Search

The current British electoral system was put in place in 1884, and has survived to the 21st century because it provides for widespread debate while creating a stable power structure. Sporadic attempts to change this system have failed, but there are further inquiries about reform in 2000.

In the build up to general elections there is invariably a wealth of discourse on constitutional and transitional issues and even on the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the civil service, but rarely is there any debate on the manner in which politicians manage the government machine. This article seeks to address this deficiency. It examines the operational factors common to the core executive, assesses the problems usually associated with the government as an organization and reviews alternative solutions. Finally, it offers managerially oriented advice, reasoning that it is the role of policy analysts to prescribe and that it is irresponsible to ignore this function. It is clearly emphasized that management solutions are not synonymous with business solutions. The article draws on universal principles of management, seeking to avoid normative suggestions and concentrating instead on practical considerations. Those considerations include personnel selection, collective responsibility, leadership style, organizational structure and team mentality. The conclusion is that strong managerially based leadership should not be dismissed as incompatible with the political constraints placed upon Prime Ministers but rather it should be the predominant impulse.

The UK was undergoing industrialization in the early nineteenth century, and this was linked to a rise in the urban population, despite high mortality rates. Skilled artisans were affected by the rise of factory work, and lack of work also affected outworkers in rural areas. Attention was focused on the sanitary conditions of the poor by Chadwick, and the need for a sewage and water system was addressed after the 1866 and 1872 Sanitary Acts. Education was seen as increasingly important as a means to integrate members of society, whereas previously it was feared that education might encourage revolution.

There was pressure to revise the Vienna Settlement in Europe by the 1920s, and strain came from both nationalist forces and the decline of Austria. Britain sought to maintain the balance of power in Europe and avoid involvement in European wars. The 1848 revolutions had little impact except in weakening Austria. The unification of Germany and Italy represented a defeat for liberal nationalism and the rise of dynastic states. Turkey was affected by revisions to the Vienna Settlement and lost control of Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania in 1878.

When the historians of the late twentieth century come to write their versions of events they may discover that one major source will be found wanting: television. Like film before [...]

William D. Rubinstein. Twentieth-Century Britain: A Political History. New York: Palgrave. 2003. Pp. 368. £55.00. ISBN 0-3337-7223-7. This book is obviously intended as a textbook and seems, from the number [...]

An A-level history question about British imperialism should be answered fully, with a conclusion drawing together all points made earlier. The student 'Chris' fails to do this, and jumps to another subject in his conclusion. His answer would have been better if he had relied less on opinion and more on evidence. However, Chris was right to break down a question into its parts before trying to answer it.