{"title":"“Like Some Cat from Japan”: David Bowie’s Global Strategy","authors":"C. Chastagner","doi":"10.4000/rfcb.8157","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/rfcb.8157","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70598411","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Underground and Mainstream in Cultural Production in Britain and Ireland since 1979","authors":"J. Mullen, F. Armao","doi":"10.4000/rfcb.8149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/rfcb.8149","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70598773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Cultural Battles: Margaret Thatcher, the Greater London Council and the British Community Arts Movement","authors":"Mathilde Bertrand","doi":"10.4000/rfcb.8435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/rfcb.8435","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70598390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Independent Labels in the 1980s: Between the Underground and the Mainstream","authors":"Jeremy Tranmer","doi":"10.4000/rfcb.8297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/rfcb.8297","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49023621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Alternative Theatre in Britain in the Late 70s and in the 80s","authors":"Moya Jones","doi":"10.4000/rfcb.8407","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/rfcb.8407","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48956021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article discusses accountability in UK electricity services against the backdrop of the energy transition. Today’s decarbonisation imperatives stand as a major accountability test for the UK government and the electricity regulator, which have been grappling with the energy trilemma since the early 2000s. The analysis will determine the extent to which both have responded to these new goals while still abiding by their original mandate to uphold the public interest. Climate change imperatives have actually brought to the surface enduring faulty accountability dynamics, which had at first been obscured – by practice or design – by the new public management reforms of the early 1990s. The inherently ad hoc and flexible British accountability culture therefore appears to have contributed to hampering the country’s progress towards decarbonisation.
{"title":"Delivering the UK Energy Transition with an Accountable and Competitive Electricity Sector: Theory and Realities","authors":"L. D. Carvalho","doi":"10.4000/RFCB.7932","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/RFCB.7932","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses accountability in UK electricity services against the backdrop of the energy transition. Today’s decarbonisation imperatives stand as a major accountability test for the UK government and the electricity regulator, which have been grappling with the energy trilemma since the early 2000s. The analysis will determine the extent to which both have responded to these new goals while still abiding by their original mandate to uphold the public interest. Climate change imperatives have actually brought to the surface enduring faulty accountability dynamics, which had at first been obscured – by practice or design – by the new public management reforms of the early 1990s. The inherently ad hoc and flexible British accountability culture therefore appears to have contributed to hampering the country’s progress towards decarbonisation.","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70598444","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This special edition of the French Journal of British Studies was prompted by the eruption of a number of scandals concerning private companies involved in the running of public services in the UK, notably the liquidation of Carillion in January 2018. Carillion was a multinational construction and facilities management services company based in Wolverhampton, employing 19,000 people in the UK alone. It was heavily involved in the provision of public services in Britain, such as building infra...
{"title":"Public Services in the UK: the Ongoing Challenges of Delivery and Public Accountability","authors":"E. Bell, Clémence Fourton, Nicholas Sowels","doi":"10.4000/RFCB.7803","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/RFCB.7803","url":null,"abstract":"This special edition of the French Journal of British Studies was prompted by the eruption of a number of scandals concerning private companies involved in the running of public services in the UK, notably the liquidation of Carillion in January 2018. Carillion was a multinational construction and facilities management services company based in Wolverhampton, employing 19,000 people in the UK alone. It was heavily involved in the provision of public services in Britain, such as building infra...","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70598058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The United Kingdom has been a pioneer regarding privatisation policies since the 1980s. This derives from the coming to power in the UK in 1979 of the New Right with the election of the Conservatives led by Margaret Thatcher. Privatisation has taken many forms and has spared no area of society or the economy. Housing has been at the forefront of the public services that have undergone privatisation for economic, political and practical reasons. Within the field of housing, the rules governing access to asylum accommodation have been altered since the 1990s and the provision of accommodation has shifted to the private sector since the 2010s. These transformations have had consequences on asylum seekers’ housing conditions. Going over successive parliamentary reports on the matter, one cannot fail to wonder who are the winners and the losers of these reforms.
{"title":"The Privatisation of Asylum Accommodation in the UK: Winners and Losers","authors":"David Fée","doi":"10.4000/RFCB.8082","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/RFCB.8082","url":null,"abstract":"The United Kingdom has been a pioneer regarding privatisation policies since the 1980s. This derives from the coming to power in the UK in 1979 of the New Right with the election of the Conservatives led by Margaret Thatcher. Privatisation has taken many forms and has spared no area of society or the economy. Housing has been at the forefront of the public services that have undergone privatisation for economic, political and practical reasons. Within the field of housing, the rules governing access to asylum accommodation have been altered since the 1990s and the provision of accommodation has shifted to the private sector since the 2010s. These transformations have had consequences on asylum seekers’ housing conditions. Going over successive parliamentary reports on the matter, one cannot fail to wonder who are the winners and the losers of these reforms.","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70598575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article discusses the constraints on, and conflicts over, the oversight and regulation of mixed public-private entities, using the part-privatisation of the probation service in England and Wales – a policy called Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) – as its case study. The article shows how TR embodied a policy and set of practices that effectively undermined both institutional and political forms of scrutiny. Actions informed by neoliberal political dogma effectively strained regulatory systems, and short circuited the most important dimension of accountability in a liberal democracy – accountability of ministers to parliament. Ironically, although TR was subject to extensive regulatory scrutiny, the article concludes that these mechanisms were controverted by ministerial disregard for rules, procedures or the advice of civil servants, demonstrating that regulatory structures struggle to trump willfully pursued but ill-advised policy.
{"title":"Finding the Eye of the Octopus: the Limits of Regulating Outsourced Offender Probation in England and Wales","authors":"M. Corcoran","doi":"10.4000/RFCB.7888","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/RFCB.7888","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the constraints on, and conflicts over, the oversight and regulation of mixed public-private entities, using the part-privatisation of the probation service in England and Wales – a policy called Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) – as its case study. The article shows how TR embodied a policy and set of practices that effectively undermined both institutional and political forms of scrutiny. Actions informed by neoliberal political dogma effectively strained regulatory systems, and short circuited the most important dimension of accountability in a liberal democracy – accountability of ministers to parliament. Ironically, although TR was subject to extensive regulatory scrutiny, the article concludes that these mechanisms were controverted by ministerial disregard for rules, procedures or the advice of civil servants, demonstrating that regulatory structures struggle to trump willfully pursued but ill-advised policy.","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70598343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper considers how the re-framing of regulation, in ways that have allowed an inter-penetration of private sector mentalities and actors with state regulators, have combined in the UK to produce both a de-democratisation and the erosion of social protection. It does so through an exploration of the enforcement of law designed to regulate business. In particular, I examine enforcement and regulatory policy at Local Authority level under the guise of the Better Regulation initiative and, then, conditions of austerity. These contexts have produced the opportunities for reframed – that is, specifically, marketised – forms of regulation which prioritise the interests of business over social protection. The paper also argues that they have been crucial in producing conditions whereby the fire at Grenfell Tower must be partly understood – conditions of de-democratisation and the decline of social protection.
{"title":"Reframing Regulation: ‘Privatisation’, De-democratisation and the End of Social Protection?","authors":"S. Tombs","doi":"10.4000/RFCB.7826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4000/RFCB.7826","url":null,"abstract":"This paper considers how the re-framing of regulation, in ways that have allowed an inter-penetration of private sector mentalities and actors with state regulators, have combined in the UK to produce both a de-democratisation and the erosion of social protection. It does so through an exploration of the enforcement of law designed to regulate business. In particular, I examine enforcement and regulatory policy at Local Authority level under the guise of the Better Regulation initiative and, then, conditions of austerity. These contexts have produced the opportunities for reframed – that is, specifically, marketised – forms of regulation which prioritise the interests of business over social protection. The paper also argues that they have been crucial in producing conditions whereby the fire at Grenfell Tower must be partly understood – conditions of de-democratisation and the decline of social protection.","PeriodicalId":31365,"journal":{"name":"Revue Francaise de Civilisation Britannique","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48917408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：