Ministerial Reshuffle Speculation Briefing August 2012 DeHavilland Political Research DeHavilland Parliamentary Affairs Table of Contents Introduction Department for Business, Innovation and Skills Cabinet Office Conservative Party Chairman Department for Communities and Local Government Department for Culture, Media and Sport Ministry of Defence Department for Education Department of Energy and Climate Change Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Foreign and Commonwealth Office Department of Health Home Office Department for International Development Ministry of Justice Northern Ireland Office Office of the Leader of the House of Commons / Lords Scotland Office Department for Transport HM Treasury Wales Office The Whips’ Office Department for Work and Pensions P a g e | 1 Introduction Speculation surrounding a ministerial reshuffle has grown in recent weeks, with commentators increasingly pointing to a September shake-up. Some commentators are anticipating a reshuffle as early as the first week of September, to coincide with the return of the Commons from summer recess, but before party conference season begins. The Prime Minister will be restricted in any attempt to revitalise the Cabinet because of several considerations. First, he may seek to strike a balance between punishing disloyalty – for example, by sacking the three Cabinet Ministers who reportedly called for the Health and Social Care Bill to be dropped – and rewarding loyalty, perhaps by promoting backbenchers who have voted against their conscience on certain issues. Mr Cameron’s approach will also be dictated by a need to placate the increasingly restive 2010 Conservative intake by promoting some of its more prominent MPs. Other commentators have suggested that it is the 2005 intake of MPs that will benefit most from the reshuffle. If either cohort is to benefit, this may even involve promoting some of those who rebelled by voting for the backbench motion on an EU referendum last October and those who voted against the progression of the Government’s House of Lords Reform Bill to second reading in July. The benefits of bringing rebels onto the Government payroll are twofold. Firstly, it could appease those who share the rebels’ views, and secondly, it could effectively silence rebellious backbench voices. Indeed, the idea of an amnesty for former rebels has been floated by various commentators in recent weeks, including Tim Montgomerie of the influential ConservativeHome grassroots website and Brendan Carlin of the Daily Mail. Other restrictions are self-imposed. In Opposition, Mr Cameron stated his ‘aspiration’ to give a third of Government jobs to women by the end of his first term. Presently, just 12 of 85 Conservatives Ministers, Whips and Lords spokespeople are women – a paltry 14 per cent. For Mr Cameron to reach the target of a third in a single reshuffle, he would need to replace 16 men with women. It is therefore unlikely that his aspiration will be met on this occasion – especially with female Cabinet Ministers among those tipped to lose their jobs – but a drive for greater representation of women in his Government will surely guide his hand. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has fewer Ministers to shuffle and a smaller parliamentary party to draw from, but he may also be keen to promote women given that there is currently not a single female Lib Dem in the Cabinet. The ratio of Conservative to Liberal Democrat Ministers, despite Tory grumbles that the size of the Lib Dem parliamentary party does not justify their current number Government jobs, is likely to remain constant. Indeed, as the Coalition Agreement, the founding text of the Government, states: “No Liberal Democrat Minister or Whip may be removed on the recommendation of the Prime Minister without full consultation with the Deputy Prime Minister.” P a g e | 2 Furthermore, the Deputy Prime Minister retains a formal consultative and nominating role in all ministerial appointments. In theory, any single ministerial move requires the consent of both the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister. In this speculation document we have sought to collate all the rumours surrounding the reshuffle into one place. By their very nature these are unreliable and subject to constant rebuttal and revision. Indeed, some may have even been conjured up out of thin air by mischievous political journalists. However, some rumours have persisted and by reviewing these we are able to provide an interesting overview of the way the Government could potentially look for the second half of this Parliament. Back to contents P a g e | 3 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Business Writing for the Daily Telegraph in July, Sue Cameron noted “speculation...about Vince Cable...who may step down with a view to becoming leader of the Lib Dems in the Commons”. The logic behind Cable relinquishing his current position, Ms Cameron writes, would be to enable him to form a deal with a Labour Party that will “never do a deal with Mr Clegg” after the 2015 general election. Were he to step down, Dr Cable would prefer Chief Secretary of the Treasury, Danny Alexander, to replace him as Business Secretary, Cameron writes. David Laws is pointed to as the most likely replacement for Danny Alexander, should he move to BIS. Mr Alexander, of course, replaced Mr Laws just 17 days into the Coalition Government, after resigning when disclosure of his expenses claims revealed that he had claimed more than £40,000 on his expenses in the form of second home costs, whilst renting rooms at properties owned by his partner. Patrick Hennessy of the Daily Telegraph noted in March that: “senior Tories are pressing for BIS... to be led by a Conservative. This would, they argue, prevent the Coalition effectively running two differing economic strategies”. Former Conservative MP Paul Goodman wrote in the Daily Telegraph in August that “the consensus of senior Conservatives and young Turks alike is that replacing Dr Cable with a more business-friendly figure would boost supply-side change, rally business confidence and signal to voters that the Government is going for growth”. However, as Goodman notes, such a move would require the Prime Minister to either replace Dr Cable with another Liberal Democrat, perhaps David Laws who is perceived by many Conservatives as fully signed up to the Government’s economic strategy, or to effectively swap BIS for another important department, such as the Home Office. The less excitable Simon Walters and Glen Owen of the Daily Mail wrote in August that Dr Cable is “likely to stay put”, along with the other three Lib Dem Cabinet Ministers. That same month, Tim Montgomerie of ConservativeHome labelled Decentralisation and Cities Minister Greg Clark (who sits in both BIS and the Department for Communities and Local Government) as one of the “junior ministers who've performed well in their briefs and are knocking at the door of the Cabinet” in August. Mr Clark was tipped in July by James Chapman of the Daily Mail to take over at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, should Caroline Spelman lose her job. Minister for Trade and Investment, Lord Green, came under sustained pressure in July following revelations of money laundering at HSBC during his tenure as the bank’s chief executive and chairman. Despite this, Leader of the House of Lords Lord Strathclyde rejected calls for his resignation on the grounds that “no minister needs to be accountable to parliament for his previous career, only for what they are doing as ministers”. However, writing in March, Philip Aldrick of the Daily Telegraph suggested that Lord Green is “thought to be favoured by the Chancellor” for the role of Governor of the Bank of England. A decision on Sir Mervyn King’s P a g e | 4 replacement is “expected by the end of the year”, so if Lord Green is in the running, a September reshuffle would be an ideal time for him to step down from his current Ministerial role. Higher and Further Education Ephraim Hardcastle of the Daily Mail reported in February that the Education Secretary Michael Gove, angered by the appointment of Professor Les Ebdon as the director of the Office for Fair Access by Vince Cable, had indicated his intention to bring the responsibility for higher education to the DfE as part of a reshuffle. Were Mr Gove to get his way, the move would cost David Willetts his position as Universities and Science Minister at BIS, Hardcastle writes. Indeed, Mr Gove told a meeting of the Education Select Committee in January 2012 that “I think it was wrong to split universities and science away from the Department for Education, but one must not make the best the enemy of the good, and at the moment we have a superb team of Ministers in BIS, who are doing a brilliant job, so I have enough to get on with at the moment.” Writing in August, Tim Montgomerie of ConservativeHome, stated that if the Prime Minister does opt for a “long knives reshuffle so that he can freshen his team with a large number of new faces...Willetts could also be vulnerable”. Another possibility is that Mr Willetts, along with his portfolio of responsibilities, would simply be transferred to the DfE, giving Mr Gove greater control over the Government’s higher education policy. Alternatively, Mr Willetts could sit in a cross-department position, akin to John Hayes (Skills and Lifelong Learning Minister, who sits in both the Department for Education and BIS). However, any mention of Mr Hayes has been largely absent from reshuffle speculation. This is perhaps unsurprising given that Mr Hayes performed the same role in opposition for the entirety of David Cameron’s time as Leader of the Opposition.