The Prime Minister’s recent reshuffle and reorganisation of Government Departments can be seen in a number of ways. Some can choose to see it as a sign of determination and focus, whilst others tend more towards a slightly desperate floundering around in the hope that a solution will present itself.
The difficulty is that after the events of the last few years the PM is faced by some impossible questions, not least about the state of his own party. Can the huge challenges he faces in that turbulent arena be resolved by reshuffling his Cabinet or reorganising the machinery of government? I suspect not, I am drawn to the words of the FT’s Stephen Bush, “I don’t think anyone thinks that the Tory Party woke up yesterday only a science ministry away from good political health.”
If the political problems have no obvious solution in the reshuffle and reorganisation, are there real benefits to be found in the field of policy? If there are, it is not immediately apparent. Changing the names of Departments will do little to resolve deep seated problems such as cost of living, energy security and workforce
Most Governments tend to focus on some key ingredients which contribute to macroeconomic stability and long term growth, such as infrastructure, skills, science, improved regulation and some notions of levelling up (at least in spatial terms). These tend to be fairly constant, what does change is the balance to be found within and between all of these fundamental considerations
It tends to boil down to choices between bringing a number of Departments together, bringing policies and functions together under a single strategy. Or developing smaller Departments with a narrower focus. As far as I can see it is the latter model that the PM is developing and that at least increases the clarity about the priorities that have been chosen.
The obvious synergies, such as business and energy, science and technology, and digital with culture/media are there. Politically it is useful too, with much clearer lines of accountability, and a clear route for key stakeholders to take their concerns forward on specific issues.
The problem is that there are policy areas that will inevitably leak over from one department to another, regulation and planning spring to mind. Only within a very strong ethos of co-operation and collaboration between departments can this be accommodated.
The role of the Treasury in working with smaller departments to create longer term and sustainable policy and strategy is also of great importance. It has been said that credible longevity is often the essential missing ingredient in UK economic policy making. The Treasury has its own political and fiscal pressures to contend with
Some are also more than a little anxious about where the public realm will sit within this context. For the Treasury next year’s budget seems to be higher priority than the 10 year plan for public services such as the NHS.
Real success should come down to long-term thinking and co-ordination. That is true measure of social political and economic progress. It does not come down to the excellence of any one department or their Minister. It will come down to how well it all works together.
In short it comes down to co-operation for the common good. That is why so many of us entered political and civic life
Chris Bain 