Sacking Mel Stride and promoting new faces like Katie Lam – along with appointing a shadow Chancellor who believes in private enterprise, is a signal of intent, says Oliver Dean
For roughly two years, Kemi Badenoch had kept the same old team in place. Mel Stride as shadow Chancellor; Priti Patel as shadow foreign secretary. The list went on and on. Time and again, critics would raise concerns about such appointments. How can she renew the Conservative brand with a top team composed of people who’d served in previous governments that had so stained the Party’s reputation?
Badenoch appears to have listened to her critics and agreed with their assessment. Earlier this week, she embarked on a ruthless clear out of the old guard. Mel Stride was replaced with Andrew Griffith. Priti Patel with Tom Tugendhat. Over the course of the day more and more old faces were told to pack up their things and leave, replaced by up and comers like Katie Lam and Harriet Cross, paving the way for a rejuvenated Shadow Cabinet.
Perhaps the biggest shock of them all, however, was Stride’s departure. Stride has long been by Badenoch’s side, championing the Party’s pledge to abolish stamp duty and helping to lay the foundations for an economic revival. But, despite such commitments, he was struggling to cut through to the public. Indeed, it was once rumoured that when asked about Stride in a focus group, one respondent quipped “who’s she?”
It was once rumoured that, when asked about Mel Stride, a focus group attendee asked ‘who’s she?’
Stepping into Stride’s role is Andew Griffith, a committed Thatcherite who served in c-suite positions at Sky and Just Eat before entering Parliament in 2019. Tory sources have labelled him as a, “no-nonsense, pro-growth shadow chancellor with real business experience.” It’s a description that certainly rang true during his time as shadow business secretary, where Griffith repeatedly lambasted Labour’s tax-and-spend dogma.
He consistently made the case for laxer regulations, lower taxes and an all-round smaller state, believing that private enterprise was the key for Britain to escape economic stagnation. He has been a vocal supporter of Sweden’s economic model too, claiming that their decision to abolish both an inheritance and wealth tax is something that the UK can “learn from”. With Badenoch opting to make the economy her battlefield, to promote a figure who is as unambiguously pro-business as Griffith is a rather welcome move.
But whilst the Westminster commentariat will spend the next week mulling over these sackings, there is one big name that should not escape notice: James Cleverly.
A Cleverly move?
The former shadow housing secretary announced his departure over the weekend, choosing to instead focus his attention on City Hall and the London Mayoralty. It’s undeniably a risky move. Aside from Johnson in 2008 and 2012, London has only ever returned a Labour mayor. But the former home and foreign secretary rejects such a downbeat attitude, arguing that London is not a “Labour city” but rather a “city currently run by Labour.”
Indeed, given the capital’s return to the supplementary vote system, there is a very real chance that he could clinch victory. A split vote on his left between the Labour, Greens and Liberal Democrats, coupled with enough second choice votes from those who would prefer Laila Cunningham, and a Tory victory isn’t as outlandish as critics would have you believe. It’s an uphill battle, sure, but to write Cleverly off entirely would be foolish.
But the names that have come and gone form part of a bigger political picture. What this shakeup shows above all else is a party that is preparing itself, both for an election and for government. It is strutting its stuff to the British public, showing them that they can be trusted, once again, with the reins of power. Kemi Badenoch has listened to the British public and taken their concerns on board. She has heard, repeatedly, the cries that for 14 years the Conservatives talked right but governed left, and she has shown that she is willing to do something about it.
At a time when people are umming and ahhing over Reform, and are still not sold on Labour, Badenoch has offered a sense of clarity. The British public now know, without a doubt in their mind, what they will get when they vote for the Conservative Party. Many may not like this changed brand. They may possess a certain level of bitterness over particular policies. But at least they know what they are getting. The same can’t be said about other parties. Indeed, stability is a hell of a thing, and Badenoch is offering just that.