ABSTRACT
In applying the theory of bureaucratic intervention-maximising to the MAFF and its policy preferences, I argue that the MAFF strives continuously to extend its jurisdictional authority to new, growth areas of intervention while, at the same time, mounting considerable opposition to proposals that might reduce the scope and scale of this intervention. Accordingly, the MAFF obstructs reforms that attack the fundamentals of intervention, circumscribe its interventionist powers or undermine the entrenched architecture of intervention. The MAFF is most vitally concerned with policies that affect its interventionist powers and prerogatives. It fiercely resists any disturbance to the core structures and modes of intervention, and to its organisational integrity and ability to intervene.
