CONCLUSION
104. The appointment from outside of people to be
ministers or 'tsars' has been a controversial development. To
some it represents a welcome change in emphasis towards extending
the range of talent and expertise available to a Prime Minster
when forming a government. To others it is an attempt to marginalise
parliamentary parties and allow Prime Ministers to appoint closed
cliques of people sympathetic to him.
105. The practice of outside appointment has been
tacked on to a system of government that was never really designed
to support it. Powers that were, in the past, used to appoint
one or two specialists or close associates of the Prime Minister
have been used to bring much more substantial numbers of people
into government from outside Parliament. Some of these people
have done valuable work, but the current appointment process does
not help to establish their legitimacy. Neither do the accountability
mechanisms for these ministers once in office. Such appointments
should be exceptional and the Prime Minister should be capable
of justifying them to the House of Commons. Appointees should
be clearly accountable to the House of Commons. Similarly, 'tsars'
need to be subject to greater transparency both in the way in
which they are appointed and the work they undertake. If current
trends on the appointment of outsiders to government are to continue,
then it is essential that there should be a proper consideration
of all the constitutional implications first.
| 
