Reshuffle comes with risk as ministerial churn may disrupt key policies

Frequent ministerial changes have been a feature of the Conservatives in power over recent years.

Government reshuffles can cause disruption across Whitehall (PA) (PA Wire)

Another reshuffle means there is a new round of ministers who need to get to grips with their briefs in short order.

The expectation is that the Prime Minister will promote key allies to instil a renewed sense of unity and a clear vision.

There is a variety of reasons why prime ministers choose to hold reshuffles and Mr Sunak will be relieved that he has not been forced into action by events beyond his control, such as a high-profile and acrimonious resignation.

But there are always potential downsides to reshuffles, notably the disruption they can cause across Whitehall and the subsequent impact on policy development and implementation.

Recent years have seen an unusual amount of instability in ministerial appointments, with the average tenure of a cabinet minister now less than a year.

Ministerial churn has long been identified as harmful to progress, with repeated leadership changes resulting in ministers struggling to get to grips with often complex and wide-ranging briefs.

The Institute for Government (IfG) said this churn “has undermined the effectiveness of the UK government in recent years”.

There has been a period of relative stability in this regard under the current prime minister, but previous rapid ministerial turnover has proved “debilitating”, with certain key roles particularly badly affected, the IfG said.

Efforts to tackle the housing crisis coincided with 18 different housing minsters between 1997 and January 2000.

Rachel Maclean’s departure as housing minister on Monday comes at a time when the Government is seeking to pass major legislation to reform the private rental market and introduce changes to leasehold.

However, her nine-month tenure was still longer than the previous four holders of the role.

It is difficult to see how often complex and controversial housing policy can be effectively implemented in this environment.

Ministerial churn can mean delays to smaller projects as well. Sir Chris Bryant greeted the news that Will Quince was stepping down as health minister by commenting that he would now be dealing with a fourth minister in his efforts to formulate a national strategy for acquired brain injury – something that was supposed to have been completed this summer.

In a further illustration that ministerial churn has been a key feature of the Conservatives’ recent years in power, there were six work and pensions secretaries during a four-year period in which the government was trying to implement universal credit reforms, while there has also been quick turnover at the top of the Ministry of Justice at a time of significant challenges in prisons and the courts.

It is notable that four junior ministers, including Mr Quince, have so far opted to leave their roles of their own accord, meaning Rishi Sunak may be making more changes than he intended.

This has an obvious knock-on effect in terms of disruption which could hinder policy development and implementation.

This risk is perhaps most acute at the Department for Education, where the experienced Nick Gibb has stepped down as schools minister.

Mr Gibb has performed the role under four prime ministers since 2010 and his extensive knowledge of the education landscape will be a big loss, particularly as Education Secretary Gillian Keegan is relatively new to her first Cabinet job.

The Government’s flagship plans are to reform post-16 education and make maths compulsory for all students up to the age of 18, but big challenges such as the recruitment and retention of teachers, improving provision for children with special educational needs and the state of school buildings are likely to dominate ministerial time.

Tim Durrant, programme director at the Institute for Government, said regular turnover can be “very damaging to how government works” and identified potentially negative consequences caused by ministers who look to assert themselves in their new role.

“New ministers may want to show they are different to their predecessors, meaning that policy can move in different directions with a change at the top. And as ministers know they are often only in the job for a matter of months, they can focus on ‘quick wins’, to the detriment of long-term policymaking,” Mr Durrant said.

With a general election looming and challenges on multiple fronts, the Prime Minister will not want any time wasted on making progress in key policy areas.

But there is a risk that the reshuffle could prove more disruptive that constructive when it comes to policy.