Seamus Lawlor Comparative Politics

Something based on this belief may well be valid but with numerous pieces of evidence that suggest the traditional role of the British Prime Minister is becoming more presidential and modern society adhering less to written convention, it has become far less clear who wields the most domestic power outside of conventional parameters. Both the UK Prime Minister and US president are the key figures in their countries politics. The UK Prime Minister has no formal written role but is rather a product of convention and historical evolution. His main powers include those of patronage, the control of the cabinet and its agenda, and the overall direction of government policy, both of head of government and leader of the party in power. In contrast, the US president has an official outlined role.

-Sir Richard Wilson In theory the PM is the most powerful person in these Isles; however, there are a number of limiting factors placed upon this power. From the lowliest voter to the highest civil servant to the opposition leader everyone has a certain amount of power with which they can constrain a PM to prevent the establishment of a tyrannous dictatorship or worse. The PM’s power is a variable whilst freewill remains a constant. Bibliography: Richard Crossman, ‘The English Constitution’ (1960) Tony Benn, ‘Benn’s Ten Powers’ (1981) Michael Foley, ‘The British Presidency’ Various Contributors, ‘Transforming British Government Vol.1’ (2000) Philip Norton’s ‘Styles Of Leadership Thesis Paper’ (1987)

Controlling the Parliament and the House of Commons 'The government controls parliament but it cannot always rely on getting its own way.' A tendency to ignore the protestations and activities of parliament in issuing central, top-down directives and 'memos' is a criticism often levied at Tony Blair's Labour administration. It is seen to signify a consolidation of executive power, often represented in the media as control-freakery on the part of the Prime Minister. Although any apparent increase in the power of the executive would be accentuated by the immense size of the 179 seat Labour majority, the present government is widely seen to have taken up a continuing trend towards centralised government, often revolving around Downing Street. It is perhaps largely the power of Blair's mandate in conjunction with the vice-like control of the party whips over MPs that has led to comments such as that of Lord Hailsham that we live under an "elective dictatorship."

But to me it creates a messy situation and also decreases the efficiency for enacting laws, because members have different ideology which leads to long discussions. This colourful situation causes flexibility and instability of the parliament. As executive has no power to make opposite effect to the legislative, the despotism can be established. Presidential system is more stabile in comparison with the parliamentary form government. Because president is elected directly by the people and his tenure of office is expressed in the constitution.

The Extent of the Prime Minister's Power and Authority In society today people think that the most powerful person in the British government system is the Prime Minister, Tony Blair. However, to what extent does he have power and authority? The Prime Minister doesn’t govern the country alone; the Cabinet as a whole discuss most matters. You could then say that we have Cabinet government as they do supposedly collectively make decisions on matters. The position however of power in one government may differ from that of another, Margaret Thatcher for example rarely used Cabinet at all, John Major on the other hand used it regularly and considered there opinions vital in the decision making process.

Federalist Paper 10: Madison argues that the Constitution creates a government that is strong enough to deal with the tension between the different political factions. Madison essentially states that factions are created from people who have similar backgrounds and political ideals/ beliefs. Despite the significant differences between the factions, they rarely interfere with the public good. During this time period, the majority of people were concerned with the financial woes caused by the divide in the political factions. Government starts to get unnecessary blame, because people believe that those in power are doing little to nothing to get these problems under control.

Prime Ministers within the UK are very well known figureheads, even to individuals that have little interest in politics PM’s are as present within society as celebrities are. Constantly in the public eye PM’s divide public opinion, each one runs the gamut of popularity with some people respecting greatly what a specific PM does , others hating it and others indifferent. What is largely agreed upon though is that PMs have a level power that is greater than the vast majority of the country, to what extent behind the general perception though requires further enquiry. This essay aims to dig deeper into how much power the Prime Minister has within parliament and what balances and checks may limit this power, these balances and checks do come from within parliament but also spread out to include non formal entities including the public and the media. By looking at the parliamentary system within the UK and looking at other political actors that are outside of formal politics can help reveal the power the UK PM has and the ability to get things done their way.

Britain is a liberal, parliamentary and stable democracy, where its dynamic society conditions the agenda of politics. The fusion/separation, or lack thereof, of powers is complicated, but essentially includes the Executive and Elected Legislature, Appointed Legislature, the Judiciary and the Crown. The largest party forms the executive government, whose primary role is to run government and present laws, and overall represents the will of the majority. The House of Commons is elected to reflect the will of the people, and create, criticize and approve laws. The appointed legislature is the House of Lords, and they constitute the unwritten constitution, acting as an extra safety measure, also with the ability to criticize and approve laws.

Winston Churchill Increasing democracy is by far the most important and powerful reason to ditch the monarchy. All other reasons either follow on from it or pale in comparison to the strength of the argument. The word democracy is ultimately derived from the Greek demokratia which is a term comprised of demos - 'the people' - and kratos - 'strength, power.' So, democracy basically means that power lies in the hands of the people. In most developed countries, this entails the direct election of a legislative (Parliament) and an elected Head of State (whether ceremonial or with a full range of executive powers).

The biggest difference between oligarchy and democracy is that oligarchy are controlled by powerful people and democracy is run by the people. Oligarchies can be used for transformation, by insisting that monarchs or dictators share power. Some advantages that come with oligarch government is decisions get made quickly, experts leadership and avoiding being ruled by one, rulers are most educated, and oligarchies work together to rule effectively. The disadvantages of oligarch government is the citizens needs and wants are not thought of and most leaders pass laws in favor of influential people, only privileged people have a say so in who are elected their leaders, and things done more quickly and effectively as they do not need to be discussed with many people.