The recent resignation of Maria Miller as Culture Secretary and her replacement by Sajid Javid was not greeted with unanimous enthusiasm.
A series of articles in the Times especially those by Libby Purves and Philip Collins discussed whether ministers dealing with culture were expected to appreciate their brief as well as champion it in a way that others are not expected to. The open letter from Michael Rosen suggesting that Javid’s background in banking made him unsuitable for the job.
Collins suggested that:
“The perfect minister would have a clear idea of what they want to achieve and the courage born of passion to stick to that plan. That minister would need to leaven their necessary passion with the ability to stay calm under pressure, to be capable of inspiring a team, clever at husbanding their time and able to take advice. Above all else… the vital quality is decisiveness. To procrastinate and not to come to a judgment is the most damaging failing a minister can display.”
A close alliance to HM Treasury is also a must as far as Collins is concerned. Although this can be a double-edged sword. The Minister may be able to argue persuasively for the purse strings to be loosened a little or could be at the vanguard of the Treasury’s efforts to impose cuts.
For those looking to engage with Government, a change in Minister is a time for instant action. That new Minister needs to hear from you and receive an initial introduction or briefing. However, it has to be appreciated that they do not always have much room for manoeuvre. Not all Secretaries of States or Ministers enjoy influence.
Consider the politics and the timings. In Javid’s case he may be able to outline some new approaches but the big issues he faces – arts funding, press regulation etc – remain the same. There will be an election in a year’s time, is this the time for any grand new strategies?
The civil servants supporting the Minister do not change and the Government’s overall policy approach has not changed either. In other words, the idea that a new Minister will bring with them a whole new or different approach is not realistic. Special advisers may remain in place as well, so the eyes and ears of the new Minister could be the same as the old one. That would suggest that things will continue as before.
The Westminster way of doing politics also means that Ministers rarely have a deep understanding of the policy area they are taking charge of. There is then a period of them needing to get ‘up-to-speed’ with the brief. This can take longer in some cases than others, especially taking the example of culture, media and sport. The brief is so wide and there are so many interests involved that this further complicates that process.
All this does not mean that a new appointment is not a good time to undertake a reassessment of approach or priorities, or to brush off some old ideas but that is done with a degree of realism.
A new Minister may well be looking to make a mark but be sure to put that in the confines of the Government’s overall approach. A new Minister, especially this close to an election, will not want to ‘rock the boat’.
The parties also have their own policy making and manifesto development processes in place. A new Minister cannot simply walk in and decide the approach. They at least have to work with what is already in place and with the processes themselves as well. Incremental change may be the order of the day in some cases but wholesale reform will not be.
Effective engagement is about context and politics. A new Minister may offer opportunities for engagement but they rarely offer the prospect of a clean policy slate.