Westminster somersaulted overnight at the scoop by @elliottimes that Lee Cain, currently Director of Communications is “poised” to be made Boris Johnson’s chief of staff. Congratulations to Times political editor on throwing a pebble which has caused **quite** so many waves.
This thread is not about household names. But the issues matter - because it touches on two key things in government, its direction, and who exercises grip on the prime minister. How powerful is the Vote Leave faction? And the rest?
What’s going on? Lee Cain is a long standing senior aide to the prime minister. He worked with BJ on the 2016 Vote Leave campaign. Alongside him in the Foreign Office and - importantly - during the wilderness years after he resigned from Theresa May’s government. Boris trusts him
So why the talk of change, and potential promotion for Cain? Firstly because there’s a feeling that the Boris Johnson needs to get a better grip: u-turns on lockdown, furlough, exams and free school meals have left MPs and the PM himself wondering whether he’s got the right setup
NB currently Johnson doesn’t have a chief of staff. It’s not Cummings (who is “senior advisor”) nor Lord Lister (ditto). Who would President Biden’s chief of staff call? Change was coming. @alexwickham had 10 Chief of Staff candidates last month politico.eu/newsletter/lon…
There is concern among some this appointment might dilute the influence of the Vote Leave faction in gvt. “The PM is known to be talking more others in the past month”, said one Vote Leave-r, suggesting a motive for changes would be to cement influence of Cummings and allies.
Lee Cain was not one of those mooted in Politico as chief of staff, which is why his name connected to that job caused such a surprise overnight. “Never bet against Lee” said one Westminster source.
BUT
All has not been well. Multiple sources suggest he is unhappy at the appointment of Allegra Stratton, the Rishi Sunak aide fronting new press briefings. He was interested in other candidates, Johnson was keen on Stratton. Cd she be one of the “others” VL alumni worry about?
The daily televised press briefings from January will be a big deal. Stratton will become the face of Number 10 on TV. Inevitably, this role would force her to the centre of events in Downing Street. Yet people see no signs of tensions being patched up with Cain.
Now it appears Cain is being given a big boost with reports he could be in line for Chief of Staff. This is NOT confirmed by Number 10. Many including Vote Leave alumni say they are reserving judgement, not sure whether it will happen. WhatsApp has had a busy morning
It would be a big boost for one faction - the Vote Leave faction - in government though, and this morning it’s aggravating factional tensions. One government source from one faction this morning described another faction as “monsters”, so you can see how well everything is going
Along with Cain’s promotion, the Times reports a plan to consolidate 1-on-1 access to the PM to him, Cummings and Lister, as Cabinet Secretary Simon Case. Notably, not Allegra Stratton or others suggesting that she would have to represent government from a middle tier position?
If Cain’s promotion to chief of staff goes ahead, the question being asked by some in gvt (including those who didn't want it) this morning is will the Daily Televised press briefings ever go ahead. They were his idea, but if he is unhappy with her...? Would he still want it to?
So lots of uncertainty, just as we hit the 7 days to go mark for a brexit deal, with the EU hinting today there’ll be a take-it-or-leave-it offer from the EU next Wednesday, it’s a busy day to be having a factional row..
What does Dominic Cummings think? Well I don’t have a contemporary readout. But someone sent me this, from his blog, from October 30, 2014 dominiccummings.com/2014/10/30/the…
Responding to the person saying “never bet against Lee”, one person with close connections to the centre replied “But what I would say is don’t bet against Carrie ....”
Interestingly emphatic message from a govt source that arrival of President Elect Biden does *not* make a difference to their approach to Brexit. We're in the final countdown on brexit - 5 to 10 days left - and big gaps remain.
1/
2/ This despite it being likely that Biden's arrival does change the context: next US administration will give more credence to Irish viewpoint on Good Friday Agreement. No reason to think Biden will alter September view that no EU-UK trade deal means no UK-US trade deal
3/ Are we tiptoeing closer to no trade deal? The UK government is thinking about argument to make over why the EU Commission hasn't treated us fairly. Gvt dug in on the Internal Market bill. Dominic Raab suggested the EU putting peace in NI at risk this morning.
YouGov voting intention puts Labour 5 points ahead of the Tories
L 40 (+2)
C 35 (-3)
LD 7 (+1)
BXP (+2)
** It'll cause a shiver down Tory spines but individual C and L changes IS within +/-3 margin of error (just)
BUT some notable changes:
BUT....
If you do a comparison with Oct 21/22
** Leave voters two weeks ago was C 60, L 13. In the current poll Leave voters C 56, L 20
** Two weeks ago 85% of GE2019 Tory voters would vote Tory again, now 78%. The L % unchanged at 87%
** BXP is bouncing around and so their two relaunches have had no measurable impact - over the last 4 weeks their poll number has been 5%, 3%, 4%, 6% so too early to say they're keyh. The amount they're eating into GE2019 Tory vote in latest poll (7%) similar to Oct 21/22 (5%)
NOW: EHRC report into Labour and antisemitism
- Culture which “at worst” “could be seen to accept” antisemitism
- Serious failings in leadership
- There WERE unlawful acts of harassment and discriminations
- some complaints not investigated
- evidence of “political interference” in handling AS complaints sometimes based on press interest not consistent criteria
- How the Labour Party broke the law twice:
By allowing “agents” to break equality law anti Semitic tropes and suggesting complaints were fake or smears. As these people are acting as agents, Labour is responsible
Tonight Sheffield mayor Dan Jarvis said he saw the “dead hand of the Treasury” behind the negotiations giving them insufficient money. Similar claims from Manchester leaders this week.
2/ There WAS a Treasury official as well as Treasury Chief Secretary Steve Barclay on Monday’s call with Manc leaders. Tho they weren’t on Tuesday’s calls when talks collapsed
They laid down certain principles like refusing to have regional increases to 67% salary scheme
But...
3/ Sky News understands that the pot the Treasury gave to No10 for negotiations with all the local authorities heading into tier 3 was SIGNIFICANTLY bigger than the sums being discussed for just Manchester.
Talking to both sides in Greater Manchester dispute
* GM this morning wanted £75m, gvt offered £55
* Officials advised gvt that GM leaders were prepared to do a deal at £60m
* But Andy Burnham refused to go below £65m
* GM insisting on getting more than Lancashire and Liverpool
Both sides agree these facts. Both sides agree that the negotiations fell down over a £5 million gap
Government couldn’t accept on principles GM getting a better deal than Lancashire / Liverpool otherwise lots of fresh negotiations would be needed elsewhere
Not clear now what happens to the £60m on offer from central gvt - will the people of Manchester lose out because of no deal?