Former cabinet secretary Simon Case has called for a refreshed cabinet manual to set out the process for changes of prime minister outside general elections.
Keir Starmer announced in early June that the cabinet manual – which sets out the laws, conventions and rules under which the government operates – would be updated, just a few weeks before he declared his intention to stand down as prime minister. Former Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham is currently expected to succeed Starmer, with no other Labour MPs so far putting themselves forward.
Writing for Heywood Quarterly, Lord Case, who was cab sec from 2020 to 2024, noted that “there are well-established, well-rehearsed and largely codified routines" for changing an adminstration at a general election, but there is no such codification for transitions within the governing party.
Case said there is however a “fairly significant body of modern precedent for the cabinet secretary of the day to draw on when it comes to running mid-term transition processes” given the high numbers of such handovers in the 21st century: Tony Blair to Gordon Brown; David Cameron to Theresa May; May to Boris Johnson; Johnson to Liz Truss; and Truss to Rishi Sunak
Highlighting the differences between the two types of transition, Case said: “Whilst the management of access talks before a general election is still occasionally fraught and requires sensitivity on the part of both sitting ministers and senior officials, the grooves feel fairly well-worn and largely reliable.
“By contrast, the realities of managing mid-term changes of prime minister are very different. The pace of change of administration is usually quicker – and it can be less predictable – which has consequences for the processes of preparing for government. It tests what is still an uncodified approach to access talks outside a general election context, as well as the management of government business.
"The cabinet manual is silent on these mid-term transitions.”
Case said the cabinet manual "remains helpfully clear on the processes governing access talks in the run-up to a general election" despite being "now woefully out of date in many regards". And he said mid-term transition processes should "as far as possible" mirror the core principles set out in the cabinet manual for general election.
These include the need for the PM to authorise any contact with potential successors; the importance of preserving confidentiality of the process of talks; and the cab sec of the day needing to manage the risk that creating multiple points of contact opening up could caused mised messages and uncertainty about the authority which sits behind any request from a potential incoming team.
But he said two other critical questions require more judgement: who the civil service can talk to; and when talks can or should begin
"To a large degree in the past, the response to these issues has been determined by the rules of the party in power regarding its own constitution about leadership elections, as well as the political circumstances of the moment," Case said.
"Generally, talks have been offered to candidates that reach the party’s own threshold to stand as a candidate. This approach was taken in 2016 and 2022, and is being used presently following the resignation of Sir Keir. It makes sense for the party process to decide which individuals are eligible for access talks, rather than requiring the cabinet secretary to make that judgement. It also helps remove the risk that an outgoing prime minister favours any particular candidate or candidates."
The timing of talks "has been more variable given the different political realities of transition", Case said.
Case also noted that the management of government business in advance of a transition "is always difficult", but particularly so during mid-term transitions.
"There is an inherent tension in those moments," he said. "The civil service continues to work for the government of the day and the government of the day retains its full legal powers; however, we expect restraint on the part of the sitting administration. The civil service can at times appear to adopt a harsh policing role over the conduct of in-post ministers. Although this tension is also a feature of general election periods, the fact that (in mid-term transitions) the party is retaining power, even if the leadership is changing, can create a slightly different and less forgiving atmosphere."
Case said another challenge during mid-term transitions is avoiding significant new announcements being announced "in an era when prime ministers and their teams become focused on prime ministerial legacies after they have announced their intention to step down".
"We appear to have become very accepting of legacy-focused announcements, speeches and foreign travel, in a way which would appear to be at odds with both the harsh political realities and the spirit of the approach specified in the cabinet manual for general elections," he said.
Concluding his case for codifying mid-term transitions, the ex-cab sec added: “We have long been promised updates of the cabinet manual by successive prime ministers. Officials have done the necessary work that would enable such commitments to be honoured relatively quickly and easily. When we finally see an updated manual, we should hope that it includes specific references to rules for mid-term transitions. Given Whitehall’s recent in-depth experience of managing them, it would seem prudent to record the key lessons now, to help inform the approach taken in future.”
Case's article is part of a series on mid-term transitions published by the Heywood Quarterly. You can subscribe to the Heywood Quarterly mailing list here