WikiPortallus: Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.html

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the political leader of the United Kingdom and the Head of His/Her Majesty's Government. The Prime Minister and Cabinet are collectively accountable for their policies and actions to the Sovereign, to Parliament (of which they are members), to their political party, and ultimately the electorate. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is often described alongside the President of the United States as being one of the most powerful men in the world. This is mainly due to the stretching cultural, political, military and financial influence the United Kingdom has. The current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is Gordon Brown.

Constitutional Background

The modern Prime Minister of the United Kingdom wields broad executive and legislative powers. The incumbent leads a major political party, commands a majority in the House of Commons (the Legislature), and is the leader of the Cabinet (the Executive). Under the British system, there is a unity of powers rather than separation as in other democracies. Walter Bagehot, an authority on 19th century British government, said this unity is "the efficient secret" of its constitution. ^[1] Called "royal prerogatives", many of these powers are still formally vested in the Head of State, the Sovereign. In practice, they were devolved to the Prime Minister as incumbents gradually acquired, after 1688, a dominant position in the constitutional hierarchy vis-à-vis the Sovereign, the Houses of Commons and Lords in Parliament, and the Cabinet.

The office was not intentionally created at a constitutional convention like other democratic heads of government. Unique among democracies, the premiership is not defined by a codified Constitution, but by unwritten, somewhat fluid, customs known as constitutional conventions. These conventions evolved haphazardly, as Sovereigns, Parliament, Prime Ministers and the Cabinet reacted to events and resolved issues as they arose. ^[2]

Until the 20th century, the relationship between the office of Prime Minister and the Sovereign, Parliament, and Cabinet was - and to a large extent still is - defined by conventions. The Premiership is a convention because it developed in the shadow of the Monarchy, competing with it for executive authority. The origins of this rivalry lay in the Civil Wars of the 17th century. Prior to 1688, the Sovereign had been both Head of State and Government. After 1688, Parliament allowed the Sovereign to remain Head of State, but gradually began to place day-to-day governance increasingly under its own control. It did not, however, create a formal mechanism by which it could wield these executive powers.

The office of the Prime Minister eventually filled this void. Evolving quietly behind the scenes, Parliament transferred the state’s executive powers first to the Cabinet and then to the Prime Minister, who usually held the official legal office of First Lord of the Treasury. During the same period, Parliament, deferentially, maintained the legal fiction that the Sovereign retained the power to govern directly, giving little formal recognition to the office of Prime Minister.

Paradoxically, it appears that Britain has two executives: the Prime Minister and the Sovereign. ^[3] The concept of the "Crown" resolves this paradox. ^[4] The Crown symbolises the state’s authority to govern: to make laws and execute them, impose taxes and collect them, judge criminals and imprison them, regulate businesses, sign treaties, declare war and make peace. After 1688, Parliament, in one situation after another, made Sovereigns give up these powers and forced them assume a more neutral political position. By this process, they placed the Crown in "commission", entrusting its authority to responsible Ministers (the Prime Minister and Cabinet), accountable for their policies and actions to Parliament and the people. Although the Sovereign's prerogatives were still intact, Parliament removed the Sovereign from everyday governance, leaving it in practice with three constitutional rights: to be kept informed, to advise, and to warn. ^[5] ^[6]

Early History of the Prime Minister: 1688-1911

Foundations of the Position: 1688-1720

Revolutionary Settlement

The evolution of the role of Prime Minister started after James II fled England, in 1688. The throne being vacant, Parliament confirmed William and Mary as joint constitutional Monarchs, enacting legislation that limited their authority and that of their successors: the Bill of Rights (1689), the Mutiny Bill (1689), the Triennial Bill (1694), the Treason Act (1696), and the Act of Settlement (1701). ^[7]

Known collectively as the Revolutionary Settlement, these acts transformed the constitution, shifting the balance of power from the Sovereign to Parliament. Unknown at the time, they also provided the basis for the evolution of the Prime Minister. Meeting every year (rather than irregularly at the Sovereign’s summons as in centuries past), Parliament became a permanent feature of political life. Holding the “power of the purse”, it controlled finances. The Monarchy could no longer live on its own income. For want of money, Sovereigns had to summon Parliament annually and could no longer dissolve or prorogue it without its advice and consent. ^[8] The veto prerogative fell into disuse because Sovereigns feared that if they denied legislation, Parliament would deny them money. No Sovereign has used it since Queen Ann vetoed the Scottish Militia Bill in 1708. ^[9]

The Treasury Bench and Standing Order 66

The Revolutionary Settlement gave the Commons new financial powers and control over legislation and, thereby, changed the relationship between the Executive and the Legislature. Treasury officials were drawn into Parliament and became the liaison between the Sovereign and Parliament. Sovereigns now had to consider them not only as department heads but also as members of Parliament and politicians.

The House of Commons early 19th century. Late in the 17th century, as a result of the Revolutionary Settlement, Treasury Ministers began to attend the Commons regularly. They were given a reserved place to sit called the Treasury Bench. Located at the front to the Speaker's right, the Treasury Bench is where the Prime Minister (First Lord of the Treasury) and Cabinet sit today.

In this new capacity, Ministers had to present and defend the government's policies, and negotiate with Members to gain the support of the majority; they had to explain the government’s financial needs, suggest ways of meeting them and give an account of how money had been spent, particularly in the House of Commons since it held the purse strings. The Sovereign’s representatives became so important and attended Commons sessions so regularly that they were given reserved seats at the front, known as the Treasury Bench. This is the beginning of "unity of powers": the Sovereign's Ministers (the Executive) became leading members of Parliament (the Legislature). Today, the Prime Minister (First Lord of the Treasury), the Chancellor of the Exchequer (responsible for the budget) and other members of the Cabinet sit on the Treasury bench and present policies in much the same way Ministers did late in the 17th century.

After the Revolution, there was a constant threat that non-government members of Parliament would ruin the country's finances with self-serving, ill-considered money bills. Vying for control over the budget to avoid chaos, the Crown's Ministers - those who sit on the Treasury Bench - gained an advantage in 1706 when the Commons informally declared, "That this House will receive no petition for any sum of money relating to public Service, but what is recommended from the Crown." Seven years later, on June 11, 1713, this non-binding rule became Standing Order 66: that “the Commons would not vote money for any purpose, except on a motion of a Minister of the Crown.” Standing Order 66 remains in effect today, essentially unchanged for three hundred years. ^[10]

Empowering government Ministers with sole financial initiative had a profound immediate and lasting impact. Apart from achieving its intended purpose - to stabilise the budgetary process - it naturally gave the Crown a leadership role in the Commons, and, just as naturally, the Lord Treasurer assumed a leading position among Ministers. The power of financial initiative was not, however, absolute. Only Ministers might initiate money bills, but Parliament now reviewed and consented to them. Standing Order 66 therefore represents the beginnings of Cabinet and Ministerial responsibility and accountability. ^[11]

Because of its leadership position in Parliament as well as the government, the term "Prime Minister" first appears at this time as an unofficial title for the Head of the Treasury. Jonathan Swift, for example, wrote in 1713 about "those who are now commonly called Prime Minister among us", referring to Sidney Godolphin, 1st Earl of Godolphin and Robert Harley, Queen Anne's Lord Treasurers and chief ministers. ^[12] From this time, every head of the Sovereign's government - with one exception in the 18th century and one in the 19th - has been either Lord High Treasurer or, more commonly, First Lord of the Treasury.

The Nascent Cabinet

The modern Prime Minister is leader of the Cabinet. A convention of the constitution, the modern Cabinet is a group of about twenty ministers who formulate policies, and carrying out the government's responsibilities, such as foreign affairs, transportation, and education. With the Prime Minister at their head, they form the "executive branch" in the British system.

The unofficial term "Cabinet" first appears after the Revolutionary Settlement to describe those ministers who conferred privately with the Sovereign. The growth of the Cabinet as the executive council met with widespread complaint and opposition because its meetings were often held in secret, and it excluded the ancient, once powerful Privy Council from the Sovereign's circle of trusted advisers, reducing it to an honorary body. ^[13]

The nascent Cabinet included the Treasurer and other department heads who sat on the Treasury bench, as it does today. But in its formative years it was an amorphous body that might include, depending on the Sovereign's preferences, household officers (such as the Master of the Horse) and members of the royal family, as well as department heads. Sovereigns appointed and dismissed Cabinet members. King William (1688-1702) and Queen Anne (1702-1714) frequently attended meetings, guiding their discussions, making decisions, and following up on executive actions. They sometimes met privately with individual ministers to discuss policies, causing much confusion. Relieving the Sovereign of these responsibilities and gaining control over the Cabinet was an essential part of political evolution of the modern office of Prime Minister. ^[14]

This process began after the Hanoverian Succession in 1714. George I (1714-1727) attended Cabinet meetings regularly at first but after 1717 withdrew, partly because he did not speak English, but mostly because he was bored with the discussions; he was only interested in decisions. George II (1727-1760) occasionally presided at Cabinet meetings, but his grandson, George III (1760-1820), is known to have attended only two during his entire 60 year reign. Thus, the convention was established that Sovereigns do not attend Cabinet meetings. The Prime Minister presides, takes notes, and reports decisions to the Sovereign. These simple, mundane executive tasks - presiding and reporting - naturally gave the Prime Minister ascendancy over his Cabinet colleagues, and identified him as their leader. ^[15]

Beginnings of the Prime Minister's Party Leadership

The modern Prime Minister is also the leader of a great political party with millions of followers. Generally agreeing on policies, party members and leaders suppress their differences of opinion for the sake of gaining a majority in the Commons at the polls and being able to form a government. Once in office, the Prime Minister, as leader of the party, fills many government offices, distributing them to party members, partly as a reward for their loyalty.

The first political parties appeared a few years before the Revolutionary Settlement, during the Exclusion Crisis of 1678-1681. The Whigs, who believed in limited Monarchy and the rights of Parliament, wanted to exclude James Stuart from succeeding to the throne because he was a Catholic and espoused absolutist ideas about Kingship. The Tories, who believed in the "Divine Right of Kings", defended James' hereditary claim to the throne. These two parties would dominate British politics for over 150 years, the Whigs generally being more liberal in their policies; the Tories more conservative. Indeed, in the 19th century, the Whigs evolved into the Liberal Party; the Tories, the Conservative Party. Even today, Conservatives are often referred to as "Tories".

Political parties were not as organised and disciplined in the 17th century as they would become in the 19th and 20th. They were more like factions with "members" drifting in and out, working together for a short time on specific issues and then disbanding. Nevertheless, it became possible to identify Parliaments and Ministries as being either "Whig" or "Tory" in composition.

Early in his reign, King William preferred "Mixed Ministries" choosing his ministers from both parties in an effort to get all points of view and to dilute the power of each. This approach did not work well. His Cabinets had no recognised leader and Ministers tended to bicker with each other and work at odds in the execution of policies. This has been the case ever since. Mixed Ministries or Coalitions have rarely been effective under the British system, except in times of war like the Great War (1914-1918) and the Second World War (1939-1945). ^[16]

Mixed Ministries having failed, William formed a homogeneous Whig ministry in 1697, known as the Junto. Nominally led by Robert Spencer, (Earl of Sunderland) but in fact led by the King himself, the Junto is often cited as the first true Cabinet because its members were all Whigs, reflecting the composition of the Commons which was also Whig. ^[17]

Queen Anne followed this pattern but she preferred Tory Cabinets, selecting her ministers almost exclusively from that party. This approach worked well as long as Parliament was also predominantly Tory. In 1702, the Tories dominated the Commons. However, in the elections of 1705, the Whigs made considerable gains, and then in 1708, they obtained a majority. Yet, Anne did not call on the Whigs to form a government; she refused to admit that a group of men could force themselves on her as Ministers merely because their adherents formed a majority in Parliament. ^[18] Anne's Cabinets always remained nominally the same as they had been from the start. No general election result, no Parliamentary pressure, ever made her part with an entire Ministry or accept an entirely new one. Consequently, although Anne's chief ministers Sidney Godolphin, 1st Earl of Godolphin and Robert Harley were recognised as the leaders of their respective Cabinets (and were called "Prime Minister" by some), they had difficulty executing policy in the face of a generally hostile Parliament. ^[19]

Anne's five immediate successors - George I, George II, George III, George IV and William IV - all agreed with her that the selection of Ministers is the Sovereign's sole prerogative. It was not until over a hundred years later, in the 1830s, that political reality firmly established the constitutional convention that the Sovereign must select Prime Ministers and Cabinet ministers from the majority party whose views and policies reflect those of the majority in Parliament. ^[20]

The Treasury Commission: 1714

The office of the modern Prime Minister is still largely a convention of the constitution; it's legal authority is derived primarily from the fact that the Prime Minister is also First Lord of the Treasury. The connection of these two offices - one a convention, the other a legal office - began with the Hanoverian Succession in 1714.

When King George I succeeded to the English throne in 1714, his German ministers advised him leave the office of Lord High Treasurer vacant because those who had held it in recent years (referring to Godolphin and Harley) had grown overly powerful, in effect, replacing the Soveriegn as head of the government. They also feared that a Lord High Treasurer would undermine their own influence with the new King. They therefore suggested that instead he place the office in "commission', meaning that a committee of five ministers would perform its functions together, rather than only one. Theoretically, this dilution of authority would prevent any one of them from presuming to be the head of the government. The King agreed and created the Treasury Commission consisting of the First Lord of the Treasury, the Second Lord, and three Junior Lords. No one has been appointed to the Lord High Treasureship since; it has remained in commission for three hundred years. The Treasury Commission ceased to meet late in the 18th century but has survived, albeit in a much altered form and with very different functions: the First Lord of the Treasury is now the Prime Minister, the Second Lord is the Chancellor of the Exchequer and actually in charge of the Treasury, and the Junior Lords are government Whips maintaining party discipline in the House of Commons; they no longer have any duties related to the Treasury. ^[21]

Ambivalent Prime Ministers: 1720-1830

The "First" Prime Minister - Walpole

Since the office was not created at a constitutional convention on a certain date but evolved slowly over centuries, there is no "First" Prime Minister as there is a first President of the United States. However, the honorary appellation "First" Prime Minister is traditionally given to Sir Robert Walpole who became First Lord of the Treasury in 1721 and remained in office for 21 years.

Portrait of Sir Robert Walpole, studio of Jean-Baptiste van Loo, 1740. Sir Robert Walpole is normally considered to be Great Britain's first Prime Minister.

In 1720, the South Sea Company, created to trade in cotton, agricultural goods and slaves, collapsed, causing the ruin of thousands of investors and great losses for many others including members of the royal family. King George I called on Robert Walpole, well-known for his political and financial acumen, to handle the emergency. With skill and luck, Walpole acted quickly to restore public credit and confidence, and lead the country out of the crisis. A year later, the King appointed him First Lord of the Treasury, Chancellor of the Exchequer and Leader of the House of Commons making him the most powerful minister in the government. Ruthless, crude, and hard-working, he had a "sagacious business sense" and was a superb manager of men. ^[22] At the head of affairs, Walpole stabalised the nation's finances, kept it at peace, made it prosperous, and secured the Hanoverian Succession. ^[23]

Walpole demonstrated for the first time how a chief minister - a Prime Minister - could be the actual Head of the Government under the new constitutional framework set up after the Revolutionary Settlement. First, recognising that the Sovereign could no longer actually be the head of the government, he nevertheless insisted that he was nothing more than the "King's Servant" and worked tirelessly to maintain the confidence of the Sovereign, sometimes resorting to bribery. ^[24] Second, recognising that real power had shifted to the Commons, he conducted all of the nation's business there and made that chamber dominant over the House of Lords in all matters, not only finances. Third, recognising that the Cabinet had become the executive and must speak with one voice, he insisted on being its leader, dominating the other members and demanding their complete, united support for his policies. Fourth, recognising that political parties were the source of ministerial strength, he insisted on being the leader of the Whig party and used every means - persuasion, patronage, political threats and bribery - to maintain discipline throughout the country, as well as in the Commons, especially during elections. In the Commons, he insisted on the support of all Whigs members, especially those who had an office under the Crown. And, finally, he set an example for future Prime Ministers by resigning his offices in 1742 when he no longer had the confidence of a majority in the Commons, even though he still retained the confidence of the Sovereign. ^[25] ^[26]

Confusion About the Office: 1742-1782

For all his contributions to the evolution of the office, Walpole was not a Prime Minister in the modern sense. The King chose him as his Prime Minister, not Parliament; and, the King chose the other members of the Cabinet, not Walpole. Furthermore, Walpole set an example not a precedent. Few of his immediate Whig successors - with the exception of Henry Pelham - understood the constitutional changes that had taken place since 1688 or, if they did, had the force of character to act upon them; and, none of the Tory opposition were willing yet to accept them. Consequently, after Walpole's fall in 1742, there was a 40-year period of confusion over the nature of the office.

In some cases, the Prime Minister may be a mere figurehead, with actual power being wielded by one or more other individuals. Weak or titular Prime Ministers were more common prior to the twentieth century; examples include William Cavendish, 4th Duke of Devonshire and William Cavendish-Bentinck, 3rd Duke of Portland. The reign of George III, which began in 1760, is particularly notable for developments in the office of Prime Minister. Over the course of his reign, the King was sometimes forced by parliamentary pressure to appoint Prime Ministers and Ministers whom he did not personally favour. Control over the composition of the Cabinet had not, however, been completely lost by the King; in some cases, George was able to prevent the appointment of politicians whom he detested (for instance, Charles James Fox).

The Office Denied

Walpole is now considered the "First" Prime Minister, but the title was not commonly used during his tenure and for some time after; indeed, it was often denied, even by Walpole and others who held the office. In 1741, during the attack on Walpole that led to his downfall, Sandys declared in the Commons that "According to our Constitution we can have no sole and prime minister . . . every . . . officer has his own proper department; and no officer ought to meddle in the affairs belonging to the department of another." In the same year, the Lords agreed that "We are persuaded that a sole, or even a first minister, is an officer unknown to the law of Britain, inconsistent with the Constitution of the country and destructive of liberty in any Government whatsoever." ^[27] In his own defence, Walpole said "I unequivocally deny that I am sole or Prime Minister and that to my influence and direction all the affairs of government must be attributed . . . I do not pretend to be a great master of foreign affairs. In that post it is not my business to meddle and as one of His Majesty's Council I have but one voice." ^[28]

Later, George Grenville, Prime Minister in the 1760s, said it was "an odious title" and never used it. ^[29] And, Lord North, the reluctant head of the King's Government during the American Revolution, "would never suffer himself to be called Prime Minister, because it was an office unknown to the Constitution." ^[30]

Use of the title became more common at the end of the 18th century and was generally accepted by the 1820s because there was growing recognition of need for the position. For example, in an interview with Lord Melville, William Pitt the Younger in 1803 argued that "this person generally called the first minister" was an absolute necessity for a government to function, and expressed his belief that this person should be the minister in charge of the finances. ^[31]

Nevertheless, denials of the office continued throughout the 19th and into the 20th centuries. In 1806, one member of the Commons asserted that "the Constitution abhors the idea of a prime minister"; in 1829 another said that "nothing could be more mischievous or unconstitutional than to recognise by act of parliament the existence of such an office." As late as 1904, still another complained that a list of the "King's birthday honours" had appeared in the newspapers as "the Prime Minister's List." In the same "debate", another inquired of Arthur Balfour whether the Prime Minister had any legal status at all.^[32]

The denials of the office, the confusion over its nature and the lack of official recognition of it cause problems for researchers who are trying to identify who was a Prime Minister and who was not, particularly in the 18th century. Thus, every list of British Prime Ministers may omit certain politicians. For instance, unsuccessful attempts to form ministries - such as the two-day government formed by William Pulteney, 1st Earl of Bath in 1746, often dismissed as the "Silly Little Ministry" - may be included in a list or omitted, depending on the criteria selected.

Emergence of Cabinet Government - Pitt and Liverpool

"First Among Equals": 1830-1911

The Great Reform Bill and the Premiership - Grey

British Prime Ministers are not elected directly by the people. They became Prime Minister indirectly because: first, they were members of the Commons or Lords; second, they were the leader of a great political party; and, third, they either inherited a majority in the Commons, or won more seats than the opposition in a general election.

Lord Grey atop the Grey's Monument, looking down Grey Street in Newcastle upon Tyne

Inscription on Grey Monument (click image to enlarge)

Most Prime Ministers have been members of the Commons; since 1902, all have had a seat there. Like other members, they are elected initially to represent only a constituency. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair, for example, represented Sedgefield in County Durham from 1983 – 2007. He became Prime Minister because he was elected Labour Party leader in 1994 and then led the party to victory in the 1997 general election, winning 418 seats compared to 165 seats for the Conservatives. More than 30 million men and women over the age of 18 voted to fill the 659 Commons seats distributed proportionately nationwide according to population.

Neither the Sovereign nor the House of Lords (with over 700 members) had any meaningful influence over who was elected to the Commons in 1997. Observing the results of the election, Prime Minister John Major advised Queen Elizabeth II to summon Blair and invite him to form a new Labour government that would replace his Conservative one. Beyond this formality, the Queen had no meaningful role in deciding whether or not Blair would became Prime Minister. Nor did the House of Lords. The detachment of the Sovereign and Lords from the electoral process has been a convention of the constitution for almost two hundred years.

Prior to the 19th century however they both had a significant influence, using to their advantage the fact that at that time most citizens were disenfranchised and seats were allocated disproportionately. The system was based on legislation passed in 1429. Virtually unchanged for 400 years, the law stated that an eligible voter must be an adult male resident who is a freeholder owning land valued at 40 shillings or more. ^[33] ^[34] In 1832, only 440,000 met the freehold qualification in a population of 17 million. While populations had increased in some constituencies over 400 years and declined in others, their representation in the Commons remained the same. Some constituencies were over-represented; others under-represented; some large towns, like Liverpool, that had grown up since the Middle Ages, had no representation at all. The Crown and Lords, through patronage, corruption and bribery, personally “owned” many seats in the Commons, giving them enormous control over that chamber. About 30% of the seats were “pocket” or “rotten boroughs” in 1832; representatives from these boroughs “won” their elections through the influence of either the Crown or a Lord. ^[35] ^[36]

Disraeli and Gladstone Race to Pass the Reform Bill, Punch, 1867 The colourful political and personal rivalry between Disraeli and Gladstone, reported almost daily in the penny press and caricatured in cartoons, helped to identify the office of Prime Minister with specific personalities in the public mind. (Disraeli is in the lead looking back over his shoulder at Gladstone.)

In 1830, Charles Grey, a Whig elected to the Commons in 1787 who had only one brief expereience in office from 1806 to 1807, became Prime Minister after 23 years in opposition. A life-long liberal, Grey was determined to reform the electoral system: to expand the franchise, to distribute seats evenly by population, and to reduce the influence of the Sovereign and the Lords in the election process. For the next two years, Grey and his Cabinet, consisting of four future Prime Ministers - Melbourne, Russell, Palmerston and Stanley (Lord Derby) - and one former one, Goderich, faught resolutely to pass what has come to be known as the Great Reform Bill of 1832. ^[37] ^[38]

The greatness of the Great Reform Bill lay less in substance than symbolism. Substantively, it produced only a 65% increase in the franchise to 717,000 with the middle class receiving the bulk of the new votes. Fifty-six rotten boroughs were eliminated completely and half the representation of 30 others; the freed up seats were distributed to boroughs created for previously disenfranchised areas. However, many rotten boroughs remained and the Bill did not transfer political power completely to the people; it still excluded millions of working class men, and all women. ^[39] ^[40]

Symbolically, however, the Bill exceeded all expectations and is now ranked with Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights as one of the most important pieces of legislation ever passed by Parliament. As John Bright, the liberal statesman of the next generation, said, "It was not a good Bill, but it was a great Bill when it passed." ^[41]

First, the Great Reform Bill eliminated the Sovereign from the election process and the choice of Prime Minister. This new convention was tested two years later in 1834 when King William IV dismissed Melbourn as Prime Minister, but then had to recall him five months later when Robert Peel could not form a working majority despite the fact that he had called an election. Since then, no Sovereign has tried to impose a Prime Minister on Parliament against its will.

Second, the Bill reduced the power of the Lords by eliminating many of their pocket boroughs and creating new boroughs where they had no influence. Candidates unfavorable to the Lords were elected. Thus weakened, the Lords were unable to prevent the passage of later more comprehensive voting reforms in 1867, 1884, 1918 and finally, 1928, when universal equal suffrage was achieved. ^[42]

Grey's character and bearing during the Reform Bill crisis and for the remainder of his time in office changed the Premiership. Often called the first "modern Prime Minister", Grey set both an example and a precedent for his sucessors. Using his Whig victory in 1830 as a mandate for reform, he assumed decisive leadership over the Cabinet becoming, as Baghot said in 1867 of the Prime Minister's status, primas inter paris, "first among equals". In the Lords and Commons, he was unrelenting in the pursuit of his mandate; he used every Parliamentary devise to achieve his goal, but never resorted to bribery or other forms of corruption. And, although gracious and respectful toward the King, he made it clear that the Sovereign's constitutional duty was to acquiesce to the will of the people and Parliament.

Just as important, the Loyal Opposition acquiesced in the decision too. There was talk among some disgruntled Conservatives that they would repeal the Bill once they regained a majority. But in 1834, Peel, their leader, put a stop to it when he proclaimed in his Tamworth Manifesto that the Bill was "a final and irrevocable settlement of a great constitutional question which no friend to the peace and welfare of this country would attempt to disturb". ^[43] Thus, Peel affirmed a basic constitutional convention that has promoted stability in the British system: the Parliament of the day must respect the decisions made by previous Parliaments.

Populist Prime Ministers - Disraeli and Gladstone

Gladstone During the Midlothian Campaign 1879 Former Prime Minister Gladstone's Midlothian Campaign was the first time the leader of a political party campaigned directly to the people. It symbolises a major change in the role of the Prime Minister as the national leader. (Gladstone is seated in the center; Lord Rosebery, a future Prime Minister, is sitting on the carpet in front.)

The Parliament Act and the Premiership: 1911

As the Royal influence over ministerial appointments disappeared, the power of the House of Commons rose, its political superiority over the House of Lords being established by the Parliament Act 1911. During the early twentieth century, the convention that the Prime Minister should be responsible not to the Lords, but to the Commons, took root. The associated convention that the Prime Minister should actually be a member of the Lower House was developed. The last Prime Minister to lead his whole administration from the Lords was Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, from 1895 to 1902. The last Prime Minister to be a member of the Lords during his tenure was Alec Douglas-Home, 14th Earl of Home in 1963. Lord Home was the last Prime Minister who was a hereditary peer, but, within days of attaining office, he disclaimed his peerage, abiding by the convention that the Prime Minister should sit in the House of Commons. A junior member of his Conservative Party who had already been selected as candidate in a by-election in a staunch Conservative seat stood aside, allowing Douglas-Home to contest the by-election, win and thus procure a seat in the lower House.

The House of Lords is considerably less restrictive of the Prime Minister's power. Under the Salisbury Convention, the House of Lords normally does not seek to oppose any measure promised by the Government in its election manifesto. When the House of Lords does oppose the Prime Minister, it is generally ineffectual in defeating entire Bills (though almost all Bills are successfully modified by the Upper House during their passage through Parliament). Peers (members of the House of Lords) are created by the Sovereign on the advice of the Prime Minister; by obtaining the creation of several new peers, the Prime Minister may flood the House of Lords with individuals supportive of his position. The threat of such a tactic was used in 1911 to ensure the passage of the Parliament Act 1911, which, together with the Parliament Act 1949, reduces the House of Lords's powers and establishes the supremacy of the Commons (in particular, the House of Lords can only delay, but not reject, most bills on which the Commons insist).

An important vote: the House of Lords voting for the 1911 Parliament Act. From the Drawing by S. Begg

The Prime Minister is appointed by the Sovereign, who is bound by constitutional convention to choose the individual most likely to command the support of the House of Commons (normally, the leader of the party with a plurality in that body). Should the Prime Minister lose the confidence of the House of Commons, they are morally obliged by similar conventions either to resign or to request the monarch to call a general election. Since the premiership is in some small sense still a de facto position, the office's powers are mainly a matter of custom rather than law, deriving from the incumbent's ability to give the sovereign binding advice on the appointment of his Cabinet colleagues, as well as from certain uses of the royal prerogative which may be exercised directly by the Prime Minister, or by the Monarch on the Prime Minister's advice. Some commentators have pointed out that, in practice, the powers of the office are subject to very few checks, especially in an era when Parliament and the Cabinet are seen as unwilling to challenge dominant Prime Ministers as they are bound by a policy of collective cabinet responsibility.^{citation needed}

The Modern Premiership: 1911 to the Present

Legal Status of the Office

The official status of the Prime Minister remains ambiguous. A Prime Minister has virtually no statutory authority in their own right; all the actual business of running the country and spending the budget is (in theory) carried out by the holders of more explicitly-defined Cabinet offices, who are empowered to do so by various Acts of Parliament. The Prime Minister holds at least one of these more tangible ministerial offices himself—normally First Lord of the Treasury—and indeed receives their salary and public accommodation only by virtue of that office.

The title "Prime Minister", however, is not altogether a matter of convention, as in 1905 it was in a sense given official recognition when the "Prime Minister" was named in the order of precedence, outranked, among non-royals, only by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, The Moderator of the Church of Scotland and by the Lord Chancellor. Furthermore, the office is not entirely without statutory justification, since it has in fact been explicitly named a number of times in emergency wartime legislation. All sorts of official pronouncements are issued from Downing Street in the name of the "Prime Minister" without further circumlocution or explanation. The first prime minister in this sense is therefore considered by some to have been Henry Campbell-Bannerman, although the term "Prime Minister" first appeared on official documents during the premiership of Benjamin Disraeli and was used informally before then.

The first mention of "Prime Minister" in an official government document occurred in a foreign country when Benjamin Disraeli signed the Treaty of Berlin in 1879 as "First Lord of Her Majesty's Treasury and Prime Minister" so that Chancellor Bismark would understand his true authority.^{citation needed} The title has been used since then in documents, letters and conversation (and, in conversation at least, may have been used before then). In 1905 the title "Prime Minister" was noted in a royal warrant that placed the Prime Minister, mentioned as such, in the order of precedence in Britain immediately after the Archbishop of York. By this time legal recognition of the title seems to have occurred and it was later mentioned in the Chequers Estate Act 1917, and the Ministers of the Crown Act 1937. ^[44]

The first Act of Parliament to mention the position of Prime Minister was the Chequers Estate Act, which received the Royal Assent on December 20, 1917. It dealt with the gift to the Crown of the Chequers Estate by Sir Arthur and Lady Lee, for use as a country home for future Prime Ministers.

Finally, the Ministers of the Crown Act, which received the Royal Assent on July 1, 1937, gave official recognition to the position of Prime Minister and made provision for paying "the First Lord of the Treasury and Prime Minister" — the former being the office that since the 18th century, has usually been held by the Prime Minister:

To give statutory recognition to the existence of the position of Prime Minister, and to the historic link between the Premiership and the office of First Lord of the Treasury, by providing in respect to that position and office a salary of…

The Act made a certain distinction between "position" (Prime Minister) and "office" (First Lord of the Treasury), emphasising the unique character of the position and recognising the existence of the Cabinet. Nevertheless, in spite of this recognition, the brass plate outside the Prime Minister's front door still bears the title of "First Lord of the Treasury."

By convention, as noted above, the Prime Minister also holds the office of First Lord of the Treasury. The only Prime Ministers who have not also served as First Lord for a significant part of their administrations are William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham (who was Lord Privy Seal) and, for most of his three premierships, Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury (who was either Foreign Secretary or Lord Privy Seal except for the first few months of his second premiership when he was First Lord). Since Lord Salisbury's retirement in 1902, every Prime Minister has also been First Lord of the Treasury. Some have held yet more offices; for example until 1942 nearly every Prime Minister was either Leader of the House of Commons or Leader of the House of Lords, depending upon the House in which they sat. Some have also held specific ministerial posts; for example Ramsay MacDonald was both First Lord and Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs during his first premiership in 1924. Since the 1960s every prime minister has also been Minister for the Civil Service.

David Lloyd George, who served from 1916 to 1922, is often cited as an example of a strong Prime Minister. Photograph published circa 1919.

Churchill waves to the Crowds After Announcing the Surrender of Germany 1945 The inherent flexibility of the office of Prime Minister allowed Lloyd George and Churchill to assume, albeit temporarily, almost dictatorial powers during the Great War and World War II.

Effect of the Permanent Civil Service on the Office

"Presidential" Premiership

The role and power of the Prime Minister have been subject to much change in the last fifty years. There has gradually been a change from Cabinet decision making and deliberation to the dominance of the Prime Minister. As early as 1965, in a new introduction to Walter Bagehot's classic work The English Constitution, Richard Crossman identified a new era of "Prime Ministerial" government. Some commentators, such as the political scientist Michael Foley, have argued there is a de facto "British Presidency". In Tony Blair's government, many sources such as former ministers have suggested that decision-making was centered around him and Gordon Brown, and the Cabinet was no longer used for decision making.^[45] Former ministers such as Clare Short and Chris Smith have criticised the total lack of decision-making in Cabinet. On her resignation, Short denounced "the centralisation of power into the hands of the Prime Minister and an increasingly small number of advisers"^[46] The Butler Review of 2004 condemned Blair's style of "sofa government".

At the opposite extreme, however, Prime Ministers may dominate the Cabinet so much that they become "Semi-Presidents." Examples of dominant Prime Ministers (more common during the late nineteenth and the twentieth centuries) include William Ewart Gladstone, David Lloyd George, Neville Chamberlain, Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, and Tony Blair. The powers of some Prime Ministers waxed or waned, depending upon their own level of energy, political skills or outside events: Ramsay MacDonald, for example, was dominant in his Labour governments, but during his National Government his powers diminished so that by his final years in Downing Street he was merely the figurehead of the government. In modern times, Prime Ministers have never been merely titular; dominant or somewhat dominant personalities are the norm.

Ultimately, however, the Prime Minister will be held responsible by the nation for the consequences of legislation or of general government policy. Margaret Thatcher's party forced her from power after the introduction of the poll tax; Sir Anthony Eden fell from power following the Suez Crisis; and Neville Chamberlain resigned after being criticised for his handling of negotiations with Germany prior to the outbreak of World War II, and for failing to prevent the fall of Norway to the Nazi onslaught.

The Prime Minister's powers are also limited by the House of Commons, whose support the Government is obliged to maintain. The House of Commons checks the powers of the Prime Minister through committee hearings and through Question Time, a weekly occurrence in which the Prime Minister is obliged to respond to the questions of the Leader of the Opposition and other members of the House. In practice, however, a Government with a strong majority need rarely fear "backbench rebellions."

Constitutional Changes Since 1973

Effects of Entry into the European Union on the Office

Effects of Devolution on the Office

The idea of having a Prime Minister who was a Member of Parliament for a Scottish constituency causes disquiet in some quarters. Conservative MP Alan Duncan told the BBC in 2006 that he was "...beginning to think it is almost impossible now to have a Scottish prime minister because they would be at odds with the basic construction of the British constitution." ^[47]

The Deputy Prime Minister

More recently, there is also the associated post of Deputy Prime Minister. An officer with such a title need not always exist; rather, the existence of the post is dependent on the form of Cabinet organisation preferred by the Prime Minister and their party. The Deputy Prime Minister does not automatically succeed if a vacancy in the premiership is suddenly created, nor do they generally assume any specific additional powers when the Prime Minister is outside the country. It may be necessary for the Deputy to stand in for the Prime Minister on occasion, for example by taking the dispatch box during Prime Minister's Question Time or by attending international conferences or bilateral meetings when the Prime Minister is unavailable. Since the resignation of John Prescott on 27 June 2007 there has been no Deputy Prime Minister.

Characteristics of Prime Ministers and Their Ministries

Margaret Thatcher was the first woman to serve as British Prime Minister, holding the office from 1979 to 1990. Photographed 1984.

There is no term of office for a prime minister. The prime minister holds office "at Her Majesty's pleasure". As however to gain supply (control of exchequer funds) that requires that the government be answerable to, and acceptable to, the House of Commons, in reality the convention "at her Majesty's pleasure" means "at the pleasure of the House of Commons". Whenever the office of Prime Minister falls vacant, the Sovereign is responsible for appointing the new successor; the appointment is formalised at a ceremony known as Kissing Hands. In accordance with unwritten constitutional conventions, the Sovereign must appoint the individual most likely to maintain the support of the House of Commons: usually, the leader of the party which has a majority in that House. If no party has a majority (an unlikely occurrence, given the United Kingdom's First Past the Post electoral system), two or more groups may form a coalition, whose agreed leader is then appointed Prime Minister. The majority party becomes "Her Majesty's Government," and the next largest party becomes "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition". The head of the largest Opposition party becomes the Leader of the Opposition and holds the title "Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition". By tradition, before a new Prime Minister can enter 10 Downing Street for the first time as its occupant, they are required to announce to the country and the world that they have kissed hands with the reigning monarch, and thus has become Prime Minister. This is usually done by saying words to the effect of:

Although it wasn't required, Tony Blair also said these words after he was re-elected in 2001 and 2005.

The period in office of a Prime Minister is not linked to the term of Members of the House of Commons. A prime minister once appointed continues in office as Her Majesty's head of government until either they resign, are dismissed (in reality something not likely to happen except in exceptional circumstances) or die. Resignation can be triggered off by the passage of a Motion of No Confidence or by rejecting a Motion of Confidence in the House of Commons. In those situations, a prime minister must either resign or seek a dissolution. A Loss of Supply also amounts to a loss of confidence. Such defeats for the Government, however, are rare; there have only been three defeats on confidence issues in the twentieth century: twice in 1924, and once in 1979. The first in 1924 took place immediately after an inconclusive election result and led to an immediate change of government, but in the other two cases a general election was called (and in both, the incumbent government was defeated).

Where a prime minister loses a general election modern constitution conventions dictate that that prime minister immediately submit their resignation. Previous precedent, until the early twentieth century, dictated that a prime minister wait until actually defeated on their legislative programme in a vote on the Speech from the Throne before resigning. This option has never entirely been discarded, and might be adopted again if, say, a General Election produced a Parliament with no overall majority. For instance, something of the kind occurred after the general election of February 1974, which did not produce an absolute majority for any party, Edward Heath opted not to resign immediately, instead negotiating with a third party (the Liberal Party) to form a coalition. Heath did eventually resign when the negotiations failed.

19th century illustration of the assassination of Spencer Perceval by John Bellingham in 1812 — the only time a British Prime Minister has been murdered while in office.

Contrary to myth a prime minister is not reappointed after every general election. They continue in office, but may use the opportunity to reshuffle the cabinet, with only those ministers moved or brought in going to the Palace for appointment. As a result, though prime minister during a number of parliaments in succession, Margaret Thatcher was only actually appointed prime minister once, in 1979.

Whatever the reason—the expiry of Parliament's five-year term, the choice of the Prime Minister, or a Government defeat in the House of Commons—the dissolution is followed by general elections. If their party has lost a majority in the House of Commons, the Prime Minister is compelled to resign (or request a dissolution, but the Sovereign is not compelled to accept such a request). The leader of the party or coalition now in the majority is then appointed Prime Minister by the Sovereign. The custom that requires the Prime Minister to resign immediately after an electoral loss is only of relatively recent invention. Previously, Prime Ministers had the option of meeting Parliament, and then inviting an effective vote of confidence.

As well as losing the confidence of the House of Commons, prime ministers may also in effect be forced to resign if they lose the confidence of their party. This was what led Margaret Thatcher to resign in 1990. The last Prime Minister to die in office was Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston (in 1865). The only Prime Minister to be assassinated was Spencer Perceval (in 1812).

Powers and Constraints

The Prime Minister's chief duty is to "form a Government"—that is to say, to create a Cabinet or Ministry which will sustain the support of the House of Commons—when commissioned by the Sovereign. They generally co-ordinate the policies and activities of the Cabinet and the various Government departments, acting as the "face" of Her Majesty's Government. The Sovereign exercises much of their royal prerogative on the Prime Minister's advice. (For the prerogative of dissolving Parliament, see "Term" above.)

The Commander-in-Chief of the British Armed Forces is the Sovereign. Under long-standing parliamentary custom and practice, however, the Prime Minister holds de facto decision-making power over the deployment and disposition of British forces, hence the Commander-in-Chief without portfolio. The Prime Minister can authorise, but not directly order, the use of Britain's nuclear weapons.

The Prime Minister also has a wide range of powers of appointment. In most cases, the actual appointments are made by the Sovereign, but the selection and recommendation is made by the Prime Minister. Ministers, Privy Counsellors, Ambassadors and High Commissioners, senior civil servants, senior military officers, members of important committees and commissions, and several other officials are selected, and in some cases may be removed, by the Prime Minister. Furthermore, peerages, knighthoods, and other honours are bestowed by the Sovereign only on the advice of the Prime Minister. He also formally advises the Sovereign on the appointment of Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England, but his discretion is limited by the existence of the Crown Nominations Commission. The appointment of senior judges, while on the advice of the Prime Minister for constitutional reasons, is now on the basis of recommendations from independent bodies. The only important British honours over which the Prime Minister does not have control are the Orders of the Garter, Thistle, and Merit, and the Royal Victorian Order, which are all within the "personal gift" of the Sovereign. The extent of the Sovereign's ability to influence the nature of the Prime Ministerial advice is unknown, but probably varies depending upon the personal relationship between the Sovereign and the Prime Minister of the day.

Members of Parliament may hold ministerial offices (up to 90 paid offices, of varying levels of seniority, exist), and may fear removal for failing to support the Prime Minister. Party discipline, furthermore, is very strong; a Member of Parliament may be expelled from their party for failing to support the Government on important issues, and although this will not mean they must resign as an MP, it would make re-election difficult for most. Restraints imposed by the House of Commons grow weaker when the Government's party enjoys a large majority in that House. In general, however, the Prime Minister and their colleagues may secure the House's support for almost any bill.

However, even a government with a healthy majority can on occasion find it is unable to pass legislation due to opposition from MPs. For example, on January 31, 2006 Tony Blair's Government was defeated over proposals to outlaw religious hatred, while on November 9, 2005 it was defeated over plans which would have allowed police to detain terror suspects for up to 90 days without charge. On other occasions, the Government may be forced to alter its proposals in order to avoid defeat in the Commons, as Tony Blair's Government did in February 2006 over education reforms.^[50]

Unlike in the United States there is no minimum age specific to the Office of Prime Minister other than that for a member of parliament (18). This is because the United Kingdom elects a party into government and not a person to be its leader.

Gordon Brown on 2 July 2007 proposed transferring parts of the Prime Minister's traditional authority to Parliament. He has said he intends to yield certain traditional Prime Ministerial powers conferred on the office by royal prerogative, including the ability to declare war, thus giving the Parliament more powers and rights to vet and veto appointments to senior public positions, in a bid to crack down on cronyism.^[51]^[52]

Precedence and Privileges

Tony Blair and Dick Cheney at the main door to 10 Downing Street, the Prime Minister's residence in London, on 11 March, 2002.

The Prime Minister draws their salary not as Prime Minister, but as First Lord of the Treasury. At present the office-holder receives £127,334 in addition to their salary of £60,277 as a Member of Parliament.^[53] Until 2006 the Lord Chancellor was the highest paid member of the government ahead of the Prime Minister. This reflected the Lord Chancellor's position at the top of the judicial pay scale, as British judges are on the whole better paid than British politicians and until 2005 the Lord Chancellor was both politician and the head of the judiciary. The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 stripped the Lord Chancellor of his judicial functions and his salary was reduced below the Prime Minister's.

The Prime Minister traditionally resides at 10 Downing Street in London, which George II offered to Sir Robert Walpole as a personal gift. Walpole, however, only accepted it as the official home of the First Lord, taking up his residence there in 1735. The Prime Minister only resides in 10 Downing Street in their capacity as First Lord; the few nineteenth century Prime Ministers who were not First Lords were forced to live elsewhere. Though most First Lords have lived in 10 Downing Street, some preferred to reside in their private residences. This happened when they were often aristocrats with grand Central London homes of their own, such as Palmerston's Cambridge House and seems unlikely to occur again. Furthermore, some such as Harold Macmillan and John Major have lived in Admiralty House whilst 10 Downing Street was undergoing renovations or repairs.

Adjacent to Downing Street is 11 Downing Street, the home of the Second Lord of the Treasury (who, in modern times, has also filled the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer). After he became Prime Minister in 1997, Tony Blair found 10 Downing Street too small for his large family, and he swapped residences with the Chancellor and Second Lord, Gordon Brown, then a bachelor. However, the Prime Ministerial offices are still maintained in Number 10. 12 Downing Street is the residence of the Chief Whip.

Chequers. The Prime Minister's official country home

The Prime Minister, like other Cabinet Ministers and senior Members of Parliament, is customarily a member of the Privy Council; thus, they become entitled to prefix "The Right Honourable" to their name. Membership of the Council is retained for life (unless the individual resigns it, or is expelled—both rare phenomena). It is a constitutional convention that only a Privy Counsellor can be appointed Prime Minister, but invariably all potential candidates have already attained this status. The only occasion when a non-Privy Councillor was the natural appointment was Ramsay MacDonald in 1924, but the issue was resolved by appointing him to the Council immediately prior to his appointment as Prime Minister.

Retirement Honours

It is customary for the Sovereign to grant a Prime Minister some honour or dignity when that individual retires from politics. The honour commonly, but not invariably, bestowed on Prime Ministers is membership of the United Kingdom's most senior order of chivalry, the Order of the Garter. The practice of creating retired Prime Ministers Knights of the Garter has been fairly prevalent since the middle-nineteenth century. On the retirement of a Prime Minister who is Scottish, it is likely that the primarily Scottish honour of the Order of the Thistle will be used instead of the Order of the Garter, which is generally regarded as an English honour.

It has also been common for Prime Ministers to be granted peerages upon their retirement as a Member of Parliament, which elevates the individual to the House of Lords. For this reason, the peerage is rarely awarded immediately on the Prime Minister's resignation from that post, unless they step down as an MP at the same time. Formerly, the peerage bestowed was usually an earldom (which was always hereditary), with Churchill offered a dukedom. However, since the 1960s, hereditary peerages have generally been eschewed, and life peerages have been preferred, although in the 1980s Harold Macmillan was created Earl of Stockton on retirement. Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan and Margaret Thatcher accepted life peerages. However, neither Edward Heath nor John Major accepted peerages of any kind on stepping down as MPs. Margaret Thatcher's son Mark is a baronet, which he inherited from his father Denis, but this is not a peerage.

Of the nineteen Prime Ministers since 1902, eight have been created both peers and Knights of the Garter; three were ennobled but not knighted; three became Knights of the Garter but not peers; and five were not granted either honour— in two cases due to their death while still active in politics; two others declined honours.

Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.html

Contents