UK Central Government - Essay Example

How has the UK central government tried to control local governments in recent years Introduction: Within the UK, the role of the central government and government agencies is to implement policies and advise the ministers. The central government works in association with local governments and councils, local authorities, non-departmental public bodies, and other government-sponsored organisations. Central and local departments go through major changes if there are related changes in government policies. Certain departments as the Ministry of Defence involve the whole of UK whereas certain others such as work and pensions or Department of Education are applicable within England and Wales only. Most such departments are led by ministers and the ministers are accountable to parliament and have to report on the progress of their department. Certain non-ministerial posts may also be given to people heading certain departments1. This essay will deal with the role of the governments, both local and central and examine to what extent the local governments are dependent on central government. Is there an issue of performance scrutiny Are the local governments completely controlled by the central government2 These are issues that will be discussed is some detail. The Structure and Function of the Central government - The ministers are in charge of government departments and are known as secretaries of state. They are members of the cabinet and carry out duties that the Prime Minster allots to them. Certain holders of traditional offices may have no departmental duties. Ministerial responsibility refers to both the collective responsibility for government policy and actions which ministers share, and to the ministers' individual responsibility for the work of their own departments. Collective responsibility implies that ministers should support government decisions and policies once they have been made and strictly implement those policies. Departmental ministers must agree with government policies as a whole so ministers are either expected to support or resign (Direct.gov on Central govt, 2005). This shows the extreme control of the central government in policy matters. In recent years we have seen such cases of resignation when ministers have failed to support government policies for instance the decision to go to war against Iraq (BBC report 2003/2005)3. The junior ministers are parliamentary undersecretaries of State and they report to a minister and oversee certain functions of a department. Departmental ministers tend to decide on all matters within their responsibility although certain cases may involve the decision of more than one department and consequently more than one minister would be responsible for the decision. On taking up office ministers are required to resign from directorships of private and public companies and ensure that there is no conflict in public and private interests (Direct.gov on Central govt, 2005). The central government consists of a cabinet of 20 ministers chosen by the Prime Minister and include both departmental and non-departmental ministers. The Cabinet represents the true collective responsibility and is expected to take the final decisions on government policies and adhere to them. The cabinet meets weekly although its business remains confidential until policies are made public and official (Direct.gov on Central govt, 2005). The civil service helps the government to formulate policies, carry out decisions and administer public services for which they are responsible. As ofJune 2001, civil servants constituted about 2 per cent of the working population in employment and about 10 per cent of all public sector employees and half of all civil services provide their services directly to the public4. The Prime Minister is responsible for central co-ordination and management of the Civil Service (Direct.gov on Central govt, 2005). The central government also consists of executive agencies that are directly accountable to the ministers. These government agencies help to implement the policies and make these policies more realistic. Local government - The local government consists of local authorities and councils that have to work within the law and the powers provided to them. In certain cases, ministers may have power to protect individual rights of citizens and can go beyond local government's authority. The Office of the deputy Prime Minister acts as bridge between the local government and the central government. Local authorities employ around 2 million people employed in various jobs and positions ranging from school teachers, police, fire-fighters and other non-manual and manual workers. Education is the largest locally-provided service, with 0.9 million full-time equivalent jobs (from Direct.gov on Local government, 2005). Local council policies are scrutinised and reviewed and there are rigorous methods to implement such assessments. Within the local council the executive has special role in decision making and decisions are taken by the executive collectively individual members of the executive committees of the executive officers of the authority (Direct.gov on Local government, 2005) In most decision making processes, the public and the press are allowed in the meetings and have access to meetings, agendas and reports. The Local Government Act 2000 required local authorities in England and Wales to implement new decision-taking structures, including the option of a directly elected mayor (Direct.gov on Local government, 2005). There are three major frameworks within which councils can work and this includes: a mayor and cabinet, a council leader and cabinet, or a mayor and council manager. The council operates using any of these frameworks and uses the constitutional agenda and policies within the local circumstances (Sanderson, 2001). The local government expenditure is 25% of public spending and the local government raise revenue through council tax that meets the revenue expenditure and property tax levied on business and non-domestic properties (Direct.gov on Local government, 2005). However the primary funding is provided by grants from central government and thus local governments are directly dependent on the central government for funds. This ensures that the local government is largely controlled by the central government in not just adherence to and implementation of policies set by the central government but also in having to depend on the central government for financial aid. More examples of the control of the local governments by the central governments can be given with the help of recent studies in this area. Control of Local Government - In recent years the control of local governments by the central government seems to have made headlines not just in newspapers but have triggered several discussions at a scholarly level5. Ball et al (2000) have argued that benchmarking in the UK local government sector has led to policy initiatives for local governments under new labour. Benchmarking has now been subsumed under the practice of performance measurement. The main issue here is the crucial role of performance monitoring by the central government. This has resulted in two distinct views on benchmarking which means benchmarking as a challenging scrutiny of local government processes and performance and benchmarking as an instrument of central government control. Policy makers in recent times have encouraged the use of benchmarking as a blueprint for reforms of local government processes. Arguing from a related perspective, Painter and Clarence (2000) suggest that that following the election of New Labour in 1997, a reinvigorated role of local governments and more powers to local authorities were far from being realised. In fact the central government has made it clear that local governments can have several opportunities to enhance their role only if they meet certain expectations of the central government. The emphasis is that local authorities must develop innovative ways of working in a multi-agency context, and also at the same time meet central government's prescriptive results-based agenda. Central government's policies towards intergovernmental management seem to have tensions, threats as also opportunities6. Painter and Clarence argue that although new approach to networking and intergovernmental working has been stressed, the 'action space' has been defined, predetermined and even controlled by the central government. Andrews et al (2005) argue that the central government in the UK has introduced performance management regimes that provide rewards as also sanctions to local authorities and councils. By implementing these measures the central government assumes that organisational performance of local councils are attributable to decisions made by local policy makers and thus local council performance is completely within control. Andrews et al suggest that contrary to central government assumptions, CPA or comprehensive performance assessment of local councils is significantly influenced by the characteristics such as social diversity and economic prosperity of local populations (Andrews et al, 2005). Thus 'poor' performance on the part of certain local councils can be attributable to difficult circumstances within a council rather than poor management by the local authorities. Conclusion: The New labour policies of strict scrutiny, benchmarking and rewards and sanctions to local authorities may have its own strengths and weaknesses but the policies of the central government definitely point to the fact that there has been increased control of local authorities by the central government and this control has increased drastically in recent years. Bibliography: Andrews, Rhys;Boyne, George A.;Law, Jennifer;Walker, Richard M. External Constraints on Local Service Standards: The Case of Comprehensive Performance Assessment in English Local Government Public Administration, Volume 83,Number 3, August 2005, pp. 639-656(18) Blackwell Publishing Ball A.;Bowerman M.;Hawksworth S. Benchmarking in local government under a central government agenda Benchmarking: An International Journal, Volume 7,Number 1, January 2000, pp. 20-34(15) Emerald Group Publishing Limited Bowerman M.;Francis G.;Ball A.;Fry J. The evolution of benchmarking in UK local authorities Benchmarking: An International Journal, Volume 9,Number 5, November 2002, pp. 429-449(21) Emerald Group Publishing Limited Painter C.;Clarence E. NEW LABOUR AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT: Flexible networks or performance control Public Management, Volume 2,Number 4, 1 December 2000, pp. 477-498(22) Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group Sanderson I. Performance Management, Evaluation and Learning in 'Modern' Local Government Public Administration, Volume 79,Number 2, Summer 2001, pp. 297-313(17) Blackwell Publishing Central Government and the Civil Service - from direct.gov.uk, retrieved 2005 http://www.direct.gov.uk/Gtgl1/GuideToGovernment/CentralGovernmentAndTheCivilService/fs/en Devolved and Local Government - from direct.gov.uk retrieved 2005 http://www.direct.gov.uk/Gtgl1/GuideToGovernment/DevolvedAndLocalGovernment/fs/en Cook quits over Iraq crisis - BBC Report 2003 - retrieved 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2857637.stm Read More