Public Interest in Local Government
| Author | Jean Bonnor |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1954.tb01214.x |
| Date | 01 December 1954 |
| Published date | 01 December 1954 |
Public
Interest in
Local
Government
By JEAN BONNOR
Mrs.
Bonnor,
Staff Tutor
in
Social Science, University
of
Liverpool,
has curried out
an
enquiry into the extent to which the citizen is knowfedge-
able about his focal
Cotrncil
and
is
interested
in
what
it
does.
N
place of the assumption that people arc apathetic about local government,
I
there is a present tendency to studyin more detail the factors influencing
low percentage polls in local elections, on which this assumption is based.
Statistical information about local elections over the whole country, available
since the war, is shown by Maud and Finer1 to contain points of great interest,
such as regional differences in the polls-the South-East has the lowest,
and the North and North-West the highest, polls in the country-the influence
of the stability
of
the population on the size of the poll, and
so
on. Studies
within regions are also of importance
;
for example, the work of Brennan,
Cooney and Pollins in South Wales2 has shown the influence, both on the
level of public interest in local government and on the voting figures, of the
dominance of one party over a number of years, “the growth of habitual
behaviour at elections, and the loss of direct influence over the type of can-
didate who now stands for election.” Besides these methods, however,
Professor Mackenzie3 has pointed to the need for sample surveys to give
a
fuller picture of voting behaviour.
A
class of adult students in Crewe recently carried out a sample survey
of a new housing estate on the outskirts of the which has yielded
information of interest in this connection. Although primarily concerned
in finding out whether there was
a
need among the residents
of
the estate
for a community centre, the students decided, as a result
of
their
own
interest
in local government, to make a small study of that subject also. They included
in the questions they put to the residents of the estate several intended to
elicit the residents’ impressions and opinions of their Borough Council and
its work.
First, various kinds
of
contact between the people and the Council
were studied. Half of the people interviewed
(60
out of
122)
could remember
having been visited by a local authority worker other than rent collectors
and maintenance workerg-e.g., health visitors, building inspectors, etc.
(County council visitors were included in this question to avoid having to
differentiate between town and county council services; all visits were
relevant.) Just over three-quarters of the residents interviewed had visited
the municipal buildings in Crewe at least once. Only seven had been in
personal touch with their own Councillors, but
65
said they knew at least
one member of the Council to speak to. Whether this was strictly true or
not, it is an interesting point that in the case of
45
per cent. of the times a
Councillor’s name was mentioned, it was that of a Councillor who was not
a representative of the ward which was being studied. This probably reflects
the newness of the estate.
The people were then asked for opinions and comments on the work
of the Council, under three main headings
:
first, in their capacity as land-
lord
;
secondly, on the work of the Council in the estate
;
and thirdly, on
the work in the town. One hundred and seven out of 122 approved of the
E
425
To continue reading
Request your trial