Skip to main content

Brexit and the British Policy Style: Back to Governance?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
British Policy-Making and the Need for a Post-Brexit Policy Style

Abstract

Britain’s decision to leave the European Union (EU), is turning out to be a classic policy fiasco, whichever side of the remain/leave divide one supports. The actual decision to leave is almost impossible to fit into either of the main policy-making models of UK policy-making outlined in this book. Whilst interest groups played a significant role in getting Britain into the EU, they appear to have played little or no role in getting Britain out of the EU. Neither did Parliament, as such, play much of a role in the decision to leave the EU. Whether Brexit is hard or soft, the government faces a truly massive task in deciding what of the four decades of EU legislation that will become British law on exit day it will keep, abolish, or amend. Expertise on such matters in Whitehall and Westminster is in short supply and so interest groups must be very closely involved in the post-Brexit policy process if a whole series of policy disasters and blunders is to be avoided. Thus, the post-Brexit policy style will need to swing away from the Westminster model, back to bottom-up consensual policy-making.

This analysis of changes in the British policy style is an amended and expanded version of Richardson, J. (2017). The Changing British Policy Style: From Governance to Government? British Politics, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-017-0051-y.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bogdanor, V. (2016). Europe and the Sovereignty of the People. Political Quarterly, 87(3), 348–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daugbjerg, C., Fraussen, B., & Halpin, D. (2017). Interest Groups and Policy Capacity: Modes of Engagement, Policy Goods, and Networks. In W. Xun, M. Howlett, & M. Ramesh (Eds.), Policy Capacity and Governance. Assessing Governmental Competences and Capabilities in Theory and Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finer, S. (1958). Anonymous Empire. London: Pall Mall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genschel, P., & Jachtenfuchs, M. (2016). More Integration, Less Federation: The European Integration of Core State Powers. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(2), 42–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, W. (2004). Pressure Politics: The Changing World of Pressure Groups. Parliamentary Affairs, 57(2), 408–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, V., & Beyers, J. (2017, May). Talking for the People Over the Peoples’ Heads? Access and Issue Congruence Among Citizens, Interest Groups, and the European Commission. Paper Presented to EUSA Fifteenth Biennial Conference, Miami.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & Wu, X. (2015). Understanding the Persistence of Policy Failures: The Role of Politics, Governance and Uncertainty. Public Policy and Administration, 30(3–4), 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institute for Government. (2018, January 25). Whitehall Monitor 2018. The General Election, Brexit, and Beyond. London: IfG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. (2015). The EU Needs to Admit Its Mistakes. http://erikjones.net/2015/08/08.

  • Jordan, G., & Maloney, W. (1997). Accounting for Subgovernments: Explaining the Persistence of Policy Communities. Administration and Society, 29(5), 557–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, A., Benson, D., WĂĽrzel, R., & Zito, A. (2012). Environmental Policy: Governing by Multiple Instruments. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Constructing a Policy-Making State. Policy Dynamics in the EU (pp. 104–124). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, W. (1955). Pressure Groups and British Government. British Journal of Sociology, 6, 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazey, S. (2012). Policy Entrepreneurship, Group Mobilization, and the Creation of a New Policy Domain: Women’s Rights and the European Union. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Constructing a Policy-Making State. Policy Dynamics in the EU (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mazey, S., & Richardson, J. (2015). Shooting Where the Ducks Are: EU Lobbying and Institutional Promiscuity. In J. Richardson & S. Mazey (Eds.), European Union. Power and Policy-Making (4th ed., pp. 419–444). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. (2012). Supranational State Building in the European Union. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Constructing a Policy-Making State. Policy Dynamics in the EU (pp. 3–28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. (2018). Brexit: The EU Policy-Making State Hits the Populist Buffers. Political Quarterly, 89(1), 118–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremy Richardson .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Richardson, J. (2018). Brexit and the British Policy Style: Back to Governance?. In: British Policy-Making and the Need for a Post-Brexit Policy Style. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90029-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics