee legislation
A strong response should distinguish influence from guaranteed legal change.
Question 5 [6]
Indicative content:
Advantage:
specialists can provide expertise and practical information
this may allow politicians to understand the effect of proposed legislation
better information may improve law making
Disadvantage:
substantial funding or political donations may produce undue influence
wealthy interests may have greater access than groups with fewer resources
this raises concerns about the democratic legitimacy of the influence
Higher marks require analysis of the effect on law making rather than merely repeating the scenario.
Question 6 [6]
Indicative content:
Advantages:
high level of legal expertise
detailed research
carefully considered reports
well regarded by Parliament
Disadvantages:
recommendations do not automatically become law
lack of political will can prevent implementation
limited parliamentary time may be given to proposals
A strong assessment should recognise that the Law Commission can produce high-quality reform proposals while having limited control over whether Parliament acts on them.
Question 7 [8]
Indicative content:
widespread public support demonstrates the democratic and agenda-setting value of public opinion
media coverage can amplify that pressure
the expert report demonstrates the contribution that specialist research can make
several influences may therefore point towards reform simultaneously
however, none can force Parliament to legislate
government priorities and limited parliamentary time can prevent reform
political influence may therefore determine whether other forms of influence ultimately lead to legislation
A strong response should compare the influences rather than discuss each in isolation.
Question 8 [12]
Indicative content may include:
Government policy
democratic mandate
ability to pursue manifesto commitments
limited parliamentary time and competing priorities
Public opinion
gives citizens a voice
increases democratic participation
difficult to identify representative opinion in a pluralist society
Media
increases awareness
helps marginal issues gain attention
may provide an unbalanced picture
Pressure groups
research and specialist expertise
raise the profile of issues
success varies and legislative change is not guaranteed
Lobbyists and special interests
can provide useful specialist information
funding relationships may create undue influence
Law Commission
high legal expertise
detailed and carefully researched reports
recommendations depend upon political will and parliamentary time
For the highest marks, the response should contain a range of well-developed evaluative points focused directly on the effect of influences on law making. Avoid lengthy descriptions of how each influence operates.
An OCR Section A response of this type does not need a conclusion. The quality and development of the evaluative arguments are more important.
Comments