Advertisement

Germany and the UK: The Slow and Winding Road to Reform

  • Dan Hough
Chapter
  • 298 Downloads
Part of the Political Corruption and Governance series book series (PCG)

Abstract

Both Germany and the UK have traditionally been viewed as countries where corruption is largely under control.1 Corruption was never taken to be non-existent or irrelevant, but it was, for much of the postwar period, seen as something that happened largely as bad applies enriched themselves but where systems of oversight, compliance and cultures of ‘doing the right thing’ would ultimately prevail. Indeed, these attitudes were not just evident in Germany and the UK, they prevailed across much of the western world.

Keywords

Public Life German Business Governance Score International Corruption National Integrity System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    For a detailed comparison of corruption across the western world, see the individual chapters in M.J. Bull and J. Newell (eds) (2003) Corruption in Contemporary Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    For analysis of Britain in the 1990s see F.F. Ridley and A. Doig (eds) (1995), Sleaze: Politicians, Private Interests and Public Reaction (Oxford: OUP).Google Scholar
  3. For the specifics of Back to Basics see A. Doig (2001), ‘Sleaze: Picking up the threads or “back to basics” scandals’, Parliamentary Affairs, 54: 260–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. For more on the Flick Affair, see C. Landfried (1994), Parteifinanzen und politische Macht (Baden-Baden: Nomos).Google Scholar
  5. 3.
    For the British case see H. Tumber (2004), ‘Scandal and media in the United Kingdom: From Major to Blair’, American Behavioural Scientist; 47 (8): 1122–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. For the German case C. Clemens (2000); ‘A legacy reassessed: Helmut Kohl and the German party finance affair’, German Politics, 9 (2): 25–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 4.
    For more on scandals and their history, see J. Garrard and J. Newell (2006), Scandals in Past and Contemporary Politics (Manchester: MUP)Google Scholar
  8. J. Thompson (2000), Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age (London: Polity).Google Scholar
  9. 6.
    The most consistently vocal and long-standing opponent of this thesis remains Hans Herbert von Arnim. See for example H.H. von Arnim (1997), Fetter Bauch regiert nicht gern. Die politische Klasse — selbstbezogen und abgehoben (Munich: Kindler)Google Scholar
  10. H.H. von Arnim (2001a), Das System. Die Machenschaften der Macht (Munich: Droemer)Google Scholar
  11. For an English language version see H.H. von Arnim (2001b), Institutionalized Political Unaccountability and Political Corruption, available at http://www.spea.indiana.edu/tac/colloquia/2001/pdf/van%20Arnim.pdf, viewed on 24 August 2012.Google Scholar
  12. 7.
    U. von Alemann (2002), ‘Party finance, party donations and corruption: The German case’, in D. Delia Porta and S. Rose-Ackermann (eds) Corrupt Exchanges: Empirical Themes in the Politics and Political Economy of Corruption (Baden: Baden: Nomos), p.112.Google Scholar
  13. 8.
    T. Eschenburg (1970), ‘The decline of bureaucratic ethos in the federal republic’, in A.J. Heidenheimer (ed.) Political Corruption: Readings in Comparative Analysis (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston), p.259.Google Scholar
  14. 9.
    P. Noack (1985), Korruption — die andere Seite der Macht (Munich: Kindler), p.113.Google Scholar
  15. 10.
    R. Abdelal, R. Di Tella and J. Schiefer (2008), Corruption in Germany: Managing Germany’s Largest Corruption Scandal (Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School), p.2.Google Scholar
  16. 14.
    For more on this see M. Möhrenschlager (2007), ‘Der strafrechtliche Schutz gegen Korruption’, in D. Dölling (ed.) Handbuch der Korruptionsprävention (Munich: Verlag C.H. Beck), pp.377–561.Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    S. Wolf (2006), ‘Modernization of the German anti-corruption criminal law by international legal provisions’, German Law Journal, 7 (9): 785. For more on the 1999 laws see F. Zieschang (1999), ‘das Eu-Bestechungs-gesetz und das Gesetz zur Bekämpfung internationaler Bestechung’, njw, pp. 105–107.Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    T.M. Funk and J.A. Dance (2012), ‘Germany’s increasingly robust anti-corruption efforts’, Litigation, 38 (3), Spring: 1.Google Scholar
  19. 22.
    R. Hornung (2010), ‘Prosecution of corruption: The Baden-Wurttemberg Example’, in Proceedings of the Seminar: Effective Means of Investigation and Prosecution of Corruption (Bucharest: National Anti-Corruption Directorate of Romania), p.45.Google Scholar
  20. 24.
    N. Lord (2011), Regulating Transnational Corporate Bribery in the UK and Germany (Cardiff: PhD, Cardiff University), pp.131–132.Google Scholar
  21. 25.
    N. Behnke (2002), ‘A Nolan Committee for the German ethics infrastructure?’, European Journal of Political Research, 41: 678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 27.
    See D. Clark, (2000), ‘Public service reform: A comparative West European perspective’, West European Politics, 23: 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 34.
    A. Adonis (1997), ‘The UK: Civic virtue put to the test’, in D. Delia Porta and Y. Meny (eds) Democracy and Corruption in Europe (London: Pinter), p.103.Google Scholar
  24. 35.
    Transparency International UK (2011), National Integrity System Report (London: TI), p.14.Google Scholar
  25. 36.
    D. Oliver (1997), ‘Regulating the conduct of MPs. The British experience of combating corruption’, Political Studies, 45 (3): 539–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 40.
    B.J. O’ Toole (2007), ‘The framework of ethical compliance in the UK’, Public Policy and Administration, 22: 113.Google Scholar
  27. 41.
    For more on the institutional machinery developed for overseeing the behaviour of parliamentarians during this period see O. Gay (2004), ‘The development of standards machinery in the Commons’, in O. Gay and P. Leopold (eds) Conduct Unbecoming: The Regulation of Parliamentary Behaviour (London: Politico’s), pp.104–105.Google Scholar
  28. 43.
    See H. Tumber (2004), pp.1127–1129. See also A. Doig (2003), ‘Politics and sleaze: Conservative ghosts and Labour’s own brand’, Parliamentary Affairs, 56 (2), April: 322–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 45.
    For more on this see P. Oborne (2007), The Triumph of the Political Class (London: Simon & Shuster UK), pp.222–225.Google Scholar
  30. 46.
    P. Seaward (2010), ‘Sleaze, old corruption and parliamentary reform: An historical perspective on the current crisis’, The Political Quarterly, 81 (1), January-March: 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 47.
    For more on the UK’s parliamentary expenses scandal, see A. Kelso (2009), ‘Parliament on its knees: MPs’ expenses and the crisis of transparency at Westminster’, The Political Quarterly, 80 (3), July-September: 329–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. M. Bell (2009), A Very British Revolution: The Expenses Scandal and How to Save Our Democracy (London: Icon Books).Google Scholar
  33. 50.
    Lord Falconer, 24 March 2003. Quoted in G. Brown (2007), ‘Prevention of corruption — UK legislation and enforcement’, Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 15 (2): 180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jack Straw, March 2009. Quoted in M. Osajda (2012), The UK Bribery Act of 2010: Whiter the FCPA (London: Thomson Reuters), p.4.Google Scholar
  35. 51.
    P.M. Heywood (2012), ‘Integrity management and the public service ethos in the UK: Patchwork quilt or threadbare blanket’, International Review of the Administrative Sciences, 78 (3): 475–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 52.
    P.M. Heywood (2012), p.475. See also Transparency International (2004), National Integrity Systems TI Country Study Report United Kingdom 2004 (London: TI UK), p.63.Google Scholar
  37. 60.
    See G. Rosenberg (2010), ‘New UK Bribery Act 2010 — Draconian in theory but is it enforceable in practice?’, Construction Law International, 5 (3): 19.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dan Hough 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dan Hough
    • 1
  1. 1.University of SussexUK

Personalised recommendations