Outline and Critically Assess ‘Rhodes’ Argument About ‘Hollowing Out of the State’
Outline and Critically Assess 'Rhodes' Argument About 'Hollowing Out of the State'
This paper will in the first instance define the term, 'Hollowing Out Of The State', as Rhodes presented it in 1994. The origins of the hollowing out process related to contemporary policy process in Britain will be outlined followed by a summary of the themes and consequences identified by the author. Alternative perspectives on the theme of hollowing out will be contrasted in an attempt to assess the validity of the claim that government in Britain is being hollowed out.
In his essay concerning the hollowing out process, Rhodes is concerned with the erosion of British public sector provision within government and the fact that erosion has taken place from within government itself through a process of delegation, decentralisation and privitisation. In order to understand the main themes of hollowing out, it is important to understand the origins and impetus, which created the need for change. Although there is a long history of transition and alteration to the British system of political administration, the contemporary process of hollowing out can be reasonably traced to the election of the 'New Right' government and Mrs. Thatcher in 1979.
During this period, the institutions of social democracy were under severe pressure throughout the 1970's. Through growing power of pressure groups such as Trade Unions, Internal pressures within the Union from the troubles of Northern Ireland and the failed devolution bill in Scotland. On an international basis, the global economy made a contribution to Britain's decline in the shape of soaring interest rates, high inflation and massive government expenditure. Spending by central government in the late 70's rose to approximately 43% of GDP. The country moved toward a position of ungovernability and near bankruptcy.
As a consequence, government lost the confidence of the electorate and in these circumstances Mrs. Thatcher was elected in 1979. The Conservative government would embark upon a programme aiming to reduce the interfering role of the 'Nanny State', cut unnecessary waste, overspending and create the wealth needed to return the country to stability. On taking office, the Conservatives intended to reduce the number of unelected bodies but political circumstance did not permit such a response. Mrs. Thatcher was unable to delegate responsibilities from central to local government because of the latter's domination by left wing opponents. One nation ideology prevented the use of devolution whilst the confrontational and disruptive melee of Westminster could also disrupt the progress needed to deliver reform.
This meant that to some extent, Mrs. Thatcher was forced to look to quasi government and reform of the civil service in order to enact her programme. The difficulty facing the government during this period is highlighted by Gamble (1994). "Success depended upon a party pledged to a New Right agenda first obtaining a mandate to reform in a political market corrupted by decades of state intervention, and then carrying it through with the assistance of agencies of the extended state" p39
The mandate for the New Right was given in the general election victory in 1979, allowing Thatcher to initiate a programme to restore the authority of government and expand the 'agencies of the extended state'. It is the consequences of this programme which create the main themes and features of hollowing out. Rhodes provides four trends which characterise the transition which took place;
"1. Privitisation and limiting the scope and forms of public intervention.
2. The loss of functions by central and local government departments to alternative service delivery (such as agency's).
3. The loss of functions by British Governments to European Union institutions.
4. Limiting the discretion of public servants through the new public management, with its emphasis on managerial accountability, and sharper distinction between politics and administration." P139
Amongst the principle aims of the Conservative government was stopping the state from being involved in every aspect of people's lives and to reduce the physical bulk of government. This was done in two ways: firstly, through a programme of privitisation, notable in the form of release from government of major utilities and industries such as Coal, Gas, Shipbuilding, Steel, Electricity and Telecommunications.
Secondly, through rationalisation at administrative and operational level involving comprehensive review and the introduction of new management techniques. First of all by reviewing where efficiencies could be made and identifying the areas of government to be reduced or transferred to quasi government and privitisation. Harold Wilson's Labour governments of the 1960's began the process but the Thatcher government brought it into central government and greatly extended it.
Areas of departmental responsibility first effected by changes included cleansing and catering. In addition to the effect on central departments, this also reduced the influence and responsibility of local authorities whilst validating cuts in their annual budgets. The role of local authorities were being transformed from that of major employer and service provider to one of overseer and enabler as Rhodes points out, "The role of local government is to facilitate the delivery of services by others and oversee performance" p241
Further reductions in local authority remit effected departments of Housing, Education, Parks & Recreation and Direct ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Areas of departmental responsibility first effected by changes included cleansing and catering. In addition to the effect on central departments, this also reduced the influence and responsibility of local authorities whilst validating cuts in their annual budgets. The role of local authorities were being transformed from that of major employer and service provider to one of overseer and enabler as Rhodes points out, "The role of local government is to facilitate the delivery of services by others and oversee performance" p241
Further reductions in local authority remit effected departments of Housing, Education, Parks & Recreation and Direct Works to name a few, altering their position in the community.
Much of the power and responsibility of all government departments was dissipated. Rhodes goes on to explain that, as the government sought to release responsibility internally, the relationship evolving with the European Community proved to be the opposite.
It is generally recognised that Britain has been the reluctant member of the European Community over the duration of membership. However, in relation to hollowing out, Europe has the effect of eroding the sovereign powers of the British parliamentary system and contributing to fragmentation of the policy making process across the country. As the major agreements made within the European Union grow in significance towards full integration, the central position of authority of Westminster in continually undermined. In addition, the European Union's commitment to the principle of regional representation through subsiduarity also reduces Westminster as a centre of power. This is evident in the potential for access to new policy networks open to the assemblies of Wales and Scotland as they build recognition of Brussels as equal or superior to London.
It could be argued that amongst the most significant changes in the reform process are those related to new managerialism in the civil service which will 'limit the discretion of public service'. These developments were initiated with the appointment of Derek Raynor from industry in order to audit government departments and services. The aim was to reduce costs by pursuing the three E's of efficiency, economy and effectiveness.
It would begin the process of moving civil servants from administration of policy to management of implementation. Each department would produce individual plans of action with specific objectives designed to meet targets set in advance.
These changes would assist the Thatcher government to politically justify strategy but the failure of reforms to deliver successful results was revealed by the review process in 1988. This would lead to the implementation of the 'Next Steps Initiative' designed to further clarify the separation of policy maker from policy implantation. Rhodes (1997) outlines the critical recommendation of the Efficiency Unit report, stating that "The management revolution was only skin- deep and recommended introducing agencies to carry out the executive functions of government and bring about real financial and managerial change" p95
This was a crucial point in the process of hollowing out as British governance moved from rationalisation of legitimate responsibility to extended delegation through non-elected and anonymous bodies. With this change in the nature of quasi government, Rhodes raises the question of accountability and control. The development of new agencies to cover an expanding list of government practice caused fragmentation throughout the policy network and difficulties in maintaining adequate channels of communication between relevant actors. Rhodes cites Hesse to illustrate the difficulties arising in this regard, "Advocates of decentralised self - guidance and control often fail to realise that highly differentiated and pluralistic fragmented institutional systems create a growing need for collective steering, planning and consensus building" "146
The 'Next Steps' initiative was taken in response to a lack of success of reform, an imbalance was perceived in the policy process, there was too much emphasis on political issues and not enough on policy implementation. The consequence was the creation of agencies with greater autonomy from government to implement policy outcomes. These agencies needed to be as diverse as the departments they served, covering such aspects as stationary, defense, health, fire safety, coastguard, social security, employment or child support for example. Rather than achieving previously unmet targets, Rhodes argues that the opposite was more likely. The National Health Service for example, has always been at the forefront of government reform. However in recent months the government has entered into agreements with private health care trusts to utilise spare capacity to compensate for continuing overload in the NHS. There are grounds to suggest that the difficulties incurred in 1979 are being incurred in 2000.
These difficulties are potentially duplicated across the breadth of the policy network. The lack of adequate measures to ensure communication and co-operation increase innefiency and waste, in addition because the legislative process undertaken has been so complex, the drive for efficiency and cost cutting diminishes the room for maneuver within government departments or ministers. Rhodes highlights the problem as follows; "Such networks restrict who contributes to policy making and policy implementation. They routinise the policy process. They are also a form of private government". P148
In the latter point, Rhodes highlights a crucial outcome from the proliferation of agencies, accountability. If responsibility for implementation of government policy is too diverse then accountability and control are confused and disparate. The most notable example of confusion was highlighted by BBC 2's Newsnight, when Jeremy Paxman attempted to clarify the role of Home Secretary Michael Howard in the sacking of Derek Lewis who was Chief Executive of the Prison Service when high profile prisoners escaped from prison.
It could be argued that little has changed when observing the recent debacle in the Scottish Executive over the delivery of examination results by the Scottish Qualifications Authority. Resignations have taken place from the agency whilst the minister responsible has moved to a new post. Accountability for politicians have shifted, they no longer resign, instead, they attend select committee hearings.
The accountability and control of the policy process from parliament itself has been undermined. Rhodes uses the example of the dissolution of the Greater London Council to illustrate the point, "Under the Greater London Council (GLC), rate payers paid their rates to four bodies. After abolition of the GLC, they paid taxes to 17 bodies, two thirds of which are unelected " p148
Similar example exists in the case of Strathclyde Regional Council, which was dismantled on ideological grounds but in doing so further weakened democratic accountability. The concluding themes of the hollowing out are concerned with such consequences. The changes made in extending networks beyond the reach of their optimum productivity illustrates a transition from government problem solving, to government as the creator of political crisis.
The process moved from necessary rationalisation of overloaded government to the creation of over extended and less controllable quasi government in the form of non-elected agencies. The original measures taken to cut costs and achieve greater efficiencies create the lack of experience and knowledge. Competition for contracts equates to the loss of quality and priorities based upon survival of the fittest. The problem set out in the beginning has not been diminished, as there is still evidence of overload. This is supported by Foster and Plowden (1996) when they state that, "Activities have been transferred from local government to centrally appointed and directly appointed bodies, and the creation of arms-length agencies within central government has perversely, involved ministers more in their affairs. And ministers are more directly involved in policy formulation than before" p219
Rhodes offers three main reasons behind the argument for a return to bureaucracy as a potential solution to the problems caused by hollowing out. Firstly return to balance rather than fragmentation, secondly, public sector record of delivery is as good as private sector and has better flexibility in meeting problems and challenges and thirdly in order to restore accountability and democracy to the policy process in government. Overall, hollowing out illustrates a process that has created less accountable and less effective, reduced government than previous systems.
The difficulties of quasi government outweigh the benefits in terms of the problems which reforms set out to solve. In Rhodes view, the private sector is not the fix all that Mrs. Thatcher in particular said it would be. Beneath the veneer on of the British political landscape, the same issues apply in 2000, which existed in 1979.
There are alternative views to the hollowing out process; the following section of this paper will attempt to highlight a selection of key points. Michael Seaward outlines an alternative view of what was arguably the most visable and significant programme undertaken by Mrs. Thatcher and highlighted in hollowing out: Privitisation, Decentralisation and Agencification.
The achievements of the Conservative government's programme of privitisation were significant, creating major industries in global markets such as BT in telecommunications for example. However many of the privitised industries have led a much more troubled existence. The British coalfield is almost gone altogether, in recent weeks the lack of progress in the rail privitisation has come to the fore along with those of the water companies. The possibility should be considered that the motivations of the Thatcher privitisations were not only concerned with the difficulties of overload but also with the achievement of ideological change. Nationalisation was strongly associated with party allegiance in Britain; the move toward privitisation would create a fundamental change in the relationship between the electorate and the role of government. This is highlighted by Seaward (1997) when he states that, "In 'majoritarian' systems, privitisation may appear to be the hollowing out of the state but this trend can equally be interpreted in terms of core actors rationally reshaping the state to suit some of their primary ends (such as power, autonomy, protection from direct responsibility)". P22
Privitisation serves two ends, firstly, to serve to lessen the overload on central government departments and ministers and secondly, to alter the perception of the electorate in relation to the role of government.
Similarly, decentralisation as it is presented in the hollowing out does not appear to consider the consequences of an approach concerned with ideological change. The avoidance or negation of local authority responsibility was concerned with the confrontation of opposition as much as it was an attempt to reallocate resources and services. The transfer of responsibilities not only decreased the bulk of government but also dismantled a significant vehicle for the adversaries of the Thatcher project. This is also supported by Seaward (1997) when he cites King: "The aim of these reforms is to marginalise local government as a political institution by creating local agencies to deliver policy and by denuding its representative function". P23
On the final theme of Agencification, Seaward focus's on the scope for interpretation of reform and the importance of the role of the minister in policy process rather than bureaucratic administration. When this separation was attempted, clear roles were identified for the politicians as representative, the civil servant or department as administrator and the arms length agency in the delivery mode of policy implementation
In terms of Britain's role within the European Community, the case for the loss of sovereignty is a strong one. There is general agreement concerning the potential for Westminster to become secondary to the dealings of Brussels and its policy networks, as Gray (2000) confirms, "In the case of increasing European Union involvement in the internal affairs of the state imply not so much a 'hollowing out of the state' as an effective by pass of it altogether in some areas of policy and administration. The extension of qualified majority voting in the council of ministers extends the possibility of being by passed." P228
Once again this view is correct from a particular perspective but does not take into account the interdependence of the European Union at its centre with the member organisations, which give it life. Britain enters into negotiation with all other partners and retains the power of veto in important areas. Once again a consideration of ideological preference is necessary. This is evident in the Labour government's moves toward partial incorporation in the social charter which was resisted throughout the life of the Conservative government. In terms of the administration of government, all issues in either Brussels or London do not effect each institution in equal measure. Rather than Europe swamping or negating British government, there is an argument for mutual accommodation, illustrated by Smith (1999), "Departments have attempted to integrate the EU throughout the department rather than concentrate it within a European co-ordination body as used to be the case." P242
The description of the hollowing out of the state, might better read as the redistribution of parliament and within the policy network, the restructuring of design, administration, delivery, evaluation and financing of the policy process. The arguments for and against the hollowing out process are strongly influenced by the perspective of the observer, the interpretations of the state and it's mechanisms. After all of the change which has been undertaken on an economic or strategic basis, an interventionist government still presides over all in Britain and the bulk of government has not decreased.
This view is supported by Smith (1999) when he states that, "The government has continued to regulate the privitised monopolies, there has been little reduction in the level of public expenditure, and it has intervened greatly in the reforms of health and education, (Richardson, 1993). In other words, the state has been reshaped rather than hollowed out." P205
Here is the crux of the issue; much of the bulk of government, which was, portrayed as such a danger by Mrs. Thatcher in 1979 remains largely intact. Privitisation and quangocracies have not lessened the extent of government; rather they have helped to dismantle it to be put back together in a different order. This is evident in the move to the centre, if not the right of the political spectrum by the Labour Party in order to regain power. It could be argued that Mrs. Thatcher failed in her political aims of reduced government and strong state but was highly successful in her attempt to alter the ideological perspective of the British political landscape. She has ensured that the devide between the pragmatic actions of the conservatives and the collective actions of the socialists has been drastically reduced. The determining factor in this change is leadership and this is supported by Smith (1999) when he states that, "...leaders often have legitimacy, and the electoral and parliamentary support, to take to take authoritative decisions and therefor to orient the policy directions of networks" p243
The conclusion of this paper is that bearing in mind, the significance of an ideological origin to the process, there is strong evidence that the hollowing out of the state has and is continuing to take place. However it is doing so in conjunction with the restructuring of parliamentary structure and continuous adjustment of the actors and responses within the policy network. Only in this fuller sense can the hollowing out of the state be applied to the evolution of the policy process in Britain.
What has remained constant or grown in strength throughout this process are the executors of power in the core of government. Although lines of accountability remain, the likelihood of recrimination for wrongdoing has become more unlikely and this is a cause for concern for the future. Both the hollowing out of the state and the strengthening of the core executive remain a matter of ongoing process.
References
Gamble A The Free Economy And The Strong State: The Politics Of
Thatcherism 2nd Ed. (1994) Macmillan Press Ltd. Basingstoke.
P39
Rhodes R.A.W.* Hollowing Out Of The State: Changing The Nature Of Public
Service In Britain. Political Quarterly Vol 65. No;2 (April - June) 1994. p139
Rhodes R.A.W.* As above. p241
Rhodes R.A.W.* * Understanding Governance. (1997). Open University Press.
Buckingham. P95
Rhodes R.A.W.* As above. P146
Rhodes R.A.W.* As above. P148
Foster D & The State Under Stress: Public Policy And Management. (1996)
Plowden F. J Open University Press. Buckingham. P219
Seaward M The Hollow Crown, ch, 'The Search For The Hollow Crown'
Eds. Weller, K Bakvis H & Rhodes R.A.W. Macmillan Press Ltd
Basingstoke. p22
Seaward M As Above, p23
Gray C United Kingdom Governance. Ch,'a Hollow State'. 2000
Eds. Pyper & K, Robins L. Macmillan Press Ltd. Basingstoke.
P288
Smith M J The Core Executive In Britain. 1999 Macmillan Press Ltd
Basingstoke. p242
Smith M J As above. P205
Smith M J As above. P243
BIBLIOGRAPH
Gamble A The Free Economy And The Strong State: The Politics Of
Thatcherism 2nd Ed. (1994) Macmillan Press Ltd. Basingstoke.
Rhodes R.A.W. Understanding Governance. (1997). Open University Press.
Buckingham.
Foster D & The State Under Stress: Public Policy And Management. (1996)
Plowden F. J Open University Press. Buckingham.
