ABSTRACT
In the debate about the fragmentation of local government and the gradual transfer of responsibilities from elected local authorities to appointed single-purpose bodies, joint authorities occupy an interesting intermediate position. The normal conception of political accountability is one which is congruent with the notion of representative democracy. Neither market democracy/accountability nor participatory democracy/ accountability is particularly appropriate to the functions which are the responsibility of the joint bodies in the metropolitan counties. The issue of the accountability of joint bodies has become topical again recently in connection with local government reorganisation. Joint boards and executive joint committees operate in an intermediate position between the direct accountability of local authorities and the opaque accountability processes of appointed bodies. The government recognises that executive joint arrangements dilute the principle of unitary local government. Joint action covers a wide range of functions and involves considerable expenditure.
