Like previous iterations of his so-called barnacle-clearing exercise (in which Mr Abbott admitted to the unpopularity of certain of his government's policies but did not actually retreat from them), the cabinet reshuffle appeared at first glance to be of little significance. A proven performer (Scott Morrison) was promoted from Immigration to Social Services, while a somewhat disappointing one (David Johnston) was demoted from Defence and out of Cabinet altogether. The low-profile Peter Dutton was moved out of Health into Immigration, while the equally beige Kevin Andrew relinquished Social Services to be given Senator Johnston's old job.

Of greater significance, certainly to the potential future success of his government, Mr Abbott has promoted a number of talented backbenchers to the outer ministry (including Christian Porter and Kelly O'Dwyer) and rewarded some of his lesser-known but nonetheless well-performed junior ministers such asSussan Ley and Josh Frydenberg into key portfolios – Health in her case, and Assistant Treasurer in his.

Ms Ley's elevation to Cabinet is an astute move. It effectively doubles the number of women in his Cabinet (a gender deficiency that caused Mr Abbott some embarrassment, though he always denied it publicly), and it hands control of what has been a problem portfolio for the government to an individual with sharp communications skills. In another acknowledgement that the selection of his first ministry was deaf to certain considerations and constituencies, Mr Abbott has also brought Science back to Cabinet by adding this to Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane's duties.

Mr Morrison, who many in the Coalition consider to have done an outstanding job halting the flow of asylum-seeker vessels to Australia, may reckon himself unlucky not to have profited more obviously from his success. Politicians possessed of great ambition, like Mr Morrison, do not hanker for portfolios like Social Services. However, Mr Abbott has sweetened the prize by widening its area of responsibility to include childcare, and by giving Mr Morrison carriage of a plan dear to the Coalition's heart: winding back access to welfare and reducing payments. This new role will test all of Mr Morrison's energy, resolve and skill, not least because social security recipients and welfare peak bodies can fight governments in ways that asylum-seekers cannot. Public anger at welfare "bludgers" nothwithstanding, Mr Morrison may find himself in difficulty if he pursues welfare spending cuts too vigorously, as David Johnston did after casting aspersions on the boat-building capacity the Australian Submarine Corporation.

The time allowed Senator Johnston to master a large and complex portfolio was insufficient, and he can consider himself unfortunate to have lost his job. His canoe remark remark may have been injudiciously framed, but it was entirely pertinent to the question of whether Australia should build submarines, particularly given the chequered history of the Collins Class boats. However, those state governments (and unions) which benefit from the billions of dollars spent on defence equipment acquisition are apt to bristle whenever there is speculation that the pipeline of tax-payer dollars may be turned off. Whether Kevin Andrews has the energy and the application to succeed where so many other have failed is probably academic since Mr Abbott has confirmed that he will be making the big decisions on "everything to do with national security".

The wisdom of an approach where major decisions are made by an individual with only one ear attuned to the complexities of the issue seems questionable. That unwillingness to trust to the competency and judgment of his colleagues may yet prove unfortunate, even if Mr Abbott has otherwise made a good fist of his first cabinet reshuffle.