Critically examine the relationship between the Prime Minister and the Cabinet

The Prime Minister (PM) is more than primus inter pares (first among equals). He has powers his ministers do not, such as the power of appointment and chair of the cabinet.

The Prime Minister has a lot of power over the cabinet. The PM can hire, fire, and reshuffle his cabinet at will. For example, David Cameron appointed George Osborne as Chancellor. This gives him a lot of power over cabinet ministers. If ministers disagree with him he can demote them within Cabinet or even sack them. For example, Tony Blair demoted Robin Cook from Foreign Secretary to Leader of the House of Commons over his pro-Euro views. However, as part of the coalition agreement the PM must consult with the Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) before making ministerial appointments and Nick Clegg gets to nominate the agreed number of Lib Dem ministers. This means the PM’s power of appointment is substantively limited by the coalition agreement so he is not as predominant as a PM with a single party majority.

As chairperson of the Cabinet the PM has a lot of power over his Cabinet colleagues. As chair he draws up the agenda, decides which items to include and where they are placed on the agenda. Contentious issues can be kept off the agenda and ministers whose views differ from the PM can be sidelined as a result.  For example, Blair used Cabinet meetings as a bonding exercise more than a forum for making key decisions. However, cabinet ministers are not without power especially if the PM is weakened. For example, Brown’s fate ultimately lay in the hands of his cabinet ministers when his leadership was challenged by Labour MPs. Had his Cabinet ministers not remained loyal, his position as party leader and Prime Minister would have been untenable. This shows the predominance of the PM can be limited by Cabinet colleagues if he is considered weak and unpopular by his own party.

Powerful colleagues in the cabinet mean power is more widely dispersed which limits the predominance of the PM. For example, when Gordon Brown was the Chancellor he politicised the Treasury by linking money to targets. He was known as the “Great white shark of Whitehall”.  This meant power was shared between Number 10 (Blair) and Number 11 (Brown). But, the PM draws a lot of power from his position as leader of the majority party. The Chief Whip reports directly to the Prime Minister so it is the PM who instructs the Chief Whip as to the wishes of the Cabinet. This means that backbenchers will be indirectly instructed how to vote by the Prime Minister. Therefore, powerful colleagues can prevent a PM from following their own agenda yet the PM ultimately has more power and authority than anyone else in government.

Power is shared between the PM and Cabinet. Cabinet ministers make policy and have responsibility for their own departments. For example, Caroline Spelman, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, proposed plans to sell off 150 000 hectares of forest and woodland in England to raise funds to help pay off the deficit. However, the PM can overrule ministers. David Cameron ordered Environment ministers to carry out a u-turn after there was a massive backlash to the proposal. This shows while ministers have power over the running of their own departments, the PM may interfere and order changes or take personal responsibility at times asserting his predominance over Cabinet ministers.

In conclusion, the Prime Minister’s relationship with Cabinet is more than ‘primus inter pares’ but he is not presidential. The PM has considerably more power than any one Cabinet minister. However, powerful individuals mean power may be shared, as was the case with Blair and Brown. Also, if the PM is already weakened, the PM will only remain in position with the consent of his cabinet ministers.