Constitutional reform, new labour in power and public trust in government

Parliamentary Affairs

Volumn 54, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 405-424

  Dunleavy, Patrick ^a   Margetts, Helen ^a   Smith, Trevor ^a   Weir, Stuart ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035402440     PISSN: 00312290     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/parlij/54.3.405     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. For the state of civil and political rights during this period, see F. Klug, K. Starmer and S. Weir, The Three Pillars of Liberty: Civil and Political Rights in the UK, Routledge, 1996. For some of the problems in this period see P. Dunleavy, 'The constitution' in P. Dunleavy et al (eds), Developments in British Politics 5, Macmillan, 1997; S. Weir and D. Beetham, Political Power and Democratic Control in the United Kingdom, Routledge, 1999; and P. Dunleavy, S. Weir, and G. Subrahmanyam, '"Sleaze" in Britain: Media Influences, Public Response and Constitutional Significance', Parliamentary Affairs, October 1995.
2. For the state of civil and political rights during this period, see F. Klug, K. Starmer and S. Weir, The Three Pillars of Liberty: Civil and Political Rights in the UK, Routledge, 1996. For some of the problems in this period see P. Dunleavy, 'The constitution' in P. Dunleavy et al (eds), Developments in British Politics 5, Macmillan, 1997; S. Weir and D. Beetham, Political Power and Democratic Control in the United Kingdom, Routledge, 1999; and P. Dunleavy, S. Weir, and G. Subrahmanyam, '"Sleaze" in Britain: Media Influences, Public Response and Constitutional Significance', Parliamentary Affairs, October 1995.
3. For the state of civil and political rights during this period, see F. Klug, K. Starmer and S. Weir, The Three Pillars of Liberty: Civil and Political Rights in the UK, Routledge, 1996. For some of the problems in this period see P. Dunleavy, 'The constitution' in P. Dunleavy et al (eds), Developments in British Politics 5, Macmillan, 1997; S. Weir and D. Beetham, Political Power and Democratic Control in the United Kingdom, Routledge, 1999; and P. Dunleavy, S. Weir, and G. Subrahmanyam, '"Sleaze" in Britain: Media Influences, Public Response and Constitutional Significance', Parliamentary Affairs, October 1995.
4. For the state of civil and political rights during this period, see F. Klug, K. Starmer and S. Weir, The Three Pillars of Liberty: Civil and Political Rights in the UK, Routledge, 1996. For some of the problems in this period see P. Dunleavy, 'The constitution' in P. Dunleavy et al (eds), Developments in British Politics 5, Macmillan, 1997; S. Weir and D. Beetham, Political Power and Democratic Control in the United Kingdom, Routledge, 1999; and P. Dunleavy, S. Weir, and G. Subrahmanyam, '"Sleaze" in Britain: Media Influences, Public Response and Constitutional Significance', Parliamentary Affairs, October 1995.
5. A. Beaton, The Little Book of New Labour Bollocks, Pocket Books, 2000, p. 13. His 'What He Meant' translation is: We prefer the former'.
6. The 'State of the Nation 2000' survey was carried out between 23 and 28 October 2000 by ICM Research Limited for the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust. A quota sample of 2,401 adults aged over 18 were interviewed, with sample boosts in Scotland, Wales and among ethnic minorities. Smaller sample boosts were applied within England to ensure sufficient numbers of people to allow regional analysis in the government standard regions. JRRT has sponsored a series of such polls, beginning in 1991.
7. See F. Klug, Values for a Godless Age: The Story of the UK's New Bill of Rights, Oxford University Press, 2000.
8. The Leader of the House of Lords, Margaret Jay, for instance remarked at a dinner with the novelist John Mortimer that no one outside the M25 cared a jot about the issue of the right to a jury trial.
9. The poll was commissioned for the CHCs' Commission on the NHS (chaired by Will Hutton) and the results are published in its report, New Life for Health, Vintage 2000.
10. See P. Dunleavy and H. Margetts, 'Mixed Electoral Systems and the Jenkins Commission on Voting Reform in Britain', British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 1999; and their 'From Majoritarian to Pluralist Democracy: Electoral Reform in Britain since 1997', Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2001.
11. See P. Dunleavy and H. Margetts, 'Mixed Electoral Systems and the Jenkins Commission on Voting Reform in Britain', British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 1999; and their 'From Majoritarian to Pluralist Democracy: Electoral Reform in Britain since 1997', Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2001.
12. See, for example, U. Beck, The Risk Society, Polity, 1999/1.
13. For London the question asked more briefly about 'the best way of deciding how to generate new jobs, develop major road and public transport, and similar issues'. This change reflected the lesser scope of the Great London Authority's competences.
14. Economist, 27.3.99. See also R. Hazell, 'Shrinking Westminster', Guardian, 3.1.01.
15. Economist, 27.3.99. See also R. Hazell, 'Shrinking Westminster', Guardian, 3.1.01.
16. S. Pharr and D. Putnam (eds), Disaffected Democracies, Princeton University Press, 2000.
17. P. Dunleavy and M. Margetts, 'From Majoritarian to Pluralist Democracy' and P. Dunleavy, 'Elections and Party Politics' in P. Dunleavy et al, Developments in British Politics 6, Macmillan, 2000.
18. P. Dunleavy and M. Margetts, 'From Majoritarian to Pluralist Democracy' and P. Dunleavy, 'Elections and Party Politics' in P. Dunleavy et al, Developments in British Politics 6, Macmillan, 2000.