Search

Local government has long been the site of experiments and innovation in transparency. Since the 1990s waves of reforms have sought to open up local government in Britain, from the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act in the 2000s to Open Data in the 2010s. This paper looks across the evidence to see how well these new transparency tools have worked, who is using them and why. It then moves to analyse what impact the changes have had on local government, in line with hopes of campaigners and fears of (some) politicians. Have reforms succeeded in making local government more open, more accountable and more participative, and in what situations? Or have they, as some claim, simply driven decision-making into other arenas, and made local bodies 'better at hiding'? Finally, how does transparency sit with the fragmented and disjointed landscape of local politics today, from outsourcing and devolution to financial crisis? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article tests Poguntke and Webb's theory of 'electoral presidentialization' through a comparison of Silvio Berlusconi and Boris Johnson. Johnson and Berlusconi stand as particular examples of 'electoral presidentialization', where dominance lies in power as an election 'winner' and 'mediatised leader'. This approach is highly contingent and reliant on continuous validation, and, as a result, both leaders failed to translate electoral 'autonomy' into concrete and lasting change. Utilising the three presidentialization 'faces', we identify three crucial weaknesses. First, their own electoral and mediatized focus created a pressure to permanently campaign and generate conflict, driving a 'politics of spectacle' that distracted from the politics of governing. Second, the centrality of their personality left them exposed to personal scrutiny, which increasingly focused on corruption, wrongdoing, and irregularities. Third, despite electoral command, their 'presidentialized' style rested on fragile party and coalition dynamics, leading to volatility and internal conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK has a fragmented, partial and weak system of lobbying regulation. The system creates a self-reinforcing cycle of 'exposure' and worsening public attitudes. In order to make the case for reform and indicate possible paths, this article reviews the system's faults and weaknesses and then analyses how the lack of political will for reform in Westminster has contributed to a transparency and integrity regime which falls below international standards. Finally, it examines how this cycle can be broken. While the UK lobbying law needs reform, we must look beyond the letter of regulation, taking into account the levels of use and political support, as well as the transparency and ethics ecosystem in which lobbying sits. Only by improvements to all of these areas can there be the possibility of stronger, more positive feedback loops, which can shift behaviour and, ultimately, attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In September 2022, Elizabeth Truss became the third Prime Minister in a row to take office directly as a result of a party leadership election. My study of takeovers between 1916 and 2016 found they have a shorter time in office than those who are elected, because they inherit deep crisis and divided parties. They also face the dilemma of whether, and when, to call a general election. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Parliamentary Monitoring Organisations [PMOs] seek to make legislators more accountable and reduce the potential moral hazards of delegation. This study of the UK finds that PMOs do reduce such hazards and make for greater ‘informatory’ accountability from MPs and Peers. The primary effect is on the House of Commons, and on individual MPs, where information seeking is most frequently local. The exact impact is variable, and depends on whether a Member is in government or opposition, how long they have served and, more subtly, whether they are male or female. The impact of PMOs is uneven, and can provoke resistance and gaming or fuel political conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Graph From FOI to TheyWorkForYou, we have more data about British politics - and politicians - than ever before. Mis-representation and "data-less darkness" Not everyone was convinced that more data made for better politics. In 2012 I The Sun i published a list of "lazy" MPs based on attendance data, which they later retracted when it emerged a number of the MPs had maternity or caring responsibilities. [Extracted from the article]

This article explores the concept of financial transparency in English local government and the role of audit in reducing information asymmetry. While transparency is often seen as a positive force, the article argues that it can be politically manipulated and strategically performed. The effectiveness of audit in reducing asymmetry is questioned, as it faces challenges such as limited coverage and access. The article suggests that audit recommendations and media scrutiny may have indirect effects on accountability, but only after the fact. Overall, the article highlights the complexities and limitations of transparency and audit in promoting accountability in local government. [Extracted from the article]

The Covid‐19 pandemic has revealed and accelerated an information crisis as well as a health one. What we discover about Covid 19, how it spreads, to whom and why and how best to mitigate it—all depend on information. The essays in this special section, which this article introduces, explore the importance of information and the fundamental role of fact checkers in understanding how information flows, why mistakes are made, and how to counteract them. Fact checking as an idea and a practice emerged in the early twenty‐first century, developed as a positive beacon to counteract a growing sense that information could no longer be trusted. Now, more than a decade after its creation, fact checking sits within a far more complex and chaotic media context, and its expertise and understanding has never been so important. We need to understand what fact checkers do because they are grappling with how to tether us to reality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Openness is essential for democratic leadership. It represents a moral commitment and an instrument for increasing trust and legitimacy. However, secrecy can still aid leaders by safeguarding their power and policies or preserving their reputation. This article examines Theresa May's attempted use of secrecy around the UK–EU Brexit negotiations to protect her power, policy, and reputation between 2016 and 2019. While this approach appeared successful initially, over time, the counter-pressure for openness reversed its benefits. By the beginning of 2019, it was clear that May's secrecy had limited her power, undermined her policy, and ultimately damaged her reputation. The analysis ends by drawing comparisons with Donald Trump, whose efforts to conceal his actions have produced the same counterproductive results. The case study illustrates how secrecy can create political space and bolster a leader's reputation in the short term; however, over time, secret-keeping encourages leaks and greater scrutiny, exposes policies, and damages reputations, especially in increasingly transparent governance systems such as in the United States and the UK. Context is key, and secrecy surrounding high-profile, controversial issues, such as Brexit, is difficult to preserve. It can prove particularly damaging when it is tied to the leader's reputation, as in May's case. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Graph Two decades on from the introduction of Freedom of Information legislation in Britain, Ben Worthy explores the successes - and challenges - of the Act politicians love to hate. FOI in Britain In the UK, politicians tip toed towards openness over decades. Freedom of Information (FOI) isn't very popular with politicians, to put it mildly. You can also see FOI as having a curious dual existence, with the "real" law used regularly and locally to open up issues and problems while, at national level, FOI becomes a symbol of unintended consequences, and a bugbear to unhappy politicians. [Extracted from the article]

How can we evaluate government transparency arrangements? While the complexity and contextuality of the values at stake defy straightforward measurement, this article provides an interpretative framework to guide and structure assessments of government transparency. In this framework, we discern criteria clusters for political transparency—democracy, the constitutional state, and social learning capacity—and for administrative transparency—economy/efficiency, integrity, and resilience. The framework provides a structured “helicopter view” of the dimensions that are relevant for a contextual assessment of transparency. An illustrative case discussion of the introduction of Freedom of Information (FOI) in the United Kingdom demonstrates its utility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholarship on transparency and freedom of information (FOI) conveys an overwhelmingly “political” narrative. Most uses of FOI, however, are private and nonpolitical in nature. This article explores the gap between the literature and empirical reality by means of an “Information-Gathering Matrix,” a framework for conceptualizing the motivations, uses, and impacts associated with FOI. Following a broad literature review, case studies illustrate that while FOI uses may be multifarious and prima facie nonpolitical, at least three of the matrix’s four quadrants—from the public to the private and the political to the nonpolitical—frequently tend toward politicization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK's FOI Act came into force in 2005. Three linked research projects were conducted to evaluate its overall impact and assess to what extent FOI has met its objectives across central and local government and Parliament. They conclude that FOI has met its 'core' objectives, making central government more transparent and accountable. However, it has not improved decision-making, public understanding, participation or trust. Nor has FOI significantly changed how government works, despite politicians' fears of a chilling effect. The article concludes with a look at the key issues that will shape the future of FOI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When Theresa May became Prime Minister in July 2016, she joined a list of eleven previous UK takeover leaders in the past 100 years. While the popular image is of Prime Ministers arriving in power after a general election victory, more than half of the Prime Ministers who governed since 1916 have acceded as 'takeover leaders' through an internal party process. This article analyses how such takeover leaders perform, concluding that May is likely to face greater obstacles and enjoy fewer advantages than if she had been popularly elected. Takeover leaders have less time in power and less chance of winning subsequent elections, and are generally rated as worse-performing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the democratic impact of the UK coalition government's Transparency Agenda, focusing on the publication of all local government spending over £500 by councils in England. It looks at whether the new data have driven increased democratic accountability, public participation, and information transmission. The evidence suggests that the local government spending data have driven some accountability. However, rather than forging new 'performance regimes', creating 'armchair auditors', or bringing mass use and involvement, the publication creates a further element of political disruption. Assessment of the use and impact of the new spending data finds it is more complex, more unpredictable, and more political than the rhetoric around Open Data indicates. The danger is that the gap between aims and impact invites disappointment from supporters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that the extent to which political office-holders can effectively attain and wield authority is a function of the stock of ‘leadership capital’. Drawing on the concept of political capital, the article defines leadership capital as aggregate authority composed of three dimensions: skills, relations and reputation of a leader. Leadership capital ebbs and flows over time within a trajectory of acquisition, expenditure and inevitable depreciation. The article presents a Leadership Capital Index (LCI) that systematically maps out the three broad areas combining concrete measures with interpretive aspects. This can be used as a tool for systematically tracking and comparing the political fortunes of leaders in a way that is both more nuanced and robust than exclusive reliance on the latest approval ratings. An illustrative case study of Tony Blair is used to demonstrate the LCI. The article concludes by discerning several promising paths for future development of the LCI. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article examines the impact of freedom of information (FOI) on English local government and compares it with UK central government. It asks whether FOI has increased transparency and accountability and improved decision-making, public understanding, participation or trust. It also looks at whether FOI has affected local leadership, service delivery and partnership work. FOI has not had a “transformative” impact on local government. Local authorities are more transparent, supported by new online disclosure reforms. FOI has also increased accountability but only increased public understanding in a small way. It has had no effect on decision-making except in particularly sensitive issues. It has not increased participation and has had no general impact upon trust. Core activities remain unaffected though private contractors’ information and media use cause concern. The variable openness of institutions depends on context, culture and political leadership. The diversity is also driven by requesters’ varying motivations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the impact of Britain's Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 2000 on British central government. The article identifies six objectives for FOI in the United Kingdom and then examines to what extent FOI has met them, briefly comparing the United Kingdom with similar legislation in Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. It concludes that FOI has achieved the core objectives of increasing transparency and accountability, though the latter only in particular circumstances, but not the four secondary objectives: improved decision-making by government, improved public understanding, increased participation, and trust in government. This is not because the Act has 'failed' but because the objectives were overly ambitious and FOI is shaped by the political environment in which it is placed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the effect of the British government's Freedom of Information Act (FOI) on universities and research studies. It offers information on FOI which creates a public right of access to information that covers 100,000 public bodies. It details the results of a study on the issue based on survey data, interviews, evidence from other inquiries, and coding of logs of FOI requests. It states that the FOI has increased transparency in certain areas in universities, however, its effect on research is still vague. It adds that some universities and public bodies are concerned that the Act will expose delicate aspects of their operations.