Social Responsibility And Its Impact On The Public Eye

Parliament is very effective when dealing with the public and their interests and needs like when they redress public grievances to make sure they are listened too. However, parliament isn’t so effective on the representative side of things. This is because the electoral system that we use isn’t very fair and excludes smaller parties of a chance of being voted into parliament. This therefore means a large number of public votes have been

Another common criticism of the UK system is that, although most politicians are elected, many powerful people hold their positions without having to face the voters. Over the years criticism has focused on the House of Lords, the civil service and judges. While the people serving these positions may indeed be experts in their field, the citizens of the UK have absolutely no say in who is elected into these positions. This shows a problem in the United Kingdom’s democratic system and one that does not follow a representative democracy.

Lawrence, Anne (2010). Business and Society: Stakeholders, Ethics, Public Policy. 13th Edition. McGraw-Hill Learning Solutions, 2010. VitalBook file. Bookshelf.

However the government is held to account by the British public in general elections because the First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system favours the two party

Undue influence-peddling - in which special interests may exercise too much sway over public policy for self-serving purposes, can be a real problem for a democratic society. Democratic government requires legitimacy to function properly, and legitimacy comes from the trust and support of its citizenry. Yet those who practice it seldom attract the attention in Britain that they do in America. In the Commons, meanwhile, the public-administration committee (PAC) has been looking since last June into the impact of lobbying on government decisions. Lobbyists insist that theirs is a respectable business. One reason is that the cash-for-questions affair gave rise in 1994 to a self-regulatory body, the Association of Professional Political Consultants

Tony Blair introduced me to politics. Taken by my parents to protest in London against the Iraq war I experienced the inability of national politics and international relations to be mutually exclusive concepts. Key issues such as the growing refugee crisis, the debate regarding Britain’s place in Europe and trade agreements such as TTIP all have national and international implications. Britain’s political sovereignty has been eroded by Unions, Agreements and world events. This opens up the debate as to where power is concentrated. A more controversial debate would address whether national and global decisions are in fact being made by politicians at all, or if global corporations impose greater power. Regardless of this nihilistic view, the

Pressure groups play a vital role within the increasingly complex and multicultural electorate. A single Member of Parliament, Representative or Senator has a diverse constituency base to represent, which makes it difficult to represent a variety of often conflicting interests. This is where pressure groups are critical to representative democracy as they allow the interests of specific groups to be represented by an organisation that is dedicated to them and understands them fully. Whilst this is a positive argument, pressure groups with vast amounts of power make this vital function of representation difficult to carry out fairly for all pressure groups involved.

With self-governing and the principles of democracy comes the flexibility of interpretation. In a society where the people are essentially supposed to be in charge, interpretation should be, and is, required by those in power. But with a Charter so entrenched in a Constitution, the issue of the dead hand of the past arises. Society should not have to worry about the past influencing current decisions due to the abstract standard, which allows adaption to changing circumstances and

As Habermas puts it “the relationship of the individual to the state has increasingly become one of client or consumer services, rather than citizen” (Roberts & Crossley, 5). Due to the limited agency (citizens’ roles) within this sphere, we can conclude that the ongoing competition and negotiation for a role in the public sphere ends with strictly dominant views. In such a monarchy, ordinary citizens such as lower classes and women have limited input when debating politics among other things. The ideal of a place where all opinions are counted, so to speak, fails to provide a sense of individual identity. This is due to the fact that it is pre-destined by the state itself and then turned back to the people- telling them what they will think about particular issues; shown especially through the controlling lens of the media.

Companies today are heavily influenced by the demands of customers and stakeholders. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) refers to the social and environmental responsibility policies and practices developed by an organization to increase its positive influence and reduce its negative activity towards society (Parks, 2008). The business approach and corporate philosophy of an organization is easily altered due to economic pressures, technological improvement and stakeholder needs and demands. "Going green" or being eco-friendly is one such demand. Environmental and sustainability concerns originate most often from governments, consumer activists, and the general public (Schlosser, 2008). Thus, organizations must implement sustainability into daily practices. In addition, sustainability alters the nature of competition and drives companies to think differently about products, processes, and technologies (Parks, 2008).

This assumption reflects the enlightenment philosophies of the time in europe, especially post-glorious-revolution Britain. Specifically, the section assumes that humans in power tend to place their own benefit over the benefit of others. Lord John Acton reflected this sentiment in his phrase, ‘Absolute power corrupts absolutely’. Similarly, George Washington stated that ‘Government Is Like Fire, a Dangerous Servant and a Fearful Master’. The argument implicit in Washington’s statement is that it is the men who the government is composed of that are the threat, no matter who they happen to be. Based on this understanding of human nature, the section’s design to limit the ability of politicians to abuse their power is a sound one.

In the case that politicians do not live up to the ideals and criteria they were chosen for, a merit of democracy is that it allows the citizenry to punish these officials – not necessarily through extreme forms like impeachment, but perhaps by simply electing someone else in the forthcoming election. While, as previously addressed, not all participants in the election process vote based on truthful information, some citizens do. It must be remembered that not only those in authority

The Influence of Pressure Groups on the Government This essay will outline the significance to which pressure groups have an influence on government and explain how they have fared under New Labour governments. Whilst the term ‘pressure groups’ may be relatively new, the concept itself dates back as far as 1787. The Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade was led by William Wilberforce and Thomas Clarkson and successfully campaigned for the abolition of the slave trade.

At the beginning of this course I wasn’t sure what was meant by social responsibility and civic engagement. During this course I realized the meaning of both and the responsibilities that both imply. A definition of social responsibility that I found particularly poignant and concise comes from Entrepreneur Magazine, “Acting with concern and sensitivity, aware of the impact of your actions on others, particularly the disadvantaged” (Entrepreneur Magazine.com). Social responsibility can be as simple as paying your taxes or recycling your glass bottles. Social responsibility can be as complex as finding solutions to global warming or hunger in Africa. You can be personally socially responsible or you can be socially

The integrative model of social responsibility, which involves the stakeholder theory and moral minimum theory, and the philosophical ethical theory of utilitarianism are the most responsible approaches to business because they involve the standards of knowing who your actions affect, knowing how to help the most people possible, and knowing how to benefit those who are left out of the positive externalities of a business decision. This paper will discuss the implications of these theories in further depth and will look at a few business cases that demonstrate a failure to meet standards of responsibility.