Learning Outcomes:
1. Critically reflect on the degree of continuity and change in the structure, institutions, actors, relationships and processes of British government.
2. Critically evaluate different historical and contemporary theoretical attempts to explain the (changing) structure, networks, relationships and processes of the British state and new forms of governance
3. Demonstrate a high level of relevant information management, analytical and critical and writing and presentation skills.
Themes to Discuss.
Prime Ministerial v Cabinet Government Debate
1. Westminster Model – collective Cabinet government and PM as primus inter pares.
2. Prime ministerial thesis – replacement of traditional Cabinet govt with PM govt and declining role of Cabinet in policy-making
3. Presidential thesis – presidential political leadership (particularly under Blair) and increased single actor at core of government.
Limitations of PM v Cabinet Government Debate
1. Misunderstands complex networks of relationships essential to effectively running of modern government and state.
2. Focuses too narrowly on personality – views power as an object rather than fluid and relational.
3. Ignores (relational) resources and constraints of actors and simplifies way decisions are made in central government.
4. Very insular context – ignores wider constraints beyond Westminster – Whitehall all political leaders have to confront.
Power Dependancy Model
1. Power dependancy model – complexity and inter-dependancy and fluid and fluctuating nature of relationships and power within central government
2. All actors have resources to exchange (and subject to constraints of other actors, context and circumstances). PM is only one (albeit important actor).
3. Notions of PM government, Cabinet government or Presidentialism irrelevant. (Power in core executive based on dependency not command and to understand operation of core executive – need to trace structures of dependency)
4. Even resource-rich actors such as PM dependent on others to achieve Goals. Government works through building alliances rather than command.
Contigent Nature of Prime Ministerial Authority/Power.
1. Authority within core executive not primarily based on personality.
2. Structured relationships shaped by rules of Whitehall game, institutions of government, past policy choices and external context and circumstances.
3. Process of exchange – forging alliances
4. Depends on particular context
5. Depends on tactics and strategies etc.
Conclusion
1. Level of resource exchange and nature of dependency varies according to context and circumstances.
2. PM and Cabinet are inter-dependent – both possess resources (and constraints)
3. Power in core executive is fluid – cannot be simply narrowly ascribed to either PM or Cabinet
Sources
1. The Rheotorical Premiership: a new perspective on prime ministerial power since 1945 (Richard Toye, Univeryod Exeter)
2. The Rise of the British Presidency (Michael Foley’s, 1993)
3. Dunleavy, P. & Rhodes, R. (1995) Prime Minister, Cabinet and Core Executive
4. Hennessy, P (2000) The Prime Minister: the office and its holders since 1945, Allen Lane/Penguin
5. Marsh, D. Richards, D. & Smith, M. J. (2001) Changing Patterns of Governance: Reinventing Whitehall
6. Richards, D. & Smith, M. J. (2002) Governance and Public Policy in the United Kingdom, Oxford University Press, Ch. 9
7. Smith, M. J. (1999) The Core Executive in Britain, Macmillan
Structured Essay in simple English.