Dr William Kitson

(he/him)

Publication

• Date
• Type

Research

My broad research interests cover the topics of devolved politics, Stateless Nationalist & Regionalist Parties (SNRPs) and elite theories of political analysis. This work has manifested in the development of a theoretically and methodologically developed version of Jim Bulpitt’s Statecraft approach coined ‘Subnational Statecraft’ which has been produced as a new framework by which to understand political leadership, political competition and the effects of the UK’s multi-levelled structure upon public and elite electoral behaviours at the devolved level. The theory describes three key ‘functions’ that devolved elites must excel in order to succeed in their Statecraft, which act as the central guides for the direction of my research: 

Governing Competence 

This is the ability of the party leadership to select policies which they will have little trouble in implementing. To be perceived as competent in government, political actors at the centre will often seek to either reject or externalise responsibility for policies that have negative outcomes (Bulpitt, 1986). A central contribution of my research is the operationalisation of how actors at the devolved level demonstrate competence; the ‘structural insulating framework’. This concept relates to how devolved parties in office take advantage of the multileveled structure of UK politics, in a fashion akin to how Westminster administrations have used higher European institutions such as the Exchange Rate Mechanism, as a structurally constraining framework to ‘insulate’ itself from criticism and defer blame onto a higher level of government when policy outcomes are unfavourable (Buller, 2000). Prominent examples of this strategy being used exists in policy areas concerning macro-economics, the NHS and COVID-19. I therefore analyse this exploitation of a ‘structural insulating framework’ and its role in determining the perceived levels of governing competency of the SNP, Plaid and Welsh Labour. 

Party Management

This refers to the ability of the leadership to present the party to the electorate as unified, even if such solidarity does not exist. Intra-party relations do not of course have to be harmonious as realistically this would be practically impossible to maintain, but as long as relations were ‘quiescent’, and the electorate and media were unable to detect divisions, then the leadership would have been successful in their Party Management (Buller & James, 2011:542). My research looks at not only the divides that exist within the parliamentary wings of devolved parties but also those rifts than manifest around the internal structures of the parties (Conferences, Candidate Selections, National Executive Councils) between the faces of the party in the parliamentary party, the party’s central office and the grassroots. Consequently, building on the work of the late Craig McAngus (2014; 2015; 2016) a key aspect of my research is analysing how political leaderships use organisational reform as a tool to aid party quiescence by centralising their own power and further professionalising the party by removing grassroot/activist influence over candidate selection and party policy. 

Political Argument Hegemony

Bulpitt described a party achieving ‘Political Argument Hegemony’ (PAH) if the party’s leadership had gained ‘predominance in the elite debate regarding political problems, policies and general stance of government’ (Bulpitt, 1986). The victor in this ‘battle of ideas’ was largely determined by the political context party elites operated in, as this would influence whether the party’s policies were perceived as plausible solutions to the most pressing political problems (Buller & James, 2011). Building upon the work of Massetti (2010; 2011), my research examines how devolved political parties have jostled for position on the three salient ideological spectrums of: Left-Right; Centre-Periphery; European Integration. The SNP have been the benefactors of a favourable structural context where there exists a clear majority of left-leaning, pro-European Scottish voters. This has made it an easier task to ideologically position themselves to capture the Downsian mean Scottish voter but also has allowed them to connect their left-right and European arguments to their constitutional raison d'etre. In the context of Wales, it is harder for any party to win political argument hegemony in all 3 arguments as there is a greater heterogeneity in left-right and European attitudes which themselves have fluctuated over the devolution period. The Political Argument Hegemony function allows an exploration of the interplay of demand-side factors of the electorate’s prevailing ideological preferences and the strategies elites use to try to utilise or shape such ideological consensuses to their advantage for more important goals relating to governing (external supply-side).

Teaching

Below are a list of modules I am currently teaching on:  

• Sex Drugs & Public Policy (3rd Year)
• Governing Modern Britain (2nd Year)
• Doing Political Research (2nd Year)
• Introduction to Government (1st Year)

Biography

Education and Qualifications

• PhD in Politics, 'Undertsanding The Differing Political Performances of the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru: A Statecraft Approach'. Supervised by Dr Jim Buller, Dr Dan Keith & Dr Adam Fusco, University of York, 2023.
• MA in Contemporary History & International Politics, University of York, 2018.
• BA in History & Politics, University of York, 2017.

Professional memberships

Wales Governance Centre

PSA's Territorial Politics Group

Academic positions

Lecturer - Cardiff University - Present

Lecturer - Leeds Beckett University - 2022-2023

GTA - University of York - 2019-2022