Annex 1
Analysis of Responses by Members
The Committee sent an email to all Members asking
for their views on the following points:
- Do you think that Secretaries
of State in the House of Lords should be more directly accountable
to the House of Commons?
- If so, do you think that such scrutiny should
take place in the Chamber, Westminster Hall or another forum?
- Should such scrutiny take the form of questions
or also include debates?
As of 25 February, 34 Members had responded. The
results are summarised in the tables below:
- Should Lords Ministers be more
accountable?
Those against the proposal were against blurring
the lines between the different institutions, as well as Members
who were strongly of the opinion that ministers should not be
drawn from the Lords.
One Member considered that such scrutiny should be
carried out through select committees, with practices modified
so that all Members could take part in that section of the proceedings.
- Where should such scrutiny
take place?
| Westminster Hall | Chamber
| Either | Other fora
|
| 14 | 11
| 2 | 2
|
The other fora suggested were committees, including
select committees, and question sessions in a committee room.
Those suggesting the Chamber included responses limiting
attendance by Ministers to the bar of the House or to exceptional
occasions.
- What form should scrutiny take?
| Questions only | Debates and questions
|
| 15 | 14
|
Of those responses supporting debates and questions,
several expressed a stronger preference for questions than for
debates.
| 
