We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2013
This article assesses Bulpitt's treatment of the centre or central state. It begins by reviewing Bulpitt's argument that the UK centre elite developed a detached style of territorial management and recognized the limits to the state's power. The argument is that the elite at the centre sought to avoid the costs of intervention in the periphery so it could retain its autonomy over decisions affecting the economy and international affairs. The article then assesses Bulpitt's claims against extant evidence from the study of UK politics. It concludes that, in spite of Bulpitt's failure to appreciate the interest of the centre in the detail of local administration, the account holds up surprisingly well and could be adopted as a comparative framework for analysing how central elites seek to keep their grip on power by managing territorial politics successfully.
1 Jim Bulpitt, Territory and Power in the United Kingdom, reissued edn, Colchester, ECPR Press, 2008, p. 65.
2 Ibid., p. 136.
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid., p. 143.
5 Ibid., p. 123.
6 The literature comparing national bureaucratic elites is sparse, but see Aberbach, Joel, Putnam, Robert and Rockman, Bert, Bureaucrats and Politicians in Western Democracies, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1981 Google Scholar; Page, Edward C. and Wright, Vincent, Bureaucratic Elites in Western European States, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1992 Google Scholar.
7 Bulpitt, Territory and Power, p. 63, author's emphasis.
8 Heclo, Hugh and Wildavsky, Aaron, The Private Government of Public Money, London, Macmillan, 1974 Google Scholar.
9 Bulpitt, Territory and Power, p. 141, n. 30.
10 Heclo and Wildavsky, The Private Government of Public Money, p. 3.
11 Ibid., p. 72.
12 Richardson, Jeremy and Jordan, Grant, Governing Under Pressure: The Policy Process in a Post-Parliamentary Democracy, Oxford, Martin Robertson, 1979 Google Scholar.
13 Rod Rhodes, Beyond Westminster and Whitehall: Sub-Central Governments of Britain, London, Unwin Hyman, 1988; David Marsh and Rod Rhodes, Policy Networks in British Government, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1992.
14 Smith, Martin, Marsh, David and Richards, David, ‘Central Government Departments and the Policy Process’, Public Administration, 71 (1993), pp. 567–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar; David Richards and Martin Smith, Governance and Public Policy in the UK, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002.
15 John, Peter, Musson, Steven and Tickell, Adam, ‘Governing the Mega-Region: Governance and Networks Across London and the South East of England’, New Political Economy, 10 (2005), pp. 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16 Dunleavy, Patrick and Rhodes, Rod, ‘Core Executive Studies in Britain’, Public Administration, 68 (1990), pp. 3–28 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rod Rhodes and Patrick Dunleavy (eds), Prime Minister, Cabinet and Core Executive, London, Macmillan, 1995.
17 Ian Holliday, ‘Executives and Administration’, in Patrick Dunleavy, Andrew Gamble, Ian Holliday and Gillian Peele (eds), Developments in British Politics 6, Basingstoke, Palgrave, 2000, p. 89.
18 Dunleavy, Patrick, ‘Reinterpreting the Westland Affair: Theories of the State and Core Executive Decision Making’, Public Administration, 68 (1990), pp. 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19 For example, Heffernan, Richard, ‘Prime Ministerial Predominance? Core Executive Politics in the UK’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 5 (2003), pp. 347–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 Martin Burch and Ian Holliday, The British Cabinet System, London, Prentice Hall, 1996.
21 Ibid., pp. 63–4.
22 Marquand, David, ‘Club Government – the Crisis of the Labour Party in the National Perspective’, Government and Opposition, 16 (1981), pp. 19–36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; David Marquand, The Unprincipled Society, London, Cape, 1988.
23 Marquand, ‘Club Government’, pp. 35–6, author's emphasis.
24 Moran, Michael, The British Regulatory State. High Modernism and Hyper-Innovation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
25 John, Peter and Margetts, Helen, ‘Policy Punctuations in the UK: Fluctuations and Equilibria in Central Government Expenditure Since 1951’, Public Administration, 81 (2003), pp. 411–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26 Peter John and Will Jennings, ‘Punctuations and Turning Points in British Politics: The Policy Agenda of the Queen's Speeches’, British Journal of Political Science, forthcoming, 2010.
27 John Griffith, Central Departments and Local Authorities, London, Allen and Unwin, 1966.
28 Loughlin, Martin, Legality and Locality. The Role of Law in Central-Local Government Relations, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1996 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
29 Cole, Alistair and John, Peter, Local Governance in England and France, London, Routledge, 2001 Google Scholar.
30 John, Peter, Ward, Hugh and Dowding, Keith, ‘The Bidding Game: Competitive Funding Regimes and the Political Targeting of Urban Programme Schemes’, British Journal of Political Science, 34 (2005), pp. 405–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31 Bulpitt, Territory and Power, p. 156.
32 George Jones and Tony Travers, Attitudes to Local Government in Westminster and Whitehall, Commission for Local Democracy Report 14, London, Commission for Local Democracy, 1996.
33 Campbell, Colin and Wilson, G., The End of Whitehall, Oxford, Blackwell, 1995 Google Scholar.
34 King, Anthony, The British Constitution, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007 Google Scholar.
35 Richards, David and Smith, Martin, ‘Interpreting the World of Political Elites’, Public Administration, 82 (2003), pp. 777–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36 Rhodes, Rod, Wanna, John and Weller, Patrick, ‘Reinventing Westminster: How Public Executives Reframe their World’, Policy and Politics, 36 (2008), pp. 461–79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37 Dunleavy, Patrick, Democracy, Bureaucracy and Public Choice, Brighton, Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991 Google Scholar.
38 Bulpitt, Jim, ‘The Discipline of the New Democracy: Mrs Thatcher's Domestic Statecraft’, Political Studies, 34: 1 (1986), pp. 19–39 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jim Bulpitt, ‘The European Question: Rules, National Modernisation and the Ambiguities of Primat der Innenpolitik’, in David Marquand and Anthony Seldon (eds), The Ideas that Shaped Post-War Britain, London, Fontana 1996, pp. 214–56.
