TOWARDS A BETTER PUBLIC LAW?

In the UK Constitution, the major weapon of judicial control over the exercise of governmental power is provided by the action for judicial review. This action serves to keep public bodies within the scope of the powers conferred on them by law. Prior to the present Law Commission inquiry into procedural aspects of judicial review, the matter was last examined in 1977 since when there have been significant changes in the ways in which governmental power is exercised and controlled. This article takes as its focus the Law Commission's Report No.226 Judicial Review and Statutory Appeals and examines specific proposals contained therein arguing that, underlying the reforms, there exists no coherent vision of the future role of public law. Instead, what is revealed is a confused cocktail of measures in which the tension between the legitimate needs of public administration and the opposing requirement that government act according to law remains unacknowledged and thereby unresolved. There is, moreover, a disappointing failure to evaluate the experience of public law procedures found in other jurisdictions. In response to these perceived deficiencies, the authors set out an alternative and principled account of judicial review, the central feature of which is to ensure that public power is subjected to an appropriate degree of judicial scrutiny. This alternative account is later used to inform arguments about specific reforms. In this regard, the valuable experience of other jurisdictions'public law procedures is also drawn upon.     

A RACE TO THE BOTTOM? EXPLORING VARIATIONS IN EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS IN THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR

This paper presents findings of a study examining state‐voluntary sector inter‐organizational relationships, and the capacity of third‐sector organizations to exercise autonomy over employment matters in this relationship. The aim is to provide insights into an under‐researched area of the inter‐organizational literature, especially in relation to its employment implications. In doing so, it reveals how, as with broader studies of inter‐organizational relations, state‐voluntary sector relations are not homogenous and therefore lead to differing implications for employment. In particular, three Types of voluntary organization emerge, employing, with varying degrees of success, various strategies to protect the terms and conditions of their employees in the face of cost‐cutting pressures from funding bodies. As industrialized countries increasingly turn to the third sector for the provision of social services, it argues that even for the strongest of these organizations, there are long‐term risks for staff morale and therefore quality of care provided by the sector if organizations fail to manage these external pressures from funders.