The Cabinets role in decision making has been marginalised in recent governments

Authors Avatar

Explain the term cabinet committees. (5 marks)

Much of the decision-making orchestrated within the Core Executive is performed by cabinet committees which are appointed by the Prime Minister. They have two principal purposes: to uphold the convention of Collective Cabinet Responsibility and to reduce the workload of the Cabinet and there are two types of cabinet committees: those which are ad-hoc that deal with unexpected or temporary issues (e.g. COBRA), the other being standing committees which are named and permanent. They usually comprise departmental ministers and a representative of the Treasury (each department needs to control its budgetary allowance). A minority of the committees are significant in the way in which the Government determines its policy; in this case, senior members of the Cabinet (including the Prime Minister) usually chair such meetings. Conclusions made in these committees are often then presented to the Cabinet for consideration in a wider context. For example, the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games is responsible for liaising with the Government on the planning, construction and general evaluation in respect to the 2012 Olympic Games in London – the official Government policy is then based on their recommendations. However, in practice, the Cabinet Committees may not reach a verdict upon the topic which they set; in which case, the Cabinet will then lose time discussing a topic which may detract away from more significant policies – it may even cause damaging splits in the Cabinet as fellow department ministers stand at two different viewpoints.

Consider how significant the doctrine of collective cabinet responsibility is in modern British politics. (10 marks)

Collective Cabinet Responsibility (CCR) is a constitutional convention in place in the Core Executive of the UK Government which aims to ensure that ministers are, as the name suggests, collectively responsible to the House of Commons for governmental policy, which – through the Cabinet – they helped to create. Generally-speaking, the doctrine entails the assurance that: all ministers carry the same views and opinions on Governmental policy so as to keep policy clear and simple for the general public and to ensure that there is a united front within the governing party as to guarantee that confidence can be placed within it and to portray the image that the Government is fully in control of itself. The uncodified practice also guarantees to avoid confusion which can occur when members of the same administration publicly show their difference of opinions. If there is disapproval to such a degree that the minister no longer feels that their operations in their current capacity are tenable and cannot remain silent about such, then it is their responsibility to resign from the Cabinet, and as such, a paradox arises; whilst on one hand the Government appears strong for rejecting members which disagree with it, it also raises questions about the direction in which their policy is heading.  

Join now!

The principle of collective responsibility underpins the system of Cabinet government. It reflects democratic principle: the Legislature expresses its confidence in the whole of the Core Executive, rather than in individual ministers. Similarly, the PM, in acting on ministerial advice, needs to be confident that all ministers represent official government policy. In all areas of their work, therefore, ministers represent and implement government policy and, from that, we can conclude that it is a significant doctrine within the functioning of the Government. In a more recent context, CCR was best exemplified by the Cabinet’s willingness to accept the terms ...

This is a preview of the whole essay