In England, for some reasons the cabinet administration has become so powerful that some scholars, including Ramgemure, Keith, Munro, etc., have called it the dictatorship. The following are the reasons for calling the British Cabinet a dictator or being powerful like it.
1. Bipartisan System
Ever since democracy started in England, there have been only two dominant parties in politics there. By the beginning of the twentieth century, these two parties Conservative and the Liberal been replaced by Labor Party. It means to say that there are mainly two parties in politics there. The result of this is that in the elections of the House of Commons, any one party usually gets a definite majority. We are well aware that a party government is more powerful than a joint government of many parties. Under the influential leadership of the Prime Minister, this type of government can work more boldly. They do not fear that if any party including the cabinet breaks apart.
They rule by being relatively dependent. Thus we see that the bipartisan system of England has also helped the cabinet there to make the dictator powerful.
2. Strict discipline of the Party
The discipline of the party has been much stricter than other democratic countries of England. All members in the team and especially in the House of Commons. They have to support the decisions of the head of the parliament party whether it agrees with that decision or not. Due to strict discipline, all the Members of Parliament of the party support the Parliament blindly and thus the Cabinet remains convinced that there is no difficulty in getting parliamentary approval on the decisions taken by it. It has been observed that whenever a Cabinet of Parliament is determined, it starts behaving like a court of law.
3. Power to dissolve the House of Commons prematurely
In England, on the advice of the Prime Minister, the Cabinet can dissolve the House of Commons as per their discretion. By this right, the cabinet compels not only its party members but also the members of the opposition party to act in a disciplined manner in Parliament. No Member of Parliament wants that his office ends before the term of office and hence the opposing parties also do not disturb the cabinet without meaning. A major reason for the instability of the cabinet during the period of the Second Assembly and the Fourth Republic in France was that the Prime Minister or the President there did not have the right to prematurely dissolve the first House of Parliament there. In England, this authority has given the Cabinet a lot of control over the Parliament and it is natural that when the Cabinet controls the Parliament, it starts functioning as a super-powerful institution.
4. The collective responsibility of the cabinet
The British Cabinet is also collectively responsible to the House of Common for its actions. This means that all members of the cabinet are equally responsible to the House of Commons and the public for the government’s actions and policies. No matter how much a minister is against any decision or policy, once that policy is adopted by the Cabinet, no member can call his vote against that policy before the House of Common or the public, unless he is in the Cabinet. Is a member of Thus, we see that due to collective responsibility, the cabinet performs the work for one party. Whenever an organization works as a team, it is natural to become relatively strong. Due to the collective responsibility among the members of the British Cabinet, the feeling works that if they live, they die together and thus the cabinet becomes very powerful. Therefore, we can say that due to the powerful power of the cabinet, it also has to be collectively responsible.
5. Reduction in rights of House of Lords
Before the twentieth century and especially before the Parliamentary Act of 1911 was passed, the House of Lord was a powerful House of Parliament and therefore the House of Lord exercised adequate control over the Cabinet. The Cabinet could not behave arbitrarily due to the powers of the House of Lord
And thus the cabinet remained within its limits. After the passing of the Parliamentary Act 1911, the House of Lords often became a powerless institution and thus the House did not have any control over the cabinet. As a result, the Cabinet’s fear of the House of Lords came to an end. In the absence of this, the Cabinet was allowed to work to its will to a great extent and thus the cabinet became very powerful. Therefore, we can say that due to lack of rights of the House of Lords, the cabinet got power like Adhilayanas.
6. Delegate legislation
Due to the welfare of the state in the twentieth century, a lot of work of the state has increased. Due to the increase in the functions of the state, there has been a wide expansion in the fields of law making and hence it is no longer possible for the Parliament to make all the laws themselves. Parliament does not have enough time to make all the laws entirely its own. Therefore, Parliament delegates this right to various executive institutions. Since the cabinet is the head of the executive, the authority to legislate the executive institutions on the basis of the administration provided is the highest practice by the cabinet. Apart from this, all the executive institutions work under the cabinet. Therefore, the cabinet can directly influence the law making by these institutions. When any executive institutions also get the right to form law, then it is bound to become very powerful. In this way, we see that the Cabinet is no longer an executive body in England, but it has also got the powers of law-making to some extent, and on this basis we can say that today the British Cabinet has the authority from the Adhinayakas.
7. Development of administrative justice
Today’s administration is not only complicated but has also become very technical. Generally, it is not very easy to explain these techniques of administration by the courts. Because neither they are given this type of training nor do they get a chance to see this type of case on the day of arrival. Therefore, in all the countries, Judiciary today given the right to settle the disputes related to the techniques of these departments of administration.