Кафедра английского языка № 6

Стр 1 из 12Следующая ⇒

Кафедра английского языка № 6

О.О. Ломакина

АНГЛИЙСКИЙ ЯЗЫК

ГОСУПРАВЛЕНИЯ

Public Administration

And

Management

English

ЯЗЫК ПРОФЕССИИ

Уровень

“С 1”

Издательство

«МГИМО – Университет»

2015

UNIT 1

The Traditional Model of Public Administration

PART I

Discussion

What do you know about ‘Public Administration’? What does the term refer to?

Is ‘Public Administration’ the same as ‘Public Management’? Prove your point of view.

Which of the following aspects of General management are, in your opinion, most important for Public administration?Why?

Strategic management * Performance management * Risk management

Personnel management * Financial management * Time management

1. Read the definition of Public Administration and match the terms in bold type to their Russian equivalents below.

Text A

Public Administration can be broadly described as the development, implementation, and study of government policy. Public Administration is linked to pursuing the public good by enhancing civil society and social justice. Though Public Administration has historically referred to government management, it increasingly encompasses non-governmental organizations that are not acting out of self-interest.

The Public Administration sector consists of establishments of federal, state, and local government agencies that administer, oversee, and manage public programs and have executive, legislative, or judicial authority over other institutions within a given area. These agencies also set policy, create laws, adjudicate civil and criminal legal cases, provide for public safety and for national defense.

In general, government establishments in the Public Administration sector oversee government programs and activities that are not performed by private establishments. Establishments in this sector typically are engaged in the organization and financing of the production of public goods and services, most of which are provided for free or at prices that are not economically significant.

Government establishments also engage in a wide range of productive activities covering not only public goods and services but also individual or private goods and services similar to those produced in sectors typically identified with private-sector establishments.

a) …………………………….… - общественное благо

b) …………………………….… - частные (индивидуальные) блага

c) …………………………….… - общественные блага

d) ………………………..… - общественная/государственная безопасность

e) …………………………….… - государственные программы

f) ………………………….… - политика, курс, план действий правительства

g) …………………………….... - учреждение, организация

2. Match the verbs from Text A on the left to their meanings on the right.

administer a - be composed (of); be formed (of)

adjudicate b - seek or strive to attain

consist of c - supply means of support

encompass d - direct or control

engage in e - arbitrate, to give a decision (on)

enhance f - watch over and direct; supervise

oversee g - take part; participate

provide for h - intensify or increase; improve

pursue i - include entirely or comprehensively

3. Comment on the underlined phrases/sentences in Text A.

4. Translate Text A into Russian.

5. Scan Text B to find the relevant information supporting or contradicting the following statement: ‘ administration is a narrower and more limited function than management ’.

Text B

PART II

Text C

Notes to Text C

1. Wilson, (Thomas) Woodrow – (1856-1924) Уилсон (Вильсон), (Томас) Вудро - 28-й президент США (в 1913-21). С 1885 по 1910 преподавал историю и политическую экономию в Колледже Брин Мор (Bryn Mawr College), в Уэслианском (методистском) университете (Wesleyan University) и в Принстонском университете (Princeton University) (курсы права и политической экономии), в 1902-10 президент последнего. Автор ряда работ по истории и политологии (около 10 крупных трудов). В 1910-12 губернатор штата Нью-Джерси. Провел несколько демократических реформ (введение прямых предварительных выборов, закон о борьбе с коррупцией, создание комиссии по контролю за деятельностью коммунальных компаний). В 1912 избран президентом от Демократической партии (Democratic Party). По его инициативе был принят ряд законов во исполнение предвыборной программы "Новая свобода" (New Freedom; New Democracy), в том числе Закон о федеральной резервной системе (Federal Reserve Act) и антитрестовский закон (Clayton Act of 1914). В январе 1918 выдвинул программу мира - "14 пунктов" (Fourteen Points), а также идею создания Лиги Наций. И хотя Версальский договор (Treaty of Versailles) предусмотрел ее создание, Конгресс США отказался ратифицировать договор с пунктом о Лиге Наций. В. Уилсону была присуждена Нобелевская премия мира (1919), а в 1950 он был избран в национальную Галерею славы (Hall of Fame).

2. Max Weber - Эми ́ ль Максимилиа ́ н Ве ́ бер, Макс Ве́бер, нем. Max Weber (1864-1920) — немецкий социолог, историк и экономист. В 1892—1894 годах приват-доцент, а затем экстраординарный профессор в Берлине, в 1894—1896 годах — профессор национальной экономии во Фрейбургском, с 1896 — в Гейдельбергском, с 1919 — в Мюнхенском университете. Один из основателей «Немецкого социологического общества» (1909). С 1918 года профессор национальной экономии в Вене. Вебер внёс существенный вклад в такие области социального знания, как общая социология, методология социального познания, политическая социология, социология права, социология религии, экономическая социология, теория капитализма.

3. Northcote -Trevelyan Report - was laid before Parliament on 23rd November 1853 (published in 1854) - arose from an enquiry set up in Her Majesty’s Treasury in 1848, and was signed by Stafford Northcote (Lord Iddesleigh) and by Sir Charles Trevelyan. Later convention would describe one of these as a politician (Northcote, to become a Minister and indeed Chancellor and Foreign Secretary) and the other as an official (head of the Treasury). The report, which revolutionized the conditions of appointment to the Civil Service, catalysed the development of the apolitical UK civil service, recruited and promoted on merit rather than as a result of patronage.

4. Gerald Caiden, Ph.D., University of Southern California professor, has research and teaching interests in several areas of public administration, notably comparative and development administration, administrative theory, and the study of maladministration and bureaupathology. He is responsible for over 29 books and over 270 academic articles on diverse topics, such as administrative corruption, public accountability, auditing, ombudsman, public service ethics, comparative administrative cultures, and public management systems. He is best known for his pioneering studies in administrative reform, organizational diagnosis, ombudsman, comparative corruption, and public sector innovations.

Case Study 1

1. Read the Case Study on the history of public administration and answer the questions that follow. Make sure you know the meaning of, can explain or paraphrase the underlined words and phrases.

Early Administration

Public administration has a long history, one paralleling the very notion of government. Administrative systems existed in ancient Egypt to administer irrigation from the annual flood of the Nile and to build the pyramids. China in the Han dynasty (206 BC to AD 220) adopted the Confucian precept that government should be handled by men chosen, not by birth, but by virtue and ability, and that its main aim was the happiness of the people.

In Europe the various Empires – Greek, Roman, Holy Roman, Spanish, and so on – were, above all, administrative empires, controlled from the centre by rules and procedures. The development of ‘modern’ states in the Middle Ages is argued by Weber to have ‘developed concomitantly with bureaucratic structures’. Although some kind of administration existed earlier, however, the traditional model of public administration really dates from as late as the mid-nineteenth century.

Earlier systems of administration shared one important characteristic. They were ‘personal’, that is, based on loyalty to a particular individual such as a king or a minister, instead of being ‘impersonal’, based on legality and loyalty to the organization and the state. Their practices often resulted in corruption or misuse of office for personal gain, although the very idea that these are undesirable features of administration itself only derives from the traditional model. Practices that now seem alien were commonplace ways of carrying out government functions under earlier administrative arrangements. It was once common for those aspiring to employment by the state to resort to patronage₂₀ or nepotism₂₁, relying on friends or relatives for employment, or by purchasing offices; that is, to pay for the right to be a customs or tax collector, and then to charge fees to clients, both to repay the initial sum invested and to make a profit. In early colonial Sydney, the customs officer personally received five per cent of all duties collected and the police were paid a shilling for ‘apprehending and lodging in gaol any sailor who may be found riotous and disorderly’. Key administrative positions were usually not full-time but were only one of the activities of someone in business. The normal way for a young man to gain government employment (only men were employed) was to apply to some relative or family friend in a position to help. There was no guarantee that people employed by the system would be competent in any way.

In the United States for most of the nineteenth century, there existed what was termed the spoils system of administration, derived from the saying ‘to the victor belong the spoils’. After an election in which a new party was elected – and this applied to elections from the local level to the Presidency – every administrative job from the top to the bottom could be filled by an appointee from the winning party. This system reached its nadir in the 1830s during the presidency of Andrew Jackson, who believed that there was no specific expertise involved in public administration, nor was there any reason that the administration of government should persist when its political complexion changes. The benefits of public office – patronage, direct financial benefits – rightly belong to the successful party in an election.

Jackson thought there were advantages in making the administration more egalitarian₂₂ and democratic: ‘I can not but believe that more is lost by continuance of men in office than is generally gained by their experience.’ Presumably, by changing officeholders whose loyalties were clearly to the party, much could be gained, perhaps even reduced corruption. It could even be argued that political accountability was enhanced in ‘reaction to a sense that government had not been sufficiently responsive to changes in the electoral will.’ This egalitarian philosophy fit well with the American distrust of government, but had major drawbacks such as the periodic chaos which attended changes of administration; the popular association of public administration with politics and incompetence; the growing conflicts over appointments, etc. Such a system was neither efficient nor effective. Citizens did not know where they stood when government administration was, in effect, a private business in which government decisions, money and votes were negotiable commodities.

Eventually, the inherent problems of earlier forms of administration led to changes in the latter part of the nineteenth century and to the reforms associated with the traditional model of administration. Pre-modern bureaucracies were ‘personal, traditional, diffuse, ascriptive and particularistic’ where modern bureaucracies, exemplified by Weber, were to become ‘impersonal, rational, specific, achievement-oriented and universalistic.’ Earlier practices now seem strange because of the very success of the traditional model of administration. Professional, non-partisan administration is so familiar to us that it is hard to imagine that any other system could exist.

Taylor and Management

The traditional model of administration was fully formed by the 1920s and continued with remarkably little change for at least fifty years. The bureaucracy was supposed to be permanent and neutral; it was not engaged in policy or politics, but was an instrument of great power to be wielded by the politicians. Although the theoretical foundations of bureaucracy and political control were firmly established and essentially unchanged, there were public sector adaptations of management theory. All that was needed for a complete theory was a way of working, of organizing, to be added to the bureaucratic model of Weber, the political control of Wilson and the merit appointments and political neutrality of Northcote-Trevelyan. This was found in the scientific management principles put forward for the private sector by Frederic Winslow Taylor (1911). There were two main points to Tailor’s theory: standardizing work, which meant finding the ‘one best way of working’ and ‘controlling so extensively and intensively as to provide for the maintenance of all these standards’.

Scientific management became an evangelical force in the early years of the century. What Taylor sought was a fundamental change as efficiency and science replaced ad hoc decision-making, even a societal change as, through scientific management, the interests of employees and employers could be shown to be the same.

Scientific management fits very well with the theory of bureaucracy: the skills of the administrator, the compilation of manuals to cover every contingency, the advance of rationality, and impersonality are aspects of both. Standardization of tasks and fitting workers to them was perfect for the traditional model of administration. Even the measurement of performance by stop-watch was common in the organization and methods branch of large public bureaucracies.

Taylor remains important for public administration, as his theory of scientific management became a key influence on what followed in the management of public and private sectors. Although particular points could be disputed – the crude theory of personal motivation, time-and-motion studies – the idea that management could be systematic remained important in the public sector: ‘a strong, effective administrative system could flourish if politics was restricted to its proper sphere, if scientific methods were applied, and if economy and efficiency were societal goals’ (Stillman², 1991).

Human Relations Theory

Another theory, ‘human relations’, is often contrasted with scientific management. The focus of human relations is more on the social context at work rather than regarding the worker as an automaton responsive only to financial incentives. The human relations school had its roots in social psychology, and although quite different in some respects, became as much of a continuing tradition in public administration as did scientific management.

Although the human relations idea has many theorists, the real founder was Elton Mayo³. In a series of experiment s during the 1930s, Mayo found that the social context of the work group was the most important factor in management. Conflict was pathological and to be avoided, and there was no necessary antagonism between management and workers. In what became known as the ‘Hawthorne experiments’, referring to the Hawthorne plant of Western Electric, Mayo found that productivity increased most by taking an interest in the workers, and other factors, including financial incentives, were much less important.

Mayo and his followers had substantial impact on the management of the public sector, even if more recent work has cast doubt on the value of interpretations of the original data, showing most particularly that financial incentives were important after all. Consideration of the psychological context of the organization was responsible for a major school of thought in theories of organizational behavior. The idea that individuals responded to other than financial motives led to an improvement in working conditions.

Mayo influenced those who thought management should be kinder to their workers and provide some kind of social interaction, including in government. Public organizations had fewer competitive constraints than the private sector and, arguably, went further in introducing human relations, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s. One of the widely-held outside criticisms of the public bureaucracy has been that workers are treated too well and had to do so little compared to the private sector.

Notes to Case Study 1

1. The Westminster system is a democratic, parliamentary system of government modelled after that of the United Kingdom system, as used in the Palace of Westminster, the location of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The system is a series of procedures for operating a legislature. It is used, or was once used, in the national legislatures and/or sub-national legislatures of most Commonwealth and ex-Commonwealth nations, beginning with the Canadian provinces in the mid-19th century. There are other parliamentary systems whose procedures differ considerably from the Westminster system (Western European Parliamentary Model, Hybrid Model)

Вестминстерская система - демократическая система государственного устройства, организованная по примеру Великобритании и используемая во многих странах Содружества наций, напр., в Канаде, Австралии, Сингапуре, Ирландии, Новой Зеландии и Индии

2. Richard J. Stillman is Professor of public administration at the University of Colorado at Denver.

3. Мэйо, Элтон (1880-1949) - американский социолог, один из основоположников школы человеческих отношений, известен благодаря Хоторнским экспериментам. Human relations school of management - школа человеческих отношений - направление в теории менеджмента, рассматривающее нематериальные стимулы как основные факторы повышения производительности труда работников.

4. the New Deal - "Новый курс" - экономическая и социальная политика президента Ф.Д. Рузвельта 30-х гг., направленная на преодоление Великой Депрессии 1929 - 1933 гг.

Questions

1. What are the main characteristics of the early administrative systems?

2. What are the inherent problems of the earlier forms of administration?

3. What is the importance of the 19^th century public service reforms in the UK and the United States?

4. Why is Weber’s theory of bureaucracy the most important theoretical principle of the traditional model of administration?

5. How did Weber specify the position of the individual official?

6. What is the essence of the theory of dichotomy? Can politics and administration be separated?

7. What was the influence of Taylor’s scientific management theory on the traditional model of administration?

8. What impact did the human relations school have on the management of the public sector?

9. What was the significance of the ‘POSDCORB’ for management in the public sector?

PART III

Text D

Notes to Text D

1. Vincent A. Ostrom - Founding Director, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Arthur F. Bentley Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Indiana University, Bloomington

2. OECD - Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - Организация экономического сотрудничества и развития, ОЭСР

PART IV

Consolidation

1. Give the English definitions of the following terms (texts A-D):

public service; public servant; public services; public utilities; public goods and services;

administration; public management; bureaucracy; policy; credit policy; domestic policy; fiscal policy; incomes policy; subsidy.

2. Translate the text into English in writing using the relevant terms.

Государственное управление

Материал из Википедии — свободной энциклопедии

Перейти к: навигация, поиск

Государственное управление (public administration) — деятельность органов государственной власти и их должностных лиц по практическому воплощению выработанного на основе соответствующих процедур политического курса (public policy). Деятельность по государственному управлению традиционно противопоставляется с одной стороны политической деятельности, а с другой стороны — деятельности по формулированию политического курса.

В теории государственного управления существует три основных подхода к формулированию основных принципов государственного управления:

правовой подход; политический подход; менеджеристский (управленческий) подход.

Согласно правовому подходу, ключевыми ценностями государственного управления являются ценности верховенства права, защиты прав граждан. Государственный служащий подчинён не столько своему руководству, сколько требованиям правового государства и Конституции.

Согласно политическому подходу, основной задачей государственного управления является максимально лучшее воплощение воли народа. Государственные служащие должны быть политически ответственны (подотчётны), восприимчивы к текущим интересам граждан. Для того, чтобы воплотить это, иногда предлагается реализация концепции «представительной бюрократии», в рамках которой органы исполнительной власти должны быть социальной моделью общества в миниатюре. Предполагается, что в этой ситуации облегчится учёт ведомствами существующих в обществе интересов, будут снижены возможности для дискриминации отдельных групп.

Согласно менеджеристскому подходу, основными ценностями государственного управления должны быть эффективность, экономичность и результативность, формулируемые, по возможности, в квантифицируемой (измеримой) форме. Основная проблема, которая ставится в этом подходе, состоит в том, как обеспечить нужный результат с наименьшими затратами или, как вариант, как получить максимальный результат при заданных затратах. Характерным признаком данного подхода является использование понятия «государственный менеджмент» (public management) в качестве синонима понятию «государственное управления».

Общей для всех трёх подходов является проблема соответствия действий государственных служащих сформулированным заранее принципам:

следования принципу верховенства права (правовой подход);

следования воле народа (политический подход);

следования цели получения нужного социально-экономического результат (менеджеристский подход).

Оценка того, насколько эта проблема решается, называется качеством государственного управления. Каждый подход использует в качестве основных разные показатели качества государственного управления.

3. Comment on the quotations of influential business figures and authors around the world.

v “Bad administration, to be sure, can destroy good policy; but good administration can never save bad policy.”

§ Adlai E. Stevenson (1900 - 1965)

§ US statesman and author

v “The administration (of a nation) must be entrusted to experts. We must not look upon these experts as grand presidents and ministers, but simply as our chauffeurs, as guards at the gate, as cooks, physicians, carpenters, or tailors.”

§ Sun Yat-Sen (1866 - 1925)

§ Chinese revolutionary leader

v “The problem of our age is the administration of wealth, so that the ties of brotherhood may still bind together the rich and poor in harmonious relationship.”

Andrew Carnegie (1835 – 1919)

US industrialist and philanthropist

4. Choose one of the above quotations to elaborate on in the form of an essay (1-1,5 pages).

PART V

Further Practice

1. Find in the box below synonyms for the following words:

1.precarious 2.ascertain [xsq`teIn] 3.expediency (expedient) 4.intractable 5.unpalatable 6.knee-jerk 7.antipathy [xn`tIpqTI] 8.guidance

Democracy in difficulty

But I think that the democratic process itself is getting more difficult and this is making the task of succeeding and surviving in a political environment, for both politicians, and those who serve and support them, more difficult. Why is it getting more difficult?

Communication

The first reason is today’s immediate global communication and the power of the media. With the internet, television and mobile phones, the public, or parts of them, often learn of things before the politicians, and even sometimes before the media know. And often, irrationally, they want answers and action before there has been time to ascertain the facts, analyze them, discuss the way forward with those who need to be consulted and decide, announce and put into place a course of action.

‘News management’ is an essential part of government at national and local level. As Sir Christopher Foster⁴ said in his PMPA⁵ report Why Are We So Badly Governed?, the problem comes when, as seems to be the case these days, the job of government becomes essentially the job of news management. That is when, as many political commentators have said over the past few weeks, we find newspapers determining the direction of government policy rather than ministers. If the home secretary has to send someone to America to find out how ‘Megan’s Law’⁶ is working, it begs the question whether those dealing with ‘paedophilia policy’ in the Home Office have been doing their basic research job properly over the past few years. Actually they probably have and one of the downsides of serving in a political environment is remaining silent when a politician, for political expediency reasons, may implicitly (or even explicitly) give the impression their staff haven’t been doing their jobs properly.

Expectations and information

Linked to this are the ever-rising expectations of a poorly informed population. Now, one can argue that we are better educated and better informed than at any time in history. I would, however, argue against that view — we certainly have access to more information, and we should be better educated to evaluate it, but the truth is that the vast bulk of the public, while demanding immediate action to solve intractable political problems, have neither the time nor the inclination to learn why they are intractable. And the politicians, and we their servants, collude with the public on this. We avoid speaking unpalatable truths. For example the economy simply cannot sustain the best health care that is scientifically available for everyone free at the point of delivery; we cannot protect every child all the time in all circumstances from evil; while waste incinerators bring with them certain risks, those risks are measurable and more containable than those we have lived with for years from landfill sites.

Government is about making difficult choices — these choices cannot be properly made and understood until the full facts as we know them are presented and heard — ‘you pays your money and you takes your choice’ — but you have to pay your money first. Sir Michael Lyons⁷ is absolutely right in his latest report to say that until the public knows what public services cost and what they pay for them, they can’t be expected to assess whether they’re getting value for money. For example, people seem to be happy to pay Tesco £5 per week to deliver their groceries, but balk at the 82 pence a week (at 2004/05 figures) that it costs to take away the resultant rubbish. But, while greater transparency on cost would be helpful, government is not about flogging something to customers as John Humphreys⁸ said in his recent book Lost for Words. It’s about engaging citizens in debate and from debate comes understanding.

The balance of power

The main component of good government is achieving the appropriate balance of power. When power is unbalanced you get, at best, a lack of accountability and, at worst, corruption. I think that the balance of power we see at the moment at all levels (internationally, nationally and locally) is wrong.

One international super power is unhealthy and dangerous. The same is true when there is an imbalance between the three cornerstones of our democracy — the executive, legislature and judiciary. The first two have been out of balance for some time — I despair of Parliament ever using effectively the existing power it has to hold government to account and, in particular, to ensure that real debate on intractable issues takes place rather than knee-jerk reaction to immediate events and newspaper reports. Hasty law-making is usually bad law-making. More worryingly, we are now seeing the balancing, independent power of the judiciary being challenged. These imbalances of power, and the slide of government into the ‘economical with truth’ task of news management, that are the main causes of the growing lack of trust, increasing antipathy and apathy of the public, particularly perhaps the young, towards politicians and the political process.

Solutions

So what do we do about it? All this means that the political environment in which we operate is getting more difficult and nowhere is that more true than in local government. The sorts of problems I’ve discussed are common to government at all levels yet, in local government, we have some added complexities compared to our colleagues in the civil service and the NHS⁹:

We are accountable to the whole council¹⁰ not just the ruling administration.

We are more immediately and more extensively accountable to the public, the press, inspectorates, government departments as well as our elected representatives — we serve a multitude of masters.

Our politicians, at least at senior levels, directly appoint and dismiss us.

The weight of government bureaucracy — targets, guidance, legislation — since it comes, it seems, independently from a range of government departments on to us, is greater than elsewhere, the NHS only has the Department of Health to contend with.

With the growth of the local partnership, neighbourhood, community agenda, we are increasingly accountable for outcomes over which we exercise very little direct control.

The growth in local government budgets has been comparatively less than in other parts of the public sector. Indeed, given the bizarre way the government’s disaggregation formula works, some of us have found that this ‘growth’ has not actually reached us.

Yet, despite this, I believe it is local government that is delivering — I could argue better than other parts of the government machine. For example, in terms of efficiency, local government delivered savings of £760M in 2004/05; £1.1 billion in 2005/06 and is on course to deliver a further £1.3 billion in 2006/ 07. We’re well on our way to meeting the £3 billion Gershon¹¹ target a year ahead of schedule — and the Treasury has confirmed that councils are making more efficiency savings than elsewhere in the public sector.

Furthermore, in terms of the public service improvement agenda, real improvements are taking place in public services under local control (for example exam results, crime rates, road accident casualties, and the percentage of household waste recycled).

Why are we doing so well, particularly in comparison to others, and what does this tell us about how to succeed and survive in a political environment?

Last year’s SOLACE¹² Commission’s work on ‘Managing in a Political Environment’ provides a number of the answers. One of the most important reasons why local government is now out-performing other parts of the public sector is because, increasingly, on the whole we get the relationship between the political leader and the managerial leader right — or, at least, in appropriate balance. The best authorities are those where there is both strong political and strong managerial leadership working well together.

Source: http://www.cipfa.org.uk

Notes

1. hung parliament – "подвешенный" парламент (в котором ни одна из партий не получила подавляющего большинства)

2. crack – зд . решить трудную задачу

3. Harold Macmillan (1894–1986) – British Conservative politician, prime minister 1957–63; foreign secretary 1955 and chancellor of the Exchequer 1955–57. In 1963 he attempted to negotiate British entry into the European Economic Community (EEC), but was blocked by the French president Charles de Gaulle. Much of his career as prime minister was spent defending the UK's retention of a nuclear weapon, and he was responsible for the purchase of US Polaris missiles in 1962.

4. Christopher Foster has been an academic at the University of Oxford and MIT, a Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, a consultant at Coopers & Lybrand, and then PWC over many years and a temporary civil servant. He advised ministers on Poll tax and rail privatization, as well as many more successful endeavours. He has sat on several private and public sector boards. He has written books on transport, local government finance, privatization and public ownership, and the public sector.

5. PMPA – Public Management and Policy Association

6. Megan's Law is an informal name for laws in the United States requiring law enforcement authorities to make information available to the public regarding registered sex offenders. Individual states decide what information will be made available and how it be disseminated. Commonly included information includes the offender's name, picture, address, incarceration date, and nature of crime. The information is often displayed on free public websites, but can be published in newspapers, distributed in pamphlets, or through various other means.

7. Sir Michael Lyons – a former Labour Party councillor and council chief executive, now the Chairman of the BBC Trust; Sir Michael Lyons is Chairman of the English Cities Fund (since 2002) and recently completed the "Lyons Inquiry" into the functions and funding of local government (published March 2007).

8. John Humphreys is a Welsh radio and television presenter, journalist, author, and the winner of many national broadcasting awards; Humphrys has written several books, including Lost for Words, in which he criticizes what he sees as the widespread misuse of the English language, plus 'Devil's Advocate', 'Beyond Words' and 'The Great Food Gamble'.

9. NHS = National Health Service

10. town council – городской, муниципальный совет (выборный совещательный и исполнительный орган в городе); county council – совет графства, округа

11. Sir Peter Gershon is a former Chief Executive of the UK Treasury’s Office of Government Commerce; In August 2003 the Prime Minister and Chancellor asked Sir Peter Gershon to review the efficiency of central, regional and local government. He was asked to identify efficiency savings which would release resources to the front line of public services. His report – The Government's Efficiency Programme Gershon Review – was published in July 2004 to coincide with the Chancellor’s 2004 Spending Review.

12. SOLACE = Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers

3. Translate into Russian the sentences from the article the words in bold (1.-10.) from Ex.1 appear in.

4. Complete the sentences with the appropriate words in bold (1.-10.) from Ex.1.

We need to ……………………… whether the project is feasible.
The government found it …………………………….. to relax censorship a little.
We were trying to avoid the ……………………………….. truth that the whole plan had failed.
Our financial situation is still ………………………………...
He had a strong personal ………………………………….. towards Nixon.
We are anxiously awaiting the ………………………………. of the negotiations.
Some astronomers ………………………… that the universe may be younger than previously believed.
She found it hard to hide her ……………………… towards her senior colleagues.
Problems that can be solved, but not fast enough for the solution to be usable are called ……………………………….. .
Sometimes the truth is …………………………………. .
They have a mutual ………………………………….. to each other.
I’ve got enough problems to …………………………. with, without your interference!
Not burying the dead soldiers was unfortunately a matter of ………………………..
Critics of the school system ……………………………. that not enough emphasis is placed on creativity.
Volunteers are restoring the building under expert ………………………………. .
Everyone was aware of the President’s ………………………… towards trade unions.
Experts were unable to ………………………………. the cause of the accident.
Persons with ………………………………. pain feel hopeless, helpless, depressed, and often commit suicide if their pain is not relieved.
The aim is to evaluate possible ……………………………s.
They are contending for the championship.
The government will not condemn its allies for torturing prisoners. It is a question of ……………………………… .
A …………………………… reaction is immediate and not carefully considered.
There is a natural ……………………………… towards people in authority.

5. Explain the meaning of and/or paraphrase the underlined words and word combinations in the article.

6. Translate the passage from the article into Russian in writing.

7. Comment on the sentences from the article:

It is a foolish politician, and a foolish officer, who ever believes they’ve ‘cracked it’, especially in a democracy.
Government has always been difficult.
… we find newspapers determining the direction of government policy rather than ministers.
… until the public knows what public services cost and what they pay for them, they can’t be expected to assess whether they’re getting value for money.
The best authorities are those where there is both strong political and strong managerial leadership working well together.

8. Make a précis (a short summary) of the article.