Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments being made in the above extract over the
role of cabinet government (25 marks)
This article argues that the power of Cabinet has decreased much in the last few decades for
a number of reasons including a ‘preference for sofa government’. It also argues that the
load of government business is ‘too heavy for them’. However, the article adds a few
examples of where the Cabinet has been fairly powerful making it a more balanced fairer,
but, overall, the article empathises the Cabinet’s weakness
Written in May 2020 it seems to be written with the resignation of Sajid Javid in mind. Javid
resigned as Chancellor in February 2020 after the PM asked him to sack all of his advisers in
a move by No 10 to seize control of the Treasury. Throughout his time as Chancellor, Javid
clashed with Dominic Cummings, one of Boris Johnson’s special advisers, over many issues.
It was suggested that Cummings had something to do with the PM’s request to Javid and in
his resignation letter, Javid stressed the importance of the PM having advisers who would
give him good advice. This situation is a perfect example of power being pulled away from
Cabinet. The Guardian are a left leaning newspaper and so are likely to disapprove of Boris
Johnson’s Conservative government and therefore disapprove of his actions in this situation.
Thus, this article about Cabinet’s decreasing power may be slightly bias as the writer may be
trying to point out that the situation with Javid was just one example of Cabinet becoming
increasingly redundant. The writer may have exaggerated slightly and used dramatic
language such as ‘little more than spokespersons’ in addition to putting more weight on the
argument that Cabinet has little power in order to make this point and appeal to their more
left leaning readers. Consequently, the article may be slightly bias.
One of the main arguments made in the article is that ‘Cabinet ministers have lost their
collective voice in preference for sofa government’. PMs have shown that large Cabinet
meetings are not their style anymore. In fact, Ken Clarke, who was a minister under
Thatcher, Major and Cameron, noted that the level of cabinet discussion had decreased
over that time period. This supports that article’s argument that Cabinet’s decreasing power
is nothing new. ‘Sofa government’ first began to appear under Tony Blair who preferred to
make decisions with an inner circle of advisors or in meetings with individual ministers. He
continued with this style of government; however, it would be highly criticised by reports
after the war in Iraq. For example, the 2016 Chilcot Report highlighted the need for frank
and informed collective ministerial discussion in the future clearly showing that it is not the
best way to run a government as the article clearly argues. ‘Sofa government’ continued to
be used by both Labour and Conservative PMs. During the 2010 Conservative Liberal
Democrat coalition, David Cameron, Nick Clegg, George Osborne and Danny Alexander were
known as the ‘Quad’ as they made many key decisions together.
It could also be argued that ‘sofa government’ is favoured by Boris Johnson who relies
heavily on his special advisers such as Dominic Cummings. Before his resignation in
December, Cummings played an unusually large role in UK politics for an unelected official.
Johnson protected Cummings heavily when he broke lockdown rules, and it seemed the pair
were inseparable much to the dismay of MPs. Many were glad to see Cummings resign as
they hoped it would allow for more collaboration between the PM, his party and his
role of cabinet government (25 marks)
This article argues that the power of Cabinet has decreased much in the last few decades for
a number of reasons including a ‘preference for sofa government’. It also argues that the
load of government business is ‘too heavy for them’. However, the article adds a few
examples of where the Cabinet has been fairly powerful making it a more balanced fairer,
but, overall, the article empathises the Cabinet’s weakness
Written in May 2020 it seems to be written with the resignation of Sajid Javid in mind. Javid
resigned as Chancellor in February 2020 after the PM asked him to sack all of his advisers in
a move by No 10 to seize control of the Treasury. Throughout his time as Chancellor, Javid
clashed with Dominic Cummings, one of Boris Johnson’s special advisers, over many issues.
It was suggested that Cummings had something to do with the PM’s request to Javid and in
his resignation letter, Javid stressed the importance of the PM having advisers who would
give him good advice. This situation is a perfect example of power being pulled away from
Cabinet. The Guardian are a left leaning newspaper and so are likely to disapprove of Boris
Johnson’s Conservative government and therefore disapprove of his actions in this situation.
Thus, this article about Cabinet’s decreasing power may be slightly bias as the writer may be
trying to point out that the situation with Javid was just one example of Cabinet becoming
increasingly redundant. The writer may have exaggerated slightly and used dramatic
language such as ‘little more than spokespersons’ in addition to putting more weight on the
argument that Cabinet has little power in order to make this point and appeal to their more
left leaning readers. Consequently, the article may be slightly bias.
One of the main arguments made in the article is that ‘Cabinet ministers have lost their
collective voice in preference for sofa government’. PMs have shown that large Cabinet
meetings are not their style anymore. In fact, Ken Clarke, who was a minister under
Thatcher, Major and Cameron, noted that the level of cabinet discussion had decreased
over that time period. This supports that article’s argument that Cabinet’s decreasing power
is nothing new. ‘Sofa government’ first began to appear under Tony Blair who preferred to
make decisions with an inner circle of advisors or in meetings with individual ministers. He
continued with this style of government; however, it would be highly criticised by reports
after the war in Iraq. For example, the 2016 Chilcot Report highlighted the need for frank
and informed collective ministerial discussion in the future clearly showing that it is not the
best way to run a government as the article clearly argues. ‘Sofa government’ continued to
be used by both Labour and Conservative PMs. During the 2010 Conservative Liberal
Democrat coalition, David Cameron, Nick Clegg, George Osborne and Danny Alexander were
known as the ‘Quad’ as they made many key decisions together.
It could also be argued that ‘sofa government’ is favoured by Boris Johnson who relies
heavily on his special advisers such as Dominic Cummings. Before his resignation in
December, Cummings played an unusually large role in UK politics for an unelected official.
Johnson protected Cummings heavily when he broke lockdown rules, and it seemed the pair
were inseparable much to the dismay of MPs. Many were glad to see Cummings resign as
they hoped it would allow for more collaboration between the PM, his party and his
