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.

When will Cameron reshuffle his team?

Following the very modest Liberal Democrat reshuffle yesterday, I’m sure it has not escaped your attention that the papers have been full of speculation about a Conservative reshuffle.

At the end of last year, Cameron, unlike Brown, did not do a major reshuffle other than a bit of tweaking due to the creation of new departments by the PM. This was primarily due to the fact that the Tory leader was waiting to see the outcome of the Caroline Spelman inquiry into whether she broke the rules by employing a nanny over 7 years ago funding it with her MPs expenses. It has been leaked that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Sir John Lyon, will clear her, which seemingly means Cameron is free to go ahead with his own significant reshuffle, the last (baring any resignations) one would expect before the next general election.

Consequently, there has been speculation (Niall Paterson - Sky News) that the reshuffle could happen on Monday. This would coincide with the return of Parliament and also be the same day as Gordon Brown's much-trumpeted "jobs summit" - an event which could be somewhat overshadowed if the Tory leader fulfils the predictions of many and restores Ken Clarke to the Opposition front-bench.

However, there has been contrary speculation (Benedict Brogan – Daily Mail) that the reshuffle will not happen so soon because Team Cameron has let it be known that a reshuffle, if there is one, will not happen before the fate of Caroline Spelman has been officially decided by Sir John Lyon. If true, it is unclear whether this means when Sir John Lyon reports, or when the Privileges Committee reports on his finding (possibly as late as next month), or just when Sir John lets Spelman know. According to Brogan, the message from CCHQ is that a reshuffle “is not imminent."

Make of that what you will.

What I would say is that with all the feverish reshuffle speculation, Cameron will not want to let it go on for too long otherwise he may be accused of being indecisive – a criticism the Tories frequently level at Brown. Moreover, he needs to settle on his final general election team so they can get on with planning the Conservative’s election strategy over the coming months.

Reshuffles in the new year?

Most commentators expect that David Cameron will reshuffle his front bench team in January bringing more experience into his Shadow Cabinet. Two names that have been reported have been Ken Clarke, the former Chancellor and political heavyweight, and Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader who has rehabilitated his political career and become something of an expert on social justice and social breakdown. In the same sense that Gordon Brown brought Peter Mandelson back into government as Business Secretary (and de facto deputy Prime Minister) to add experience, Cameron could bring Ken Clarke into his shadow Cabinet as either shadow Chancellor (unlikely – it would create too much of a political storm as it would be seen as an admission that Osborne has been a failure and Tory economic policy has been a failure, not to mention the fact that Cameron and Osborne have a very close political relationship which would serve them well in government) or shadow Business Secretary (much more likely as it would help bolster the Tory business-economic team, be a counter-weight to Mandelson, and would not undermine Osborne). As for Iain Duncan Smith it has been speculated that he could become shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Chris Grayling would then be free to become Party Chairman, a role he would be good at, given that he is an able television performer and is good at taking the fight to Labour. Another benefit for Cameron of bringing Clarke and Duncan Smith into his team is that it can help counteract Brown’s charge that the Tories are “novices.” Some have argued that if Cameron does this it could undermine his message of change, though I would contend that bringing back two politicians is hardly likely to do that.

Gordon Brown could also choose to undergo a reshuffle in the new year. There has been some speculation that former Cabinet minister David Blunkett could be brought back into government. Peter Bingle, from Bell Pottinger Public Affairs, has also predicted that Ed Balls will be made Chancellor in the new year. I would be amazed if this happens. Although Darling is an unremarkable Chancellor and has faced criticism, he has taken a lot of flak on behalf of Brown who most people believe is still determining Britain’s economic policy. I remain to be convinced that Ed Balls would be better at providing Brown political cover even though Balls is closer to Brown than Darling. Moreover, I fail to see how Balls would be more reassuring to the public or the markets. He is not the greatest television or Commons performer and not somebody I can see the public particularly warming to during these difficult times. In addition, if Brown moves Darling, it might also look like an admission that his economic policy has been a failure and that he was making Darling carry the can for his own failings.

Cruddas wanted Cabinet position

An extremely reliable source has informed me that Jon Cruddas rejected a return to government because Gordon Brown only offered him a junior ministerial position, that of Housing Minister.

There had been much speculation that Cruddas would join the government, especially due to his support on the Left of the Labour Party and that he came third in Labour's deputy leadership contest last year.

My source, a senior Labour figure, says Cruddas wanted a position within the Cabinet but Brown refused on the grounds that it was a step up too far. Therefore Cruddas refused the lesser position offered and spun the line that he was far too busy fighting the BNP to return to government.

My source said he felt Brown made a mistake in not bringing Cruddas back - and had told the PM so - but tipped Cruddas as a future Labour leader in the event that Labour suffers a landslide defeat at the next general election as the Labour Party would no doubt shift to the Left and would need to rebuild from scratch.

Mandelson back in the Cabinet

Amazing! The enemy of Brown has just been brought back into the tent! No official news about what job he'll get, but looks likely that he'll be made a peer and then become Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. Mandelson has formerly been Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

Looks like Brown is trying to send out the message that he runs a united team of Blairites and Brownites and that he has appointed someone with international experience - given his current role as EU trade commissioner.

I can imagine the Tories having fun with this. Mandelson has been forced to resign twice from Cabinet during the Blair years and there are many anti-Brown quotes from Mandelson over the years.

This move would mean John Hutton will have to be moved - looks like defence - and also looks like the Unions have got something for all their money! They absolutely detest Hutton calling him the 'CBI's man in government'.

Also means Brown needs a new Commissioner - Geoff Hoon? Would Brown be bold enough to move his Chief Whip and appoint his deputy, Nick Brown, in his place - that would upset the Blairites given his role in forcing Blair out!

UPDATE:

• Mandelson will become Secretary of State for BER.
• John Hutton becomes new Defence Secretary
• Hoon is likely to become new EU Commissioner but not for another year. Will stay in the Cabinet in some capacity for the time being.
• Des Browne may become Secretary of State for the Nations.

Derek Draper has just said that the Tories will be really worried now Mandelson has come back in government. Hahahahahaha. Draper is a comedian!

UPDATE 2:

• Geoff Hoon to be Transport Secretary
• Nick Brown to become Chief Whip - a lot of crap about 'balance' coming from the spin doctors.
• Margaret Beckett - you remember, that outstanding former Foreign Secretary - is rumoured to be returning to government.

Looks like Brown is trying to ram home the experience vs novice point. I'd expect Cameron now to follow suit and bring back Malcolm Rifkind and Ken Clarke to give his own Shadow Cabinet a couple of its own experienced heavyweights...

UPDATE 3:

• Hillary Benn looks set to stay in his job at DEFRA.
• Des Browne to return to backbenches
• Sir John Bond to become 'Business Ambassador' - window dressing this. As Matthew Paris has just said, government can get advice from whomever it wants.
• Damian McBride - Brown's spin doctor - is to take a more backroom role. He has been blamed for briefing against Cabinet Ministers. He's quite a diversive figure known as Damian 'McPoison'!

UPDATE 4:

• New Department for Energy and Climate to be formed - to avoid conflicts of interest between securing energy supply and fighting climate change.
  

UPDATE 5:

• Plans for a possible merger of the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish departments to create a "ministry of the nations" have been put on hold, according to BBC's James Landale.
• Beckett to be a "Cabinet Enforcer"
• Ed Miliband to head up new Dept of Energy and Climate Change.

Thinking about the reshuffle, it seems to me that another message from it is that it is supposed to show government unity. Brown hopes that having a Cabinet that represents all wings of the party will help unify the party behind his leadership. This looks as a direct response to Cameron's repeated claims in his Conference speech that only he led a united party. Interesting to see whether this fragile unity will hold.

Still think the main message is that of 'experience'. Cameron will have to rise to the challenge and bring some big beasts of his own into his Shadow Cabinet. Alternatively, he needs to brand the reshuffle a desperate move bringing tired, has-been politicians back. Can't see the Daily Mail liking the fact that Mandelson, the Prince of Darkness, has been brought back... that should help Cameron. And some Labour backbenchers do not appear that happy with Mandelson's return either. Backbench Labour MP John McDonnell has said the Labour movement will be "perplexed" by the shock move and regard it as "extraordinary step backwards" for the party.