Changing the No.10 cast is not enough to reshape Boris Johnson's premiership

The cast in 10 Downing Street has increasingly resembled a stuttering soap opera rather than the smooth-running heart of government. But in all the behind-the-scenes accounts of what is going wrong in No.10, who wanted what, who fell out with whom, and what needs to change, the most important view of all – that of Boris Johnson – has been hard to follow. We will now see whether a Johnsonian style of Number 10 differs from the one in which Dominic Cummings and Lee Cain wielded power behind the throne.

Cummings is blamed but Johnson is responsible for No10's approach

Perhaps predictably, Johnson’s premiership looks set to fall into the Cummings Era and After Cummings. While the prime minister's chief adviser brought good and bad to the government, this latest drama has typified some of the worst aspects of No.10 that many associate with his most controversial aides. The battle over who was going to be Johnson’s new chief of staff followed a pattern of botched communications, badly-handled announcements, mixed messaging and leaked briefings which have dogged this government. The choice of Allegra Stratton as the new face of the No.10 televised briefings is meant to address these problems, but Stratton’s appointment – said to be against Cain’s advice – seems to have been a big part of the blow-up of tensions in Downing Street. Cain and Cummings may now be gone, but there are still questions of hierarchy unsettled and tensions unresolved.

But while Cummings may get much of the blame – particularly from the Conservative MPs he has shown little time or regard for – it is Johnson who is ultimately responsible for what has gone wrong. It was his decision to let the people who helped him get to No.10 to then define his No.10. The prime minister will have been well aware of the problems created by Cummings and Cain, but he repeatedly decided the pros outweighed the cons – or that it was easier to avoid the showdown which has now taken place.

Predictions about the post-Cummings regime now presume that Johnson, freed from his dominant chief adviser, will shape a No.10 in his own image. Journalists have been briefed about a pivot towards a less confrontational attitude towards public institutions and the media, a prime minister who reaches out to his own MPs and a No.10 that will be altogether softer. Styling this messy denouement as the change Johnson always wanted could yet prove to be the first major comms success of Stratton’s impending arrival.

A new style of premiership needs more than just new people in No.10

Whether he planned a change of approach or not, this break point forces Johnson to reshape No.10 with new personnel. Appointing a chief of staff who he can trust, and who can build bridges with MPs, ministers and anyone else with a growing grievance, is one part of the task. Other valuable advisers – not least Munira Mirza, who features far less in the public eye but also plays a big role behind the scenes – may now step up too.

But as his predecessors have found, changing the supporting cast is not enough to fix a stumbling premiership. The departures of Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill came after Theresa May’s unsuccessful 2017 snap election; the arrival of former Conservative MP Gavin Barwell as chief of staff part of the need to placate her party. But Barwell’s appointment could not resolve the fundamental problems of no majority and ever-increasing infighting over Brexit. And despite plenty of personnel changes, and a similar loss of a controversial key adviser – Damian McBride – Gordon Brown’s premiership was still beset by problems that stemmed from his own personality and working style.

Johnson may need to reflect on his own approach to the top job and what more he can do to lead this government and the policies it adopts, rather than allowing other advisers to wield as much power as Cummings had.

How the cabinet reacts, and how Johnson uses them, matters as much as No.10

Johnson also needs to consider how his cabinet are going to respond to the No.10 shake-up. Cummings and Cain wanted to increase the power of No.10, and the assumption was that this was the kind of premiership Johnson wanted. It seems unlikely that he will suddenly release control and shift to being a more collegial premier. But senior, and ambitious, figures in his cabinet may now sense an opportunity to demonstrate their assertiveness. On the key question of who Johnson appoints as chief of staff, it will be his fellow ministers who will be watching most closely for the signals it sends.

Warring factions are hardly new in Downing Street or across government, but Johnson’s government – and the prime minister himself – risked being defined by the way No.10 was operating. If Johnson wants to embrace this moment to launch a different type of premiership, with a No.10 designed to deliver what he wants to achieve, then it is down to the prime minister to set out what he wants. If he ends up with the same problems of the last year, we will know that the Cummings era was the Johnson style all along.