Memorandum submitted by the Better Government
Initiative
On behalf of the Better Government Initiative
(BGI) I am writing to put forward, on the basis of our work and
consultation with parliamentarians over recent years, some key
points which the Committee might consider in preparing their report
in the short time available.
The resolution setting up the Committee does
not include the objective of reforming the House. But two of the
specific matters listed in the resolution (scheduling business
in the House and appointments to Select Committees) and the Government's
constitutional agenda, suggest to us that a quotation from the
Governance Green Paper of July 2007 expresses the core of the
objective well:
"|to rebalance power between Parliament
and Government, and give Parliament more ability to hold the Government
to account|"
A key part of this is strengthening parliamentary
scrutiny. As a 2006 report by the Modernisation Committee put
it: "the purpose|is to make better laws by improving the
scrutiny of Bills." Our proposals are geared to these purposes.
KEY POINTS
1. Parliament should set standards for thorough
preparation by the executive of legislation and policies. This
could be initiated by Parliament (we have suggested an illustrative
resolution to be found at Annex A to the summary attached to this
letter), or alternatively by Government and then endorsed by Parliament.
Either way this would produce agreement between Parliament and
executive; and would need to be accompanied by changed procedures
within the executive.
2. The standards would include showing that:
a. The bill or other proposal is complete
and comprehensive;
b. New powers are operationally necessary;
c. The criteria for secondary legislation
are defined when a bill enters Parliament;
d. The problem addressed, and the purpose
and intended effects of the measure, have been defined;
3. Once standards were agreed, they would
need to be enforced. For example, the relevant departmental select
committees could check compliance before the proposal reaches
the floor of the House. If the proposal were judged non-compliant,
it might only reach the floor of the House if a motion from the
select committee is voted down (perhaps by a qualified majority).
Alternatively a business committee could withhold time on the
floor for a proposal judged non-compliant by a select committee.
Such cases should be rare once standards are agreed between Parliament
and executive.
4. The volume of legislation should be limited
to a level that can be adequately scrutinised by Parliament. Ministers
should confirm to Parliament that their programme satisfies this
criterion. A business committee could, if necessary, reject this
statement and reflect this in the allocation of time. Again this
should be rare.
5. Pre-legislative scrutiny should become
the norm with timely publication of draft bills, along with adequate
explanatory documents (Green, White papers and impact assessments)
directly related to the bill or major policy proposal.
6. Select committees should be strengthened,
partly through changes in the way chairs and members are chosen,
and partly through other means, including the pay of chairs, designed
to create an attractive career in scrutiny, as an alternative
to becoming a minister. Their chairs should be able to present
their reports on the floor of the House and the Committees should
have the power to propose substantive motions and amendments or
bills.
7. The Commons and Select Committees should
play a greater role in expenditure and tax matters, as proposed
by the Liaison Committee report, Financial Scrutiny: Parliamentary
Control over Government Budgets, and by the BGI.[19]
The Committee may consider other measures merit
similar improvements in parliamentary scrutiny: for example, major
policy proposals not requiring legislation, among them significant
changes in the machinery of Government, and in service delivery
and information systems.
We wish the Committee every success in its crucial
task.
July 2009
19 See Liaison Committee, Financial Scrutiny: Parliamentary
Control over Government Budgets, Second Report of Session
2008-09, HC 804; and BGI Report, Governing Well, on the BGI website:
www.bettergovernmentinitiative.co.uk Back
| 
