This thesis is a chronological case study into the origins, operation and consequences of the Lib-Lab Pact 1977-1978. Cross-party co-operation in British politics since 1945 is assessed. David Steel’s election as Liberal Party leader, his political philosophy and strategy are examined. Concepts of realignment, ‘co-operation strategy’ are explored. The parliamentary and political events together with a detailed assessment of the inter-party negotiations which led the Pact are examined. New perspectives include: the significance of the leader-led nature of the negotiation process; the Labour-Ulster Unionist understanding which ran concurrent with the Pact; the importance of Lib-Lab discussions on devolution which pre-dated the Pact in influencing Steel’s subsequent decision-making. Analysis focuses on the Lib-Lab negotiations into if the Direct Elections to the European Parliament Bill should include a proportional voting system and whether the parliamentary Labour party should be compelled to vote for PR. A key finding of the thesis is that rather than allowing a free vote, as was agreed, the Prime Minister, James Callaghan, was prepared to offer the Liberals a ‘pay roll’ vote; the significance of Michael Foot in this process is also noted. The structure of the Lib-Lab consultative mechanism is reviewed. Case studies include a review of on Liberal policy influence on the Budget 1977 and 1978. The nature of intra-party dissent is reviewed with the difference between Labour and the Liberal parties noted. An examination of the serious internecine conflict is complemented by a reassessment of the role of Christopher Mayhew in this process. The Lib-Lab Pact is reviewed, assessing its affect in influencing Callaghan’s decision not to call a General Election in 1978; its influence on Liberal/Liberal Democrat party strategy, and its importance in the subsequent formation of the triple-lock, as such the thesis highlighting the Pacts relevance to subsequent cross-party understandings.

This thesis examines the political role played by the private members' clubs of the St. James's district of London, between the first two Reform Acts. The thesis looks at the institutional history of such establishments and their evolution insofar as it affected their political work. It then analyses the statistical trends in club membership among Members of Parliament, the overwhelming majority of whom belonged to political clubs. The crucial role of clubs in whipping is detailed, including analysis of key divisions. The distinctive political use of space by clubs is then set out, including an overview of the range of meetings and facilities offered to parliamentarians. Finally, the thesis seeks to address the broader impact of clubs on national electoral politics in this period.

This thesis is designed to be a study if the Liberal Party between 1880 and 1900, undertaken in order to ascertain the reasons for its decline in those year. My attempt is to show that the seeds of the Party's later decay can be found in this period, and that the study of these twenty years is, in fact, essential to an understanding of the crucial changes in the structure of British politics which have subsequently taken place. There were, I feel, several reasons for the Liberal decline. One is to he found in the revolt of many of the middle classes against orthodox liberal utilitarian ideals. Thus, whereas advance bourgeois thinks between 1820 and 1870 had mostly been laissez-faire Radicals of the Manchester School variety, those who followed were socialist, or at least collectivist, in their ideas. A second reason was the revolt of many of the working classes against the misery which was their lot and the gradual adherence to socialism. These two major changes have been taken as background; the major emphasis of this thesis, however, is on the Liberal Party itself. I have studied its leaders, their concepts, their quarrels, and the political events of the twenty years; I have tried to show how Gladstonian Liberalism reacted to the new forces in the late Victorian period and how its failure to do so adequately was in part inherent in its very nature. The Liberal Party was a phenomenon unique to an age which believed in "free enterprise" and a laissez-faire state; once these beliefs were threatened, so too was the party which practised them. Other factors making for Liberal decline included the Home Rule issue, the new Imperialism , and the defection Joseph Chamberlain. None of these, however, was as important as the first; Liberalism, by its very nature, contributed to its own destruction. I have tried to show how this process took place.

In recent decades, regional pressures for stronger autonomy have encouraged a number of central and federal governments around the world to devolve powers and resources downwards to the regional level. The contemporary revival of regionalist movements and the simultaneous tendency towards greater government decentralisation have received considerable academic attention. Most of these contributions present detailed accounts of the processes of regional mobilisation and devolution in a specific region or set of regions. Although these analytical stories tell us a lot about the distinctive aspects of a particular case, they do not, in general, present a coherent theoretical account that would allow us to study the origins of these two interrelated but distinctive trends in a structured way. This thesis aims to make a contribution towards such an account. Building on the literature on political legitimacy and social movements, this study develops a tripartite typology of regionalisms which allows us to analyse and compare the origins of regional autonomy movements across different contexts. In addition, it seeks to show that an actor1based rational choice approach to the process of regionalist accommodation and non1accommodation can help us gain a better understanding of the mechanisms through which such demands influence the shape of the government system. The usefulness of the resulting theoretical framework is demonstrated by applying it to the contemporary history of regionalism and devolution in mainland Britain.

This thesis provides an analysis of communism in Britain between 1927 and 1932. In these years, the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) embarked upon a 'new period' of political struggle around the concept of class against class. The increasingly draconian measures of the Labour Party and trade union bureaucracy between 1924 and 1927 significantly restricted the scope of communist influence within the mainstream labour movement. As such, the CPGB - in accordance with the Communist International - attempted to establish an 'independent leadership' of the working class. The decline in Communist Party membership that accompanied the 'New Line' has led historians to associate an apparent collapse in CPGB influence with the political perspective of class against class. Similarly, the CPGB's initial resistance to the line has been interpreted as evidence of the Party's willing subservience to Moscow. In this thesis, such a portrayal of communist motive and experience will be challenged. Instead, a more multifaceted approach will endeavour to show that: i) the 'left turn' of 1927- 28 complemented attitudes evident in Britain since at least 1926; ii) the simultaneous collapse in CPGB influence related primarily to the structural changes afflicting Britain (and the British labour movement) between the wars; iii) the period was a difficult but not completely disastrous time for the Party. Rather, the years should be seen as a transitional period, in which the focus of communist activity moved out of the workplace and onto the streets. Thus, the Party's successful mobilisation of the unemployed, and the development of an idiosyncratic communist culture, were 'positive' factors. And finally; iv) that the political line pursued by the CPGB was more flexible and changeable than has hitherto been recognised. The Party continually modified its political strategy and objectives throughout the Third Period. Moreover, the 'sectarian excesses' that characterised class against class were due in part to the will of the Party rank and file. Many in the Party embraced the exclusivity of the New Line, and were responsible for interpreting the policy 'on the ground.'

This thesis offers the first detailed assessment of an event that has hitherto been consigned to the margins of the literature on devolution and territorial reform in the United Kingdom, the Conference on Devolution, 1919-1920. Sitting between October 1919 and April 1920, the Conference on Devolution was arguably one of the two moments in the UK’s constitutional history when the territorial constitution was approached in a holistic fashion by policy makers and political elites (the other occasion being the Royal Commission on the Constitution, 1969-1973). The primary aim of this thesis is to provide the first detailed analysis of the Conference on Devolution, to develop a fuller understanding of why it was established, what it debated and why it failed. Secondary to that objective, this thesis will also assess what relevance the Conference has for students of territorial governance in the UK today, at a time when the UK’s constitution is in flux. In pursuit of these objectives, the thesis utilises the ideas and insights on territorial governance of James Bulpitt and James Mitchell, alongside an extensive catalogue of archival evidence, including the previously unstudied (in the context of the Conference on Devolution) personal papers of the Conference’s Secretary, Gilbert Campion. Using this methodology and archival sources, the thesis offers a considerable revision to previous understandings of the Conference on Devolution. It demonstrates that the Conference’s fatal disagreement on how the devolved legislatures should be composed, was not, as has been previously portrayed, just a disagreement at the latter stages of the Conference’s work, but was instead a cleavage that undercut the entirety of the Conference on Devolution. Finally, the thesis highlights the clear resonance between the issues deliberated by the Conference and many of today’s territorial governance debates.

The 1991 Child Support Act is seen as one of the most controversial and notorious policy failures in Britain, being described as ‘the most incompetent and inhuman agency ever set up by a British government’ (Ingrams, 1997). Its first year in operation was marked by administrative chaos, error, and failure. This thesis will demonstrate that this failure was ‘foreseeable’ and ‘foreseen’. This thesis is both an examination of the British policy-making process, and the 1991 Child Support Act. Analysis focuses primarily on policy formation, assessing the reasons behind why policy-makers pursued certain actions, and ultimately how a foreseeable and foreseen policy failure was able to gain cross-party support. It examines the role of power, imbalance of resources, and inter-Departmental and inter- Ministerial battles. Parliamentary processes, together with a detailed assessment of Parliamentary discussions, are also addressed. The existence of dual origins, and the role of ‘policy transfer’, or as this thesis argues, ‘incoherent dual-policy transfer’ are examined. The thesis re-introduces the stages approach as an appropriate framework for examining policy-making in general, and analysing policy failure in particular. It draws on evidence gained through interviews, official documents, unpublished consultation responses, Parliamentary debates, and materials from pressure groups and think-tanks, as well as academic literature. Examination of the policy formation process shows that the Child Support Act had two separate paths of origin. These conflicting origins led to ‘incoherent dual-policy transfer’, whereby the policy pursued by Newton and Mackay was undermined by Thatcher and the Treasury. It also demonstrates that the Bill’s flaws were magnified by ineffective legislative process. It ends by illustrating the roots behind the 1991 Child Support Act’s failure, and the ultimate failings of the British policy-making process. The larger implications for these findings is the presentation of the idea of ‘perfect legislation’, which shows us what leads to, and thus provides a criteria for avoiding, policy failure.

By using the political career of the leading Conservative Douglas Hogg, 1st Viscount Hailsham, as a prism, this thesis explores important aspects of inter-war British politics. Considering that Hailsham held key posts during the 1920s and 1930s, his career has attracted less historical coverage than one would expect. By charting his important role in the policy-making process, this study sheds light upon the major challenges facing Conservative leaders and enhances our understanding of British politics during this turbulent period. Hailsham helped shape the moderate form of Conservatism that asserted itself at this time and became intimately involved in formulating Britain’s imperial, defence and foreign policies. Hailsham’s contribution to the Conservatives’ response to the rise of the Labour Party during Britain’s newfound age of mass democracy emphasises the intricacies of inter-war Conservatism. Notwithstanding the overwhelmingly working class electorate, the Conservatives were the dominant party at the polls and this study demonstrates that Hailsham played no small part in the Conservatives’ highly successful inter-war appeal. By the end of the 1920s, he had assumed such a prominent position that a number of high-ranking Tories regarded him as Stanley Baldwin’s likely successor. During the 1930s, Hailsham confirmed that he was a committed imperialist. He was amongst those who defined Britain’s policy as the Empire was transformed into the Commonwealth. He also made important contributions to the interplay between the National Government’s foreign and defence policies. He was one of only a handful of ministers whose continued presence allowed them to make interventions in Britain’s disarmament, rearmament and appeasement policies during the era of the European dictators and the rise of militaristic Japan. Hailsham’s contribution is even more significant because he has strong claims to being the first cabinet minister to express disquiet over the mounting German menace.

This research is concerned with issues of episteme, epistemology, and community. It asks how and why an epistemic community emerges? It looks at the study of the Northern Ireland conflict and peace process as covered in the British and Irish political science academy in order to answer this question. This research is thus ultimately about knowledge, knowledge creators, and the circumstances and conditions in which they develop. It is also a case study of what happens when academics engage with political events. Do they act as innovators or simply as scholar who react to changing political environments? This research explains the emergence of the Northern Ireland epistemic community using the boundary object concept. It asserts that knowledge communities do not develop de novo but instead emerge through academics struggles and frustrations with existing knowledge paradigms. A boundary object is the means by scholars can come together and challenge such paradigms and build new knowledge infrastructures. Through the emergence of the Northern Ireland peace process and scholar’s (re)engagement with and application of consociational theory and comparative methods this epistemic community was made possible. This research looks at the barriers that prevented the emergence of this community during the Troubles, its emergence following the outbreak of the Northern Ireland peace process, and its evolution following the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. Additionally, we look at the conflicts that developed between members of this community and how these academics define themselves both professionally and in relation to a community they are a part of yet see themselves as a part from.

This thesis traces the development of political competition in Britain by exploring the relationship between politicians and their constituents; in particular, it examines the decisions rank-and-file politicians made when choosing how to run election campaigns. Between the pre-Reform period and the First World War, three major developments changed campaigning. Firstly, campaigning shifted from clientelistic to programmatic. Secondly, competition became polarized along an economic left-right dimension. And thirdly, elections became a venue for holding incumbents accountable by means of retrospective voting. Together, these three changes transformed political competition in Britain. Each of the three papers in this dissertation addresses one of these changes. The first paper shows how the Second Reform Act caused a shift in politicians’ preferences away from clientelistic campaigning. It uses a difference-in-differences strategy to estimate the causal impact enfranchisement had on how MPs spoke in the House of Commons, finding that reform increased the extent to which MPs – particularly Liberals – discussed corruption. It argues that this increase raised the salience of corruption so much that previously abstaining or opposing Liberals came around and passed the Ballot Act in 1872. The second and third papers get more directly at the relationship between politicians and constituents by introducing a new dataset of all ‘election addresses’ issued by all parliamentary candidates in the six elections between 1892 and 1910, which provide, for each candidate, a comparable text advertising their political positions and personal qualities. The second paper, joint work with Daniel Ziblatt, uses these manifestos to show how campaigning became concentrated on an economic left-right dimension, and increasingly polarized. It also addresses the long-running debate over whether the rise of Labour doomed the Liberal Party into third place, showing that while Labour did initially stake out a unique programmatic identity, by 1910 the Liberals moved to occupy the same ideological space, positioning themselves as the natural party of progressivism going into World War I. Finally, the third paper shows the rise of retrospective accountability in campaigning. It uses a regression discontinuity design to show that the way candidates appealed to their constituents depended on their position: incumbent candidates’ campaign addresses are more positive than those of challengers, indicating that politicians appeal to their constituents on the basis of their record in government. I show that this effect developed around the turn of the century, and is particularly strong in those constituencies in which the Third Reform Act of 1884 enfranchised more people. Together, the papers capture these three distinct facets of the transformation of campaigning. By using quantitative text analysis to explore parliamentary speeches and campaign manifestos, I am able to examine how rank-and-file politicians spoke about – and to – their constituents, and how this changed. Focusing on rank-and-file politicians rather than party leaders, the thesis shows the importance of the decisions made by backbench politicians in changing how they related to their voters.