Evaluate the view that the PM has power over the cabinet.
The cabinet consists of roughly 20 senior government ministers who head large
state departments and approve and question new policies however the Prime
Minister appoints and chairs this cabinet and decides the agenda for their
meetings. Although it appears at first glance the Prime Minster has much power
over the cabinet, there are many arguments which contradicts the extent of
power the PM holds, suggesting the cabinet is equally important. For example,
powers of patronage, when used too often, could imply a weak government or
portray the PM as a weak leader. Furthermore, their methods of cabinet
management can allow them to control the cabinet but also, if managed
incorrectly, could lead to resignations or lack of support. Finally, the PM’s power
can hugely vary due to their current circumstances and particular personality.
This can hugely affect their popularity, difficulty of their job or their power over
cabinet. Clearly, there is a range of features to investigate when evaluating a
Prime Minister’s power over their cabinet and to what extent of power.
Arguably, the most influential power of the Prime Minister over the cabinet is the
prerogative power of patronage. This is where the PM has the ability to appoint
or remove a minister from their position if the PM feels they are not completing
their job sufficiently or they are breaking the ministerial code. This brings
numerous benefits to the Prime Minister and places them in a very powerful
position to establish authority. Firstly, they can promote loyal colleagues and
supporters into positions of power, making their cabinet more likely to support
them, their decisions and provide unwavering support in a crisis. An example of
a PM using their prerogative powers for this reason is Boris Johnson. He assigned
Priti Patel and Rushi Sunak into some of the most critical cabinet positions,
possibly because they are Brexit supporters. Brexit has proven to be an
extremely controversial issue in governments as seen from Cameron’s decision
to suspend collective ministerial responsibility due to the fear of it weaking
cabinet. Boris, therefore placing Brexiters in key positions strengthens his
cabinet and ensures his policies will be supported. Furthermore, the power of
patronage ensures loyalty as the PM controls the minister’s career. This can be
effective as the Prime minister can appoint conciliating potential rivals and
maintain a balance between different factions within the governing party. This
allows a range of views to be represented in meetings when deciding policy and
for them to be scrutinised before being introduced to the house of commons and
ensure rivals are loyal. Another advantage is it binds these more rebellious MPs
to collective ministerial responsibility. This means they must openly support
policies made, the government and must not disclose information. If they do not
adhere to his they must either resign or will be sacked by the PM through the
power of patronage showing the power the PM has over members of cabinet.
This was used by Cameron who placed leave and remain supporters in vital
cabinet positions to ensure a balanced cabinet in the run up to the 2016 election.
Whilst patronage has clear benefits, it also has limitations. The PM when
selecting their cabinet, must take into account many aspects. This includes the
diversity of their cabinet as John Major in 2009 received a harsh backlash due to
the lack of women in cabinet, which weakened the public’s view of him. Also, the
placement of opposition and rivals in the cabinet can cause a split in cabinet or
result in policies lacking support due to the range of ideas in Government. The
lack of support for policies can result in a divided cabinet leading to resignations,
reflecting the PM as weak. Their party will also have less faith in their leader. This
was seen in Theresa May’s cabinet when Davis and Johnson both resigned after a
Brexit conference in Chequers, reflecting May as weak that the government
The cabinet consists of roughly 20 senior government ministers who head large
state departments and approve and question new policies however the Prime
Minister appoints and chairs this cabinet and decides the agenda for their
meetings. Although it appears at first glance the Prime Minster has much power
over the cabinet, there are many arguments which contradicts the extent of
power the PM holds, suggesting the cabinet is equally important. For example,
powers of patronage, when used too often, could imply a weak government or
portray the PM as a weak leader. Furthermore, their methods of cabinet
management can allow them to control the cabinet but also, if managed
incorrectly, could lead to resignations or lack of support. Finally, the PM’s power
can hugely vary due to their current circumstances and particular personality.
This can hugely affect their popularity, difficulty of their job or their power over
cabinet. Clearly, there is a range of features to investigate when evaluating a
Prime Minister’s power over their cabinet and to what extent of power.
Arguably, the most influential power of the Prime Minister over the cabinet is the
prerogative power of patronage. This is where the PM has the ability to appoint
or remove a minister from their position if the PM feels they are not completing
their job sufficiently or they are breaking the ministerial code. This brings
numerous benefits to the Prime Minister and places them in a very powerful
position to establish authority. Firstly, they can promote loyal colleagues and
supporters into positions of power, making their cabinet more likely to support
them, their decisions and provide unwavering support in a crisis. An example of
a PM using their prerogative powers for this reason is Boris Johnson. He assigned
Priti Patel and Rushi Sunak into some of the most critical cabinet positions,
possibly because they are Brexit supporters. Brexit has proven to be an
extremely controversial issue in governments as seen from Cameron’s decision
to suspend collective ministerial responsibility due to the fear of it weaking
cabinet. Boris, therefore placing Brexiters in key positions strengthens his
cabinet and ensures his policies will be supported. Furthermore, the power of
patronage ensures loyalty as the PM controls the minister’s career. This can be
effective as the Prime minister can appoint conciliating potential rivals and
maintain a balance between different factions within the governing party. This
allows a range of views to be represented in meetings when deciding policy and
for them to be scrutinised before being introduced to the house of commons and
ensure rivals are loyal. Another advantage is it binds these more rebellious MPs
to collective ministerial responsibility. This means they must openly support
policies made, the government and must not disclose information. If they do not
adhere to his they must either resign or will be sacked by the PM through the
power of patronage showing the power the PM has over members of cabinet.
This was used by Cameron who placed leave and remain supporters in vital
cabinet positions to ensure a balanced cabinet in the run up to the 2016 election.
Whilst patronage has clear benefits, it also has limitations. The PM when
selecting their cabinet, must take into account many aspects. This includes the
diversity of their cabinet as John Major in 2009 received a harsh backlash due to
the lack of women in cabinet, which weakened the public’s view of him. Also, the
placement of opposition and rivals in the cabinet can cause a split in cabinet or
result in policies lacking support due to the range of ideas in Government. The
lack of support for policies can result in a divided cabinet leading to resignations,
reflecting the PM as weak. Their party will also have less faith in their leader. This
was seen in Theresa May’s cabinet when Davis and Johnson both resigned after a
Brexit conference in Chequers, reflecting May as weak that the government
