As a regular and sometimes ritualized event within parliamentary systems, the cabinet reshuffle has become a global phenomenon. Nevertheless, the political science of cabinet reshuffles remains largely underdeveloped (see for example, Helms 2022). This article attempts to remedy this by contributing a theoretically grounded and empirically rich account of this important aspect of Westminster-type democracies’ governance and leadership.
Reshuffles offer a unique opportunity to create, abolish or rename ministerial posts and to reassign responsibilities among them. This often reflects new priorities or the need to make policy more efficient. Reshuffles are also a popular way to signal that the government is making a particular change in direction.
On the other hand, excessive reshuffles can hinder departmental effectiveness. Frequent changes prevent ministers from developing the expertise required to manage their departments, and they make it harder for parliament to hold them accountable for policies they have overseen.
Moreover, they can undermine the legitimacy of the government as a whole. A prime minister may decide to send a rival to the backbenches as a means of exercising party discipline, but doing so can backfire when they are then free to openly criticise the government in public (see for example Rhodes 2022).
In the long run, limiting reshuffles may help to restore the democratic accountability of governments and reduce political instability. It is not clear how this might be achieved, but a time limit on ministerial terms of office could offer one avenue to pursue.