Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:04:36.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Home Office and Race Relations Policy: Coordinator and Initiator?*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Jaqi Nixon
Jaqi Nixon
Affiliation:
Department of Community Studies, Brighton Polytechnic
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article attempts to analyse why, to quote a recent report from the Home Affairs Committee of the British House of Commons, ‘in the vacuum caused by the Home Office's reluctance to be seen to be interfering, ethnic minority concerns go by default’. It first examines the reasons for placing responsibility for race relations policy with the Home Office and then goes on to detail events within the Home Office in the two years following the introduction of the 1976 Race Relations Act. The article concludes by suggesting that a lack of preparedness for the implementation stage of the policy, together with a diminution of political commitment and the limitations on special funding, discouraged the Home Office from playing a more active and more effective role in coordinating and initiating within central government policies for racial disadvantage.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , October 1982 , pp. 365 - 378
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Boulding, K. (1973) In Bursk, E. C. (ed.), Challenge to Leadership: Managing in a Changing World, The Free Press.Google Scholar
Cmnd 6234 (1975) Racial Discrimination. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Commission for Racial Equality (1976) Annual Report 1975–76.Google Scholar
Downs, A. (1967) Inside Bureaucracy. Little, Brown & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J. and Batley, R. (1978) The Politics of Positive Discrimination. Tavistock.Google Scholar
Hague, D. C, Mackenzie, W. J. M. and Barker, A. (eds.) (1975) Public Policy and Private Interests: The Institutions of Compromise. Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heclo, H. and Wildavsky, A. (1974) The Private Government of Public Money. Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hill, M. (1980) Understanding Social Policy. Blackwell & Robertson.Google Scholar
Home Affairs Committee (1981) Fifth Report: Racial Disadvantage, Session 1980–81, Vol. I, HMSO.Google Scholar
Home Office (1981) Proposals for replacing Section 11 of the Local Government Act, 1966. November 1981.Google Scholar
Home Office (1982) The Government Reply to the Fifth Report Home Affairs Committee Session 1980–81. HMSO.Google Scholar
Jenkins, R. (1971) The Sunday Times, 17 January 1971. Gaynor Cohen, whilst she was senior research officer at the Civil Service College.Google Scholar
Nixon, J. (1980) The importance of communication in the implementation of government policy at local level, Policy and Politics, 8 (2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nixon, J. (1982) Communication, co-ordination and implementation, Policy and Politics, 10 (2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nixon, J. and Cohen, G. (1978) Dimensions of equal opportunity. In Brown, M. and Baldwin, S. (eds.), The Tear Book of Social Policy in Britain, 1977, RKP.Google Scholar
Rose, E. G. B. (1967) Colour and Citizenship. OUP.Google Scholar
Select Committee on Race Relations and Immigration (1975) The Organisation of Race Relations Administration, Session 1974–75, Vol. II Evidence. HMSO.Google Scholar
Standing Committee A (1976) House of Commons Debates, 24 June 1976.Google Scholar
Wilson, H. (1974) The Labour Government 1964–70. Penguin.Google Scholar