Srong-sngrjal ministry
Srong-sngrjal ministry | |
|---|---|
| Cabinet of Themiclesia | |
| Date formed | 23 June 1971 |
| Date dissolved | 20 June 1972 |
| People | |
| Head of state | L′jabh-tsung |
| No. of ministers | 27 |
| Status in legislature | minority |
| History | |
| Election(s) | 1971 general election |
The Srong-sngrjal ministry (雙山政府, srong-sngrjal-tjengh-pjo′) was formed by the 4th Lord of Srong-sngrjal on Jun. 22, 1971, in consequence of the Conservative plurality in the 1971 general election. The intended leader, Kop Ben, died after the election, leaving Srong-sngrjal, to accept the appointment. Since before inauguration, the ministry's legitimacy without its leader in the House of Commons was widely controverted. The prime minister called the 1972 general election to bolster the legitimacy of his government, but it was then defeated by the Progressives. The ministry governed for a total of 353 days.
History
In 1971, the Conservatives were returned to Parliament with a plurality of seats, hoping to form a minority government under party leader Kop Ben. The election results were announced on July 10, the incumbent Liberal ministry announcing its resignation on the 22nd. However, Kop suffered a stroke on the 17th and died, leaving the leadership of an internally-divided Conservative Party to his lieutenant, the Lord of Srong-sngrjal (雙山侯), who was earmarked to be deputy prime minister and foreign secretary. While he was not a controversial choice for a foreign secretary, the Liberal Party soon attacked the idea of his becoming head of government, saying that a member of the unelected upper house should not lead it. They said the last PM not to be an MP stepped down in 1932, and the people are "entitled to a head of government that answers to them". The Conservative Party's spokesperson replied that ministers can be responsible to either house of the legislature, and there was no legal reason to distinguish the prime minister from other ministers. Rumours surfaced that the Liberal government may refuse to resign to block Srong-sngrjal's appointment, but it did resign on the day declared. Srong-sngrjal was appointed prime minister by Emperor L′jabh-tsung on the 23rd.
The ministry led by the Lord of Srong-sngrjal was plagued not only by internal division, having to survive three backbencher revolts within six months, but also the attack from the Liberal and Progressive opposition. The PM sat in the House of Lords when it was in session and in the Commons galleries when important debates were taking place. Politics on the Commons' floor was largely controlled by Kah Pin-ngjon, who was a divisive figure that served as finance secretary. The Progressives took virulent exception to the prime minister's absence from the Commons and focused their polemics on this fact, constantly heckling they would have the prime minister answering questions there and would not deal with "lower ministers". Kah announced, with Srong-sngrjal's approval, that he would speak for the prime minister in the chamber. The Progressive leader in the chamber questioned Kah why would he not take over the Party, if he could stand in for the prime minister in the chamber "of consequence". Kah refused to answer what he called a "smear". Despite this, Kah was alienated from Srong-sngrjal, and the latter suspected the former of higher ambitions. After a dispute in November 1971, Kah was dismissed from the ministry without warning and replaced with Edward Kjong, foreign secretary. The Progressives capitalized on Kah's dismissal, changing their position to portray Kah as a victim of manipulation from the unelected house.
By February 1972, the opposition ran an ongoing publicity campaign questioning Srong-sngrjal's legitimacy, since he was neither elected nor expected to become the head of government when the poll happened. His lack of performance, largely due to his separation from the Commons chamber, had also become quite thorny for his supporters. In view of this, Srong-sngrjal called a general election for June 20, 1972, in an attempt to demonstrate the legitimacy of his government. He proclaimed to the House of Lords in April 1972 that if his government was re-elected, he would consider "all questions regarding the legitimacy of the present ministry absolutely quashed". He was questioned in the Lords whether a resulting majority or minority would at all affect his judgment. Srong-sngrjal replied that he believed a majority was the more welcome, but even a minority would make him "feel empowered to remain in office". Constitutional scholars debated whether Srong-sngrjal would set a precedent: a prime minister who was neither an MP nor the party leader must call a general election, after appointment, to confirm his legitimacy. This problem remained academic: the election resulted in a Progressive majority and the reduction of the Conservatives from 125 seats to 71 seats. The Lord of Srong-sngrjal resigned the night results were announced, conceding to the Party that he had "completely failed to fulfil the public demand for progress". His finance secretary, Gwjang, formed a brief caretaker ministry until the Progressive takeover on June 29.
After the election, Srong-sngrjal revealed in an interview that he believed he, as an experienced civil servant and diplomat, would have been able to do much more for the nation had the public attention not been "so extravagantly concentrated on the chamber where he sat, rather than what he said." When asked if he believed his removal was "unfair", he said that he "served at the pleasure of the people, and if [he] displeased them for any reason, then it was [his] duty to vacate office." In 1980, he said to another journalist he believed "the people had placed [him] in office in July 1971, and the people had removed [him] from ofice in June 1972" and he had "no complaints at all, but much regret".
Composition
| Portfolio | Holder | Term |
|---|---|---|
| Cabinet ministers | ||
| Prime Minister | Lord of Srong-sngrjal | 1971 – 1972 |
| Deputy Prime Minister Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs |
Edward Gwjang | to Nov. 1971 |
| James Kwran | Nov. 1971 – Jun. 1972 | |
| Deputy Prime Minister Secretary of State for Rites |
Mik Ng′ja′ | 1971 – Mar. 1972 |
| Ralph Tjep | from Mar. 1972 | |
| Secretary of State for Appropriations | Kah Pin-ngjon | to Nov. 1971 |
| Edward Gwjang | from Nov. 1971 | |
| Secretary of State for Defence | Lord Kaw-t'jang | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for Administration | Lady of Tseng-lang | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for Transport | Hap Dagh | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for Home Affairs and Local Government | Lord Kuh | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for Industry | Long Gabh | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for Health | Nui Lok-sum | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for Social Services | Reng Mnji | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for the Environment | Gwang Srak | 1971 – 1972 |
| Secretary of State for Employment | Tawh Gil | 1971 – 1972 |
| Attorney-General | Charles Moh | 1971 – 1972 |
| Chancellor | Lord of Ra-′rjem | 1971 – 1972 |
| Vice Chancellor | Lord of Mi | 1971 – 1972 |
| Minister without Portfolio | Tracy Mreng | 1971 – 1972 |
| Minister without Portfolio | Anthony Guk-nai | 1971 – 1972 |
| Inner Administrator | ′ep Ghu | 1971 – 1972 |
| Minor Exchequer | Rjang nDul | 1971 – 1972 |
| Also attending cabinet meetings | ||
| Marshal of the Galleries (as Chief Whip) | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Other members | ||
| Lords-in-Waiting | Lord of Mhje′-ndjang′ Lord of Ljep-lang Lord of Krungh Lord of Mrjar Lady of Kjung-l′adh |
1971 – 1972 |
| Minister to the Foreign Office | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister of Revenues | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister of State for Defence | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Under-Secretary of State for Munitions | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Under-Secretary of State for Shipbuliding | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Under-Secretary of State for Air | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Assistant Minister of State for Defence | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister for Commerce | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Assistant Minister for Commerce | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Under-Secretary of State for Industry | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister for Technology | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister for Public Arts and Sport | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister for Economic Recovery | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister for Culture and Ethnic Harmony | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister for Equality | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Minister for Labour | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Under-Secretary of State for the Palace Hall | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Under-Secretary of State for Public Land Development | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Master of the Chancellor | 1971 – 1972 | |
| Master of the Vice Chancellor | 1971 – 1972 | |
Criticism
According to political analyst C. Trjoi, the Srong-sngrjal ministry did not include an excessive number of peers. 11 of its 37 members were peers, and the remainder MPs, which was a reasonable spread for the late 60s. It was especially unremarkable for a Conservative government, which tended to include more bureaucratic experience from the House of Lords. The popularity of the Lord of Srong-sngrjal was also quite stable, albeit on a decline common for prime ministers entering office, since his takeover, until Feb. 1972, when the Progressives ran an aggressive campaign to question his legitimacy. By April 1972, his popularity had taken a nosedive, from about 30% satisfied to 17%, with as much as 4% of the voting public calling for his immediate resignation. Polls friendly to the Conservative Party were unable to recover much more supportive figures, which suggested that Srong-sngrjal was unable to rally his own party to support him.
Later scholars have debated the role of the Progressive Party in the downfall of the ministry. Conservative commentators, such as Dr. Mrjang Klang, believed the Progressive Party "fabricated the issue" and brought down the government, pointing to Srong-sngrjal's stable popularity until the publicity campaign. Liberals, on the other hand, have asserted that Srong-sngrjal's decline in public opinion was "at least as strongly motivated" by his lack of performance in a stalling economy, which is a consequence of his inability to control his party and the House of Commons, which in turn was because he sat in the House of Lords. These voices therefore consider the Progressive "campaign of negative publicity" to have misrepresented the problem, i.e. showing it in a light of political legitimacy while it was in reality a problem of political efficacy, but nonetheless brought to light a substantive issue that would have made the government dysfunctional and unpopular anyway. Others credit the Progressives for a creative appeal to a doubtful public in an uncertain time, making a problem otherwise difficult to reify manifest to the public.