How Dominant Is the Prime Minister within the British system of Government?

 The leadership styles of prime ministers historically vary. Thatcher is renowned to having a dominant style in which she had a direct approach, whilst political writer Martin J Smith described her style as being autocratic.   Wilson, in contrast even though a good communicator, was normally keen to get popular agreement within the party, to impose his personality on a particular area of policy. Generally, the prime minister consults with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and treasury before economic, foreign policy initiatives are made, however the ultimate decisions are made by the PM who is vital in determining policy. Over the past forty years in the UK, prime ministers had to play an important part in various initiatives such as, industrial trade unions and issues in Northern Ireland. PM’s on the other hand might delve into areas that they passionately believe in, which might sometimes risk upsetting other ministers. James Callaghan the PM during the late seventies intervened in educational and health matters, while Margaret  Thatcher bought in the poll tax, Tony Blair  on his thinking put into operation  the millennium dome, had a keen interest in law and order and supported President Bush in the Iraq war. The prime minister has the power to recommend to the monarch the arrangement of disbandment of parliament within a five-year period. This reinforces the PM’s authority against the oppositional parties but not the party, however this weapon can sometimes backfire, for instances when Edward Heath called an election in 1974 and James Callaghan in failing to call one in 1978 can mean defeat. Final decisions on election dates are generally finalised after   consultations with chief whips and cabinet.  Prime Minister’s historically have  unique responsibilities for the concerns of the citizens of Britain, notably in world wars and recent crisis like foot and mouth and fuel crisis. Prime Ministers importantly must govern in a democratic way, by getting a consensus if they are to do well in office. Crucially as colleagues and cabinet ministers in the party form an opinion of the prime ministers style of leadership, and the authority in which the PM is able to carry out their role. Concerns over important areas of policy effectively meant the downfall of Thatcher and Callaghan, (Coxall, Robins &Leach 2003 187-192).         The support of the party gives the prime minister the right and influence to carry out their duties, relationships within the party are paramount and are two way. The relationships the PM has between cabinet ministers and close  associates  do not necessary have to do with personally as generally they are part of a structural relationship which is linked by the rules of the Whitehall circle, which are made up of institutions of governments, past policy decisions and by outside political and economic matters. Cabinet ministers and the   prime minister have resources available to them; however, to achieve this they have to go through a process of exchange. This clearly has to do with the particular framework, which the prime minister would have achieved on the election result, if the PM were unpopular in the polls, and then they become more reliant on others for advice. A prime minister has the most authority after an election victory. The PM does not achieve anything in office if they do not have the support of their cabinet ministers. In addition, the PM is reliant on the cabinet, as the prime minister being in office is based on legitimacy. Again, an illustration of this was during the Thatcher years when in the end, she was removed as her cabinet lost confidence in her leadership and therefore she had lost the cabinets backing. After Thatcher John Major’s style of leadership represented working with the cabinet to build a consensus, which was needed at the time. Blair being aware of how support is important owed his position in lots of ways to Gordon Brown’s loyalty as Brown decided not to challenge against Blair. In return, Blair has given Brown the autonomy and authority to run the government’s economic affairs.                        Even though Tony Blair’s style is more of a superior figure, who makes executive decisions which he feels is best for the country regardless of what the majority of cabinet might think. Prime Ministers are clearly in a powerful position of authority; however, ministers are also in a strong position of the heads of departments, as these departments play an integral role in central government.  Various observers have described the present Prime Minister leadership as being presidential. If Blair is  viewed as more presidential than some of the past Prime Ministers like Major, or Douglas-Home, maybe the contrast  is  not as significant  when compared  to leaders in the vein of  Lloyd George,  Churchill and Thatcher.  Generally, Prime Ministers are in a strong confident position when things are going well, more presidential in periods of war, (Coxall, Robins and Leach,2003:200).

 The final analysis On the Prime Minister is that they have   around them ministers who have needs of looking after what is best for their department and themselves. The quest of self-interest can weaken the combined ambitions of government and the role of the PM; the task of the prime minister therefore is to act as an entrepreneur who gives support and benefits to ministers in return for their support, which is important. Furthermore, the PM is an entrepreneur not only creates incentives and choices, but can also use leadership authority to shape preferences so that cabinet ministers  can choose what is best for the party, (Fisher, Denver, Benyon, 2003:227-235).

To conclude, we can see that the position of the Prime Minister is about power, responsibility, and influence, such as areas in foreign affairs and global and European council events. Overall, the Civil Service as gone through major changes to make the civil service more accountable, even though the Blair government have carried on with these reforms bought in by the conservatives. Evidence suggests the reduction of the Civil Servants is definitely a cost cutting measure designed to make the Civil Servants more efficient. Another theme of this essay related to the leadership styles of the Prime Ministers and comparing these. It can be argued that leadership needs to find a common ground to build a consensus amongst colleagues, otherwise as in the example of ex Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher; the prime minister can be easily voted out when the confidence is lost.  The support of cabinet and everyone working together is very important if the PM is to remain in office, evidence suggests that this will always be the case. Overall, the modern Prime Minister has many resources available to them, also, the relationship the Prime Minister has with cabinet will always continue to be a two way one. It follows that the Prime Minister as a political entrepreneur attempts to encourage cabinet to do what is best for the country. This can at times be very risky, such as the millennium dome, and in past and current world conflicts.