Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.
Any subject. Any type of essay.
We’ll even meet a 3-hour deadline.Get your price
121 writers online
Absolute majority which make up the Members of Parliament is the one that constitute the Cabinet. When it comes to ordering of administrative issues, as a body, the cabinet handles this. In the past, one can find a similar and relatable cabinet system to the cabinet system of now. In this era, the monarchical way or ruling was defeated because it gave up its cartel of power. What was paramount was that individuals do not have such powers anymore and this in return had a ripple effect which made the cabinet very powerful. This also made the English political system strengthen its idea of collectiveness and togetherness when making decisions. The general perspective, especially since the 60’s is that the prime minister has too much control and may now have a role in the cabinet that is too dominant.
Those who support the power of the prime minister generally believe that he is indeed the highest and primary. This notion although misleading just buttresses the idea that the prime minister has executive powers that are alarming or frightening. For example, the prime minister has the power to pick and dismiss members of his choice, he has monopoly over what will be discussed during meetings without a second in motion from his members and so on. In addition to this, these politicians who are on the cabinet have their personal interest to protect with the new appointments of members around the corner. As a result of this , it is difficult for this members to stand up against the ways of the Prime Minister. Consequently, the Prime Minsters ability to determine what will be relevant for discussion and in what order at the meetings means that he can use his power in areas that are of sentiments to him. For this reason, many argue that the relationship the Prime minister has with his cabinet members can be likened to that of an employee and an employer.
Nevertheless, despite the excess power of the prime minister and how glaring it is, scholars like George Jones share the view that his authority cannot be easily constrained in real life. Even though appointment of MP’s is done by the Prime Minister, it is widely supported that the most relevant members appoint one another. For the sake of party togetherness, it is irrelevant whether the PM finds a member and his position intimidating. For instance, Harold Wilson had cabinet members who were more accommodating to his rivalries than his close counterparts. Even during thatcher’s reign which many argue there was signs of excess power, two members; Carrington and Prior fought their way through to getting seats and recognition they deserved in the party. History shows that when relevant members; especially members who have been there for a respectable amount of years has been fired, the PM gets a fair amount of consequences to this. An example was when during the Thatcher regime, Normant Lamont was dismissed, he became more popular and exposed the extreme right wing to being criticised. This led to lots of consequences.
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:
Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website. If you’d like this or any other sample, we’ll happily email it to you.
Your essay sample has been sent.
Want us to write one just for you? We can custom edit this essay into an original, 100% plagiarism free essay.Order now
Are you interested in getting a customized paper?Check it out!