AO1: The Conservative Party has always had significant input into its policies from right leaning think tanks. The Institute for Economic Affairs was very influential under Truss, The Centre for Policy Studies and the Adam Smith Institute were central to Thatcherism and in office David Cameron's policies were influenced by Policy Exchange. AO2: The radical changes introduced by all governments can trace their origins to think tanks. Many ideas and policies of the Conservative Party originated in think tanks and were endorsed by PMs and Ministers. In essence this saved time and effort of the Conservative Party as they had tailor made policies for them. AO3: We can conclude that think tanks advising governments are very influential. AO1: The Labour Party enjoys a similar close relationships with left or centrist think tanks. New Labour was influenced by Demos and The Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) and it remains influential, prior to the general election Keir Starmer was influenced by the Centrist think tank Labour Together. AO2: In a similar mode the Labour Party in office and in opposition shows that it has been significantly influenced by think tanks in the policies which it has adopted, Senior officials in Demos and the IPPR were given roles in the New Labour government. AO3: We can conclude that thinks tanks have considerable influence. AO1: Lobbyists have considerable power in parliament as they are well funded and have good contacts with MPs, Peers, Ministers and the Civil Service. AO2: Although any individual can lobby Parliament, it is professional lobbyists with a budget of over £4 billion that can have an impact. There have been scandals over the role of lobbyists in the Betting and vaping industry. AO3: We can conclude that such vast sums of money must deliver change otherwise the funds would not continue to flow. AO1: Corporations have immense funds available to them and also great leverage and they can make demands on governments to suit the demands of their corporation. AO2: Global corporations wealth far exceeds those of Lobbyists. Many governments seek to please big corporations, many of whom have more wealth than some countries. Corporations such as Google, Apple, Ford, Starbucks, Microsoft and McDonalds carry vast influence as they decide where to spend their money. Governments have been criticised for allowing many to pay less tax and be given grants to open factories. The recent example of David Cameron working as an advisor for Greensill Capital shows their reach. AO3: Therefore we can conclude that are very influential.

AO1: Pressure groups if they are well organised and have insider status can have more impact than the other collective organisations. AO2: Insider groups have great leverage with governments. They include groups such as the NFU and the British Bankers Association and Stonewall. At some point they have carried influence with governments and gained access to decision makers resulting in policy adoption. If a pressure group is trusted and valued by the government this makes their influence all the stronger. AO3: Therefore we can conclude that pressure groups are more influential. AO1: Pressure groups are able to mobilise public opinion and directly reach out to voters in a way that the other collective organisations cannot. AO2: Pressure groups are able to challenge governments and institutions in court, mounting legal challenges to change decisions e.g. government policy on Rwanda, the Met Police and the Sarah Everard vigil, River Action and the Environment Agency. AO3: We can conclude pressure groups can exert huge influence. AO1: Governments are more likely to take heed of pressure groups if they have a large or concentrated following. AO2: Some pressure groups also have a global presence, like Greenpeace, and are able to exert influence on governments, international organisations as well as mobilising public support. As they educate and mobilise public support, they exert great influence. AO3: As such pressure groups can be highly influential. AO1: Pressure groups not only have influence over government and ministers but change public views and actions. AO2: Pressure groups normally have a more transparent campaigning model, their aims are clear and often lucid. This can engage the public and gain their support. This leads to open dialogue with the government who have to explain and justify their decisions. In contrast, the work of other collective bodies is less open and transparent– and may backfire if their action is seen as dishonest – e.g. Owen Patterson. AO3: Therefore pressure groups are more influential.