Patrick Moray Weller

Traditions of governance: interpreting the changing role of the public sector

TRADITIONS and GOVERNANCE * Mark Bevir R. A. W. Rhodes Patrick Weller Address for correspondence: R. A. W. Rhodes Department of Politics University of Newcastle Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 7RU UK Telephone: 44 191 222 8823 Fax: 44 191 222 5069 E-mail: r.a.w.rhodes@ncl.ac.uk Length: 7,935 words. Mark Bevir is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley, USA. Rod Rhodes is Professor of Politics in the Department of Politics, University of Newcastle, UK. Patrick Weller is Professor of Politics and Public Policy in the School of Politics and Public Policy, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.

Comparative governance: prospects and lessons

This article revisits the country case studies and seeks to answer two questions. What are the strengths and weaknesses of an interpretive approach? What lessons can we draw from our analysis of public sector reform? To assess an interpretive approach, we discuss: the issues raised in identifying beliefs; the meaning of explanation; how to select traditions; the shift from prediction to informed conjecture and policy advice as storytelling. To assess the lessons, we outline our preferred story of public sector reform. We seek to show that an interpretive approach produces insights for students of public administration. We argue it remains feasible to give policy advice to public sector managers by telling them stories and providing rules of thumb (proverbs) to guide managerial practices.

Traditions of Australian governance

Australias traditions of governance tend to be pragmatic and to blend different ideologies. Its traditions are less dependent on political party ideologies, and more on competing conceptions of the significant problems and the way that they should be addressed. In this article we identify five principal traditions, namely: settler–state developmentalism; civilizing capitalism; the development of a social–liberal constitutional tradition; traditions of federalism; and the exclusiveness/ inclusiveness of the state and society. These traditions have been robust and have developed over time. We show how political actors operating from within this plurality of traditions have understood the public sector and how their understandings have led to changes in the way the public sector is structured.

Evaluating Policy Advice: The Australian Experience

Mandarins give policy advice. The process is shrouded in the mystique of confidentiality. Policy advising is regarded as the ultimate skill, the height of ambition for civil servants, far above responsibility for the exercise of executive authority in the delivery of services. For departmental secretaries this policy-advising relationship with the minister is a crucial element of their success; for senior officials access to the minister may be an indication of their centrality to the department’s interests. The challenge of advising ministers is the ultimate ambition for many in public service. But how well is the job done? In part there seems to be an implicit assumption that good people give good advice. If the system ensures those who reach the top of the civil service are properly talented, then it follows that the quality of advice will be based on firm foundations. Where policies fail, it can be argued, it is because the government failed to listen. Since ministers take decisions, failures need not indicate the advice provided by officials was poor. However such assumptions need to be tested. Programme evaluation is now routinely undertaken, but the evaluation of policy advice has been left to more informal mechanisms. Yet policy advice is a crucial determinant in public sector activity. Policy advice may be difficult to assess. It is, after all, eventually a matter of judgement, an art or craft rather than a science (Wildavsky 1979; Waller 1996, p. 12). It usually requires the reduction of a complex problem to a set of options, based on assumptions about causation, and compatible with government policies or directions. There is no guarantee ministers will accept the advice. Nor should there be. Hence in the process of evaluation the emphasis must be more on the development of advice than on resultant action. Acceptance cannot be an absolute criterion of good advice. Even when advice is accepted without change, there may be problems of

What Drives Machinery of Government Change? Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom, 1950–1997

Machinery of government arrangements attract a diverse and detailed literature, but surprisingly little comparative research. This article provides a graphically presented indication of functional changes in the architecture of national government in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom between 1950 and 1997. An analysis finds interesting national differences, with sharp changes in practice in Australia and Canada, but more gradual incremental adjustment in the United Kingdom. The correlation between parties and machinery change is weak for Canada and the United Kingdom, but all countries demonstrate stronger links between elections, new prime ministers and machinery of government changes. Further, all tend to oscillate between many specialist departments and fewer, broader agencies The explanation for such machinery change, we argue, is found in the political, policy and administrative calculations made by prime ministers in Westminster-style parliamentary systems

Where is the Quality? Political Science Scholarship in Australia

This article presents a comparison of research quality in political science among Australian universities. Two sources are used to assess the output of high-quality political science scholarship. The first looks at publication totals in leading journals, using the hierarchy of journal quality from the Excellence in Research Australia program. The second counts Australian Research Council Discovery Grants awarded in political science. Although there is no attempt to present an authoritative master ranking, it is argued that common patterns do emerge regarding the distribution of high-quality political science research among different universities in Australia. More broadly, the data confirm earlier conclusions on the British or European character of the field in this country, despite the overwhelming dominance of the USA in political science worldwide.

The Hollow Crown: Coherence and Capacity in Central Government

Can governments provide coherent policy or follow consistent processes? Does the centre of government have the capacity to direct or control the branches? Modern governments are frequently described as incoherent. As leaders become more exposed to analysis and criticism, as the media provides instant criticism, as the expectations of government become more jaundiced, so the demands for better government grow. In hard economic times, there is greater intolerance of alleged ‘inefficiency’ or duplication of functions. Unsuccessful administration may receive a vote of no confidence at the next election; a government that does not know what it wants may not survive.

Are You being Served? State, citizens and governance

Even while democracy triumphs around the world, there is a growing distrust of governments and a suspicion of politicians. Social capital is in decline, citizens want to be less involved and to pay fewer taxes, but they still want governments to meet their needs and solve many of societys problems. What implications do these often contradictory aspirations have for the process of governance in Australia? This book seeks to answer this question. It begins by examining the attitude of citizens to government, and looks at the different ways that citizens now organize: into social movements rather than political parties. It then explains the consequences of these changes, and asks whether consultation is the answer to developing trust and consent. The conclusion draws the lessons together, suggesting that, in part, the problems are caused by a difference in perception. Nevertheless, governments will need a number of solutions and strategies if the problems of governance in contemporary Australia are to be solved.

Disentangling Concepts of Ministerial Responsibility

Debates on ministerial responsibility have too often gone around in circles. The application of the principle is related to the incidence of resignations; analysis considers the reasons given for resignation or, rather more often, the reasons given for not resigning. The usual conclusions are that ministers resign occasionally when their personal involvement is unquestioned and when the prime minister determines that the political costs are less to let the minister go. But the ideas remain at a broad level because they relate to all the ministerial activities. This article seeks to disentangle these concepts, developing the ideas in Thompson and Tillotsen’s article in this symposium, to see if a different set of concepts can better define this old notion.

The younging of Australian politics or politics as first career

Abstract Politics is usually seen as a second career and many elite studies include details of the background of MPs and draw conclusions from that data. But Australian politicians appear to be entering politics, reaching the ministry and retiring at younger ages. This article explores the accuracy of these perceptions for Australian federal politics and explores some of the implications of politics becoming a first career.