Question b
Analyse the role of the Cabinet in government in decision- making.
The cabinet is by law, meant to be a key decision making body, it is meant to debate and ratify, reach and endorse final decisions. It is made up of between 20 and 25 ministers, which can be both departmental and non- departmental; the Prime Minister is also a member of the Cabinet. Cabinet meetings are help in private, once a week. The Cabinet is the central and collective decision making body. The cabinet ministers are appointed by the Prime minister. However the Prime Minister himself is only the spokesperson, referred to as primus inter pares (first among equals).
As the full cabinet cannot fully make policy during the meetings which are so short, a lot of the work is carried out through the committee system. So issues can be referred to either a standing committee or to an ad hoc committee, which consists of ministers which are directly concerned.
However many people argue that we do not have a Cabinet government because we have a Prime Ministerial government. It is argued by Kavanagh and Thomas that because the Prime Minister has Royal Prerogative Powers like signing treaties, granting honours as Head of State, and is also able to wield influence over the civil service as he is the Head.
It is also the Prime Ministers role to appoint and dismiss ministers. It is up to him who he chooses to be the Cabinet, so it can be argued that he only picks like minded people, who will perform for him. It is also up to the Prime Minister to chair, set agenda and sum- up cabinet meetings. He is meant to listen to cabinet ministers, but he is the one that controls what issues can be discussed, so naturally he would leave any issues that go against his views out of meetings.
It is the prime Minister that dominates the policy making process, he is ultimately responsible for all decision. He uses the Kitchen cabinet more often than the real Cabinet and chairs many cabinet committees and therefore gets his point of view across in the more important departments. Department Ministers have to clear all important decisions with the Prime Minister before they can go through to the Cabinet for discussion, so if the Prime Minister does not like a suggestion, he can easily reject it and it will not be discussed in a Cabinet meeting. This is a way for Tony Blair to shut up political heavy weights which go against him.
The Prime Minister also has some informal powers, for example he is the party leader, and he has been democratically elected by his own party and therefore has the mandate to implement his policy from the party and the electorate. He is also seen as the national leader and figurehead internationally, especially after September 11th and War against Iraq. He is respected within International Community which increases his authority.
Policy advisers can be used instead of ministers. He is able to make governmental policies by using unaccountable policy advisers. An example of this is Andrew Adoinnis who has a large say in the education policies. The Pm office and the Cabinet office are overlapping. The Cabinet has been reformed by Tony Blair to offer advice and support and a Cabinet enforcer to oversee Tony Blair’s will within the Civil Service.
However it can still be said that the UK has a cabinet government because the media can always work against him, showing him in a bad light would loose him support in the General election. Cabinet Ministers who feel they are stopped from having their say can always resign and call a leadership contest which shows the party as being disloyal to the public.
The Prime Minister is not really able to choose who he wants on the Cabinet as he needs to ensure party balance, so that on- one can dominate the Cabinet including himself. He must have people with different ideologies working together. This causes Tony Blair to have a strong reliance on Gordon Brown as he provides opposition within the Labour Party. The prime Minister relies on Cabinet Ministers for support; he must listen to them to stop any backbench rebellion.
Senior colleagues are able to exert pressure on the Prime Minister as they can easily embarrass the Prime Minister and the Government by calling a vote of no confidence. As it is the people that elect the party, if the Prime Minister did something that went against their views they could easily vote for another party in the next general election. The prime Minister must reflect the will of the people. The Prime Minister must please and cajole the party as a whole. The Prime Minster is also limited by constraints form the EU, NATO and UN treaties.
However some people think that the Prime Minister has a lot more power than we know, he can be seen as having the same amount of power as the President of USA. This is because he is head of state and has most of the powers that the president has. Also like a US president policy making is much more formulated by the Prime Minister rather than the Cabinet. The use of special advisers is more popular, and media focus is also increased n the Prime Minister rather than the Cabinet ministers. The prime Minister also has more similarities to a President after the Iraq War as he got much more International prestige.
Some people decide that Tony Blair is more than even a President; he is seen as a King. This is because there is no written constitution; the Prime Minister is not formally constrained like the President. He can also be seen as the King because he has all power over the Cabinet ministers. He is able to dismiss and move ministers around. He also controls the agenda and therefore can dismiss any topics he does not wish to discuss.
Overall I think that Tony Blair, the Prime Minister is in some ways controls parliament but in some ways he is controlled by the Cabinet. I think that this is effective because neither the Prime Minister nor the Cabinet can have too much power. The only way that the Prime Minister can have his own way only is by ignoring his Cabinet Ministers, but then he will be disliked and a leadership contest would be called.
