Political-Administrative Relations in Times of Turbulence

Preferred panel: The Politics‐Administration Dichotomy: has it ever and/or does it still matter? In the first part of this paper we introduce the politics-administration dichotomy (PAD) and argue why it proves a relevant tradition for administrative craftsmanship. We first review the literature on both PAD’s place in Dutch public administration theory and practice, focusing on the notion of ministerial responsibly as its cornerstone. Secondly, we draw from Rod Rhodes’ concept of court politics as an analytical tool to better understand the internal dynamics of the PAD, and the strengths and limitations of PAD-inspired concepts and models for studying the apex of central government in The Netherlands. This paper draws from 31 hours of elite-interviews with a single top civil servant spanning his career from 1979 to the present which included 3 permanent secretary positions, as well as from eight supplementary interviews with his (former) ministers and co-workers. By focusing on key cases, such as the most turbulent year in modern Dutch political history (late 2001 to late 2002) when this top civil servant was secretary of the prime minister’s department, we illustrate the ambiguous and permeable boundaries and complex relationships between ministers, public servants, and political advisers. The discussion claims that if the PAD is to remain relevant in understanding and assessing elite behaviour in executive politics, it has to come to terms with the boundary-blurring impacts of, e.g. mediatized real-time politics, the thickening of public accountability regimes that affect not only elected officials but increasingly also public servants, and the emergence of the ‘hybrid’ class of ministerial advisers. Keywords: Politics-Administration Dichotomy, court politics, core executive relations