Search

It is now two decades since the Advisory Group on Citizenship, commissioned by the newly elected Labour government, recommended the introduction of statutory citizenship education. On the twentieth anniversary of the eponymously named 'Crick Report,' this article presents the findings of a rigorous mixed-methods study of citizenship educators in the UK. This research suggests that teachers continue to lack a shared understanding of citizenship, conceptually and pedagogically, and also reveals an emphasis amongst teachers upon individualistic notions of good citizenship that are reflective of national, and increasingly global, political discourse. The findings are analysed using a new conceptual framework--the declarative--procedural paradigm--which is developed here to understand the relationship between political and normatively driven visions of democratic citizenship and classroom pedagogy. In doing so the article adds, theoretically and substantively, to the specific research pool of citizenship studies and broader debates about political disengagement.

This article explores the interplay between crises, opportunities and democratic change in the United Kingdom. A vast body of scholarship underlines that crises open 'windows of opportunity' that can occasionally lead to radical shifts in the role of the state and the design of public policy. Even when a radical shift occurs, however, it has often proved temporary, with relationships and processes quickly reverting to pre-crisis modes once the immediacy of the crisis abates. This may not be true of our present period of crisis following the COVID-19 pandemic. The consequences of decades of underinvestment in infrastructure and increasing concentration of resources in a small minority of individuals and organisations are being exacerbated by climate change, geopolitical conflict and new waves of disease. The challenge for policymakers in the UK now is heightened by evidence that suggests that nudging, a libertarian paternalist means of promoting certain ends, is ineffective. Policymakers who have long used state neutrality between conceptions of the good as the justification for not promoting certain ends now have to confront a real ethical dilemma: coerce to achieve specific outcomes or invest in addressing the social determinants that actually affect behaviour. This article suggests that contrary to decades of opposition to redistribution among UK policymakers, only the latter is consistent with libertarian paternalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How, when and why do policies change? This article engages with this question through a focus on the taxation of menstrual products in the United Kingdom from its initial emergence as an issue in 1996 through to the eventual abolition of the 'tampon tax' on 1 January 2021. Despite the significance of this topic for broader debates concerning gender inequality, political efficacy and social change it is not one that has been the focus of close historical analysis. The research presented in this article fills this gap in the existing research base and reveals (inter alia): (i) the ebb-and-flow of the issue-attention cycle; (ii) the grating of domestic pressures against international obligations; (iii) incremental policy change in an attempt to assuage campaigners; (iv) the co-option of 'period poverty' as a strategic and symbolic issue by Brexit campaigners; (v) and the eventual resolution of the issue a quarter of a century after it was first raised. As such the politics of policy change vis-à-vis the taxation of menstrual products in the United Kingdom fits within a number of broader debates concerning: how, when and why policies change; the complexities of multi-level governance; and interpretations of policy success and policy failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last 20 years, the notion of relevance vis-à-vis political science became not only a subject of academic debates but also a domain of practice, largely due to the developments in the research funding, increasingly referred to as the 'impact agenda'. In this article, we explore how the growing focus on socio-economic impact as the assessment criterion of research funding shapes the discipline of political science itself—its knowledge production, dissemination and the emergent forms of accountability of political scientists. The article presents the results of a major international study that has examined the emergence of 'impact agendas' across 33 countries. We report on the changing idea of relevance of political science through the lens of its strategic ambiguity and historical evolution. We then explore these broader trends through an in-depth analysis of the UK as an 'extreme case' and a blueprint for funding system reforms. These developments, we argue, are not a mere funding policy innovation but rather a paradigm-level change, reshaping the position of political science in society as well as the types of scholarship that are possible and incentivised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now two decades since the Advisory Group on Citizenship, commissioned by the newly elected Labour government, recommended the introduction of statutory citizenship education. On the twentieth anniversary of the eponymously named ‘Crick Report’, this article presents the findings of a rigorous mixed‐methods study of citizenship educators in the UK. This research suggests that teachers continue to lack a shared understanding of citizenship, conceptually and pedagogically, and also reveals an emphasis amongst teachers upon individualistic notions of good citizenship that are reflective of national, and increasingly global, political discourse. The findings are analysed using a new conceptual framework—the declarative–procedural paradigm—which is developed here to understand the relationship between political and normatively driven visions of democratic citizenship and classroom pedagogy. In doing so the article adds, theoretically and substantively, to the specific research pool of citizenship studies and broader debates about political disengagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the historical foundations and social context that framed the anti-politics of the 2017 general election in Great Britain. Topics discussed include the post-Brexit collapse of the UK Independent Party (UKIP), the repositioning of the Labour Party under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, and the long-terms risk of adopting a populist strategy.

An extensive literature on aversive constitutionalism and elite blockages outlines the manner in which embedded political elites will generally reject or dilute reform agendas that threaten their privileged position within a constitutional configuration. It is for exactly this reason that the same seam of scholarship frequently highlights the role of crises in terms of providing a 'window of opportunity' through which a significant or fundamental recalibration of a political system may be achieved. 'The Palace of Westminster' the Joint Committee on Restoration and Renewal (R&R) concluded in September 2016 'faces an impending crisis which we cannot possibly ignore'. Their recommendation was that the Palace be completely vacated for five to eight years so that a multibillion-pound programme of rebuilding work can be undertaken. This article offers the first research-based analysis of the 'Scoping & Planning' stage (2012-2016) and reveals the 'hidden politics' of R&R in the sense of how it threatens both the British Political Tradition and the position of the two main parties. This explains the nature of the very closed and secretive decision-making processes that have characterised this stage and why a number of formative decision-making points that have been deployed to frame and restrict the reform parameters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK is often regarded as the archetype of Westminster democracy and as the empirical antithesis of the power-sharing coalitions of Western Europe. Yet, in recent years a different account has emerged which focuses on the subtler institutional dynamics that limit the executive. It is to this body of scholarship that this article responds, locating the recent chapter of coalition government within the wider context of the UK's democratic evolution. To do so, the article draws on Lijphart's two-dimensional typology of democracies, developing a refined framework that enables systematic comparison over time. The article demonstrates that over the course of the 2010-2015 Parliament, the UK underwent another period of majoritarian modification, driven by factors including the long-term influence of the constitutional forces unleashed under Labour and the short-term impact of coalition management. The article makes several important contributions, salient in the UK and beyond. Theoretically, it offers a critical rejoinder to debates regarding the relationship between institutional design and democratic performance. Methodologically, it demonstrates that the tools of large-scale comparison can be effectively scaled down to facilitate within-case analysis. Empirically, it provides a series of conclusions regarding the tenability of the UK's extant democratic architecture under the weight of pressures to which it continues to be subject. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill 2015-2016[ HL] was introduced into the House of Lords as Bill No. 1 in the 2015-2016 parliamentary session. The Bill forms a critical element of the government's high-profile policy of devolving powers and responsibilities to local areas within England. The transition from first-generation 'city deals' to second-generation 'devolution deals' within five years provides a sense of the pace and development of the reform agenda but there is also a strong sense that something is missing. 'Missing' in the sense of an understanding of the specific type of devolution on offer, 'missing' in the sense of how an explosion of bilateral new 'deals' will be offset against the obvious risks of fragmentation and complexity, and 'missing'-most importantly-in relation to the democratic roots that might be put in place to counterbalance the economic thrust and make the reform agenda sustainable. It is in exactly this context that this article argues that the full potential of the current devolution agenda will only be realised when the Conservative government fulfils its September 2014 commitment to wider civic engagement about how England is governed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The delegation of public tasks to arm’s-length bodies remains a central feature of contemporary reform agendas within both developed and developing countries. The role and capacity of political and administrative principals (i.e. ministers and departments of state) to control the vast network of arm’s-length bodies for which they are formally responsible is therefore a critical issue within and beyond academe. In the run-up to the 2010 General Election in the United Kingdom, the ‘quango conundrum’ emerged as an important theme and all three major parties committed themselves to shift the balance of power back towards ministers and sponsor departments. This article presents the results of the first major research project to track and examine the subsequent reform process. It reveals a stark shift in internal control relationships from the pre-election ‘poor parenting’ model to a far tighter internal situation that is now the focus of complaints by arm’s-length bodies of micro-management. This shift in the balance of power and how it was achieved offers new insights into the interplay between different forms of governance and has significant theoretical and comparative relevance. Points for practitioners For professionals working in the field of arm’s-length governance, the article offers three key insights. First, that a well-resourced core executive is critical to directing reform given the challenges of implementing reform in a context of austerity. Second, that those implementing reform will also need to take into account the diverse consequences of centrally imposed reform likely to result in different departments with different approaches to arm’s-length governance. Third, that reforming arm’s-length governance can affect the quality of relationships, and those working in the field will need to mitigate these less tangible challenges to ensure success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand how the UK government's headline climate change targets are translated into action at the local level in the transport sector drawing on the findings of research in two English regions. In doing so, these headline targets are identified as a symbolic meta-policy that results in little action on the ground and which challenges established conceptions of policy implementation. Both the 'meta' and 'symbolic' aspects of the policy offer part of the explanation for the lack of substantive action on the ground. As a meta-policy, the headline targets across government require the elaboration of other policies at other levels such as targets for government departments and local authorities, but these are largely absent, leaving the meta-policy without teeth. Over time, these headline targets have developed into a symbolic policy, serving political goals but having little practical effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although declining political engagement has been identified as a key problem for advanced liberal democracies, this article suggests that a more profound tension needs to be addressed. Specifically, it identifies interdependences between growing political pressures on national governments, and the tendency to delegate decisions away from control by elected politicians. These processes of “hyper-democracy” and “hyper-depoliticization” arguably create and re-enforce political tensions, magnifying a risk of central government “overload.” Through analyzing the arguments of prominent scholars of democracy, the article picks apart these interdependencies and argues for a more balanced approach to democratic governance. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The role of legislatures in scrutinising executive patronage has received scant attention in the context of parliamentary democracy. This article addresses this lacuna by focusing on the parliamentary scrutiny of public appointments in the UK. Presenting the results of an extensive programme of research, it reveals how select committees have accrued increasing powers to challenge ministerial appointments, and how this has resulted in a series of unintended consequences that raise critical concerns regarding the overall added-value of pre-appointment scrutiny. The article is therefore of comparative significance for theories of legislative scrutiny in particular and executive–legislature dynamics more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A growing literature on 'agencification', 'quangocratization', and the 'autonomization' of the state has highlighted a coordination dilemma in contemporary public governance whereby governments rely on delegated governance but are frustrated by the lack of control that arises from such structures. In the run-up to the 2010 General Election in the United Kingdom this coordination dilemma was prominent as the capacity of the Cabinet Office to exert control over arm's-length bodies, either directly or indirectly, received intense criticism. This article presents the findings of the first detailed research project to examine the subsequent Coalition Government's approach to this dilemma. It argues that in relation to the governance of public bodies, the role and capacity of the Cabinet Office has been transformed. In mapping this development the article explores the implications of the centre striking back in the context of 'post-New Public Management' reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article returns to Christopher Hood's influential work, The politics of quangocide, to examine the United Kingdom's coalition government's approach to public bodies reform since May 2010. It combines theoretical-innovation and fresh empirical research to argue that the coalition has not simply engaged in quangocide, but has adopted a dual-track strategy based upon 'bureau-shuffling' and a focus on strengthening internal control rather than outright abolition. This has significant international and comparative relevance due to the manner in which these findings resonate with broader 'post New Public Management' narratives of state restructuring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of arm's-length bodies to deliver certain services, to regulate certain sectors or to assume responsibility for particularly salient political issues is neither new in historical terms or a feature unique to the UK in comparative terms. What is particularly distinctive, however, is the Coalition Government's attempts since 2010 to reduce the number of ‘quangos’ while also strengthening the capacity of the core executive and sponsor departments to control and co-ordinate this dense and fragmented sphere of delegated governance. Drawing upon the findings of the first research project to analyse the current Public Bodies Reform Agenda, this article provides an account of the ‘filling-in’ of the ‘hollowing out’. It argues that when viewed through a historical lens, the Coalition Government has adopted a distinctive approach to ‘the quango problem’. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

For centuries, the capacity of British ministers to appoint individuals to positions on the boards of agencies, boards and commissions was viewed as little more than one element of the ‘spoils of war’ in a highly majoritarian polity. This article examines how the politics of patronage has evolved in recent decades and argues that it is possible to identify a silent revolution that has gradually but consistently constrained the reach and discretion enjoyed by ministers in deploying their patronage powers. What is particularly distinctive about British political history since 2007 is the introduction of a far-reaching ladder of legislative scrutiny that ranges from informal pre-appointment hearings, at one end of the ladder, to a statutory veto over the minister's preferred candidate, at the other. However, this ‘outlawing of the spoils’ has evolved in a typically British way with reforms being implemented on an ad hoc and incremental basis, that is, frequently without any advance consultation or planning but rather dependent on non-formal, informal and discretionary elements to counter problems as they arise. The result is a complex and frequently overlapping mixture of regulatory and scrutiny processes that arguably offer little in terms of principled underpinning or constitutional logic. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In the last decade the role of the Prime Minister in the process for making senior Church appointments has changed significantly. The man who replaces Dr Rowan Williams-and it will be a man-will be appointed through a procedure in which the Prime Minister is expected to enjoy no choice but to simply confirm the Church of England's preferred candidate. The aim of this article is to draw upon fresh empirical research in order to explore why and how the politics and governance of ecclesiastical patronage has been recalibrated in this way. More importantly this article seeks to embed the study of ecclesiastical patronage within a much broader appreciation of how other forms of ministerial patronage have also become tightly constrained. This, in itself, forges a connection between the role of politicians in senior Church appointments, on the one hand, and a much richer and broader seam of research and writing that poses distinct questions about the nature of modern governance, the benefits of depoliticisation, the accountability of appointment commissions, the capacity of politicians and the future of democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Some problems of governance regularly resurface, and the use and role of ‘quangos’— public bodies operating at arm's-length to ministers—is a case in point. The administrative history of the British state is littered with official reviews and political debates about quangos. Historically, governments, whatever their reforming zeal, have found it difficult to make substantial changes. Now the UK government has initiated a rapid and large-scale set of reforms. This article analyses these changes and highlights five challenges for governments wishing to reform arm's-length bodies: mapping, assessing, reconfiguring, saving, and accounting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been a notable surge in research on the shift from elected government to appointed governance. As the work of public bodies and the decisions made by their board members can impact upon the everyday lives of citizens, the extent to which their boards are both representative and diverse is of great salience. Focusing on the boards of public bodies in the UK, this article explores whether the Labour government's ambition to improve diversity in public appointments was achieved over its three terms of office, and seeks to explain why public boards have remained 'male, pale and stale'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The delegation of functions to a range of quasi-autonomous bodies has formed a major challenge to the operation of representative democracy, in both administrative and democratic terms, since the formation of the modern state. These challenges have been more pronounced within Westminster-style democracies that are founded on the logic of ministerial departments and the convention of individual ministerial responsibility to Parliament. Towards the end of the twentieth century, these challenges became more pronounced as the centrifugal dynamics of New Public Management led to what has been termed the 'unravelling' or 'unbundling' of the state. In many countries around the world concerns regarding a 'democratic deficit' and patronage stimulated reform campaigns demanding territorial devolution in the belief that new regional democratic structures could increase accountability and transparency. This was particularly true in the UK where proponents of devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland claimed that such a reform would lead to a 'bonfire of quangos'. This article draws upon theories derived in relation to multi-level governance in order to frame an analysis of how devolution has altered the sphere of delegated governance. This reveals a complex pattern of resource dependencies, motivations and incentives that have led to markedly different reform trajectories but certainly not the 'end of the quango state'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of 'governance' denotes a shift in the distribution of power within and beyond modern democracies and state systems. At the heart of this shift lies a normative preference for disaggregating large bureaucratic state structures into smaller, more flexible, single-purpose organisational units. This process poses distinct questions regarding the capacity of elected politicians to control or coordinate this sphere of delegated governance. The central argument of this article is as simple as ABC (that is, agencies, boards and commissions): patronage is a critical political resource for elected politicians that should not automatically be derided as corrupt, unfair or nepotistic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this, my inaugural lecture, I wanted to sing out in praise of politics! This seemed such a good idea twelve months ago, but now in the wake of even more stories about MPs not declaring foreign trips and former ministers demanding ‘cash for access’ the idea of trying to defend politicians and praise politics suddenly seems like a very bad idea. And yet it is exactly because politics is held in such low esteem that the lecture is so important. Democratic politics matters because it achieves far more than we generally give it credit for. I want to rediscover the essence and arguments of Bernard Crick's classic book In Defence of Politics because its arguments are more appropriate today than when they were first published in 1962. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The MPs expenses scandal that erupted in May 2009 has certainly rekindled interest in the next stage of constitutional reform and democratic renewal in Britain. This article examines how Gordon Brown's tenure as Prime Minister has differed from Tony Blair's in relation to the ‘new politics’ narrative. It argues that despite his long-term personal commitment to major constitutional reforms, the role of crises in recalibrating the political opportunity structure and the manner in which electoral incentives can alter elite attitudes to institutional change that Brown's tenure can be characterised by optimism followed by timidity. Gordon Brown may have flown a few kites in relation to a written constitution, electoral reform, English devolution and the future of the House of Lords but he has left things far too late for a ‘constitutional moment’. Brown may have the political inclination but he lacks the capacity to deliver far-reaching reform; Cameron is likely to have the capacity but not the inclination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on recent research in the United Kingdom and the Canadian province of British Columbia, this article focuses on the politics of electoral reform: the strategic maneuvering by political elites to prevent and facilitate change. Through a comparative analysis of two highly majoritarian polities in which dominant executives have, since 1997, adopted contrasting reform trajectories, the article suggests that previous analyses of this topic have underemphasized the role of political agency and ideational change. In order to demonstrate this argument, the article develops and refines a process-based approach by embedding it within a framework that recognizes the interplay between context, agency, and structure. Not only does this approach deepen our understanding of executive veto points, majoritarian modification, and aversive constitutionalism, but it also sensitizes scholars to the role and power of political cultures and dominant ideologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

‘The Governance of Britain’ agenda represents Gordon Brown's attempt to respond to long-standing criticisms regarding the way in which Labour governments have since 1997 approached the topic of constitutional reform and democratic renewal. The central argument of this article is that the Labour Party remains afflicted by constitutional anomie and these recent documents, combined with the behaviour of politicians, have done little in response. This article is of methodological importance because it assesses the cumulative impact of recent reforms through the application of Lijphart's framework and reflects on the utility of this tool. It is of conceptual importance because the results of the systematic analysis add further weight to the accusation of constitutional anomie while also allowing the development of a new conceptual tool – bi-constitutionality – which offers a way of understanding long-standing debates. The article is of normative importance because it avoids the descriptive-prescriptive approach to constitutional literature that has dominated British political studies, and it is relevant for comparative politics because it replicates and takes forward a methodology that has been applied around the world. In doing so it provides a critical case of executive politics and statecraft vis-à-vis constitutional reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Delegation is a central concept in the study of governance and public policy. The modern state could not function without delegation because it provides a structural and esoteric capacity beyond the cognitive and physical limits of politicians. This article focuses on the role of ministers in making appointments to quasi-autonomous agencies, boards, and commissions in the United Kingdom. Research undertaken within the Cabinet Office reveals a pattern of shrinking reach and diluted permeation in relation to ministerial appointment powers. This finding is significant because the existing body of research in this field is generally associated with exposing clientelistic relationships between political parties and quangos, and patronage is frequently regarded as a resource through which political parties can “politicize” or “colonize” the state. This article therefore contributes a case study that exhibits countervailing tendencies and a quite different pattern of statecraft that raises broader questions about the evolution of state projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Charter 88 was committed to achieving one central aim—shifting the nature of British democracy from a highly majoritarian polity to a more pluralistic or consensual model of democracy. This article argues that New Labour has not demonstrated a clear commitment to a more consensual or pluralist model of democracy but has instead implemented a bi-constitutional system whereby a system of ‘modified majoritarianism’ has been retained at the national level while at the same time creating more consensual and pluralistic polities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. However bi-constitutionalism within a unitary state is unlikely to prove unstable in the long-term. A focus on future dynamics opens up space not only for the assertion that it may still be too soon to comprehend the legacy and impact of Charter 88 (because the organisation's work planted certain seeds that may in the long-term indirectly lead to systemic change of the nature it campaigned for) but also because there exists a contemporary need for groups like Charter 88 in providing a new narrative in the form of a holist approach to understanding and shaping the constitutional configuration, thereby providing a form of constitutional morality and ending the current situation of constitutional anomie. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In 2008 David Cameron declared that the Conservative party was 'ready for government' and suggested that 'the change we need is not just from Labour's old policies to our new policies... It's about a change from old politics to new politics'. This 'new politics' narrative is something of a cliché: British constitutional history reveals a regular pattern whereby opposition parties renege upon implementing far-reaching constitutional and democratic reforms once they win power. It is in this context that this article draws upon documentary analysis and a number of interviews to examine the Conservative party's position on constitutional reform and democratic renewal. It concludes that although the Conservative party has spent the last decade decrying the 'destruction' of the constitution it has undertaken little detailed preparatory work in relation to how it might seek to alter the governance of Britain. As a result the research presented in this article provides a number of insights into elite politics, strategic game-playing and executive veto capacities within a context of growing political disengagement from politics and falling levels of trust in politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question - 'Where is the map?' continues to encapsulate a broad range of concerns regarding the state and future of British democracy. The ongoing 'Governance of Britain' agenda has done little to disguise the poverty of purpose and aspirations that has surrounded New Labour in relation to constitutional reform and democratic renewal since 1997. In many areas the reforms remain unfinished or barely begun. In other areas the potential benefits of reform, in terms of rebuilding public trust in politicians, politics and political institutions, has been eviscerated through marginalisation, the dilution of powers or a lack of resources. Put simply, New Labour's approach to democratic renewal and constitutional reform has always (and continues to) lacked confidence and coherence. This article is concerned with reshaping, renewing and stimulating the programme of democratic renewal, particularly in terms of making explicit its underpinning principles and goals. It reviews New Labour's impact on British democracy and argues that the party is suffering from constitutional anomie. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the future of the civil public bureaucratic structure of the British government as of September 2008. It discusses government trends since the election of the New Labour Party government in May 1997, attempts to identify significant contemporary and future social trends challenges, as well public attitudes toward those challenges, and proposes several policy options. The article discusses the concept of new public management (NPM), the delivery of public services, and the rhetoric of then-British prime minister Tony Blair. It also discusses the effectiveness of third sector organizations (TSOs), private sector organizations (PSOs), and non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs).

Although there is no doubt that the British constitution has been significantly reformed since the election of Labour in May 1997, the degree to which these reforms have altered the nature of British democracy remains deeply contested. A major problem within this debate is that it has become polarised around a binary distinction between consensual or majoritarian models of democracy when the contemporary situation is more complex. This article develops the concept of 'meta-constitutional orientations' in order to argue that the distinctive element of 'New' Labour's approach to constitutional engineering is not that it has shifted the nature of British democracy from one model to another but has, instead, sought to apply different models at the periphery and core: hi-constitutionality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The parliamentary decline thesis overstates the dominance of the executive. The relationship between the executive and legislature is actually far more complex and balanced than is commonly recognised. After exploring recent developments in Australia and New Zealand, this article draws upon an audit of parliamentary modernisation in Britain since the election of New Labour in 1997 and suggests that a reforming parliament occurred during 2001–05 in which an executive with a majority of 166 was forced to acquiesce in the introduction of a raft of reform measures in the House of Commons that were designed to shift the balance of power. At the same time, the ‘transitional’ House of Lords displayed a new-found zeal and activism in a way that further frustrated the executive's control of parliament. This is not to overstate the degree of change: party loyalty remains the primary glue in the executive–legislative relationship and the executive remains dominant. However, it does suggest that in the British context the executive must still work within the limits and constraints of the parliamentary framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a response to a commentary by Peter Burnham about an article on depoliticisation in Great Britain. Burnham's commentary contains a number of perceptive observations that serve to advance further the debate on depoliticisation. He suggests that rather than conceptualising the post-war development of British governance as a simple transition from politicised to depoliticised methods, it is more productive to analyse statecraft in terms of the relationship between the two in any given period. One area of disagreement between Burnham and the authors of the article relates to the theoretical utility of the term dual polity.

This article seeks to build on Peter Burnham's analysis of New Labour's depoliticisation statecraft as set out in an earlier volume of this journal. While Burnham provides a convincing account of how this new governing strategy differed from earlier ‘politicised’ methods of governance, we know less about why such change took place. Burnham makes a start by suggesting that developments in the international financial system go some way to explaining this shift. The main argument of this article is that this account of change needs to be supplemented by a focus on domestic factors. It is asserted below that politicised strategies failed in part because state managers governed within a strategically selective context which penalised the deployment of more activist and discretionary policy instruments in industrial affairs. Instead, this context was more favourable to the depoliticisation techniques which have emerged in the 1980s and the 1990s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 1 May 1997 the Labour government in the United Kingdom has implemented a number of public–private partnerships (PPPs) as a central tool of governance within their wider modernisation agenda. To date, the introduction of PPPs has largely been evaluated through conceptual lenses that emphasise either the administrative, managerial, financial or technical dimensions of this reform strategy. This article seeks to complement this wider literature by arguing that PPPs raise a host of political issues and tensions that have largely been overlooked. Five specific themes are set out in order to provide a framework or organising perspective. These are: efficiency; risk; complexity; accountability; and governance and the future of state projects. The main conclusion of the article is that PPPs represent a Faustian bargain in that forms of PPP may deliver efficiency gains and service improvements in some policy areas but these benefits may involve substantial political and democratic costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In May 1997 the British electorate voted a Labour government into office after 18 years of Conservative administration. This government has subsequently enacted a large number of constitutional reforms. However, a debate exists in relation to the degree to which, taken together, these reforms amount to a fundamental shift in the nature of British democracy. This article utilises Arend Lijphart's work on patterns of democracy in order to provide a conceptual lens through which New Labour's constitutional reforms can be analysed in terms of representing either a minor or major shift from a traditionally majoritarian to more consensus-orientated system. The article concludes that, although significant, the actual degree of reform in Britain is less radical than is commonly assumed: although New Labour is committed to far-reaching constitutional reform in principle it has been far less committed in practice . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the mechanism of government in Great Britain. Creation of new forms of delegated governance in 1980 and 1990; Interrelationship between elected arenas and the wider area administration; Failure of the Labour government to institute reforms that clarify the rationale and structure of the state.

This article examines the paradoxes of parliamentary reform. Focusing mainly on the House of Commons, the first section highlights the contradictory roles of parliament and utilizes a distinction between the ‘Whig’ and ‘Peelite’ conceptions of the Whitehall-Westminster model to demonstrate the ambiguities and tensions that exist. This framework is then applied to a case study of parliamentary reform under Labour governments since 1997 in the second section. The third section emphasizes that parliament cannot be studied in isolation. It suggests that the British constitution is at a critical historical, political and institutional juncture in which a number of inter-linked emerging agendas are altering the relationship between parliament and the executive. The significance of these emerging agendas is that, unlike internal reform of parliament, they are largely beyond the executive’s control. The combined influence of these factors is likely to impel the executive, at some point, to support a coherent and far-reaching reappraisal of the structure, role and powers of parliament. Consequently the degree to which Britain ( de facto ) remains a parliamentary state will be subject to intense and increasing debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Governance theory raises conceptual and theoretical questions about the coordination of complex social systems and the evolving role of the state within that process. A central aspect of the governance debate focuses on the ability of national governments to address salient social issues. This article examines the British Labour governments’ attempts to facilitate cross-departmental inter-organizational collaboration within Whitehall in an attempt to develop innovative responses to seemingly intractable social problems. The government’s desire and strategy to increase its capacity to orchestrate ‘joined-up’ government can be interpreted as both an acceptance and a response to the challenges of modern governance. The article locates the structural, procedural and cultural responses to this challenge within the theoretical and analytical framework of governance theory. It concludes by suggesting that meaningful change in the way public policy is designed and implemented may well demand a more deep seated reappraisal of the structure of Whitehall and the dominant values of the British political elite than is currently anticipated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Demonstrates how the planned freedom of information legislation in Great Britain has been enfeebled due to its construction within a framework of ministerial responsibility. Overview on the Code of Practice on Access to Official Information; Differences of the Code and the White Paper Your Right to Know; Background and rationale of the Draft Freedom of Information Bill.

The article presents the author's views on the relevance of political studies in Great Britain. He explores his experience of being a lecturer at the 2012 Political Studies Association conference held in Belfast, Northern Ireland wherein he argued that the study of politics is in danger of irrelevance. He discusses three reasons to support his argument which are the changing context and culture of the academe, the anti-intellectual culture, and the changing academic context. He also tackles the revolution in information technology which allows the public to produce output that can be readily used in public debate.