No.10 should give up its control of special advisers

Changes to the structure of government are already underway in Downing Street following the departure of Dominic Cummings. During his time in No.10, special advisers (SpAds) reported to both their secretary of state and to him, a hierarchy established since Boris Johnson came to power. There have been suggestions that a return to previous arrangements, with special advisers’ main line manager being their secretary of state ^[1], is now on the cards, though other reports have ruled this out.^[2] But it should happen. This is a change that would be good news for the government, reversing an arrangement which a recent IfG paper warned had led to a disempowering of ministers.

Cummings’s changes reduced trust between ministers and their advisers

While all SpAds require the approval of the prime minister to work in government, Cummings installed an unusual level of oversight from No.10. Advisers often found themselves facing in two directions – working both for their minister and to the senior advisers in No.10. This dual loyalty meant ministers could not always be sure their adviser shared their objectives and priorities, or was giving advice that suited their aims or someone else’s. The arrangement has reduced the trust between ministers and their advisers and, as a result, disempowered ministers.

This lack of trust also made advisers’ jobs more difficult. SpAds need to work with departmental officials to make progress on their minister’s priorities. If officials feel like an adviser has been foisted on to the department by No.10, and is loyal to another part of the government machine, it will be more difficult for that adviser to build effective relationships with the civil servants. This in turn means officials will be less willing to respond to their requests for information and help them to achieve their aims. None of this helps government departments, and by extension, government itself, work as well as it should.

Ministers value a close relationship with their special advisers

Ministers get plenty of advice, but most of it is from the permanent civil service, who are expected to remain politically impartial. So ministers particularly value the input of SpAds, whose main responsibility is to bring political considerations into the work of the government. The sometimes lonely job of a government minster requires support of loyal advisers who share goals and can speak with candour – but special advisers also help ministers make better decisions, by ensuring they consider all the relevant factors, including the views of their political party and important outside groups.

This helps the government as a whole. Ministers who are well-advised are better placed to question the decisions of their peers, including the prime minister, which should ultimately lead to better decisions. As former chancellor Sajid Javid explained when he stepped down rather than allow the prime minister to impose on him a new team of advisers, “[a minister] has to be able to give candid advice to a prime minister so that he is speaking truth to power.” ^[3] By making all advisers answer directly to No.10, Cummings’s changes reduced the amount of debate in government and undermined the quality of decision making.

The government should not reverse all the recent changes to how special advisers work

Some of the changes made in the last 18 months have made special advisers more effective, particularly the strengthening of the ‘network’ of advisers across government. Special advisers are uniquely placed to unblock disagreements in government, whether between ministers or officials. Linking every adviser more closely with No.10 created more of a sense of team in this government’s advisers than was the case in the past (particularly when compared to the end of Theresa May’s premiership). This strengthened network should be retained in the post-Cummings era.

There are many ways that special advisers can become more effective. Overall, however, reinforcing the relationship between ministers and their special advisers, and restoring trust and a shared sense of purpose, would be the best first step.