As the monarch lost power and the party government replaced personal authority, the cabinet came to be formed not from the monarchs most trusted advisors but from the most senior members of the dominant political party.” However, many countries in Western Europe have a political executives and each country has its own name of this group of senior ministers. The cabinet is known in many countries as the Council of Ministers e.g. in France
The basic purpose of the Cabinet is to advise the President and it is collectively responsible to Parliament for all Government policies and the operation of Government services.
The Cabinet is appointed by the prime ministers and forms an adversarial decision making unit. It may be a centre of acute conflicts in the privacy of the cabinet room but it must present a united front in public.”Cabinets in Europe are represented by the executive- it made up the most influential people in the government, bodies, agencies, and it has a significant influence on the core government decisions.
Members of cabinets introduce a policy and they have the final judgment of policy either to submit it to parliament or disregard it. In addition, the United Kingdom cabinet consist of more than twenty departments each department serve its own needs, such as the defence, education, transport, foreign Secretary and health. In Western European states the “political chief executive” is the person on charge of national policy This title has many different translations such as in United Kingdom there is the 'Prime Ministers' and in other states such as Germany this title is known as the 'Chancellor' in Ireland the “Taoiseach”.
The prime minister was once regarded as “the primus inter pares” (first among equals) in the cabinet, but this is an inadequate description for individuals who are the dominant political personalities.” Recent phenomena -in the case of Thatcher and Blair. The power of the chief executive is depends on the type of political system; so in the parliamentary system the Prime minister is the leading member of the cabinet he or she is on the top level of government in a parliamentary system of a government. However, in a country where the presidential system is been used such as the USA, the president is the head of the executive and the head of government.
There are many differences in power and duties between both leaders. The Prime Minister leads the Government and exercises executive rule-making power. It is therefore the Prime Minister, as head of the Government, who decides policy and intervenes in case of conflict among ministries, in accordance with the general aims of national interest. Strom illustrated that the parliamentary democracy is much simpler than the other democracies such as the presidential one.
The prime minister takes an important role in the parliamentary democracy. In his article, Strom shows us the role the Prime Minister in the Parliamentary system. Storm- “the representative democracy features a chain of delegation from voters to those who govern, in which we can identify at least four discrete steps, the delegation started with from the voters to elected representative, then from the legislature to the executive branch, specifically to the head of government in other words ‘Prime Minister’- after that from the head of government ‘Prime Minister’ to the head of different executive department which has been chosen by the Prime Minister, finally it moves from the head of different executive branches ‘ministers’ to the civil servants”
Throughout history these powers changed depending on the characteristics and the ability of the leaders. The American president, Abraham Lincoln, offered a definition of democracy, he indicates; "Democracy: 'government of the people, by the people, for the people'." The power of the prime ministers is dependent on election.“The second formal role that gives a Prime Minister particular political power arises from his or her combined position as both "first among equals" in the cabinet and head of a major political party. A Prime Minister typically has the formal power to hire and fire cabinet ministers."
It is obvious as a leader of the cabinet and the party he or she has the absolute power which there is no institution can judge her or his decision in appointing and dismiss the cabinet ministers or any person in their group. Finally, being the Prime Minister means that every single aspect in the politics of his own government can be accessed, a very great power-. Indeed the powers of the within the have developed in recent years to such an extent that some political analysts now refer to as having a Prime Ministerial government rather than a government.
The Prime Minister selects his own and tends to select those people who have loyalty to him. Cabinet members who “failure to perform” can be removed from the Cabinet by the Prime Minister or ‘reshuffled’ to another position. Any senior Cabinet position brings with it certain perks and it is claimed that this tends to breeds loyalty. Some claim that by doing this, the Prime Minister surrounds himself with people who rarely get involved in serious discussions at meetings.
Senior positions within the Civil Service are appointed by the Prime Minister; it is likely that those who aspire to be senior civil servants will do little to tarnish their reputation with regards to their relationship to the Prime Minister. Blair has been accused of using a small group of people to discuss policy matters –and also of having a compliant . Therefore, when it comes to the Cabinet to discuss already discussed policy issues, some political analysts argue, that the policy will be passed but the process of Cabinet discussion will have taken place.
Some examples of recent events whereby important decisions were made by a small group of people include: The devaluation of the pound in 1967 by Harold Wilson; The Falklands conflict of 1982 when the Cabinet was suspended by Margaret Thatcher and replaced by a ‘War Cabinet’.
Tony Blair has been accused by some of moving away from cabinet government to prime ministerial government.
Although the Prime Minister has , these are not unlimited indeed there are considerable constraints on the power of the PM, these include; party Pressure for example, Thatcher was removed from office by her own MP's in 1990.Public Opinion is important, most Prime Ministers will back down in the face of severe public opposition, and examples of this include: Thatcher and Major over the Poll-Tax. Parliament can restrict the power of the Prime Minister for example; Callaghan was voted out by a no-confidence motion in 1979 and lost the subsequent election. Another example is opposition in Cabinet that severely restricted Major in his European policy in the 1990. The Civil Service can influence power. A well organised Civil Service opposition to the policy of a minister of the PM can be very effective; the and theories suggest this. A good example of Media opposition is the continuing delay in a Government decision on the Euro.
It is interesting to look at the Italian political system.The difficulty in producing policies and the high turnover of governments is evidence of a weak executive in Italy. The main reason for this is the party culture as party influence is notable in all institutions throughout the political system. The multi-party system and polarization of party ideologies, have resulted in unstable governments.The members of the two chambers of parliament have the authority to individually introduce legislature and are collectively able to block governmental legislature.
When governing parties are fragmented and unable to control their members it is increasingly difficult to pass policy bills, which has been the case in Italy. In the Italian case,The President is meant to be impartial and his main task is that of a figurehead, although he has some political influence he has does not have executive power.In Italy this has been given to the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. the Prime Minister has often not been a senior member of his party and was thus unable to lead the coalition negotiations in which over the posts Prime Minister and other ministers was decided.
The Prime Minister is not able to sack ministers this shows the potential weakness of the executive in comparison with the parliament. The task of Prime Minister is restricted to political management, to ease the political programme and to hold the coalition and therefore not to press for co-ordinating policies.The potential weakness of the executive is rooted in the Italian Constitution. So, in Italy the parliament and the executive have almost equal power over the content and detail of government legislation which is given to them by the constitution.
Politicians in Italy have been debating over the relationship between collective cabinet decision-making and the role of the Prime minister, some people support the collective principle others have favored a form of Prime Ministerial authority over the other ministers. There are also politicians who see a combination possible as collective decision making does not have to affect the role of the Prime Minister.
The Italian Constitution considers the cabinet to be a collegial body, but defines the status of the ministers and the role of the Prime Minister in a way that has been confusing.
It is therefore not difficult to conclude that the Cabinet has been relatively weak.
Compared to other Western Countries with long and stable governments like Germany and the UK the Italian executive has been relatively weak. The political system had been controlled by party influentials outside the government, this is however changed since the early 1990's and influence of executive has increased. These changes are quite radical compared to the older party system and have led to a different perspective on the executive in the Italian political system. the position of the executive in the Constitution is relatively weak in its relations with the parliament..
Looking at the the Role of the French Prime Minister gives an insight into the French system of politics and political power.France is a multiparty democracy with a semi-presidential political system.The president in such a system has ultimately no strong authority over the cabinet (as in a parliamentary system of government), because the latter ultimately depends for its survival on parliamentary support. At the same time, parliamentary and presidential survival are closely tied together as the president can dismiss the prime minister and his or her cabinet at will.
The relationship between president and prime minister is at the heart of the executive.That relationship is an unstable, volatile compound of competition, conflict and co-operation. However, although both president and prime minister hold power according to political circumstance, their powers remain founded in the constitution.Article 8 states that, the prime minister proposes members of his/her government to the president, who in turn appoints them under the leadership of the PM. The influence of the Prime Minister is also felt at a number of levels in the day-to-day work of the government. he plays a major role in forming and promoting government policy. He also coordinates the activities of members of government and, when disagreements arise, intervenes between their decisions.
It is important to note that a considerable number of the prime minister's responsibilities cannot be carried out individually without the interception of the president, ( the more important decrees have to be signed by the president also).The constitution can be criticised to a certain degree as it allocates powers and responsibilities in a vague and sometimes contradictory manner between president, prime minister and government; however, while the President of the Republic is charged with preserving fundamental national interests, it is the responsibility of the government and prime minister, as head of the government, to define and implement national policy.
The prime minister's role as part of a dual executive seems to be forever evolving, and although not granted the same powers as the prime ministers of Germany and the UK, the position of the president in France has become more ceremonial, leaving the leader of government to take control of domestic policy and parliamentary affairs.
Western prime ministers do not have full control over their cabinets, as this was never the intention of Western democracy. To have complete control implies, a form of political dictatorship where debate, and opinion would be restricted.
The role of the prime minister is quite clearly defined for example in the British case- the P.M is the leader of his party in the House of Commons ,the head of government , has the right to select his cabinet, hand out departmental positions, decide the agenda for cabinet meetings which he also chairs, he can dismiss ministers if this is required he directs and controls policy for the government ,he is the chief spokesman for the government ,he keeps the Queen informed of government decisions ,he exercises wide powers of patronage and appointments in the civil service, church and judiciary he can amalgamate or split government departments ,he represents the country abroad ,he decides the date for a general election within the five-year term and he decides the timetable of government legislation in the House.
These considerable powers seem to have been on the increase in recent times, as we have noted Tony Blair has been accused of becoming too powerful in his actions, however keep in mind that the extent of prime ministerial control is governed by a Democratic Constitution, the Cabinet, the Parliament, the media, party pressure, the civil-service, and above all a public opinion.
The question of what extent Western prime ministers have control over their cabinets will ultimately be determined by the control they have over their stakeholders and general populace!
Bibliography:
- Delegation and accountability in parliamentary democracies, Kaare Storm, deportment of political science, University of California, USA
- Politics UK edition 4, B. Jones, D. Kavanagh, M. Moran, P. Norton, Longman, chapter
- Politics 2 editions, Andrew Heywood, pal grave foundation, second addition 2002, chapter
- M. Calise, 1993, West European Studies, Frank Cass, London
- Koff and Koff, 2000, Itlay; From the First to the SecondRepublic, Routlege
- www.premier-ministre.gouv.
Submitted By: Saood M. Al Hameli
Submitted To: department of politics & I R
Date Submitted: 3-12-2003
Model code: PO607
Models of executive politics p.223
Western European Government and Politics, p.71
representative government in modern Europe, P.50-51