Last week, George Eustice resigned as an agriculture minister and Alberto Costa resigned as parliamentary private secretary to the Scotland secretary, David Mundell. They have taken the total tally of resignations from Government positions under Theresa May to 40.
Turnover in Government is disruptive enough, but the basic ability of the Prime Minister to appoint MPs to vacancies in her Government now appears to be under threat.
The slimness of her Parliamentary majority means the pool of MPs from which the Prime Minister can recruit was always small, but the scale of the opposition over Brexit has reduced it still further. Excluding MPs who have voted against the government over Brexit or been investigated for misconduct since the last election, the Prime Minister has just 27 backbench MPs to choose from. For context, in January 2000 Tony Blair could pick from 188 backbench MPs who had not yet taken part in any major rebellion.
It may also be more difficult still to find people to appoint as PPSs or Conservative Party vice chairs, as such jobs rarely go to former ministers, veteran MPs or those who already hold an important position. Just five MPs fit this profile, two of whom have recently left PPS positions.
This could be part of the reason why there is a raft of vacancies to fill in the Government’s junior ranks. It appears that just five new MPs have been given Government positions since November, despite 18 resignations in the same period. There are now 14 junior Government jobs for which no appointee has been announced - including four as PPS to a Cabinet minister. Rather than recruit new MPs, the Prime Minister has been promoting those who already hold jobs and merging the portfolios of more junior roles.
There is no obligation on the Prime Minister to fill these vacancies, and not everyone believes they should be filled. But the fact these vacancies exist has some significant short-term ramifications for the Government.
Any Government would want as wide a pool of candidates as possible to choose from. There is huge variety in the specialisms and experience of MPs, and being a minister is a varied and challenging job. It would not be conducive to good government if the Prime Minister was forced to recruit out of necessity, rather than based on the qualities of a candidate.
The Prime Minister’s difficulties in replenishing Government positions could also make life more difficult when it comes to party management. She may be reluctant to do anything that could lead to further departures from office; in turn, if the Government lacks MPs on the backbenches to act as replacements, members of the Government might feel emboldened to challenge her. As one minister told ITV’s Robert Peston in January: “Frankly she can’t lose more than one [of us]. There’s no one left to replace even the most modest PPSs who haven’t rebelled recently”. Ministers have publicly stated recently that they would defy the whip to avoid a no-deal Brexit. Presumably this was done in the knowledge that they would be difficult to replace if they were sacked.
As more MPs resign from the Government, the Prime Minister’s recruitment problem becomes more acute. Further resignations might increase the feeling among the remaining members that they can deviate from the Government’s line without consequences. This will be one of the many things to watch out for in the next few weeks as the Brexit drama plays out in parliament.
Alasdair de Costa is an intern at the Institute for Government