Morgan McSweeney calls for rethink of UK cabinet ministers’ ‘quasi-judicial’ powers

Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff also says the ‘thicket of rules’ about how PMs operate should be cleared away

Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, has called for a rethink of “quasi-judicial” powers given to cabinet ministers such as the energy secretary’s ability to approve future oil and gas fields.

McSweeney, who helped propel Starmer to power and served as his chief of staff until February this year, said he believed “quasi-judicial processes” were stopping wider cabinet discussions and input from the prime minister on issues of national importance.

He did not give specific examples, but one of the key quasi-judicial decisions under Starmer included Ed Miliband’s role in determining the future of the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields, which were subsequently put in the hands of his successor as energy secretary, Miatta Fahnbulleh.

The then housing and local government secretary, Steve Reed, also had the power to decide whether to give the go-ahead to a new Chinese super-embassy in east London.

Speaking to the House of Lords constitution committee, McSweeney said the quasi-judical processes were obstructing government work. He also called for the “thicket of rules” about how the prime minister operates to be cleared away.

As an example, he cited Starmer being advised he should not issue letters to cabinet ministers setting out their priorities and asking them for progress updates as it was against convention.

He said constitutional democracy was under pressure not just from the threat of abuse of power but also from the failure of governments to deliver the programmes on which they were elected.

“There are quite a lot of rules that govern the prime minister’s powers … every single one of them. They should be identified and there should be fewer of them and they should be justified, the ones that are there.

“Ones that prevent abuse of power should be kept. Everything else needs be looked at in the round, not just each individual one but the cumulative effect of all of them.”

He said some of the rules prevented the government operating at the speed that it needed to and stopped it carrying out its lawful mandate, and he suggested the prime minister’s powers should be codified by being written down.

McSweeney said it was not about individual issues but the accumulation of the weight of conventions that held the prime minister back.

Starmer has also been open in the past about his frustration at not being able to pull as many levers of power as he might have wanted.

McSweeney quit in February because of his closeness to the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as US ambassador. He admitted in an interview this year that Labour had not been prepared enough for government or for the volatile world when Starmer took office.

The former No 10 aide had been the party’s elections guru, credited by many in the party for the size of their victory in 2024, but said Labour did not have enough of an idea about how to make things happen quickly for people who wanted change.