Abstract
This article examines an unusual phenomenon — a basic British public service which has remained highly stable and ‘unreformed’ for the past thirty years. Civil registration (‘births, marriages and deaths’) touches all of us, but in 2006 was still operating very much along the lines laid down in the mid-19th century. It has thus been an exception to the more general turmoil in the British public sector, and one that demands further explanation. Analysis shows that this stability is related to a number of features, including the non-controversial nature of the service, its relatively low cost, lack of Parliamentary time for fresh legislation and a series of what can best be described as accidents. Paradoxically, perhaps, the lack of political interest has left civil registration as a perennially low priority for reform. Comparisons with developments in civil registration over the same period in Belgium and Finland help to eliminate some possible explanations and strengthen others. Both these countries have managed to create what are, technologically at least, more advanced systems. These comparative experiences indicate that it is not just the nature of the service itself, but also the details of the institutional context that facilitates or delays change. They also suggest the need considerably to refine academic approaches that use general classifications of countries as simply ‘fast’, ‘medium’ or ‘slow’ reformers.