Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T09:33:19.412Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The British Bureaucracy and the Origins of Parliamentary Policy, II*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Charles Aikin
Affiliation:
University of California

Extract

Thus far, reference has been made, not to the great mass of the civil servants, but only to the higher officials. The work of more than ninety-seven per cent of the members of the service has no significance for this study. The laborers, clerks, writing assistants, and a large majority of the members of the professional class make only incidental contributions to policy, and while their importance is occasionally to be noted, we are not concerned here with a detailed examination of their work. Suffice it to say that the 150,000 who are usually referred to by the term “civil service” possess a certain esprit that links the members together. Within this number, however, there are marked divisions: there is the foreign, diplomatic, and consular service, the colonial service, the defense services, and the home service, all with their peculiarities, often of outlook and sometimes of mode of recruitment, salary, or promotion. Outside of this group fall such diverse units as the local government service, the large judicial service, and the employees of such semi-independent agencies as the British Broadcasting Corporation and the Central Electricity Board. Our interest here is centered on the more important members of the professional or specialist class of some 14,000 members, the higher officials of the executive grade numbering between 4,000 and 5,000, and the administrative class with its small but highly important membership of 1,200 to 1,300.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1939

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

16 Royal Commission on the Civil Service (1929–30), Statement Submitted by the Association of First Division Civil Servants, p. 6, par. 15.

17 Ibid., p. 8, par. 21.

18 Royal Commission on the Civil Service (1929–30), Statement Submitted by the Association of First Division Civil Servants, p. 5, par. 12.

19 Boyd, C. W. (ed.), Mr. Chamberlain's Speeches (1914), Vol. 2, p. 7Google Scholar.

20 SirFloud, P. L. C., “The Sphere of the Specialist in Public Administration,” Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 1, p. 117 (April, 1923)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Royal Commission on the Civil Service (1929–30), Statement Submitted by the Institute of Professional Civil Servants, p. 12, par. 25.

22 Carlill, H. F., “Administrative Habits of Mind,” Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 8, p. 128 (April, 1930)Google Scholar.

23 P. 91 (1925).

24 P. 168 (1928).

25 Vol. 2, p. 637 (1934).

26 Laski, H. J., “The Tomlin Report on the Civil Service,” Political Quarterly, Vol. 2, p. 514 (Oct.-Dec., 1931)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 Cf. Stout, H. M., Public Service in Great Britain (1938), p. 137Google Scholar.

28 Hansard, April 14, 1926, Col. 289.

29 “Governorships and other appointments, such as were formerly reserved for noblemen and the like, have been more frequently given of late to civil servants.” SirLeathes, S., “The Old Civil Service,” Fifty Years: 1882–1932, p. 159 (1932)Google Scholar.

30 A Reform Bill for 1932,” Political Quarterly, Vol. 2, pp. 56 (Jan.-March. 1931)Google Scholar.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.