The reshuffle has left No.10 supreme – and that could lead to new battles  

An assertion of control with a touch of vindictiveness. That is the essential character of this reshuffle, Boris Johnson’s first since the general election delivered him an effective majority of 87. It removes obstacles – from his ministers, at least – to his main plans. We should expect a rush of enthusiastic spending to follow, uninhibited by the fiscal rules championed by the previous chancellor Sajid Javid, the biggest casualty of the Cabinet clear-out. The tussle between Downing Street and the Treasury is age-old; the single greatest effect of this week is that it leaves No.10 on top.

It would be a step back if the government now effectively jettisons fiscal rules for the national finances. But the prime minister has good reason to argue that more spending is justified, on infrastructure, skills and public services. His bigger problem will be getting results. The inexperience of his new team will not help.

His biggest problem, however, is that the combination of ideological unity and lack of constraints may lead the new government into a hard-charging approach which provokes unnecessary confrontations and where he might find it hard to control the results. The three most likely fronts are Northern Ireland, Brexit and the courts.

Javid’s removal as chancellor could open the way to a spending spree

Javid has said he resigned because Downing Street demanded he sack his special advisers and work with a new team shared with No. 10. There are reasons why this might be a good reform, but the intrusion into the chancellor’s power is clear. Javid’s response cannot have been a surprise.

More important, it followed weeks of tension about whether the fiscal rules in the manifesto – which Javid had advocated – were too much of a constraint on the plans which Johnson has made central to his premiership. The effect was not so much on capital spending – big infrastructure projects which it is already clear the prime minister loves. They are a key part of his agenda for “levelling up” regions outside the southeast. Javid – along with many – accepted that with the cost of government borrowing consistently low, this spending is justified.

But the rules gave Johnson little headroom at all on public service spending. Meeting his pledges on improving NHS standards is unlikely without even more money than has been pledged. As we have argued, the justice system and social care have also been very hard hit by cuts.

The test of the government’s views will come in the Budget (perhaps now delayed beyond 11 March),  and the spending review expected this summer which will cover the next three to five years of public spending. Those will also reveal the opinions – and clout – of the new chancellor, Rishi Sunak, who has been elevated from chief secretary to the Treasury to one of the top government jobs. It would be regrettable if the government showed little concern for the level of borrowing; the question will be how it balances this with its understandable ambitions for improving the fabric of the country and its services.

The exit of Julian Smith could cause problems in Northern Ireland

The sacking of Julian Smith as Northern Ireland secretary, the biggest exit after Javid, added an air of vindictiveness to the reshuffle. His achievements in getting the Northern Ireland Assembly to re-form after its three-year hiatus were hugely valuable and may now be jeopardised if the assurances he gave the parties now come into question. His main offence, it is said, was failing to properly alert the prime minister that the agreement that restored the Assembly might lead to investigations of British military actions in the Troubles. Others say that his past challenges to Johnson on Brexit and as a whip were a more likely cause.

Brandon Lewis, Smith’s replacement, is not short of ministerial experience. But it takes ministers time to build confidence among the many parties in Northern Ireland. He takes up his post at a point of real tension caused by Johnson’s Brexit deal which appears certain, contrary to the prime minister’s declarations, to require more checks and paperwork for goods moving between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. That, and Sinn Fein’s strength in the recent Republic of Ireland elections, has pushed talk of reunification up the agenda.

Northern Ireland will be only one difficult part of this year’s talks with the EU. There are many potential clashes; deadlines for agreement on financial services and fish, for a start, fall in mid year. The danger is that the government, exhilarated by its majority and short of time for its ambitious agenda, approaches these talks with an impatience that provokes an early clash.

Suella Braverman sounds ready for battle with the judiciary

In elevating Suella Braverman to the cabinet as attorney general, Johnson can have been in no doubt of her stance. She has written that politicians should “take back control” from the courts. Johnson’s manifesto proposed to examine the powers of the judiciary and judicial review. Many suggest that this is retaliation for the Supreme Court’s rejection of his prorogation of parliament last year as well as other recent rebuffs in the courts. If the government does go ahead with a commission and wants to confound the suspicion that it is intolerant in general of constitutional constraints on government power, then the tone matters. Even so, there must be a question of whether frustration and anger has driven this battle – and it would be a battle – further up the government’s agenda than on any dispassionate view it merits.

The Johnson government has set itself an ambitious agenda. Its aim of “levelling up” the country has struck a chord with many, even if people are understandably sceptical. As the experience of many governments has shown, making good such promises is hard. It faces plenty of other tough problems too, starting with Brexit, which brings strains in turn to Northern Ireland and the Union. Even though the government is exhilarated by its majority and the opportunities that presents, and the reshuffle has created a unified Cabinet, the government would be well advised not to be so indifferent to compromise that it creates or inflames fights it does not need to have.