The Prime Minister Debate - Essay Example

Together with the senior ministers who make up the cabinet, the prime minister is responsible for his strategies and performance to the queen, his political party, the parliament, and above all the electorate. The office is not instituted by constitutional laws but subsists according to a customary convention which outlines that the queen appoints an individual as the prime minister. One should be capable of upholding the buoyancy of the House of Commons. Usually, the Prime Minister is the head of the party or coalition of parties with the majority seats in the chamber (Tuchman 1996,p.37). The prime minister is mandated with the task of making top appointments including the cabinet members, ministers, High commissioners, senior civil servants, senior military officers and Ambassadors while other appointments are made by the minister who have powers to appoint or dismiss.

The prime minister under constitutional practice can declare war and by the virtue of being the chair of the defence council can influence the deployment and disposition of the British Armed Forces. Even though he is not permitted to directly order the deployment of the nuclear weapons, he has the power to offer consent to their use. The Prime Minister is also vested with the power to appoint ministers called the ‘whips’ whose main duty is to solicit the support of MPs and to discipline nonconformists of the government parliamentary party.

Since the electorate votes for parties and not individuals, party discipline becomes extremely crucial. In fact, MPs can be expelled from their party for failure to rally behind the government on core matters though this does not necessitate their resignation as MPs. Ministers and MPs with political privileges are prone to demotions if they do not support the Prime Minister fully (Barnett 2009,p.84). The government’s party strengthens its position by ensuring that it has the majority number of MPs in the house or enjoys a bigger support of the voters.

The Prime Minister on the other hand enforces the support of the Commons through party negotiations without much consideration to the opposition MPs. However, at times, a government may be unable to legislate effectively despite enjoying a luxury support. For instance in 31st January 2006, the former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s administration found it difficult to convince the House of Commons on various issues concerning religious abhorrence (Knappen 1998,p.53). On such circumstances, the government is forced to change its proposals to curb any chance of defeat in the Commons as this would render it critically weakened.

Such a scenario would necessitate the Prime Minister’s and his government’s resignation. In most cases, the Prime Minister solidifies his position by keeping his staunch supporters in the cabinet. He also enforces his position by exercising his legal power of choosing the cabinet ministers to attend a particular meeting. In essence the prime minister holds the power of any government he is administering since he is accountable for both producing and enacting the ministerial code (Chrimes 1997,p.56). Owing to the fact that the prime minister controls the law making process, he or she can easily and at will manipulate the process of enacting his own legislative agenda or those of his political party.

Over a period of time, the holders of this office have ensured that laws have been enacted to cement their position or for the interest of their