Using recent events in A Level Politics: The cabinet reshuffle, January 2018

Cabinet reshuffle, January 2018: What happened?

On Monday 8^th January, Theresa May carried out a reshuffle of major cabinet positions. Junior ministerial posts were reshuffled the following day. The major outcomes are below:

• Philip Hammond, Boris Johnson, David Davis, Amber Rudd, and Michael Gove all kept their positions as Chancellor, Foreign Secretary, Brexit Secretary, Home Secretary, and Environment Secretary respectively.
• Jeremy Hunt refused to be moved from his position as Health Secretary, and remained in place.
• Justine Greening, previously Education Secretary, was offered the Department for Work and Pensions but refused it. She left the cabinet, and was replaced as Education Secretary by Damian Hinds.
• Several ‘rising stars’ were promoted to positions as junior ministers, including Sam Gyimah, Caroline Dineage, and Margot James.
• The number of white members of government fell from 113 to 111, the number of men fell from 89 to 82, and the average age fell from 52 to 51.

 

The cabinet reshuffle: How is it relevant to A-Level Politics?

The relationship between ministers and prime minister, and the prime minister’s power

AQA paper 1: The government and politics of the UK

• The government of the UK
• The Prime Minister and Cabinet

Edexcel component 2: UK government and non-core political ideas

• UK government
• The Prime Minister and Executive

Sample question: ‘The prime minister exercises considerable power over the cabinet.’ Discuss.

The reshuffle demonstrates the limited power of the Prime Minister over ‘Big Beasts’ in her party. In September 2017, Boris Johnson undermined May by outlining his ‘vision’ for Brexit several days before the PM’s own speech outlining government plans. This was seen as a breach of collective responsibility, and an attempt to put pressure on May. In November, a letter to the Prime Minister from Johnson and Michael Gove was leaked to the press. The two cabinet ministers urged the PM to adopt a less conciliatory approach in EU negotiations in a way that many considered insubordinate. The reshuffle could have been the prime opportunity for May to punish such ill-discipline by demoting or sacking these ministers, but she did not do so. She probably fears the consequences of doing so. Johnson is very popular in the Conservative Party, particularly among those who oppose EU membership. He would probably be able to encourage enough MPs to express no confidence in May to trigger a leadership contest in the Conservative Party. When Gove was on the back benches in early 2017, he embarrassed the PM by meeting newly elected US President Donald Trump before she did. It seems that, given the threat these men would pose on the backbenches, May is unable to punish cabinet ministers by freely exercising her power to hire and fire. Moreover, being unable to remove such supporters of ‘hard Brexit’ from the cabinet, May is also obliged to retain supporters of a ‘soft Brexit’, such as Philip Hammond, so that she has some defenders around the cabinet table. The result of these limitations was a ‘reshuffle’ in which remarkably little reshuffling actually took place. May’s weakness is also demonstrated by the clash with Jeremy Hunt. The precise details of the conversation between them are not known, but it seems that May tried and failed to remove Hunt from his position as Health Secretary. Hunt probably refused to accept a lesser cabinet position, challenging May to either keep him at the Health Department or sack him outright. Again, May apparently feared the impact of banishing a powerful figure to the backbenches. Being forced to back down from demoting a minister, after beginning the reshuffle process, is a clear sign of the PM’s limited power. May did succeed in removing Justine Greening, the Education Secretary perceived to disagree with the Prime Minister regarding grammar schools. However, Greening’s refusal to accept a different cabinet post indicates that she sees little to be gained by remaining close to May. Greening perhaps feels that May’s power of patronage is limited, given the dominance of figures like Johnson. On the back benches, Greening is likely to form an alliance with other Conservatives who voted to remain in the EU at the time of the referendum. May has obviously judged that the embarrassment caused by this group would be less than the embarrassment of backing down to a second minister in one day. Whether this pays off remains to be seen, but it is a sign of May’s weakness that she was unable to conduct the reshuffle as she would have liked, and in achieving partial success created more backbench opposition. This reshuffle may also indicate that uncontrollable circumstances can constrain the prime minister. Brexit, and the divisions it has engendered, continue to influence Theresa May’s actions. She kept in place both Philip Hammond, champion of a ‘soft Brexit’ within cabinet, and Johnson, leading advocate of limited concessions to the EU. This may have been because she is concerned about the impression given to the British public and EU leaders by a shift in the balance of power between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ Brexiteers. Moreover, had May wanted to change the Secretary of State for Leaving the EU, she probably would not have been able to do so, given the disruption this might cause to the negotiations with the EU (which are on a tight schedule). Finally, Hunt may have been able to use the current NHS ‘winter crisis’ as an argument that he needed to stay on as Health Secretary. These external factors, outside the control of the prime minister, may have contributed to the May’s inability to change her cabinet to a great extent.

Equality of gender, ethnicity, and sexuality

AQA paper 3: Political ideas

• Other ideologies
• Feminism/Multiculturalism

Edexcel component 2: UK government and non-core political ideas

• Non-core political ideas
• Feminism/Multiculturalism

Sample question: To what extent have ideas of gender and racial equality taken hold in British society?

The reshuffle had a very limited impact on the representation of various groups in government. Touted as an opportunity to make the government less ‘pale, stale, and male’, the reduction in the number of white, middle-aged men was small (see the figures in the ‘What happened?’ section). With Justine Greening, one of the UK’s most senior gay politicians left government. The change in the numbers of female and ethnic minority ministers occurred mainly in the junior ministerial positions, the cabinet remaining largely unchanged. Bringing more women and members of ethnic minorities into junior posts does, however, suggest that there may be greater change in future. It may be that there is more diversity among younger members of the Conservative Party, and that it will take time for this to be reflected at the highest levels. For the moment, expediting this process seems to come second to the more pressing priorities that determined the membership of the cabinet itself.

Related subjects