The Government of England (Vol. I)Lowell, A. Lawrence (Abbott Lawrence)
History
The Government of England (Vol. I)
Lowell, A. Lawrence (Abbott Lawrence)
Great Britain -- Politics and government
Not only does the Prime Minister stand above and apart from his
colleagues, but they do not all stand upon one plane. The influence of a
minister depends upon his personal force, but it may be affected by the
office that he holds, and perhaps by his nearness to the Prime Minister
himself; for although there is no formal interior junta, or cabinet
within the cabinet, yet the Premier is apt to take counsel informally
with other leading ministers, and if he is a masterful man those who
can command or win his confidence have the better chance of shaping the
policy of the government while it is still formless and malleable. The
cabinet, moreover, does not always act as a whole. It sometimes appoints
committees to consider special subjects, and indeed it has an old and
well-established practice of appointing committees to prepare important
government bills.[73:1]
[Sidenote: Joint and Several Responsibility.]
It is commonly said that the ministers are severally responsible to
Parliament for the conduct of their own departments, and jointly
responsible for the general policy of the government. Like many other
maxims of the British Constitution, this has the advantage of being
sufficiently vague to be capable of different interpretations at
different times. With the growth of the parliamentary system, and the
more clearly marked opposition between the parties, the joint
responsibility has in fact become greater and the several responsibility
less. The last instances where a single minister resigned on an adverse
vote of the House of Commons were those of Mr. Lowe, who retired from
the vice-presidency of the Committee on Education in 1864 in consequence
of a vote charging him with improper mutilation of the reports of
inspectors, and Lord Chancellor Westbury, who resigned in 1866 on
account of a vote censuring his grant of a pension to a registrar in
bankruptcy charged with misconduct.[73:2] If at the present day the
cause of complaint were a personal error on the part of the minister, he
would probably be brought to resign voluntarily before there was a
chance of his resignation being forced by a hostile vote in the House;
and if the question were one of policy, the government would, save in
very exceptional cases, assume the responsibility for that policy,
treating a hostile vote as showing a want of confidence in itself. The
majority in the House of Commons, on the other hand, while it may
question, criticise and blame a minister in debate, is reluctant to
permit a vote of censure upon him which is liable to involve the fall of
the ministry.[74:1]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account