What is meant by the term 'patronage' as used in passage 2?What do the passages suggest about the premiership of Margaret Thatcher?

she had had a very tough term, considering she had taken over from Wilson after the winter of discontent and industrial and economic strife in the 70’s. Luckily for Thatcher her strategy managed to get the economy straight, however her attempts to bring in a poll tax and her approach to Privatisation certainly brought her position and her authority under scrutiny. It was Thatcher’s taxation policies which the electorate seemed to dislike, even though by ’86 inflation was down to 2.5%. She cut income tax however VAT and indirect taxes were raised, this resulted in a bigger gap between the high and low earners because a tax like VAT affects those with a lower income much worse than those with a higher income. Under Thatcher unemployment rose from 1.5 million in ’79 to as much as 3.2 million in ’85. These figures were tolerated in the hope some sort of economic efficiency would be reached. The Falklands war seemed to restore some of the popularity, however over the rest of her power she slowly lost her favour among the public and the members of parliament and her own cabinet. The passages suggest that Thatcher took advantage of her position and though she tried to do what she thought was best, she came across badly to both the public and the media, which is one of the most important tools in politics. Blair has become a definitive leader of the New Labour party. He has united what was for much of the eighties a very divided party, and in the ’97 election finally provided a decent opposition for the Conservative party. Blair’s critics say he has become too presidential in his attitude and too concerned with the press’ attitude towards him and his party to concentrate on the real issues facing him and his government. His media personnel has almost doubled under the press secretary Alistair Campbell. It has also been noted that Blair has significantly reduced the emphasis on Cabinet meetings. Though each prime minister is obviously individual, none so far have underestimated the importance of the Cabinet meetings. Tony Blair’s meetings occur once a week and are sometimes less than one hour long. More often than not he does not even consult his cabinet on a new issue, he seems to prefer what have become known as ‘bilateral’ meetings with individual ministers. Mr. Blair, much like Thatcher has disregarded consensus politics, more so in his second term. It now appears that he is adopting a more ‘gun-ho’ attitude and will go it alone against Iraq whether his party and the electorate support him or not. This is where the idea that Blair was becoming too presidential was invented. Since becoming prime minister and particularly in his second term, Blair has spent very little time in his own country. His interests have become far too international and the press and the electorate in particular are beginning to feel that he is not concerned with the crisis in his own country and rather more interested in becoming a world power to the same extent as America. He ought to realise that to the British public, home comes first. His relationship with Bush is getting stronger every day, even though bush faces a huge opposition over many of his policies. Blair’s critics also argue that he has delayed various referendums such as the euro as the year 2002 has been particularly patriotic with the Queen’s Golden Jubilee and the World cup etc. he knows that the nation would almost certainly vote against it. If the government were to lose a referendum it would be very bad for their image and party morale and parliament would almost certainly take a vote of no confidence. If Blair were to be removed from office, he wouldn’t like to go that way. The question asks how Blair has developed the role of prime minister. In some ways he has diminished it. Those more extreme critics would say he and Cherie had another baby to invoke sympathy from the public, as well as having blind minister, David Blunkett in his cabinet. Blair’s policies are supposedly becoming more Thatcherite and in many ways this is indeed the truth. He has dropped his emphasis on party consensus, as Thatcher did, he has a very ambiguous approach to foreign policy and he has almost completely diverted his party to the centre and continued to adopt right win policies. This is mainly to ensure he gets enough votes. It was really Tony Blair who paved the way for the successful Labour government of today, by simply changing the image of labour, adding the label New to it and create what is now known as the third way. This third way or the centralisation of the labour party has been criticised as ambiguous and incoherent by even Roy Hattersley, former deputy leader of the party. The government seems to be making less and less of cabinet. Cabinet’s role seems to be getting ever smaller. Blair has been making less and less of an emphasis on consensus politics; similar to Thatcher. Critics view Tony Blair’s approach as ambiguous and he has a ‘control-freak style’. The problem with Blair’s one-man attitude is that if something does go wrong should he expect his cabinet to shoulder responsibility even if they had nothing to do with the decision. Supporters, on the other hand tend to admire Blair for his ‘charismatic modesty, impatient niceness and tousled efficiency’. Critics have also alleged that Blair’s government is no loess sleazy than that of Major, if anything it is more so. Blair’s huge investment in a large press office pays off at times of crisis. More recently there occurred a scandal involving Blair’s key spin-doctor, Alistair Campbell. Politicians use the media to promote themselves and their policies and pass on their party’s message to the general public. Politicians employ press officers who adapt various bits of information so that it doesn’t sound as bad as it is. These officers liase with journalists and therefore gain favourable exposure in the media. It’s not just Blair that has used spin-doctors. There has been a long history, within the various parties, of politicians and spin so that the party ideology is put across to the electorate in the best possible light. Blair has also been accused of spending far too much time out of the country, and when he is in the country, he tends to avoid domestic issues, which are key to his staying in office. The most important thing, from the point of view of a voter, is the health service, education and public transport. Not so much the foreign policy. Although it is clear that Blair has become increasingly presidential in his role as prime minister, the party knows that the primary reason for their success is down to their leader. The party’s popularity almost completely rests on the charisma and popularity of its leader. One of the lessons we learnt during the Thatcher years was that, provided the government had a significant majority, it could in effect control the proceedings of parliament to suit its purposes. The basic idea is that power has moved very substantially from the parliament itself to the executive. This seriously affects both individual and collective ministerial responsibility. If an individual minister retains the support of the prime minister and cabinet, then parliament can do little about any alleged incompetence. Similarly, if the cabinet collectively stands firm in parliament, since it controls the majority, it is safe from serious censure. It is no wonder that commentators talk of prime ministerial and cabinet government, rather than parliamentary. It is now becoming the case that the prime minister barely seeks the consent of his cabinet. This must seriously undermine the position of his authority within both cabinet and parliament. Prime Ministerial meetings with one or two ministers, also help to co ordinate government policy as well as being a positive reaction to the problems often experienced with the size of the cabinet. This is possibly one of the reasons Blair has a problem with his cabinet meetings, there are simply too many ministers and so to get through everything in only one hour would be extremely difficult.   In my opinion it is true to say that Blair has taken on too much for his role as prime minister. He is behaving in the same way as a president and this is bringing much criticism that will not bode well for his future. If he is to be elected again, he must not get somplacent and assume that the voting behaviour will remain the same.