🏠 Home Detailed notes Factors chart PM power walk-through All judgement grids

How to use this

Two grids on the same template. The first is empty - print it, fill in each cell with a one-line note while you revise. The second is a worked example to check yourself against.

Each cell asks one question: does this row strengthen the column quality (mark +) or weaken it (mark -)? Then add a one-line note saying why. The plus and minus columns are deliberately not pre-printed - your judgement is the work.

Majority = how big a Commons cushion did this PM have? Mandate = did this PM have a clear personal or manifesto mandate? Media = did the media strengthen or weaken this PM? Big Beasts = did senior colleagues strengthen this PM or threaten them? Party Control = did this PM control their parliamentary party? Opposition = how strong was the opposition this PM faced? Events = did events strengthen or weaken this PM?

Power of the Prime Minister - factors grid +   -

Empty version. Print and fill in.
PM+   - Majority Mandate Media Big Beasts Party Control Opposition Events
Starmer
2024-
(174)
Sunak
2022-24
(80→38)
Johnson
2019-22
(80)
Blair
1997-2007
(179 / 167 / 66)
Thatcher
1979-90
(43 / 144 / 102)
How to use the grid in an essay. From the 2025 Paper 2 Q2(b) examiner report, the themes strong answers used: the development of 24/7 media; the changing nature of results under FPTP; the growth of a presidential style of politics with personalised election campaigns; the claiming by PMs of a personal mandate; and the rising importance of the Downing Street machine. Read your filled grid down a column (one factor, five PMs = one comparative paragraph) or across a row (one PM, seven factors = one case study) - examiners reward the comparison, not a list of PMs.

Power of the Prime Minister - factors grid +   -

Filled version. Use this to check your own grid - and tap any cell for the full detail behind the judgement.
PM+   - Majority Mandate Media Big Beasts Party Control Opposition Events
Starmer
2024-
(174)
+174-seat majority (Labour 411, Conservatives 121) - he can lose dozens of backbenchers and still legislate. ±Huge in seats, thin in votes: 33.7% is the lowest winning share in post-war history. -Right-wing press hostile from day one; the Lord Alli row (2024) and Mandelson row (2026) each ran for weeks. ±No open rival yet, but Burnham and Streeting wait - and Rayner sits on the back benches. ±Over 40 Labour MPs signalled revolt over disability benefit cuts (2026); the Reeves Budget split the party. ±The Conservatives collapsed (worst since 1832) but the threat moved: Reform UK hit 27% in 2026 polling. -Southport riots, Trump's second term, the Iran conflict and Gaza divisions - a run of early shocks.
Sunak
2022-24
(80→38)
±Inherited Johnson's 80 but it eroded to roughly 38 through defections and lost whips. -Never won an election - or even a members' ballot, having lost to Truss in 2022. -Nicknamed Drowning Street; leaving the D-Day commemorations early (2024) was seen as ending his campaign. -The cabinet attacked more than it backed: Braverman's savage resignation letter, Johnson looming. -Open splits over Brexit, Rwanda, immigration and the ECHR; the whipping operation broke down repeatedly. -Labour led by 15-20 points for over eighteen months and swept the by-elections. -Inflation at 11.1%, NHS strikes across 2023, the mortgage-rate surge - crises inherited, never mastered.
Johnson
2019-22
(80)
+An 80-seat majority - the largest Conservative win since 1987 - drove through Brexit and lockdowns. +Get Brexit Done: the clearest single-issue mandate of any modern PM, taking dozens of Red Wall seats. +Boris was a personal brand - skilled at using the media and at dodging it. ±Tame at first, then the cascade: Sunak's resignation (July 2022) triggered 50+ resignations in 48 hours. ±Strong at the start, collapsed by July 2022 - open revolt over Partygate and the Pincher affair forced him out. +Corbyn's Labour lost 60 seats in 2019 - its worst result since 1935. ±The vaccine rollout and early Ukraine support lifted him; Partygate - his own event - ended him.
Blair
1997-2007
(179 / 167 / 66)
+179 (1997), 167 (2001), 66 (2005) - the 1997 cushion passed devolution and the minimum wage with ease. +A clear Change mandate built on the 1997 manifesto. ±The Sun switched to Labour and Campbell ran the Grid - until the dodgy dossier (2003) broke his credibility. ±Brown was his greatest asset and greatest internal threat; Cook resigned over Iraq (2003). ±139 Labour MPs voted against Iraq - the largest backbench rebellion since the 1840s; top-up fees scraped through by five. +Weak Conservatives under Hague, Duncan Smith and Howard - until Cameron arrived in 2005. ±Judged strong on 9/11 and 7/7 - but Iraq defined the premiership and broke it.
Thatcher
1979-90
(43 / 144 / 102)
+43 (1979), 144 (1983), 102 (1987) - no PM since has won three consecutive elections. +A clear Change mandate: curb the unions, roll back the state, privatise - BT, Gas and BA all sold. +The Iron Lady image embraced; Saatchi and Saatchi's Labour Isn't Working. ±A talented cabinet that turned on her: Howe's resignation speech and Heseltine's challenge ended it. ±Strong for a decade, then lost - Westland (1986) and the Lawson and Howe resignations drained her authority. +A weak, divided Labour, with the SDP-Liberal Alliance splitting the anti-Conservative vote. ±The Falklands made her and the miners' strike entrenched her - the poll tax helped end her.
What the filled grid shows. Read the rows against each other. Blair 1997 and Thatcher post-1982 are the office at full power - majority, mandate, media and a weak opposition all plus at once. Sunak is the same office with almost nothing - the one row that is minus nearly all the way across. Starmer is the modern test case: a huge majority with almost every other factor working against him - which is why a big majority alone does not make a dominant PM. The judgement line: the power of the Prime Minister is conditional, not fixed - the office gives every PM the same formal powers, and the seven factors decide what they can actually do with them.
See also