Parliament & the Executive:political accountability in the UK

© Dr Nigel Forman

CPS Seminar

15th March 2012

Parliament as a counter weight to the Executive

• Both Houses of Parliament have long provided opportunities to hold Government to account - in debates, statements, questions to Ministers and in the scrutiny of Government sponsored legislation

• In the UK the leading scrutiny roles are played by the official Opposition and especially the Leader of the Opposition at PM’s Questions

• When the Government (or a governing Coalition) has an overall majority, a key role is also played by Government back-benchers in the Commons and by Peers of all parties in the Lords

Scrutiny by Select Committees

• Select Committees play an important part in scrutinising the Executive and in holding Ministers and civil servants to account for the policy, administration, public spending and delivery of Government objectives

• Yet such Committees are only one Parliamentary mechanism for achieving political accountability and their influence should not be exaggerated

• The most formidable is the Public Accounts Committee which holds Permanent Secretaries & Executive Agency Chief Executives to account for public spending in their spheres of responsibility

The role of Select Committees

• Departmental Select Committees monitor, scrutinise and evaluate the policy and administration in their area of interest - e.g. Defence, Treasury, Work and Pensions, Home Office etc

• They are all-party, back-bench committees which invite written submissions and cross-examine witnesses to assemble evidence on which to base reports to the House

• They have incremental influence rather than power but, when making common cause with pressure groups and the media, they can be formidable critics of any Government

The activity of Select Committees

• Many Select Committees develop symbiotic relationships with the Departments which they monitor and conduct a running commentary on the Departments they scrutinise

• They build up a level of expertise which is not usually found among the generality of M.P.s - an attribute which is particularly evident in Lords Select Committees.

• Select Committees also offer an alternative career path in Parliament for ex-Ministers and those who are unlikely to achieve Ministerial office in the first place

The work and structure of Select Committees in the Commons

• Composed of 11 to 14 back-benchers drawn from different parties in relation to party strengths in the Commons

• In charge of their own agenda and free to call for evidence, both written and oral, from experts and others

• Advised by Clerks and expert advisers and assisted by the Scrutiny Unit which is available to all Committees in the Commons

• They conduct a variety of inquiries, either brief or lengthy, which form the basis of their Reports that are debatable in the Chamber of the whole House

Other channels of accountabilitywhich influence the Government

• In a pluralist democracy the non-Parliamentary channels of accountability can be as important and influential as those in Parliament:

* Ministers and civil servants are wary of criticism in the media and many of their actions are designed to propitiate business interests and other stakeholders

* In the global economy, multinational companies and financial markets can move swiftly to challenge or support the action or inaction of national Governments - as can be seen in the tussle between opposing forces over sovereign debt in the Euro zone

Accountability to regulators

• Independent regulatory bodies are a significant part of governance arrangements in the U.K. and many other national jurisdictions

• They are usually created by statute or by Ministers acting within their spheres of administrative discretion

• During Labour’s term of office in the UK, the number of such bodies grew to the point where they were responsible for about £10 billion of public expenditure

• The Coalition Government has sought to reduce bodies of this kind which it sees as unnecessary overheads of Government

Judicial channels of accountability

• The Judiciary are another category of institutions which hold the Executive to account via the well established practice of judicial review in the High Court

• This involves judge-made case law (as opposed to statute law made in Parliament)

• It also involves senior judges who conduct one-off inquiries - e.g. Lord Hutton on Iraq or Lord Saville on ‘Bloody Sunday’ in Northern Ireland

• European judges perform an equivalent role in the European Court of Justice (EC law) and the European Court of Human Rights (European Convention law)

Direct accountabilityto the British people

• Direct accountability to the British people is increasingly significant - notwithstanding the traditional British attachment to ‘representative democracy’

• This is evident in:

- opinion polls commissioned by the press and other organisations

- focus groups organised by the political parties

- referenda organised at public expense - e.g. on greater devolution to Wales or independence for Scotland

- direct democracy for the general public, whether in TV studios or social networking on the internet

Some international contrastsand similarities

• The defining feature of political accountability in the UK is the inter-penetration of the Executive and the Legislature

• This usually enables the Government to act decisively with the support of a working majority in the Commons

• Other democracies do things differently:

- explicit separation of powers (e.g. USA, Nigeria)

- codified constitutions (e.g. France, Germany)

- inter-penetration of politicians and officials (e.g. Russia, South Africa)

Concluding observations

• Under the influence of modern technology, elected politicians are constantly scrutinised and held to account by stakeholders, other politicians and the media

• Personal accountability can limit (or sometimes expand) what a democratically elected Prime Minister or President can do - e.g. in Brazil, South Africa, or Russia

• On some issues the entire ruling elite is held to account, as can be seen in the media and public backlash against corrupt practices and the public discontent in some dictatorships - e.g. Syria, Burma, Zimbabwe