Safety and health in mines: the rise of bureaucracy in the coal mining industry and its results as evidenced by the public enquiry into an accident at Houghton Main Colliery

This thesis is concerned with certain aspects of the Public Inquiry into the accident at Houghton Main Colliery in June 1975. It examines whether prior to the accident there existed at the Colliery a situation in which too much reliance was being placed upon state regulation and too Iittle upon personal responsibility. I study the phenomenon of state regulation. This is done (a) by analysis of selected writings on state regulation/intervention/interference/bureaucracy (the words are used synonymously) over the last two hundred years, specifically those of Marx on the 1866 Committee on Mines, and (b) by studying Chadwick and Tremenheere, leading and contrasting "bureaucrats" of the mid-nineteenth century. The bureaucratisation of the mining industry over the period 1835-1954 is described, and it is demonstrated that the industry obtained and now possesses those characteristics outlined by Max Weber in his model of bureaucracy. I analyse criticisms of the model and find them to be relevant, in that they facilitate understanding both of the circumstances of the accident and of the Inquiry . Further understanding of the circumstances and causes of the accident was gained by attendance at the lnquiry and by interviewing many of those involved in the Inquiry. I analyse many aspects of the Inquiry - its objectives. structure, procedure and conflicting interests - and find that, although the Inquiry had many of the symbols of bureaucracy, it suffered not from " too much" outside interference. but rather from the coal mining industry's shared belief in its ability to solve its own problems. I found nothing to suggest that, prior to the accident, colliery personnel relied. or were encouraged to rely, "too much" upon state regulation.

The Legitimation of authority in the European Union

The founding Treaties of the European Union (EU) provide the Commission with bureaucratic structures and functions, and the authority to take a political leadership role in the integration process. However, the legitimacy of the Commission's authority to act either as a bureaucracy or as a political institution is periodically contested, as is the authority and leadership of its President. Max Weber's theory of the legitimation of authority suggests itself in this context as a working tool for assessing the nature of institutional and individual authority and leadership in the Commission and the broader EU context. Weber's typology of authority offers both an understanding of the changes in the Commission's fortunes within the 'would-be polity' of the European institutions, and an appraisal of claims to authority at the individual level by the Commission President. When applied to two contrasting moments in the Commission's life during the presidency of Jacques Delors (the generating of the White Papers of 1985 and 1993), Weber's typology provides an explanation for the evolution of the legitimation of these forms of authority in terms of, first, the Union's imperfect provisions for legitimate claims to leadership authority on 'charismatic' grounds and, second, the absence in the Union of resources for leadership legitimacy based on 'traditional'-type authority, such as explicit, popular, or party political European-wide support for the project of European union. These are resources which, if present in the EU, would legitimise calls to reform the EU's institutions in the direction of more integration and a more federal polity. The case studies offer an appraisal of the functioning and malfunctioning of authority within the Union, as well as a critical assessment of the applicability of the Weberian model to the legitimation of authority in the EU.