How far do you agreewith the proposition; the cabinet is dead?

Authors Avatar

How far do you agree with the proposition; the cabinet is dead

        The notion is one that is widely argued and has a vast divergence of opinions. No one can argue however, that aspects of the modern cabinet are different from the eighteenth century origins.

        Although the cabinet has expanded since its routes, this is hardly surprising because now the government intervenes much more on aspects such as agriculture and health.

        Modern Prime Ministers have found it difficult to keep the cabinet size below 22 members. Attempts have been made to reduce it in size, for example, farmers may be offended they are not represented in government, as would the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. In a response to the criticism that the cabinet is not a true representation of society and that the cabinet should remain small so decisions can be made decisively, some plans have been put forward.

 One idea is to reduce the size of the cabinet and having ‘super ministers’ who may look after several areas, such as defence, foreign policy and international development or education and culture. As well as making sure all interests are and feel represented. The Prime Minister also needs to give a large number of top jobs as a reward for loyal and able colleagues, and ensure that all sections of the party are represented at cabinet level.

By convention, all members of the cabinet have to be members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. A role may include the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the secretary of state. Cabinet members also need to be privy councillors and as a result, take an important oath to secrecy about all government business. They are all governed by a very strict code of conduct. If it is breached, the Prime Minister will require a resignation. Examples of this are Peter Mandelson and David Mellor. People have criticised this because it does not give ministers of high positions to state any opposition publicly to government policy, even though they may have perfectly reasonable points about a key issue, they are forced to resign. For instance Robin Cook resigned from cabinet due to his opposition to the Iraq war, although the majority of people were supportive of war, there was a considerable number who opposed it, he spoke for them and had to resign as a result.

Join now!

The convention states that one decision has to be made by the cabinet, and then all of the cabinet have to support it fully, even if argued against in cabinet. Resignation is the only alternative if you disagree with a collective decision.

This ‘collective responsibility’ that PM’s such as Thatcher used caused senior and well respected ministers to resign, namely Michael Hesseltine and Geoffrey Howe. The criticism made at the time was that the cabinet had no say in policy and had to follow the ruling of the PM or face resignation. There respected opinions were therefore not used ...

This is a preview of the whole essay