The UK now needs a formal acting prime minister role

The news that the prime minister has been taken to intensive care as his coronavirus symptoms worsened is a shocking reminder of just how serious the virus can be.

Most of the focus since the news broke has rightly been on wishing the prime minister and his family well, but attention has also turned to how the government will function in Johnson’s absence. The prime minister has formally handed over some of his duties to first secretary of state and foreign secretary Dominic Raab – having previously remained at the helm during his self-isolation in Downing Street.

But Raab will lack the full authority of the PM, and his limited ‘understudy’ role opens up many questions about how he will run the country at what is a highly sensitive time. The crisis is showing up major problems in the UK’s lack of any clear acting prime minister succession plan in its constitution.

There are good reasons for Raab not acting with all the prime minister’s authority

The initial line from government was that Raab would deputise ‘where necessary’. A No.10 press conference on 7 April revealed that he would continue to work out of the Foreign Office, not No.10, that he would not have weekly audiences with the Queen, and that he would not have powers to hire or fire ministers. This appears to be an explicit decision to limit Raab’s role – easing the workload that would normally fall to the prime minister, while not empowering the deputy with all of the premier’s authority.

The UK does not have a standing provision for a role to deputise for a prime minister’s absence. Keeping Raab’s role limited could be a move to dispel fears over the constitutional implications of the move – to avoid implying he has more power than he ought. Johnson remains the premier, and only certain duties are being handed over.

There are also good political reasons. Limiting Raab’s role will reassure other ministers who fear giving power to a potential rival. In this No.10’s role was telling. Informing the press that Raab would not have the power to hire and fire ministers is likely a message to the public – ministers are unlikely to think he would. But it sends a clear message to the cabinet that Raab is not ‘the new PM’. This seems prudent. Ruffled feathers, or bruised egos, in the cabinet would do little to help the government, or the country.

With Raab in the Foreign Office, No.10 remains empty

But there are areas where Raab may have to assert himself. The news that he will remain working from the Foreign Office may be for practical reasons: his private office is there. It may be symbolic: he is not, literally, walking into the top job. But it also means that No.10 won’t have a live-in boss.  

No.10 is already lacking a number of staff who are now self-isolating and working from home. Many of the officials and advisers who are still there will be able to carry on their duties in Johnson’s absence – but, as with the cabinet, it is vital they know who to turn to for a decision or if disagreements arise.

The cabinet secretary, PM’s chief of staff and principal private secretary can do a lot to manage the team at No.10, but ultimately it is prime ministers who control their advisers. In this frantic period, inertia or confusion in No.10 poses as much a risk as taking the wrong decisions.

Raab and the cabinet need to work together

Raab’s authority is based on the prime minister passing it to him. There are no formal powers invested in him (other than those he has as foreign secretary). The title first secretary of state is a title often given to mollify those in cabinet who want status. Nor does he have Johnson’s personal authority as leader of the party.

But what he will need is the support of the cabinet. If they, as a whole, had objected to Johnson’s decision to pass the reins to him, this would cause a fracture between the prime minister and his cabinet. But it works both ways. The cabinet need to work together as a collective, but they also need Raab to ensure that he is acting collegiately.

Getting this right matters. Officials need to know who is in charge, ministers need to know who to call on to resolve a dispute. Everyone in government needs to know how a decision will be made. This is all the more important at times of national crisis.

Everyone in government will be hoping that Johnson will recover soon and his absence from government will be short. But in the midst of what the PM described before his hospitalisation as ‘the worst health crisis in a generation’, the lack of a plan for who can take over when the prime minister is incapacitated looks extraordinary to many in the country and abroad. It is time for the UK to work out how the post of acting prime minister can be established on more than an ad hoc basis.