“Is Parliament becoming more presidential?” Introduction Over a period of time there has been a growing idea that that parliament and the prime minister are becoming increasingly presidential. There is an argument that the Prime Minister dominates in the British Political system. The British traditional system has moved away from the “cabinet government” model to a “prime ministerial government” model. For * Prime minister has effectively, though not legally, become head of state and leader of the nation, irrespective of party allegiance. In a national crisis and times of difficulty the country unites behind the head of government.
A constitutional monarchy is when the monarch is the head of state and they can influence who is in parliament. By appointing Pitt the Younger as Prime Minister, King George III carried out patronage, patronage is granting favours or making appointments to parliament in return for political support. Without the support of the king, Pitt would not have become Prime Minister to begin with. Pitt also managed to remain as Prime Minister
Thus the machinery of the central government has become increasingly similar to that of the White House machinery. Sir Christopher Meyer, the former British Ambassador in Washington DC, has claimed that Jack Straw and the Foreign Office were sidelined as most communication was directly between Downing Street and the Washington embassy. However, whether or not the Prime Minister has a Presidential style leadership depends highly on his (or her) majority within Parliament. Margaret Thatcher enjoyed huge majorities of over 100 following the 1983 and 1987 elections, and because of this she was able to enjoy huge amounts of power in
Doing so gives him a longer term in power and receiving more seats in his riding to get a bigger majority government. As for the United States’ government, they have something that is called checks and balances. It is where executive, legislative, and judicial branches has the right to check one another’s actions in order to prevent concentration of power. Therefore if the president wants to make changes of some topic, it must be approved by the senate. An unique part about this
The ‘prime ministerial’ government thesis focuses upon the range of patronage available to the prime minister and his tendency to by-pass the Cabinet in making policy decisions - Mackintosh saw the Cabinet as little more than a clearing house and a court of appeal. Other factors are his control over the civil service, his dominance of the House of Commons, his high media profile, and his ability to appear ‘above politics’ and to make direct, statesmanlike appeals to the
Evaluate which is more valuable to the president the EXOP or the cabinet (30) The President has two organisations at his disposal in order to help him with the running of the country; the first is the Executive Office of the President (EXOP), which consists of the immediate staff of the current President of the United States and multiple levels of support staff reporting to the President. The EXOP is headed by the White House Chief of Staff, which is currently Denis McDonough. The size of the White House staff has increased dramatically since 1939, and has grown to include approximately 4,000 policy experts in various fields. The second is the Cabinet, which is composed of the most senior appointed officers of the executive branch of the federal government, who are generally the heads of the federal executive departments, although the Vice President and the US Ambassador to the UN are also present, as are other non-department heads. Since the cabinet members are in charge of huge departmental budgets such as the Department of Health with Sylvia Burwell, the Department of Defence with Ashton Carter, the Department of Justice with Eric Holder and the US Department of State with John Kerry have colossal amounts of importance, due to the significance of their departments, and the importance that the budgets of these departments are constantly flowing to make sure the government runs smoothly, and since the Affordable Care act of 2010 has made the Department of Health even more important as this has increased the US’s spending on health care which will rise to $170bn by 2020.
As a consequence, prime ministers have gradually institutionalised their involvement in policy. The view now, is that it is the prime minister, and not the cabinet, who dominates both the executive and Parliament. This happens because the prime minister is both the head of the civil service and the leader of the largest party in the Commons. As prime ministers have considerable authority in the management and controlling of cabinet, it is argued that cabinet has declined and so the power of the prime minister has increased. Prime ministers chair cabinet meetings, this enables prime ministers to harness the decision – making authority of the cabinet to their own ends.
To what extent does the Prime Minister dominate the political system of the UK? The political branch concerned with the assembling of policy and the proposal of most legislation is called the executive. The traditional position of the prime minister within the executive branch is considered as ‘primus inter pares’, meaning ‘first among equals’. This implements the idea that the prime minister is merely the leading minister, preeminent in terms of reasonable respect and authority, among other similarly responsible ministers. However, since the 1950s, many have argued that the growth of prime ministerial power as a consequence of aspects such as the media, have led to an increase in dominance over the cabinet.
A function that demonstrates that the House of Commons is effective is because ministers are regularly questioned and held accountable. An advantage of this is that it increases constituency representation and scrutinises legislation. For example during Prime Minister question time MPs can bring different examples forward from their own constituencies which can allow them to demonstrates problems with a Bill, thereby representing people within their constituencies more. At election times the government becomes directly accountable to the people; for example in 2007 the Labour government saw popular support fall from 41%. In the House of Commons, Bills introduced under the ten-minute rule are one of the ways in which backbench MPs (private Members) can introduce legislation.
In this essay, we will consider the performance of UK Parliament in 3 main functions: making laws, representation and controlling the Executive. The name “legislature” suggests that Parliament has something to do with making law. Although this is not the primary function, but still, undoubtedly appropriate as most laws certainly have to get the assent from both Houses ( the Lords and the Commons ) and Parliament can amend or defeat any law easily. Debates on bills constitute about 40% of the time spent on the floor of the Houses and in theory give backbenchers-people who support the government or the opposition, opportunity to infuence the shape of legislation with their speech. Along with the rising number of back-bench rebellions and MPs defeating government’s proposals such as the Syria war in 2011, it can be seen that Parliament is performing well in making laws.