PM & cabinet

evtvt since 1997 the UK has seen a return to cabinet govt

1: parliamentary majority

-when PM lacks strong parl maj theres a return to cab govt as they are forced to rely on cab consensus & negotiation

-w out a secure maj PM cant easily impose decisions so must maintain cab unity to survive

-e.g. may 2017-19 led minority govt relying on DUP “confidence & supply” so forced to consult cab heavily on Brexit strategy due to constant parl vulnerability, inc cab influence bc mins had to be kept united to avoid govt defeat in parl

-however strong parl maj enables PM dominance of cab decision making

-secure commons maj reduces cab bargaining power bc PM can rely on party discipline & whips

-e.g. Blair 1997-2003 governed w large lab maj allowing highly centralised “presidential” style, like in Iraq war 2003 decision making process used bilateral meetings w gordon brown & jack straw, cabinet only informed after key decisions effectively made so cab influence over decisions reduced

2: personality & personal mandate

-when PM lacks electoral mandate or legit they are more dependent on cab govt

-limited personal authority reduces ability to impose decisions unilaterally

-e.g. liz truss 2022 had no electoral mandate entering office through party leadership contest so lacked public legit, forced to rely on advisers & cab mins. rapid downfall following mini budget crisis where key cab members like suella braverman resigned & criticised her leadership showing weakness of PM authority w out broad support

-however strong electoral mandate & personal popularity strengthen PM control over cab

-winning gen elec gives PMs authority to dominate cab policy direction

-e.g. David Cameron 2010-15 & 2015-16 had strong electoral mandate 2015 allowing him to dominate cab decision making. partnership w chancellor George Osborne largely drove econ policy on austerity rather than collective cab debate & decision to hold EU ref was primarily his own political strategy. he was strengthened by electoral success & political capital

3: leadership strengths, cab control & survival

-when PMs are politically weak cab & senior ministers gain greater influence + can even control or remove them

-PM survival depends on cab confidence & party unity giving mins real leverage

-e.g. sunak governed w fragile parl position & limited authority so relied heavily on cab unity avoiding rebellion & confrontation w big beasts. retained figures such as suella braverman despite repeated criticism & breaches of ministerial code due to fears of triggering party rebellion

-however PM can control cab appts, reshuffles & policy direction

-structural control ensures cab govt hasn’t truly returned

e.g. johnson repeatedly reshuffled cab & centralised decision making (especially over covid), carrying out 3 reshuffles in 2 years removing around 27 ministers, demonstrating strong exec control even when facing internal criticism. blair also maintained structural domination through major use of sofa govt instead of formal cab meetings & strengthening no10 + SPADs like Alistair Campbell & Jonathan Powell who were influential despite not being elected politicians

evtvt the concepts of IMR & CMR are now important again

1: accountability

-IMR & CMR still important mechanisms for holding ministers accountable, mins expected to take respons for actions +conduct

-resignations show mins remain account to parliamen, PM & public

-e.g. suella braverman resigned home sec 2022 for unauthorised sharing official docs. Gavin Williamson resigned 2022 after allegations of bullying

-however account often weak & inconsistently enforced. mins don’t always resign when conventions breached

-whether IMF enforced or not often depends on PM support + political circums

-e.g. pritt patel remained in office 2020 after being found to bully civil servants. bojo initially remained in office despite criticism for partygtate

2:govt effectiveness & stability

-cmr remains crucial for presenting united govt. govts rely on mins publicly supporting agreed policy

-cab unity helps maintain confidence, credibility & effective govt

-e.g. braverman dismissed by sunak 2023 for repeatedly challenging govt policy & creating political difficulties showing expectation for ministers to support govts collective position. Simon hart & Alex chalk publicly defended sunaks Rwanda policy despite internal tory divisions showing continued operation of CMR. Angela Rayner publicly supported labs fiscal policies despite concerns & pressure from some lab MPs. annelise dodds resigned 2025 bc she disagreed w starmers decision to cut international aid budget

-however cmr frequently breaks down in modern politics as mins increasingly challenge govt policy

-maj political issues can override expectations of cabinet unity

-e.g. during 2016 brexit ref MPs campaigned for diff sides, michael gove leave, goerge osborne remain, cameron temporarily suspended cmr. cab unity collapsed under may 2022 mini budget causing dismissal of kwasi kwarteng & widespread pub criticism from con MPs & mins

3: prime ministerial power

-recent events show PMs still rely on cmr & imr to maintain authority

-mr remains key mechanism for pm to maintain control as resignations can strengthen or fatally undermine PM

-sunak & sajid javid resigned 2022 after chris pincher scandal and lack of faith in johnsons leadership. triggered 50+ further departures & forced johnsons resignation. tulip siddiq resigned 2025 after concerns abt family linked property arrangements became politically damaging. resignation helped starmer demonstrate mins would be held account if becoming distraction to govt business

-however PMs increasingly dominate conventions

-imr & cmr often only operate when PM enforces them so PMs can protect mins & decide when resignation is necessary

-e.g. braverman repeatedly made comments challenging & embarassing sunak + govt but he kept her in cabinet bc she was influential. tulip siddiq initially defended by starmer before resigning showing pm has significant direction over whether mr enforced. aslo supported rayner despite admitting underpaying stamp duty and ignored calls for her dismissal

evtvt the govts control of the HofC has weakened in recent years

evtvt political loyalty is the most important factor that decides a PMs selection of cabinet ministers

1: political loyalty vs ability & experience

-PMs need mins who will support & implement their agenda, making loyalty crucial

-loyal mins are less likely to undermine collective responsibility, challenge policy publicly or become leadership rivals

-e.g. johnson appointed strongly pro Brexit cab (priti prater, dominic raab, Michael Gove) in 2019 & excl many prominent cons who opposed his brexti strategy to help achieve his manifesto “get Brexit done” w out oppo. thatcher purged “wets” from cab during reshuffles particularly 1981, replacing mins who opposed her econ policies (like Ian gilmour) w loyal thatcherites

-however PMs need mins capable of running complex departments effectively

-administrative competence & experience can outweigh ideological loyalty, particularly in major offices of state

-e.g. gordon brown remained chancellor throughout the entirety of Blairs premiership regardless of freq tensions w blair bc of his econ expertise. Jeremy Hunt was retained by sunak in 2022 largely to reassure markets following the truss mini budget crisis

2: polticial loyalty vs maintaining party unity & factions

-PMs often use appts to reward loyal supporters & strengthen their personal authority

-cab appts can help consolidate PMs position within party

-e.g. anti no deal Brexit conservatives like Phillip hammond & David gauke were excl from govt, prioritising Brexit strategy loyalty over representing all wings of party. blair promoted key new labour allies like Peter mandelson & Joe Prescott strongly associated with Blairs modernising new lab project

-however PMs freq appoint critics and rivals to maintain party unity

-excl maj factions can promote rebellions & leadership challenges so managing party factions more important

-e.g. may appointed leading Brexit supporters from diff factions like johnson, Davis & fox after 2016 ref to balance party division. sunak retained suella braverman despite repeated controversies bc she was influential among conservative right & removal risked rebellion

3: political loyalty vs strengthening PM authority & public image

-loyal mins are essential for enforcing collective responsibility & supporting govt policy

-a cab full of critics makes governing much more difficult

-e.g. johnson carried out multiple cab reshuffles removing around 27 ministers during premiership, often replacing them w figures seen as more loyal to his leadership

-however modern cabs are chosen partly to reflect soc & incl influential senior politicians

-public expectations & internal party politics means loyalty cannot be the sole criteria

-e.g. Cameron promoted more women to cabinet incl Theresa may to modernise cons party image. blair couldn’t ignore the political weight of brown & his influence within lab. starmers diverse cabinet w women in maj offices of state (Rachel Reeves first female chancellor, Yvette Cooper) & ethnic backgrounds (David lammy & shabana Mahmoud)

evtvt since 2010 the exec has dominated parliament

1: legislative process

-govt largely controls what parliament debates, when it debates it and which laws are likely to pass

-control of the legislative timetable, party discipline & large commons majs usually allow the exec to secure their preferred outcomes

e.g. limits opps for PMBs, debated on Fridays when attendance is low, upskirting bill 2018 was unsuccessful bc of it. manipulate timetable, mays govt repeatedly delayed & rescheduled meaningful votes on her withdrawal agreement. johnsons 80 seat maj enabled passage of withdrawal agreement act 2020 as MPs forced to back it through whip discipline. govt can legislate through SL reducing detailed parliamentary scrutiny like govts use of SIs to introduce covid restrictions (masks, travel, school, lockdowns)

-however when party unity collapses or govts lack secure majority parl can severely constrain exec

-MPs increasingly willing to rebel against own party leadership

-e.g. inc num of bb rebellions in last decade: mays withdrawal agreement suffered multiple defeats, one had 230+ voters against it, largest govt defeat in modern parl history. parliament passed Benn act 2019 against johnsons wishes forcing him to seek extension to Brexit negotiations.

2: scrutiny & account

-although parliament possesses security mechanisms, mins can often control info & limit effective accountability

-parl cant always compel cooperation from govt

-e.g. 2013 chancellor George Osborne refused permission for treasury officials to appear before public accounts c’tee to give evidence on tax avoidance investigations.

-however parl scrutiny has become significantly stronger since 2010, reforms have strengthened their ability to investigate & challenge govt

-b’bench c’tees & select c’tees have gained greater independence & visibility

-e.g. 2010 wright reforms inc c’tee independence from whips. 2011 culture media & sport c’tee summoned Rupert + James Murdoch over phone hacking scandal showing inc status of c’tees. b’bench business c’tee (created 2010) forced debate on Hillsborough disaster 2011 contributing to release of docs

3: consitutional checks

-HofL & constituional conventions rarely prevent govts from achieving objectives

-commons remains supreme + govts usually prevail

-e.g. lords usually defer to commons after ping pong. salisbury convention stops peers blocking manifesto commitments. under blair lords couldn’t block major manifesto legislation like 1998 HRA, 2000 FOIA, 1998 nat min wage act. 2004 hunting act passed despite lords repeatedly amending bill, eventually backed down

-however parliament has become more willing to challenge exec authority & govts inc accept those restraints

-exec power is now subject to stronger political & constitutional limits

-e.g. 2013 parl voted against military strikes in syria, Cameron could’ve done it anyway but accepted it. lords voted to delay + demand revisions to govts 2015 tax credit cuts. lords amended article 50 bill 2017 & inflicted 15 defeats on govts eu withdrawal bill 2018. peers repeatedly challenges cons illegal migration bill & policies 2023 challenging calling Rwanda safe