...Chapter 2 – The Executive The Prime Minister What do you know about the roles and powers of prime ministers? • In Austria & Germany (Dr. Angela Merkel): chancellor • Prime minister: not only the chief executive of the state [In Europe], but also the head of one of the legislative parties. (usually the largest) ( Great power [in particular in single-party majority governments as Greece (Kostas Karamanlis), Britain (Gordon Brown)] ( The lack of any separation between legislature and executive. • In EU-style, the person who can muster a legislative majority ( Head of the executive • In such countries, the threat to the Prime minister comes from the governing party. Elements of power of the Prime minister: (1) Approved by the legislature (i.e. Parliament) as the political head of the government. (Most important task of the legislature after an election has been held.) - If the incumbent prime minister can collect the parliamentary votes to remain on office: he or she has “won” the election even if his party had large losses. - The politicians campaigning in Parliamentary elections are typically party leaders. - Electing/Approving a new prime minister is the central duty of a newly elected parliament. [Citizens vote for the party] - If citizens want to change their chief executive in a parliamentary government system, they do so by voting in legislative elections. (2) The modest role of head of state. Premier political...
Words: 853 - Pages: 4
...TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN PUTRA AL-HAJ Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj ibni Almarhum Sultan Abdul Hamid Halim Shah is Malaysia first Prime Minister after its Independence in 1957. He is well-known as Bapa Kemerdekaan (Father of Independence) or Bapa Malaysia (Father of Malaysia). Tunku who is the seventh prince and twentieth child of Sultan Abdul Hamid Halim Shah was born in Istana Pelamin , Alor Setar in Kedah on February 8, 1903. His mother was Che Manjalara who is the fourth wife of Sultan Abdul Hamid. In 1909, Abdul Rahman was sent to a Malay Primary School Jalan Baharu and was later transferred to study at the Government English School in Alor Star, which currently known as the Sultan Abdul Hamid College. Abdul Rahman was then sent to Debsirin School in Bangkok in 1911. Then, he returned to Malaya in 1915 and continued his studies at Penang Free School. He graduated from St. Catharine’s College in Cambridge University with a bachelor degree of Arts in law and history in 1925. In 1951 Abdul Rahman became the president of UMNO and in 1955,he became the first Chief Minister of Malaya. As UMNO President, he has successfully solved many political issues in the Federation of Malaya, with various races cooperation. As a result, he succeeded in forming an alliance between the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC) and this was known as the Alliance, Party. Under Tunku Abdul Rahman, the country successfully...
Words: 1518 - Pages: 7
...politics, a more proactive and pragmatic foreign policy. The govt has been able to ensure high growth with low inflation (food inflation though has been high) and that too with low fiscal deficit. The Indian policies are now being implemented in mission mode, the prominent examples being PMJDY (Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana) and Toilets in schools. We find no example in recent history of Indian schemes completed on time. In social sector, Accidental and life insurance at Rs12 and Rs 330 have come as a huge relief to the poor and the marginalized sections of society. Moreover in all these 18 months he has never made a single statement which can be construed as even being remotely communal. He has truly upheld the dignity of the office of The Prime Minister. Modi deserves Kudos for all these achievements. This shining story has its other side also, which looks most unpleasant and ludicrous. The theory of Love Jihad, according to this theory, Muslim men are on a mission to get Hindu girls and...
Words: 787 - Pages: 4
...Is the British Prime Minister now effectively a president? Nowadays the British prime minister is effectively a president, as the role has increasingly acquired presidential powers and been carried out in presidential style in order to become more dominant of government in general. Although the distinction between the legislature and executive in the UK is blurred and the prime minister is technically different to a president, the prime minister is now effectively the Chief of the Executive, Chief of State and Commander-in-Chief in Britain – these are typically considered presidential functions. This means that prime ministers in the UK are now more powerful and very similar to presidents – they govern in a similar way, and have similar prerogatives. Many argue that the British prime minister is unique and unlike a president because of the overlap between the executive and legislating branches of government. Whereas in the UK the prime minister’s party has a majority in the upper legislative chamber, and he can therefore harness parliamentary sovereignty, in America the legislature is independent of the president and can act as a barrier to his mandate. For example in 2012 Obama’s ‘Bring Jobs Home’ Bill, which would take tax breaks from companies that ‘outsource’ jobs abroad, and give them to ‘insourcing’ companies was blocked by Senate Republicans, 42 of whom voted against it. 17 other bills with similar widespread public appeal such as this one have been blocked by republicans...
Words: 951 - Pages: 4
...What are the main sources of Prime Ministerial power? The Prime Minister enjoys certain privileges and powers that the rest of the executive. The Prime Minister is the most important figure in the UK political system, there is debate to the extent of he or she’s power; the PM draws power from a number of sources. The extent to which these powers are harnessed and used is dependent upon a number of factor, but in reality the PM can gather an incredible amount of power from the traditions, conventions and laws which regulate the post of Prime Minister. The post is seen as providing “National Leadership” and is therefore the pre-eminent position in UK politics. The Prime Minister is first and foremost an MP. This affords them legitimate power to act as they see fit on behalf of the electorate. Moreover, they have also been democratically elected within their own party, therefore they have a mandate to rule. The principle job and source of power for the PM is to set up a government. Ratified by the Queen this gives the PM the power of patronage. They can hire and fire; this gives them control and power over the careers of party members and peers. As a result party member and ministers want to impress the PM and often agree with his or her policies. Much of the PM’s power comes from being able to “hire and fire”. Although this does come with constraints; firing members of the cabinet can cause tensions within the party. However, substantial reshuffles have secures a PM’s power...
Words: 706 - Pages: 3
...Is the UK Prime Minister now effectively a President? (40 marks) The arguments that used to take place among political academics about 'prime ministerial government' have now largely disappeared. Few, if any, now doubt that the office of prime minister dominates the British political system. As long as the holder of that office is not faced by too many limiting factors, such as a small parliamentary majority or a divided party, the British system has moved away from the traditional 'cabinet government' model to a 'prime ministerial' model. But a somewhat different question has emerged concerning the role and importance of the prime minister. This asks whether the system has now become 'presidential'. The prime minister has come to be, effectively though not legally, the head of State, the leader of the nation, irrespective of party allegiance. It should be stressed that this is not the same as national 'popularity'. Rather, it means that in times of difficulty, emergency or crisis such as war or terrorist threats, the country can unite behind its head of government. Nothing new in that, and certainly it has always been true to a great extent. But it can be argued that there has been a long term drift towards seeing the prime minister of the day rather than the monarch as national leader, and thus creates a more presidential 'feel' to the prime minister. The prime minister now has an extensive network of personal advisers, think tanks, policy units and working groups...
Words: 1460 - Pages: 6
...Has the power of the UK Prime Minister increased? It can be argued that the power of the British Prime Minister has increased power due to his multiple sources of authority and his dominance over the cabinet government. However due to the coalition formed in the 2010 general election the argument that the Prime Ministers power has not increased takes precedent because power has to be shared and they can still be removed from office by their party or parliament. The UK government is becoming more closely comparable to the American presidential system, as the Prime Minister holds more power, mainly due to his dominance over the cabinet. The party leader has the ability to choose who is appointed what position within the cabinet; David Cameron announced he would ‘re-shuffle’ the make-up of the cabinet after being elected in 2010. Thus allowing him to choose individuals to undertake certain roles which he can manipulate to his advantage. The Prime Minister can also dominate the decisions which should be made by the cabinet. For example Margaret Thatcher’s decision to ban trade unions at GCHQ in Cheltenham in 1984, was the result of a meeting between a small group which defied the convention of Cabinet collective decision making. Demonstrating how the power of the Prime Minister has increased as the cabinet government has adopted a more passive role. Similarly to their dominance of the cabinet, another valid reason in favour of the Prime Minister having increased powers is that...
Words: 391 - Pages: 2
...presidentialism of our prime ministers is the fact that they are not our head of state whereas presidents are heads of state. However our prime minister is or head of government. The head of state is responsible for attending political functions, exercising political powers and legitimising the state. They also have the power to call for early elections and are responsible for signing off all laws passed in parliamentary government. Whereas the head of government is the leader of the ruling party and is the chief of the executive branch. Their responsibilities are implementing laws and making all important decisions with the approval of the cabinet. In the presidential form of government the head of government and the head of state are the same individual whereas in our government the head of state is the Queen and the head of government is the prime minister. One way that the prime minister can be seen as becoming presidential is the greater concentration on the presentation of policy. The prime minister likes to be associated with the positive policies being enforced and passed through their government, guidance and leadership. So as to add to their public appeal. Famously Blair announced on Breakfast TV that the government was to make significant investments in the health service. Brown accused the prime minister of stealing his budget when in fact Brown was due to make the announcement the following day as part of his spending review. A second way in which the prime minister appears...
Words: 809 - Pages: 4
...Are British Prime ministers as powerful as is sometimes claimed? [40] It is often argued that in this day and age, Prime ministers are almost untouchable within the British political system, due to the shear number of powers that the Prime minister holds, and the prerogatives that he utilises. However, due to a handful of checks and balances on the government, and the Prime minister not being separated from the political system, which means he or she is liable to these checks and limitations, the Prime minister may therefore not be perceived as all that powerful. As previously mentioned, the Prime minister enjoys a collection of powers within the UK political system. Firstly, the prime minister has this huge amount of power due to the fact that they are both part of the executive branch of government and the legislature, due to the fusion of powers within the British political system. This means that they are able to create law and then use their representation in the legislature to force through this law. For example, when Tony Blair won a landslide victory in 1997, winning 179 seats. As a result of this, he was not beaten in the commons until 2005, when they rejected his proposition on terror laws. Tony Blair can also be used as another example of how Prime ministers are as powerful as is sometimes claimed. Prime ministers have many prerogative powers that are granted to them by the Queen as head of state. For example, in 2003, when Tony Blair utilised these prerogatives...
Words: 1212 - Pages: 5
...Winston Churchill is well known for what he did as prime minister, but there is more information to know about him. Winston Churchill was born on November 30, 1874 and was born into an aristocratic family. His family, being aristocrats, were very wealthy which gave him a good education. He was related to many high up people. His father name was Lord Randolph Churchill, who was a British statesman and his mother’s name was Jeanette Jerome, who was a New York socialite. In Winston Churchill’s early life he got in trouble a lot and did not do well at his first two schools. In April 1888, he went to a boarding school where he enrolled in a military program. At first, he did not seem fit to go to on a military path. It took him three tries to pass the test for the British Royal Military school. Once he got in he did well though. During this time he wrote letters to his mother asking her to come and visit him, but she hardly ever came. His father died when he was 21 and didn’t really know him that well, aside from his work and what he did. Even though he never got to see his parents that often, he loved them both. While in the military, and at the Battle of Omdurman, he found himself writing reports on newspapers....
Words: 607 - Pages: 3
...Pierre Elliott Trudeau was the fifteenth prime minister of Canada and held this position for sixteen years. He was the most controversial Prime Minster in Canadian history. He made some tough decisions for the unity of Canada. He was Prime Minster from 1968 to 1979 and 1980 to 1984. In 1972 Trudeau returned with a minority Liberal government. I came to Canada as an immigrant and arrived in Montréal at Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport. Later on, I came to know that he was the famous Prime Minster of Canada from Montreal. Trudeau had a vision of unified, bilingual and multicultural Canada. Trudeau used to drive sports cars, wore capes and floppy hats, and always had a red rose in his lapel. His charismatic, flamboyant and exciting...
Words: 778 - Pages: 4
...Sir John Alexander MacDonald was Canada's first prime minister in 1857 that helped improve Canada. MacDonald accomplished many things during his two terms such as making British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, and North West Territories be apart of Canada and building the pacific railways. His legacy had many mistakes but made achievements, he was an alcoholic and was the father of the confederation, although some Canadians have said MacDonald did not know a lot about Canada when he was the prime minister. MacDonald was born on January 11, 1815 in Glasgow, Scotland and moved to Kingston, Ontario at the age of 5 and went to John Cruikshank school. At the age of 15 MacDonald started legal practice and was an apprentice for George Mackenzie who influenced him. By the time he got to age 20 he became a lawyer and opened his own office after he studied at Midland District Grammar school. When MacDonald was a child he always had interest in public affairs which led him to be a really known lawyer and a public spirited citizen that easily got elected to the Kingston Town Council as an alderman. After three year of service MacDonald ran Kingston as a conservative in 1844 but it didn't have any power at that time since he didn't...
Words: 656 - Pages: 3
...MOV E R S S H A KE RS A LOOK AT HUMANA’S INTEGRATED HEALTH APPROACH: A Conversation with Chief Medical Officer Dr. Roy Beveridge March 2014 “We Accelerate Growth” MOV E R S & S H A KE R S Movers & Shakers Inter view with Dr. Roy Beveridge Senior Vice President and Chief Medical Officer, Humana March 2014 Humana Inc. (NYSE: HUM) is a leading provider of commercial health plans, specialty insurance plans, and integrated health and wellness services. Headquartered in Louisville, Ky., the company was founded in 1961 and currently serves 12 million members across the US through individual and employer markets. Humana is the fifth-largest company in terms of medical membership in the country. Humana is particularly strong in the Medicare market and has developed deep expertise over its 25-plus year experience with the program. Humana currently has Medicare offerings in all 50 states and offers Medicare Advantage plans and standalone prescription drug coverage for approximately 5.8 million members. In addition to selling insurance products, Humana also delivers primary care, urgent care, wellness, and other healthcare services through its operation of medical centers and worksite medical facilities via its Concentra subsidiary, CAC Medical Centers in South Florida, wellness company LifeSynch and other affiliated businesses. Humana’s president and CEO is Bruce Broussard, who was named president in late 2011 and appointed CEO in 2013.The company reported $41.31 billion...
Words: 2672 - Pages: 11
...dominant Prime Ministers; Thatcher and Blair for example. Although, in order to determine the extent that the Prime Minister dominates the political system, we have to look at changes in the role rather than looking at a couple of individuals. An argument that says the Prime Minister dominates the political system is the growth and use of an extensive advisory unit who work exclusively for the Prime Minister. This means the Prime Minister has access to information that his Ministers do not have, and it also means the Prime Minister can essentially overlook the advice of his/her Ministers thus allowing the Prime Minister to dominate cabinet. The Prime Minister, as the chief appointer of the Cabinet, can also effectively remove anyone who does not agree with his/her views. This results in a complete dominance of the executive, which inevitably results in dominance of the UK political system. However, this dominance is a short term consequence of the Prime Minister’s powers. There are only so many Ministers the Prime Minister can remove before his Cabinet loses complete faith in him/her; secondly, by completely dominating policy, Ministers lose any sense of ownership over policy which can cause party factions, or even a vote of no confidence. A Prime Minister’s power is said to be elastic, in that the further the Prime Minister tries to stretch their power, the harder his/her party pulls back. This is something we have seen with the UK’s most dominant post-war Prime Ministers...
Words: 902 - Pages: 4
...source, a prime minister may choose to appoint those who have shown and proven that they can deliver in their departments. It says in the source that ‘the prime minister sees the second half of this parliament as the delivery phase’. This shows that a prime minister would want to put those in positions of power who have evidence showing that they are successful in the policies that they implement and can do this effectively. Therefore they would not want to promote, and would want to dismiss, those ministers that have not delivered and whose performance has been dissatisfactory. For example ‘Caroline Spelman’ is likely to be a victim of being sacked or demoted as she ‘has failed to recover from the fiasco of failed plans to sell off parts of the national forest’. Also suggested in the source is the fact that other influential politicians may have an effect on the prime ministers appointments or dismisses. It says ‘the appointment of Mitchell shows the influence of George Osborne, his close supporter’. Because George Osborne is the Chancellor of the Exchequer he would be an important MP, the fact that he supports another minister would encourage David Cameron to promote this minister. This influential minister may work particularly well, or agree on many policies with another politician. Equally if an important minister does not support another politician, or does not collaborate well with them, they are more likely to be dismissed. Another factor that the prime minister might...
Words: 386 - Pages: 2
