8 Conclusion
80. We believe that the Backbench Business Committee
has made a positive difference to the work of the House. The new
opportunities for self-expression by backbenchers have enlivened
this Parliament and made it much more relevant to the world outside.
This has benefitted not only Parliament's reputation but also
the Government's decision-making, which is better for being more
carefully scrutinised.
81. In conclusion, we revert to the subject of
how the Government responds to backbench debates. It is damaging
to the reputation both of the House and the Government if it simply
ignores those debates. Expectations amongst people outside the
House are raised only to be dashed. We recommend that when the
House has agreed to a backbench motion, the Government should
undertake to make a written ministerial statement setting out
what if any action will take place in response to the House's
decision. This may simply result in the restatement of the Minister's
speech in the debate, but it could form part of a series of consultations
or meetings with Members and others on how to carry forward action
on the topic debated. At the very least, even if the Government
takes no action, they will have to explain why they are taking
no action.
82. We also recommend that the House's committee
system, particularly the departmental select committees, should
play a role in monitoring the Government's response to debates
in their subject area. If a Minister makes a commitment from the
despatch box, the relevant committee can follow it up during the
course of their inquiries and regular sessions with Ministers.
If no action follows, the original sponsoring Member or the appropriate
select committee could pursue the matter by tabling another backbench
motion.
| 
