Is David Cameron planning a summer clear-out of the shadow cabinet?

Ben Brogan writes that he is in The Daily Mail.  Only a "Magnificent Seven" are definitely safe apparently.  That all-male magnificent seven are "George Osborne, William Hague, Chris Grayling, David Davis, Michael Gove, Andrew Lansley and Patrick McLaughlin."  That should be McLoughlin, Daily Mail!

But if those who are the M7 there are others that are also pretty safe:

• Philip Hammond, Osborne's deputy.  Mr Hammond is regarded as a safe, competent pair of hands.
• Nick Herbert and Jeremy Hunt - newly promoted last year and both are thought to be doing good jobs.
• Sayeeda Warsi and Pauline Neville-Jones - both installed as peers last year and it would be far too early to end their new careers.  By all accounts David Cameron is pleased with their work.
• Caroline Spelman MP - although not a powerful party chairman she has done a good job in keeping CCHQ out of the news and the operation has ticked over nicely during her tenure.  Not every chairman has managed that.  Candidate selection issues are set to become tricky again, however, but that's another story for after 1st May.
• Lord Strathclyde, loved by the grassroots and a master of the Upper House.  Unless Tom is moving on for personal reasons it is difficult to see him not going into Government with David Cameron.  We expect the popular Baroness Anelay to stay as Opposition Chief Whip too.
• Oliver Letwin, still an important influence on the leader - just outside the inner quartet of Cameron, Osborne, Hilton and Coulson.
• Owen Paterson, only promoted to shadow cabinet last year and has handled his Northern Ireland brief very effectively.
• Alan Duncan, has done important outreach work to the business community and is one of the party's most effective media operators.

That takes us up to eighteen as the number of shadow cabinet ministers that are pretty safe.

In fact we'd add a nineteenth and twentieth to the list: Liam Fox and Francis Maude.  Ben Brogan suggests that Dr Fox and Mr Maude are "at risk" in a possible summer reshuffle.  We don't think so.  Dr Fox is working incredibly closely with William Hague on their overlapping briefs.  If there were differences between David Cameron and Liam Fox in year one on certain foreign policy questions they do not seem to be apparent now.  On reforming NATO and care for servicemen's families, in particular, the working relationship appears sound.  Francis Maude's work at the Implementation Office is also just underway and it's important work.  Mr Maude, we predict, won't be moved.  We're now up to a magnificent twenty - or at least a 'good enough 20'!

That leaves us with possible candidates for moving out: Peter Ainsworth, Cheryl Gillan, Theresa May, Andrew Mitchell, David Mundell, Eric Pickles, David Willetts and Theresa Villiers.  (We're treating David Lidington and Grant Shapps as people who are not full members of the top team).  Most likely to leave are Peter Ainsworth, Andrew Mitchell and Theresa Villiers.  Least likely to leave is Eric Pickles.

That leaves us with the question of who would replace any top-teamers that are moved?  Maria Miller, Mike Penning and Michael Fallon are mentioned by Ben Brogan.  Maria Miller is a very good bet and was the only non-member of the shadow cabinet to be included in the shadow cabinet photo at the Spring Forum (so she's almost there).  We'd be delighted to see Michael Fallon, readers' Parliamentarian of the Year, sat around the Tories' top table, but his views on tax and spending may be a little too Thatcherite for David Cameron.  Justine Greening and Ed Vaizey are other good tips for the top - particularly Ed.  We'd like to see Greg Clark there.  At the start of the year you most wanted Dominic Grieve and Patrick Mercer promoted.  We don't expect either to get the nod.

Related link: Our 2nd January guide to the top members of the team.

Comments

[David Belchamber]

At the risk of becoming very boring, I do think that DC would be wrong to retain George Osborne as shadow chancellor. I agree he deserves a top job and is a very good politician but the economy is too important a portfolio to leave in the hands of someone who (as far as I know) has neither the relevant experience nor training for it.

If there were nobody else, I would have to go along with it because GO has improved. But he does not come over as a figures man and we already have some better qualified people.

As it is, DC runs the risk of being accused of cronyism.

[Dave B]

Isn't Mr Brogan an extension of the New Labour PR department? Is there any reason to think he'd know more about Mr Cameron's plans than Fred Basset?

[eugene]

John Redwood should definitely be there- one of the most experienced (been there, done that). He so often speaks in the House and people shut up when he talks.

[Tony Makara]

As someone who supports the idea of corporate government I would like to see people in the shadow cabinet with real-life experience. Particularly people hands-on experience of business and working at the highest level in the public sector. Politicians may have a good overall knowledge of affairs but they often lack the expertise and experience needed in key areas. Any such appointments should not be politically motivated as that would defeat the objective. Hiring a 'yes man' would be of no use when government is on the wrong track and needs to be told where it is getting it wrong. Good governments are those that are held to account and will listen to expert advice. Politicians do not have all the answers.

[Letters From A Tory]

Cameron will want to breed stability now, and if Lansley can survive after his recent policy gaffe then I think most of the Shadow Cabinet jobs are very safe as they are more than a match for Labour.

[CCHQ Spy]

BB's piece is ill-informed.

I would not bet on McLoughlin staying at all.

If I were a betting man I'd put money on Andrew Mackay to replace him.

Mitchell and Ainsworth are unlikely to survive either.

Miller and Vaizey will replace them.

If Cameron is really judging on ability then Villiers will go too.

On the same measure ConHome is right to identify Greg Clark as deserving top table status.

[David Belchamber]

LFAT at 10.03:

"I think most of the Shadow Cabinet jobs are very safe as they are more than a match for Labour".

I am sure that you are correct BUT are they all as good as the country needs them to be?

I agree with Tony Makara about having people with hands-on experience (like John Redwood, as eugene suggests)

[Alan S]

If Cameron is going to wield the axe he should do it soon while he is riding high. Otherwise reshuffles look weak.

[KJ]

He can't get rid of Eric Pickles! Eric Pickles is superb at his brief!
Surely he can't promote Justine Greening...that would just be awful...

[Parliamentary Insider]

This story is pure dross.

The really fun speculation in Parliament and CCHQ is actually about who briefed Brogan on it.

It must be someone credible, but also totally out of the loop. The "at-risk" names are particularly risible.

I reckon David Ruffley is trying to rock the boat.

[Edison Smith]

Fallon is a must.

[Mountjoy]

Dominic Grieve should be given a top position. Without doubt. Future cabinet material easily.

[Conand]

I'm sure 'Parliamentary Insider' is right.

The Dominic Grieve question is still the elephant in the room though. Why isn't he in the shadow cabinet?

I'm meeting one of the 'Magnificent Seven' later, so I may get some info on that.

[Tony Makara]

I agree with the calls for a senior position for John Redwood. I can't think of anyone who can match Mr Redwood for experience and intellectual rigor. He doesn't suffer fools lightly and has a cutting analytical technique. As has been said, when John Redwood speaks an audience shows reverence and wants to hear what he has to say. That is a level of respect few people can command.

[Duncan]

Not sure I agree with you that Theresa Villiers should be leaving the Shadow Cabinet. She is very bright and a good media performer who deserves a place in the Shadow Cabinet team on merit rather than because she is a woman. In my view it would be a mistake to exclude her.

I do agree with those calling for the promotion of Dominic Grieve and John Redwood. However at this stage any reshuffle should be comparatively minor. We have to look like a Government in waiting and in order to do this we must allow the members of the Shadow Cabinet more time to increase their media profiles and register in the minds of the public in the way that Labour did in the 1995-1997 period.

[Duncan]

Not sure I agree with you that Theresa Villiers should be leaving the Shadow Cabinet. She is very bright and a good media performer who deserves a place in the Shadow Cabinet team on merit rather than because she is a woman. In my view it would be a mistake to exclude her.

I do agree with those calling for the promotion of Dominic Grieve and John Redwood. However at this stage any reshuffle should be comparatively minor. We have to look like a Government in waiting and in order to do this we must allow the members of the Shadow Cabinet more time to increase their media profiles and register in the minds of the public in the way that Labour did in the 1995-1997 period.

[nobody]

Maria Miller and Greg Clark are very good and deserve shadow cabinet jobs.

Dominic Grieve is not shadow cabinet material and will never be. He is not loyal and would probably embarrass the party within a matter of weeks of taking a job and then would have to be put on the back benches from where he would constantly criticise the leadership. It seems better to keep him at arms length whilst still keeping some sort of influence over him. I am not denying he is very good but just that he is not loyal enough. He also has a bad habit of speaking on issues that have nothing to do with his brief, which is bad enough on the front bench but would be far worse in the shadow cabinet.

[nobody]

Maria Miller and Greg Clark are very good and deserve shadow cabinet jobs.

Dominic Grieve is not shadow cabinet material and will never be. He is not loyal and would probably embarrass the party within a matter of weeks of taking a job and then would have to be put on the back benches from where he would constantly criticise the leadership. It seems better to keep him at arms length whilst still keeping some sort of influence over him. I am not denying he is very good but just that he is not loyal enough. He also has a bad habit of speaking on issues that have nothing to do with his brief, which is bad enough on the front bench but would be far worse in the shadow cabinet.

[Opinicus]

Why exactly is Lansley one of the M7?

He's had a vital brief for ages and hasn't had a new idea in rather longer. When he speaks its an own goal and he never ever attacks Labour or not hard/interestingly enough to get into the press. Health care is very high on voters priority lists and we hear nothing from lansley.

The trouble with much of the shadow cabinet is that they are for all important purposes invisible. Not one of them has the attack dog or even the terrier instincts needed to harrow the government.

[gingeral]

How about getting rid of Theresa May as leader of the House and replacing her with someone who's actually a gifted parliamentarian, like Sir Malcolm Rifkind? Ainsworth is useless and should go, replace him with Duncan. Willetts is a good brain but he's too gaffe prone, give him some sort of background job instead. Fox and Maude should stay. Bring in David Trimble, and definitely Michael Fallon.

[Parliamentary Insider]

Why is this even running, Editor?

As I said, the real story is about the ongoing witch-hunt to find out which moron briefed this out.

Brogan's article even says

"despite rumours, the Tory leader took the unusual step this morning of ordering officials to refute claims that he would wield the knife in the summer to sharpen up his team and try to stretch his poll lead.

A spokesman said: "He is very happy with the team and there are no plans for a summer reshuffle.""

That's basically saying "some bloke told me this and I'm short of copy".

Whoever this TOP SOURCE was, they didn't know what David Lidington's job is, nor how to spell his name:

"Others in the danger zone include Northern Ireland spokesman David Liddington..."

That established, the top names for potential useless sources are:
- David Ruffley
- Mike Penning (who, pray tell is tipping Fireman Mike for a promotion!?)

[Richard]

What about Liam Fox?

[CCHQ Spy]

Good point Parliamentary Insider, Mike Penning is likeliest source for this story. That's the buzz anyway. Whenever you see a story like this it's always wise to identify the unlikeliest name tipped for promotion within it and they are probably the source for the story.

It should be called The Kite Rule.

The same happened last time when David Ruffley was mentioned in Melissa Kite's speculative piece. A piece which was proved to be crap.

[Alan S]

Perhaps it should be called The Ruffley Rule, CCHQ Spy?

Richard: I don't understand your point about Liam Fox? Ben Brogan says he's for the chop. ConHome says he is staying.

[London Tory]

What this piece indirectly demonstrates is that our depth of talent is getting deeper, just as we prepare to go into Government. Malcolm Rifkind [1979 vintage] went up against Nick Cleggover on Newsnight last week and frankly the intellectual gap between them was embarrassing [for the Lib Dems at least].

Personally, with economic crisis looming, I would make Hague or David David Shadow Chancellor this summer, as both have gravitas. Osborne has improved, can coin a good phrase, and would be an ideal Party Chairman during an election campaign.

How about Michael Howard for Lord Chancellor too ? No man has done more for the Party in recent years.

[VB]

www.despatchblog.com links to this story and adds comments.

[John]

There were many infuriated Tories that believed Patrick Mercer had betrayed their leader and Party by choosing to advise Gordon Brown at a time of maximum difficulty for David Cameron, a relocation that gave the impression that their Party was in turmoil. Perhaps there are those who will now look upon Patrick Mercer and perceive him to be an ambitious, disingenuous and hypocritical operator, who exemplified the most disagreeable traits of his time.

The racially insensitive remarks of Mercer allowed the opposition a propaganda victory along with an ITN newscaster proclaiming, everyone knows that life in the Army is tough but is racist abuse an excepted part of it? YES according to Patrick Mercer, in his interview he could see nothing wrong with the racial insults, but that’s the way it is in the Army he told the Times. Nothing wrong, is why David Cameron gave him his marching orders.

Some will wonder why Mercer seemed to be indifferent and did not express disapproval of the way it was in his yesteryears. Possibly we can understand his stance somewhat better knowing that he said when he joined the army in the 1970s the atmosphere in which recruits were trained was in many ways utterly unacceptable nevertheless "nothing was said about this, it wasn't challenged, it was taken on the chin because that's what made you a man", perhaps racially insensitive remarks is also something he believes should be taken on the chin.

Patrick Mercer, said of the anger and deep resentment among the grassroots of the Party that one would have thought I kill the pope, but to them he had proven himself to be faithless and Mercer’s past record would imply he is somewhat a loose cannon that could caused substantial damage to the Tory Party should he once again from a position of high rank bring about yet another scandal.

Best by far that he should remain a "rent-a-quote" on the backbenches.

[Yet Another Anon]

It would be unusual to make Michael Howard Shadow Lord Chancellor because he is retiring as an MP and isnt going into the Lords so he could only serve until the next General Election. George Osborne should be reduced to Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, David Davis could be Shadow Chancellor and John Redwood could be Shadow Home Secretary

[Yet Another Anon]

It would be unusual to make Michael Howard Shadow Lord Chancellor because he is retiring as an MP and isnt going into the Lords so he could only serve until the next General Election. George Osborne should be reduced to Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, David Davis could be Shadow Chancellor and John Redwood could be Shadow Home Secretary

[Jack Stone]

If we are going to have John Redwood as Home Secretary why don`t we have Mr Spoke as Education Secretary and Captain Kirk as Leader.
Bringing John Redwood into the cabinet would be a disaster.His ideas are so right-wing, two months and all the good work done by David Cameron to bring the party back into mainstream politics and make it look like a potential government would be undone!

[Yet Another Anon]

His ideas are so right-wing, two months and all the good work done by David Cameron to bring the party back into mainstream politics and make it look like a potential government would be undone!
John Redwood's ideas on Criminal Justice policy are mainstream, he is much more in tune with most Labour and Conservative voters who want to see the scum on the streets dealt with by whatever means stop them.

The 3 main political parties over a number of decades have been far more socially liberal than the General Public, many of whom would quite happily allow the police a licence to kill, most people on working class estates will cheer on vigilantes sorting out paedophiles, thieves, murderers and chavs - people want law & order restored.

[Jack Stone]

If John Redwood was promoted into the cabinet people would think the party was simply going backwards not forwards!