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.
Cabinet government can operate in a number of ways, depending on the
particular Prime Minister, the government, the nature of the policy
issues under consideration and the political circumstances. The
traditional view is that the Cabinet is the seat of power in terms of
policy initiation and decision-making. Cabinet doesn’t just decide
all-important issues; it also controls government policy as a whole.
Walter Bagehot regarded the Cabinet “as the crucial institution of
government” describing it as the “efficient secret”. The assumption
behind the traditional view is that Cabinet minister’s meet together
to discuss all major issues of policy before coming to a collective
decision, which then binds all members of government. Some critics
have argued that Cabinet committees enhance the power of the Prime
Minister; to Harold Wilson this was a simplistic view. Cabinet
committees make government more effective and prevent the Cabinet
being caught up in detail. Wilson said that it did not increase prime
ministerial power since it would be difficult to ignore a decision
made by a committee of Cabinet colleagues.
The argument that Cabinet government has declined in the UK is not
accepted. Arguments have been put forward to back this up. These are
that the style or character of individual Prime Ministers has a
bearing on the extent to which they wish to exercise plan or resort to
The Role and Powers of the UK Prime Minister Explain the factors which limit the way his/her power can be exercised
In Mellon’s article, several aspects are mentioned supporting the belief that the prime minister is too powerful. One significant tool the prime minister possesses is “… the power to make a multitude of senior governmental and public service appointments both at home and abroad,” (Mellon 164). Mellon goes on to state the significance the prime minister has when allowed to appoint the government’s key member...
Richard E. Neustadt, the author of Presidential Power, addresses the politics of leadership and how the citizens of the United States rate the performance of the president's term. We measure his leadership by saying that he is either "weak or "strong" and Neustadt argues that we have the right to do so, because his office has become the focal point of politics and policy in our political system.
Presidents of the United States take an oath to uphold the Constitution. In times of crisis, however, presidents are tempted to circumvent the spirit of the Constitution in the name of political expediency. The president of the United States of America is frequently under pressure, which could be for something as simple as dealing with his wife (especially if she's running for the US Senate), but usually the problem is more extensive. Then, the whole nation is affected, and the problem becomes a national crisis. A widespread panic is possible. The president must propose a plan to aid his nation while keeping the public under control. Lincoln. Roosevelt and Truman proposed bills to stop or prevent the national crises that plagued the country.
While relationship between the legislative, executive and judiciary largely remained the same, the public perception of President’s place in system has changed (Jeffrey Tulis, 1990). In the twentieth century, a strong executive emerged and was institutionalized in American national politics. Even though the framers anticipated that Congress would be the predominant branch of government, contemporary presidents wield formidable formal and informal resources of governance. As a result, the public expectations of presidents have grown and created a gap between expectations and formal powers. In an attempt to explain presidential power and its limits, four major often conflicting theories of presidential power has emerged in the last four decades.
Within parliamentary systems, the government i.e. the legislature consist of the political party with the most popularly elected Members of Parliament (MPs) in the main legislative parliament e.g. the House of Commons in the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister is appointed by the party to lead as the executive decision-maker, and the legislature work to support and carry out their will (Fish, 2006). In presidential systems, the President is directly elected with the support of their political party, with the legislative being separately elected and, in the case of the United States, being made up of representatives from different states (BIIP, 2004). This essay will provide examples to suggest that Presidents are generally more powerful than Prime Ministers. As two of the oldest forms of parliamentary and presidential governments (Mainwaring and Shugart, 1997), the United Kingdom and the United States will be the main focus of this essay, but other parliamentary and presidential countries will be mentioned.
Limits of the Prime Minister The formal constitutional powers listed in the previous answer 'The powers of the Prime Minister' are subject to a number of restraints in practice, which means that the British PM is not as powerful as often assumed, or as commonly alleged by critics. The large number of main constraints are as follows: Constraints on the power of patronage ------------------------------------- Ø If the party has been in opposition, then the first Cabinet appointed after a general election victory is usually the shadow cabinet. Ø
Since the 1950s there has been a rise in the power of the Prime Minister, specially Crossman in 1962 and Benn, who in 1979 referred to “a system of personal rule in the very heart of our Parliamentary democracy”. As Britain has remained the “world’s most successful representative democracy”. The role of the executive has significantly increased at a great deal since the end of World War 2, however, the outward dangers of a supplementary individual hegemony attached to the Prime Minister shouldn’t be overemphasized. Although the modern examples of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair whose styles of leadership have each been labelled as presidential. In this essay I will be assessing the four main prime minister’s power and if his or her powers constrained under the British system. For instances, the power of patronage, cabinet power, the party leadership and the mass media. These are four main factors of the prime minister and its effectiveness can be argued.
Ministerial Accountability Under the UK Constitution “The prerogative has allowed powers to move from Monarch to Ministers without Parliament having a say in how they are exercised. This should no longer be acceptable to Parliament or the people.” Discuss whether ministerial accountability is adequately addressed under the UK constitution The Royal Prerogative has allowed a wide array of discretionary powers to be delegated from the Monarch to ministers without a need to seek parliamentary approval. This system is both unjust and undemocratic as it leaves a number of largely unchecked powers in the hands of a privileged few. These powers, including the ability to ratify treaties, declare war, regulate the civil service and appoint ministers, have a profound effect on the lives of the citizens of the United Kingdom and therefore it is necessary for them to be regulated by Parliament, the democratically elected body of the British people.
Presidents of the United States of America have been around since the country became it’s own. Each president is given certain responsibilities and rights. Presidential power is listed in the Constitution but since then, there’s been room for more responsibilities to come into play. The powers exercised in the modern world surpass those included in the Constitution. Today, the president has a number of offices and departments serving under him. These institutions help keep the government together and everything running smoothly. The presidents rely on a number of other things. Some include elections, political parties, interest groups, the media, and public opinion. There are different kinds of powers granted to the president. While some are expressed powers and can be found written in the Constitution, others are delegated powers are given by the Congress to the president, and inherent powers, which are powers claimed by the President but aren’t found in the Constitution.
The United Kingdom as one of the remaining monarchies of the world, which head of it, the Queen Elizabeth II, has powers that provide an essential evolution of the country. These powers, are called Royal Prerogative powers. Obviously, British people respect the Royal family and additionally the queen, nevertheless they could have their own beliefs as seen on their references. According to the Royal Prerogative (“RP”), it is definitely the most historically and continuing tradition of Britain. In some situations, circumstances tend to disappear them and replaced them by other recent means. In this essay, it will define the RP and how can preserve the separation of powers. Therefore, it should explain how these powers dying to a democratic environment.
Karl Weber, a sociologist and political economist, describes authority as a form legal domination. Followers comply with the rules of these individuals because they consider their authority to be legitimate. While the legitimacy of domination does not have to be rationality, right, or natural justice, it is legitimate because individuals accept, obey, and consider domination to be required. The president of the United States is considered a traditional, legal and charismatic authority, where the legitimate domination rests on the idea of the legality of enacted rules for these individuals elevated to their status to give commands. The news article Obama's Executive-Power Use Shows He Still Holds Some Cards by NPR.com shows the President Barrack Hussein Obama II, the 44th president of the United States, as a traditional, legal and charismatic authority figure based on the characteristics of domination defined by Karl Weber.
The Three Key Functions of the Prime Minister The Cabinet and the post of Prime Minister date back to their introduction in 1721. However, at that stage, the Cabinet did not exist in its present form. Nowadays, the Prime Minister's power is akin to that of a President. The Prime Minister's post has many functions and purposes - after all, he is Head of State and Head of Government.
The Power Of The Prime Minister The role of a Prime Minister has existed since the 1700's, however most historians find it hard to pin point or name the first ever Prime Minister. Sir Robert Walpole, while universally recognized as the first prime minister of Britain, did not actually hold the title. He was probably called first minister while the title of prime minister was not officially recognized until 1905. The extent of Prime Ministerial power depends on many factors. The formal powers of the Prime Minister are extensive.
Although they are very closely related, power and authority are two different concepts. Power is needed in order to establish authority, yet it is also completely distinct from authority (Week 9 Study Notes).