Editor's Notes
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1099-162X.1969.tb00355.x |
| Date | 01 January 1969 |
| Published date | 01 January 1969 |
Ed
itor's Notes
WHILE
the structure of central and of local government is the subject of
scrutiny and the objective of reformers both in industrialised and in less
developed countries, and while the democratic process at both levels is
dominated in most states by one or multi-party systems, the Channel Islands
remain an appanage of the British Crown where an ancient system of self
government has continued almost unchanged over the centuries, free of
party politics and where in effect local government is central and central
government is local.
The
Channel Islands are divided into two separate
entities, the Bailiwicks of Jersey and of Guernsey. It is with the adminis-
tration of Guernsey that Mr. Sleator's article is concerned; proximity to
Britain has facilitated the development of a major tourist industry, together
with renowned dairy herds and horticulture, making the Islands prosperous
and largely self-supporting. In these happy circumstances rarely to be found
elsewhere, the unique system of administration, one not readily transferable
elsewhere, certainly seems to meet local needs, and the fascinating account
provided here may perhaps provide a lesson for other lands.
In contrast to the virtual independence of Guernsey, the New Towns of
Britain established after the second world War "principally to encourage
people to leave the large cities - heavily overcrowded and still growing fast
and to find homes and work in the new towns," have been strictly
Whitehall-tied. How this came about, the advantages and disadvantages
involved and the problems created for the local authorities affected by their
coming into being, are clearly set out by Mr. McDougall who as General
Manager of Stevenage, the first of all New Town Corporations, for a decade,
writes with the greatest of authority.
The
Indian sub-continent with its vast population sets immense
administrative problems and despite palliatives provided, still places an
unduly heavy burden on the shoulders of the district officer.
The
situation
in Bihar is the subject of Dr. Haridwar Rai's article and those whose
experience lies in smaller emptier lands will appreciate the administrator's
staggering task when he reads of an Enquiry Committee feeling that
"a
population of about a million represented as much as a district officer could
handle, others that one and a half-million wasabout right, and most
of
them
thought that two million was the outside limit!"
In comparison perhaps the problems of administration and leadership in
East Africa, the subject of Mr. Warrell Bowring's article should be simple.
Maybe they will be resolved more easily, but here again the geographical
areas are great, the resources are limited, the political objectives are new, and
political/administrative relationships are far from simple; the requisite
administrative expertise cannot be gained overnight. No doubt, as suggested
here, training institutions should give greater emphasis to personal qualities.
But while book-knowledge can be absorbed and retained, it can only be on
the job that the young administrators' personal qualities can develop and be
proven.
3
To continue reading
Request your trial