Often committees exercise their power not so much against the parent body,
but against another committee. For example, proposals from a substantive
committee, say the building committee of a college, will be referred from the
full governing body back to the finance committee for a test of feasibility.
Unless the finance committee agrees, it is unlikely that the full body will accept
a building committee recommendation. The power of a committee is generally
greater if it represents a small proportion of the size of the full body.
Consequently thecabinetcommittees in Britain are relatively powerless
because their members, perhaps five ministers, already represent nearly a
quarter of the full body, and are usually people whose voices could not have
been ignored whether or not they were on the committee. Thus committee
membership is often a way of acknowledging the prior political or institutional
authority of a subgroup, rather than originating their power.
One particular type of committee, frequently known as a ‘steering com-
mittee’, is often of particular power. Such a committee is charged with
preparing the agenda for the main body, and with deciding the rules of debate
and timing, and who should be invited to speak to a matter. Again, with a
powerful chairman, such a committee can often manipulate arrangements
effectively to stifle issues, or to push them through the main debating assembly
with little chance for the opposition to make their case or lobby support.
Because of the specific rules of debate and discussion adopted by some
parliaments, including the US Congress and the British House of Commons,
there has also developed a procedural device by which the entire assembly
turns itself into a committee, known as the ‘Committee of the Whole House’,
but in such cases it no longer remains a committee in any substantive sense.
Common Good
The term common good describes a goal or an object of policy that is in the
interests of everyone in a society. It is related to such terms aspublic interest,
general willand, in a more complex way, tocollective goods. The greatest
difficulty in its application arises from the fact that there are very few things
which are equally beneficial, and imply equal cost, to all members of a society.
A typical example, though one by no means unproblematic in itself, would be
the avoidance of industrial pollution, or the provision of military defence. The
concept may have more utility in a comparative concept. A politician claiming
to work for the common good, rather than for some sectional interest, even
when that interest is quite legitimate, may gain more credence. In fact there is
no logical reason why this should be so. It is perfectly possible that the
provision of something, such as national parks, is indeed a matter of the
common good, but that the cost of so doing is unfair in comparison with
Common Good