In the language of cabinet government, reshuffles can be used signal a
change in direction, reinvigorate an ailing government, and, of course, to get
rid of recalcitrant ministers. So what did David Cameron tell the country with
his first reshuffle, last week?
The political environment in which the reshuffle too place
was a hostile one for the government. Early promise of radical reform to the
public services, welfare and the constitution has turned into inertia. Though
progress has been made on schools and welfare reform, the Government’s health
and policing reforms have run into stiff opposition from the organisations the
Government is trying to change. Meanwhile, each of the government’s proposed
constitutional reforms – AV, elected mayors, equal-size constituencies and
Lords reform - have floundered, leaving a bitter air between the coalition
partners. At the same time, disgruntled Tory backbenchers are becoming noisier,
their leadership having taken a younger, more left-wing mistress, in the form
of Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats. All of these factors are magnified by the
economic downturn, leaving Cameron’s government looking frail.
Political logic states that Cameron ought to have used the
reshuffle to give the government new vigour in its weakest areas. Thus, we see
Andrew Landsley, the man who has mishandled the health reforms replaced with
the trustworthy and likeable Jeremy Hunt, shaking off some of the mud he
accumulated over his support of Newscorp’s BSkyB takeover bid in the process.
The government’s growth agenda is also at the fore of the reshuffle. Justine
Greening, a West London MP was replaced as Transport Secretary by Patrick
McLoughlin who has no constituency interests in Heathrow. Also in are the new
planning minister, Nick Boles, whose
think tank recommends building on the green belt, and the new Environment
Secretary Owen Paterson, a proponent of shale gas.
The reshuffle also saw concessions being made to the Tory
right. Ken Clarke, the doyen of the Tory left, loses his department in favour
of the fiercely euro-sceptic Chris Grayling, while Michael Fallon moves in with
Vince Cable at the Department for Business Innovation and Skills. Some
commentators have argued that these concessions mark the end of Cameron’s modernisation
project. However, this is a misreading. The fact that Cameron embarked on his
detoxification project in the first place, shows that he understands the need to
appeal to a broad cross-section of society, rather than the curmudgeonly Tory
right. This is even truer in the new era of coalition politics, where the Tory
leader must be seen as a man who liberals can do business with.
