Talk:Minister without Portfolio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Possible article move

Should this article, perhaps, be moved simply to "minister without portfolio" (as opposed to the capitalised "Minister without Portfolio")? While it seems that it's a formal term in the United Kingdom, some other countries use it as a simple descriptive term. I'm not particularly familiar with the usage in other countries, but in early New Zealand politics, there were frequently "ministers without portfolio", but I don't think it was never an official title, and thus was never capitalised. I would prefer having the article refer to ministers without portfolio as a general category, while mentioning that some countries make it an official term. It's not important, though. -- Vardion 07:01, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The list of British ones should definitely stay capitalised. As you say, it's an official title in the UK. I would be surprised if this wasn't the case in other countries too. Even if it isn't an official title, it's likely to be formal. Minister for Women is not an official title, as no legislation has been passed to bring such an office into existence, but it is capitalised. Similarly, we have Prime Minister of Australia even though that is not an official title.

[edit] Deputy Prime Minister

The article says "The sinecure positions of Lord Privy Seal and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster can also be used for equivalent effect." Would it be appropriate to add Deputy Prime Minister to this list? DavidFarmbrough 12:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Definition and responsibilities

This article needs a cleanup and a clear definition. Would this minister be in the cabinet? How does this role come about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.5 (talk) 13:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)