Dominic Cummings: a very special Special Adviser

When we hear about special advisers, there is a tendency to think of shady political operators who live in the dark. If anyone plays up to that stereotype, it is Dominic Cummings. Of course, he is far from the first to have such a reputation – Alastair Campbell, Damian McBride and the duo of Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill, all shared a similar reputation.

The memo sent to the Spectator yesterday, widely regarded as coming from the Cummings side of Downing Street, makes a series of veiled threats. Clearly it is another play in the ‘blame game’ coming from someone who is a lead strategist, though not a government player. It isn’t going to help unify the fragmented Party to get behind a deal, but it will help set the strategy for an election.

It is this that singles Cummings out from others before him. Most Special Advisers enter Downing Street having fought a campaign and then spend a few years of building bridges and fostering relationships before the next one begins. Cummings’ style has been very different – he still sees himself as running the Leave campaign and positioning the prime minister ready for an election. Some of his followers still seem to think he has an ace up his sleeve; whatever he is planning next, we can be certain it will cause some upset over the next fortnight.

So, what is it that Cummings has that makes him feel more dangerous than the rest? Is he the “political genius” many believe him to be, or has he overplayed his hand already?

Special advisers often seem to have followed a similar path – some time in a Parliamentary office, a stint at Party headquarters, involved in a campaign or two along the way – allowing them to form relationships with those that will eventually become their recruiter. They are the ‘political geeks’ of Westminster; usually with a particular gift for strategy, communications or policy. For a minister in a department of civil servants, a special adviser (or SpAd) is a trusted ally; a loyal employee to help deliver the minister’s priorities. So why is this close and trusting relationship often the downfall of one or both parties?

Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy were Theresa May’s special advisers during her time as Home Secretary. Neither had a great relationship among May’s parliamentary colleagues. Timothy was known for his argumentative and confrontational personality, and allegedly blocked by Downing Street from the Conservative candidate list in 2015. Hill left the Home Office following a spat with Michael Gove’s departments in 2014, but was thought to have stayed close to May before eventually joining her leadership campaign team. On arrival at Downing Street, they wasted no time in alienating the parliamentary party by restricting access to the Prime Minister and Hill, in particular, had a penchant for blunt text messages. Notably telling Alistair Burt MP, in relation to Nicky Morgan, that he should not bring “that woman” to Downing Street again after she had criticised the prime minister’s leather trousers.

The closed ranks of May’s Number 10 team would have been quite a change to MPs used to the more affable team surrounding Cameron and the coalition government. Steve Hilton, Cameron’s ‘guru’ credited with bringing forward a modernising agenda, invested time in making himself available to the parliamentary party. Channels of communication were always open, or gave that appearance, and MPs liked and respected Ed Llewellyn – Cameron’s Chief of Staff – and other members of the top team. Cameron’s election successes can certainly be attributed to his responsive, progressive team that steered the Party away from its ‘nasty’ image. Ed Llewellyn was a key member of the coalition negotiating team and it’s hard to image that role being played by the likes of Cummings, Hill or Timothy.

Cummings’ approach could not be more different to those who supported Cameron. He came into Downing Street with many enemies already in Parliament, having already had battles with Iain Duncan Smith, David Davis and Bernard Jenkin over the years. Despite his commitment to the Leave campaign, he is not a fan of the ERG and it’s hard to see where his allies in the Party lay. And he wasted no time in showing government ministers that he oversees their special advisers and is not afraid to monitor their communications; personal or otherwise. This alone will make many nervous – that trusted relationship between a minister and their closest adviser is now under the supervision of a higher order; and one who is known for not suffering fools gladly.

With much talk of constitutional and democratic crises, a minority government that is yet to win a vote and a highly respected faction of their own MPs expelled and alienated, it is hard to see what Cummings’ grand plan is, or if it has failed already. When the Prime Minister eventually needs to find support on the backbenches, will Cummings’ tactics leave him anyone left to turn to?