The management of Parliament was seen as a central task of government. However party alignments were defined, ministerial majorities were uncertain. Victory in elections, and the subsequent opening of the bazaar of patronage to parliamentarians, did not necessarily entail either quiescent sessions or, more seriously, stable majorities. In some moments of crisis, governmental majorities fell, in part due to defections by MPs to the opposition, but, more generally, due to a rise in the number of abstentions. The latter were crucial in Sir Robert Walpole's two major parliamentary defeats: the enforced withdrawal of the excise legislation in the Commons in 1733, and his own loss of control in the Commons in the winter of 1741–2. Once the parliamentary majority of a ministry began to fall and rumours circulated of government changes, it proved very difficult to retain the loyalty of Whig MPs keen to make bargains with those they believed were about to take power, who were bound to be prominent Whigs. Indeed, various statements were attributed to Walpole to the effect that if the majority fell below forty or fifty his power was lost.

It was widely argued by the opposition in Britain, as well as in Jacobite circles and in Europe, that the ministry was able to dominate Parliament thanks to corruption and to the tempting prizes it could offer. This was an argument rejected by the government.