THE coming Cabinet reshuffle is about Tony Blair and his premiership, not about the future of Ruth Kelly or any other minister. What does he want to achieve, or rather what is politically feasible, in his remining time in Downing Street?
Ms Kelly both simplified and complicated Mr Blair’s reshuffle yesterday. She simplified his decision by turning in a solid performance that defused much of the hysteria about sex offenders. Despite lurid headlines about “perverts in schools”, there has been no recent evidence that any convicted offender had again abused children while working in a school.
There has obviously, however, been confusion about the various lists, and there have been bureaucratic delays in implementing the Bichard recommendations after the Soham murders.
So there has been an urgent need for greater coherence and clarity, as David Willetts, for the Tories, and Ed Davey, for the Lib Dems, have been arguing. Ms Kelly duly announced widely agreed improvements in vetting procedures. Her political, and media, fault was in not getting a grip of the issue quickly.
She did more than enough yesterday not to be sacked over the sex offenders issue. But this also complicates Mr Blair’s reshuffle. Many, if not most, of her Cabinet colleagues, while strongly supporting her on this matter, still have doubts about her political weight and ability to take through the Schools Bill. So, after her counter-attack yesterday, does Mr Blair leave her in place or move her to another department?
Advertisement
But this is really a secondary question. The fate of the schools Bill lies in 10 Downing Street, rather on whether Ms Kelly stays. Mr Blair has to decide what compromises are needed to get the Bill enacted. There is formidable opposition: 90-plus Labour MPs, the coming criticisms from the Education Select Committee, a broadside last night from the Kinnock-Benn-Millar axis (Neil; Melissa, daughter of Tony and sister of Hilary; and Fiona, former No 10 adviser and partner of Alastair Campbell), and an incisive critique from the Audit Commission.
Possible amendments to last October’s White Paper have already been hinted at by Mr Blair: putting the admissions code that rules out selection by ability into statutory form and clarifying the role of local councils. But if such concessions are made, how different would the proposed trust schools be from existing secondary schools? These already enjoy considerable managerial and financial independence. A big change is that schools would be able to link together and involve outside sponsors. But Mr Blair now needs to justify the Bill.
Yet this raises a broader question, about Mr Blair’s public services agenda. It is not just education, his top priority. The NHS already faces serious financial problems, even before the growth of spending slows sharply in two years. Patricia Hewitt is correct that the NHS has improved, but that has been in a time of plenty. Can these improvements be sustained and remaining problems remedied when money is tighter?
This is not only about the Blair legacy, but, more immediately, about what his premiership is for. We know what he wants. But what can he do? It is a test of Mr Blair’s political authority, not about who gets shuffled where early next week.