The Political Rhetoric and Oratory of Margaret Thatcher

The aim of this book is to assess the construction of the political persona of Margaret Thatcher and within this the rhetorical devices and oratorical methods that she used to justify Thatcherism. The study of political persona, rhetoric and oratory and its impact upon the political process is an emerging area of academic research, and Thatcher constitutes a high profile and controversial figure to use as a case study. By doing so, the book will provide an insight into the persuasive abilities (and limitations) of Thatcher, and the extent to which the personalisation of her leadership was core to the narrative(s) of Thatcherism. The book will revolve around two sections. The first section evaluates how the political persona of Thatcher was established and embedded by examining her approach, arguments and effects in three different arenas: first, at parliamentary debate; second, in set piece speeches, most notably party conferences; and third, in interviews and press conferences. The second section will examine her rhetoric and oratory by considering her use of ethos or her character to justify political positions; her exploitation of pathos or emotion as a means of justification, and the extent to which her communication was informed by logos (evidence and logic) as a means of persuasion. The second section also broadens the analysis out to consider her communicative style in terms of the Olmsted criteria: when was it deliberative (considered); when was it judicial (reflective and forensic) and to what extent was it epideitic (based around drama and performance). By the analytical approaches identified above the book will offer a new and distinctive interpretation of the leadership of Margaret Thatcher and the politics of Thatcherism. It will also offer a framework for analysis that can be applied to other political elites

Ministerial selection and portfolio allocation in the Cameron Government

This paper examines how David Cameron has utilised the Prime Ministerial power of ministerial selection and portfolio allocation within the context of the relationship between party expectations and coalition constraints. Specifically, the paper considers the significance to the Parliamentary Conservative Party of Cameron's use of patronage in terms of proportionality (numbers); portfolio distribution (prestige) and reshuffles (renegotiation of numbers and prestige). It argues that Cameron has been relatively astute in terms of his allocation of portfolios to the Liberal Democrats. However, it notes that the constraining impact of coalition has been detrimental to three groups within the PCP: first, those made ministers at a lower level than expected; secondly, those who held shadow ministerial posts in opposition but were overlooked when fewer ministerial roles were available; and, finally, the new intake of 2010 whose career progression has been slower than in previous administrations as fewer reshuffles have occurred

‘The longest suicide vote in history’: the Labour Party leadership election of 2015

The Labour leadership contest of 2015 resulted in the election of the veteran Left-wing backbencher, Jeremy Corbyn, who clearly defeated the early favourite, Andy Burnham. Yet Corbyn enjoyed very little support among Labour MPs, and his victory plunged the PLP into turmoil, particularly as he was widely viewed as incapable of leading the Party to victory in the 2020 general election. Given that, much of the established academic literature on Party leadership contests emphasises the ability to foster unity, and thereby render a party electable, as two of the key criteria for electing a new leader, coupled with overall competence, important questions are raised about how and why the Labour Party chose someone to lead them who clearly does not meet these criteria. We will argue that whilst these are the natural priorities of MPs when electing a new leader, in Corbyn’s case, much of the extra-parliamentary Labour Party was more concerned about ideological conviction and purity of principles, regardless of how far these diverged from public opinion. This was especially true of those who signed-up to the Labour Party following the 2015 general election defeat. Indeed, many of these only did so after Corbyn had become a candidate. This clearly suggests a serious tension between maximising intra-party democracy and ensuring the electability of the parliamentary party itself

Prime Ministerial powers of patronage: Ideology and Cabinet selection under Margaret Thatcher 1979–1990

This article will examine how Margaret Thatcher utilised the Prime Ministerial power of Cabinet ministerial appointment between 1979 and 1990. The article will utilise the Norton taxonomy on the Parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) to determine the ideological disposition (non-Thatcherite versus Thatcherite) of her Cabinet members across her eleven years in office. It will assess the ideological trends in terms of appointments, promotions and departures from Cabinet and it will use archival evidence to explore the advice given to Thatcher to assist her decision-making. Through this process the article will demonstrate how Thatcher was more ideologically balanced than academics have traditionally acknowledged when discussing her Cabinet selections. Moreover, the article will also demonstrate the significance attached to media presentation skills to her decision-making, thus challenging the emphasis on ideology as a dominant determinant of Cabinet selection

Tales of the unexpected: the selection of British party leaders since 1963

Jeremy Corbyn’s election as Leader of the Labour Party in 2015 stunned observers and practitioners of British politics alike. In this article, we first outline a theoretical framework that purports to explain why political parties operating in parliamentary systems choose the leaders they do. We then examine 32 leadership successions involving five major British parties since 1963, and note that many of these were unexpected, in that they were triggered by unforeseen circumstances, such as the sudden death or resignation of the incumbent. Examining each party in turn, we briefly explain why the winners won and identify at least eight cases (a quarter of our sample) where a candidate widely expected to prevail at the outset was ultimately defeated by a ‘dark horse’, ‘second favourite’ or even ‘rank outsider’. Of these, Corbyn’s election in 2015 was the most unexpected and, consistent with the findings of studies of party leadership conventions in other parliamentary systems, namely Canada and Spain, suggests that ideological and policy concerns are sometimes more important than considerations of party unity and electability, especially when a leadership contest is dominated by party activists

Understanding prime ministerial leadership in the United Kingdom and Japan in the twenty-first century: introduction to a special issue

The introduction to this special issue begins by presenting a recent puzzle – the increasingly strong position of the Japanese prime minister, who has traditionally been regarded as weak, in contrast to the increasingly fragile position of the United Kingdom prime minister, who has traditionally been regarded as strong. To make sense of these developments, the introduction reviews existing academic perspectives related to prime ministerial leadership with a specific focus on the literature on the UK and Japanese prime ministers. It subdivides our understanding of prime ministerial leadership into three distinct but inter-related levels of analysis. First, the institutional setting, which concentrates attention upon prime ministers’ relations with the machinery of government and a range of institutions including the executive, legislature and judiciary, and relates to prime ministerial versus cabinet government debates, and the core-executive model. Second, the party context, which focuses on prime ministers as leaders of their political parties and debates surrounding party centralisation, internal party cohesion and leadership selection and ejection. Third, the role of agency within these above two settings and in relation to the broader public, which includes the personal skills and performative styles of individual prime ministers

Patient and family partner involvement in staff interviews: Designing, implementing, and evaluating a new hiring process

Healthcare organizations in Canada and the United States are seeking to enhance their ability to offer patient and family centred care (PFCC). One aspect of PFCC is the participation of Patient and Family Partners (PFPs) in a variety of roles within healthcare organizations. This article describes the creation and evaluation of a hiring process that utilized a PFCC interview tool (PFCCIT) and collaborated with PFPs in interviewing candidates for healthcare positions. An evaluation of the new hiring process was designed, including an on-line survey of candidates and semi-structured interviews with healthcare leaders and PFPs. Survey results indicated candidates felt the new process helped them understand the importance of PFCC at the organization. In interviews with leaders, comments were overwhelmingly positive, with leaders urging the spread of this hiring process throughout the organization. Similarly, the four PFPs who were interviewed felt their participation was valuable, and useful in furthering the organization’s commitment to PFCC. The implementation of a staff hiring process utilizing PFPs and the PFCCIT provides a valuable tool for healthcare organizations working to enhance PFCC to better meet the needs of their patients and families. Further study is required to validate the long-term impact of this initiative and determine whether it improves recruitment and retention of staff sharing the organization’s commitment to PFCC

Choosing party leaders: Anglophone democracies, British parties and the limits of comparative politics

Since 1965, Britain’s major political parties have radically, and repeatedly, changed the ways in which they choose their leaders. Building on a recent comparative study of party leadership selection in the five principal Anglophone (‘Westminster’) parliamentary democracies (Cross and Blais, 2012a), this article first outlines a theoretical framework that purports to explain why the major parties in three of those countries, including Britain, have adopted such reform. It then examines why five major British parties have done so since 1965. It argues that, while Cross and Blais’ study makes a significant contribution to our knowledge and understanding of processes of party leadership selection reform in Anglophone parliamentary democracies, it has limited explanatory power when applied to changes enacted by the major parties in modern and contemporary Britain. Instead, the adoption of such reform in the British context is ultimately best understood and explained by examining both the internal politics and external circumstances of individual parties

Political Leadership as Statecraft? Aligning Theory with Praxis in Conversation with British Party Leaders

How should prime ministerial and party leadership be understood and assessed? One leading approach posits that we should assess them in terms of whether they achieve statecraft, that is, winning and maintain office in government. This article supplements and then assesses that theory by drawing from Pawson and Tilley’s (1997) concept of the realistic interview, in which practitioners are deployed as co-researchers to assess and revise theory. Unprecedented interviews with British party leaders were therefore undertaken. The article provides new empirical support for the framework because many of the key generative mechanisms identified within the neo-statecraft model were present in an analysis of the interviews. The interviews also allowed the limitations of the model to be demarcated. Statecraft focusses purely on cunning leadership where the aim is to maximise power and influence. This differs from leadership by conscious where the aim is to achieve normative goals