AFTER the night of the long knives, it was the day of the tender handshakes as David Cameron changed the guard and put in place the more youthful and female team he hopes will convince voters to put him back in Downing Street next May.
William Hague's surprise resignation as Foreign Secretary meant the ministerial shake-up has been far more extensive than anyone had envisaged.
But the appointment of his successor, Philip Hammond, pitched the reshuffle into the heart of the independence referendum debate.
The former Defence Secretary famously suggested that, if the in-out referendum on Britain's membership of the EU were tomorrow, he would vote to leave if no real reform were achieved.
First Minister Alex Salmond took no time to insist Mr Hammond's promotion had thus "put one hand on the exit door leading the UK out of the European Union". In another move seen to have a Eurosceptic slant, Dominic Grieve was sacked from the legal post of Attorney General.
The Buckinghamshire MP was seen by some Conservative rightwingers as a block to withdrawal from the European Convention of Human Rights. The Tories want to repatriate powers from Strasbourg to Westminster because they feel the convention has made it more difficult for the UK to deport terror suspects.
Another intriguing move, which could also play into the referendum debate, was the surprise shift for Michael Gove from Education Secretary to Chief Whip. His radical time in shaking up education south of the border just made too many enemies among teachers.
No 10 played up the new roles of Mr Hague and Mr Gove, who will now lead the election charge against Labour. The new Chief Whip will, we are told, become a more familiar face as he effectively becomes Minister for TV.
As a Scot, we could be seeing more of Mr Gove in the final run-in to September 18.
But will the Cabinet shake-up have any real impact on the referendum battle ahead?
Certainly, new Cabinet members like Liz Truss and Nicky Morgan will have to engage in the Scottish debate at some stage but, in doing so, they will also have to ensure they observe the first rule of government - don't mess up.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article