THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND INTEREST GROUPS

<< “POLITICAL GROUPINGS AND ALLIANCES: ISSUES AND PERSPECTIVES”

“THE POPULATION, EDUCATION AND ECONOMIC DIMENSIONS OF PAKISTAN” >>

Globalization of Media MCM404

Lesson 13

THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND INTEREST GROUPS

Text of the handout for students

Note: This handout contains the text of a chapter of the same name written by the lecturer and published

in "From Chaos to Catharsis" by Javed Jabbar published by Royal Book Company (1996), BG-5, Rex Centre,

Zebunnissa Street, Karachi 74400, Tel: 5684244, 5653418, e-mail: royalbook@hotmail.com.

The legislative process and interest groups

If the legislature itself is seen as the supreme national interest group representing the totality of a country's

perceptions about itself, then there may be the tendency to assume that all sectoral interest groups are more

or less adequately represented within the legislature and that, therefore, any extra role that interest groups

want to play in the legislative process is really a "vested interest "group role, self-serving rather than being

nationally oriented.

This is an incorrect assumption. Because even though a fairly elected legislature is a fairly accurate cross-

section of a country the method of election (i.e. first past-the-post as distinct from proportional

representation), the socio-economic profile of successful candidates, the size of political parties and groups in

the legislatures and other factors may prevent all principal segments of public opinion as well as of the public

interest from being adequately represented in the Houses.

Interest groups therefore, have a valid and legitimate role to play in society and in the legislative process

provided, of course, that they observe norms and parameters of conduct. This does not always happen but

such aberration does not in itself invalidate the role of interest groups.

This general principle stated, it is necessary to determine the precise interest of an interest group before

proceeding further. Where an interest group's stated motivation and objectives are in harmony with a

country's security and progress, where the interest group aims to improve public policy whereby a larger

national good is achieved while also satisfying the more limited good of the group, it is possible to accept the

aims and objectives of interest groups.

At the same time, while having constructive national aims, an interest group, out of uncertainty of success or

out of sheer temptation for short-cuts may use methods that are dubious, illegal or corruptive. This is the

case of the means certainly not justifying the ends. And it is here that special vigilance is required to monitor

the methods used by interest groups to advance their own aims.

Where interest groups use methods that are above board, then obviously they deserve study and observation.

Interest groups can represent a wide variety of sectors; different categories of industry such as textiles (within

which there can be sub-categories such as yarn, wool, ready-mades, linen, cloth, synthetics, etc.) chemicals,

food, beverages; different facets of agriculture such as cotton growers, rice farmers, wheat farmers, sugarcane

cultivators; different types of traders dealing in imports and exports, financial institutions including banks, co-

operatives, white collar workers, blue-collar workers; academics; consumer groups; professional associations;

voluntary organizations; social issues and national issues-oriented groups on family planning, education,

welfare, health, environment, etc.

Some of these interest groups, perhaps a few, are always well-represented in the legislatures. For example,

agriculturists in rural-oriented countries; industrialists, people with significant financial power, etc. In these

cases, such interest groups are also well-represented in the highest levels of the executive leadership of the

government and often of the State. This fortuitously reduces the work-load of interest groups because the

legislative majority and the government do their job for them! For those interest groups that are either

under-represented in the legislatures or not represented at all, there is a distinct and considerable work-load.

It is relevant to note that, due to a variety of factors such as an inherited, transplanted parliamentary or

legislative system, the economic and social structures of a nation, the majority of peoples in South Asian

nations are not represented in legislatures by individuals who share their socio-economic profile. In other

words, a constituency of very poor peasants in the rural areas or an urban constituency of middle class or

low-income workers may well be represented by individuals of very high income and of a very different

socio-economic profile.

Globalization of Media MCM404

Thus, a major interest group, i.e. the poor, while going through the delusion that they are duly organized as an

interest group through the political party or movement that they support may, in real terms, be deprived of

representation inside legislatures as well as deprived of interest groups outside legislatures because a political

party led by individuals who masquerade as champions of the poor pre-empt any potential attempt to set up a

special interest group for the poor.

The moral of the story is therefore, that a country may have democracy, may have regular elections and yet

may continue to deprive the majority of authentic participation in the legislatures, or even in interest groups.

There are also instances where political parties and movements set up ostensibly and specifically by the poor

for the poor, end up as partners of the rich and distort the articulation of the interests of the poor.

Legislatures are virtually always at the mercy of the majorities. Governments tend to enjoy an unfair

advantage over the opposition in setting the legislative agenda. When oppositions have the numerical

strength to requisition sessions at their own initiative, they remain subject to the overt and covert influence of

the government in determining the work of the legislatures.

Interest groups that seek legislative intervention have to strike a fine balance in their approach in order that

they are able to provide the opposition with fresh ammunition to fire upon the government while at the same

time ensuring that they do not antagonize the government by too close an alignment with the opposition.

Interest groups should be very good at walking the thin line of hyper-sensitivity that marks the partisan aspect

of legislatures.

Legislative majorities and other members of legislatures have a fair number of priorities competing for their

attention, ahead of interest groups. Constituency considerations, petitions for jobs, transfers and favours,

their own pre-occupations with government, party matters, attendance of House sittings, House committee

meetings, social engagements et al.

Interest groups use a range of methods to capture the attention of legislators. Letters and documents in the

mail, telephone calls, interviews for personal briefings, delegations to the premises of Parliament to button-

hole members, meetings with Ministers, publication of appeals, protests, letters in the Press to invite the

attention of leaders, holding of seminars, Press conferences, requests to be heard by Parliamentary

committees to enable presentation of viewpoints.

There is a tendency in most interest groups to concentrate only on specific policy measures such as taxes,

duties, etc. rather than on conceptual and fundamental issues that may require entirely new legislation or

substantive amendments to existing legislation. There are honorable exceptions such as when interest groups

take up critical causes like women's rights, children's rights.

In general, interest groups are "reactive" rather than anticipatory and pre-emptive, going into action as soon

as their interests are threatened or affected by a legislative or executive decision. Legislatures enjoy certain

inherent advantages over interest groups in terms of infrastructure, resources and the panoply of privileges.

Yet certain interest groups can also deploy vast resources to achieve their aims, particularly in a covert

manner. Where lobbies have access to unreported income or where they are able to offer legislators facilities

and electoral support, then members of legislatures become vulnerable to undue influence. When legislators

and interest groups converge and collaborate there can be an inhibiting and inimical impact on democracy

because those adversely affected by such a combination have no recourse, except to the courts.

Reporting of Parliament is a complex and challenging task for media correspondents. It demands knowledge,

understanding and vigilance of the highest level. Reporting on the activities and aims of interest groups and

monitoring their open as well as unseen interaction with the legislative sector requires an additional

investment of time, talent and investigative resources. To enable correspondents to do justice to these

considerable demands, media need to significantly increase the quality and quantum of the support that they

provide to correspondents.

Globalization of Media MCM404

In principle, interest groups have a positive and corrective role to play in relation to the legislative process

provided that the media are able to accurately and effectively report on this relationship and keep the people

well-informed with in-depth analyses.

Table of Contents: