constitution that representatives of interests affected by a Bill to be
laid before Parliament should be consulted by the executive whilst it
is being drafted. Groups also have the opportunity to table amend-
ments to Bills as they go through the Commons and Lords.
Where different levels of government exist (e.g. European, British
and local or federal, state and local) the pluralist principle is that of
‘subsidiarity’, as discussed at the end of Chapter 6. In the Netherlands
such principles have become firmly entrenched with, on one
interpretation, contemporary central government coalition govern-
ments being reduced to largely setting the procedural rules for local
policy-making communities (Frissen, 1994).Corporatism
It has been suggested that pluralism is too optimistic a description of
policy making in many contemporary ‘liberal democracies’, and the
alternative description of ‘corporatism’ was often thought to be
appropriate in 1970s Britain. It is clear that much policy making in
Britain is made behind closed doors – in Whitehall rather than at
Westminster. This does not necessarily mean that no consultation
takes place – an extensive network of official committees and
unofficial contacts with representatives from professional, academic,
managerial, trade union and other bodies does exist. It is customary,
as Jennings indicated, to sound these out on policy proposals.
Similarly much policy making in Brussels is made in closed nego-
tiations between governmental delegations and by obscure discus-
sions between the Commission and those interest groups organised
on a European basis. In the United States, Congress is open to
representations from any of the thousands of interest groups that
exist in the country. However, only a relatively select group of
interests have effective and permanent relationships with the key
policy-making committees in their areas. Such interest groups often
contribute heavily to the election expenses of key committee chair-
men and women and exercise a virtual veto on key executive appoint-
ments in what Cater (1965) calls the ‘sub-government’ relating to
their policy area.
‘Corporatism’ indicates that the consultation tends to be some-
what selective. Established bodies like the Confederation of British
Industry, the American Medical Association and the French CGT186 DEMOCRACY