pm and executive predicted questions + evidence

ETVT the Cabinet has a very important role in policy making

overall: no

1a) point + 2 evidence

the Cabinet must give authority to government policy

• e.g. all decisions must be bought to and approved by Cabinet for them to become policy

• e.g. in 2016 Cameron lost a key vote on Sunday Trading

1b) point + 4 evidence

Cabinet now meets for less time and is seen as more of a ‘rubber stamp’

• e.g. growth of SPADs sees PM become less reliant on Cabinet as they often have a Policy Unit at Number 1 and a number of SPADs

• e.g. Wilsons ‘Kitchen Cabinet’

• e.g. Blair’s ‘sofa government’

• e.g. PMs increasingly use bilateral decision making and meets key ministers to make decisions rather than discussion with Cabinet

2a) point + 2 evidence

Cabinet still makes decisions on key matters

• e.g. after completing renegotiations of the UK’s EU membership in 2016 Cameron called a full Cabinet meeting

• e.g. also important in times of national crisis such as during the Falklands War 1982 where the ‘War Cabinet’ made many key decisions which were reported and discussed with the full Cabinet

2b) point + 4 evidence

PM is able to control the workings of the Cabinet through powers of patronage

• e.g. controls agenda and length of Cabinet meetings as well as summing up conclusions and maintaining control over discussions

• e.g. collective responsibility gives PM power to silence dissenters in the Cabinet

• e.g. they can control posts such as in 2014 when Cameron’s reshuffle saw him sack 5 Cabinet members, promote or demote 3 including replacing ‘Leaver’ Micheal Gove with ‘Remainer’ Nicky Morgan

• e.g. in 1983 Thatcher replaced many ‘wets’ with ‘drys’ so all key economic posts were held by ‘drys’

ETVT the executive has too much power in the UK political system

overall: yes

1a) point + 3 evidence

rise of rebellious MPs and more assertive Lords challenge the executive

• e.g. 2010 coalition saw the Tory backbenchers revolting more often leading to significant defeats on House of Lords reform and the EU referendum

• e.g. whips were powerless to keep Eurosceptics in line with the Major and Cameron governments

• e.g. Lords defeated proposed tax credit cuts in 2015

1b) point + 4 evidence

majority governments can pass almost anything, strengthened by Parliament Acts

• e.g. Blair did not lose a vote for the first 8 years of his premiership due to his landslide majority of 179 seats

• e.g. major changes have been passed without opposition such as the Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 and devolving more powers to devolved governments

• e.g. Parliament Act 1949 reduced Lords’ delaying powers to 1 year

• e.g. executive rejected Lords’ attempts to amend the Article 50 Bill

2a) point + 3 evidence

the Supreme Court can use judicial review and protect human rights

• e.g. Supreme Court can rule the decisions of the executive ultra vires

• e.g. UNISON case 2017 the Supreme Court ruled the Fees Order to be ultra vires, the government was forced to refund over £27 million to thousands of people

• e.g. judicial activism sees judicial branch take on more power as in Miller vs Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union judges became known as the ‘enemies of the people’

2b) point + 1 evidence

the Supreme Court is limited in its power over the executive

• e.g. the executive cannot be forced to take action by judiciary as seen in Steinfeld and Kaiden vs Home Secretary in 2018 deciding if civil partnership should be available for couples other than same-sex couples, Steinfeld and Kaiden won but the executive remedied the situation with the 2019 Opposite Sex Couples Civil Partnership Act