Select Committees Flashcards
what are select committees?
select committees provide scrutiny of a particular Department of government
they scrutinise expenditure, administration and policy
there is one select committee for each government department
when were select committees introduced?
Select committees were introduced in 1979 at the beginning of the Thatcher government by Norman St John Stevas (leader of the House at the time)
what do select committees do?
Select committees examine details of legislation and can devote weeks to debating and investigating an issue
They examine how legislation will work, what its likely impact will be et cetera
debates in the House of Commons are not this free And MPs cannot dedicate this amount of time to debating issues outside of select committees
what are select committees made up of?
Most select committees have a minimum of 11 members
The members of select committees are backbenchers that have been put forward by parties
There is a chair elected by all MPs — This was part of the reform to the House of Commons, before select committee chairs had been chosen by the Prime Minister and party whips
Since 2010, chairs are elected by fellow MPs rather than party whips and members are chosen by a secret ballot within party groups
This reform has increased their independence and given them greater legitimacy
what does the membership of select committees reflect?
The composition of select committees reflects the balance of party strength in the House of Commons
for example, the Education Select Committee was chaired by Conservative MP Neil Carmichael following the 2015 general election
of the other 10 members, 5 were Conservative, 4 were Labour and 1 was SNP
what else do select committees do besides examine legislation?
select committees also draft lists of questions and inquiries — they play an important role in questioning ministers through cross-examination, thus forcing them to explain their actions and decisions
They also call for evidence, which can be written or oral
They summon witnesses — witnesses can be all sorts of people including the Prime Minister as well as ordinary people
for example Tony Blair was called forward to explain his actions in the Iraq war to a select committee
Other witnesses may include ministers, civil servants, experts or members of the public
what do select committees work across?
Select committees work across all parties, they are far less party political and focus more on actually improving the work of government and holding them accountable
what may select committees appoint?
They may appoint specialist advisors, such as an academic in the field they are investigating, to assist them in their work
example of a recent select committee
2018 — International Development Committee, which has been responsible for scrutinising and examining Oxfam
what are the powers of select committees?
The government must respond to select committee suggestions and recommendations within 8 weeks
The government often listens to these committee reports and takes them on board in order to improve legislation
Select committees produce reports of their findings, which the government must respond to within 2 months
examples of non-departmental select committees
there are several non-departmental select committees with specific functions…
- Public Accounts Committee examines government expenditure, seeking to ensure that value for money is being obtained
- Liason Committee consists of the chairs of all select committees, question the Prime Minister twice a year across the whole field of government policy
- Committee on Standards oversees the work of the Parliamentary commissioner on standards, an official who is in charge of regulating MP conduct including their financial affairs
All of these committees show that the scope of committee work has widened in recent years (e.g. the Treasury Select Committee can veto the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s choice for the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility)
strengths of select committees: RESPECTED WORK
One of the biggest strengths of select committees is that they carry out very respected work
The work they do is respected as it is evidence-based, their hearings are televised and reported on in the media which increases their influence and they air issues of public interest
For example, the Transport Select Committee held the Transport Secretary to account for the controversy over the West Coast Main Line rail franchise in 2012
strengths of select committees: EXPERTISE
select committees often consist of people with a wide range of expertise
A long serving member of a select committee can accumulate more knowledge of a particular policy area than a minister who may only stay in a government department for two or three years
In particular, the House of Lords select committees work on a much wider basis to avoid duplicating the work of their counterparts in the House of Commons
for example, a Treasury Select Committee can be found in the House of Commons which examines the work of the Treasury and HMRC, and the House of Lords has an Economic Affairs Committee which looks at wider economic issues such as the economic case for the HS2 rail link
Lords committees can draw on the services of a range of well qualified experts in different fields
But unfortunately however learned and thoroughly researched their reports are, they tend to have limited wider impact
strengths of select committees: CAN DIRECTLY INFLUENCE GOVERNMENT POLICY
another strength is that select committees can directly influence government policy
In 2014, following a critical report by the Home Affairs Select Committee, the Home Office took the Passport Office back under ministerial control after the chief executive of the Passport Office had been criticised for a large backlog in applications that had caused considerable public anger during the summer
Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Select Committee from 2010 to 15, said that she had more influence in this role and she did as a government minister earlier in her career
criticisms of select committees
the influence of select committees should not be over exaggerated
some criticisms of select committees include…
- no enforcement powers
- poor preparation and questioning
- over reliance on the media
- no guaranteed independence
- substandard evidence
- government majority
criticisms of select committees: NO ENFORCEMENT POWERS
select committees have no enforcement powers, meaning they cannot compel the government to follow their recommendations because they lack powers of enforcement
they can criticise, publicise and recommend action but cannot ensure this action is implemented
however, 40% of committee recommendations are accepted by the government and one third of recommendations for significant policy changes are implemented
this is because committees do generate fear and act as a deterrent, government insiders often think about how policies would be viewed by select committees and will make changes accordingly
although only 40% of select committee recommendations are accepted by the government and these rarely involve major changes of policy, 60% are rejected, demonstrating that select committees often have limited influence
criticisms of select committees: POOR PREPARATION AND QUESTIONING
select committees are often accused of having poor preparation and questioning
this was demonstrated in July 2012 when the Treasury Committee questioned former Barclays Chief Executive Bob Diamond, the questioning was unfocused and criticised for lacking preparation
many MPs do not attend select committees regularly, which adds to this problem
and although resources available to select committees have increased, they can still only cover a limited range of topics in depth and tend to avoid investigations into more long-term, strategic issues as this will use up a lot of their already limited resources
criticisms of select committees: OVER RELIANCE ON THE MEDIA
select committees are also over reliant on the media because select committees need media exposure
this means they are sometimes too keen to attract headlines which can weaken their long-term influence on more important subjects
for example, several interviews suggested that the Home Affairs Committee focuses too much on inquiries that will grab the headlines and inviting too many celebrity witnesses (such as Russell Brand in April 2012) to gain media attention rather than focusing on long-term inquiries
criticisms of select committees: NO GUARANTEED INDEPENDENCE
select committees do not have guaranteed independence
between 1997 and 2010 Labour MPs dominated the committees which arguably led to some failing to hold Tony Blair’s government to account
these committees (such as defence and foreign affairs) were all chaired by loyalists, which suggests they were not completely independent and may have failed to properly scrutinise
another way that select committees cannot be said to be truly independent is because membership is influenced by party whips who may attempt to insert loyalists and remove independent minded members to further their party’s agenda
this was the case with Gwyneth Dunwoody as chair of the Transport Committee in 2001
furthermore, members may be reluctant to properly criticise the government as it could hamper their career aspirations — they may feel that if they restrain themselves from criticising and scrutinising the government they may be considered for cabinet positions
however, now chairs of select committees are chosen and elected by the whole House
criticisms of select committees: SUB-STANDARD EVIDENCE
arguably, select committees use substandard evidence
this is because they cannot access all government documents and witnesses can claim the right to silence and refuse to be involved in inquiries
they have limited power to summon witnesses — for example, in 2013, Theresa May as Home Secretary blocked the Home Affairs Select Committee from interviewing the head of MI5 Andrew Parker
this is made worse by the fact that committees are under resourced which means their investigations are not as effective as they could be
unfortunately, they can only cover a limited range of topics in depth and there is a tendency to avoid investigations into more long-term issues in order to prevent using up their limited resources
criticisms of select committees: GOVERNMENT MAJORITY
the government tends to have a majority in select committees because the composition of select committees reflects the relative strength of each party in the House of Commons
moreover, MPs from the government side traditionally chair the influential Treasury, foreign affairs and defence committees
the majority of select committee members will be drawn from the governing party, because FPTP usually results in a strong majority
the 2009 Wright Reforms
select committee chairs are elected by all MPs in the House of Commons — this is done by AV in a secret ballot by all MPs following a division of chairs between parties on a proportional basis
other members are chosen by their parties — this is done by a secret ballot, thus reducing whip influence
committee size reduced
penalties for poor attendance
Backbench Business Committee — chooses issues for debate on 35 days per Parliamentary session
examples of recent select committee inquiries: TREASURY COMMITTEE
Treasury Committee 2015
conducted an investigation into proposals for stricter regulation of the banking sector
they insisted that government should implement the recommendations of the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards
this pushed policy forward on banking regulation
examples of recent select committee inquiries: HOME AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Home Affairs Committee 2012
conducted an investigation into the Independent Police Complaints Commission’s (IPCC) role in the investigation of the 1997 Hillsborough disaster
the government’s response was to make the IPCC investigate the disaster further following the 2016 inquest
examples of recent select committee inquiries: DEFENCE COMMITTEE
Defence Committee 2014
conducted an investigation into the circumstances when the UK should make military interventions in world conflicts
they urged the government to consider legislation about whether Parliament should control major armed interventions
