¹ Gough, I., The Political Economy of the Welfare State (London: Macmillan, 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Gough, I., ‘The Crisis of the British Welfare State’Google Scholar, in Fainstein, N. and Fainstein, S., Urban Policy Under Capitalism (London: Sage, 1982).Google Scholar

² Abel-Smith, B., ‘The Welfare State: Breaking the Post-War Consensus’, Political Quarterly, LI (1980), 17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ Duke, V. and Edgell, S., ‘Public Expenditure Cuts in Britain and Consumption Sectoral Cleavages’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, VIII (1984), 177–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴ Cmnd. 8175, The Government's Expenditure Plans 1981–2 to 1983–4 (London: HMSO, 1981).Google Scholar

⁵ Cmnd. 8789, The Government's Expenditure Plans 1983–4 to 1985–6 (London: HMSO, 1983).Google Scholar

⁶ Public Finance and Accountancy, 05 1982.Google Scholar

⁷ Jackman, R., ‘Does Central Government Need to Control the Total of Local Government Spending?’, Local Government Studies, VIII (1982), 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ Local Government Planning and Land Act 1980 (London: HMSO).

⁹ Local Government Finance Act 1982 (London: HMSO).

¹⁰ Transport Bill 1982 (London: HMSO).

¹¹ Education Act 1980 (London: HMSO).

¹² Housing Act 1980 (London: HMSO).

¹³ For example, ‘Tory shires join rates attack’, The Guardian, 6 10 1981.Google Scholar

¹⁴ The Guardian, 22 10 1981.Google Scholar

¹⁵ The Guardian, 18 12 1981.Google Scholar

¹⁶ The Guardian, 10 02 1982.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Saunders, P., Social Theory and the Urban Question (London: Hutchinson, 1981)Google Scholar and Saunders, P., ‘Why Study Central-Local Relations?’, Local Government Studies, VIII (1982), 55–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar: O'Connor, J., The Fiscal Crisis of the State (London: St James Press. 1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar: Castells, M., The Urban Question (London: Edward Arnold, 1977)Google Scholar and Castells, M., City, Class and Power (London: Macmillan, 1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁸ Although no individual item of state expenditure may be unambiguously assigned to either social investment, social consumption or social expenses, most may be allocated according to the primary function which they perform.

¹⁹ Jessop, B., ‘Capitalism and Democracy: the Best Possible Political Shell?’ in Littlejohn, G. et al. , eds. Power and the State (London: Croom Helm, 1978).Google Scholar

²⁰ Redcliffe-Maud, Lord, ‘Local Governors At Work: Could They Do Better?’, Public Admins tration, XLV (1967), 347–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²¹ Broadbent, T., Planning and Profit in the Urban Economy (London: Methuen, 1977)Google Scholar and Cockburn, C., The Local State (London: Pluto, 1977).Google Scholar

²² Ashford, D., ‘The Effects of Central Finance on the British Local Government System’, British Journal of Political Science, IV (1974), 305–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²³ Rhodes, R., ‘Research into Central–Local Relations in Britain: A Framework for Analysis’, in Social Science Research Council, Central–Local Government Relations (London: SSRC, 1979).Google Scholar

²⁴ Dearlove, J., The Reorganization of British Local Government (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979)Google Scholar and Elcock, H., Local Government (London: Methuen, 1982).Google Scholar

²⁵ Support for the party effect may be found in Alt, J., ‘Some Social and Political Correlates of County Borough Expenditures’, Birtish Journal of Political Science, 1 (1971), 49–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Boaden, N., Urban Policy-Making (Cambridge: Cambridge University press, 1971)Google Scholar; Davies, B., Barton, A. and McMillan, I., Variations in Children's Services Among British Urban Authorities (London: Bell, 1972)Google Scholar. In contrast, Oliver and Stanyer, and Nicholson and Topham concluded that there was no evidence of a significant political effect on expenditure patterns – see Oliver, F. and Stanyer, J., ‘Some Aspects of the Financial Behaviour of County Boroughs’, Public Administration, XLVII (1969), 169–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Nicholson, R. and Topham, N., ‘Investment Decisions and the Size of Local Authorities’, Policy and Politics, I (1972), 23–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In both the two last-mentioned articles, however, the findings are somewhat restrictive in that the latter related only to capital expenditure and the former was concerned solely with total revenue expenditure. Newton and Sharpe have stressed the importance of disaggregating total expenditure into individual services and even to the level of specific items within services – see Newton, K. and Sharpe, L., ‘Local Outputs Research: Some Reflections and Proposals’, Policy and Politics, V (1977), 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁶ Greenwood, R., ‘Fiscal Pressure and Local Government in England and Wales’Google Scholar, in Hood, C. and Wright, M., Big Government in Hard Times (Oxford: Martin Robertson, 1981).Google Scholar

²⁷ Page, E., ‘Why Should Central–Local Relations in Scotland be Different To Those in England?’, Public Administration Bulletin, XXXVIII (1978), 51–72.Google Scholar

²⁸ Cooper, N. and Stewart, J., ‘Local Government Budget Closer to Targets’, Public Finance and Accountancy, 06 1982.Google Scholar

²⁹ Bassett, K., ‘Which Way for Labour Councils?’, Local Government Studies, VIII (1982), 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁰ Ferlie, E. and Judge, K., ‘Retrenchment and Rationality in the Personal Social Services’, Policy and Politics, IX (1981), 311–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁰ Ferlie, E. and Judge, K., ‘Retrenchment and Rationality in the Personal Social Services’, Policy and Politics, IX (1981), 311–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³¹ Clegg, T., ‘Social Consumption, Social Investment and the Dual State: the Case of Transport Policy in the Paris Region’, paper presented at the annual conference of the Political Studies Association, University of Kent, 04 1982.Google Scholar

³² Flynn, R., ‘Co-optation and Strategic Planning in the Local State’, in King, R., ed, Capital and Politics (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983).Google Scholar

³³ Martlew, C., ‘The State and Local Government Finance’, Public Administration, LXI (1983), 127–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also Harrington, T., ‘Explaining State Policy-Making’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, VII (1983), 202–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁴ Dunleavy, P., ‘The Political Implications of Sectoral Cleavages and the Growth of State Employment: Part 1, The Analysis of Production Cleavages’, Political Studies, XXVIII (1980), 364–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁵ Our main data sources are: (a) an interview survey of two matched wards, one located in Torytown district and the other in Labourville district; (b) official statistics at national, regional and local levels. Of particular relevance are the numerous indicators published by CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy), and (c) newspaper data at national, regional and local levels. For further details see Edgell, S. and Duke, V., ‘Social and Political Effects of the Public Expenditure Cuts’, SSRC Report HR 7315 (1981).Google Scholar

³⁶ Data supplied by the treasury departments of Labourville and Torytown. Every attempt has been made to ensure comparability between categories. Constant prices as used here merely allow for general inflation and do not take into account any relative price effects between and within services.

³⁷ Greenwood, , ‘Fiscal Pressure and Local Government’.Google Scholar

³⁸ This does not preclude the possibility of real cuts in particular services at this time.

³⁹ Greater Manchester, Facts, Figures and Finances (published annually by GMC).

⁴⁰ For more detail on alternative strategies see Duke, and Edgell, , ‘Public Expenditure Cuts in Britain’.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Education Statistics Actuals, CIPFA.

⁴² See Table 4 later.

⁴³ Housing is defined here as the statutory Housing Revenue Account which covers the bulk of all housing expenditure.

⁴⁴ The two districts can be differentiated with respect to concessionary fares, but this is located under social services by CIPFA.

⁴⁵ Facts, Figures and Finances.

⁴⁶ Local Government Comparative Statistics 1982, CIPFA.

⁴⁷ Local Government Comparative Statistics 1982, CIPFA.

⁴⁸ Personal Social Services Statistics, CIPFA.

⁴⁹ Housing Rents April 1981, CIPFA.

⁵⁰ Personal Social Services Statistics, CIPFA.

⁵¹ Duke, and Edgell, , ‘Public Expenditure Cuts in Britain’.Google Scholar

⁵² Bassett, K., ‘The Sale of Council Houses as a Political Issue’, Policy and Politics, VIII (1980), 290–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵³ Manchester Evening News, 11 06 1982.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Housing Rents April 1982, CIPFA.

⁵⁵ Education Statistics 1980/1 Actuals, CIPFA.

⁵⁶ Local Government Comparative Statistics 1982. CIPFA. The reduction of nursery education in Torytown was subsequently followed by the emergence of several private nurseries. See for instance the local newspapers for 20 June 1980 and 23 October 1980.

⁵⁷ Education Statistics Actuals, CIPFA.

⁵⁸ Education Statistics 1980–1 Actuals, CIPFA.

⁵⁹ Action here includes signing petitions, lobbying politicians, attending meetings and participating in demonstrations.

⁶⁰ For the relationship between action, occupational class and partisanship see Edgell, S. and Duke, V., ‘Reactions to the Public Expenditure Cuts: Occupational Class and Party Realignment’, Sociology, XVI (1982), 431–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar In a further article we have examined protest against the cuts by gender, economic status and union membership – see Edgell, S. and Duke, V., ‘Gender and Social Policy: The Impact of the Public Expenditure Cuts and Reactions to Them’, Journal of Social Policy, XII (1983), 357–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶¹ Marsh, A. and Kaase, M., ‘Measuring Political Action’, in Barnes, S. H. et al. , Political Action (London: Sage, 1979).Google Scholar

⁶² Miliband, R., The State and Capitalist Society (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1969), p. 53.Google Scholar

⁶³ One of the many avenues of future research in connection with the Greater Manchester Study is a broader comparison of CIPFA data for the ten GMC districts.

⁶⁴ See also Macintyre, S., Little Moscows: Communism and Working-Class Militancy in Interwar Britain (London: Croom Helm, 1980)Google Scholar and Duncan, S. and Goodwin, M., ‘The Local State and Restructuring Social Relations’, International journal of Urban and Regional Research, VI (1982), 157–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶⁵ It has not gone unnoticed by Conservative politicians (local and national) that the system of strong central control developed by the Thatcher government could be used for a very different end by a Labour central government.

⁶⁶ Jessop, , ‘Capitalism and Democracy’.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Duncan, S. and Goodwin, M., ‘The Local State: Functionalism, Autonomy and Class Relations in Cockburn and Saunders’, Political Geography Quarterly, I (1982), 77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar And for some evidence see Edgell, S. and Duke, V., ‘Collective Resistance to the Public Expenditure Cuts in Britain’, paper presented to the Fachgruppe Politikwissenschaft/Verwaltungswissenschaft, University of Konstanz, 06 1982.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Urry, J., ‘Localities, Regions and Social Class’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, V (1981), 455–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar