theme 3 - PM and the executive Flashcards
what is individual ministerial responsibility? (IMR)
ministers are responsible for their own personal conduct and for the work within their department.
when has IMR been shown to be important?
Ministers taking responsibility over their department:
1) exercised through ministerial questions. For example, Geoff Hoon being questioned over why a solider died in the Iraq War. It turned out the MOD didn’t supply enough protective equipment and he was left without any body armour. Another example is Alok Sharma being questioned over Grenfell tower – despite being the housing minister for only a handful of weeks beforehand. He was scrutinized on why it had taken over 2 weeks to re-house the residents of Grenfell.
2) failure to keep up to date with their department - for example, minister of defence Lord CARRINGTON resigned after he failed to do anything about warnings of Argentina invading the Falkland islands.
3) select committees used as a tool to question ministers over their department - for example, Matt Hancock questioned by the health and social care select committee over his covid-19 response while he was health secretary.
How is IMR no longer that important?
Due to governmental departments being huge with vast projects, it has become easier in recent years to pass the blame of a minister’s department onto the civil service. For example, amber Rudd passed the blame onto her civil servants during the Windrush generation scandal – where residents who have lived in the Uk since the 70s were asked to prove their right to work here. Similarly, Matt Hancock blamed his civil servants when scrutinized over Covid-19 responses, he also blamed the WHO (World Health Organizations) for praising their plan of response – stating he placed good faith in their verdict. Neither the WHO or civil servants can be scrutinized in parliament nor take responsibility.
Equally, many ministers will now just wait to test their luck and see if the PM sacks them, rather than voluntarily resigning themselves due to misconduct. For example, Suella Braverman stirring up unrest with her comments on the intentions behind certain protests, and then waiting until Rishi Sunak sacked her rather than resigning herself.
what is collective ministerial responsibility (CMR) ?
collective ministerial responsibility is where ministers must support the government in their decisions in the public eye
When has CMR been shown to be important?
If a minister doesn’t agree with the cabinet, they should resign due to their CMR. This can be shown through a number of examples:
1) Robin Cook - resigned from Tony Blairs government over the Iraq war. He stated he could not operate in a government that didn’t have the public support. 1 million people protested in 2003 against the Iraq war.
2) Ian Duncan Smith - resigned in 2016 due to cuts to disability benefits by £4 million. He stated this decision was “indefensible”.
3) Sunak and Javid resignation from cabinet after Johnsons failure to address Chris pincher scandal. Javid stated he could no longer sit in the cabinet with good conscious. These two resignations is what led to the downfall of Boris Johnson.
Why may CMR be no longer than important?
Ministers no longer resign when they don’t agree with the government anymore. instead it appears, they express their disapproval through other means - like leaking to the media.
For example, Theresa May struggled a lot with media leaks during her time.
^leaks over Phillips Hammond’s comment on the public wage sector and how train driving was “so easy even a woman could it.”
^ leaked to the plan for the Chinese firm Huawei to fund Britain’s new 5G network – this naturally had speculation surrounding it.
Factions within party’s have been growing in recent years. Therefore during the Brexit referendum, both David Cameron and Corbyn suspended CMR so ministers could campaign how they liked - rather than following the government consensus.
Coalition governments naturally cannot be bound to the same intensity / level of CMR as a single party government - due to the differences. for example, CMR was removed for certain areas of legislation where the Lib Dems disagreed with the conservatives during the 2010 coalition government. They both campaigned differently in the AV referendum - due to their different interests in the matter.
Lastly, it appears ministers that do resign, don’t seem to resign due to their respect for CMR, but rather to save face. For example, Sunaks and Javids resignation from Johnsons cabinet seemed long overdue, and it appears they resigned just as the ship started sinking - rather than when their good conscience told them to do so under CMR.
How is cabinet seen to not be that important during decision making?
(political advisors, cabinet committees)
Political advisors have been seen to be prioritised over cabinet during decision making in recent years. This style of governance has gained the nickname “sofa politics”.
^Alastair Campbells - Tony Blairs political advisor. He advised Blair on how to respond to Diana’s death, and the Northern Irish good Friday agreement.
^Nick and Fiona - Theresa Mays political advisors. They advised May on the dementia tax, without consulting cabinet. They also knew that May was going to call an election before the majority of her cabinet.
^Dominic Cummings - Boris Johnsons’ political advisor. He helped design Johnson’s Brexit campaign.
most of the day to day work of the cabinet is carried out through cabinet committees. These committees make decisions on their specific area of policy, which is later ratified by the whole cabinet.
^The PM can exert influence over the cabinet in this way, as they choose the membership of the committees and choose who chairs them. The chair is an important figure as they set the agenda. This allows the PM to control decisions, whether present or not – as they can place a close ally as the chair, or even themselves. For example, Theresa May decided to chair three important committees, including the committee dealing with Brexit – which was at the top of her agenda to pass through.
^Equally, Blair was known for leaving out certain ministers from important discussion - even if it was going to effect their department. for example, during the Iraq war, he left out dissenting voices.
How does the cabinet still remain powerful?
Chairing (or deciding who chairs) committees doesn’t always guarantee the PM influence over their cabinet. Although Theresa May chaired 3 committees, her cabinet wasn’t fully obedient. This can be shown through the amount of leaks her cabinet made to the media.
“Big Beasts” in your cabinet can limit your ability to ignore cabinet. for example, Gordon Brown was a dominant figure in Blairs cabinet. Blair wanted to introduce the euro, yet Gordon Brown stated it would have to pass 5 checks first, and if it didn’t, he’d essentially veto it. The euro didn’t pass the checks, and thus we remain with the pound.
^Theresa May also felt obliged to have representation from the leave campaign, despite campaigning remain herself. For example, the appointment of Boris Johnson -who she later made foreign secretary.
When ministers lose faith in the PM and start to resign, this acts as the beginning of the end for the PMs premiership.
^Sunaks and Javid’s resignation from cabinet following Johnsons mishandling of Chris Pincher scandal.
^Geoffrey Howes resignation from Thatcher’s government, with his famous speech about how “its like going to bat, yet the bat has been broken by your team captain” led to the downfall of Thatcher
how important is the PMs popularity in dominating cabinet decisions?
If it is thought that the party has won the election due to the popularity of the PM themselves, then they will have a larger personal mandate, that they can use to dominate cabinet, as it reflects the publics mood.
^Tony Blair maintained a president like campaign in the 1997 election, with many voters switching to labour due to Blairs image. He maintained this president like role throughout his premiership, notably his speech about Diana’s death, and the Good Friday agreement.
^Boris Johnson populist style of campaigning, and his many public stunts (like the Brexit wall, or love actually advert - which only featured himself) arguably led to the conservatives 90 seat majority. Such win certainly wasn’t due to the party’s popularity themselves, given Mays previous minority government.
Equally, an unpopular PM can result in a loud cabinet. for example, John Major was unpopular with the public, being described as dull / boring from the media - with spitting image presenting him as grey. Consequently he had little control over his cabinet - with a growing division over the role of the European union emerging in his cabinet and party.
why may the PMs popularity not be that important for dominating decisions in cabinet?
A popular mean doesn’t mean that cabinet will always act as yes men - if a decision goes against their good conscience or wiser judgement, they will likely speak up about is. This illustrates how important it is for even a popular PM to keep their ministers on side.
^Geoffrey Howes resignation from Thatcher’s cabinet can be seen as the beginning of the end for Thatcher’s time as PM. He stated the relationship between cabinet and PM as if their “bats had been broken before the game by the team captain.”
^Robin Cooks resignation from Tony Blair - over the Iraq war.
Equally, you can have a very popular PM, while also having a very popular minister.
^Tony Blair and Gordon Brown both had their fair share of popularity. Blair being PM didn’t limit Gordon Browns ability to also dominate decision making. For example, Blair wanted to introduce the euro, yet Gordon Brown stated it would have to pass 5 checks first, and if it didn’t, he’d essentially veto it. The euro didn’t pass the checks, and thus we remain with the pound.
^Both David Cameron and Nick Clegg were very popular, with Cleggmania souring in the media. This meant both partners remained influential during their joint time in office.
to what extent was Thatcher dominate in decision making while in office?
Margaret Thatcher used powers of patronage to sack people who spoke against her and promote ministers who supported her. The phrase “elective dictatorship” was used during the time of Thatcher as her style of governance meant she was heavily dominant in any decision. This dominance was also shown in programs like the spitting image, where Thatcher was at dinner with her cabinet, ordered some meat and the waiter asked, “what about the vegetables?” and she replied, “they’ll have the same”.
Thatcher passed many bills that fitted her own ideology and ideal of how the country should run. Her ideal of privatization saw the Housing Act (1980) being introduced, where tenants could buy the council house they lived in. She privatized state owned companies like British gas, British airways, etc. New nuclear weapons were bought under Thatcher and the poll tax was introduced. Her ideology and ideals can be seen present in all areas of legislation her government proposed.
What is the evaluation to this?
MPs started to rebel against Thatcher when the divisions in her party became clear. The first bill to be lost to a rebellion was the Sunday trading bill – Thatcher believed businesses should have the freedom to trade on a Sunday, yet many of her MPs were strongly religious and believed the day should be kept sacred for family time, not shopping – this led to a rebellion of 72 backbenchers.
These divisions were made more intense over issues like the UK’s membership in the EU. She was against the EUs control over Britain yet many of her cabinet ministers felt it was the new way of global governance. This led to many important resignations, like Geoffrey Howes, where he encouraged other MPs to check their conscience overstaying in her government. A few days later a leadership bid was made, which later led to labour voting for a motion of no confidence. This led to Thatcher standing down.
to what extent was Tony Blair dominate in decision making while in office?
Tony Blairs large majority of 179 seats meant that he could pass many transformative bills. He served 3 terms as PM, with his last term having a majority of 66. Tony Blair managed to pass bills that were important to him, like the good Friday agreement, devolution, etc.
Tony Blair exerted control through his “sofa politics” style. Blair surrounded himself with a large office staff, including his press officer Alistair Campbell who was a key figure in the administration. Informal discussions are also used to make decisions between the PM and someone else, like 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.
If he did not want to include a dissenting voice, he left them out for example, in discussions about the Iraq War, he excluded his International Development Secretary, Clare Short, despite her department having a clear interest in the decisions taken. It was this way he was able to influence decisions without consulting his cabinet.
His political advisor Alistair Campbell had a dominate part to play in his cabinet - advising him on Diana’s death and the good Friday agreement.
what is the evaluation to this?
Gordon Browns dominance in Blairs cabinet influenced what he could and couldn’t do. Brown as chancellor denied Tony Blairs wish to switch the pound to the euro – he created 5 tests that the scheme would have to pass and insisted the Treasury (his department) would decide whether it had or not. This led to Brown rejecting the euro, from his own evidence/findings.
Blairs decision to take Britain into the Iraq War, despite consulting parliament, led to 1 million people protesting in Britain. Despite the clear consensus to not go to war, Blair did anyway in order to support the US president, which tarnished his premiership.
His first defeat in parliament was over an amendment to the terrorism bill, in which he wanted to extend the duration a suspected terrorist could be held in prison without charge for 90 days. He saw 4 defeats in total during his time as PM.
what are the main powers of the executive?
1) royal prerogative powers
2) initiation of legislation
3) secondary legislation
4) sets the timetable for debate
5) proposes the budget each year
