Although the prime minister holds the highest position in UK politics, they have limitations on their powers. They still retain numerous powers, but one notable restriction is imposed by their party. The appointment of ministers necessitates acknowledging the importance of political equilibrium and administrative proficiency. The prime minister might encounter pressure from colleagues or the media to select certain individuals, although they always take into account advice from senior colleagues. Furthermore, the prime minister’s ability to control the course of business is restricted.
Although they are responsible for drafting the party manifesto, Prime Ministers often have limited influence in initiating policy. They rely on a small staff because most expertise and detailed information is within individual departments. Additionally, if a prime minister loses support from their party, it indirectly affects their ability to pass bills. This was demonstrated during Thatcher’s governance when her party turned against her. Such a situation can be detrimental as it undermines both the party and its leader, eroding public confidence. Citizens may interpret the lack of unity within the party as a sign of national disarray.
The Prime Minister’s power is constrained due to the fact that he is publicly responsible for any major errors that occur while in office. This can be observed through the instance of Richard Nixon, who had a plaque on his desk declaring “the buck stops here” throughout his presidency. Likewise, as the leader, the Prime Minister carries ultimate accountability. When things go well, the Prime Minister receives commendation; however, this also applies when things go awry. In such circumstances, it is the Prime Minister whom the public holds liable since they perceive him as the most prominent government figure.
Anthony Eden, Edward Heath, Margaret Thatcher, and Tony Blair have all been associated with significant events in British history. Eden was held accountable for the Suez episode in 1956, while Heath was blamed for both the 1974 miners’ strike and the implementation of a three-day working week. Thatcher faced criticism due to issues related to the Poll Tax, whereas Blair received backlash for his close alliance with American President Bush and failure to criticize his foreign policy decisions. Additionally, Blair was also condemned for leading Britain into an unnecessary war in Iraq. It is worth noting that revolts within their own cabinet can restrict a Prime Minister’s authority.
The Prime Minister has the power to choose Cabinet members, so it is uncommon for a politician to clash with their leader. Nevertheless, John Major faced difficulties with his Cabinet whereas Tony Blair has been criticized for disregarding his Cabinet in favor of a ‘kitchen cabinet’ and relying on “special advisors”. The media has thoroughly analyzed Blair’s political partnership with Chancellor Gordon Brown, and Blair likely knows that Margaret Thatcher’s downfall started with her former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Geoffrey Howe.
Currently in Ireland, Cowen’s cabinet is facing opposition and there will be a vote of no confidence in his leadership. Additionally, a Prime Minister might need to address the concerns of a pressure group. In 1997, the Labour Party firmly opposed fox hunting, deeming it unacceptable in a civilized society. With their victory in the 1997 election, it was expected that legal measures would be enacted to prohibit fox hunting.
The creation of the Countryside Alliance, a well-funded pressure group, was motivated by the desire to preserve traditional country life, including the right to fox hunting. As of August 2002, fox hunting remains legal, and the current debates revolve around licensed hunts and a free vote in the Commons. The Countryside Alliance has already held a large demonstration in London and has plans for another in September 2002.
Despite no Prime Minister openly acknowledging that their policies are influenced by un-elected pressure groups, the undeniable influence of the Countryside Alliance is apparent. The Prime Minister wields considerable political power; nevertheless, this power is counterbalanced by certain limitations. As long as a Prime Minister enjoys the support of their party, their position remains secure; however, losing that support renders their position highly vulnerable. Hence, it is imperative for any Prime Minister to stay informed about the sentiments of the back-benchers.
