The Political Quarterly最新文献

{"title":"Government Communications, Political Trust and Compliant Social Behaviour: The Politics of Covid-19 in Britain.","authors":"Kenneth Newton","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12901","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12901","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is commonly said that the lockdowns and social distancing necessary to control coronavirus pandemics will only work if the general population trusts its government, believes the information it provides, and has confidence in its policies. This article traces the British government's record in providing information about its policies and performance, and compares this with the public's use of the mainstream news media. It then considers how these two sources of information affected trust in government and public compliance with social distancing and lockdown rules. Lastly, it compares Covid-19 with Brexit and draws conclusions about how beliefs and behaviour are formed when individuals are personally faced with a serious threat.</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"502-513"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12901","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38457147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Intergovernmental Relations in the UK: Time for a Radical Overhaul?","authors":"Nicola McEwen,&nbsp;Michael Kenny,&nbsp;Jack Sheldon,&nbsp;Coree Brown Swan","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12862","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Brexit and the coronavirus pandemic have put relationships between the UK government and its devolved counterparts under growing strain. Tensions generated by both of these developments have exposed the inadequacies of the existing, under-developed system for bringing governments together in the UK. The limitations of the current system include the <i>ad hoc</i> nature of intergovernmental meetings, and their consultative rather than decision-making character. Drawing upon an analysis of how intergovernmental relationships are structured in five other countries, the authors offer a number of suggestions for the reconfiguration of the UK model. They explore different ways of enabling joint decision making by its governments, and argue against the assumption that England can be represented adequately by the UK administration. Without a serious attempt to address this dysfunctional part of the UK's territorial constitution, there is every prospect that relations between these different governments will continue to deteriorate.</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"632-640"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12862","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Lesson-Drawing from New Zealand and Covid-19: The Need for Anticipatory Policy Making.","authors":"Sonia Mazey,&nbsp;Jeremy Richardson","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12893","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12893","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Covid-19 pandemic has seen most governments worldwide having to think on their feet rather than implementing detailed and well-rehearsed plans. This is notwithstanding the fact that a pandemic was bound to happen, sooner or later (and will happen again). The effectiveness of national responses has varied enormously. Globally, New Zealand has been perceived as setting the gold standard in 'curve crushing', and for a short period achieved Covid-free status. For this achievement, much credit is due to the New Zealand government, especially to Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern. However, post-lockdown the New Zealand government has encountered a number of Covid policy implementation problems (many of which could have been anticipated). Nevertheless, Covid-19 might still turn out to have been a seismic shock to existing policy processes and policy frames (such as austerity). If so, there are grounds for hope that in the future, governments and voters might be less short-term in their outlook. Perhaps anticipatory, rather than reactive policy making, might become more fashionable?</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"561-570"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12893","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297138","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Governing Under Pressure: German Policy Making During the Coronavirus Crisis.","authors":"Jörg Michael Dostal","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12865","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12865","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The global threat of the coronavirus pandemic has forced policy makers to react quickly with totally new policy-making approaches under conditions of uncertainty. This article focuses on such crisis-driven policy learning, examining how the experiences of China and South Korea as early responder states influenced the subsequent coronavirus crisis management in Germany. The first reaction of the German core executive was the quick concentration of decision-making power at the top of the political hierarchy. Asserting the prerogatives of the executive included the radical simplification of the relationship between politics, law and science. State actors took emergency measures by recourse to a single piece of legislation-the 'infection protection law' (<i>Infektionsschutzgesetz</i>)-overriding other elements of the legal order. They also limited the government's use of scientific expertise to a small number of advisors, thereby cutting short debates about the appropriateness or otherwise of the government's crisis measures. Finally, German actors failed to understand that some of the earlier Chinese and Korean responses required a precondition-namely public willingness to sacrifice privacy for public health-that is absent in the German case.</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"542-552"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12865","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297136","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Scientific Advice at a Time of Emergency. SAGE and Covid-19.","authors":"Lawrence Freedman","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12885","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12885","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The challenge for experts in government is often described as one of speaking unwelcome truths to a resistant power. Yet, just as problematic can be instances where the advice is welcome and so left unchallenged. Two such cases in which the UK government followed flawed expert advice are considered: intelligence assessments and military advice leading up to the 2003 Iraq War and the role of SAGE (the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) during the first stages of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. Governments need to interrogate advice and make sure that they understand its underlying assumptions and implications. It remains vital to protect the independence of the experts, but to get the best out of their advice early and active political engagement is required rather than an arms-length relationship.</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"514-522"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12885","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Deliberation, Citizen Science and Covid-19.","authors":"Harry Pearse","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12869","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12869","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rather than aiming to produce more 'rational' or more 'other-regarding' citizen judgements (the outcome of which is uncertain), deliberative democratic exercises should be re-designed to maximise democratic participation. To do this, they must involve citizens <i>and</i> experts, a novel arrangement that will benefit both cohorts. For the former, a more inclusive form of deliberation will offer an opportunity to contribute to political discussion and be listened to by people with political or policy-based authority. For the latter, it will provide a venue through which expertise can be brought to bear on democratic decision making without risk of scapegoating or politicisation. More broadly, deliberation that prioritises dialogue (over, say, opinion change) affirms the principle that political decisions reflect value judgements rather than technically 'right' or technically 'wrong' answers-judgements that are legitimate if arrived at through discussion involving the people due to be affected by the resultant policy. This article sets out the advantages of this form of deliberation-which bears some similarity to certain types of citizen science-in the context of the UK government's responses to Covid-19; both the confused decision making evident to date, and the forthcoming re-opening phases that will prioritise or advantage some constituencies over others.</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"571-577"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12869","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Covid-19 and UK Universities.","authors":"Dennis A Ahlburg","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12867","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12867","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Universities UK (UUK) has suggested that there may be very significant losses to higher education as a consequence of Covid-19. However, losses are likely to be substantially lower than the potential losses estimated by UUK. But the magnitude of losses is very uncertain. The UUK's proposal to restrict undergraduate enrolment per university to stop institutions poaching students is not in the interests of the most highly regarded universities, or that of students. Some rationalisation of the sector should be the price of further government support. Now is also the time to reconsider how university research is funded.</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"649-654"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12867","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297135","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Covid-19 and the Blunders of our Governments: Long-run System Failings Aggravated by Political Choices.","authors":"Jen Gaskell,&nbsp;Gerry Stoker,&nbsp;Will Jennings,&nbsp;Daniel Devine","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12894","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12894","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>More urgently than ever we need an answer to the question posed by the late Mick Moran in <i>The Political Quarterly</i> nearly two decades ago: 'if government now invests huge resources in trying to be smart why does it often act so dumb?'. We reflect on this question in the context of governmental responses to Covid-19 in four steps. First, we argue that blunders occur because of systemic weaknesses that stimulate poor policy choices. Second, we review and assess the performance of governments on Covid-19 across a range of advanced democracies. Third, in the light of these comparisons we argue that the UK system of governance has proved itself vulnerable to failure at the time when its citizens most needed it. Finally, we outline an agenda of reform that seeks to rectify structural weaknesses of that governance capacity.</p>","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 3","pages":"523-533"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12894","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Equity and Fairness in a Pandemic.","authors":"Deborah Mabbett","doi":"10.1111/1467-923X.12856","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12856","url":null,"abstract":"THE 2020 BUDGET, delivered on 11 March, included measures to address the economic impact of the coronavirus lockdown. The budget envisaged that these impacts would be addressed by business rate cancellation and bridging loans for firms, along with some easing of the rules on Statutory Sick Pay (SSP). SSP is normally paid by the employer for up to twenty-eight weeks; the government would exceptionally cover the cost for the first two weeks. For the self-employed, for whom SSP is not available, rules on accessing Universal Credit and contributory Employment and Support Allowance were eased. Nothing else was said in the budget about Universal Credit, although it would supposedly provide the safety net for many. The inadequacy of these measures was soon apparent, forcing a frantic rethink at the Treasury. On 20 March, a ‘Plan for People’s Jobs and Incomes’ was announced by the Chancellor. The headline measure was the Job Retention Scheme (JRS), under which employees who could not work because of the lockdown could continue to be paid, with 80 per cent of their salaries up to £2,500 per month being funded by the government, via the employer. Universal Credit was also boosted by around £20 per week for the coming year, but its income and assets tests were not eased. Thus, a furloughed worker can receive £2,500 per month from the state, while a single person on Universal Credit receives around £400 (plus a contribution to rent, if renting), and a third, with too much saved to qualify for Universal Credit, gets nothing. Some of these inequities may be inevitable given the conditions of emergency, but this should not stop us from asking questions and learning lessons for building stronger institutions before the next crisis. This we singularly failed to do after the 2008 financial crisis. The response to that crisis was marked by vast differences in the protection against loss provided by the state to different classes of firms and people. Notoriously, the banks received substantial injections of capital and sheltered under abundant central bank liquidity, but nonetheless paid inflated salaries and bonuses, while holders of financial assets benefitted from central banks’ support for markets. Monetary profligacy was matched by fiscal austerity, which brought steady erosion in welfare benefits in real terms, outright cuts in tax credits, and a devastating reduction in central government funding for local authorities. While a palpable sense of inequity fuelled political alienation and a general sense of ‘them and us’, it has proved difficult to nail the nature and scale of social injustice in the response to the financial crisis. Doing the accounting has been difficult: guarantees were potentially costly, but were not necessarily called, and central banks collected substantial fees for some of the insurance they provided. But most important, as the Bank of England has loftily explained, it would have been worse for everyone if it had not taken its measures. ","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":"91 2","pages":"271-274"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-923X.12856","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38297172","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}