Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Explain local government relations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Explain local government relations
France Homogeneous model:
France is a republic, unitary state and traditionally seen as centralised where authority comes from its capital Paris, the relationship between governments tiers the centre and periphery is very complex. The local government in France controlled from its capital in Paris. The French ‘Napoleonic’ local government model has been adopted in many other European countries, and can be seen as very influential with local governments systems. The Decentralisation Act of 1982, very influential to the French system this enabled enormous amount of decentralisation reforms been applied in France to strengthen the local governments autonomy. This Act gave local authorities new responsibilities and more power on public service delivery. According to (Denters and Rose 2015, p.14) “Identifies that local government
…show more content…
Each local authority has a deliberative and executive bodies; they are responsible for their own budget and resources. In general, terms, this theoretical idea means all departments are power dependence on each other, need to cooperate with each other. A study comparing countries is that of Rhodes (1981) highlights “a model of intergovernmental relations that portrayed central and local actors as participants in a complex game in which they maneuver for advantage” comparing the French system of multi-level governance different tiers of government departments all act and work together in intergovernmental relations. The more power that the governments have in relation to transfer of their functions to subnational governments. Decision making should take place as close as possible to the citizens. An example would be that social problems are best dealt with subnational government and not with central
The municipal restructuring in Ontario from 1996 to 1999, whether voluntary or involuntary, was the most comprehensive process of municipal reforms since the Baldwin Act of 1849 (Frisken 30). After the election of Harris’ Conservative government in 1995, municipal reform took on a life of its own as it was followed with substantial activity between 1996 and 1999 (Sancton 135-56). This research paper looks to categorize, describe and evaluate the substantial activity that took place between the province and its municipal subordinates. While other papers have argued whether the change of the fiscal relationship was to benefit the province or if the structure of local government had simply become outdated, the issues of why the reforms occurred is not the focus of this research. However, what this paper will evaluate is whether the substantial activity made any long-term changes in the system by outlining the numerous reforms and examining their impact. This paper will begin by assessing the financial reform, which was the starting point for more extensive changes, followed by functional, structural and legislative reforms during 1996 to 1999.
would change became reality. This was a threat to the power of the king. The different
French Pre-Revolutionary Government The ancien regime was an expression used to describe the system of government, laws and institutions which preceded the French Revolution of 1789. The system relied heavily on the 'seigneurial system', based largely on the medieval feudal system by which the monarch had absolute power, most of the clergy (first estate) and the nobility (second estate) were very wealthy, and the peasants (third estate) were oppressed by heavy taxation and made to work as virtual slaves for their landlords. It was this system which was an important contributing factor to the resentment which developed between the poor, who made up three quarters of France's population at the time, and the nobles, and eventually led to the uprising of the lower classes and revolution in 1789. The ancient regime was an outdated system which ignored the demands of social and economic progress in favour of keeping the third estate in check and attempting to ensure that France was a dominant power in Europe. In most European countries the system of feudalism had died out in the Middle Ages.
Over the course of the semester, the class has discussed a variety of theories about legitimacy and government. In Hobbes, authority hinges on the Leviathan, with Locke, authority rests on the people and with Rousseau, an extreme version of Locke. Yet in each case, there appears to be a focus on one individual or one group of people. What institutions can enforce that the group who possesses legitimate power do not overstep their authority? Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu advocates for a solution that results in a system of government that has the sovereign not abuse his or their power. Thus, a system of checks and balances.
Each social class in France has its own reasons for wanting a change in government. The aristocracy was upset by the king’s power, while the Bourgeoisie was upset by the privileges of the aristocracy. The peasants and urban workers were upset by their burdensome existence. The rigid, unjust social structure meant that citizens were looking for change because “all social classes.had become uncomfortable and unhappy with the status quo.” (Nardo, 13)
The national government is often though to be the sole sovereign authority of a territory, however, governmental authority is not so often clearly delineated or concentrated. Large, regionalized identity groups within an existing state may call for greater autonomy, or existing states may see unity with another as politically or economically advantageous, either development leading to multiple governmental levels within the same territory. Differentiated models of constitutional organization amongst regional governments and centralized national or super-national structures developed from this tension between autonomy and unity, namely the unitary state, the federation, and the confederate models. Each of these systems seeks to accommodate regionalized
In 1789, thousands of starving peasants abandoned the lands of their ancestors as the price of bread rose to eighty percent of the average peasant’s income (Kreis). Blazing buildings marked the path they took to the source of their woes in Paris. They attacked any food cart they passed. The outline of their skeleton could be seen from under their filthy, thread-bare clothing. Their impoverished condition had reached its climax. Their desperation led them to action. They over took the largest fortress in France, the Bastille, in search of weapons. Members of the Bourgeoisie had formed the National Assembly three weeks prior to the storming of the Bastille to begin to address the grievances of the peasants (Dabney). On August 4, the National Assembly met in Paris, and, with one enthusiastic fell swoop, they agreed to abolish the feudal system forever, thus gaining the support of the mob. “The Decree of the National Assembly Abolishing the Feudal System” created equality between the nobility and citizens, ended the Church’s authority over the state, and pledged to work with King Louis XVI to rectify the injustices of the people.
The variation in the public health leadership and organizational structures are that the local government has vertical linkages with various businesses and households. It has upward vertical linkages with the state and other federal agencies in order to coordinate its operations smoothly. Public health leadership and organizational structures are performed at many levels from local to national. The organizations and agencies devoted to public health at these different levels share many of the same functions including disease surveillance, policy development, and provision of access to health care. In terms of public health, no level of government has complete authority and autonomy (Turnock, p.195). Optimal outcomes result from a symbiotic relationship and a complementary effort on all levels.
The French government was a complete monarchy. At the time France had thirteen different regions. Each of these thirteen regions made up their own rules. What did that mean? France didn't have a unified law system, basically a government, to make up the rules; everyone made their own through Parliament. The Parliament had the jurisdiction to make laws in their own region. Each individual Parliament had between 50 to 130 members made up of judges and “legal elites” in that region. This was the only government in France. The Parliament were the ones set prices on foods, and held trials including murders and thefts. Even though they served as the government of the region, they were hated by everybody, including the king. The King had people called intendents who “curbed the power of nobility” who were hated even more than Parliament.
Government, one of the greatest concepts of mankind since learning how to live together as a community. Government was designed to give order and to represent the people in their quest for happiness. When a government works well the majority of its citizens are satisfied with what the government is doing, but what happens when the government fall short of satisfying the basic needs of its citizens? When the current government fails a new one is the cry of its people. In many countries change is accomplished by a revolution. In France the National Assembly cried for revolution from its oppressive King and the Ancien Regime. They wanted to improve human rights. They wanted an improved economy and religious reform like the American Revolution. This is an argument that the French Revolution failed.
The Doctrine of Separation of power is used both in democratic as well as federal states. In the early times when the Constitutions around the world were still uncodified it was used by the Greeks and the Roman Republics. It was Montesquieu who for the first time actually penned down and explained the doctrine in a scientific manner in his book ‘Esprit des Lois’ . In brief, it explains the duties of the Government and its corresponding organs. That is Legislature for legislative functions, Executive for executive functions and a Judiciary
Federal and state authority differs in order to protect us from any one governing body making all the decisions. This delegation of power seeks to prevent imbalance and helps to create equality. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely (Moreell, 2014)”. This famous saying perhaps portrays the resoning behind the division of power. The Federal g...
Frank J. Goodnow’s “Politics and Administration,” infers that politics and administration cannot be divided and are in need of each other to function. However, politics are superior to administration. Goodnow’s further analyzes and identifies three forms of authorities that enforce and implements states will. The first responsibility of authority is to respect the right of the people when conflicts ascend between either private or public matters. The second is judicial authorities also referred to as executive authorities that ensure the needs and policies of the state are executed. The third authority also referred to as “administrative authorities,” focuses on the mechanical, scientific and business authorities pertaining to the government.
On a large scale, governance describes methods a governing body uses to ensure its citizens follow established protocol. At the macro level, there is a loosely coupled organizations structure that supervises and maintains respons...
The Main Features of Government and Society Under the Ancient Regime in France before 1789