PM and the executive

Question 1

Define Executive

Answer 1

the branch of government responsible for implementing (‘executing’) legislation. The executive includes the government and the civil service

Question 2

Define Cabinet

Answer 2

a formal committee of leading government members, including heads of government departments

Question 3

Define Ministers

Answer 3

Ministers oversee the work of, and run, the various government departments. They work with civil servants, who are not in the cabinet (although very senior and experienced civil servants may be asked to attend cabinet meetings).

Question 4

Define Government department

Answer 4

A government department is a sector of the UK government that deals with a particular area of interest. Government departments are either ministerial or non-ministerial departments.

Question 5

Define Royal Prerogative

Answer 5

The ‘royal prerogative’ refers to powers originally held by British monarchy on an absolutist, arbitrary basis, before the days of parliamentary democracy.

Such powers included the right to declare war, command armies and appoint generals, and to make peace and preside over treaties and conferences with other monarchs and their representatives.

Question 6

Define Secondary legislation

Answer 6

Secondary legislation is law created by ministers (or other bodies) under powers given to them by an Act of Parliament.

It is used to fill in the details of Acts (primary legislation). These details provide practical measures that enable the law to be enforced and operate in daily life.

Secondary legislation can be used to set the date for when provisions of an Act will come into effect as law, or to amend existing laws.

Question 7

Define Individual responsibility

Answer 7

Individual Ministerial Responsibility is a constitutional convention that makes Government Ministers responsible for not only their own actions, but also for those of their department. It is not to be confused with collective cabinet responsibility, which states that cabinet members must approve publicly of its collective decisions or resign.

Question 8

Define Collective responsibility

Answer 8

Collective Cabinet Responsibility is the convention that Ministers agree on policy, and defend that policy in public thereafter. If a minister dissents openly, he must resign, or will be sacked. Thus, for example, two Lib Dem junior ministers resigned in 2010 rather than support the government policy increasing university tuition fees but the five Cabinet ministers supported it and kept their offices

Question 9

Define Presidential government

Answer 9

A Presidential government is a system of government in which the head of government and head of state is one person, and typically the executive branch of government is separate from the legislative branch. In a Presidential executive, the President is not accountable to the legislature, and likewise cannot directly instruct it to do anything.

Question 10

Outline the structure of PM

Answer 10

The prime minister is the single most important figure in the UK political system. He or she is the UK’s chief executive. But what this means in practice is the subject of considerable debate.
* 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

Question 11

Outline the Structure of the Cabinet

Answer 11

The cabinet in Britain has the following characteristics:

• It is composed of between 20 and 25 senior politicians, all appointed directly by the prime minister.
• Members of the cabinet must be members of either the House of Commons (i.e. they are MPs) or the House of Lords (i.e. peers).
• Normally one party wins an overall majority of the seats in the Commons and so forms a government alone. In this case all members of the cabinet will be from that governing party.
• Where, as in 2010, there was a coalition, the members of cabinet can be from either or all of the parties in a coalition. In 2010, therefore, there were both Conservative and Liberal Democrat members of the cabinet.
• Cabinet meets normally once a week, more often if there is a crisis or emergency
• The prime minister normally chairs the meetings. Together with the cabinet secretary, the most senior civil servant, the prime minister decides what will be discussed in the cabinet and notes in the minutes (the detailed accounts of meetings) what was decided.
• A number of cabinet committees are created to deal in detail with specific area of government policy. These have a small number of members (perhaps between four and six) and will be chaired by the prime minister or another senior cabinet member. Typical examples are defence, foreign affairs, environment, education health.

The minutes of Cabinet meeting remain secret for at least 30 years.

·Cabinet decisions are, in effect, official government policy.

· The prime minister has the power to dismiss ministers from the cabinet, to appoint new cabinet ministers, to create new cabinet posts or abolish old ones, and may move ministers around into different posts (known as a ‘reshuffle’).

Question 12

Outline the structure of Government departments

Answer 12

· 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

Question 13

Outline the main roles of the executive

Answer 13

The executive decides how the country is run. The executive is, technically, responsible for executing or implementing government policy. As such, it is the ‘sharp end’ of government, the bit that impacts on the public. However, its role is much wider and more significant. It is the chief source of political leadership, and controls, most importantly, the policy process. In short, the executive ‘governs’. It represents the UK abroad and manages the defence of the country. It is responsible for public services including the National Health Service, welfare benefits and the criminal justice system. Since devolution, some of these functions have been transferred from the core executive in London to devolved bodies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The UK is unusual in that many of the organs of the executive are described as being under the control of the monarch, for example ‘Her Majesty’s ministers’ or ‘Her Majesty’s Treasury’. However, this is an illusion. In practice the executive branch is under the control of the prime minister (using his or her ‘prerogative powers’) and the cabinet. The civil service — the unelected permanent officials who serve the government — is expected to act in a neutral fashion, standing outside the party battle, and is forbidden from serving the political interests of the government, but it, too, is technically within the control of the prime minister, who is officially ‘head of the civil service.

Question 14

Outline proposing legislation as a role of the UK executive

Answer 14

The executive introduces proposals for new laws, or amendments to existing laws. It announces a new programme at the start of each parliamentary session in the Queen’s speech, which is read out to both Houses of Parliament by the monarch, but is written by the government. For example, the May 2015 Queen’s speech reflected the priorities of the Conservative government that had just been elected under the leadership of David Cameron, including proposals for:

• an in/out referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union
• measures to ensure that decisions affecting England, or England and Wales, would be taken only with the consent of MPs from those parts of the UK
• legislation to protect essential public services against strikes.

The executive does not, of course, 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,

Secondary legislation, or delegated legislation, is created without a new Parliament act, using powers from an earlier act. Statutory instruments are the most common form of secondary legislation, allowing the government to modify or repeal existing legislation without introducing a new bill. Critics argue that these instruments can be used for controversial changes, such as abolishing maintenance grants for university students and allowing fracking in national parks. Although Parliament can debate and reject statutory instruments, about two-thirds become law without being put before MPs.

Question 15

Outline proposing the budget as a main role of the Uk Executive

Answer 15

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, presented to the House of Commons for its approval in March. 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 16

Outline Making policy decisions as a function of the Uk executive

Answer 16

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 17

Outline prerogative powers as a main power of the Executive

Answer 17

These are powers exercised by ministers that do not require parliamentary approval. They are collectively known as the royal prerogative and date from the time when the monarch had direct involvement in government. The monarch still has some personal prerogative powers, including the appointment of the prime minister and giving royal assent to legislation, but in exercising these, the monarch seeks to avoid controversy and acts under the direction of ministers.

Most prerogative powers are exercised by ministers acting on behalf of the Crown. These include:

■ making and ratifying treaties

■ international diplomacy, including recognition and relations with other states

■ deployment of the armed forces overseas

■ the prime minister’s patronage powers and ability to recommend the dissolution of parliament

■ the organisation of the civil service

■ the granting of pardons

Some prerogative powers have been clarified and limited in recent years. It has become a constitutional convention that parliament votes on the deployment of the armed forces overseas. Parliament voted against airstrikes on Syria in 2013 and then gave its approval in 2015. Prior to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the prime minister could ask the monarch to dissolve parliament and call an early general election. Now, an early election can only be called if two-thirds of MPs approve in a vote in the House of Commons. In April 2017, MPs approved a motion for an early general election by 522 votes to 13. The prime minister’s powers to award honours and make public appointments have also been restricted.

Question 18

Outline the concept of individual ministerial responsibility

Answer 18

Individual responsibility is the convention that defines the relationship between ministers and their departments. It has two main features:

• It implies that ministers are responsible to Parliament for the policies and actions of their departments. This is reflected in an obligation to inform and explain (via Question Time or select committees), but it may extend to resignation in the event of blunders or policy failures. In theory, individual responsibility implies that ministers take responsibility for the mistakes of their civil servants, but in practice they now only resign as a result of blunders that they have made personally (The conduct expected of ministers is set out in more detail in Questions on Procedure for Ministers (1992), The Ministerial Code (1999) and the Cabinet Manual (2011).)
• It implies that civil servants are responsible to their ministers. This suggests that civil servants should be loyal and supportive of whatever minister or government is in office, although if they have ethical concerns about a minister’s conduct they should refer these to the cabinet secretary.

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 latters 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

Outline The erosion of ministerial responsibility

Answer 19

One factor that has eroded the concept of individual responsibility is 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’. For example, 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.

The blurring of lines of accountability has meant that in some cases, civil servants rather than ministers have been held responsible for departmental errors. Traditionally civil servants were anonymous, taking neither credit nor blame for the actions of governments, but this has been eroded in recent decades. For example, in 2012 Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin admitted that mistakes had been made in the awarding of a franchise to companies to run trains 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.

The first principle — that ministers must offer themselves to be accountable to Parliament — certainly operates successfully and is a key principle of UK government. However, there is no specific way in which Parliament can remove an individual minister. Parliament and its select committees can criticise a minister and call for their resignation, but whether or not they go is entirely in the hands of the prime minister. There was a time, long ago, when ministers did resign as a matter of principle when a serious mistake was made, but those days have largely passed. The last time a minister resigned as a result of errors made was when the education secretary, Estelle Morris, left her post voluntarily. In her resignation letter to Prime Minister Blair she said, ‘with some of the recent situations I have been involved in, I have not felt I have been as effective as I should be, or as effective as you need me to be’. This was a rare event indeed. Before and since, many ministers have experienced widespread criticism and have apologised for errors made, but have not resigned or been dismissed.

This erosion of the principle does not, however, extend to that which concerns personal conduct. Here, when ministers have fallen short of public standards, they have been quick to resign or been required to resign by the prime minister.

Question 20

Outline the Case study of Suella Braverman `

Answer 20

In September2022 Braverman had to resign when serving under Liz Truss for breaking the the ministerial code on individual responsibility, she was then reinstated a few days later after the new PM Rishi Sunak made a deal to forgive her error in return for supporting his leadership.

In November 2023 she was sacked by Sunak for breaking individual and collective responsibility.

The rapid forgiveness of her transgression in 2022 and the tolerance she was shown before her second sacking are evidence of the erosion of IMR and the limits of CMR.

Question 21

Outline the concept of ministerial responsibility

Answer 21

Collective ministerial responsibility 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 he or she should resign.

A prime minister’s authority is greatly enhanced by the fact that they will not experience open dissent from within the government. It is also important that the government presents a united front to the outside world, including Parliament and the media. Specifically, the government knows it can rely upon the votes of all ministers in any close division in the Commons. This is known as the payroll vote.

Question 22

Outline the resignation of Robin Cook as a case study

Answer 22

Robin Cook resigned as Leader of the House of Commons the day before parliament was due to vote on the Blair government’s decision to join the USA in the invasion of Iraq without a second United Nations resolution. He had expressed concerns about military action in cabinet and resigned when he could no longer accept collective responsibility for the decision. Cook, a former foreign secretary, delivered a powerful resignation speech in the House of Commons. Secretary of state for international development Clare Short had publicly threatened to resign from the cabinet over policy on Iraq, but supported the government’s resolution in the Commons. She resigned 2months later.

Question 23

Outline Exceptions to collective responsibility

Answer 23

Prime ministers have sometimes temporarily suspended collective responsibility to prevent ministerial resignations. In 1975, Harold Wilson allowed ministers to campaign for either a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ vote during the European Economic Community (EEC) referendum, allowing a divided government to function more united on other issues. Since 1945, it has been necessary to suspend collective responsibility on two occasions, during both referendum campaigns on Britain’s membership of the European Union. In the 2016 EU referendum, Cameron allowed ministers to campaign to leave the EU, but denied access to civil service resources and required to support the government’s position on all other issues.

In 2019, Theresa May’s government suffered a devastating parliamentary defeat when 118 Eurosceptic Conservative MPs rebelled over her Brexit deal proposals. Critics suggested that the government should have resigned since it had been defeated on its leading manifesto commitment. However, after coming close to being defeated by Jeremy Corbyn in the 2017 general election, May was unwilling to risk another general election and Conservative MPs rallied around her, giving her a 19-vote majority. The Conservative Party’s divisions over the EU and Brexit have put collective individual ministerial responsibility under significant strain in recent years.

Question 24

Outline why the selection of prime ministers ministers in cabinet is important

Answer 24

The power to appoint, reshuffle and dismiss ministers (hire and fire) belongs exclusively to the prime minister. There has only been one exception to this in recent times. As part of the negotiations to form the coalition in May 2010, David Cameron had to allow the Liberal Democrats five of the 22 Cabinet posts. Nominations to these (and to an agreed number of junior posts) were the preserve of the Liberal Democrat leader and Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg. When a Liberal Democrat minister resigned, Clegg found a replacement from his own party. This meant that there was a formal constraint on the prime minister’s power of appointment. However, even in a single-party government a prime minister does not in practice have total freedom to appoint whom he or she wants. In practice the composition of a Cabinet will depend on a range of considerations.

Question 25

The factors governing the prime minister’s selection of ministers

Answer 25

• Selecting the members of a cabinet is one of the key roles played by a prime minister. If they get this wrong, they will suffer difficulties ranging from poor policy making to constant threats to their own position. It may seem simple — to choose the best men and women for the job; but there is more to it than that.
• To pack the cabinet with the prime minister’s own allies. This ensures unity and bolsters the prime minister’s power, but it may lack critical voices who can improve decision making. After 1982 this was the tactic adopted by Margaret Thatcher (1979–90), an especially dominant prime minister with a great singularity of purpose. Tony Blair (1997–2007) adopted a similar approach.
• To pick a balanced cabinet that reflects the different policy tendencies in the ruling party. When Theresa May became prime minister in 2016 she chose such a cabinet, which included some of her former adversaries such as Boris Johnson, David Davis, Andrea Leadsom and Liam Fox. It was especially important for her to include members who were both in favour of and against leaving the EU. She did, though, keep some key allies close to her, including Chancellor Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Amber Rudd. John Major (1990–97) was forced into choosing a similarly varied cabinet.
• To pick a cabinet of the best possible people. Such a cabinet has not been seen since the 1960s and 1970s when Harold Wilson (1964–70, 1974–76) and James Callaghan (1976–79) assembled a group ‘of all the talents’. Prime ministers have complete patronage powers so they can reshuffle their cabinets at will. Some prime ministers have changed the personnel in this way annually. Dismissing and appointing new ministers is a device prime ministers can use for asserting and re-asserting their authority, as well as ensuring the quality of government.
• Neutralise a potential rebel or rival — because of collective responsibility, including such a potential opponent can be an effective way of silencing them (2016 Boris Johnson) (2017 Michael Gove’s return to the Cabinet as Environment Secretary after May’s disastrous election- seen as an effort to neutralize a rival and placate the brexiteers)
• 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 David Blunkett 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.
• 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 26

Factors which influence a PM’s relationship with the Cabinet

Answer 26

· The management skills of the prime minister some PMs are better at managing the cabinet. A skilled 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 blood, and to marginalise opponents. Patronage

· The prime minister’s ability to set the agenda Decisions are rarely, if ever, taken in Cabinet by holding a vote. The prime minister’s traditional right to chair the meeting and to sum up at the end is an important source of influence. He or she 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 smaller, informal groups, or in bilateral meetings. 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 Brown 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, even 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 governing 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. The Press Office, which handles the government’s presentation in the media, also works closely with the prime minister. Under Blair it gained enhanced importance as part of a newly created Communications and Strategy Directorate in Downing Street. Boris Johnson was seen as too reliant on his adviser Dominic Cummings.

· 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 becoming prime minister, after allowing expectations of a contest to build, and his authority was further undermined by the financial crash of 2007-08. Theresa May lost authority when Parliament rejected her deal with the EU over Brexit.

Question 27

Outline Blairs Cabinet

Answer 27

The decline of the cabinet has increased the power of the prime minister, with less frequent meetings and a less collective body. Prime Ministers now dominate policy leadership, such as May’s support for Grammar Schools and Cameron’s lack of enthusiasm. Blair was accused of ‘control freakery’ and used the term ‘joined up government’ to manipulate the media.

Blair’s cabinets were likened to a presidential approach, with short full-cabinet meetings rubber-stampeding decisions taken elsewhere. He repeatedly sidelined his Cabinet colleagues and exploited group-think to railroad through the Iraq invasion. Sir John Chilcot found that on at least 11 occasions, decisions were taken without any reference to the most senior figures in his own Cabinet.

However, the cabinet has some functions common to all UK administrations. In emergency or crisis situations, the prime minister may rely on the collective wisdom of the cabinet to make decisions. This is particularly common in military situations, such as the Syrian civil war and the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Cabinet meetings are held in secret, helping when military and security matters are at stake.

The cabinet also sets the way in which policy is presented to Parliament, MPs, peers, and the media, presenting a united front. Occasionally, disputes can arise between ministers, but the cabinet acts as the final ‘court of appeal’ when this is not possible. Most government business must pass through Parliament, and the cabinet settles the government’s agenda.

Most of the cabinet’s time is spent ratifying decisions reached elsewhere, with ministers informed in advance and their civil servants preparing brief summaries of proposed proposals. Negotiations are usually settled outside the cabinet room, making the cabinet a ‘clearing house’ for decisions.

Question 28

Outline The Cabinet After 2010

Answer 28

After the 2010 general election, no party had an overall majority in the House of Commons, necessitating the formation of a coalition to command such a majority. A minority government is challenging to form, as it requires building support among MPs for each legislative proposal. In 2010, a coalition was quickly agreed between the Conservative and Liberal Democrat leaderships, with David Cameron as prime minister and Nick Clegg as deputy prime minister. The Coalition Agreement was developed, with cabinet places apportioned in a 22:5 ratio between the two parties. The cabinet was responsible for appointments or dismissals to 22 Conservative posts and five Liberal Democrat posts.

The coalition marked a brief ‘golden age’ for the cabinet, as it became an essential role in the politics of the coalition. Disputes within the coalition were inevitable, and the cabinet was a key place to resolve them. If a policy dispute arose, the cabinet would be called on to clarify the issue. David Cameron used an ‘inner cabinet’, consisting of himself, Chancellor George Osborne, the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, and Danny Alexander, known as the Quad.

Question 29

Outline Theresa May’s Cabinet 2016-2018

Answer 29

After the 2010 general election, no party had an overall majority in the House of Commons, necessitating the formation of a coalition to command such a majority. A minority government is challenging to form, as it requires building support among MPs for each legislative proposal. In 2010, a coalition was quickly agreed between the Conservative and Liberal Democrat leaderships, with David Cameron as prime minister and Nick Clegg as deputy prime minister. The Coalition Agreement was developed, with cabinet places apportioned in a 22:5 ratio between the two parties. The cabinet was responsible for appointments or dismissals to 22 Conservative posts and five Liberal Democrat posts.

The coalition marked a brief ‘golden age’ for the cabinet, as it became an essential role in the politics of the coalition. Disputes within the coalition were inevitable, and the cabinet was a key place to resolve them. If a policy dispute arose, the cabinet would be called on to clarify the issue. David Cameron used an ‘inner cabinet’, consisting of himself, Chancellor George Osborne, the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, and Danny Alexander, known as the Quad.

Question 30

Outline The Cabinet under Boris Johnson 2019-

Answer 30

Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, has been criticized for his inexperienced Cabinet, which has been criticized for investing too much power in too small a team. This has led to a concentration of power and strategizing, with good ideas not being heard and bad ideas not being checked. Critics argue that this concentration of power can lead to a “bunker of close allies surrounded by a lightweight, supine and largely ineffectual Cabinet chosen mainly for their commitment to Brexit or their loyalty to Mr. Johnson.”

The government’s criticism of Johnson’s Cabinet is based on the danger of investing too much power in too small a team, namely Johnson, his chief advisers, and a few trusted allies from the former Vote Leave campaign. The Financial Times accused Johnson of presiding over “a bunker of close allies surrounded by a lightweight, supine and largely ineffectual Cabinet chosen mainly for their commitment to Brexit or their loyalty to Mr. Johnson.”

More control of communications was taken in to the Number 10 machine, with plans for presidential style press briefing and an expensive briefing room refurbished. However, this change effectively reduces the Cabinet to just another set of government spokespeople, allowed out only when No 10 wants. Not one story has said whether the Cabinet was consulted about this change.

Liz Truss, the new leader of the Conservative Party, has favored those who supported her in the leadership contest, rather than trying to include different strands of opinion within the party. Ministers identified with the defeated candidate, Rishi Sunak, have been evicted to make way for Truss loyalists such as the new Health Secretary and Deputy PM, Thérèse Coffey. This makes political sense in terms of conciliating rivals at the top of the governing party, but most of these senior figures endorsed Truss after dropping out of the contest.

Question 31

Outline Boring but pragmatic- Rishi Sunak’s Cabinet

Answer 31

A clue to Rishi Sunak’s first cabinet is the prominence of two chancellors – of the exchequer and the Duchy of Lancaster – and the limited role of the deputy prime minister Dominic Raab. Chancellors Jeremy Hunt and Oliver Dowden are chairs and deputy chairs of multiple committees, and Hunt has control of the wide-ranging Home Affairs Committee. Chairing a committee matters beyond the status it conveys – both in the meeting when deciding how to manage the discussion and to sum up, and before and after in setting the agenda and prioritising follow up work. So chairing ‘HA’ gives Hunt the opportunity to range widely across the domestic policy agenda and, as importantly, strengthens the Treasury’s already powerful role in blocking initiatives of which Hunt does not approve.

This reinforces the idea that Raab’s role as deputy is more about status and symbolism than as a genuine no.2 to Sunak. It also shows that the Treasury – orthodox or otherwise – will play a central role in policy-making in this government. And if the prime minister is serious about continuing Johnson’s plans to level up the UK he might come to regret the lack of a specific committee on a project which will only succeed with tight cross-government co-ordination.

However boring he tried to be Sunak had to include the very un boring- rather bonkers- Suella Braverman for reasons of unity and because he needed her support to become PM. Braverman was dismissed as Home Secretary in the cabinet reshuffle of 13 November 2023, and was replaced by James Cleverly, who had been the Foreign Secretary. David Cameron became Foreign Secretary in a move seen a a return to ‘boring’.

Question 32

Give the Case Study of Margret Thatcher

Answer 32

Examples of control:

Thatcher was perhaps the first PM to act like a president. She made policy ‘on the hoof’ without much discussion- she was even accused treating her cabinet with a lack of respect. She reduced number and duration of cabinet meetings, and portrayed herself as the dominant character within her party (her image was displayed at Tory party meetings). She clashed with party members more wedded to One Nation conservative principles (dubbed the ‘wets’), but was able to successfully reduce their influence in the party (in favour of her allies, the ‘dries’). Events often worked in her favour- the victory in the Falklands War greatly strengthened her popularity and authority. She had something of a mixed media image, however. Some in the press praised her dominance, conviction and control, whereas others saw her as inflexible and uncaring.

Examples of lack of control:

Thatcher’s authority and control started to weaken towards the end of her premiership. Perhaps this was because she had been in power for so long (11 years) and had started to see herself as invincible. This was demonstrated by her attempt to introduce the poll tax- a council tax that was calculated according to the number of people living in a property, rather than how large or valuable the property was. Many Conservatives advised her against introducing this, fearing that it would be very unpopular, but Thatcher refused to listen and pressed ahead with the policy in the face of large protests against it. As a result, her popularity declined and her party lost faith in her ability to deliver electoral success. The resignation of her previously loyal deputy prime minister Geoffrey Howe (over this issue of being undermined over discussions over Europe) was the trigger for Michael Heseltine to launch a leadership challenge. In the ensuing leadership contest, Thatcher failed to win enough support to carry on as leader and subsequently resigned. This shows how, by the end, she was no longer in control of her cabinet or party, so had to step down.

Question 33

Outline the case study of Tony Blair (1997-2007)

Answer 33

Examples of control:

Tony Blair became PM in 1997, and, in contrast to Major, closely controlled his party members and its media image, through the extensive use of ‘spin’ (spin doctor Alastair Campbell was a key figure in Blair’s government). When he came to power, he had a strong media image and was overwhelmingly popular with the public, who had grown tired of 18 years of Conservative rule. The economy was strong, and remained so until after he left office, so strengthening his economic credibility. Blair extended his control over the cabinet, reducing the time he met and discussed policy with them. Instead, he relied more on hand-picked special advisers and informal meetings with key colleagues to formulate policy (dubbed ‘sofa government’). This allowed him to make decisions effectively bypassing the cabinet, so increasing his control. A number of policies were successfully implemented, partly due to the large majorities Blair always enjoyed in government. For example, the House of Lords was partially reformed and devolved governments were introduced in Scotland and Wales. Perhaps Blair’s biggest success with the Good Friday Agreement (1998), a continuation of Major’s efforts to make peace in Northern Ireland. A Northern Ireland Assembly was created, with the provision that power would be shared between unionists and republicans, so satisfying both sides. Other successes included the introduction of a minimum wage and civil partnerships for same-sex couples. He was able to lead support of the US-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 __and __2003, despite some opposition.

Examples of lack of control:

Blair’s biggest restriction was the Chancellor, Gordon Brown. It was rumoured that the two had made a deal whereby Blair would serve as PM, then hand over to Brown at some point in the future, in return for Brown not opposing Blair in the 1994 __Labour leadership election. Brown knew that he would not be sacked by Blair, and built up a large power base in the Treasury. Blair had to take Brown into consideration when making policy, and did not take the UK into the European single currency (as he had wished), as this was blocked by Brown. To keep Brown on side, Blair announced that he would not fight another election after __2005- this damaged his authority, as speculation began over when he would step down. The Iraq War was a very damaging event for Blair personally. The evidence used to justify the war was later found to have been exaggerated (although Blair may not have known this at the time), and there had been no proper plan as to what would happen once the regime had been toppled. As a result, Blair’s popularity plummeted (along with much of his authority), and his legacy is dominated by his perceived failures over Iraq. He eventually stood down in 2007, and, in contrast to his early years in government, continues to have a rather negative public image

Question 34

Case Study Boris Johnson

Answer 34

Boris Johnson’s tenure in Number 10 and the manner of his departure provide good material for essays on the nature and scope of prime ministerial power and the relationships within the executive.

Johnson pulled the Treasury closer to No. 10, imposed iron discipline on departmental advisers, made controversial political appointments to the civil service, announced plans to streamline government communications. In past decades, successive prime ministers have complained about this lack of control and an inability to keep a close eye on departments, increasing the chances of being blindsided by crises. Tony Blair, David Cameron and Theresa May were all accused, in various ways and at various points in their premierships, of similarly trying to become more presidential, though real reform of Whitehall failed to materialize.

Boris Johnson’s war in Ukraine initially proved beneficial for him, as he built a close personal relationship with President Zelensky and became seen as a strong supporter of Ukraine. This helped him during the UK economy’s struggles with Brexit, as leaving the EU allowed him to act swiftly and independently. Johnson used the war as a justification for staying in office after the vote of confidence in June 2022.

Johnson’s handling of the Covid crisis was initially uncontroversial, but his popularity peaked in April 2020 when the crisis hit. His former Conservative Party opponent Jeremy Hunt accused him of lacking integrity, competence, and vision. After the publication of the Sue Gray report, a confidence vote in his leadership was won, but 41% of Conservative MPs voted against him. Johnson refused to resign, and a series of ministerial resignations in early July 2022 led to a decline in his popular support. By the time Johnson resigned, 46 ministers had quit, demonstrating that even a PM with a large majority can be brought down by the cabinet.