Political advisors have risen in significance in Westminster countries, and have been increasingly thrust into the limelight by headline scandals and through their characterisation in various television series. This increased prominence has led to greater scrutiny of their role and influence. This book demonstrates that the introduction of political advisors into the structure of the executive has led to the erosion of the Westminster doctrine of ministerial responsibility. Adopting a comparative approach, the book analyses the rise in the power and significance of political advisors in the Westminster jurisdictions of the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. It shows the fundamental shift of the locus of power from the neutral public service to highly political and partisan ministerial advisors. Tracing the divergent paths for legal and political regulation of political advisors, Yee-Fui Ng illuminates the tensions that they pose within the Westminster system in terms of the media/politics and faction/opposition interfaces. Providing insights for those researching or engaged in politics and public administration, this work will interest scholars and students of politics and public law, policy and administration.

Making a significant, novel contribution to the burgeoning international literature on the topic, this Handbook charts the various methodological, theoretical, comparative and empirical dimensions of a future research agenda on ministerial and political advisers.

A comprehensive and comparative analysis of who advises government and how systems of policy advice operate in four Westminster countries.

Political executives have been at the centre of public and scholarly attention long before the inception of modern political science. In the contemporary world, political executives have come to dominate the political stage in many democratic and autocratic regimes. The Oxford Handbook of Political Executives marks the definitive reference work in this field. Edited and written by a team of word-class scholars, it combines substantive stocktaking with setting new agendas for the next generation of political executive research.

From coping with Covid-19 through to manging climate change, from Brexit through to the barricading of Congress, from democratic disaffection to populist pressures, from historical injustices to contemporary social inequalities, and from scapegoating through to sacrificial lambs... the common thread linking each of these themes and many more is an emphasis on blame. But how do we know who or what is to blame? How do politicians engage in blame-avoidance strategies? How can blaming backfire or boomerang? Are there situations in which politicians might want to be blamed? What is the relationship between avoiding blame and claiming credit? How do developments in relation to machine learning and algorithmic governance affect blame-based assumptions? By focusing on the politics and governance of blame from a range of disciplines, perspectives, and standpoints this volume engages with all these questions and many more. Distinctive contributions include an emphasis on peacekeeping and public diplomacy, on source-credibility and anthropological explanations, on cultural bias and on expert opinions, on polarisation and (de)politicisation, and on trust and post-truth politics. With contributions from the world's leading scholars and emerging research leaders, this volume not only develops the theoretical, disciplinary, empirical, and normative boundaries of blame-based analyses but it also identifies new research agendas and asks distinctive and original questions about the politics and governance of blame.

This book offers a systematic inquiry into how, why, and with what consequences media affects governments and the standing of prime ministers. It aims at an understanding of how media has caused institutional effects in government, as well as at advancing a unified theory of government communication. The author develops a logic of centralization and applies it to one case, Sweden. Government communication has been institutionalized, tightened and centralized with the prime minister and has changed irreversibly. Analysis of how the government communication system has evolved, mainly in its institutional structures, suggests that the shift to centralization arose more out of necessity than choice. For prime ministers most of this is about finding ways to ensure that the entire government respond to media uniformly. As governments face a set of functional demands from media, different kinds of media, uniformity has been a paramount objective. Nevertheless, this development involves shifting dynamics of intra-executive relations and a shift of power away from ministries to the prime minister’s office; the apex of political power. The prime minister has been empowered at the expense of ministers through the concentration of power and resources to the executive centre. That is partly because of media, which reinforces political hierarchies. That and the centralized control of government news in turn raises further questions about democratic governance and the nature of modern-day governing.

Drawing upon a diverse range of traditions and contexts, this authoritative new textbook presents a systematic introduction to political leadership. Making extensive use of examples of real leaders from a variety of cultural backgrounds, the book links theoretical ideas and concepts to real-world political leadership and in doing so helps students to make sense of why different leaders lead as they do and why people choose to follow them. This is ideal reading for students taking courses on political leadership and related topics.

This book examines the impact of several decades of public sector reform in four Westminster systems – Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Political and managerial change has re-defined roles and relationships and how their public sectors function. Often this occurs in comparable ways because of a common administrative tradition, but choices made in different country contexts also produce divergent outcomes. In analysing the results and implications of reform, fundamental issues of and tensions in public administration and management are addressed.

In this comprehensive Handbook, international experts examine theoretical and empirical research to analyse a core element of the public policy process: implementation. Traversing numerous sub-disciplines and traditions including top-down and bottom-up approaches to public policy implementation research, the chapters present a synthesis of the state of scholarship and stimulate future thinking in the field.

Bureaucracy is a much-maligned feature of contemporary government. And yet the aftermath of September 11 has opened the door to a reassessment of the role of a skilled civil service in the survival and viability of democratic society. Here, Ezra Suleiman offers a timely and powerful corrective to the widespread view that bureaucracy is the source of democracy's ills. This is a book as much about good governance as it is about bureaucratic organizations. Suleiman asks: Is democratic governance hindered without an effective instrument in the hands of the legitimately elected political leadership? Is a professional bureaucracy required for developing but not for maintaining a democratic state? Why has a reform movement arisen in recent years championing the gradual dismantling of bureaucracy, and what are the consequences? Suleiman undertakes a comparative analysis of the drive toward a civil service grounded in the New Public Management. He argues that "government reinvention" has limited bureaucracy's capacity to adequately serve the public good. All bureaucracies have been under political pressure in recent years to reduce not only their size but also their effectiveness, and all have experienced growing deprofessionalism and politicization. He compares the impact of this evolution in both democratic societies and societies struggling to consolidate democratic institutions. Dismantling Democratic States cautions that our failure to acknowledge the role of an effective bureaucracy in building and preserving democratic political systems threatens the survival of democracy itself.