Ministers of the crown are MPs or members of the House of Lords (peers) who are appointed by the prime minister to specific roles within the government. They are responsible for setting the policy direction of government departments and are accountable to parliament for their actions.

All ministers, from the prime minister down to the most junior ranks, are bound by the constitutional convention of collective responsibility. This means they must publicly support all government decisions or resign from their post.

The power to appoint, dismiss and move ministers between departments is one of an incumbent prime minister’s most significant personal powers, known as the power of patronage.

The House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 mandates that there cannot be more than 95 ministers in the House of Commons. The number of paid ministers is limited to 109 (across both the House of Commons and the House of Lords). This places something of a limit on the so-called “payroll vote”.

The ministerial hierarchy

There is a clear hierarchy of ministerial ranks within the UK government.

Secretaries of state

These are the most senior government ministers, appointed by the prime minister to head major government departments such as the Home Office, the Treasury, or the Department of Health and Social Care.

All secretaries of state are members of the cabinet, the government’s primary collective decision-making body. The chancellor of the exchequer is also considered to be among the most senior cabinet ministers.

Ministers of state

Ministers of state are mid-level ministers who work under a secretary of state in a government department. They are sometimes referred to as a “deputy” to the secretary of state and are typically given responsibility for a specific policy area within the department’s remit. Some senior ministers of state may be invited to attend cabinet meetings.

Parliamentary under-secretaries of state

This is the most junior rank of minister. Parliamentary under-secretaries work as part of a ministerial team, supporting the secretary of state and ministers of state in their parliamentary and departmental duties. A large department may have several.

Parliamentary private secretaries (PPSs)

Parliamentary private secretaries are not formally ministers. They act as an unpaid parliamentary assistant, providing a link between the senior frontbencher and backbench MPs.

The role is widely regarded as the first step on the ministerial ladder. Although they cannot speak for the government in debates, a PPS is bound by collective responsibility and becomes part of the so-called “payroll vote”, expected to support the official line in all divisions.

PPSs are sometimes referred to as the “eyes and ears” of a minister in the House of Commons.

What do ministers do? Roles and responsibilities

A minister has duties both in parliament and within their government department.

In parliament, a minister’s role is to represent the government, answer questions from MPs and peers, make statements on new policy, and steer new legislation (bills) through its parliamentary stages.

In their department, a minister sets the policy and strategic direction for their area of responsibility, manages the department’s work, and is ultimately accountable for its performance and spending.

Each minister is supported by a private office, staffed by civil servants. Led by a Private Secretary, the office manages the minister’s diary, correspondence, and the flow of official papers, which are famously transported in ministerial red boxes.

Ministerial salaries: how much do ministers earn?

MPs who serve as ministers or hold specific parliamentary offices are entitled to an additional salary on top of their basic MP’s salary. However, the ministerial portion of these salaries has been voluntarily frozen by successive governments since 2015.

• Prime minister: £169,344 (actual) – comprising the £93,904 MP salary and a frozen claimed ministerial salary of £75,440. (Legal entitlement for ministerial salary is £80,807).
• Cabinet ministers (chancellor, secretaries of state, etc): £161,409 (actual) – comprising an MP’s salary and a frozen claimed ministerial salary of £67,505. (Legal entitlement for ministerial salary is £72,454).
• Minister of state: £125,584 (actual) – comprising an MP’s salary and a frozen claimed ministerial salary of £31,680. (Legal entitlement for ministerial salary is £34,742).
• Parliamentary under secretaries of state (including exchequer secretary to the Treasury): £116,279 (actual) – comprising an MP’s salary and a frozen claimed ministerial salary of £22,375. (Legal entitlement for ministerial salary is £24,947).

The appointment of ministers: patronage

All ministers are appointed by the prime minister and hold their position for as long as they retain the prime minister’s confidence. By convention, ministers must be members of either the House of Commons or the House of Lords so they can be held accountable by parliament.

Occasionally, a prime minister may wish to appoint an expert from outside politics to a ministerial role. In this case, the individual is normally granted a life peerage to allow them to sit in the House of Lords.

Keir Starmer, upon becoming prime minister, took advantage of this patronage power. In July 2024, Starmer appointed Richard Hermer KC, a leading human rights lawyer, as attorney general. Because he was not an MP, Hermer was granted a life peerage. He took the title Lord Hermer and became the government’s chief legal adviser from the benches of the upper house.

Starmer also asked the king to ennoble Jacqui Smith, the former home secretary; James Timpson, the chief executive of the Timpson Group; and Patrick Vallance, the former chief scientific adviser – having signalled his intention to make them ministers.

Another notable example came in November 2023, when Rishi Sunak created former Conservative leader David Cameron as a life peer and appointed him as foreign secretary .

Lord Cameron’s appointment caused considerable controversy at the time. MPs objected to the fact that a head of one of the so-called “great offices of state” was subject to routine scrutiny by peers, as opposed to elected MPs. Upon Cameron’s appointment, the speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, said he would work to ensure that the new foreign secretary was “accountable”.

While senior appointments from the Lords are now unusual, it is routine for junior ministerial posts to be filled by peers. In fact, this is a constitutional necessity, ensuring every government department has a spokesperson to answer questions and steer legislation through the upper house. It also allows a government to draw on specialist expertise from individuals who are not elected MPs.

Ministerial reshuffles

A ministerial reshuffle is the process by which a prime minister changes the composition of their ministerial team.

A major reshuffle can involve a large number of ministers changing roles, while a smaller ‘mini-reshuffle’ may occur following the unexpected resignation of a single minister. Larger reshuffles are generally regarded as high-stakes political events; they generate intense media speculation and offer insight into the prime minister’s priorities, authority and strategic direction.

In selecting or reshuffling their ministerial team, the prime minister must balance a range of political and personal imperatives. These include managing party factions, rewarding loyalty and maintaining internal discipline. A reshuffle can also be used to refresh the government – particularly mid-way through a parliamentary term – by promoting a new generation of MPs, addressing perceptions of drift and injecting a sense of renewed energy and purpose.

Reshuffles may also be reactive, allowing the prime minister to respond to events by removing ministers who have underperformed, become embroiled in scandal or proved politically problematic.

Key conventions and principles

Collective responsibility

Collective cabinet responsibility is a key constitutional convention that shapes the government of the United Kingdom. It dictates that all members of the government are jointly responsible for its policies and decisions and must publicly support them, regardless of any private reservations.

The convention is not a law but a binding rule of political conduct set out in the ministerial code. It is underpinned by three principles: confidence, unanimity and confidentiality.

Ultimately, if a minister finds they cannot publicly support a government position, they are expected to resign from their role.

Collective responsibility is considered essential for maintaining a strong and united government, ensuring it presents a clear and consistent front to parliament, the public and other states.

Collective responsibility is also central to accountability in the parliamentary system, ensuring that those who bear responsibility for explaining decisions cannot simultaneously express reservations. The government speaking with a single voice provides clarity and allows for effective scrutiny by parliament and the public.

The application and potential breaches of collective responsibility, however, are a perennial source of controversy.

The ‘payroll vote’

The convention of collective responsibility creates what is known as the “payroll vote” – the bloc of all government ministers and their PPSs who are expected to vote with the government in every parliamentary division.

The payroll vote, and its significance in passing legislation, is therefore an extension of the prime minister’s patronage powers.

In September 2025, the payroll vote was reported to number over 160 MPs.

• 92 ministers (including whips) in the House of Commons
• 55 parliamentary private secretaries
• 16 Labour trade envoys.

This disciplined bloc of votes gives the government a significant advantage in passing its legislative programme.

In 2010, the House of Commons public administration select committee sounded the alarm about the payroll vote, arguing that “the ministerial side of government has now grown too large” – thereby strengthening the power of the executive in the House of Commons.

The report concluded: “The ever increasing size of the payroll vote should be addressed as a matter of urgency. We recommend that the ministerial code be amended to limit parliamentary private secretaries to one for each department or cabinet minister.”

The committee proposed a limit on the payroll vote of 15% of the membership of the House of Commons (97 MPs).

The ministerial code

The ministerial code is the official rulebook that sets out the standards of conduct expected of all government ministers in the United Kingdom.

It is a document issued by the prime minister of the day, and it is a condition of holding ministerial office that all ministers adhere to its rules and principles.

The code is not a law passed by parliament. Its operation is enforced by convention, and the ultimate judge of whether the code has been breached, and what if any sanction should be applied, is the prime minister.

The independent adviser on ministers’ interests is responsible for investigating alleged breaches of the ministerial code. But the ministerial code maintains that the “final decision rests with the prime minister.”

Possible sanctions include requiring a public apology, remedial action, or the temporary removal of ministerial salary. In cases of serious breach, the minister concerned may be required to resign and may also forfeit any ministerial severance payment to which they would otherwise be entitled.

Ministerial departures and resignations

A minister may leave office by being dismissed by the prime minister, by choosing to resign, or as part of a government reshuffle. Resignations are typically announced via an exchange of letters with the prime minister, and a former minister has the right to make a personal statement to the House of Commons to explain their reasons for leaving.

Resignations are conventionally expected when a minister breaches the principle of collective responsibility or the rules set out in the ministerial code. In practice, this decision rests with the prime minister of the day.

Of course, the prime minister can opt to sack ministers if they refuse to resign, or if a loss of confidence makes their position untenable. Resignations often occur when a minister is threatened with dismissal, effectively prompting them to step down voluntarily.

Resignations can also be used by a political tool for ministers to put pressure on the government to change direction. The threat of a resignation, especially if it comes from a senior minister, could force the prime minister of the day to change policy.

Johnson ministerial exodus (July 2022)

In June 2022, Chris Pincher resigned as deputy chief whip following allegations that he had drunkenly groped two men at the Carlton Club in London. The resignation, and Downing Street’s subsequent handling of it, acted as the final catalyst for the collapse of Boris Johnson’s government.

A loyal ally of the prime minister, Pincher had been promoted to his post in February 2022 in a bid to shore up Johnson’s premiership. His appointment formed part of a strategic shift termed “Operation Save Big Dog”.

Initially, Downing Street insisted that the prime minister considered the matter closed and that Pincher would remain a Conservative MP, having lost only his government job. This position quickly became untenable as a storm of new allegations about Pincher’s past behaviour emerged over the following days. The critical political question became what Boris Johnson knew about these previous allegations when he appointed Pincher to the whips’ office in February 2022.

Ministers were sent out to defend the prime minister with briefings that were later shown to be false, fatally undermining their own and the government’s credibility. Dominic Cummings, former chief adviser to Johnson, said the prime minister had once referred to the loyalest MP “Pincher by name, pincher by nature”.

The scandal culminated in the explosive revelation from Lord (Simon) McDonald, the former top civil servant in the Foreign Office, that Johnson had been personally briefed on a formal complaint against Pincher in the past, during his time as a Foreign Office minister, directly contradicting No 10’s claims.

On 5 July, the health secretary, Sajid Javid, and the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, resigned in protest.

Javid delivered a blistering resignation statement in the House of Commons. It drew parallels with Lord Howe’s fatal parting shot that sank the Thatcher government.

The wave of resignations that followed, totalling over 60, forced Johnson to announce his own departure on 7 July, against his obstinate wish to remain in office.

Chequers resignations (2018)

On 8 July 2018, the secretary of state for exiting the European Union, David Davis, resigned from the cabinet. The resignation was a direct protest against the ‘Chequers plan’, a compromise agreement on the future UK-EU relationship that had been revealed to the cabinet just two days earlier by prime minister Theresa May.

In his resignation letter, Davis told the prime minister he would not be a “reluctant conscript” to the plan agreed at Chequers. He argued that “the current trend of policy and tactics” was making it “look less and less likely” that the UK would leave the customs union and single market.

Steve Baker, a junior Brexit minister, resigned alongside Davis. The following afternoon, Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, also resigned. In his own resignation letter, Johnson claimed the Chequers plan meant the UK was “heading for a semi-Brexit” that would leave it as a “colony” of the EU.

Cook resignation (2003)

On 17 March 2003, Robin Cook, the leader of the House of Commons and a former foreign secretary, resigned from Tony Blair’s cabinet in protest at the government’s decision to commit British troops to the invasion of Iraq. His departure marked the most high-profile protest against the conflict from within the government.

In his letter of resignation, Cook wrote: “It is 20 years ago that I first joined Labour’s shadow cabinet. It is with regret I have today resigned from its cabinet. I can’t accept collective responsibility for the decision to commit Britain now to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support.”

Howe resignation (1990)

On 1 November 1990, Geoffrey Howe resigned from his posts as deputy prime minister and leader of the House of Commons, citing fundamental disagreements with Margaret Thatcher’s stance on European integration. It came after Thatcher famously responded “No. No. No.” when considering proposals for European integration put forward by Jacques Delors, the president of the [European] commission.

In his resignation letter, addressed to the prime minister, Howe cited “the growing difference which has emerged between us on the increasingly important issue of Britain’s role in Europe.”

The Westland affair (1985/1986)

In January 1986, Michael Heseltine resigned as defence secretary, sparking one of the most serious political crises of Margaret Thatcher’s premiership.

Heseltine had championed a rescue package from a European consortium for the Westland helicopter company – which was suffering severe financial difficulties. In taking this stance, he clashed with Thatcher and Leon Brittan, the trade and industry secretary, who favoured a rival bid by the American Sikorsky Fiat group. Observers were hence treated to the unusual spectacle of a cabinet member (Heseltine) appearing to pursue a policy that was diametrically at odds with the government’s stated intentions.

On 6 January, the crisis deepened markedly after a “confidential” letter from the solicitor general, Patrick Mayhew, was leaked to the press. The letter accused Heseltine of “material inaccuracies” in his lobbying for a European consortium rescue package.

The immediate trigger for Heseltine’s departure, however, was a ruling by Thatcher that all public comments on the Westland controversy should be cleared through the Cabinet Office to maintain collective responsibility. Thatcher was at pains to overcome the impression that the government was at war with itself; it is also speculated that she feared Heseltine’s popularity.

In a commons statement on 23 January, Thatcher stated that Brittan – Heseltine’s main cabinet antagonist on Westland – had authorised the leaking of the 6 January letter. An inquiry, requested by Mayhew, had accused Brittan of conspiring against his cabinet colleague. Brittan subsequently resigned.

In a speech to the commons on 19 October 1986, Brittan accused Heseltine of having consistently “undermined” the government over the Westland affair.

Brittan told MPs that “after the Westland affair, I have no doubt that any future government, whatever their political complexion, will and should insist that the decisions of the government should have the support of all members, and should not be undermined from within.”

Another notable collective responsibility controversy concerns the saga over House of Lords reform and boundary reforms during the coalition government.

Who are the whips? What do they do?

Whips are distinct from ministers, but they also make up the “payroll vote”. They are MPs or peers in the House of Lords who are appointed by their political party to enforce party discipline and manage its contribution to the parliamentary schedule.

The term “whip” has three meanings. It refers to an individual MP or Lord who holds the role – but also to the written instruction they send to parliamentarians, as well as the parliamentary party’s whipping system as a whole. The name originates from the 18th century hunting term “whipper-in” – a person responsible for preventing hounds from straying from the pack.

Every major political party has a Whips’ Office. The work of whips is considered essential to the functioning of the parliamentary system at Westminster; it provides a channel of communication between a party’s leadership and its backbench members, and a means by which a government can reliably construct a parliamentary majority.

Who are the trade envoys? What do they do?

Appointed by the trade secretary, envoys are tasked with boosting British exports and attracting foreign investment. An envoy’s duties typically involve leading trade delegations, lobbying host governments on market access issues, and building relationships with overseas businesses.

In July 2025, three Labour MPs were stripped of their government trade envoy roles after voting against the government on its flagship welfare bill. The group consisted of Rosena Allin-Khan (South Africa), Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Ghana) and Mohammad Yasin (Pakistan).

In a statement, Ribeiro-Addy said: “Trade envoys have historically been chosen as the person best suited to boost relations and trade with a given country. In some instances, this is regardless of party affiliation. However, it is the prime minister’s prerogative to choose his representatives on the international stage and I wish my successor all the best.”

Additional resources

• GOV.UK – List of current Ministers: https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers
• GOV.UK – How Government Works: https://www.gov.uk/government/how-government-works