PM and Executive Flashcards
(28 cards)
What would your 3 paragraphs be to answer the question(evaluate the view that the cabinet holds limited power in the executive)
Power over the PM
Power over policy/decisions
Impact of CMR and IMR
Power over PM(Ministers are powerful)
PM can’t bypass the cabinet on key decisions as they can resign demonstrating instability and a loss of confidence in the PM, therefore making sure the PM consults the ministers
Example: Johnson was forced to step down after more than 55 resignations including Javid and Sunak over Chris Pincher, or Geoffrey Howe and Thatcher
Patronage may be limited as PMs use big beasts and include factions in the cabinet
Example: Sunak choosing Braverman as home sec and Hunt as chancellor for economic stability. Blair added brown who was a rival to his premiership and a big beast and brought his own Spads to meetings despite being told not to. Johnson under May as foreign sec Brexiter and a big beast
Power over PM(Ministers are not powerful)
If ministers were not powerful we would see the PM forcing members of their cabinet out if they did not
comply or if they were a bad look on the party
- Sajid Javid resigned as Chancellor after Cummings demanded he sack his team of advisors, in this he came second to Johnson’s SPAD
- Gavin Williamson - Sacked as Defence Secretary by Theresa May over a Huawei leak - he denied involvement
Power over policy/decision making(ministers are powerful)
Policy can require collaboration between ministries e.g. in 2019, government policy of the NHS’ ‘long-term plan’ was published after being devised by Cabinet. Needed cooperation of ministries as it involved many ministries including the Treasury, Health and the Home office
During Covid-19 in 2021, Nadhim Zahawi was widely credited with the vaccine rollout due to his ability to get things done and appoint specialist advisors to help him.
Michael Gove reshaped the education system by introducing academies which gave more autonomy to schools to choose the curriculum
Brown said no to the Euro, despite Blair wanting it
Power over policy/decisions(Ministers are not powerful)
If Ministers were not powerful they would not have any influence over policy decisions and we would see the PM making decisions on behalf of their department effectively marginalising their department
- David Davis (2018) - Brexit Secretary pushed through her Brexit deal, marginalising his department
Annalise Dodds-Starmer’s policy to cut international aid conflicted with International Development Minister leading to her resignation which demonstrates that she was clearly not consulted before making the decision
Impact of CMR and IMR(ministers are powerful)
In 2020, Priti Patel was found to have broken the ministerial code with regards to allegations of bullying civil servants in her department. Yet Johnson stood by her and refused to sack her, leading the Institute of Government to say that the ministerial code had been fatally undermined
In 2020 Gavin Williamson passed the blame for the exam fiasco to Ofqual rather than accepting his mistakes and responsibilities
May in 2017-19 had ministers such as Johnson who broke CMR by writing in a telegraph article against her Brexit plan.
David Davis and Dominic Raab her Brexit ministers also had resigned over CMR as they did not support her plan. Therefore discrediting her Brexit plan and contributed to her two historic losses in Parliament
Impact of CMR and IMR(Ministers are not powerful)
If ministers were not powerful, then the PM would be quick to uphold CMR and IMR to avoid even the slightest bad look on the party
- Lord Wolfson (2022) – The Justice Minister resigned instead of accepting collective responsibility for the government’s actions during the Partygate scandal, demonstrating a strict adherence to CMR.
- Louise Hague- Starmer enforced IMR very tightly after Louise Hague was found years ago of accidental fraud after claiming to have had her work phone stolen when it was really at home
What would your 3 paragraphs for “Evaluate the view that Prime Ministers have too much power”
Public standing and leadership, legislative ability, cabinet
What is your argument for the PM being too powerful(public standing and leadership)
PM’s are too powerful due to their media image and public standing helping to boost their power.
Example: in times of crisis such as Ukraine with Johnson or Blair with Kosovo or Thatcher with the Falklands it has boosted their public standing as they have been seen as strong and diligent therefore the party loyalty increases.
If PM’s are seen as electoral assets and are received well by the media they gather large party unity, Blair in 97 and 2003, Johnson in 2019 and breaking down the red wall many northern conservatives are very grateful as they believe he won them the seat.
What is your argument against the PM being too powerful(Public standing and leadership)
however in times of scandal the media have been incredibly harsh and limits their power.
Example: Starmer and the gifts given by Waheed Ali a labour donor such as £2000 glasses and paying for his wife’s dresses or letting them stay in his central London apartment worth more than £20,000 a month. Rosie Duffield MP for Canterbury and Kent subsequently resigned and his image is the worst of any PM ever in terms of polls and the general opinion of his administration.
What is your argument for the PM being too powerful(legislative ability)
PMs with typically a very large majority can pass a range of legislation through parliament and can easily make significant constitutional change
* Blair’s significant constitutional changes with his 179 seat majority in 1997 such as Devolution and House of Lords Reforms
* Sunak’s Rwanda legislation to overturn the Supreme Court
* Johnson’s EU Withdrawal Agreement
* Starmer’s plans to scrap all hereditary peers from the House of Lords
Whipping systems in Commons to control their parties
* Whips are used to ensure that party members vote with party lines
* Whips put members forward for Select Committees meaning scrutiny is not checked as effectively
House of Lords’ power is limited as they can delay bills but cannot stop them from passing and their amendments do not need to be enforced
What is your argument against the PM being too powerful(legislative ability)
PMs legislation is scrutinised effectively
* Lords and Committees offer amendments to legislation and whilst these can be ignored it would be a bad look and may lead to media outrage
* PMQs and opposition days are effective checks on the PMs work and PMQs involves questioning from the opposition over policies and other matters in front of the public
PMs have to consult their cabinet and over some decisions
* Boris Johnson during the Covid Pandemic had to consult Matt Hancock(the health secretary) over laws being passed
* May had to go to her cabinet for decisions because she did not have a big enough majority
* Even PMs with a big majority and were powerful often had important SPADs that worked with them to make decisions
What is your argument for the PM being too powerful(cabinet)
Patronage powers allow the PM to appoint their own cabinet which means they can appoint a loyal cabinet which is a bad check on their work
* Such as Boris Johnson’s cabinet in 2019 with Dominic Raab, Pritti Patel who were all Brexiteers
* Thatcher in her second cabinet had a loyal cabinet who she referred to as her vegetables as she had so much control over them
It could also be argued that the PM can bypass the cabinet when making important decisions through use of SPADs
Blair and the millennium dome, sofa government, Theresa May brought her SPAD Ollie Robins instead of David Davis and Dominic Raab to Brussels, Lancaster House speech-red lines
What is your argument against the PM being too powerful(cabinet)
They have to bring in factions and big beasts from their party
* Sunak- Suella Braverman was appointed as Home Secretary to appease right-wing of party and Jeremy Hunt as chancellor for economic stability
* Other potential leadership candidates have to be included such as Gordon Brown in the Blair Government who brought his own SPADs to meetings
* Johnson under May as a big leadership candidate but also a Brexiteer
Cabinet can chose to resign if they feel the PM does not represent them and is dominating their roles
* Johnson was forced to step down after 55 resignations including Javid and Sunak after the Chris Pincher trouble,
* Howe and Thatcher
Johnson writing articles about May’s Brexit plans
What are your 3 paragraphs for “Evaluate the view that the conventions of individual ministerial responsibility and collective responsibility are no longer an effective check on the government”
CMR maintains government unity and effectiveness, CMR is flexible and allows government to adjust to circumstances, IMR is effective in maintaining standards of behaviour
What is your argument for CMR isnt effective(unity)
- Throughout 2018-2019 May had many senior ministers disagreeing and not resigning, which was very destabilising to her government. Chancellor Hammond and Brexit Secretary Davis public ally challenged each other regarding the ending of free movement, but neither resigned despite openly contradicting one another
In March 2019, 13 Conservative members, including 4 Cabinet Ministers abstained on ruling out a no-deal Brexit in all circumstances despite three-line whip for them to oppose it
What is your argument for CMR is effective(unity)
- Under the premiership of Theresa May, David Davis and Boris Johnson resigned after the Chequers agreement was unveiled as they couldn’t support it
- Also in 2019, but under PM Johnson, Amber Rudd resigned from government for the second time, being ‘unable to stand by when loyal MPs were purged’ and over a no Brexit deal
Under Cameron, Ian Duncan-Smith resigned when he couldn’t support courts both on disability benefits and Capitan Gains Tax
What is your argument for CMR is not effective(flexibility)
- All the examples above occurred to resolve party management difficulties. In other words, collective responsibility had to be suspended on these occasions because the PM could nit make their Cabinet support them
This shows that collective responsibility is not effective in making ministers support policies of their government
What is your argument for CMR is effective(flexibility)
- In 2016 May announced that Cabinet Ministers who disagree with the decision to grant Heathrow an extra runway would be given ‘degration’ from collect responsibility
- On the 2016 referendum on the UK’s membership on the EU, Cameron suspended collective responsibility allowing ministers to campaign for either side
In 1975, ministers in the Labour Government were allowed to disagree publicly during the referendum campaign on the EC. This historic decision was known as ‘the agreement to differ’
What is your argument that IMR is not effective
Maintains high standards of behaviour
- In 2020, Priti Patel was found to have broken the ministerial code with regards to allegations of bullying civil servants in her department. Yet Johnson stood by her and refused to sack her, leading the Institute of Government to say that the ministerial code had been fatally undermined
- Theresa May as Home Sec in 2012, managed to keep her job despite confusion over deadlines for appeals against Abu Qatada’s deportation to Jordan
Ensures ministers take responsibility for their departments
- In 2020 Gavin Williamson passed the blame for the exam fiasco to Ofqual rather than accepting his mistakes and responsibilities
In 2020, Matt Hancock avoided resignation during the Covid-19 crisis by blaming (and subsequently abolishing) Public Health England, arguing that ministers had been dissatisfied and frustrated with how it had been handled (the Coronavirus)
What is your argument that IMR is effective
Maintains high standards of behaviour
- Also in 2017, Michael Fallan resigned regarding allegations about inappropriate sexual behaviour
- Louis Haigh
- Tulip Siddiq
- Andrew Gwynne
Ensures ministers take responsibility for their departments
- Amber Rudd 2018 resigned as Home Sec when she inadvertently misled MPs over whether she knew about targets to remove illegal immigrants
Priti Patel in 2017 resigned over controversy about her unauthorised meetings with Israeli officials
What are your 3 paragraphs for “Evaluate the view that the main check on PM power is Parliament”
Parliament, cabinet, Media
Argument for parliament being most effective
PMs legislation is scrutinised effectively
* Lords and Committees offer amendments to legislation and whilst these can be ignored it would be a bad look and may lead to media outrage
PMQs and opposition days are effective checks on the PMs work and PMQs involves questioning from the opposition over policies and other matters in front of the public
Argument that parliament is not effective
PMs with typically a very large majority can pass a range of legislation through parliament and can easily make significant constitutional change
* Blair’s significant constitutional changes with his 179 seat majority in 1997 such as Devolution and House of Lords Reforms
* Sunak’s Rwanda legislation to overturn the Supreme Court
* Johnson’s EU Withdrawal Agreement
* Starmer’s plans to scrap all hereditary peers from the House of Lords
Whipping systems in Commons to control their parties
* Whips are used to ensure that party members vote with party lines
House of Lords’ power is limited as they can delay bills but cannot stop them from passing and their amendments do not need to be enforced
