1. Specimen Paper – Unit 2 Mark Scheme
What criticism is David Cameron making of Tony Blair’s style of decision
making in Source 1? (5 Marks)
Big political decisions it is now suggested are made according to source:
Away from the full Cabinet forum
Exclusively in the PM’s office
With no clear recording mechanisms
With no clear lines of accountability
In allegedly an arrogant manner
Explain the main functions of the Cabinet. (10 Marks)
There are a range of functions which the Cabinet perform.
It acts as a chamber or forum where major Government decisions are made, these may
include a decision on major budget items or the decision to enter armed conflict such as
the decisions to send troops in to combat.
The Cabinet also functions as an information chamber where Government Ministers
outline issues and progress within their departments and shares this detail with
colleagues.
The Cabinet in addition provides unity and leadership to the Government as a whole to
show a united and committed approach to policy.
In times of crisis the Cabinet provides emergency control bringing collective support
and guidance.
A further function is to review the legislative timetable for Parliament and make all
senior Government Ministers aware of new Bills and legislation in the pipeline.
The Cabinet has been seen to act as a training ground for future Prime Ministers.
To what extent have UK Prime Ministers become “Presidential”? (25 Marks)
A range of factors have been identified as contributing to a “Presidential” style of Prime
Minister.
Reference may be made to the factors outlined by Foley, these include: the culture of
the outsider, where the PM is seen as a non-establishment figure on the side of the
ordinary citizen: spatial leadership where the PM distances him or herself from the

2. formal Governmental apparatus; the growth of bilateralism where the PM instead of
conducting the bulk of meetings in a full Cabinet forum with a number of Ministers, by
contrast chooses to hold “one to one” meetings with each Departmental Head or
Secretary of State, this allows a greater leverage for the PM, instead of this being
diluted and challenged in a full Cabinet;
There is the increasing focus of the media which puts a direct spotlight on the PM
raising her or his profile above and beyond fellow colleagues. The drive to a
“Presidential” style allegedly focuses on the person above issues and this downplays
ideological or policy debate and raises the importance of style and individual
characteristics. This can be seen in the personalised drive of current electioneering
where the leader of a party is seen as far more important than its policies.
This in turn has been implied to diminish the role of the political party in its former
context and the leader is seen as the “brand image” to the loss of the political party.
The PM is seen to have more direct contact with public, making a point to be seen at
grassroots level.
In addition the last 20 years has seen the growth of the PM’s Office and an increase in
the number of staff. It is alleged that there has been a diminishing role for the Cabinet
and decisions are made elsewhere in smaller groups and presented to the Cabinet
simply to approve as opposed to discussing.
It is further alleged that the decline of Parliament has enhanced or raised the prestige
and power of the PM.
However, the extent and reality of a “Presidential” style of Prime Minister may be
challenged by pressures which curtail PM power.
The Cabinet is still an important and instrumental part of the Government machine, it is
noted that lack of support here was the factor which finally removed Mrs. Thatcher. The
political party is not as enfeebled as often suggested and a PM who acts arrogantly will
ultimately fall or be curtailed by its power, for instance backbench revolts can limit the
legislative scope of the PM.
The media which can deliver power can also damage the PM’s image.
In the UK the constitutional arrangements can and do limit the PM, for instance the
Constitutional Monarch acts as the Head of State not the PM.
Likewise Parliament can act to censure the PM as noted in legislation but also in an
open forum.
Events can also act to undermine and restrict the PM, events over which the PM has no
direct control or influence.

3. The latter can also deliver failure in post for the PM which undermines his or her
authority and image.