Diritto Pubblico Comparato ed Europeo

ZOOM 
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

L'Associazione nasce nel 2001 con la finalità di promuovere il dibattito fra studiosi ed operatori del diritto in ambito nazionale ed internazionale, con particolare attenzione al metodo comparatistico.

Dal Board System ai Quangos: le autorità “indipendenti” in Gran Bretagna
Fascicolo 2000-3
Scritto da Torre Alessandro   

Sommario

1. Evoluzione e forme storiche del board system. – 2. Dall’autogoverno amministrativo al dipartimentoministeriale. – 3. Il mondo dei quangos. – 4. Censire, classificare e riformare i fringe bodies: un problemaancora irrisolto.

 

Abstract

Since the Victorian age a wide range of fringe bodies (boards, corporations, authorities, etc.) works at the centre of a big network of administrative and political connections, and a wide new range of forms (quangos, task forces, etc,) has been added in recent times. They act between central government and local authorities, between the day-to-day work of Her Majesty’s executive and the authority of Parliament, between the constitutional bodies and the civil society, between the public and the private. The so-called fringe bodies’activity actually covers the whole area of public administration, and the support they usually provide to the individual departments of central government is a very striking feature of the British administrative history. Starting from the origins of the old “board system”, the most recent developments of quangos and other as sorted authorities or non-departmental bodies acting in the ‘quasi-government’dimension show that within the British system of government the idea of independence of fringe authorities is a quite relative one. From the old liberal and victorian age to the Thatcherite and “New Labour” style of government, gaining the control of “independent” bodies is a very important goal for all policy-makers, and the struggle for power in British public administration and government is increasingly focused on the issue of their actual accountability: to Parliament, to the Minister’s patronage, to the public, or just to themselves?