The Execution of the GLC: A Policy Folly?
Abstract
The Execution of the GLC: A Policy Folly? * D. B. O'LEARY POLICY FOLLY is a policy pursued contrary to the self-interest of the policymakers. It must meet three criteria. First, it must be perceived as counterproductive by at least some of its makers at its inception, not merely with the benefit of hindsight. Second, feasible alternative policies must be available. Third, the policy should be that of a group. The abolition of the GLC meets all three criteria. First, abolition was regarded as complex, time consuming and counterproductive by both Michael Heseltine and Tom King, Patrick Jenkin's predecessors at the Department of the Environment, and by William Whitelaw, chair of the cabinet committee MISC 79 which offered abolition as a 'sop' to Mrs Thatcher in compensation for failure to do something about the rates (Forrester et al., pp. 6+.-6). Second, feasible alternative policies were available. Ratecapping, expenditure limits and a propaganda offensive to defeat the Livingstone administra- tion in the GLC elections due for 1985 were feasible options, capable of achieving the government's objectives - presupposing, of course, that it had well defined objectives. Third, abolition has been stoutly defended by the cabinet, which has included Peter Walker