Theresa May is enjoying a honeymoon among most Tory-supporting newspapers. With a few caveats, they greeted the new prime minister’s extensive government reshuffle.
She has “unveiled a cabinet characterised by both talent and purpose”, said the Daily Telegraph, which had expected “a half-Eurosceptic, half-Europhile fudge.”
“Out goes the chumocracy” with the “quite ruthless” culling of various former ministers. She “has combined the best of old and new without implying messy compromise.” It continued:
“Whereas Mr Cameron used to think tactically and liked to appoint the people he was most comfortable dealing with, Mrs May is somewhat more strategic.
We infer that she has understood the message from the referendum. Yes, it was a vote about leaving the EU. But it was also a cultural rebellion against a metropolitan elite.”
The Telegraph accepted that “Eurocrats might not be so happy about Boris Johnson’s appointment as foreign secretary” but spoke up for its columnist (or should that be former columnist?) as “a hugely popular politician” who “brings charisma to Britain’s global brand.”
The Daily Mail also praised May for dispensing with “the public school ‘chumocracy’” and introducing “a Tory meritocracy, a team chosen according to their abilities and track record - not who they know or where they went to school.”
It is “a refreshing team that the Mail wholeheartedly welcomes and one which can unite both party and country in a way we have not seen for many years.”
David Davis “is an inspired choice in the new role of Brexit secretary” and it applauded the appointment of Johnson as foreign secretary.
The Mail lauded “the advancement of women”, such as Justine Greening, Priti Patel and Andrea Leadsom, “into positions of real power”. And it concluded that May “has put the right people in place” to move “Britain forward in the new post-Brexit age.”
The Daily Express joined in the chorus of praise. It reminded readers that Margaret Thatcher was in office for three years before she had finally appointed the cabinet she really wanted. By contrast, May remodelled the government in her own image in just a few days.
“Taking a firmer grip than even the Iron Lady herself is a considerable achievement,” it said. “Keep up the good work, Mrs May.”
But the Sun and the Times were altogether less sure. The Sun registered is disappointment at May’s firing of Michael Gove, “a brilliant, innovative thinker and reformer.”
It was, however, “delighted” that health secretary Jeremy Hunt “survived the brutal purge of the Cameron team.”
The Times, in noting the significance of the key appointments - Johnson, Davis, chancellor Philip Hammond, Liam Fox as international trade secretary and Leadsom in charge of agriculture - wondered about their “incompatible beliefs over what Brexit means.” It continued:
“Mr Hammond is thought to favour a settlement as close to membership of the single market as possible. Mr Davis, by his own words, wants a far greater separation. Mr Johnson appears to think several contradictory things at once, often in the space of a single column.
Mrs May has brought several explosive egos into her cabinet, some of which belong to people with track records of self-detonation, and incompatible aims.
Should Mr Hammond mutter the wrong phrase on the radio it is not inconceivable that Mr Davis or Dr Fox could have resigned by the end of the week. This instability at the core of her government looks like a miscalculation.”
The Times was particularly exercised by Johnson’s appointment. May “cannot possibly have calculated... that life on an endless series of red-eye flights will limit Mr Johnson’s potential to cause her embarrassment.”
Although “a clever man”, Johnson “will need to show a hitherto unexpressed capacity to reinvent himself as a serious one.”
The paper thought “the exile” of “the so-called Notting Hill set is either a show of strength or a show of pique.”
Like the Sun (singing a tune for Rupert Murdoch’s pal), it spoke up for Gove as “one of the few Cameroons with clear achievements to his name.”
The Times said: “It would reflect poorly on Mrs May if long-running personal animosity had led to his sacking.
“The same is true of George Osborne. A true heavyweight, the former chancellor of the exchequer is a highly thoughtful and capable politician. It is a strange Conservative cabinet which has room for Mr Johnson but not for him.”
The non-Tory press was somewhat more critical. The Independent, calling May’s changes “a most creative act of butchery”, did not lament the passing of Gove and Osborne, but it saw some wisdom in Johnson’s appointment:
“Ms May has parked a still-dangerous rival in a job where he will have his hands full and will have to take partial responsibility for the Brexit deal. She has deftly neutralised him.”
It concluded that “May has imposed her will on the highest echelons of her party, cleverly managed the Brexiteers, and changed the face of the Conservative government.”
The Guardian was anything but warm about Johnson, devoting a leading article to the man who “has been infuriating the rest of the EU ever since he was a correspondent in Brussels in the 1990s.” It continued:
“However tactical the move, its parochialism hardly squares with the wider challenges Britain confronts: defending Britain’s interests in Europe and beyond is a task that has just become much more difficult; it will require no small degree of precision, steadfastness and reliability, none of which anyone has ever had reason to suppose are among Mr Johnson’s prime qualities.”
It predicted “damage ahead for Britain’s image in the world... Celebrity and brash behaviour will not go far in the pursuit of strategic goals... his appointment is, simply, very bad news.”
In a separate editorial, the Guardian was not encouraged by the appointment of Fox as international trade minister. He “disgraced himself when last in cabinet with an atrocious lapse of judgment”, it said.
Nor was it warm about Davis becoming Brexit negotiator: “There is little in his backbench repertoire to prove he is up to the challenge.”
The Financial Times thought May, having exhibited “more grit and resilience than her male rivals in the race for the leadership”, had now “displayed the necessary ruthlessness to be prime minister... After weeks of drift, the smack of firm government is welcome.”
By handing foreign policy to a team led by Brexiters “makes a virtue of a necessity but is also a shrewd political move.”
As for Johnson, “one booming voice in a larger foreign policy chorus”, he “has a lot of ground to make up if he is to win trust on the international stage.”
For the Daily Mirror, the reshuffle was a lurch to the right. It was upset by Hammond becoming chancellor and especially outraged by Hunt staying in the department of health.
“May’s pretence of a fresh start is destroyed by this silly, stupid, dangerous decision... Hunt has proved himself incapable of healing and reviving the NHS so his reappointment is confirmation, should any be required, the new PM is about continuity and not the real change the country so desperately needs.”
