ETVT the PM dominates cabinet

T1 – The formation of cabinets, dominates

PM can shape cabinet to their liking, surrounded by allies. Allows them to maintain auth over ministers they can control, marginalise party factions that scrutinise them.

Liz Truss removed important members of Johnson cabinet e.g. Patel, Dorries, Raab. Similar case for Starmer, initial cabinet built from own selection in shadow cabinet for many years as opposed to more popular members (none are household names). Explains lack of proper leadership challenge (aside Streeting questionable attempt) despite ~-40% approval ratings across 2025/26.

PM can also sack ministers if they undermine authority by breaking CMR, threat to keep them in line, e.g. Braverman sacked 11/23 for controversial opinion piece in times, accusing MetPol of playing favourites in Palestine Protestors. Published without review/approval by Downing Street, challenged PM.

T1 – The formation of cabinets, does not dominate

PM freedom to appoint cabinet undermined by requirement to represent different factions to maintain auth in divided party, limiting appointment of solely allies.

May cabinet balancing Brexiteers (Johnson, Davis) and Remainers (Hammond, Hunt).

PM also has to yield to popular members as they have sway over party. E.g. Powerful Blair limited by Chancellor Brown, concede policy in number of areas e.g. denied Blair’s wish to join ESC.

When PM is weak, CMR breaks down where PM is unable to control cabinet due to presence of popular members. For instance Johnson weekly critical articles in telegraph about May, leaked own dissatisfaction yet May could not sack him due to Brexiteer allegiance to him in CON. Shows how she is unable to dominate.

T1 – The formation of cabinets, overall

PM ability to appoint ministers gives sig power to control shape of cabinet, but does not equate to domination as sig power must be yielded to popular members (that inevitably will head opposing factions in the party) that the PM cannot control in order to retain authority. Otherwise, they become weak and unpopular, leading to breakdown of CMR and thus ability to govern (MPs who like popular member will vote with them against a weak PM).

T2 – Importance in decision-making, dominates

PM can bypass cabinet when determining gov policy through SPADs and less formalised meetings. PM uses these methods to announce policy in cabinet rather than determine policy with cabinet (as they have more control in smaller groups).

E.g. Blair negotiated with Brown to determine economic policy, while Blair also used bi-lateral meetings to determine policy on specific areas. Dubbed ‘sofa government’ due cabinet shunned.

SPADs playing increasing role in DS decision making. Unelected, hired by PM to work closely. Major had 8, Blair had 30 by 2005, Starmer had 20 for DS / 80 overall.
Cummings has greatest power as SPAD in influencing Johnson gov, importance in gov seen when Johnson sacrificed gov popularity to defend Cummings trip to Barnard Castle (breaking lockdown rules).

Modern PMs do not rely on cabinet as once did, can dominate cabinet by centralising governance to revolve around DS rather than cabinet as whole group.

T2 – Importance in decision-making, does not dominate

Limited extent of PM ignorance. All PMs rely on Cabinet to deliver policy, not just a formality. Power is fragmented in UK core-executive model where PM acts as manager of ministers, can exert influence but not consistently force it.

E.g. May cabinet Brexiteers forcing hard Brexit, influential.

Sunak gave control to Hunt/Cameron over decisions / policy. E.g. Cameron led UK peace negotiations on Israhell/Palestine, coordinated UK-US response to Houthi attacks in Yemen.
Hunt announced economic policy himself (unorthodox) e.g. Autumn 23 announced NatIns tax cut.

Increasingly been the case since 2010, series of weak/coalition govs (Cameron having to consult Clegg to ensure wide support).

Cabinet serves important role for gov to project unity to public, make imp decisions during crisis e.g. Johnson and Hancock during COVID.
PM acting selfishly in decision making increases risk of disorder in cabinet, reflects poorly on them = they must cede some power.

T2 – Importance in decision-making, overall

Pop PMs with big majorities can bypass cabinet and determine key policy, but is not a sustainable strategy. PM cannot handle everything, requires cabinet to run departments and deliver policy, esp important during emergency. Thus PM does not dominate.

CCLN

PM not able to dominate their Cabinets. Pop PMs w big majorities able to control gov policy and cabinet itself to detriment of cabinet’s importance, though weak PMs must give sig power to ‘big beastsʼ, weak PMs often removed by their Cabinet. Even for these popular Prime Ministers, do not dominate as ultimately rely on cabinet Cabinets to ensure gov runs smoothly, must concede to prevent themselves from being toppled.