The 2016 New Year Corbyn reshuffle was a very drawn out affair with only minimal change evident upon completion. While all leaders have to reshuffle their cabinets to deal with political and personal pressures, this reshuffle was observed a little more closely than other reshuffles because of the issues which Corbyn has been dealing with as leader. No-one can dispute his stunning and overwhelming victory in the Labour Party Leadership contest nor the impact that his success had upon the Westminster elite. Rather than entering in the ‘Punch and Judy’ style of politics which many politicians criticise but inevitably replicate, Corbyn argued he would have a different leadership style. Discussion was encouraged, personal attacks were deemed to be unsightly and unnecessary and a new style of politics was born. A quiet revolution from the opposition benches. As the old saying goes though, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and Corbyn clearly wasn’t happy with his pudding over Christmas.
Michael Dugher, Shadow Culture Secretary was the first to be sacked, despite his protestations that Corbyn should not remove those from the shadow cabinet who had spoken out against him. As one of the most vocal critics in the shadow cabinet his sacking was not surprising, but the level of public support he received from Parliamentary Labour Party colleagues was perhaps a little more unexpected. Heavy hitters such as Chukka Umunna and Andy Burnham tweeted their support for Dugher along with a variety of other figures, but with Dugher’s removal, eyes turned to the other members of the shadow cabinet, particularly those who have not toed the Corbyn line. Next in the firing line, several hours later, was Pat McFadden, Spokesman of Europe. McFadden was accused of disloyalty, with David Cameron suggesting during Wednesday’s PMQs that McFadden had been sacked after his comments on the Paris Terror attacks, which did not sit well with the party leadership. This obviously chimes with the comments of Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell, prior to joining the Shadow Cabinet, where he spoke of his support for some IRA terrorists, something he later apologised for if his comments had been ‘misinterpreted’. As a long-standing party loyalist, McFadden’s sacking was greeted with more party criticism, with figures such as Chris Leslie, former Shadow Chancellor, tweeting their concern on the issue. Jonathan Reynolds, shadow rail minister and Stephen Doughty, shadow business minister both resigned in protest, with Doughty publically resigning on the BBC2 Politics Show.
The trouble for Corbyn did not end there. His pro-Trident shadow Defence Secretary, Maria Eagles, was always vulnerable in a reshuffle, as her opinions on the replacement of trident were so diametrically opposed to that of her leader. With the issue of trident renewal due to be debated in the House of Commons in 2016, Eagles should perhaps have expected to be reshuffled, although perhaps she would have hoped for a more high profile portfolio than the Culture brief, vacated hours before by Dugher. The new shadow Defence Secretary is Emily Thornberry, perhaps most infamous for her election tweet of white van man. For Corbyn, her key qualification is perhaps her stance on nuclear weapons and trident, which she strongly opposed, as does Corbyn. This alignment in his front bench over the issue of nuclear weapons is unsurprising and certainly politically necessary, but the fallout over the changes has been far larger than Corbyn might have expected, exacerbated by the length of time it took for Corbyn to announce his changes.
Perhaps the biggest issue in the reshuffle is the figure who hasn’t been reshuffled – Hilary Benn. After Benn’s stirring and powerful performance at the dispatch box during the debate on Syrian airstrikes, his personal position was strengthened, with his supporters beginning to wonder whether he wouldn’t be a better leader than Corbyn, somewhat reminiscent of similar comments made about his father during the leadership of Michael Foot in the early 1980s. Politically though, Benn found himself, inevitably, in a difficult position, publically at odds with his leader on a key issue. For Benn, his position as Foreign Secretary was saved by his personal strength and popularity. To sack Benn from the front benches, or significantly demote him, would have completely undermined Corbyn’s rhetoric of a new style of politics and would have also allowed Benn to have openly and repeatedly criticised his leadership from the backbenches. The lesser evil is perhaps to have such a figure bound into the shadow cabinet to reduce the chances of dispute and attacks, even if public spats cannot be completely avoided. Media reports initially suggested that Benn had been silenced, with guarantees demanded by Corbyn that Benn would publically behave. This seems have to have been partially confirmed by John McDonnell, who suggested critical members of the shadow cabinet should temporarily move to the backbenches to make their criticisms before returning to their front bench positions. How this game of musical chairs would work in practice is open to interpretation, but it seems unlikely that many members of the shadow cabinet will be voluntarily and temporarily speaking from the backbenches on key issues. Benn publically stated that he would not be ‘muzzled’ and that no such deal existed. It is hardly surprising that a figure such as Benn would refuse to have his free speech limited in order to remain shadow Foreign Secretary in such an unstable and divided party.
Has Corbyn strengthened his hand with his reshuffle? There is no doubt that he has unified the shadow cabinet position on trident to at least some extent. His shadow Defence Secretary, at least, agrees with her leader. However, Corbyn and his supporters still remain at odds with the majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party politically, and Corbyn needs to be careful that his shadow cabinet does not become a bunker which insulates and isolates him from his party. While the Parliamentary Labour Party cannot ignore Corbyn, he cannot ignore them and it is possible that Hilary Benn’s preservation as Foreign Secretary might be beneficial to Corbyn, allowing him to remain tacitly in touch with those who do not support him and fear for the future of the Labour Party.
Victoria Honeyman is Lecturer in British Politics at the University of Leeds. She tweets @VHoneymanLeeds.
Image: Andy Watkins
