‘And What Good Came of it at Last?’ Press–Politician Relations Post‐Leveson

James Margach famously argued that Prime Ministers from Lloyd George to Callaghan had been intent on exploiting the media in their determination to centralise power. From Margaret Thatcher onwards, however, there is a strong argument that the power relationship has been reversed, and that the Leveson Inquiry—set up in the wake of the phone hacking scandal—exposed a political class which had become deeply fearful of the power and influence of the national press. Citing evidence to Leveson and subsequent recommendations by the inquiry, this article presents two case studies—on data protection and on media ownership—where the public interest clearly demanded political intervention, which would be inconvenient for the major publishers. And yet, despite recommendations by Lord Justice Leveson and despite clear support from leading politicians of all parties, there has been virtually no policy progress in either case. While the Leveson Inquiry was billed as a watershed in press–politician relations and an opportunity to counteract decades of unhealthy press power, political inertia in these two areas suggests that very little has changed.     

Beyond Hollowing Out: Straitjacketing the State

For two decades, the metaphor of ‘hollowing out’ dominated discussions about the changing role of the state in delivering public services. Today, this metaphor no longer captures important contemporary developments. European Union policy has expanded deeper and deeper into public service sectors, increasingly constraining government's capacities to deliver these services. I suggest a new metaphor to capture this: straitjacketing the state. People are straitjacketed when they are perceived to be at risk of damaging themselves through self‐harm. Straitjacketing the state occurs when a state signs up to a new set of supranational rules which purportedly will help avoid it damaging itself, by restricting room for localised inefficient practices. However, due to the strength of the straitjacket, governments become significantly restricted in choosing policies for domestic implementation according to their preferences.     

DECENTRING POLICY NETWORKS: A THEORETICAL AGENDA

This introduction starts by specifying the theoretical and analytical framework underpinning the range of essays in this special issue. It then provides an overview of the existing literature on policy networks and network governance in order to identify what a decentred approach might contribute. What follows is an account of decentred theory, a discussion of the potential alternatives it can offer to existing accounts and how these might be achieved through reconstructing networks by appealing to notions of situated agency and tradition; it concludes by considering the potential methodologies to be employed, with particular emphasis on ethnography.