|
|
||||||||
 |
||
 The
Contemporary
British Politics website
Chapter
summaries Note: Full tables of contents listing all subheadings, figures, tables and boxes, together with an index, are provided in Coxall (2003). The following notes are not intended to duplicate this information, but to give provide brief summaries of the main points and arguments presented in each chapter. It is hoped that readers will find them useful. However, inevitably such summaries involve considerable selection and simplification from the discussion in the main text, to which reference should be made if extra clarification is sought. Chapter 1 Politics, Democracy and Power Success (or the appearance of success) in the management of the economy is critical in the public assessment of British governments and their prospects for re-election. In the post-war decades governments sought to manage demand in the economy according to Keynesian economic theory, using fiscal and monetary policy, with some direct intervention (e.g. nationalisation), supplemented with incomes policies in the 1960s and 1970s. Governments were criticised for presiding over a ‘stop-go’ economic cycle of expansion followed by deflation. Britain’s relatively poor economic performance compared with other western nations coupled with the increasing cost of the welfare state led to economic crises in the 1960s and 1970s, and a change in direction. Keynesian demand management was abandoned for monetary controls and free market policies. However the economic record of the Thatcher governments remains controversial. There were major recessions affecting manufacturing at the beginning and end of the eighties, followed by further economic problems culminating in Britain’s forced exit from the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992 (Black Wednesday), an event which damaged the Conservative reputation for competent economic management. The commitment of the new Labour government to keep within Conservative spending for two years and the decision to hand over control of interest rates to the Bank of England reflected the determination of Labour Chancellor Gordon Brown to establish a reputation for economic prudence. However, following the government’s re-election in 2001, Brown’s budgets have involved substantial additional government spending, and what some critics perceive as an optimistic reading of immediate economic prospects. Yet Brown has been markedly cautious on the issue of membership of the Euro. Thus Labour’s handling of the economy has become more contentious. However there are limits to the capacity of Chancellors to deliver economic success. The British economy is heavily integrated into the global economy, so that its prosperity remains particularly subject to global fluctuations over which British governments have little control.
The successful delivery of public services has always been important for governments, and particularly for Blair’s Labour Government. Changes were introduced into the management of public services by Conservative governments from 1979-1997. These involved the introduction of new management techniques and practices, more competition from the private sector, and the development of further competition in the public sector through internal markets. The Labour Government’s rhetoric has emphasised co-operation, co-ordination and ‘joined-up government’, but they have retained some elements of the market approach, and continued to encourage private sector involvement, particularly through the Private Finance Initiative. After a cautious start in which the Government was bound to its commitment not to exceed Conservative spending plans for two years, substantial extra sums have been committed to the health service, education, and law and order. However it has become even more important for the government to demonstrate that the extra money is delivering improved services, so one consequence has been further regulation and performance measurement through testing and league tables. Yet there are problems over the interpretation of performance. Moreover targets can lead to a distortion of priorities in favour of objectives which are more easily measured.
Although it was assumed that the welfare state would eventually eliminate poverty and reduce the gap between rich and poor, this does not seem to have happened. Although there are continuing arguments over the definition and measurement of poverty, large and perhaps growing sections of the population experience substantial relative deprivation, while income inequality has increased. One particular concern is child poverty, which the Labour Government is committed to cut, and eventually eradicate. Another concern is social exclusion – people who may feel excluded from mainstream British society by a combination of connected problems, including unemployment, low skills, low income, poor housing, bad health and family breakdown. Such social exclusion may involve apathy and alienation, damaging democracy, and can lead to more serious community breakdown, involving high crime, and riots. The Labour Government has introduced measures to reduce poverty and social exclusion, including a national minimum wage, a welfare to work programme, the New Deal programme for young people, single parents and the unemployed aged over 50, a new deal for communities, the working families tax credit, and baby bonds for newborn children. Yet it remains to be seen whether these measures will enable the government to meet its ambitious targets on poverty reduction. Critics suggest that inequality has been substantially unaffected to date. A key problem for the future is the combination of an ageing population and inadequate pension provision. While child poverty may be eradicated or at least substantially alleviated over time, poverty among sections of the old looks set to increase.
Increased ethnic diversity in Britain has been accompanied by some intra-community tensions and manifestations of racist prejudice and discrimination. While legislation has reduced some overt forms of discrimination, statistics continue to indicate continuing social and inequalities between different ethnic groups. A particular concern has been evidence of institutional racism in some organisations, including the police. While it has been suggested that Britain is becoming a multi-cultural society, in many towns and cities there is substantial segregation in housing and education. Tensions have led to race riots in some northern towns. Extremist groups have exploited concerns over asylum seekers. Finally, September 11th, the War against Terror, and the Iraq war have stimulated Islamophobia which has caused particular problems for Britain’s Muslims. The gender division is still perceived as important, particularly by many women. Although women have made advances in the professions and politics, women’s incomes remain on average below those of men, despite legislation providing for equal pay and opportunity. Although there has been a change in the law and a substantial change in public attitudes, leading to increased toleration of those with different sexual orientations, discrimination remains, particularly in sections of the church and the armed forces. Gays and lesbians are seeking further changes to promote their rights and interests, so that same sex couples can enjoy the same legal rights as married couples.
Environmental issues have moved up the political agenda, as it has become increasingly clear that current consumption of resources, and associated pollution, may lead to irreversible damage to the environment, with potentially dire costs for future generations. Green ideas have been articulated by writers, pressure groups, and specialist Green parties. They have increasingly influenced the thinking of mainstream parties and politicians. However, critics suggest that the approach of the latter is insufficiently radical, and continues to be driven by the satisfaction of current human needs. Many environmental problems transcend national boundaries and require global solutions. The British government and the European Union have made commitments to reduce some forms of pollution, and pursue sustainable development. Environmentalists fear that targets will not be met. A particularly contentious issue in Britain has been the development of genetically modified (GM) crops, which critics claim involve potential dangers for consumers, and may lead to irreversible damage to other crops through cross-pollination.
External policy differs from domestic policy in important respects. Much of it is reactive, rather than proactive, as governments respond to actions, crises and perceived threats from other parts of the world. Public opinion tends to be more united than in domestic policy, particularly when British interests and especially lives seem at risk. Finally, except in times of war or crisis, foreign and defence policies are generally of less concern to the bulk of the population than bread and butter economic and social policies. Foreign and defence policy thus tends to be the concern of a relatively small and specialist policy community. British policy since the war has been influenced by three major interests – continuing ties with the Commonwealth, the special relationship with the United States, and membership of the European Community/Union. Although the Commonwealth is a declining influence on foreign policy, there is a continuing tension between Britain’s Atlantic alliance and commitment to Europe, dramatised particularly in the crisis over Iraq in 2003. The end of the Cold War between the West and the Soviet Union eastern bloc has led to a dramatic shift in foreign policy, although it has not led to the peace dividend and ‘New World Order’ which some predicted at the time. While Britain and western Europe have drawn closer to Russia and the countries of eastern Europe, symbolised by the expansion of NATO and the European Union, the events of September 11th have provoked a sea change in attitudes. Some argue that the old ideological conflict between western capitalism and communism has beenreplacedbeen replaced by a new struggle between cultures and religions. The impact on British foreign policy has been the re-emphasis of the special relationship with the USA, and close collaboration between Blair and President Bush, at the expense sometimes of increased division between Britain and leading countries in the European Union.
A key concern in a country claiming to be democratic is the scope for popular participation in politics and policy making. Even minimal participation through the ballot box is declining. Although political parties remain important at the centre of British government, they are of declining significance for ordinary citizens. More significant are the opportunities for participation through pressure groups and political movements. However the distribution of effective influence over policy remains contentious. Business interests continues to appear very influential. There is continued controversy over the power of central government. Some argue that central control and regulation have increased, others that the state has been ‘hollowed out’. Certainly the state appears more complex, and there is renewed emphasis on partnership between the public, private and voluntary sectors. Some perceive a shift from government to governance. The influence of international and European organisations and interests in UK policy, coupled with pressures to devolve and decentralise policy making within the UK to nations, regions, communities and institutions has led to what some describe as multi-level governance. At the same time there has been more segmentation of policy making into between policy areas and policy communities. The distribution of power and influence may vary markedly between communities. These developments have important implications for democracy and the potential of people to influence decisions affecting their own lives. There is more scope for influence at different levels, yet the increased complexity of the policy process makes meaningful involvement more difficult and sometimes more frustrating. It is less clear who is in charge, and who should be the target for influence. It should not be taken for granted that specifically British government and politics has a future. One Eurosceptic scenario is the disappearance on Britain into a European super-state. More feasible perhaps is the break-up of Britain into its national components. Neither scenario seems imminent, but it does not follow that the British state and political community will survive indefinitely. The future of politics within these islands will depend as much on the felt identities and allegiances of peoples as on the record of particular institutions and governments.
|
||
