Written evidence from Professor Kevin
Theakston, School of Politics and International Studies, University
of Leeds
JUNIOR MINISTERS
1. In constitutional terms the position of junior
ministers in the British system of government today is the same
as in the 19th century when the job was invented. They have no
formal or legal powers of their own: any executive authority they
have is by delegation from their ministerial chief. They share
in the Government's collective responsibility to Parliament but
in policy terms they are formally responsible to their Secretary
of State rather than to Parliament (though in practice, if things
go badly wrong, the junior minister may end up walking the plank).
Historically, they had mainly a parliamentary role (and this is
still an important aspect of the work) but the departmental and
policy-making roles have grown more important in recent decades.
Ministers are encouraged in the Ministerial Code to devolve
on to their juniors responsibility for a defined range of departmental
work and many—particularly at Minister of State level—carry
special titles (a practice started by Harold Wilson in the 1960s).
But what the job of a junior minister has amounted to in practice
has usually varied between one department and another, and has
depended greatly on the style of the Cabinet minister involved
and his or her relations with the junior minister(s).
2. Junior ministers are sometimes written off as
marginal or irrelevant dogsbodies, as political and departmental
Cinderellas. Lord Digby Jones described being a junior minister
as "one of the most dehumanising and depersonalising experiences
a human being can have." Professor Peter Hennessy has said
that "in Whitehall terms, junior ministers are the wretched
of the earth and are often treated as such." Tony Blair's
former Chief of Staff, Jonathan Powell, said "there is an
awful lot of make-work in junior ministerial jobs." Former
Cabinet Secretary Lord Turnbull argued "a lot of what they
do could be done by officials." Chris Mullin complained in
his diaries about his "pointless existence" as a junior
minister, the low-level drudgery, his "utter lack of influence"
and the absence of team working in government.
3. On the other hand, Baroness Joyce Quin's experience
convinced her "there can be real job satisfaction" because
"some jobs at the secondary level have substance and a proper
measure of independence", with some junior ministers being
able to take decisions and make a difference in their own defined
sphere. Cabinet ministers are already overloaded; without the
support of junior ministers their jobs would be impossible. In
all this, civil servants take their cues from ministers. Formally
(as spelt out in the Ministerial Code) junior ministers
cannot give directions to permanent secretaries, meaning a civil
service "appeal" to the top minister is always possible.
Junior ministers in the past have always found that their scope
and clout depended crucially on whether they had the confidence
and backing of the Secretary of State, and the same will go for
junior ministers in the present Government.
4. The move to coalition government adds a new dimension
in the sense that a Secretary of State in charge of a department
(and civil servants) may not be able to treat, say, a Parliamentary
Under Secretary as the lowest form of political life and of little
account—to be told to "get back in your little box
and stay there", as one uppity junior minister was once instructed
by his boss in the previous Labour Government—particularly
when that junior minister is the only representative of the Liberal
Democrat Party in a ministry headed by a Conservative Cabinet
minister. There are nine major Whitehall departments headed by
Conservatives that include one Liberal Democrat in the junior
ministerial team (six of these at Minister of State level, three
at the more junior "Pussy" level, as it is sometimes
dubbed). These juniors all have their designated departmental
responsibilities, and in formal terms their roles and responsibilities
may seem as limited and circumscribed as with any other junior
minister. But politically they have an important "watchdog"
role, trying to represent their party's interests and provide
a Liberal Democrat voice and input on a wider waterfront, across
the full range of departmental business. This may involve more
ministerial team meetings, these junior ministers being put more
in the picture and having greater access to policy papers outside
their own departmental responsibilities than would normally be
the case, and a shift in the usual views of political seniority
and hierarchies. Their wider role may mean these junior ministers
will need more private office support and perhaps in some cases
even their own special advisers (though current rules limit them
to Cabinet ministers and ministers who attend Cabinet). But for
most junior ministers from the larger party in the coalition—the
Conservatives—working under chiefs from their own party,
the underlying realities and determinants of their role, status
and influence have not necessarily changed.
5. The long-term increase in the number of junior
ministers has been widely commented on. In 1914 Asquith's Government
had only 15 junior ministers; in 1945 Attlee appointed 32 junior
ministers; counting on the same basis (Parliamentary Secretaries
and Ministers of State), Brown's Government in 2010 had 77 junior
ministers while Cameron's has 65. British governments are, overall,
bigger and have many more junior ministers than their international
counterparts. Up until the 1950s most government departments had
only one junior minister but now ministerial teams are much larger:
currently ten departments have four or more junior ministers (one
has six); in the previous Government one department (Business,
Innovation and Skills under Lord Mandelson) actually had nine
junior ministers. Whitehall mandarins sometimes complain about
departments being "over-ministered"; Lord Turnbull claimed
most departments could be run with just three ministers. At the
same time there is concern about the size of the "payroll"
vote in the House of Commons, with proposals regularly made to
cut the number of ministers or to set a percentage quota of MPs
who could be in government.
6. In 2009 the Irish Taoiseach reduced the number
of junior ministers in his government at a stroke by 25%. In Britain,
as a first step, there is probably scope to shave off one junior
ministerial post per department (and save other ministerial posts
by the overdue merger of the territorial offices for Scotland,
Wales and Northern Ireland), cutting up to 20 junior ministerial
posts. A reduction in the size of governments and in the number
of junior ministers need not involve a loss of administrative
quality, parliamentary accountability or governing capacity, provided
that those junior ministers who are appointed are of high quality
and have a real job to do. Fewer junior ministers could—and
should—mean that those who serve in the "foothills"
of government may be more likely to have a significant and satisfactory
role.
October 2010
|
