Appendix 4: Memorandum on the Work of
the Scrutiny Unit
Scrutiny Unit activity in 2003-04
Overview
1. The Committee Office Scrutiny Unit was set up
in November 2002 following recommendations from the Liaison Committee,
the Modernisation Committee and the Procedure Committee, and the
approval of the House of Commons Commission. The Unit provides
specialist support for committees on expenditure matters and draft
bills, together with an element of 'surge' capacity at times of
unexpected demand or temporary staff shortages and more general
support in its areas of specialism. The Unit reached its full
complement in January 2004 with ten specialists and seven core
staff, but the short-term nature of many contracts means staff
turnover has been high.
2. The Scrutiny Unit carried out 87 tasks for select
committees in the 2003-04 parliamentary session. Of these, 42
related to expenditure, 14 related to draft bills and 31 related
to other tasks such as legislation other than draft bills. As
Table 1 shows, however, the 14 draft bill tasks accounted for
over two thirds (68 per cent) of staff time, with expenditure
accounting for a further 22 per cent of activity and other tasks
representing 10 per cent.
3. Chart 1 shows that the split of Unit staff time
between these three task types has not been uniform over the session
but has been driven by parliamentary activity, such as the publication
of draft bills and departmental annual reports.
4. Table 2 details the ten largest individual objects
of Scrutiny Unit activity in 2003-04: the largest being the draft
Gambling Bill, which accounted for over 400 staff days (not
including support from House of Lords staff). Each of the four
largest objects relate to joint committees staffed by the Unit.
In total, the Unit staffed eight joint committees and worked with
three others in 2003-04, entailing 1,228 staff days of work -
more than half the Unit total.
5. Each of the eight joint committees staffed by
the Unit considered draft bills. In several instances, a significant
number of memoranda were received. The Unit received over 1,200
memoranda in relation to the draft Mental Incapacity Bill,
over 400 for the draft Mental Health Bill (to date), and
over 350 for both the draft Civil Contingencies Bill and
the draft Charities Bill.
6. Chart 2 details the number of tasks and the length
of time spent by the Unit on work for Commons select committees.
This chart excludes work that cuts across several committees,
such as that undertaken on Winter and Spring Supplementary Estimates
(which forms a significant element of its work), and focuses on
those tasks on which committees have approached the Unit for assistance.
Differences in usage levels across committees have depended on
subject matter, relevant committee and Unit staff expertise, and
the timing of requests. The largest users of Unit time were the
ODPM, EFRA, Constitutional Affairs and Northern Ireland Affairs
committees.
Task 1: Scrutiny of policy proposals
7. Amongst other relatively small tasks undertaken
on behalf of select committees, the Unit assisted the Joint Committee
on Human Rights with its review of counter-terrorism powers, analysing
the legal response of 14 foreign jurisdictions to the threat from
international terrorism.
Task 2: Identification and examination of areas
of emerging or deficient policy
8. Examples of tasks falling under this heading include
ad hoc assistance provided to the Constitutional Affairs
Committee for a single evidence session on ecclesiastical patronage
and assistance given to the Home Affairs Committee in reviewing
and questioning the cost assumptions underlying the possible introduction
of ID cards.
Task 3: Draft Bills
9. The Unit worked on draft bills by providing (in
collaboration with staff of the House of Lords) the secretariat
of ad hoc joint committees and assisting departmental select
committees. This was the major consumer of Unit resources.
The two Joint Committees on the Draft Gambling
Bill
10. The Joint Committee on the Draft Gambling Bill
was appointed by the House of Commons and the House of Lords on
9 September 2003. The bulk of the draft Bill, which ran to 268
clauses and 10 schedules, was published in instalments between
July 2003 and February 2004. The Joint Committee received over
170 written submissions and held 17 oral evidence sessions. Evidence
was heard from a broad range of witnesses, including Christian
groups, industry associations, academics, a trade union and four
Government Ministers. In addition, the Committee made a number
of visits within the UK, including to Great Yarmouth and Blackpool,
as well as two overseas visits.
11. The Committee's Report was published in April
2004. Given the range and complexity of the issues examined during
the intensive eight month inquiry, the Report ran to over 600
paragraphs and included 139 recommendations. The Government's
response, published in June 2004, described the Report as "a
thorough examination of all the issues surrounding the reform
of gambling law in Britain" and accepted 129 of the Committee's
139 conclusions and recommendations.
12. The Committee recommended that it should be reappointed
to consider the Government's response to its conclusions relating
to the definition, location, economic and other implications of
the largest casinos. This recommendation was accepted by the Government
and the Joint Committee on the Draft Gambling Bill (Regional Casinos)
was appointed on 21st June 2004. Although the Committee reported
within a month of its appointment, it received over 50 submissions
and held four oral evidence sessions, hearing evidence from more
than 25 witnesses.
13. The Committee's Regional Casinos Report, published
in July 2004, ran to nearly 100 paragraphs, including 24 conclusions
and recommendations. A number of these recommendations were accepted
in the Government's September 2004 response to the Report. The
Gambling Bill was presented to the House of Commons on 24th November
2004 and the Parliamentary and public debates about it have been
informed by the conclusions and recommendations of the Joint Committees,
whose work has been referred to extensively.
Draft Disability Discrimination Bill
14. The draft Disability Discrimination Bill
was published on 3 December 2003. It fitted within the existing
framework of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. A Joint Committee
was established by resolutions of the House of Commons on 15 January
2004 and the House of Lords on 21 January 2004. The Committee
received over 140 written submissions in response to a general
call for evidence. Oral evidence was heard in nine public meetings
in February and March.
15. In its Report published on 27 May, the Committee
made 75 recommendations. The Government responded to the Report
on 15 July; it accepted 41 of the Committee's recommendations,
partially accepted, deferred or delegated 11, and rejected 23.
16. The Disability Discrimination Bill was introduced
to the House of Lords on 25 November 2004.
Draft Charities Bill
17. A joint committee was appointed on 10 May 2004
to "consider and report on any draft Charities Bill presented
to both Houses by a Minister of the Crown" and to do so by
the Government deadline of 30 September 2004. The draft Bill was
published by the Home Office on 27 May 2004. The Committee held
14 meetings, 8 of which were oral evidence sessions, and received
362 memoranda.
18. The Committee published its Report on 30 September
2004, making 54 recommendations in total. The Government's response
was published, alongside the Bill proper, by the Home Office on
21 December 2004. Of the Committee's 54 recommendations the Government
accepted 26, partially accepted, deferred or delegated 13, misinterpreted
1 and rejected 14.
Draft Mental Health Bill
19. A Joint Committee on the Draft Mental Health
Bill was set up in July 2004 with 12 Members from each House under
the chairmanship of Lord Carlile of Berriew. The Joint Committee
is required to consider and report on the draft Bill, which was
published on 8 September, by 31 March 2005. The Committee began
taking oral evidence on 20 October and by the end of the year
had held eight evidence sessions, including one at the National
Assembly for Wales, had received 401 memoranda and had visited
mental health facilities in South London and in Cardiff.
Assisting other Committees with pre-legislative
scrutiny work
20. The Scrutiny Unit provided extensive legal and
financial expertise to support the Constitutional Affairs Committee
in connection with its inquiry into the draft Criminal Defence
Service Bill. The Unit also assisted the ODPM Committee in
its pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Elected Regional
Assemblies Bill, giving specialist advice on the economic
and constitutional implications of the proposals. Specialist financial
and legal support was also provided to the Education and Skills
Committee in connection with its scrutiny of the draft School
Transport Bill. In addition, the Unit's lawyers provided advice
to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee on the Draft Criminal
Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2004 and to the Defence Committee
on its inquiry into the Government's proposals for a Tri-Services
Act. The Unit assisted the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Committee with legal and financial briefing as well as contributing
to the Committee's final report on the draft Animal Welfare
Bill.
Task 4: Examination of departmental decisions,
circulars, guidance etc
21. Under this heading, support from the Unit has
generally focused on financial and legal aspects of material encountered
by individual committees in the course of their wider policy inquiries.
The Unit provided substantial input into the Northern Ireland
Affairs Committee's inquiry into electoral registration.
Task 5: Scrutiny of expenditure plans and outturn
22. In addition to the expenditure issues raised
in the course of policy inquiries and draft bills, committees'
scrutiny of public expenditure continued to develop both in volume
and breadth during the year. This work was conducted through analysis
and review of:
· departmental
annual reports;
· Supplementary
Estimates;
· departmental
resource accounts; and
· 2004
Spending Review settlements.
23. This wider basis demonstrates that an active
interest is directed towards expenditure-related issues by departmental
select committees. Committees' ability to identify and highlight
such issues has continued to be enhanced by the Scrutiny Unit's
expert assistance.
24. Activity during 2004 continued to focus primarily
on departmental annual reports. Examination was conducted either
by correspondence or by taking oral evidence from Ministers or
officials. A significant number of the oral sessions included
questions relating to the 2004 Spending Review settlements. Overall,
an increased number of oral evidence sessions on departmental
annual reports were held compared to last year and an equivalent
number of committee reports are intended to be produced.
25. The number of committees examining Supplementary
Estimates continued to increase during the year, building on previous
levels in both the 2003-04 Spring Supplementary and 2004-05 Winter
Supplementary Estimates rounds. This work took the form of written
correspondence with departments and follow up action as appropriate,
with the Scrutiny Unit performing the majority of this analysis
on behalf of committees.
26. A number of committees undertook a detailed review
of their department's resource accounts for the first time in
2004, whilst the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee continued
to examine all Northern Ireland departments' resource accounts.
Both the Public Administration Select Committee and the Northern
Ireland Affairs Committee found evidence of poor financial control
in combination with either a lack of corporate governance processes
or unacceptably high levels of fraud and error and dedicated oral
evidence sessions to these findings. Subsequent to this, the Northern
Ireland Affairs Committee published a report in January 2005 setting
out their findings and recommendations on this inquiry.
27. Following correspondence with the Liaison Committee
Chairman, which highlighted concerns over the lack of time between
the presentation of Estimates and their being formally put to
the House for approval, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury agreed,
as part of a package of amendments updating Standing Order No.
55, that the minimum period between laying and voting the Estimates
be extended from seven to fourteen clear days, providing committees
with more time to examine Estimates, seek further information
from departments and, if appropriate, report back to the House.
This extension allowed the Liaison Committee to suggest an education-related
topic for the Estimates Day, after analysis of the Supplementary
Estimate requests, which was accepted by the House and debated
on 9 December 2004.
28. In conjunction with this change, Treasury now
requires departments to produce an Estimates Memorandum in support
of each Estimate presented to Parliament for approval (including
Revised or Supplementary Estimates). The new Memorandum is intended
to assist select committees' scrutiny of public expenditure by
providing explanations of the impact and consequences of changes
sought in the Estimate. Memoranda are to be provided to committees
no later than the date the Estimate is laid, and should follow
a standardised format.
29. Cross-departmental analysis undertaken by the
Scrutiny Unit of the first set of Memoranda, those supporting
the 2004-05 Winter Supplementary Estimates, showed marked variability
between departments in their quality and usefulness. In the majority
of cases Memoranda did not contain sufficient detail under the
specified standard headings to add significantly to committees'
understanding of the changes sought. In two instances the Memoranda
produced were of such poor quality that committees returned the
documents and requested revised versions from the departments.
In another two instances the Memoranda arrived over a week late.
Task 6: Scrutinising Public Service Agreements
and targets
30. The Unit has undertaken ongoing systematic review
of departments' annual spring expenditure reports and annual autumn
performance reports, and provided briefing to select committees
on these matters. These briefings have been used to pursue issues
with individual departments relating to public service agreements
and targets.
Task 7: Monitoring the work of agencies and
others
31. The Unit has provided extensive background briefing
to committees in supporting their work under this heading.
Conclusions
32. Overall, demand for the services provided by
the Unit remains strong, but generally in a reasonable balance
with the resources we have to meet it. It seems likely, if present
trends continue, that demand for support for joint committees
on draft bills may continue to grow significantly. If it does,
there will be staffing implications.
33. The financial scrutiny work of the Unit is significantly
enhancing the House's capacity to take an overview of the quality
of government financial reporting and its usefulness to select
committees and individual Members. This is an area of work in
which there is room for further development.
34. A general election will provide an opportunity
for a strategic review of the Unit and the application of resources
to tasks, within the broad framework set by the Liaison Committee
and the House of Commons Commission in establishing the Unit.
Paul Evans
Head of the Scrutiny Unit
22 February 2005
| 
