Political Authority and Bureaucratic Power

Page, Edaward C. 1985. Political Authority and Bureaucratic Power: A Comparative Analysis. Knoxville : The University of Tennessee Press

Hmm... Kui võtta arvesse ainult pealkirja esimene ja viimane sõna, ilmneks selle raamatu üldine kirjeldus: Political Analysis. Õigemini on kogu teos "võrdlev analüüs" nelja riigi (USA, Inglismaa, Prantsusmaa ja Saksamaa) bürokraatlikest süsteemidest, ehk kokkuvõte paljudest poliitanalüüsidest. Kaaneserval on selline tekst:

Page compares the role of state and local government in service delivery and the organisational structures of governmental departments. He argues that the main danger of beaucratic government is not that it produces bad, ineffective or illiberal government, but rather a system over which there is no public control.

Lugesin seda nagu ilukirjandust, sest 25-aasta vanust poliitanalüüsi ei saa mitte kuidagi tõsiselt võtta. Raamat on kirjutatud Max Weberi vaimus, mistõttu on pentsik lugeda nt kuidas sellest, kuidas Weber osutas liiga vähe tähelepanu survegruppidele. On imetlusväärne, et Weberi kirjutistest niigi palju klappis autori kaasajaga. Teose lõppkokkuvõte oligi vist mõte, et üheski neist neljast riigist ei ole poliitilise juhi iseloom selline, nagu Weber seda kirjeldas. Eeldan, et palju läks ka arvustajale kaotsi, sest kaaneservalt pärinev "kokkuvõte" on tegelikult tõlgendus raamatu viimasest kahest leheküljest. Igatahes, lugemine ise oli tänuväärsem, kui mingi lõplik point.
Page oli esitanud täitsa asjalikud käsimused: nt kuidas eristada poliitikuid ja ametnikke millise väljaõppe saavad tippametnikud nimetatud riikides? Sain teada midagi, mida oleksin pidanud juba teadma: eelarved on inkrementaalsed. Tähendab, eelneva aasta eelarve võetakse aluseks millele parlament arvutab juurde kasvu, mis on enamjaolt "lagi" ehk kõige kõrgem võimalik summa. USA poliitsüsteemis on huvigruppide liiasus, igale grupile on ka oma vastu-grupp. Ja fakt, et Adenaueri üritus luua 1961. aastal rahvuslikku telekanalit kuulutati mittepõhiseaduslikuks, paneb mõtlema kuidas meie riigis õnnestus tekkida telekanal pealinnale (Tallinna TV?). Sisutäiteks mõned tsitaadid:

For Weber, politics is the struggle of personal power. Political activity involves building up coalitions and popular following, making compromises and being accountable for one's own ideas. Political leadership exists where one can find a politician at the apex of a state authority. A politician has the authority and skill to assert his own preferences and priorities desipte the constraits of bureaucratic government. (Page 1985: 135)

There are two broad conditions for the existence of political leadership, and the degree to which they are present or absent shapes the type of limitations which in turn may characterise the constraints upon political leadership in different bureaucratic systems. First, the supply of political leaders - men who have made their careers out of the political struggle for power with the capacity to mobilise political support for their preferred policy initiatives, and second, the existence of a comprehensive, hierarchically-structured governmental organization. There are differences between each of the four countries on each of these two dimensions, and it is possible to use these two conditions to pinpoint the specific problem for the exercise of political leadership within each of the four countries. (Page 1985: 142)

Headey distinguishes between five different types of ministers. Policy initiators are those who promote their own policy initiatives; policy selectors are those who accept the objectives of the department and see their role as choosing between alternatives presented to them by officials; executive ministers are concerned with particular aspects of the management of their ministry and in maintaining morale; ambassadors see their function as representing the department in relations with interest groups and parliament, and minimalists conceive of their role as simply the person who signs official documents, bats for the department in Cabinet and makes sure that he does not make any blunders in parliament. (Page 1985: 156)