Are Ministers ‘Representatives’ or ‘Managers’, ‘Amateurs’ or ‘Specialists’? Similarities and Differences Across Western Europe

Abstract

The nature of ministerial careers has begun to attract attention, both in Western Europe and elsewhere1. This is highly justified, would it only be because, to a substantial extent at least, the efficiency of governments is likely to depend on the type of persons who are called to join these governments as well as on the characteristics of their tenure when in office2. These questions are especially important in parliamentary cabinets in general and in Western Europe in particular, since the membership of the government is more pre-determined in this type of political system than in others: not just party leaders but parliamentarians are involved in the process of selection of ministers and indeed can be ministers themselves. Furthermore, the cabinet system is the only form of executive structure in which ministers have a double role, that of administrators and that of political representatives. This is why, more than in any other form of government, too, members of parliamentary cabinets are often referred to as having to be both ‘generalists’ and ‘specialists’, ‘representatives’ and ‘managers’3. Such a combination is likely to be difficult to achieve; cabinets may therefore vary markedly in terms of the generalist and representative or managerial and specialist skills of their members, depending on circumstances and on the ‘political culture’ and traditions of the country concerned. As governments are also likely to display differences in political and administrative effectiveness in view of the mix of characteristics of the ministers, it would seem highly valuable to locate them along a dimension ranging from representativeness to management and specialization4.