Why do governments swap Ministries between Cabinet Members?

JonathanAnon

One thing that always confused me was why governments will take a Minister from one portfolio and give him another. For example Micheál Martin has been in Health, Enterprise and Foreign Affairs.. Would it not have made more practical sense to keep him in one Ministry ... Noel Dempsey, Mary Hanafin, Mary Coughlan etc etc have all had similar switches...

I mean I can understand if you thought Minister was not doing a good job and demoted them to the back benches.. But why would you switch jobs .. Is it for the TD's Personal CVs, pensions? I mean a private business wouldnt move their IT Manager into accounts.. but it is of course the public service?

So enlighten me lads.... Cui Bono?

sceptre

Bear in mind that in the UK and Ireland, minsters come from the legislative branch rather than the executive. In other words, they're not appointed as experts and there's a best fit effort every time.

Some of the reasons are:

Because of the "best-fit" idea, where a minister resigns or dies, an existing minister may be the best choice for the other guy's job. Then you may have to move another, then another... then you're into reshuffle territory. Happens a lot when one of the main ministers (finance, foreign affairs) becomes Taoiseach for example.

Also, being given a ministerial position is often a reward for someone who's been loyal to the Taoiseach. After elections, there's almost always a reshuffle for this reason. Before you get antsy at the idea of ministries sometimes being given on loyalty, it even works that way at times in countries like the US where their secretaries of state aren't drawn from congress at all.

As ministers have successes or embarrassing failures, the Taoiseach of the day may take the opportunity to move an able person to a bigger job and move someone who isn't able for a bigger job to a lesser one (as opposed to firing them out of a cannon, which would trigger a bye-election). That again may well trigger a knock on effect, making the whole thing effectively a full reshuffle.

Last reason (of my mist, others may have more): they get the notion to do it for little apparent reason. Sometimes this is like an actual shuffle where the leader has no blasted notion. That's not that common though, they usually have some idea. It may be suitable to do a reshuffle after 2.5 years or so of a 5 year term. Keeps people on their toes you know. Otherwise they'll be sure of their position for five years and may not give a damn about anything.

To save someone else saying it, the really cynical view would be that Teddy Taoiseach appoints no-one but his mates to ministries and later on he promotes or demotes them purely on the basis of who's been nice to him lately. As we're dealing with politics and Irish politics in particular, I'm willing to bet that this is at least a factor.

jumpin_macflash

its purely political. you put your biggest allies in the best jobs. some ministries are more important than others, for eg. finance and justice are biggies, health another while defence is pretty crap. you might big name politicians in samller jobs, like o' dea getting defence as hes so popular in a big constituency like limerick. the easiest way to judge which ministries are more important is by how much money they get, generally.

afaik only two taoisigh were not finance ministers before getting the taoiseachs office.

Red_Marauder

I wouldn't be quite so cynical about swapping Ministers around between departments.

It happens in every multi-national or large scale corporation - moving staff around is a well established management technique whose value is in injecting new ideas and new energy into tiring methods and means of doing business.

It's very easy I would imagine, after a few years in a particular department like transport or the environment do get bogged down by trying to revive you failing policies or perhaps dealing with ever-more balding and bleak civil servants without any prospects of newness or change.

As long as the functioning 'body' of the department remains intact - the limbs, the arteries, the eyes and the ears - then it's probably not a bad idea to change the brain every so often - at least, one might hope it is the brain and not just the face.

jumpin_macflash

its nothing to do with cynicism. ministerial positions are completely the gift of the taoiseach, to think its anything but political to appoint certain TD's to certain departments is nonsense really. like i said most taoisigh came from the department of finance, because that is the second best job in government.

sure albert reynolds sacked almost an entire cabinet because of political alliances. there may be a shake up every now and again but the big jobs usually stay in the same few hands.

also it might be worth noting that the governments change far more often than the civil servants do. the civil servants have the experience and expertise in each of the departments. id be more inclined to believe they are running the TD's than the other way round.

Red_Marauder

jumpin_macflash wrote: »

like i said most taoisigh came from the department of finance, because that is the second best job in government.

But of course. That's like the way most school prinicpals used to be deputy principals, it's a simple issue of promotion.

Otherwise in cabinet, a few lateral movements from things like environment to transport, transport to enterprise, and enterprise to eduacation and so on, is no harm at all

Victor

JonathanAnon wrote: »

I mean a private business wouldnt move their IT Manager into accounts.

Are you saying your IT manager doesn't understand accounts? Sure you accountants will understand accounts better, but if you only had accountants in accounts they would only do the things that served accountants, not what served the raison d'etre of the business.

Note that ministers aren't "the boss", but are more of an interface between the government / Oireachtas and the permanent government - the civil service.

but it is of course the public service?

Eh, no it isn't.

jumpin_macflash

Red_Marauder wrote: »

But of course. That's like the way most school prinicpals used to be deputy principals, it's a simple issue of promotion.

Otherwise in cabinet, a few lateral movements from things like environment to transport, transport to enterprise, and enterprise to eduacation and so on, is no harm at all

not necessarily. a deputy principal has been promoted through his experience and abilities and im sure some application processes etc, much like any other job. ministerial positions are completely decided by the taoiseach. brian lenihan went from no cabinet position to minister for finance (with a brief dalliance in justice), why, because of political alliances. thats some promotion.

im not being cynical or denouncing our type of governance. its necessary for our government to work. if there were no reward for political loyalty there would be no loyalty, and no stable government.

Red_Marauder

jumpin_macflash wrote: »

not necessarily. a deputy principal has been promoted through his experience and abilities. While it may be your opinion, I don't think you have any definite way of showing us that this isn't why certain and im sure some application processes etc, much like any other job. ministerial positions are completely decided by the taoiseach. brian lenihan went from no cabinet position to minister for finance (with a brief dalliance in justice), why, because of political alliances. thats some promotion.

What you're saying is opinion but personally I think that Lenihan was chosen largely for his intelligence, affability and ability. If it was solely on the basis of alliance alone, Cowen would have been far more likely to have chosen Coughlan, who instead has (in reality) a lower office than lenihan.

JonathanAnon

Victor wrote: »

Are you saying your IT manager doesn't understand accounts? Sure you accountants will understand accounts better, but if you only had accountants in accounts they would only do the things that served accountants, not what served the raison d'etre of the business.

Jesus, I didnt say that IT Managers dont understand accounts. What I said is that a private business does not usually move the head of one department which they have worked they way up through (gaining all the required knowledge and experience), to the head of another department (of which they have little or no experience). There are, of course, odd cases.

Eh, no it isn't.

So you are saying that they are not public servants, is that right (in your own distinctive condescending manner)?

Red_Marauder

JonathanAnon wrote: »

What I said is that a private business does not usually move the head of one department which they have worked they way up through (gaining all the required knowledge and experience), to the head of another department

What you're talking about here are the first secretaries, not ministers. Ministers do not work their way up through departments, they come into a department as, ideally, a leader who is there temporarily to represent the best interests of the population and to oversee governemnt policy in the provision of services.

rasper

Red_Marauder wrote: »

What you're saying is opinion but personally I think that Lenihan was chosen largely for his intelligence, affability and ability. If it was solely on the basis of alliance alone, Cowen would have been far more likely to have chosen Coughlan, who instead has (in reality) a lower office than lenihan.

Yeah right Cowen isn't capable of this , its party over country every time, Lenihan was party because of his father plain and simple , sure how else with the other clown Conor be in charge of anything, the loyal are bougth and paid off just like Roddy Molloy.

JonathanAnon

Red_Marauder wrote: »

What you're talking about here are the first secretaries, not ministers. Ministers do not work their way up through departments, they come into a department as, ideally, a leader who is there temporarily to represent the best interests of the population and to oversee governemnt policy in the provision of services.

Yeah, I know what youre saying. No Minister in a new government is gonna have experience of being a Minister, obviously. But my question is simpler than that.. I suppose it might have been better if I had phrased it as ..

Why bother swopping the Ministers and their briefs. You have a Minister, say Transport, who has a couple of years experience at the helm... and then he gets swopped for Education / Enterprise whatever.... why take him/her from a position that they are becoming familiar with and give them a similar position (comparable in prestige I mean) in Cabinet.. I just dont understand who gains from swopping Ministries just for the sake of it.

Victor

JonathanAnon wrote: »

You have a Minister, say Transport, who has a couple of years experience at the helm... and then he gets swopped for Education / Enterprise whatever.... why take him/her from a position that they are becoming familiar with and give them a similar position (comparable in prestige I mean) in Cabinet..

Maybe because you want to change emphasis or because that minister or another minister isn't performing.

There is a definite perception that Mary O'Rourke didn't perform well in the Department of Public Enterprise (possibly understandable given that she lost her husband at the time). Collectively, the government didn't step up to the plate by replacing her or giving her extra support.

blinding

Its a good way of limiting the damage they can do. Move them on before they get settled in. They might try to actually do something and in most cases this is extremely dangerous as most of these people are well connected morons.

The best thing to do with morons is to keep them busy doing something relatively harmless i.e. moving between departments but not actually doing anything.

If you let morons actually do stuff then you get the country into the state it is in now.

JonathanAnon

Victor wrote: »

Maybe because you want to change emphasis or because that minister or another minister isn't performing.

Yeah, I'd accept that as one reason alright. Hard to put a fiasco like PPARS or electronic voting behind you, if you are still the Minister for that particular portfolio.