SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Footnotes
  • 1

     Ministry of Reconstruction, Report of the Machinery of Government Committee (Chairman: Viscount Haldane of Cloan), Cd. 9230, December 1918, Part I, paras, 12, 14 and 15 and part II, Chapter IV.

  • 1

     Cmnd. 2276, paras. 217–32 and 605 (t).

  • 2

     For instance by Dudley Seers and Professor Peter Self, Fulton Evidence, Vol. 5 (2), Memoranda nos. 145 and 147 respectively.

  • 2

     Fulton Report, Cmnd. 3638, June 1968, para. 172.

  • 1

     Ibid., paras. 173–87.

  • 2

     H.C. Deb. (1967–68), v. 767, c. 455–6. The speaker was the then Prime Minister, Mr.Harold Wilson. The main recommendations accepted were those transferring the central management of the Home Civil Service from the Treasury to a new Civil Service Department, advocating the establishment of a Civil Service College, and proposing that the civil service should be made ‘classless’.

  • 3

     H.C. Deb. (1968–69), v. 773, c. 1554,1675–6 and 1680.

  • 4

     Ibid., v. 785, c. 506.

  • 5

     The Times, 13 August 1969.

  • 1

     In the recent Penguin Education Special, The Politics of Education. Edward Boyle and Anthony Crosland in conversation with Maurice Kogan (1971) Crosland said that when he wanted to establish the Planning Branch in the DES in 1966 he faced opposition from his civil servants which was based ‘partly on general conservatism and partly on administrative argument. The administrative argument was that a Department like Education didn't need a central planning division because the planning function was already being carried out in the separate operating branches - teacher supply, school building, further education, and so on’. Crosland did not agree and the Branch was set up. Crosland also revealed that he used to use outside educational advice, mainly from academics whose sympathies were Labour (such as John Vaizey, Michael Young, Noel Annan, Asa Briggs and David Donnison) as a check on the advice that he was getting from the Department. (Ibid., 176–7, 183, 185).

  • 1

     Cmnd. 2276, paras. 217–32 and 605 (t)

  • 1

     The Reorganization of Central Government, Cmnd. 4506, October 1970, paras. 44–48.

  • 2

     The former Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Technology, Sir Richard Clarke, has observed that the development of PESC and PAR ensures that long-term policy has now to be looked at in departments, the latter system providing ‘an annual requirement to state the Department's objectives and priorities’. Sir Richard, however, envisaged the need for some departments to have a ‘very long-term’ planning unit (New Trends in Government, 1971, pp. 9–10).

  • 3

     First Report of the Civil Service Department (1970), para. 172.

  • 4

     At least to judge from the latest authoritative account of that machinery by Michael Howard (The Central Organization of Defence, Royal United Service Institution, 1970) and the report published by that Institution of a discussion held there in January 1971, chaired by Michael Howard, which considered the question ‘Does the present Central Organization of Defence meet the Requirements of the 1970’S?’.

  • 1

     Geoffrey Williams, Frank Gregory and John Simpson, Crisis in Procurement: a Case Study of the TSR-2, RUSI, 1969, pp. 6, 44 and 46.

  • 2

     H.C. Deb. (1968–69), v. 773, c. 1675–6.

  • 1

     The Research Department of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office was initially established in 1957. Its Director of Research is of Assistant Secretary status and there are about fifty research staff. Its principal purpose has been officially described as being to provide expert knowledge on, and appraisal of, problems of other countries (including both domestic and external policies) and their implications for Britain, so that those responsible for policy shall be in possession of all the relevant factors. The degree to which the Department is concerned with defence, economic affairs, and certain other fields is limited to the political aspects. The Arms Control and Disarmament Unit, which was set up at the beginning of 1965, is a much smaller entity, currently of four officers, including a Director of Under Secretary status. The name of the Unit indicates its function, and, as indicated in the text, it sees itself as doing its research in an ‘action orientated’ rather than academic way, mobilizing for this purpose not only the resources of Whitehall, but also outside expertise. What the Planning Staff attempts to do is to span the whole range of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and serve up reflections on policy.

  • 1

     According to Lord Boyle, a member of the Fulton Committee, in an interview with the author on 16 June 1971

  • 2

     Peter Shore, Entitled to Know, 1966, pp. 154–5.

  • 3

     Mr.Fowler expressed these views at a Sociology of Education Seminar held at the University of Leeds on 17 February, 1971.

  • 4

     W.J.M.Mackenzie, ‘The Structure of Central Administration’ in Sir Gilbert Campion and others, British Government since 1918, 1950, p. 59.

  • 5

     Jeremy Bray, Decision in Government, 1970, p. 268.

  • 1

     Emmanuel Shinwell, Conflict Without Malice, 1955, p. 172.