1 Pahl, R. E. and Winkler, J. T., ‘The Coming Corporatism’, New Society, 10 10 1974 , pp. 72–76 Google Scholar; Winkler, J. T., ‘Law, Society and Economy: The Industry Act 1975 in Context’, British journal of Law and Society, Vol. 2 1975, pp. 103–28;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Winkler, J. T., ‘The Corporate Economy: Theory and Administration’, in Scase, R. (ed.), Industrial Society: Class, Cleavage and Control, London, Allen & Unwin, 1977, pp. 43–58;Google Scholar Schmitter, Phillipe C., ‘Still the Century of Corporatism?’, Review of Politics, Vol. 36, 1974, pp. 85–131;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and, Cawson, Alan, ‘Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of the State’, Government and Opposition, Vol. 13 Number 2, Spring 1978, pp. 178–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Cawson, Ibid., pp. 178–9.

3 Schmitter, op. cit., pp. 93–4.

4 Pahl and Winkler, op. cit., pp. 72–3.

5 Ibid..

6 Cawson, op. cit., pp. 187–94.

7 Pahl and Winkler, op. cit., pp. 74–5: and, Cawson, op. cit., pp. 190–1.

8 Ibid., pp. 196–8.

9 This is the basic argument presented by Winkler in ‘Law, Society and Economy’, op. cit., see pp. 103–13 especially.

10 Grant, Wyn and Marsh, David, ‘Tripartism: Reality or Myth?’, Government and Opposition, Vol. 12, No. 2, Spring 1977, pp. 194–211 Google Scholar discuss these trends.

11 Winkler, ‘Law, Society and Economy’, op. cit., pp. 119–28 discusses these bodies in detail, as does Hood, C. C. in ‘The Rise and Rise of the British Quango’, New Society, 16 08 1973 , pp. 386–388.Google Scholar

12 Cawson, op. cit., pp. 194–6, Has doubts about the role and acquiescence of the working class under corporatism and this view is mirrored by Pahl and Winkler, op. cit., p. 76. Winkler, according to Cawson, op. cit., p. 180, Tends to see the trend as inevitable despite working‐class opposition.

13 Ibid., p. 72.

14 Guttsman, R., ‘State Intervention and the economic crisis: The Labour government’s economic policy 1974–75’, Kapitalistate No. 4–5, Summer 1976, pp. 225–70.Google Scholar

15 Op. cit., p. 72.

16 One example of the failure to control multinationals has been seen in Ford’s Bridgend factory location decision, Aris, Stephen, ‘The battle for Henry’s car’, Sunday Times, 9 10 1977 , p. 17.Google Scholar

17 Op. cit., pp. 103–5.

18 A useful distinction between the confused concepts of dirigsme, interventionism, planning and socialism is offered by Leruez, Jacques, Economic Planning and Politics in Britain, London, Martin Robertson, 1975, p. 2.Google Scholar Leruez also offers a useful introduction to the development of corporatist and planning ideas in Britain in the 1930s (pp. 1–13). The concept of ‘étatiste corporatism’, implying state control of the national economy with private ownership, rather than short‐term micro‐ and macro‐inter‐ventionism (dirigisme) to iron out bottlenecks is taken from Harris, Nigel, Competition and the Corporate Society, London, Methuen, 1972.Google Scholar

19 Grant and Marsh, op. cit., pp. 194–211.

20 The TUC has recently experienced disagreements between senior trade union representatives. David Basnett and Tom Jackson have favoured income policies against opposition from men like Moss Evans and Joe Gormley. For details see: ‘5%. Now You see it, Now You Don’t’Sunday Times, 8 October 1978, p. 63. The CBI has seen vociferous opposition to incomes policies and state intervention from its rank and file members: Elliott, John ‘A Paper Tiger Seeking Teeth’, Financial Times, 6 11 1978 , p. 25.Google Scholar

21 Ford was eventully forced to grant a 17% pay claim in November 1978, after attempting to limit pay rises to 5%. For details of the background see: ‘Fighting to Save Phase Four’, Sunday Times, 1 10 1978 , pp. 17–18.Google Scholar

22 James Mackie & Sons, a Belfast engineering firm, granted a 22% pay award above the 10% desired by government in the summer of 1977. The government attempted to punish the company by withdrawing export credits, but with little effect. See ‘Pay Sanctions fail to bite’, The Guardian, 24 September 1977, p. 9.

23 For details of these policies see McKay, D. H. and Cox, A. W., The Politics of Urban Change, London, Croom Helm, 1979, pp. 218–25.Google Scholar

24 Pahl and Winkler, op. cit., p. 76 and Cawson, op. cit., pp. 196–8.

25 Ibid., pp. 194–6.

26 This has been the rationalization offered for corporatism by various proponents from Macmillan, Harold, The Middle Way, London, Macmh, 1966 Google Scholar, to Holland, Stuart, The Socialist Challenge, London, Quartet, 1975, and Strategy for Socialism, London, Spokesman Books, 1975.Google Scholar

27 For details see, ‘Scaled‐down version’, The Guardian, 3 November 1975, p. 14.

28 Winkler, , ‘Law, Society and Economy’, op. cit., pp. 119–28.Google Scholar

29 Some of the problems are outlined in Bacon, Robert and Eltis, Walter, Britain’s Economic Problem: Too Few Producers, London, Macmillan, 1976.Google Scholar

30 Cawson, op. cit., p. 178 and Winkler, op. cit., pp. 105–6.

31 This view of the real motive behind the formation of the NEDO and NEDC is offered by Leruez, op. cit., pp. 81–126 and Panitch, Leo, Social Democracy and Industrial Militancy: The Labour Party, the Trade Unions and Incomes Policy: 1945–1974, London, Cambridge University Press, 1976, pp. 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar It is a view disputed by Shanks, Michael, Planning and Politics: The British Experience: 1960–1976, London, Allen & Unwin, 1977, pp. 17–30.Google Scholar

32 Leruez, op. cit., pp. 81–95.

33 Leruez, op. cit., pp. 124–97.

34 Shanks, Planning and Politics, op. cit., pp. 87–104.

35 Young, Stephen with Lowe, A. V., Intervention in the Mixed Economy, London, Croom Helm, 1975, pp. 39–120;Google Scholar and Beesley, M. E. and White, G. M., ‘The Industrial Reorganization Corporation: A study in choice of public management’, Public Administration, Vol. 51, Spring 1973, pp. 61–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36 Young and Lowe, Ibid., pp. 25–6.

37 The process of dilution is reported in ‘Scaled‐down version’, The Guardian, 3 November 1975, p. 14.

38 Mingione, Enzo, ‘Pahl and Lojkine on the State: a comment’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, 03 1977, pp. 29–36;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Harloe, Michael, ‘Introduction’, Captive Cities, Harloe, Michael (ed.), London, J. Wiley, 1977, pp. 26–9.Google Scholar

39 Beetham, David, Max Weber and the Theory of Modem Politics, London, Allen & Unwin, 1970, pp. 252–60.Google Scholar

40 For a discussion of the nature and scope of the state see: Poulantzas, Nicos, ‘The Problem of the Capitalist State’, New Left Review, 58, November‐December 1969, pp. 67–78;Google Scholar Miliband, Ralph, ‘The Capitalist State: Reply to Nicos Poulantzas’, New Left Review, 59, January–February 1970, pp. 53–60;Google Scholar and Laclan, Ernesto, ‘The specificity of the Political: The Poulantzas‐Miliband Debate’Economy and Society, 1975, pp. 87–110.Google Scholar

41 For details of these struggles see: ‘Budget clash hots up as Benn writes his own’, Sunday Times, 12 February 1978, p. 1; ‘Budget clash at Chequers’, Sunday Times, 19 February 1978, p. 53; and ‘Healey ready to hand back 1B IMF loan’, The Guardian, 30 October 1978, p. 14.

42 Westergaard, John, ‘Class, inequality and corporatism’ in Hunt, A. (ed.), Class and Class Structure, London, Lawrence Wishart, 1977, p. 174.Google Scholar

43 Ibid., pp. 175–9.

44 Panitch, Leo, ‘The development of corporatism in liberal democracies’, Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 10, No. 1, 04 1977, pp. 61–90;CrossRefGoogle Scholar ‘Corporatism in Canada’, Studies in Political Econamy, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1979, pp. 43–92; and ‘Recent theorizations of corporatism: reflections on a growth industry’, re‐draft of a paper presented to the CSE state apparatus and state expenditure group, 10/11 February 1979; redraft June 1979.

45 Panitch, ‘Recent theorizations…’, ibid., p. 8.

46 Ibid., p. 6.

47 Jessop, Bob, ‘Recent theories of the capitalist state’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 1, 1977, pp. 353–73;Google Scholar ‘Capitalism and democracy: the best political shell?’ in Littlejohn, Gary et al (eds.), Power and the State London, Croom Helm, 1978, pp. 10–51;Google Scholar ‘Corporatism, Parliamentarism and social democracy’, in Schmitter, P. and Lehmbruch, G. (eds.), Trends Towards Corporatism and Intermediation, London, Sage, 1979, pp. 185–212;Google Scholar and ‘The transformation of the state in postwar Britain’, paper presented to the inaugural meeting of the SSRC committee on ‘The State in Western Europe’, Paris, 29–30 November 1978.

48 Jessop, ‘Capitalism and democracy…’, ibid..

49 ‘Corporatism, Parliamentarism…’, op. cit., pp. 200–01.

50 ‘The transformation of the state…’, op. cit..

51 Ibid., pp. 60.