3. Prime Minister and Executive

Question 1

What is the executive?

Answer 1

The decision-making branch of government, centred on the prime minister and Cabinet and its committees

Question 2

What is cabinet?

Answer 2

The group of senior ministers, chaired by the prime minister, which is the main collective decision-making body in the government

Question 3

What is a minister?

Answer 3

A member of either the House of Commons or the House of Lords who serves in government, usually exercising specific responsibilities in a department

Question 4

What is the ‘government department’?

Answer 4

A part of the executive, usually with specific responsibility over an area such as education, health or defence

Question 5

What is the structure of the executive?

Answer 5

• Prime Minister: Head of the executive who chairs the Cabinet and manages its agenda, Appoints all members of the Cabinet and junior ministers, and decides who sits on Cabinet committees, Organises the structure of government - can create, abolish or merge departments
• The Cabinet: Consists of 20 to 23 senior ministers, including those who hold the title Secretary of State, Several senior figures are not members of the Cabinet but attend its meetings, Administrative support and help in delivering policy is provided by the Cabinet Office, headed by the Cabinet secretary, the UK’s most senior civil servant, many decisions taken in Cabinet committees, which deal with particular areas of policy such as economic affairs and national security
• Government departments: Each one responsible for an area of policy, e.g. the Ministry of Defence, Department for Transport, Each headed by a Cabinet minister, supported by several junior ministers responsible for specific aspects of the work of the department
• Executive agencies: Semi-independent bodies that carry out some of the functions of government departments, for example, the DVLA (Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency) is overseen by the Department for Transport

Question 6

What is the hierarchy of a typical government department (example)?

Answer 6

• Justice Greening MP - Secretary of State for Education (also Minister for Women and Equalities) - leads the department
  ⬇️
• Junior ministers - Nick Gibb MP - Minister of State for School Standards, Jo Johnson MP - Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation, Robert Halfon MP - Minister of State for Apprenticeship and Skills, Edward Timpson MP - Minister of State for Vulnerable Children and Families
  ⬇️
• Caroline Dinenage MP - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Women, Equalities and Early Years, Lord Nash - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for the School System

Question 7

What are the main roles of the executive?

Answer 7

• Proposing legislation
• Proposing the budget
• Making policy decisions

Question 8

How is ‘proposing legislation’ a main role of executive?

Answer 8

• The executive introduces proposals for new laws or amendments to existing laws. It announces a new programme at the start of each parliament session in the Queen’s speech, which is read out to both House of Parliament by the monarch, but is written by the government. E.g. the May 2015 Queen’s speech reflected the priorities of the Conservative government that had just been elected under the leadership of David Cameron
• The executive doesn’t confine itself to measures proposed in a party manifesto at a general election. It also has the power to introduce legislation to contend with emergencies, such as the threat of terrorism, and to amend existing statutes in order to bring the UK into line with international law. This is known as a ‘doctor’s mandate’
• Ministers will often consult with interested parties, such as pressure groups and professional bodies, before introducing legislation. For example, in 2015 the Cameron government undertook a consultation exercise with employers on its proposal to introduce an apprenticeship levy, a requirement for large companies to contribute towards the cost of training new workers. This was introduced in 2017

Question 9

How is ‘proposing the budget’ a main role of executive?

Answer 9

• The government needs to raise revenue in order to fund public services and to meet its spending priorities. The budget is created by the chancellor of the exchequer in consultation with the prime minister, and is revealed to the rest of the Cabinet shortly before it is delivered. The budget is an annual statement of the government’s plans for changes to taxation and public spending
• In recent years, the budget has been presented to the House of Commons for approval in March, but this moved to November from 2017. If a new government comes to power after a general election, it introduces a budget of its own, even if the previous government has already presented one. For example, in June 2010 George Osborne, chancellor in the new coalition government, delivered an ‘emergency budget’ only 90 days after the previous Labour government’s budget

Question 10

How is ‘making policy decisions’ a main role of executive?

Answer 10

• The executive has to decide how to give effect to its aims for the future direction of the country
• Examples of important policy decisions taken by the 2010-15 coalition government include: streamlining the welfare system by introducing a single benefit for working-age people, known as Universal Credit, allowing parents and voluntary groups to set up ‘free schools’, independent of local councils, introducing more competition into the National Health Service (at least in England) and putting GPs in control of the commissioning of care for patients

Question 11

What are the main powers of the executive?

Answer 11

• Royal prerogative powers
• Initiation of legislation
• Secondary legislation

Question 12

How is royal prerogative powers a main power of the executive?

Answer 12

• They are powers that historically belonged to the Crown, but which over time have been transferred to the prime minister or other ministers. Many of these are not properly defined. They are not set out in statutes but are based largely on the practice of previous governments
• Both Gordon Brown’s Labour government (2007-10) and the coalition government (2010-15) were open to the idea of placing some prerogative powers under parliamentary authority
• Two powers have been abolished or reformed (2011 Fixed Term Parliaments Act and the idea that military action requires prior parliamentary approval)

Question 13

What are the main prerogative powers?

Answer 13

• Award honours (a handful are given personally by the monarch)
• Declare war and authorise the use of the armed forces
• Sign treaties
• Take action to maintain order in case of emergency
• Grant and withdraw passports
• Grant legal pardons
• Appoint ministers and other senior officers holders

Question 14

What is royal prerogative?

Answer 14

A set of powers and privileges belonging to the monarch but normally exercised by the prime minister or Cabinet, such as the granting of honours or of legal pardons

Question 15

How is ‘Initiation of legislation’ a main power of the executive?

Answer 15

• The executive controls most of the parliamentary time available for legislation. The exceptions to this are 20 opposition days, 13 days set aside for private member’s bills, and a variable amount of time allocated for debates chosen by the Backbench Business Committee. Legislation can be introduced in either the Commons or the Lords but it is usual for the most important bills to go to the Commons first
• If the government has a majority in the Commons, it can usually rely on the party whipping system and the power of patronage to push through its programme. Rebellions can occur, although it is rare for a government to be defeated on the second or third reading of a bill
• The executive has several tools to strengthen its hold over the passage of legislation. The guillotine (‘allocation of time’ motion) which dates back to 1887, is a procedure that allows the government to curtail debate on the individual clauses of a bill. It applies only in the Commons. An attempt by the Cameron government to use the guillotine in a Lords debate on the redrawing of constituency boundaries was abandoned after opposition in 2011. The programming motion, introduced by the Blair government, enables the executive to set out in advance the time limits for each stage in the passage of a bill. In addition, since 2002 it has been possible for the government to carry over uncompleted legislation from one session to another, without having to start again from the beginning of the legislative process in the new session

Question 16

How is ‘secondary (or delegated) legislation’ a main power of the executive?

Answer 16

• It’s law made without passing a new act of parliament. Instead the government uses powers created by an earlier act. The most common form of secondary legislation is statutory instruments. These enable a government to modify or repeal existing legislation without introducing a new bill. Clearly it would be pointlessly time-consuming to enact new legislation every time the government needs to amend or update the detail of existing regulations
• However, critics have raised concerns about the growing use of statutory instruments to make more controversial changes. E.g. in 2016 statutory instruments were used to abolish maintenance grants for university students and to allow fracking in national parks
• Opposition politicians and press commentators argued that the government was sneaking these changes through the back door. Statutory instruments are sometimes called ‘Henry VIII clauses’ because they enable the government to evade parliamentary scrutiny. Although parliament can debate and, in theory, reject a statutory instrument, about two-thirds of them simply become law on a specified date in the future, without being put before MPs

Question 17

What is secondary legislation?

Answer 17

Powers given to the executive by parliament to make changes to the law, within certain specific rules

Question 18

What is the idea/ concept around individual ministerial responsibility?

Answer 18

• The idea that ministers are responsible for running of their department and its policies. They also have responsibility for the standard of their own personal conduct.
• The official definition of individual responsibility is set out in a document known as the Ministerial Code, issued at the start of a new government by the prime minister. The latest version states that ‘Ministers have a duty to parliament to account, and be held to account, for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments and agencies’. They are obliged to give accurate information to parliament, and if they knowingly mislead parliament, they are expected to resign.
• Ministers are responsible for deciding how to conduct themselves but, importantly, they ‘only remain in office for so long as they retain the confidence of the prime minister’. The latter is described as ‘the ultimate judge of the standards of behaviour expected of a minister and the appropriate consequences of a breach of those standards’

Question 19

What has been accepted within government relating to individual ministerial responsibility that give ministers more lenience?

Answer 19

• Now widely accepted that the business of government is so large and complex that a minister can’t be expected to know about everything that goes on within their department, and so would not be expected to resign over a minor mistake.
• It is hard to be certain how the concept of individual responsibility will work out in a given situation

Question 20

What is individual responsibility?

Answer 20

The principle by which ministers are responsible for their personal conduct and for their departments

Question 21

Under individual ministerial responsibility when relating to resignation what does the fate of an individual minister depend on?

Answer 21

• How serious the issue is perceived to be
• The level of criticism in parliament and the media when a mistake is made
• The attitude of the prime minister of the day

Question 22

What is a factor that has eroded the concept of individual responsibility?

Answer 22

• The way in which since the late 1980s many government functions have been delegated to executive agencies under a director general, rather than a minister
• This has led to some doubt about who is accountable, with the minister assuming responsibility for making overall policy, while the head of the agency exercises ‘operational responsibility’
• E.g. In 1995, the Home Secretary Michael Howard controversially sacked Derek Lewis, the director general of the Prisons Service, following criticism of the escape of prisoners from Parkhurst Jail

Question 23

Under ministerial responsibility who else can be held accountable other than ministers and an example?

Answer 23

• Due to the blurring of line of accountability has meant that in some cases, civil servants have been held responsible for departmental errors rather than ministers
• In recent decades the idea that civil servants being anonymous never taking the credit or blame for the actions of governments has been eroded
• E.g. in 2012 Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin admitted that mistakes had been made in the awarding of a franchise to companies to run trainers on the West Coast Main Line. Three civil servants were suspended as a result, one of whom launched a successful legal action, leading to the officials’ reinstatement. Constitutional expert Professor Vernon Bogdanor made the case for the traditional relationship between ministers and civil servants. He argued that ministers were responsible for ensuring that officials had the necessary skills to carry out the work of the department, and that ministers should be in a position to assure parliament that all was in order

Question 24

What’s the most common cause for ministers resignations under ministerial responsibility?

Answer 24

• Personal misconduct rather than failures of policy or administration
• In some cases the impression that a minister’s behaviour has fallen short of expected standards of integrity has been enough to bring about a departure from office
• E.g. Peter Mandelson was obliged to resign twice from Tony Blair’s first government because of a perception of wrongdoing. In 1998 he left his post as trade and industry secretary after it was revealed that he was buying a house with the help of a loan supplied by a Cabinet colleague, whose business affairs were being investigated by Mandelson’s department. Brought back as Northern Ireland secretary, he was forced out in 2001 by accusations that he had used his influence to fast track a passport application by an Indian businessman. Mandelson was exonerated by an independent enquiry but by then he had already gone. In both cases he had to resign simply to clear the air, regardless of the facts

Question 25

What is the concept/ idea surrounding collective ministerial responsibility?

Answer 25

• It is the convention that ministers must support all decisions of the government in public. It means that they are responsible as a group to parliament and thus to the people, and that discussions in Cabinet should be confidential. If defeated in a vote of no confidence in the Commons, the government as a whole resigns. The practice is designed to maintain the unity of the government in face of attacks by the opposition
• While ministers are free to argue their case with each other in private, once a decision has been reached it is binding on them all. If a minister cannot accept such a decision, in theory they should resign. One of the best-known examples of such a resignation in recent times was in 2003 of Robin Cook, leader of the House of Commons, in opposition to the Blair government”s decision to commit Britain now to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support’
• Clear cut resignations on grounds of disagreement with government policy are quite rare in practice. To take such a step may well end a political career. It is more common for ministers who are unhappy with government policy to grumble from within, or ‘leak’ their dissatisfaction to the media, rather than take a public stand. Not all resignations are purely concerned with matters of principle but may be complicated by personally clashes and ambitions

Question 26

What is collective responsibility?

Answer 26

Principle by which ministers must support Cabinet decisions or leave the executive

Question 27

What have been some exceptions made to collective responsibility?

Answer 27

• There’s been occasions where it has been modified for political reasons
• E.g. The need to find a compromise between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in order in order to form a coalition government in 2010. There were four issues on which, it was agreed at the outset, Liberal Democrat ministers would not be bound by collective responsibility
• These were areas where they were most likely to come into conflict with the views of their Conservative partners. Liberal Democrats were allowed to abstain in votes on the construction of new nuclear power stations, tax allowances for married couples and higher education funding, and to propose an alternative to the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent. There were other instances, during the lifetime of the government, where members of the two parties took opposing standpoints. E.g. 2011 referendum on the Westminster electoral system, in which David Cameron defended first past the post, while Nick Clegg campaigned for the alternative vote

Question 28

When were the times where it was necessary to suspend collective responsibility?

Answer 28

• Two occasions, during both referendum campaigns on the troubled issue of Britain’s membership of the European Union. In 1975 Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson recognised that, in order to prevent resignations by anti-Europeans, he had to allow ministers to campaign on both sides of the argument. The understanding was that, having been allowed to argue their cases in public, they would then unite behind the people’s verdict. Labour ministers were allowed to share platforms at public meetings with members of other parties who shared their views. The only condition was that, as the official government position was to remain in Europe, opponents could not speak against membership from the despatch box in the House of Commons. Industry Minister Eric Heffer was sacked for breaking this rule.
• In the spring of 2016 David Cameron, faced with an equally divided Conservative Party, reluctantly agreed to suspend collective responsibility on the European issue. The ensuing referendum was more bitterly fought than the 1975 campaign, with five anti-EU Cabinet ministers joined by the charismatic former London Mayor, Boris Johnson, in attacking the terms on which Cameron proposed to continue British membership. Unlike Wilson four decades earlier, Cameron took personal charge of the ‘Remain’ campaign and, when his side lost the vote in June 2016, had no real alternative but to resign as prime minister

Question 29

What are the factors governing the prime minister’s selection of ministers?

Answer 29

• The importance of including individuals with ability and experience - Prime ministers do not have the luxury of an unlimited pool of talent in the parliamentary party. There will always be a large number of MPs who are “natural backbenchers’ - who do not have the aptitude for high office, or whose views place them too far outside the mainstream to make them acceptable as ministers. General ability as an administrator and communicator is more important that detailed knowledge of a particular policy area, as each department is staffed by civil servants who supply an incoming minister with the necessary specialist support. There are some exceptions: both, Gordon Browm and George Osborne served substantial apprenticeships as shadow chancellor belore taking over at the Treasury. In any party there will be senior figures. who will need to be induded. A prime minister who has come to office by winning a leadership contest will usually include their defeated rivals in recognition of their standing within the party. E.g. John Major retained Douglas Hurd at the Foreign Office in 1990 and offered the other leadership candidate, Michael Heseltine, a choice of senior posts
• Establishing a prime ministers authority - An incoming prime minister, even one who replaces a premier of the same party midway through a parliament, will want to stamp their own authority on the government. Not all prime ministers make radical changes to the team they inherit. For example. John Major did not remove key people associeted with Margaret Thatcher when he took over in 1990, but walted until he had won his own general election 18 months later. By contrast Theresa May was determined to distance herself from David Cameron’s administration when she became prime minister in 2016. The former chancellor, George Osborne, was the most prominent figure from the previous government to be sacked. A further nine senior ministers lost their jobs over the next 24 hours.
• Rewarding loyalty and including key allies (but also conciliating potential rivals) - Blair began his second term in 2001 by appointing several committed supporters of the New Labour project to key positions, including Davld Glunkett as home secretary and Alan Milburn as health Secretary. They were also personally loyal to him. It is politically wise to occupy potentially troublesome MPs with senior posts, even if this means handling tensions within the team. Blair’s appointment of Brown as chancellor, and his acceptance that he could not move him to another post against his wishes, is a good example of this limitation on a prime minister’s freedom of action
• Maintaining a balance between different factions within the governing party - In order to maintain party unity it is often necessary to find posts for MPs with different ideological views from those of the prime minister. Taking over after the 2016 EU referendum, Theresa May had to include prominent supporters of ‘Brexit’, such as Boris Johnson (Foreign Secretary and Liam Fox (International Trade Secretary) as well as individuals who - like her - had supported the ‘Remain’ side, such as Philip Hammond (Chancellor) and Amber Rudd (Home Secretary)
• Meeting expectations of diversity - When he formed his first Cabinet in 1990, John Major faced adverse comment for including no women - something that he later corrected. Since then it has become the norm for prime ministers to appoint a number of female ministers, and not only to middle- and lower ranking Cabinet posts. Margaret Beckett, made foreign secretary by Tony Blair in 2006, was the first woman to hold one of the three most senior posts under the prime minister. There has also been greater representation of ethnic-minority groups in recent years. Sajid Javid, a leading MP of Asian background, has served in both the Cameron and May governments.

Question 30

What is relationship between Cabinet and prime minister?

Answer 30

• The Cabinet is formally responsible for policy-making. However, in recent times it has been more usual for decisions to be taken elsewhere, and it is often claimed that the executive is now dominated by the prime minister to an undue degree.
• Some commentators have argued that the result has been the rise of presidential government - the idea that leadership is becoming much more personalised, and that prime ministers are distant from, and much less dependent on, traditional institutions such as the Cabinet

Question 31

What is presidential government?

Answer 31

An executive dominated by one individual. This may be a president but can also describe a strong, dominant prime minister

Question 32

What are the factors that affect the relationship between Cabinet and the Prime Minister and how they’ve changed?

Answer 32

• The management skills of the prime minister - A determined and astute prime minister will exploit the elastic nature of the office to assert control over the Cabinet. The right to appoint and dismiss ministers can be used to reshape the top team, to remove poor performers and bring in new bleed, and to marginalise opponents. This power should, however be deployed with core. For example after establishing herself as prime minister in the early 1980s, Margaret Thatcher promoted supporters such as Nigel Lawson and Norman Tebbit in order to bulld a Cabinet in her own image. However by the end of the decade her dominance of the Cabinet and alienation of senior colleagues was starting to undermine her position. The resignation of Deputy Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Howe triggered a leadership challenge in November 1990. When Thatcher needed the support of her Cabinet she found that goodwill had evaporated at the top, leading directly to her resignation.
• The prime minister’s ability to set the agenda - Decisions are rarely if ever, taken in Cabinet by holding a vote. The views of the most senior figures will usually command more weight. Most minsters will, in any case, be too concerned with their individual departmental responsibilities to challenge the consensus view on a matter of which they may have limited knowledge. The prime minister’s traditional right to chair the meeting and to sum up at the end is an important source of influence. They can also keep certain items off the agenda of Cabinet meetings. Harold Wilson, for example, refused to allow discussion of devaluation of the pound in the period 1964-67, even though several ministers wanted to open up the argument.
• The use of Cabinet committees and informal groups to take decisions - Since 1945 prime ministers have made increasing use of Cabinet committees to take decisions, which are later ratified by the full Cabinet. By choosing the membership of these committees and taking the chair of the most important ones - or placing this responsibility in the hands of a reliable ally - the prime minister can exercise a significant degree of control. On entering Number 10, Theresa May decided to chair three important committees, including the one dealing with the crucial issue of Britain’s exit from the EU. Many decisions are taken in smaler, informal groups, or in bilateral meetings involving the prime minister and one colleague. For example, the market sensitive decision to place management of interest rates in the hands of the Bank of England was taken by Tony Blair and Gordon Grown within days of the 1997 election victory, and the rest of the Cabinet were informed later. Under the coalition, the presence of two parties in government meant that it was necessary to have more discussion of policy in Cabinet. Yet, ever then, an informal body known as ‘the Quad’ - David Cameron, Nick Clegg and their two most senior colleagues, Chancellor George Osborne and Chief Treasury Secretary Danny Alexander met regularly to resolve differences between the coalition partners
• The development of the Prime Minister’s Office and the Cabinet Office - Although there is no official ‘Prime Minister’s Department’, the prime minister has access to more resources than other ministers, with a Prime Minister’s Office in Number 10 Downing Street staffed by a combination of civil servants and special advisers drawn from the govering party. Harold Wilson created the Policy Unit in 1974 to enable the prime minister to gain an overview and to drive policy across departments. Under Blair there was close co-operation between the Prime Minister’s office and the Cabinet Office to support the co-ordination and implementation of policy. Cameron initially adopted a more ‘hands off’ approach to Government depertments, allowing individual ministers more autonomy than under Blair and Brown but, after some policy embarrassments, he strengthened the centre once again with the creation of a Policy and Implementation Unit in 2011. The Press Office, which handles the governments presentation in the media, also works closely with the prime minister. Under Blair it gained enhanced Importance as part of a newly created Communitations and Strategy Directorate in Downing Street. Although media management has been less obtrusive under later prime maisters, the capacity to get the government’s message across remains an important function of the Downing Street machine
• The impact of the wider political and economic situation - It is important to note that the degree to which the prime minister can dominate the Cabinet is affected by a variety, of external pressures. A prime minister with a large parliamentary majority and a united party, such as Blair in the wake of the 1997 Labour landslide, will find it much easier to gain ascendancy than
  one like Major, whose control over the Commons was precarious from 1992 onwards. Popularity with the public, a booming economy and an ability to master events rather than appear as their victim all strengthen the hand of the prime minister in dealing with the Cabinet. Margaret Thatcher’s standing improved enormously after victory in the 1982 Falklands War. Gordon Brown was harmed by his decision not to hold a general election on becomine prime minister, after allowing expectations of a contest to build, and his authority was further undermined by the financial crash of 2007-08. The weakness of his position was underlined in 2009 when it became known that Alistair Darling, the chancellor, had refused to take another post so that Brown could replace him with his favoured candidate, Ed Balls. Brown could not afford the additional damage that the high-profile resignation of his chancellor would cause at a time of economic crisis.

Question 33

What are the main arguments that support the idea that the cabinet remains an important body relating to the balance of power between the PM and Cabinet?

Answer 33

• The cabinet approves government decisions, so confers legitimacy on them in the eyes of parliamentary and the public. A minister who cannot accept the agree line, such as Robin Cook over the Iraq War, should resign from the Cabinet
• On important issues the PM recognises the need for Cabinet support. After completing his renegotiation of the UK’s membership of the EU in 2016, Cameron presented the deal to a full Cabinet meeting. The Cabinet is also important in times of national crisis such as a military conflict, although (as in the Falklands War in 1982) day-to-day decisions may be taken by a smaller ‘War Cabinet’ of key ministers and armed service leaders, whose decisions are then reported to the full Cabinet
• The Cabinet is where the programme of government business in parliament is discussed. In theory it is also where disagreements between government departments are resolved
• The UK does not have a ‘presidential’ system in reality, even if it has some characteristics of one. The fall of Thatcher demonstrates the continuing importance of keeping the support of the Cabinet

Question 34

What are the main arguments that support the idea that the PM is the dominant force in government relating to the balance of power between the PM and Cabinet?

Answer 34

• Decisions are commonly taken by Cabinet committees, hand-picked by the PM, or in small groups and bilateral meetings, such as the 1997 Blair/Brown decision to hand control of interest rates to the Bank of England. Cabinet ‘rubber stamps’ decision taken elsewhere
• The PM controls the agenda and length of Cabinet meetings (less than an hour under some PMs). It only meets once a week, and then only while parliament is sitting, unless an emergency occurs. Most ministers do not feel qualified, and are too immersed in their own departments, to be able to offer an informed view on the detail of matters outside their remit. Most are reluctant to challenge the PM, who has the power to dismiss or demote ministers
• In practice disputes are usually resolved outside the Cabinet, in committees or by the intervention of the PM (for example, Cameron’s settlement of the 2011 clash between Energy Secretary Chris Huhne and Business Secretary Vince Cable on the level of carbon emission targets to which the UK should sign up)
• The media focus heavily on the PM (for example, in the televised leadership debates in the 2010 and 2015 elections). Modern PMs tend to project themselves as national leaders p, separate from the institutions of government, and with a personal mandate from the people for action

Question 35

In what ways are the PMs powers exercised?

Answer 35

• Appointment, reshuffling and dismissal of government ministers
• Management of Cabinet, including chairing it’s meetings, controlling the agenda and summing up its conclusions
• Leadership of the largest party in the House of Commons
• Responsibility for the overall shape and set of government, including the number and functions of government departments
• Direction of government policy, with a special responsibility for economic and foreign policy and for decisions to use military force
• Providing national leadership and representing the UK in international affairs

Question 36

What are the factors that might enhance or restrict the prime minister’s powers?

Answer 36

• The popularity of the prime minister and size of the governing party’s parliamentary majority
• The impact of external pressures such as the state of the economy and unforeseen crises in foreign affairs
• The personality and leadership style of the prime minister
• The extent to which the governing party and Cabinet are united

Question 37

What is a brief summary of John Major before being appointed as PM and how his run of PM is seen by people ?

Answer 37

• John Major (PM 1990 - 1997) was little-known to the general public when he unexpectedly took over from a very dominant and long-serving prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, in November 1990. He had served less than four years in the Cabinet before becoming prime minister, more than half of this time as chief secretary to the Treasury, a position that does not normally give its occupant a high profile outside Westminster. Major was chosen partly because he was expected to provide calm and stability, and a less divisive approach to government than Thatcher had adopted
• Major surprised many observers by winning (with a small majority of 21 seats) a further general election victory for the Conservatives in April 1992. However, his second term as prime minister was fraught with problems and in May 1997 his Labour rival, Tony Blair, won a crushing 179-seat majority. For this reason Major is commonly seen as a weak and unsuccessful prime minister

Question 38

What were 3 times where John Major has shown control over events and policy as PM?

Answer 38

• Major won credit in his first 18 months in office by acting decisively to replace the unpopular poll tax with the less-controversial council tax, which remains the system of local government finance today. This helped to distance his government from the confrontational and ‘uncaring’ reputation of his predecessor. The speed with which the new system was put in place helped Major to win re-election in 1992
• Major was regarded as having handled the first Gulf War in early 1991 effectively. The war was fought to expel Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, from Kuwait, which he had invaded shortly before Major took office. Major worked effectively with Britain’s US allies, led by President George H.W Bush, and struck the right note both in dealing with British forces and in uniting British public opinion. This enhanced Major’s standing as a national leader
• Progress towards a peace deal in Northern Ireland, which had been riven for over two decades by sectarian conflict between unionists and republicans, was one of the more positive aspects of Major’s premiership. He managed to establish trust with both sides through the December 1993 Downing Street Declaration, which ruled out the imposition of a united Ireland against the wishes of the unionists, while showing respect for the aspirations of the nationalist community. There was a return to violence in Major’s final year as prime minister, but he had laid the foundations on which Tony Blair was able to build

Question 39

What were 3 times where John Major has NOT shown control over events and policy as PM?

Answer 39

• Major’s economic policy record is more mixed. As chancellor of the Exchequer in October 1990, he had persuaded a reluctant Thatcher to join the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM). On ‘Black Wednesday’ in September 1992, market pressure forced the pound out of the ERM, even though the government frantically raised interest rates in a bid to uphold its place within the specified exchange-rate limits imposed by the system. This event fatally damaged Major’s reputation for economic competence and, although the economy recovered, with both inflation and unemployment falling by the mid-1990s, he gained no credit with the general public. Major was also unfortunate that Labour, steered by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, was distancing itself from the damaging ‘tax and spend’ image of the party in previous years, and so appeared more responsible as a potential manager of the economy
• Major’s control of his party and Cabinet was seriously undermined during his second term. Conflict over the European Union was one of the root causes of his difficulties. His party contained a hard core of ‘Eurosceptic’ backbenchers, who saw the EU as a threat to the UK’s national sovereignty, and were particularly hostile to the Maastricht Treaty. Certainly, Major secured opt-outs for Britain from joining the planned single European currency, and from the ‘Social Chapter’ that increased European intervention in social policy. However, many Conservative MPs were not pacified by these concessions. Backbench revolts meant that Major secured the Treaty’s passage through the Commons by only one vote in July 1993. He presided over an increasingly divided Cabinet. A sympathetic view of Major would argue that he successfully balanced pro- and anti-European ministers by taking a moderate line, whereas a leader with more pronounced views, such as Michael Heseltine (who served as environment secretary, trade and industry secretary and finally deputy prime minister), might have provoked a worse split. More negatively, however, the spectacle of disunity created an impression of weak leadership, which led to open ridicule of Major in parliament and the media. His attempt to restore his authority in June 1995, by resigning the party leadership
• The fact that Major and his team had to devote so much time to day-to-day parliamentary management, with a disappearing majority and a divided party, hampered his chances of leaving a distinct legacy in terms of policy. He seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time on crisis management, trying to paper over the cracks on Europe and also coping with a semes of financial and sexual scandals involving junior ministers and backbenchers, dubbed ‘sleaze’ by the press. One of Major’s aims was to make public services more accountable to their users an approach that was sometimes called ‘Thatcherism with a human face’ - but little came of this. The ‘Citizen’s Charter’ was an attempt to lay down expectations for the performance of schools, hospitals and other bodies, but it failed to capture the public imagination. Rail privatisation was consistent with Thatcher’s policy of reducing the size of the state sector and bringing in competition. However, the way that it was accomplished led to widespread criticism, in particular of the decision to separate responsibility for track from the running of train services. Overall Major appeared to be reacting to events rather than driving forward a clear and popular agenda.

Question 40

What are the key dates of John Major’s premiership 1990-97?

Answer 40

• 1990 - Major succeeds Thatcher as PM
• 1991 - Gulf War: Saddam Hussein driven out of Kuwait
• 1992 - General election victory (21 seat majority) ‘Black Wednesday’: Britain leaves the European Rate Mechanism
• 1993 - Downing Street Declaration on NI
• 1995 - Major faces Conservative Party leadership challenge
• 1997 - General election defeat; Major resigns

Question 41

What was the difference between John Major and Tony Blair’s governing style and what is an overview of Tony Blairs run in government?

Answer 41

• Tony Blair was a strong contrast with John Major in terms of governing style. While still leader of the opposition he taunted Major mercilessly over his divided following. ‘There is one very big difference,’ he told the Commons in April 1995, ‘I lead my party, he follows his. ‘Blair combined a ruthless insistence on unity and discipline with an acute awareness of how to project a winning image through the media.
• The remodelling of Labour as an attractive, modernising centre party, together with the evident weaknesses of Major’s government, gave Blair a decisive victory in May 1997. He went on to win again, almost as overwhelmingly, in June 2001. Even after the loss of 100 seats in his general election in May 2005, Blair still had a majority of 66. This meant that he did not suffer a defeat in the Commons until the autumn of 2005, on a proposal to extend the time that the police could hold terror suspects before charging them. Blair was, for a time, extraordinarily popular, with a mandate to make significant policy changes. The fact that he inherited a recovering economy, and left office before the financial crisis of 2007-8, meant that he always operated within a favourable economic context. After he took Britain into the controversial Iraq War 2003, however he began to lose credibility, and by the end of his time in Downing Street there was a serious question mark over the nature of Blair’s achievement

Question 42

What were 3 times where Tony Blair has shown control over events and policy as PM?

Answer 42

• The Blair government had a number of important policy achievements to its credit. In his first term Blair put through a range of constitutional reforms that modernised the political system without jeopardising the authority of central government. Most hereditary peers were removed from the House of Lords, ending the Conservative Party’s control of the upper house, but the more radical step of replacing an appointed chamber with an elected one was not taken. Devolution was granted to Scotland and Wales, with new representative bodies elected using proportional systems, but Blair avoided holding a referendum on electoral reform for Westminster, preferring to retain a model that delivered Labour victories
• Blair’s most outstanding personal success was his revival of the peace process in Northern Ireland, culminating in the creation of power-sharing institutions following the April 1998 Good Friday agreement. He showed his skills as a negotiator in finding just enough common ground to bring unionists, moderate nationalists and hard-line republicans together. Although trust between the rival communities broke down more than once, leading to the re-imposition of direct rule from London for five years, Blair succeeded in restoring devolved government shortly before he left office. This was a due to a combination of firmness and a talent for building constructive personal relationships with key individuals on both sides of the sectarian divide
• Public service reform was an area close to Blair’s heart. He had some success in introducing the ideas and methods of the business sector to improve the delivery of education and health. Self-governing city academies, which took their funding directly from central government rather than from local authorities, began to replace failing state schools, providing a model that was developed by later governments. Foundation hospitals, whose managers were given additional powers and funding, were another break with the traditional Labour idea that the state should guarantee a uniform model of welfare provision. The principle that university students should contribute to the cost of their education was established, and the level of tuition fees was hiked in 2004 in the teeth of bitter Labour backbench opposition. At the same time some distinctively ‘Labour’ measures were introduced, including a national minimum wage, free nursery places and Sure Start centres to help families in the most deprived areas. Their overall effect was to halt the widening of the gap between rich and poor, if not to reverse it. Blair’s insistence on a socially liberal agenda, which was at least as important to him as the battle against poverty, was reflected in the introduction of civil partnerships for same sex couples.

Question 43

What were the things where Tony Blair has shown control over events and policy as PM?

Answer 43

• There was one important individual whose presence placed a significant limitation on Blair’s power within the government. This was the chancellor throughout the Blair years, Gordon Brown. The two men had struck an informal deal in May 1994, after the sudden death of Labour leader John Smith. Brown had given Blair a clear run at the party leadership in return for the post of chancellor when they came to power. In addition, Brown believed that Blair would eventually step down, allowing him to become prime minister. When this did not happen before the end of Labour’s second term, relations between the two deteriorated, The need to keep a powerful colleague on side influenced Blair’s decision to announce that his third general election victory would be his last. The ensuing public speculation about when exactly the handover would occur reduced Blair’s authority. The difficult relationship between prime minister and chancellor also meant that Blair had to concede a significant amount of control over a number of policy areas. E.g., Brown effectively denied Blair his wish to take Britain into the European single currency. He devised five economic tests that would first have. to be passed, and insisted that the Treasury would determine whether they had been met. These tensions at the top meant that, although Blair had the advantage of a broadly united party - most Labour MPs were grateful to him for delivering three successive election victories - there were destabilising conflicts between ‘Blairite and ‘Brownite factions
• There were areas where change was frustrated. Blair himself blamed the opposition of vested Interests within the public sector, talking of ‘scars on his back’, for his unsuccessful attempts lo reform the way in which services were delivered. Perhaps more important was the fact that in his second term issues of national security and foreign policy diverted his attention. Blair’s premiership reminds us that even the most driven of leaders is subject to the problem of overload. After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 in New York and Washington, Blair showed the ability of a powerful prime minister to shape overseas policy. He committed the UK to support US President George W. Bush’s ‘war on terror’, which saw British troops engaged in lengthy campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. Unlike the first Gulf War under Major, nether operation concluded with a clear-cut result. The Iraq War in particular inflicted lasting damage on Blairs reputation as, although the tyrant Saddam Hussein was rapidly removed, order inside the country disintegrated and allied troops faced prolonged guerrilla resistance. Critics focused on Blair’s willingness to take the country to war on the basis of unsubstantialed claims that Iraq’s government possessed weapons of mass destruction. He was also blamed for his failure to formulate a plan with the US for the reconstruction of Iraq after the toppling of Saddam. He gave the impression of having surrendered his judgement in order to keep in line with the US administration. Blair’s premiership illustrates both the immense potential of the office - to transform governmental structures and to embark on major departures in policy and its limitations. The erosion of trust that followed the Iraq War severely limited Blair’s chances of leaving a positive legacy in other areas.

Question 44

What is the view on Tony Blair’s legacy?

Answer 44

• Blair shaped Downing Street to place Number 10 at the centre of power, pushing forward policy initiatives and managing the government’s public image in a pro-active way.
• He pursued a modernising agenda in both constitutional reform and the delivery of public services, achieving notable success in bringing about a peace settlement in Northern Ireland.
• His authority was enhanced by three consecutive general election victories but undermined by the persistent tensions with his ambitious chancellor, Gordon Brown.
• Blair’s decision to take the UK to war in Trag on questionable grounds, reduced levels of trust in him. His pursuit of the war on terror alienated cor support and diverted him from a focus on domestic reform.

Question 45

What were the key dates in Tony Blair’s premiership?

Answer 45

• 1997 - Blair wins general election (179 seat majority) Devolution for Scotland and Wales
• 1998 - Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland
• 2001 - Second general election victory (167 seat majority) 9/11 events signal start of ‘war on terror’
• 2003 - Iraq War
• 2005 - Third general election victory (66 seat majority)
• 2007 - Blair resigns as prime minister

Question 46

Who are the current main people apart of top cabinet?

Answer 46

• PM - Rishi Sunak
• Deputy PM - Oliver Dowden
• Chancellor of the Exchequer - Jeremy Hunt
• Foreign Secretary - Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
• Home Secretary - James Cleverly