Change—and Scepticism—as a Constant: Anthony King on Parties and Party Systems

Tony King had a healthy disrespect for conventional wisdom but a deep appreciation for common sense. Drawing on an eclectic mix of sources, both qualitative and quantitative, he wore his learning lightly, the better to highlight and explain to academic and non‐academic audiences how shifts in society and public opinion drove change inside parties and in the party systems in which they operated. King asked great questions and provided answers that simultaneously captured complexity and the big picture. His provocative interpretations and analysis were always stimulating—and many of them proved highly prescient.     

Why do only some people who support parties actually join them? Evidence from Britain

What makes people join a political party is one of the most commonly studied questions in research on party members. Nearly all this research, however, is based on talking to people who have actually joined parties. This article simultaneously analyses surveys of members of political parties in Britain and surveys of non-member supporters of those same parties. This uniquely enables us to model the decision to join parties. The results suggest that most of the elements that constitute the influential ‘General Incentives Model’ are significant. But it also reveals that, while party supporters imagine that selective benefits, social norms and opposing rival parties’ policies are key factors in members’ decisions to join a party, those who actually do so are more likely to say they are motivated by attachments to their party’s values, policies and leaders, as well as by an altruistic desire to support democracy more generally.     

Book reviews

The Politics of Central Europe by Attila Ágh. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 1998. Pp.xii + 244. £15.99 pb ISBN 0 7619 5032 X.

Legitimacy and the European Union by David Beetham and Christopher Lord. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd, 1998. Pp.viii + 144. £11.99 pb ISBN 0 582 30489 X.

Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government edited by Shaun Bowler, David M. Farrell and Richard S. Katz. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1999. Pp.ix + 304. $59.95 hb ISBN 0 8142 0796 0; $22.50 pb ISBN 0 8142 5000 9.

Conscience and Parliament edited by Philip Cowley. London and Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 1998. Pp.204 £35 hb ISBN 0 7146 4836 1; £16.50 pb ISBN 0 7146 4388 2.

The House of Lords: Its Parliamentary and Judicial Roles edited by Brice Dickson and Paul Carmichael. Oxford: Hart Publishing Ltd, 1999. Pp.258. £30 hb ISBN 1 84113 020 6.

Namibia's Post‐Apartheid Regional Institutions: The Founding Years by Joshua Bernard Forrest. Woodbridge, Suffolk: University of Rochester Press, 1999. Pp.xviii + 408. £40 hb ISBN 1 58046 028 3.

Bakom Riksdagens Fasad by Magnus Hagevi. Göteburg: Akademiförlaget, Corona, 1998. Pp.314 pb ISBN 91 24 16844 0.

Feminist Perspectives on Public Law edited by Susan Millns and Noel Whitty. London: Cavendish Publishing Limited, 1999. Pp.xviii + 306. £19.95 pb ISBN 1 85941 480 X.

Senates: Bicameralism in the Contemporary World edited by Samuel C. Patterson and Anthony Mughan. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1999. Pp.xii + 360. $52 hb ISBN 0 8142 0810 X; $19.95 pb 0 8142 5010 6.

Deliberative Democracy in Australia: The Changing Place of Parliament by John Uhr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Pp.xvi + 265. £45 hb ISBN 0 521 62458 4; £15.95 pb ISBN 0 521 62465 7.

Pursuit of Justices: Presidential Politics and the Selection of Supreme Court Nominees by David Alistair Yalof. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999. Pp.x + 296. £19.50 hb ISBN 0 226 94545 6.     

Book reviews

Research on the impact of parties on public policy, and on immigration policy in particular, often finds limited evidence of partisan influence. In this paper, we examine immigration policy-making in the UK coalition government. Our case provides evidence that parties in government can have more of an impact on policy than previous studies acknowledge, but this only becomes apparent when we open up the ‘black box’ between election outcomes and policy outputs. By examining how, when and why election pledges are turned into government policies, we show that partisan influence depends not only on dynamics between the coalition partners, but how these dynamics interact with interdepartmental conflicts and lobbying by organised interests. In-depth process tracing allows us to see these complex dynamics, which easily get lost in large-n comparisons of pledges and outputs, let alone outcomes.     

'It's Labour, But Not as we Know it.' Media Lesson-drawing and the Disciplining of Social Democracy: A Case Study

A qualitative content analysis of New Zealand newspapers from 1997 to 2002 shows how the overwhelmingly conservative print media in that country used a highly partial version of Tony Blair's New Labour to try to help set parameters for its New Zealand counterpart and point it in what it saw as the right direction. Globalisation rests on the flow of ideas as well as the flow of trade: it has an important ideational component that the media—internationally owned though often parochially focused—helps construct by drawing lessons from abroad. The thrust of the coverage analysed was to transnationalise a business-friendly common sense concerning the proper—indeed the inevitable—response of a modern social democratic party to a globalised political economy. Whether this actually affected the behaviour of the New Zealand variant of social democracy, however, is a moot point. Finally, in keeping with Lijphart's seminal discussion of the purpose of case studies, this one generates the following hypothesis: that the print media in one country will interpret the domestic politics of other countries (other than those which are geographically closest or economically crucial) in such a way as to try to influence the outcome of political and policy debates at home.     

The logic of no alternative? Political scientists, historians and the politics of Labour's past

This paper critiques the largely incommensurate approaches taken both by historians and political scientists to the governmental past of the British Labour Party. It argues that revisionist historians, in flight from the traditional left critique of parliamentary socialism, are in danger of damaging their capacity to produce general explanations, while political scientists (who specialise in the latter) have tended to preserve an outdated version of Labour's past that supports their greater interest in its present and future. Both approaches dovetail with the political strategy of the Party's current leadership, but do little to contribute to what could be a profitable breaking-down of the barriers between the two disciplines in this area.