The British Prime Minister Now Has Presidential Powers

Th“The British Prime Minister now has Presidential Powers” Discuss the Validity of this Statement It would be correct to say that over the years the British Prime Minister has become more of a Presidential figure in Parliament. Recent prime ministers that have been referred to as presidential include Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair and Harold Wilson. Prime Ministers are supposed to be ‘First Among Equals’ (Primus Inter Pares), however recent Prime Ministerial actions have got people questioning whether or not the Prime Minister has more power and is becoming a Presidential figure.

The idea that the prime minister is now more presidential is drawn from the knowledge of the United States president and how the British Prime Minister compares to him. Firstly, the media turns the Prime Minister into a political celebrity. The actions the Prime Minister takes inside parliament and also much of the PM’s personal life is publicised in newspapers and television. The Prime minister is the spokesperson for the government. Although their access to the media can be used for personal benefit, the media has been more critical of politicians in recent years.

There is evidence of this as the BBC made allegations that the Iraq dossier was ‘sexed up’ during Tony Blair’s time as Prime Minister (class notes). The U. S President tends to have media coverage also. The wider use of special advisors increases how presidential the Prime Minister appears. The ‘Spatial leadership’ that the Prime Minister now adopts also gives us this impression. Prime Ministers now distance themselves from parties and government and develop their own ideologies. Examples of this include Blairism and Thatcherism (class notes).

In times of distress in the country the people often turn to the Prime Minister in search of a solution. They PM tends to reach out to the people in times of crisis, for example, David Cameron returned home from his holiday early last year to address the issue of the London Riots (class notes). The power of the PM has increased in recent years as the prime minister has now increased control over Cabinet Office, which has turned it into a small scale Prime Minister’s department. The Prime Minister has the capability to dominate his cabinet. This makes him more like a president as

Collective Responsibility is an effective way of ‘gagging’ his ministers. All ministers are expected to support publicly all decisions made in cabinet, or else resign. For example, in 2010 David Cameron was discussing with cabinet about building a Millennium Dome. Before a decision was made, he went outside and told the awaiting media that a dome was being built. Therefore the Prime Minister made the decision alone and cabinet couldn’t disagree (class notes). Another example of this is that Gordon Brown announced his decision to give independence to the Bank of England.

Blair and Brown took this decision alone and Mo Mowlam, one of the most popular ministers in Blair’s cabinet stated, “I read about the bank of England decision in the newspapers” (Politics Review). This clearly shows that the Prime Minister can dominate his cabinet and make decisions despite him being “Primus Inter Pares” (first among equals). As the years go on, Prime Ministers are also having shorter and less frequent cabinet meetings and are holding more bilateral meetings. The amount of cabinet meetings has declined from 100 a year to approximately 40.

Under Margret Thatcher’s parliament, her Cabinet was used less than previous Prime Ministers and annual meetings took place about 35 times. Under Blair, meetings rarely lasted an hour. This is evidence of the Prime Minister becoming more presidential and tackling decisions alone rather than with Cabinet. Thatcher and Blair also tended to have more committees and sub-committees. Blair’s ‘Sofa government’, Thatcher’s ‘Wise men’ and Wilsons ‘Kitchen Cabinet’ are all operating through bi-lateral meetings between the Prime Minister and advisors, so policy was ratified before it reached cabinet.

These are all examples of Prime Ministers taking matters into their own hands and becoming more dominant and presidential. The dominance of the Prime Minister over Parliament is also shown in the ways that he/she chairs important cabinet committees and sets the cabinet agenda. Setting the cabinet agenda allows the Prime Minister to leave anything that may be difficult to come to an agreement on in Cabinet, to the end so that there will eventually be no time to cover it and the Prime Minister has to come to a decision on his/her own. Margaret Thatcher was said to have done this quite frequently.

This shows that the Prime Minister can therefore decide on important affairs without having to consult cabinet. Tony Blair was noted to have used cabinet Committees a lot. The Prime Minister is also considered presidential because of what is seen as a growing ‘West Wing’ in Downing Street. This is due to the increase in Political Advisors in the PM’s office. The advisors help the Prime Minister make decisions even though they are unelected themselves. This means that they effectively influence his decisions and help him bypass cabinet, for example Blair gave his advisors power of Civil Servants.

On the other hand, the Prime Minister can give considerable control to his cabinet members, which isn’t evident in American politics. For example, during Blair’s reign as PM, the Labour party was said to have a ‘Duel Monarchy’ due to how much power was given to Gordon Brown. Other ministers can constrain the Prime Ministers power and effect his decisions, which doesn’t happen with the U. S president. The Prime Ministers personality is an issue in how much power they have over Cabinet. They have powers over office but some may be more proficient than others in the exercise of those powers.

Some Prime Ministers have been good in government management and other haven’t. Some adopted an autorical approach and some others focus on policy reflections. The amount of authority a PM had depends on how assertive a personality he/sh has. For example, John Major was often ridiculed for his inability to make decisions and was seen as a pushover (class notes). The PM’s popularity with the public also dictates how much power they have. At the moment, David Cameron is restricted from acting presidentially as a result of the constraints of a coalition government.

The coalition government may weaken the powers of Cameron as many compromises need to be made to keep the government stable. For example, Cameron had agreed to a referendum on the electoral system. He had agreed to introduce fixed term elections. Liberal democrats hold key cabinet positions. Unlike the president, the PM may face resistance in cabinet as particular cabinet members may not go along with a particular proposal. For example, Thatcher’s parliament lost a bill as the majority of cabinet voted against it.

The PM cannot completely ignore his cabinet. Unlike the U. S. A, the cabinet is Britain is elected. The cabinet can overthrow the Prime Minister is he is disliked. This cannot happen in U. S government. In conclusion, the Prime Minister, in many ways over the years has increased his/her power to such an extent as to appear presidential. However, there are many constraints on PM power to conflict with this view. Whether or not the Prime Minister remains in high powers depends on power, personality and circumstance.

Read more

British Prime Minister

From the year 1905 to the year 2008, there are already 24 prime ministers who have ruled over as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (United Kingdom Prime Ministers 2008). As of the present times, the position is occupied by Gordon Brown. The power that is being held by the prime minister has been passed on from one hand over the next for the past 103 years. The source of power is an important factor in analyzing the role of the prime minister and the way through which a deeper understanding of how it is maintained can be seen.

The distinctiveness and the constant replacement of the prime minister over the course of their existence in the British government have to be related to the dynamics of power together with its source in order to explain why and how it is held by the people in position. This paper aims to draw a concept of power and identify whether there is an informal and formal side of power. This is done through a research using different literatures and also draws upon personal opinion in order to provide a critical position on the general topic of power.

This is followed by a discussion of the power that is exercised by the prime minister, more specifically that of the United Kingdom. The sources of power, according to the conventions, arrangements, and constitutional devices are also researched in order to relate this to how the power is earned and maintained. In order to do this, the experiences of the past prime ministers are studied and collected to form a historical overview of how the power to govern as a prime minister is taken and maintained. What is Power?

In understanding the concept of power, it is important to take note of its definition and the characteristics that are associated with it. Morgan (2006) defines it to be “the medium through which conflicts of interest are ultimately resolved [and] influences who gets what, when, and how” (p. 166). In relation to this, it is seen that power occurs with the picture of social reality drawn by the members of a particular group and the need for the allocation of the scarce resources (Pfeffer & Salancik 2003).

There is a relation that can be seen from the two definitions wherein it could be derived that the person or the group which has the power defines the resources that are considered to be of limited amount. Along with the possession of power is the ability and influence for particular resources together with its allocation. In addition to this, the seat of power is defined by the individuals making up a group. Politically speaking, power is seen to be a means through which sharing occurs in the process of making decisions (Fahlbusch, Bromily, & Barrett 1999).

In the context of the government, the decision-making process meanaaas the formulation of the policies, which include government action or inaction. Further disparity is seen with the use of power as there are two faces seen for it. It is seen as an instrument through which peace and status quo can be achieved (Fahlbusch, Bromily, & Barrett 1999). On the other hand, it remains to be very susceptible to abuse that includes “misuse, excess, and tyranny” (Fahlbusch, Bromily, & Barrett 1999: 311)

Two additional and related definitions of power is provided by Shortell and Kaluzny (1997) where it is seen that power is: 1) something that is used in order to change the course of action or behavior of another group or individual and 2) the influence that is exerted in order to force another person or group to do something that is in opposite to the original decision. There are certain elements that can be clearly seen from these definitions of power. First, it is seen that it may or it may not transcend through a hierarchical structure and is not dependent on the way through which positions in the organization is patterned.

This is because the direction from which the power stems can be anywhere who can actually accomplish the two conditions mentioned above. However, it can be seen that there is, actually, a greater chance for those who occupy higher positions to have power and use it because of the capabilities and responsibilities that is attached to the position. Second, it is a means of initiating change. To a certain extent, it can be seen that change is often associated with leadership as the latter is associated with two characteristics which include being “masters of change” and “visionaries” (Fisher 1999: 138).

It can be related that since there is a sense of change in every leader, it can be seen that power is something that is used for the purpose of leading people into making several changes for a particular goal that is intended. It should be noted, still, that leadership is not the same as management and may or may not lie within the formal organizational structure. Third, power is sometimes associated with coercion and the use of force in order to achieve something.

Though this is oftentimes seen and accepted in negative terms, it should be considered that this is not the sole aspect of power. In fact, there are different types of power that is classified according to their sources and coercion is only one of the elements that can be seen from one or a few of these types. A discussion with regard to this is placed in the following section. Sources of Power There are five general sources of power as presented by Cronkhite (2008). The classification includes reward power, coercive power, legitimate power, referent power, and expert power (Cronkhite 2008).

First, reward power exists where loyalty and cooperation is earned in exchange for something that is needed (Cronkhite 2008). Second, coercive power involves the ability to take away something that is considered to be of value when the behavior or action desired is not achieved (R. Denhardt, J. Denhardt, & Aristigueta 2001). Third, legitimate power, placed in simple terms, is considered to be the type of power which stems from the position that is being held wherein people are made to follow and act in consideration of the organizational structure, which indicates the position (Bob, I.

Asherman, S. Asherman, & Randall 2001). Fourth, referent power is the type wherein power is gained through association with a powerful group or persons (Timby & Smith 2007). It could be of the inherent power of the organization to which a particular person belongs that makes other people behave in a particular manner Lastly, expert power is that which is derived from the “special knowledge, skill, or ability” that a particular individual possesses (Cottam, Uhler, Mastors, & Preston 2004).

The Role of the Prime Minister There are several roles that need to be fulfilled by the British Prime Minister being the national leader. The breadth of responsibilities include “constitutional and procedural, appointments to ministerial and other senior posts, conduct of Cabinet and parliamentary business, the organization and efficiency of government, the Budget and other economic decisions, and special foreign and defense functions” (Mayne 1999: 26).

As can be discerned from the list of general roles taken by the Prime Minister, there are functions which are legislative and executive in nature. The Prime Minister’s presence and control is felt when it comes to policy formulation, which is in the decision-making process, and in policy implementation, which is the executive functions of the prime minister. For example, he or she has affairs to deal with in the decisions made but also has defense functions, which is under the executive branch of the government.

Another set of classification is also provided by Borthwick, Shell, and Williams (1995) wherein the Prime Minister is vested with responsibilities as the primary individual responsible for the operations of the government, the head of the party to which he or she belongs, and the leader of the whole nation. There are different specific tasks that need to be accomplished in consideration of the different interests of the people to whom the prime minister is accountable to.

It is also defined by Hayward and Menon (2003) that a seemingly prime ministerial government exists in Britain wherein the “prime minister co-ordinates policy, resolves conflicts, and controls the main resources” (67). In the definition previously provided in an attempt to clarify the concept of power, it has been shown that the elements of power include possession of control in resources, an influence in the decision making process, and a voice in the resolution of conflict.

These are the three elements that could also be discerned from the functions and roles of the prime minister that are presented by Hayward and Menon (2003) and Mayne (1999). It can be concluded that the set of functions given here characterize the existence of power within the hands of the Prime Minister and the sources can be both formal and informal, as is followed in the definition of power in general. Where it all Comes From There are different sources of power that can be seen from the history of prime ministerial incumbency in Britain.

Through the intricate network of relations formed from the organizational hierarchy of the government, it can be seen that there are three general sources of power that includes the conventions, the constitutional devices, and the arrangements that are present in the British government. From personal characteristics also comes a consideration of whether or not a particular individual is given the power to serve as the Prime Minister.

There are four characteristics, which include: 1) the name and status in the society or an organization together with what an individual can do; 2) perceived affiliation with success in terms of politics; 3) acceptance of the public; and 4) a relatively high position in the “party, parliamentary party, and government” (Poguntke & Webb 2005: 37). While these can not be considered as the direct sources of power, it serves as among the characteristics that are seen as bases whether power is given to an individual or not.

This is important because these are requirements or prerequisites that are seen to be the main characteristics of the people that are vested with the powers of the Prime Minister. Likewise, it can be seen that these bases for the acquisition of power is not framed in the Constitution nor is it determined through the formal lines of government but are the shadow elements being considered in the selection process. However, it should also be noted that not everyone who fits these conditions become Prime Ministers.

This is because there are other forms of standards are present that limits only one individual to be considered rightful as the Prime Minister. To a certain extent, it can be said that the Prime Minister is considered to be an “elected monarch” and draws certain powers from the Royal Crown of the land (Borthwick, Shell, & Williams 1995). The approval and acceptance of the monarch has been an important factor in maintaining the power that is within the reach of the Prime Minister.

Over the years, the manner through which the monarch is selected has evolved in such a way that in the beginning, it is the personal affiliation of the person to the monarch that mattered but in the twentieth century, it became the credentials and appropriateness of the person that is considered by the monarch (Borthwick, Shell, & Williams 1995). While today’s monarch do not hold as much power and influence as those that existed in the past, they are still given the chance to voice out their concerns over the affairs of the government especially with the selection of the key leaders of the country.

It has been through traditional considerations and the influence that the monarch has that renders them to still be powerful for certain decisions made in the country. In addition to this, the Prime Minister is tasked to report to the monarch every week in consideration of the monarch’s possession of “the right to be consulted, the right to encourage and the right to warn” (Williams 1998: 165). There are still powers and rights that are given to the monarch that the Prime Minister could not ignore and should continuously take into account for the former could easily use its power against the Prime Minister.

In addition to this, it is argued by Harrison and Boyd (2006) “that the major development strengthening PM power over the last century have been mainly political rather than constitutional (34-5). Politically speaking, the power of the Prime Minister is related to the party that wins in the House of Common, which is considered to be a source of power for the Prime Minister (Borthwick, Shell, & Williams 1995). The largest party wins in the House of Common and the person who serves as the leader of the said party is appointed as the Prime Minister with the approval of respective authorities in the land.

Just the same as the Prime Minister reports to the monarch, he or she is likewise responsible to the House in lieu of the need to maintain the power that is vested upon him or her. There are several expectations that need to be fulfilled as a Prime Minister that would continuously be within the shoulders of the incumbent. Moreover, another source of power for the Prime Minister is the assignment of being the First Lord of the Treasury where the two positions are often associated with one another (Goodnow 2005). The responsibilities of the said office give the Prime Minister another area from where his or her power could stem from.

Conclusion Power is considered to be the influence in the decision-making process, the control over the resources, and the force exerted over the behavior and actions of other people. In general, there are five sources of power that is categorized according to how power is attained and maintained. Placed in the context of the British government, power is considered in the roles of the Prime Minister. There are general roles that are fulfilled by the individual who is incumbent to the said position, which is being the head of the state, government, and the parliament.

The powers of the Prime Minister are also earned through the monarch and the positions assigned of him or her. There are different limitations to the extent of control exhibited by the monarchy today but it remains to be ingrained in the British society and it can still place several pressures on the Prime Minister and the power of the same. In addition to this, there are also personal characteristics that are held as important for the position. Indeed, the powers of the Prime Minister stem from different sources, which are both formal and informal.

The broad range from which power is sourced out is considered to be an implication of the need for a clear delineation of the powers and functions of the British Prime Minister. List of References Bob, P. , Asherman, I. , Aherman, S. , and Randall, J. (2001) The Negotiation Sourcebook. Amherst, MA: HRD Press. Borthwick, R. L. , Shell, D. , and Williams, R. (1995) Churchill to Major: The British Prime Ministership Since 1945. NY: M. E. Sharpe, Inc. Cottam, M. , Uhler, B. , Mastors, E. and Preston, T. (2004) Introduction to Political Psychology.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Cronkhite, C. (2008) Criminal Justice Administration: Strategies for the 21st Century. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Denhardt, R. , Denhardt, J. and Aristigueta, M. (2001) Managing Human Behavior in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. London: SAGE. Fahlbusch, E. , Bromiley, G. , and Barrett, D. (1999) The Encyclopedia of Christianity: (A-D). Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Fisher, K. (1999) Leading Self-Directed Work Teams: A Guide to Developing New Team Leadership Skills. NY: McGraw-Hill. Goodnow, F.

(2005) Comparative Administrative Law: An Analysis of The Administrative Systems, National And Local, Of The United States, England, France, And Germany. NY: G. P. Putnam’s Sons. Harrison, K. and Boyd, T. (2006) The Changing Constitution. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Hayward, J. and Menon, A. (2003) Governing Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mayne, A. (1999) From Politics Past to Politics Future: An Integrated Analysis of Current and Emergent Paradigms. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Morgan, G. (2006) Images of Organization. London: SAGE. Pfeffer, J.

and Salancik, G. (2003) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Poguntke, T. and Webb, P. (2005) The Presidentialization of Politics: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Shortell, S. and Kaluzny, A. (1997) Essentials of Health Care Management. NY: Thomson Delmar. Timby, B. & Smith, N. (2007) Introductory Medical-Surgical Nursing. Philadelphia PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Williams, A. (1998) UK Government and Politics. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers.

Read more

Why John a Macdonald Is Consider One of the Greaters Prime Minister

The greatest prime minister in Canada Introduction •After 143 of Canada been created by the father of confederation, it can be realize that nothing of this would have happen if it was for the persistence of Prime Minister John A. Macdonald •Three British colonies were formed into four Canadian provinces. The British Province of Canada was divided into the new Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and two other British colonies, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, also became provinces of Canada. Promise to connect west with east and in today’s environment that connection is still and icon in Canadians •Convince one important person in Nova Scotia so that this province would not retired from the confederation •Server 2 term in •He is consider one of the father or confederation •Second longest prime minister in Canada history

•Only prime minister with six majority governments •won praise for having helped forge a nation of sprawling geographic size, with two diverse European colonial origins, numerous Aboriginal nations, and a multiplicity of cultural backgrounds and political views Thesis Sir John A. Macdonald, Canada’s greatest Prime Minister was responsible for the founding of Canada and work hard to make this nation stable and prosperous The greatest prime minister in Canada Introduction •After 143 of Canada been created by the father of confederation, it can be realize that nothing of this would have happen if it was for the persistence of Prime Minister John A. Macdonald •Three British colonies were formed into four Canadian provinces.

The British Province of Canada was divided into the new Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and two other British colonies, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, also became provinces of Canada. •Promise to connect west with east and in today’s environment that connection is still and icon in Canadians •Convince one important person in Nova Scotia so that this province would not retired from the confederation •Server 2 term in •He is consider one of the father or confederation Second longest prime minister in Canada history •Only prime minister with six majority governments •won praise for having helped forge a nation of sprawling geographic size, with two diverse European colonial origins, numerous Aboriginal nations, and a multiplicity of cultural backgrounds and political views Thesis •Sir John A. Macdonald, Canada’s greatest Prime Minister was responsible for the founding of Canada and work hard to make this nation stable and prosperous

Read more

Richard Bedford Bennett – Canada’s 11th prime minister

Richard Bennett was a very wealthy prime minister of Canada from 1930-1935.

He came into office in 1930 due to the accusation that the previous prime minister, had no idea how to deal with depression; the majority of Canadians agreed. Bennett had plenty of plans for Canada, to change the economics and political issues. He won the 1935 election, therefore starting his reform of Canada. On January 3, 1935 Bennett made a coast to coast radio announcement stating “I am for reform, and to my mind, reform means government intervention, it means government control and regulation, it means the end of laissez-faire.” Bennet of 1935. As Bennetts reform developed, he made plans to start the “New Deal” right after U.S.

President “promised a new deal for Americans”. The new deal included such promises and laws to regulate the hours of work,provide minimum wage,improve working condition,insurance against sickness, industrial accident, and employment Relief Camps. Relief camps were developed for thousands of homeless men who were searching for work. The job in which a relief worker, worked; consisted of building bridges and roads, cutting trees, digging ditches, and worked on other projects. Relief payment were purposely kept lower than the lowest paying job. Many Canadian families starved, malnutrition and disease were common among the children. Richard Bennett strongly believed governments should not interfere in the free enterprise system.

He made efforts to regulate the economy and involved traditional policies. Bennett elevated costs to groundbreaking levels to change outcomes in hopes that he would the Canada markets. Richard Bennett convinced Britain to offer Canada some preferential trading opportunities. These efforts unfortunately did not hold off the economic hemorrhage. There had been many promises for the future of the generations outlook, like a new taxation form. Bennett had also promised changes like insurance for people, and their needs, a change in health care. Bennett also wanted to change and have more accurate working regulations.

The generation also reached for high social reforms, as did Bennet; all of these were to be improved by Bennett. and working conditions. Sadly Bennetts ideas collapsed before he had enough time to complete them. Richard Bennetts party was tightly associated with the hardships of the Depression. Bennett had no popularity like Roosevelts to be able to sell the plan. Therefore an election was called for October 1935. Bennett was put up against his opponent, Mackenzie King.

Mackenzie King had offered the choice of “King or Chaos.” This caused a massive deal of failure for Richard because the Canadians chose King that handed him a majority government. Although Bennett’ was out of office his new deal of legislation was challenged; at the Supreme Court. And the court found the most important parts were not in accordance with the political constitution or procedural rules. To answer the question;” Was Bennett the primary figure in his own demise or were there other historical developments and forces that influenced the rejection of his New Deal? Bennett had a huge impact on his own downfall. In the beginning Bennett had a great chance of changing the economics and fixing the way the government worked, he sadly failed as he was “making progress”. Although Bennett had a great plan to change everything and correct the social and economic parts of Canada, his strong demands, decisions, and rules caused a severely bombed effect on his wants.

There were many things that Bennett wanted to do, to help with the great depression. His decisions only really made a larger impact on the great depression of the 1920-1930’s. There was a few political issues that affected Bennetts plans to fix everything, such as being challenged and limited with what he could change and alter. Those restrictions may have been for the best, and maybe Bennetts downfall was truly for the better of the generation and time period; despite his hard work and dedication.

Read more

The Powers of the Prime Minister

Introduction The purpose of this essay is to describe and discuss the powers of the British Prime Minister and which implications arise from his position for the government and politics. This essay will consist of three parts. In the first part the main powers of the Prime Minister (PM), currently David Cameron, will be considered. […]

Read more

Richard Bedford Bennett – Canada’s 11th Prime Minister

Richard Bennett was a very wealthy prime minister of Canada from 1930-1935. He came into office in 1930 due to the accusation that the previous prime minister, had no idea how to deal with depression; the majority of Canadians agreed. Bennett had plenty of plans for Canada, to change the economics and political issues. He […]

Read more

Discuss the powers and constraints on the power of the Prime Minister

The British Prime Minister (PM) is holder of great power(s). ‘The PM is the most powerful figure, indeed the most powerful figure in the British system of government’[1]. He or She leads a group of political figures some of whom have a party or national standing in their own right. At the beginning of the […]

Read more
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat
Close

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own

Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses. Let us handle your;

  • Dissertations and Thesis
  • Essays
  • All Assignments

  • Research papers
  • Terms Papers
  • Online Classes
Live ChatWhatsApp