The Changing Nature of Financial Management in Local Government 1980-85, with Particular Reference to a Rate Capped Authority.

Abstract

The relationship between central and local government, their respective roles and functions is a rich area of research for those interested in the management of the Public Sector. This study focuses on the significance of changing central and local government relations for mechanisms of financial control and is illustrated by reference to a specific local authority Thamesdown Borough Council. It is a study set against a backcloth of tense central-local relationships during a period of considerable change, evidenced by a polarisation of political views at national and sub-national level. This study considers the reasons for this position, analyses the mechanisms and procedural changes that occurred (and continue to occur) and evaluates what this has meant to local government generally and to the case studied local authority particularly. Thamesdown was chosen for the in depth study because it is currently the only non London Borough to be rate capped in each of the five years of rate limitation. This study reviews a period of time that has been critical to central-local relations. It tests the normative theories that relate to the role and function of local authorities and examines a local authority undergoing change. The material upon which the thesis is based was gathered between 1984 and 1987 by manual and on line literature searches, reports and committee minutes of Thamesdown Borough Council reinforced with structured and semi structured interviews with senior officers and councillors of the authority. The principal feature of the research methodology is the case study of Thamesdown under going financial change. The research highlights crucial events and legislation particularly the Planning and Land Act 1980 and the Rates Act 1984. The research examines what has happened to a particular local authority over a period of time, and also provides the opportunity to examine what has happened to local government generally in terms of central-local government relationships. It attempts to form a view as to what has actually happened as distinct from what is assumed to have happened.