The following memo has dropped into my e-mail inbox.
To: Ciaran Smarter, Head of Vision and Strategy Implementation, No 10
From: [REDACTED]
Subject: Fightback Reshuffle
Dear Ciaran,
You asked me to take a look at the various options for a reshuffle and report back to you.
The purpose of this reshuffle has to be to show that the Government has a clear direction, is focussed on the general election and on winning back support. All my suggestions are based on trying to achieve that with a combination of communicators in key jobs, strengthening of party unity, and promotion of talent.
The essential problem is a log jam at the top. Darling, Straw, Miliband, Smith and Harman are all difficult to move, for one reason or another. Yet without change here, the reshuffle will seem relatively small scale. Because the reshuffle needs to be significant I propose making significant changes.
Top Level
Lord chancellor: Darling
For Sec: Miliband
Chancellor: Hutton:
Home Sec: Johnson OR Blears
Leader of House: Harman
Alistair Darling has done nothing wrong as Chancellor that we haven’t also been involved in. The current situation is not his fault. However, the politcal reality is he needs to move.
This approach gives Darling a senior post of commensurate dignity to CofE, one that fits his talents as an advocate in a big job. As long as no-one is foolish enough to brief it as a demotion it should work.
Milband statys where he is in a significant role.
The job of Chancellor goes to Hutton. His promotion would be regarded as the keystone move in the whole reshuffle, as it involves the promotion of a senior Blairite to the second biggest job in government.
The advantages of this are threefold.
First, promoting a Blairite makes the PM look open to new ideas while promoting his own choice makes him look strong.
Second, it means that the business community are more likely to accept some of the more popular taxation measures we’re proposing, if they come from someone widely regarded as a friend of business.
Third it promotes an English MP for a relatively marginal seat into the job that will decide the next general election. Hutton is not a the most charismatic of communicators, but there’s no doubt he understands the pressures we face in English seats.
The Unions won’t like his promotion, but actually the Chancellorship has little day to day contact with the Unions, post NPF.
The other key role is Home Secretary. Ideally I’d suggest promoting Alan Johnson or Hazel Blears into this role. Both are effective communicators, with Alan slightly more emolliant, but Hazel having a greater natural understanding of the role the fear of crime plays in people’s lives.
However, Jacqui Smith has done little wrong, and you might decide that to demote her would be counter productive. There is also the sense that it is important to have a woman in one of the top jobs which might mitigate against Alan.
This leaves the question of what to do about Jack…
I shall return to this.
Second Tier
Education: Smith/Blears
Health: Johnson/Byrne
BERR: Balls
Communities: Denham
DWP: Purnell
Defence: Woodward
Nations and regions: Alexander
Chief Whip: Mcfadden
Defra: Miliband (E)
If we decide to move Smith, her natural electoral home would be education. If she says as Home Sec, Hazel would be an effective second choice, while Johnson could either stay at health, or if moved to Home Sec, be replaced by a reformer. Byrne seems ideal.
Ed Balls would move to Berr, which would give him a lot of face to face time with both unions and business figures, while also providing the same check to the Treasury that the likes of Hewitt and Byers used to provided under Blair.
Communities could go to someone who is both in touch with voters and a good campaigner. Denham would seem a natural fit, especially given his views on England.
Woodward could go to defence, which would suit the brass, Purnell stays where he is, briefed as a vote of confidence. Douglas gets the key political job of nations and regions, while there are big promotions for Mcfadden and Ed Miliband who are both regarded as having performed well in more junior roles.
The Mcfadden appointment may be regarde a controversial, but I strongly advise on a new face in this job. If not Mcfadden, then perhaps Cooper?
Third Tier:
Culture/Cabinet Office/DIUS: Byrne/McFadden/Burnham/Cooper
These roles could go to any of the above who didn’t make it in the second tier posts. Each are capable, good young ministers.
Chief Secretary: Cooper/Healey
We need continuity in the Treasury, and Yvette has only been there six months. I don’t think there’s a conflict with Ed in BERR, and it makes in interesting story. If we did decide that wouldn’t work John Healey would be an excellent choice as a former Treasury minister with good contacts in the Unions.
Transport: Flint
Caroline deserves promotion, and has done well in current jobs.
DfID: Bradshaw/Dhanda/Ussher
I’d like to suggest one “surprise” appointment. Each of the above is a good communicator. Appointing someone fresh and unexpected is usually a good idea, and DfID would be a good department for someone to prove their front rank abilities.
Departures:
Browne, Hoon, Murphy, Benn, Kelly
To put it brutally, we lose four grey haired men and Ruth Kelly. Ruth is the harshest sacking, and could easily be retained.
Jack
I’ve deliberately left Jack Straw till last.
Let’s be clear. The PM could sack Jack. He’s a long servigng old friend, but hes’s also allegedly been positioning himself. He doesn’t have deep support in the PLP as he heads no faction. Some argue for sacking him pour encourager les autres.
However, I don’t agree. Jack is vital to recovery.
Straw has good experience, decent political antennae and is a shrewd operate within the PLP. If he doesn’t have his own faction, he has the respect of others. I therefore suggest that the PM makes Jack Straw First Sec of State and Deputy PM, putting him in charge of manifesto development and campaign preparation as well as a wide swathe of cabinet committees. In essence, he should do the Chris Patten/Heseltine role for the PM, with the focus being on how to win the next election, giving the PM room to focus more on big picture questions.
22 Comments
August 4, 2008 at 2:25 pm
.Milliband cannot accept no change now it would be a slap down. Promoting dead wood token Blairites will not wash either.Perhaps the Deckchairs might look nice over there by Celine Dion?
August 4, 2008 at 3:04 pm
‘Strengthening of party unity’ and ‘focusing on the General Election’ by promoting loads of Blairites, demoting or sacking all the Brownites and not bringing in any lefties?!
I do like the idea of John Hutton telling business the good news about our new popular economic policies, though.
August 4, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Don – which ‘brownites’ would be sacked or demoted? Hoon? Hardly. Balls moves to a big econ dept, miliband (e) is promoted, darling gets a big job, alexander moves back to domestic politics and cooper is either promoted or stays still… Hardly a night of the long knives! Actually the one person missing from this who shouldn’t be is jim murphy
August 4, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Hi Hopi,
I suspect (on the basis of total ignorance) that the way Team Brown would see it is as follows:
They are down one with Des Browne leaving the cabinet.
Alexander moving from international development to half a cabinet post is a step down. Balls losing his children’s empire to move to BERR is a step down, and Darling is definitely getting demoted (if you have to brief that someone isn’t getting demoted…) Fair point about Ed Miliband, though.
That’s even before you tell them the good news about John Hutton being the new Chancellor
August 4, 2008 at 6:33 pm
[...] as news comes in that the first Cabinet meeting in September is to be out of ThatLondon, Hopi Sen has some suggestions on what the Gord should do if he has a reshuffle, some LibDems aren’t happy with the [...]
August 4, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Whatever the rationale, promoting Hutton, Blears and Flint all at the same time could hardly been seen as anything but boosting radical Blairism. It would be seen as political positioning; a quick fix rather than doing what we ought to be doing – listening to the electorate and responding with a coherent policy vision.
Health seems a bizarre suggestion for Liam Byrne, because we need someone there who can draw clear dividing lines between us and the Tories. He has built his career on trying to neutralise Tory messages on immigration by positioning the government closer to them. But the Tories benefit from the parties being positioned closer on health. It’s not the time to be moving someone who has not demonstrated the required skillset into such a crucial role. In fact, if we could easily lose four grey-haired men, it would be even easier to lose a no-haired man.
A thought – if we want as Chancellor a capable performer who’s shown herself able to cope with extreme pressure, why not move Jacqui Smith there? Then you could have your pick of Johnson/Blears at Home Secretary without Brownites losing face…
August 5, 2008 at 12:26 am
I think a lot of people would regard DFID as a plum job, not as leftovers!
August 5, 2008 at 1:27 am
Kerry- I’m trying to put myself in the voice of the most cynical type of political operator, and for them, Dfid equals sucking up to oxfam, being nice to churches, generally being worthy and no votes at all!
August 5, 2008 at 9:31 am
A lot I would agree with in this. Hutton would make a good Chancellor, despite his anti-union instincts. I’d go for Yvette Cooper at Health though. Apart from anything else it would help counterbalance some of the other obviously Blairite appointments.
No role for Alan Milburn? How about Cabinet Office, with a brief to look at policies to kick-start social mobility across the board?
August 5, 2008 at 10:11 am
Paul- good idea about Cooper at health, which, as you say, would help meet the “blairite” tag. As for Alan, It’s an interesting idea, and i’d support it, but wonder if perhaps a few bridges have been burnt in the last week or so. i’d like to think not, but it’s hard to see it now due to all the ex-ministers briefing.
August 5, 2008 at 11:21 am
I’m stunned Benn is dropped altogether though – what’s he done wrong? I think he’s been rather good and I’ve never heard a bad word about him except that he was ‘born a millionaire’.
Keep him at Defra or at the very least move him back to DfiD surely (he seemed to get more headlines there than Douglas does there now).
August 5, 2008 at 11:43 am
labourboy- I think the essential problem with any reshuffle is how to deal with those who haven’t done anything wrong.
Browne in particular has been a very good defence secretary, abosorbed the role of scottish secretary too and got little reward for it. He deserves better than to be sacked.
Yet the nasty truth of his position is that he’s a mid-ranking cabinet minister of some years service but no significant personal following in a government desperate for new talent and with a logjam at the top.
That’s a very vulerable position, and one I think shared by Hilary Benn. That makes them vulnerable, justice or no (think of Ann Taylor, Paul Murphy (twice!),
August 5, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Hilary Benn particularly hard done by. No place for Hain?! That “safe pair of hands” whose joshing about his armed body guards we all love so much? Subject of course to his not being in jail.
August 5, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Reminds me of Harold MacMillen’s “Night of the Long Knives”
Greater Love hath no man that he lays down his friends, for to save his life !
GW
August 5, 2008 at 9:44 pm
I take your point Hopi, I guess that’s politics. Benn used to be my MP and was absolutely brilliant. He helped out my neighbours on that tax credits debacle too so we think very highly of him in the Labourboy household!
August 5, 2008 at 11:08 pm
It’s the “A-Team” all over again. All big bangs, bodies flying all over the place and lots of smoke but nobody actually gets killed! Mr T would love it.
August 5, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Just a small point. Your clock is wrong – you are an hour behind. Is that significant?
August 6, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Since we are talking re-shuffles I humbly submit the following as one way forward for Labour. The glaring ommissions are Balls and Brown. I really do feel that King Lear and his fool should be cast into the wilderness for the good of the party. Anything else is just shuffling deckchairs.
A.Johnson – PM
Blears – Deputy
Purnell – Chancellor
Denham – Home Office
Alexander – MOJ
D. Miliband – FCO
Flint – Health
Byrne – DWP
McNulty – Defence
Burnham – DCLG
Harman – Schools
Bradshaw–– DEFRA
Hutton – Leader
Milburn – BERR
Cooper – Universities
Jim Murphy – Transport
E. Miliband – DFID
Straw – Chief Whip
Lammy – DCMS
August 6, 2008 at 5:36 pm
I really cannot belive that anyone would promote Hazel Blears.
Still you appear to be serious.
Times must be tough with your choice of Chancellor.
I note no real comments about the ability of any to do their jobs: but I suppose ability to do a Cabinet job is not a prerequisite .
August 6, 2008 at 10:17 pm
[...] a former Labour press officer who now works for a Peer, is one of the party’s best bloggers. Today he muses on what would be the most effective reshuffle for Gordon Brown to implement after coming [...]
August 7, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Madasafish. Since you ask.
Blears has an irrepressible outlook – much like Prescott did. She would die in a ditch for the party and as a former Chair and one of the few “regional” accents, I reckon she could really give it a go.
Purnell has handled a large spending Dept. -DWP – rather well and would be a good opposite to Osborne.
Also, with Denham and Johnson, he can provide voters of South England a reason to listen to Labour again.
I accept dumping Balls is unfair. So give him a Cabinet place as Chair of the Party. Then he can build relations within the party for his own advancement, whether that is a good thing, I have no idea.
I could go on, but i won’t.
August 11, 2008 at 8:05 pm
We should keep the present leader he is doing a good job. If we are going to lose why would a new leader want to take the mantle of heaviest defeat anyway.
My reshuffle would be make Darling foreign secretary Milliband chancellor.