1 Introduction
Purpose of
the report
1. For our final report of this Parliament we decided
to look back over our work since 2010. In the past, we, like other
select committees, have produced reviews of our work towards the
end of each session and these have examined how during the preceding
year we addressed the core tasks suggested as a guide by the Liaison
Committee.[1] It is our
intention in this report not only to cover these core tasks and
to comment on our recent work but also to provide a wider perspective
on our work since the beginning of the Parliament in 2010 and
to reflect on major issues likely to arise in the next Parliament.
To assist in the preparation of this report, we sought views on
how we carried out our work and what changes may be ahead from
2015. Our objective is to distil our experience into a report
for the benefit of our successor committee in the next Parliament
as well as the Liaison Committee.
Written contributions
2. In reviewing our work we have, as we have done
previously,[2] drawn on
our own experiences and deliberated as a committee. In addition,
several members have produced personal reflections on working
on a select committee and these are interspersed through this
report. To obtain the views of those beyond our Committee with
an interest in our work we issued a call for written submissions
on 12 November 2014.[3]
We sought views on four areas.
a) First, on how we carried out our work since
2010, particularly in scrutinising and reporting on the Department
for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), its agencies and
local government. We explained the broad strategy we had adopted
since 2010 which focused on (i) the review of policies as they
were formulated by the Coalition Government in the earlier years
and how we then shifted later in the Parliament to reviewing the
implementation and impact of these policies; and (ii) carrying
out inquiries into the major areas of policy for which DCLG is
responsible. As is usual select committee practice we also carried
out a number of inquiries as new issues and concerns emerged.
We made it clear in the call for submissions that we welcomed
contributions reflecting on our approaches and techniques used
for identifying, collecting and analysing evidence and publicising
our activities, and on the impact of the recommendations in our
reports. (There is a complete list of the reports we have published
since 2010 at the end of this report.)
b) Second, we have firmly supported the Coalition
Government's policy of greater localism. For this policy to operate
effectively local services have to be scrutinised effectively.
The recent reviews into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham[4]
and governance in Tower Hamlets[5]
have revealed systemic weaknesses in local scrutiny and have given
us concern that scrutiny within local government is not operating
as effectively as it should. In the time available we took evidence
on child sexual exploitation in Rotherham (and produced two reports),[6]
which underlined our concerns about local scrutiny. We would have
wished to carry out a major inquiry—which typically takes
six to nine months—into local government scrutiny if there
had been time. Instead, in the call for evidence made in November
2014 we sought views on local scrutiny.
c) The third area on which we sought written
submissions were the changes and challenges that can be expected
from 2015, which may affect the work of the select committee scrutinising
DCLG and local government. We see this as an opportunity to scan
the horizon and provide some pointers.
d) Finally, we asked for views on how we have
handled and weighed up evidence. We wish to take the opportunity
of this report to reflect on the types of evidence we have used
to carry out our work. One question we posed was whether there
could be greater scope to use and test research evidence—for
instance, where an inquiry could be informed by social science
research—and if so, how this might be best incorporated
into the ways in which we work. Our interest in this issue arose
from our participation in a project being led by the Parliamentary
Office of Science and Technology in partnership with the Economic
and Social Research Council and with support from University College
London.[7] This project
is studying the ways that research feeds into parliamentary processes
of scrutiny, debate and legislation.
We received over 20 submissions which we have published.[8]
We have drawn on the written
submissions we received at several points in this report but we
have not set out to summarise them and we suggest that our successor
committee may wish to read them.
Roundtable discussion
3. We supplemented the written evidence with a roundtable
discussion with some of those who answered our call for submissions,
specialists who have advised us and witnesses. A note of the main
points made in discussion is appended to our report.
Coverage of the report
4. Our report therefore not only looks back to the
work we have done since 2010 but also forward to the next Parliament.
It is our intention that this report will provide one of the briefing
papers for the new committee. We also hope that it can be used
to improve continuity between this Parliament and the next. It
is neither our job, nor intention, to trespass on the discretion
of the new committee or to set its agenda but the business of
local government does not stop with the dissolution of Parliament
and we have therefore used our report to set out, at chapter 5,
some unfinished business which the new committee may wish to follow-up
and include in its programme of work. As well as that chapter
we have structured our report with chapters on: our methods of
working (chapter 2); and linked to that, how we handle research,
including both that submitted to, and used in, inquiries and the
research we commissioned (chapter 3); a review of the core tasks
for select committees suggested by the Liaison Committee (chapter
4); and a review of major developments that we suggest may inform
the new committee's deliberations (chapter 6).
Record of appreciation
5. We must put on record our thanks not only to those
who have contributed to this report but all those since 2010 who
have taken the trouble and effort to submit written evidence and
to appear before us to give oral evidence, all of which has been
essential to our work. We also put on record our thanks to the
specialist advisers who have provided professional and technical
guidance in many of our reports.
1 Liaison Committee, Second Report of Session 2012-13,
Select committee effectiveness, resources and powers, HC 697,
paras 16-20 Back
2
See Liaison Committee, Session 2013-14, written evidence from
the Communities and Local Government Committee (SCE 002). Back
3
CLG Committee Press Notice, 'CLG Committee to report on its own work',
12 November 2014 Back
4
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham 1997-2013,
August 2014 Back
5
PWC, Best Value Inspection of London Borough of Tower Hamlets Report,
16 October 2014 Back
6
Communities and Local Government Committee, Third Report of Session
2014-15, Child sexual exploitation in Rotherham: some issues for local government,
HC 648; Ninth Report of Session 2014-15, Child sexual exploitation in Rotherham: Ofsted and further government issues,
HC 1144 Back
7
Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Evaluation, accessed
February 2015 Back
8
CLG Committee, Written evidence submitted to inquiry into the Work of the Committee since 2010 Back
| 
