ABSTRACT

In post-war Britain, as in all other industrialised countries, the role and management of the state has been central to political debates, and control of state structures – expected to be achieved by winning elections – has been the basis of competition between political parties and the interests, ideologies, and leaders which inspire and mobilise them. This debate and competition has primarily revolved around two themes: the role which political parties and leaders believe the state should play in terms of enforcing outcomes, regulating behaviour, or delivering services in political, economic, social, or cultural affairs; and administrative efficacy – whether political leaders and parties perceive existing state structures as a politically or technically efficient aid or obstacle to the goals they pursue through state structures. While ‘the issue of the proper sphere of government’ and ‘the efficiency of the machinery intended to achieve the aims it sets itself’1 are conceptually distinct, they are also interrelated: the capacities and efficacy of state structures help shape what roles the state is believed capable of playing, and the roles which specific parties and agendas assign to the state can in turn result in important modifications of state structures.