Denied! Clarke vs. Mandelson

The Business Secretary is due to give a statement in Parliament at 3.05pm today on the car industry.

Pretty important one might think.

Unfortunately, we are denied the prospect of the shadow Business Secretary holding the Business Secretary properly to account.

This is because Gordon Brown has deemed fit to appoint a peer - Lord Mandelson - to the important position, especially in a recession, of Business Secretary.

We should be able to tune in to see Ken Clarke going head to head with Peter Mandelson but that is not to be.

More...

This is part of a wider problem. The Business Select Committee has recently voiced concern that the government has more Business ministers in the Lords than in the Commons.

LORDS

• Rt. Hon. Lord Mandelson - Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
• Shriti Vadera - Minister for Economic Competitiveness and Small Business (jointly with Cabinet Office)
• Stephen Carter CBE - Minister for Communications, Technology and Broadcasting (jointly with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
• Mervyn Davies CBE - Minister for Trade and Investment (jointly with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office)

COMMONS

• Pat McFadden MP - Minister for Employment Relations and Postal Affairs
• Gareth Thomas MP - Minister for Trade, Development and Consumer Affairs (jointly with the Department for International Development)
• Ian Pearson MP - Economic and Business Minister (jointly with HM Treasury)

It speaks volumes about how Brown perceives the ministerial qualities and business experience of his MPs that he has had to rely on the Lords to fill most of his business ministerial positions.

And as Peter Oborne has pointed out, not a single member of the Cabinet has ever occupied a wealth-creating job.

The Commons is the primary and democratically elected chamber and Gordon Brown would do well to remember this when appointing his ministers.

Will Osborne be overshadowed by Clarke?

There has to be a real risk of this.

Osborne has had his detractors of late with many stories being interpreted as a slight against him such as Cameron making Hague his deputy "in all but name."

Clarke's return is also being viewed as another slight by some - as an admission by Cameron that his economic team was not up to scratch and Osborne lacked the experience and gravitas necessary to convince the political world and electorate that he had what it takes.

It is perhaps to be expected that some will draw this type of conclusion. However, Clarke has not replaced Osborne as shadow Chancellor. Osborne is central to Cameron's mission to lead the Conservatives back to electoral success. Clearly Cameron has decided he can utilise Clarke's talents and experience BUT as a compliment to Osborne, NOT as a replacement.

More...

I do not remember Peter Mandelson's return being interpreted in any way other than as a strengthening of Brown's economic team, adding his considerable experience. I do not remember the media saying that Mandelson's return undermined Alistair Darling. But perhaps that is because it was impossible to undermine Darling any further; a man widely seen as a puppet controlled by his master, Gordon Brown.

Nevertheless, Clarke's huge profile will mean the media will increasingly go to him for economic comment. This will play to the Tories' advantage (so long as he toes the same line as Cameron and Osborne). Like a Black Hole, he will act as vacuum for media coverage sucking it his way to the detriment of political opponent's, such as the current media economic darling, Vince Cable, and redressing the current imbalance that has been in favour of Mandelson since the Prince of Darkness's return. The downside, though, is that Osborne too could be overshadowed.

What is extraordinary is that Osborne was the initial driving force behind Ken Clarke's return. If true, and there is no reason to think otherwise, Osborne has chosen to put his party above his own personal career ambitions as he must have thought that Clarke's return could undermine his position, a point made by Rachel Sylvester today in the Times,

Despite all the worries that have been voiced about the return of Clarke it has undoubtedly strengthened the Tories' economic team.

The Tory Top team of Cameron, Hague, Osborne, Clarke and May is definitely stronger than their Labour opposites of Brown, Miliband, Darling, Mandelson and Purnell.

I'd score it 4-1 victory to the Tories (Purnell being the consolation goal - still think May's appointment is a mistake).

Clarke returns in Tory reshuffle

David Cameron has reshuffled his frontbench team this morning.

Timing

It had been reported that Cameron would wait until the inquiry into Caroline Spelman had officially reported, but it looks like Cameron decided he could not wait another couple of weeks given the ongoing reshuffle speculation that was potentially damaging morale within his team as frontbenchers worried whether they would keep their jobs.

Ken Clarke

As expected, the big story of the reshuffle is the return of Ken Clarke to the frontbench for the first time in 12 years. Clarke, 67, has vast experience of government and is the former Chancellor of the Exchequer who was responsible for the economic recovery following the recession of the early 1990s. He becomes the shadow Business Secretary, shadowing Lord Mandelson although the two will clearly not face each other at the despatch box as Mandelson is in the Lords while Clarke will be in the Commons. The Business Select Committee had voiced concern that the government has more Business ministers in the Lords than in the Commons. Clarke’s position in the Commons will draw attention to this to a much greater extent.

More...

There have been concerns raised about Clarke’s appointment, however. He is strongly Europhile which does not sit well with the overwhelmingly Eurosceptic Conservative Party. Indeed, this was largely the reason he failed to become Tory leader, despite three attempts. However, Clarke has said that he accepts that the Tory party now has a settled position on Europe (unlike the 1990s where the party was far more evenly split between Europhiles and Eurosceptics) and has said that he will not seek to change the party’s position on Europe. David Cameron, for his part, accepts that Clarke is not going to renounce his views so is happy for Clarke to retain his Europhile stance in private, though tow the party line in public. Clarke has said that he will adhere to the principle of collective responsibility. If Clarke can maintain the discipline, it is likely that he will just go quiet on the European issue though this will not stop his political opponents and the media trying to make disunity the story. In truth, Cameron and Clarke are very relaxed about it all. As Clarke himself has pointed out today, it is well known that Mandelson is far more pro-European than Gordon Brown, being a strong advocate of joining the Euro for example, but this is not causing the government any difficulties.

I mentioned above the issue of discipline and this has been a concern of many. Clarke can be a bit of a loose canon in terms of speaking his mind. It is what helps make him such a colourful and popular figure with the public but can cause consternation among his colleagues. There has also been criticism of Clarke by Lord Tebbit who says that despite his talent, Clarke is “lazy.”

That said, I believe that Clarke is an excellent politician, with vast experience and superior media skills. He will strengthen the Conservative economic-business team in just the way Mandelson has helped Labour’s. I’ve always taken the view that Clarke is not particularly interested with the business of opposition. The fact that he has returned to the frontbench after all these years seems to suggest he is confident, at least, that the Conservatives will return to government after the next general election.

Other moves

 Mark Francois enters the Shadow Cabinet becoming Shadow Minister for Europe
 Alan Duncan, who makes way for Ken Clarke’s return becomes Shadow Leader of the House of Commons, replacing Theresa May. This is a senior role for Duncan that shows he still has the support of David Cameron. There had been speculation that Duncan faced the chop after concerns with his outside business interests etc. However, Cameron made a point of defending Duncan last week.
 Chris Grayling leaves his Work and Pensions brief and becomes Shadow Home Secretary. He is a very good media performer who excels at taking the fight to Labour. He had been linked to the position of Party Chairman but he skills will be well utilised covering the Home Affairs brief, especially given how successive Home Secretaries have struggled to master their department which John Reid described as “not fit for purpose.”
 Dominic Grieve becomes Shadow Justice Secretary which is a sideways move. He replaced David Davis as Home Secretary but is said to be happy with his move to Justice. The cerebral former barrister will be better suited at Justice rather than the Home Affairs which tends to suit hardy attack dogs.
 Nick Herbert leaves his Justice brief and becomes Shadow Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary. He replaces Peter Ainsworth who has failed to make an impression, particularly with the media, on a brief that Cameron has attached a great deal of importance to. Herbert, the former director of the Reform think tank should be an improvement.
 Theresa May moves to become Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary and Shadow Minister for Women. This is the one move I’m not convinced about. Given the importance of welfare reform I feel Cameron would have done better to have given this role to a stronger politician to face the Labour rising star James Purnell. There had been speculation that Iain Duncan Smith would have been brought back to the frontbench to take on this role. However, this was either not offered or was declined.
 Eric Pickles, hugely popular with the party grassroots becomes Chairman of the Conservative Party. 57 percent of readers of ConservativeHome chose him as their preferred choice of Party Chairman. This role will increasingly important as the general election draws closer. Pickles will be helping to galvanise the grassroot activists and also take the fight to Labour in the television studios. As working glass Yorkshireman he is also a good counter to the claims that the Conservatives are just wealthy old-Etonians.
 Caroline Spelman loses her position as Party Chairman to Pickles but takes his old job as Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary. The expenses inquiry into Spelman has yet to report but Cameron is clearly confident that she will be exonerated. It was widely felt that the Tories needed a new Party Chairman but Spelman is respected and Cameron will have been keen to retain her in his Shadow Cabinet otherwise the gender imbalance of the frontbench would have been even greater.

Impact of a Clarke return on Osborne

Another issue that needs to be considered about a Clarke return is how this will impact Osborne.

If Clarke returns it will be as Business Secretary. In this regard, Clarke is not a threat to Osborne’s position as shadow Chancellor.

However, some have argued that the return of Clarke will undermine Osborne because Cameron will have been forced to bring him back to make up for the shadow Chancellor’s deficiencies, though cannot go all the way and replace Osborne because of the political damage this would entail.

I do not buy into this very negative interpretation. I do not remember Mandelson’s return being viewed in any way as damaging for Alistair Darling and/or a consequence of his weakness. Mandelson and Darling have interrelated briefs but they compliment one another and Mandelson’s return has strengthened the government’s team by adding experience and a much higher media profile.

Accordingly, I would view Clarke’s return in just the same way. One can argue that at the moment the team of Mandelson/Darling is outperforming that of Osborne/Alan Duncan. A Tory team of Osborne/Clarke is likely to be as strong, if not stronger, than Labour’s Mandelson/Darling team.

As for whether Osborne would welcome Clarke’s return there have been mixed reports. The Daily Telegraph reported that "a friend" of George Osborne had said that the shadow Chancellor was actively pushing for his return in a reshuffle: “George has been talking to Ken about his return and Ken has been very supportive of George. The two get on very well and George would not have a problem with him coming back - in fact is pushing for it." However this has reportedly since been denied by Team Osborne.

Make of that what you will.

Arguments against Ken Clarke's return

Viewing the return of Clarke from the prospective of the previous post it would seem there are only positives to be gained from his return. That is not the case, however. Although Clarke’s 67 years means he comes with vital experience of government and business-economic issues, he also comes with significant baggage.

To many within the Conservative Party, his Europhile views are an anathema. He is strongly pro-European at a time when the Conservative Party has become strongly Eurosceptic. In the bad old days of the 1990s when the Conservatives tore themselves apart over Europe, the party and Cabinet were much more evenly split. But ever since the 1997 general election, the party has been transformed into a united party on the issue of Europe, with successive intakes of Conservative MPs holding Eurosceptic views. The fear some have about the return of Clarke is that his return with reopen these splits. This is the principal reason why Ken Clarke never became Conservative leader, despite contesting the leadership in 1997, 2001 and again in 2005.

Another fear some have is about his loyalty. Will Ken Clarke toe the party line on Europe? William Hague has recently said a Conservative government would never join the Euro. Would the pro-Euro Clarke adopt this position in interviews, in the Commons etc? However, it is believed the recent hardening of the Tory line on joining the single currency was triggered by the prospect of a Clarke return. Previously, the commitment had been not to join over the course of the next Parliament.

Ken Clarke is, believe it or not, the most disloyal Conservative MP according to his voting record. This is largely as a result of his supportive stance for the ratification of the EU Lisbon Treaty. But still, can Cameron afford to bring him back when Clarke is most likely to defy the whip on European issues?

Some may argue that once in the shadow Cabinet he will toe the party line. I’m not so sure. Clarke seems to me a deeply principled man who will not put ambition above his beliefs. Otherwise, why did he not pragmatically change his beliefs on the single currency? Had he done so, he, and not David Cameron, Iain Duncan Smith, and William Hague would have most likely been elected as Conservative leader in 1997, 2001 and 2005.

If Clarke is to return, Cameron may have to give him a special dispensation to vote with his conscience on European issues but this would be highly irregular and possibly damaging to party unity, the notion of collective responsibility within a Cabinet, not to mention being a gift to Labour and the media.

Other occasions of disloyalty are worth flagging up. Clarke attempted to sabotage William Hague's 'Save the pound' campaign in the late 1990s and unforgivably, for some Tories, shared a pro-Europe “Britain in Europe” platform with Tony Blair (alongside Michael Heseltine and Charles Kennedy) back in 2000. More recently Clarke attacked David Cameron's human rights bill as "xenophobic" and opposes leaving the EPP grouping in the European Parliament as a "head-banging" policy. Moreover he has also made embarrassing remarks for the Tory leadership regarding the government’s VAT cut. Clarke said that if he was Chancellor, the tax cut he would have been minded to choose was a VAT cut. This does not square at all with the views of his leader who has branded the government’s VAT cut a “joke,” “criminal,” and an "unbelievable and expensive failure."

Furthermore, at a time when Cameron is offering a message of change, some argue that the return of the 67 year old former Chancellor during the Major years undermines this message. It has also been argued by ConservativeHome that this goes beyond presentation as his ideas are out-dated. For example, Clarke does not support the Tory leader's flagship policies on the family and would resist recognition of marriage in the tax system.

As a consequence, ConservativeHome has argued that Cameron would be better off leaving Clarke as a backbencher. The idea here is that the party gets the best of him at present - as a big beast on the backbenches he has no significant influence on party policy but is an active and effective media player. If Cameron wants to utilise his talents further, he can create an economic council of wise men. This could enable David Cameron to acknowledge the contributions of individuals such as Clarke and John Redwood - but not shackle them with the responsibilities of a fully-fledged frontbencher.

Arguments for bringing Ken Clarke back

Clarke’s return would signify a significant u-turn on his part as he has made it known for years that he has no interest in returning to the frontbench while the party was in opposition, especially to shadow a job he has held previously when in government. That said, there has been evidence last year that his views on a return were softening. It was reported that he had let it be known that he would like to return as Leader of the House in any new Conservative government. Then, towards the end of last year, he seemed to express a desire to return as shadow Chancellor, were the position to become available.

Clarkes’ return would be comparable to that of Peter Mandelson’s. Clarke, 67, is a political heavyweight, and is vastly experienced given that he has held Cabinet positions under Margaret Thatcher and John Major, most notably as Chancellor of the Exchequer between 1993 and 1997 and won plaudits for turning the British economy around during that period that followed the debacle of Black Wednesday (not that the electorate rewarded his achievements in the 1997 general election).

If Clarke does return to the Tory frontbench it is very likely that this will be as shadow Business Secretary – shadowing, and acting as a counterweight, to the experienced and high profile Peter Mandelson. It would help strengthen the Tory Treasury/business team, and if it works well, should complement George Osborne in his job as shadow Chancellor. His experience should also help counter Brown’s “novice” jibe.

Unfortunately, because Mandelson is now in the Lords, we will be deprived of Mandelson/Clarke battles at the despatch box in the Commons. That said, this may be something that the Conservatives can spin to their advantage. They can say they are taking business issues in a recession very seriously so have appointed a high profile, experienced figure to the post of shadow Business Secretary that will operate in the Commons, the primary Chamber, rather than the Lords. The Tories can argue that the Business Secretary, like the Chancellor, ought to be an MP to be held to account by the people’s elected representatives at such a crucial time for Britain.

In addition, Clarke is a popular figure with the public which makes him an electoral asset. Michael Portillo in The Sunday Times has been one figure who has urged the return of Ken Clarke: "He has what his party’s front bench apparently lacks: “bottom”, that combination of independent-mindedness, experience and gravitas that makes people listen and trust… His return to the team would wipe the smirks from Labour faces as surely as Mandelson’s reenlistment shook the Conservatives a few weeks ago. Labour could then hardly taunt the Tories as Etonian toffs, for nobody looks less Bullingdon club than Clarke."

Even Mandelson himself apparently welcomes the prospect of Clarke returning. In full mischief-making mode, Mandelson has let it be known that he likes the idea of a fellow pro-European lending weight to the campaign to get Britain (eventually, when the time is right and all conditions have been met) into the single currency. Something tells me Mandelson is trying to derail Clarke’s return...

One issue that may have been a cause for concern was Clarke’s outside business interests though the latest register of MPs' interests reveals Clarke has quietly dropped many of these. For example, he is no longer a deputy chairman of British American Tobacco, his most controversial post. This has added to the speculation that Clarke is preparing for a comeback.

Just for the record, ConservativeHome's most recent reader survey showed half of its readers wanted to see Ken Clarke return to the shadow Cabinet (although nearly three quarters wanted to see a return for David Davis). However, the ConservativeHome editorial team is opposed to Cameron bringing Clarke back.