Career De‐Separation in Westminster Democracies

Datos Bibliográficos

ID10358180
AutoresKeith Dowding (0000-0001-6888-9369, autor de correspondencia), Marija Taflaga (0000-0001-9516-7193)
Año2020
Volumen91
Número1
Páginas116-124
Fecha de publicación2020-01-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaThe Political Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0032-3179 • E-ISSN: 1467-923X
EditorialWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/1467-923x.12812
OpenAlexW3004893756
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas11

In Westminster parliamentary systems there was once a clear separation between the careers of public servants and of elected politicians. Politicians decided what policies they wanted to pursue, while public servants advised, devised and delivered the policies. This separation ensured that policy ideas were developed by a professional elite with experience and knowledge. Politicians came from a variety of backgrounds, entering politics for a variety of reasons. Over time, the source of policy advice for ministers has shifted from the professional public servant to political advisers lacking experience and with different career ambitions than public service. Increasingly, elected politicians are becoming ‘professionalised’—emerging from similar party and adviser backgrounds. The de‐separation of what were once distinct career paths has led to poorer policy development, increasing public malfeasance, a lower‐quality civil service, and democratic disenchantment. We need to separate the career paths once more

Civil servants · Democracy · Disenchantment · Elite · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Public service · Sociology · Variety (cybernetics · Labor Movements and Unions · Law · Political and Economic history of UK and US · Public Administration · Social Policy and Reform Studies