Explain the economic and political deficiencies of the C A P
Explain the economic and political deficiencies of the C A P To answer this question it is essential first to state the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy, as stated in Article 39 of the Treaty of Rome. ) to increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress and by ensuring the rational development of agricultural production and the optimum utilisation of all factors of production in particular labour. 2) To ensure thereby a 'fair' standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture. 3) to stabilize markets. 4) to provide certainty of supplies. 5) to ensure supplies to consumers at reasonable prices. The second part of the essay looks at why such a policy was deemed necessary, and also how far politics can account for the consistent failure of the Community to deal with its problems. But the first part concerns why in economic terms the policy is fundamentally flawed. The problems of the C.A.P. go deeper than economic theorising as to why the policy itself has created imbalances within the agricultural system. They are fundamental. `Economic logic dictates agriculture to be a major contributor to economic development. This is true especially in the primary stages, whereby it releases resources to other sectors. By increasing its own productivity the labour
Critically assess Rhodes' (1997) argument that 'Policy networks of resource dependent organisations are a characteristic of the British policy process.'
Richard Swann Critically assess Rhodes' (1997) argument that 'Policy networks of resource dependent organisations are a characteristic of the British policy process.' Policy networks first emerged in the early 1980's. The origins of the theory were constructed by Richardson and Jordan however it was the work of Professor Rod Rhodes that moved the theory and our understanding of it on. Rhodes (1997) argument that, "policy networks of resource dependent organisations are a characteristic of the British political system," was one of his core themes in his book Understanding Governance. Despite the fact that Rhodes has written extensively on this area it is still debatable to what extent this statement is true. In an effort to assess Rhodes argument as well as considering the usefulness of the policy network approach I will examine it in the context of a policy area. My chosen case study is the internal market in health focusing on the G.P. fund holding scheme. For the purpose of looking at the relevance of Rhodes argument in the contexts of the policy process in this area I will evaluate policy networks activities from the 1991 Conservative reforms till the present New Labour government. The policy process in Britain in resent years can best be described as complex and hard to define. In British politics policy is not constructed in one single area, the policy process is not
How presidential is the premiership of Tony Blair.
HOW PRESIDENTIAL IS THE PREMIERSHIP OF TONY BLAIR? INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT The traditional view of the UK's constitutional arrangement of power in government has been that decision making in the executive rests with the cabinet, with the Prime Minister acting as "first amongst equals". However, this has been challenged by many recently, who argue Margaret Thatcher in particular challenged and now Tony Blair has almost eliminated cabinet government, and is the most powerful Prime Minister in the modern era. Some have claimed that Blair is now more of a Presidential figure than a Prime Minister working within the context of cabinet government, in that he exercises personal control over the executive branch and we have an executive decision and policy making process based on an individual rather than a collective body. Obviously there are some major differences between a Presidential system of government and the current British system. In the US, which is Presidential, you vote directly for who you want to become President. In Britain, you are voting for an individual who will become an MP in the Commons. The public has no direct say over who becomes PM; they have been chosen internally within the particular party. However, exit polls from the 2001 British general election do suggest that voters are increasingly influenced by the personalities of the party leaders1. During
Outline the principle ideological factors of Thatcherism
Outline the principle ideological factors of Thatcherism "Thatcherism represents something qualitatively new in British politics." `This statement, made by Stuart Hall in 1980, is a good starting point for a discussion of Thatcherism, raising as it does, several key questions. `Firstly, what is Thatcherism? Is it an ideology or is it, as Riddell believes, "an instinct, a series of moral values and an approach to leadership rather than an ideology"? (A view shared by Gamble, who regarded Thatcherism as being "essentially statecraft rather than ideology.") `Secondly, if Thatcherism is an ideology (and the majority of political commentators clearly see it as being so) then is it, as Hall claims, a new ideology or is it simply a continuation of traditional Conservative philosophy? Is it possible to distinguish between Conservatism and Thatcherism or are we in danger of losing sight of them altogether under an "overelaborate edifice of theory"? `We might even ask legitimately if Thatcherism is purely a British phenomenon (a view Beetham regards as one - dimensional) or whether or not it forms part of what Douglas calls the "international New Right movement". It may seem a paradoxical question but it is important in identifying that some of the most significant influences on Thatcherism have an undeniably international outlook. `"According to Hall and Gamble, Thatcherism is a
Was Thatcherism just 'old-fashioned' Liberalism?
Was Thatcherism just 'old-fashioned' Liberalism? The panorama of the British political domain in the 1970s, and indeed since the end of the Second World War, has been one of apparent relative economic decline and social unrest. The Conservative election victory of 1979 marked the end of Keynesian economic management and consensus politics, signified clearly in the neoliberal rhetoric of the rising Thatcherite movement. In this context, Thatcherism can be seen in response to the 'creeping socialism' of the post-war period, but also in terms of Conservatism regaining the political ascendancy under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher, following the disillusionment in the party caused by the what many saw as the failures of the Heath government of 1970-74. Thatcher and her allies, identifying the problems of the country illustrated by the economic decline since the war, the increasing role of the state and growing strength of organized labour, merely added zeal and vigour to New Right ideals and practice. Essentially this called for a rolling back of the state and the clear objective of promoting free market mechanisms as a means of preserving political freedom and individualism, the latter being diluted by the vastness of the bureaucracy of state. Indeed, this may lead to the conclusion that Thatcherism is, in its essence, Libertarian, echoing as it does (in theoretical terms)
What are the strengths and weaknesses of a positivist/empiricist approach to political analysis?
WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF A POSITIVIST/EMPIRICIST APPROACH TO POLITICAL ANALYSIS? 21-Jan-09 560011924 POL1014A 807 What are the strengths and weaknesses of a positivist/empiricist approach to political analysis? Introduction introduction..... Positivists test their theories through direct observation. They contend that as they intend to answer empirical questions, direct observation will maintain objectivity due to them not considering reasoning and understanding behind the act. Direct observation is a quantitative method. For example if looking at voting behaviour, positivists would observe variables such as if someone votes, their age, race and class. This excludes personal motivation of an individual. From their raw results, positivists can construct correlations between the variables in order to establish a predictive model as to who will vote. This scientific method means that the political scientist's own views and experiences will not bias the results. However, many have criticized the idea that positivist methodology is objective. Within positivism, one of the tenants is that knowledge can only come from experience. Theories can only be compiled and tested if one is seeking to establish a casual relationship from prior experience. For example, if a positivist saw a woman crashing a car he may think that all women are bad drivers. He would then
'Critically discuss whether Britainhas been an 'awkward partner' (George) in relation to themovement towards European unity'.
'Critically discuss whether Britain has been an 'awkward partner' (George) in relation to the movement towards European unity'. Great confusion and differences in opinions exist today in Britain when considering the issue of Europe. The British Government seems to hold a wait and see policy on most issues raised within the European Parliament, whilst the citizens remain uncertain of the consequences and gains of deeper European Integration, with no definite leads from either of the main parties. When considering Britain's past involvement with Europe, it is continuing to show reluctance by remaining two steps behind everyone else. This reluctance in accepting all European policies and ideologies is why Britain is often dubbed the 'difficult' or 'awkward' partner. In this essay I intend to analyse these allegations to see to what extent Britain has been awkward. 'In 1902 Britain first entered into a long-term security alliance in peacetime' (Young 1993:02), but it was not only concerned with Europe. This alliance was signed after the Boer war, as it revealed the military weaknesses and problems of Europe uniting against Britain. Britain eventually committed itself to a war against the Central powers, Germany and Austria- Hungary in 1914, this required some large changes (such as restrictions on personnel freedom) and higher taxes. However Britain could not cope with these
DOES TONY BLAIR RUN A PRESIDENTIAL-STYLE ADMINISTRATION
DOES TONY BLAIR RUN A PRESIDENTIAL-STYLE ADMINISTRATION? In this paper, I intend to analyse the extent to which the current Labour administration shows the characteristics of a presidential government. To do this, the term 'presidential' must first be defined. A definition of a presidential government that is generally accepted by political analysts is 'a system of government in which the powers of the president are constitutionally separate from those of the legislature.' The British system of government is parliamentary and does not match the definition of presidential. Therefore, the question must be answered by looking at the individual features of a presidential government and comparing them with aspects of the Labour administration and Tony Blair in particular. I will conclude by summarising the arguments presented. In 1997 it is fair to say that the Labour party was desperate after being out of power for fifteen years. But there was hope. A relatively new face had emerged to become the leader of New Labour. In an era when political parties are run like organisations and rely on numbers and strong leaders, Tony Blair filled his party with excitement and anticipation. He went on to lead the party to a landslide victory in the general election after a campaign that focused significantly on his personality. Inevitably, Tony Blair was idolised by his party for
The future European Union - what should it be? An integrated federal state, a free trade area, something else?
The future European Union - what should it be? An integrated federal state, a free trade area, something else? Since the first enlargement of the European Community in 1973 northward, which saw the inclusion of the United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark, the search for "an ever closer union" has been taking place. When EC recommended on 9th October 2002 that another ten countries should join in 2004, it is believed that the integration of Eastern Europe will push the European Union towards a new level, because it will provide a larger market, which will be the only way for the EU to compete in the new global economy. However, people cannot stop wondering, what the EU should be like in the future, as the new Europe will be highly diverse in all dimensions - not only in the field of economics, but also geopolitics, and social conditions, political priorities. In this essay, it will look at the future EU, being a state with liberty, democracy and solidarity. Liberty has two meanings. To start with, in terms of The Single European Act, the chapter on the single market committed the EC to remove all internal barriers by the end of 1992, enabling the free flow of goods, services, capital and people in the member countries. There is little doubt that the internal market will become the prime focus of economic interest and activity over the next few years since it has given the EC a
"Conventional wisdom holds that governments that deliver economic prosperity tend to secure re-election whereas those associated with economic failure tend to lose office." Discussed in respect to the 2001 general election.
"Conventional wisdom holds that governments that deliver economic prosperity tend to secure re-election whereas those associated with economic failure tend to lose office." (Sanders and Brynin). Given that the 1997 General Election was held after a prolonged period of economic recovery in Britain, how can one explain the outcome? What does it tell us about the value of perspectives that link economic prosperity or failure with election outcomes? Briefly consider your findings in the light of the 2001 general election. (You will be given credit for discussing the methodological problems that arise in this type of analysis.) "It's the economy stupid" is the famous response (ever since Bill Clinton coined it in his 1992 election campaign) to people who ask what matters in an election. It is certainly true to say that there is a lot of evidence from electoral research that voters' choices are conditioned heavily by economic conditions and by their view of the ability of competing parties to manage those conditions. However, as this essay will show it is people's perception of the economy and how the parties can manage it, rather than the actual economic prosperity of the country, that affects how people vote. It can also be argued how far other factors affect voting choice, especially in the post 1997 election period. Ever since the explanatory power of social class
