Almost 100 years later, when Richard Crossman edited “the English Constitution he was able to state that the doctrine of cabinet government had itself been replaced by one of prime ministerial government.. Later in his diaries Crossman was able to develop his original theory that the PM dominated the decision making process.
The PMs powers have grown over the last 100 years for a variety of reasons: the growth of the franchise has placed the elected government in a position of greater authority; the development of national party organisations after 1870 has tended to exalt the position of party leaders as leaders of mass parties and government itself has increased in both size and complexity. Whilst executives in most industrialised countries have tended to increase their powers , legislatures have relatively declined, and an important factor in Britain which has aided this has been the growth of party discipline. The PM heads the cabinet which comes from the majority party, and through party discipline the leadership can usually ensure that their backbenchers support the governments policies. In this way the government has virtual control over parliaments theoretical legal sovereignty.
The powers of the PM are formidable, they cover the cabinet itself, the wider cabinet system and the party organisation: the PM is not only the head of government and its leading spokesman, but also the leading personality in the commons the instigator of important government policies and the representative of the government both home and abroad.
However the dominance of the PM is not absolute, and there are significant limitations upon his powers. Britain is a pluralistic state and purports to be a democracy, where there is a system of parliamentary government and where the government remain responsible to the commons and ultimately to the people. The term pluralism implies that power is divided rather than concentrated; that authority lies in various institutions and is not monopolised by just one.
It is the PM who is drawn from the Commons and to the Commons that the PM is accountable. Parliamentary questions must be answered on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and the PM is expected to play an important role in major debates, defending the view of government.
As elections have become personality contests and more akin to presidential elections, so the position of PM now rests upon the view of the electorate. The media exposes party leaders to continuous examination and their television image can have an important bearing upon their success. In many respects the British system of parliamentary government gives a PM more power over British politics than the president of the USA as he can’t rely on the support of his party colleagues.
The PM is just one politician amongst many, and the powers which go with that position are not only limited by the political, institutional, economic and international circumstances, but are also limited by the personality, effort and determination of the PM in relation to his colleagues. A PM like Home may have been similar to the 19th century “primus inter pares”, but mrs Thatcher has displayed a strength of personality that represents a growth in PM power. However any PM in a modern government faces limitations from every sector of the government, the public and parliament, and PMs can only do what’s feasible – as RAB Butler said “politics is the art of the possible”. Neither “parliamentary government” nor cabinet government has ever existed in a pure form and equally prime ministerial government has its constraints. If mrs Thatcher at the peak of her influence signified the outer limits of prime ministerial power, john major saddled with a small parliamentary majority and a party bitterly divided over Europe, equally signifies the very real limitations a PM can be subject to.
