CORE TASKS FOR SELECT COMMITTEES
10.We recommend that select committees should experiment
with appointing one of their number as a rapporteur on a specific
task, such as for example financial scrutiny.—[Paragraph
34]
11. We recommend that as part of the process of producing
an annual report each departmental select committee should submit
to the Liaison Committee a statement of how it has met each core
task in the scrutiny of its department.—[Paragraph 35]
8. We recommend that there should be an agreed statement
of the core tasks of the departmental select committees.—[Paragraph
33]
9.We recommend the following model as an illustration
of what we would regard as the principal objectives of departmental
select committees:
"It shall be the duty, where appropriate,
of each select committee:
- to consider major policy initiatives
- to consider the Government's response
to major emerging issues
- to propose changes where evidence persuades
the Committee that present policy requires amendment
- to conduct pre-legislative scrutiny
of draft bills
- to examine and report on main Estimates,
annual expenditure plans and annual resource accounts
- to monitor performance against targets
in the public service agreements
- to take evidence from each Minister
at least annually
- to take evidence from independent regulators
and inspectorates
- to consider the reports of Executive
Agencies
- to consider, and if appropriate report
on, major appointments by a Secretary of State or other senior
ministers
- to examine treaties within their subject
areas."—[Paragraph 34]
16. The Modernisation Committee reflects our own
approach to improving the focus of committee work. Our
recent Report was able to draw on the review of committees' work
in 2001, and noted the use of seminars, induction programmes,
and clear frameworks for justifying an inquiry and assessing its
desired output. Indeed, we commented:
"A more methodical and less ad hoc approach
to the business of scrutiny can only strengthen the work of committees.
Identifying core tasks enables Members to have a clear discussion
of priorities for a committee's work programme, and to monitor
the results achieved."[18]
17. We welcome the further ideas on committee
objectives and tasks set out by the Modernisation Committee as
a valuable contribution to this process. The Report sets out
a useful illustrative list. It contains no novelties for most
departmental select committees, which should have no difficulty
in meeting the spirit of the recommendations - although the use
of terms such as objectives, tasks, work programmes and performance
measurements will need some refinement and standardisation. We
would also be glad to develop a framework based on such objectives
and tasks as a template for the annual reports which committees
now make to our own Committee. The key to the usefulness of a
list of core tasks is that it should represent a serious aspiration
for committees, not a mechanical checklist. Not every item will
be appropriate for every committee, nor will all items be capable
of being tackled each year. One other task which we and our predecessors
and the Hansard Society Commission considered crucial is the need
for committees to follow up previous reports in a systematic way.
Although not mentioned in the Modernisation Committee's list of
"principal objectives", we continue to believe that
reviewing their earlier work is something which the House has
a right to expect its committees to do on a regular basis, with
assistance from the proposed central scrutiny unit where appropriate.
18. The work of select committees has expanded consistently
since their creation. There are limitations on what committees
can take on: mainly the time Members have to devote to committee
work and the resources of committee staffs. Even if the latter
were increased, the former would remain, particularly in the crowded
Westminster week. The use of sub-committees, made possible by
the recent revision of SO No. 152, requires some Members to put
in extra time. Use of rapporteurs, which the Report proposes as
an experiment, would be a matter for decision by individual committees;
it is of course an option already open to them. Wider use of
either sub-committees or rapporteurs would require additional
staff support, and the time of Members for consideration of the
output by the full Committee in due course.
1 Select Committees, First Report from the Select
Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons, HC 224 of
Session 2001-02, paragraph 5 Back
2
Subsequent passages in our Report are preceded by relevant recommendations
from the Report of the Modernisation Committee - "Report"
- , and follow the same broad categories Back
3
Report, paragraph 9 Back
4
Report, paragraph 12 Back
5
Report, paragraph 19 Back
6
Report, paragraphs 24 to 25 Back
7
Report, paragraph 27 Back
8
The Work of Select Committees 2001, First Report from the
Liaison Committee, HC 590 of Session 2001-02, paragraphs 14-18 Back
9
The Legislative Process, First Report, HC 190 of Session
1997-98 Back
10
First Report, HC(1997-78), 588-I Back
11
First Report, HC (1980-81), 118-I Back
12
Second Report, HC (1989-90), 19-I Back
13
First Report, HC(1996-97), 323-I Back
14
Sixth Report, HC(1998-99), 295. This proposal was rejected by
the Government in its Reply to the Report. Back
15
Report of the Hansard Society Commission on Parliamentary Scrutiny:
The Challenge for Parliament - Making Government Accountable,
2001 Back
16
Report, paragraph 30 Back
17
Paragraph 30 Back
18
HC 590, paragraph 8 Back
