The Party leader in Parliament: The Prime Minister is the principal figure in the House of Commons, above all in weekly Questions Time when the Prime Minister’s performance has the greatest effect on party morale and public perception, particularly since the televising of the Commons in 1989.
The Senior UK representative overseas: Since the 1970’s prime ministers have been involved in increasing amounts of travel and meetings with foreign heads of government. There are several engagements per year (the G7, UN and up to four European Councils) and several less frequent regular events such as the biannual Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting as well as other less structured summits, most frequently with Ireland and the USA.
The above are merely brief summaries of the minimum requirements of Prime Ministers. However, different Prime Ministers interpret this role very differently. Naturally, every Prime Minister brings their own personal contributions to office, and have all demonstrated different approaches to policy, politics and relations with the Cabinet. It is a truism that each occupant is a different person, but the important influences on the role and style of particular prime ministers are, however, contingent on factors subject to limited, or no control from Downing Street. To an extent, the fluctuations in party support in interim elections, in polls, and approval ratings for the Prime Minister also create conditions for weak or strong prime ministerial leadership. The state of the economy and a ‘feel-good’ mood among voters are key variable factors: if strong, the Prime Minister’s position will be enhanced. As a general election draws near, the Cabinet and party usually rally to the Prime Minister, in the realisation that they will prosper or falter depending on how united they are behind the leadership.
Margaret Thatcher proved to be the most dominant peacetime Prime Minister this century. She broke with a number of policies pursued by her Conservative predecessors and is credited with substantially changing the agenda of British Politics. Many of her policies are associated with her personally, including trade union reform, income tax cuts, privatisation and a reduced role for local government. She was forceful in Cabinet and in Parliament and willing to be seen as a figure apart from cabinet which did not score high on collegiality. She kept a close rein on her Chancellors and her Foreign Secretaries and, as a result, had troubled relationships with some of them. By the end her hostile attitude to the European Community (as it was then called) lost her the support of a number of her senior ministers. Mrs Thatcher is an outstanding example of somebody who regarded herself as a conviction rather that a consensus politician. She must be regarded as a successful Prime Minister, in terms of winning three successive general elections and introducing lasting radical policies, many of which have been accepted by successors, including Tony Blair.
The reasons why Margaret Thatcher became more dominant provide important insights into the source of prime ministerial power. She had a successful use of Cabinet reshuffles over time to produce a more loyal team. She had originally appointed her supporters to the key economic departments in 1979. During 1981 she gradually dismissed a number of dissenters from her Cabinet. She appointed newcomers who were more supportive of her policies and owed their promotion to her. She gained from policy successes, particularly the down-turn in inflation in 1982 then decisively, the recapture of the Falklands, the steady rise in living standards of those in work and, of course, from general election victories in 1983 and 1987. She held fewer cabinet meetings. She even bypassed the Cabinet on occasions, relying heavily on her Policy Unit and making decisions in Cabinet committees, in bilateral meeting between herself and her advisors and the departmental minister. She also interfered energetically in departments, seeking outside advice via seminars, individuals she trusted and think tanks, following up initiatives and taking an unprecedentedly close interest in the promotion of senior civil servants.
After Thatcher’s loss in popularity she was succeeded by John Major. Several factors remained consistent throughout John Major’s prime minstership, namely a collegial approach to Cabinet decisions, autonomy for most secretaries of state in managing their departments, and a low-key approach to national leadership. Major was most definitely a ‘stabiliser’, without an overriding political project rather tan a ‘mobiliser’ like Thatcher or Blair, who sought radical changes. Like Gladstone and Blair, he became increasingly concerned with Ireland and sought to leave his mark on history by producing lasting peace.
As prime Minister Major appeared to feel constricted, firstly be the circumstances of his succession (Margaret Thatcher supporters felt she had been stabbed in the back when she stepped down from the leadership; she soon became a menacing presence for Major and in the first two years he was careful to seek her support.) Secondly, his lack of an electoral mandate until 1992, thirdly, being surrounded by colleagues who were more senior and more experienced than himself.
He lost much of his ability to speak for the nation, being treated by the media and the public alike as a target for ridicule and abuse. Progress in Northern Ireland was the principle prime ministerial achievement in this difficult period. The line of ‘wait and see’, or what Major called ‘negotiate and decide’, on the single currency just about held among Cabinet ministers until the general election.
A strong contrast to Major and a similar figure to Thatcher is the current prime minister, Toney Blair. However, he has been a distinctive prime minister. On the basis of his first three years he already ranks alongside Mrs Thatcher as the strongest Prime Minister this century. Interestingly, his style of leadership closely resembles that of the leadership of his leadership of the party in opposition. His reforms of the party, particularly of Conference and NEC, were designed to make them more supportive of the leadership. In opposition he recruited a large team of aides to support him in the Leader’s office and he relied on these and key figures such as Gordon Brown, rather than the shadow Cabinet.
