The Civil Service and Intergovernmental Relations

Abstract

The civil service is potentially one of the factors facilitating good intergovernmental relations in the United Kingdom, as either the ‘glue’ holding together administrations, or the ‘oil’ lubricating their working contacts. Its role is influenced by two contrasting models: ’interdepartmental’ and ‘diplomatic’ which in turn derive from a continuum of proximity between officials ranging from working for the same department to working for a foreign government with no special ties. UK devolution has tried to preserve the interdepartmental approach, generally with success because of a past history of interaction and the small scale of the devolved institutions. The formal ‘diplomatic’ mechanisms set in place have not been used, and the unified nature of the Home Civil Service is under little challenge. The continued success of this approach is not guaranteed, especially because the civil service role in the devolved administrations is tending to merge into the wider public service. A system based on goodwill, personal contact and a reluctance to resolve issues through open structures is working now but may face sociological and political challenges, especially if English regional government requires a more systematic approach to policy divergence and resource allocation within the UK.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson Report (2002), Foot and Mouth Disease 2001: Lessons to be Learned Inquiry, ( London: The Stationery Office, HC 888 ).

Cabinet Office (2002), ‘Memorandum by The Cabinet office on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government’ in House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution (2002a).

Cairney, P. , and Keating, M. (2004), ‘Sewel Motions in the Scottish Parliament’, Scottish Affairs, No 47. pp. 115-134.

Hazell, R. (2000), ‘Intergovernmental Relations: Whitehall rules OK?’, in Hazell, R. (ed.), The State and the Nations, ( Exeter: Imprint Academic ).

HM Treasury (2004), 2004 Spending Review: New Public Spending Plans 2005-08, ( London: The Stationery Office, Cm 6237 ).

House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution (2002a), Devolution: Inter Institutional Relations in the United Kingdom: Evidence, ( London: The Stationery Office. HL Paper 147 2001-02 ).

House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution (2002b), Devolution: Inter Institutional Relations in the United Kingdom (2nd Report 2002-03), ( London: The Stationery Office, HL 28 2002-03 ).

Parry, R. (2003), ‘Devolution, Integration and Modernization in the United Kingdom civil service’, in Butcher, T. , and Massey, A. (eds), Modernizing Civil Services, ( Cheltenham: Edward Elgar ); earlier version in Public Policy and Administration Vol 16, No 3. (2001), pp.53-67.

Richard Commission (2004), Report of the Commission on the Powers and Electoral Arrangements of the National Assembly for Wales, (www.richardcommission.gov.uk).

10.

Simeon, R. (2003), ‘Free Personal Care: Policy Divergence and Social Citizenship’, ain Hazell, R. (ed.), The State of the Nations 2003, ( Exeter: Imprint Academic ).

11.

Trench, A. (2001), ‘Intergovernmental Relations a Years On: Whitehall still rules OK?’, in Trench, A. (ed.), The State of the Nations 2001, ( Exeter: Imprint Academic ).

12.

Trench, A. (2003), ‘Intergovernmental Relations: Officialdom Still in Control’, in Hazell, R. (ed.), The State of the Nations 2003, ( Exeter: Imprint Academic ).

13.

Trench, A. (2004), ‘The More Things Change the More they Stay the Same: Intergovernmental Relations Four Years On’, in Trench, A. (ed.), Has Devolution Made a Difference: the State of the Nations 2004, ( Exeter: Imprint Academic ).