APPENDIX 1: GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
Letter from the Rt Hon Tessa Jowell MP
The Government is grateful to the House of Lords
Select Committee on the Constitution for its detailed and considered
inquiry into, and recommendations on, the Cabinet Office and the
Centre of Government.
The key characteristics for the centre of government
are for it to be able to react coherently and effectively to the
changing pattern of current and future opportunities and challenges.
The report in large part supports the structures and arrangements
that are already in place and the Government is grateful for that
endorsement.
The Committee's central recommendation relates to
the need to ensure good levels of transparency and accountability.
The Committee rightly draws attention to the specific point that
accountability structures should reflect power structures.
The Government agrees about the essential nature
and value of transparency and accountability; it will continue
to work—with others in and outside Parliament with a role
to play—to improve both. Some aspects are already being
addressed through measures in the Constitutional Reform and Governance
Bill that is currently before Parliament.
The need for the centre of government to react quickly
and flexibly to new challenges means that accountability structures
may not always mirror new responsibilities at the centre. The
Government will act as quickly as it can to ensure that power
and accountability mechanisms are aligned as swiftly and accurately
as they can be.
Introduction
Recommendation at paragraph 251
In our view, structures of accountability should
mirror structures of power, and where structures of power have
changed, the structures of accountability should be adjusted accordingly.
Two considerations flow from this view:
· Upholding and improving parliamentary
accountability;
· Ensuring that all elements of the centre
and all aspects of the centre's work are transparent. (Para 8)
Government Response
The Government agrees that transparency and accountability
are key aspects in the working of the centre of government, and
that accountability structures need to adapt to reflect changing
roles and responsibilities.
Supporting the Prime Minister
Recommendation at paragraph 252
Sir Gus O'Donnell asserted that "there is
one Cabinet Office of which Number 10 is a subset". This
description of the relationship between the Cabinet Office and
Prime Minister's Office was not reflected in other evidence that
we received. It conflicts, for instance, with the statement of
Lords Armstrong, Butler and Wilson, that the two offices are "functionally
distinct". It is open to doubt whether Sir Gus O'Donnell's
description of the Prime Minister's Office as a "subset"
and a "business unit" goes beyond what Sir Richard Mottram
told us, that "Number 10 is part of the Cabinet Office for
public expenditure planning purposes", and whether it accurately
describes how the centre operates in practice. We believe that
the nature of this relationship should be clarified by the Cabinet
Office, and should be reflected in government publications, which
appear to suggest that the two offices are independent institutions.
(Para 25)
Government response
The Prime Minister's Office is a unit within the
Cabinet Office rather than a department in its own right. It shares
the Cabinet Office's overarching purpose of making government
work better. The specific role of the Prime Minister's Office
is to support the Prime Minister, one of the three core functions
of the Cabinet Office, which also include supporting the Cabinet
and strengthening the Civil Service. The Government will consider
the way the relationship is reflected in Government publications.
The Permanent Secretary and other senior staff of
the Prime Minister's Office play a significant role within Cabinet
Office governance structures, for example by participating in
the Cabinet Office Board and its sub-committees.
Staff from the Prime Minister's Office and other
Cabinet Office units work closely together in many contexts, including
the provision of policy advice to the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
The Prime Minister's Office also assists other Cabinet Office
units in ensuring that other departments' policies receive proper
collective consideration. On three core communications functions—strategic
communications, press office and digital communications—there
will shortly be full integration of management. This means one
manager overseeing each of these functions across the Prime Minister's
Office and broader Cabinet Office with the brief of bringing the
two sets of teams together as far as possible.
Recommendation at paragraph 253
The role of the Prime Minister's Office is central
to the role and structure of the centre of government. The establishment
by the current Prime Minister of the post of Permanent Secretary
to the Prime Minister's Office is an important step in the evolution
of the structure of the centre. We recognise the arguments set
out by Sir Gus O'Donnell and Jeremy Heywood in favour of the current
arrangements, and Sir Gus O'Donnell's explanation of the role
of the six permanent secretaries located in the Cabinet Office.
We recommend that the Prime Minister's Office, and the Permanent
Secretaries that operate within it, are subject to appropriate
parliamentary accountability mechanisms. (Para 26)
Government response
The structure and responsibilities of the centre
of government, including the Prime Minister's Office, will continue
to evolve in order to respond flexibly and effectively to current
and future challenges. It is worth noting that the Prime Minister
is now subject to more scrutiny and accountability than before.
He attends the Liaison Committee where he answers questions from
the heads of all Select Committees on topics of their choice twice
a year. He also conducts monthly press conferences. This is in
addition to Prime Minister's Questions and twice daily lobby briefing
by his official spokesman. This makes No10 one of the most actively
accountable prime minister's offices in the world. The Prime Minister's
Office and officials who operate within it are subject to the
usual accountability mechanisms in the same way as other officials
and as set out in the Civil Service Code and the Cabinet
Office Guidance on Departmental Evidence and Response to Select
Committees.
The Cabinet Secretary is the Accounting Officer for
the Prime Minister's Office. The Intelligence and Security Committee
also scrutinises the relevant sections of the Cabinet Office,
and the Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee gives evidence
to it.
Recommendation at paragraph 254
We conclude that a greater involvement and influence
by the Prime Minister on policy delivery is inevitable in the
modern age, that the Prime Minister's role has evolved over a
long period under different governments, and that Prime Ministers
will wish to use all possible resources in pursuit of the role.
We recommend that the Prime Minister's role and the centre's role
in policy delivery are transparent and accountable to Parliament.
(Para 43)
Recommendation at paragraph 255
We believe that the Delivery Unit and the Strategy
Unit play a useful role in delivering the Government's policy
agenda, for instance in co-ordinating work across government departments,
and that there should be transparency and accountability for the
work of these units. (Para 52)
Government response
The Government agrees about the importance of transparency
and accountability in the work of the Prime Minister and of units,
including the Delivery Unit and the Strategy Unit, supporting
policy delivery. Information about the work of the Delivery Unit
and the Strategy Unit is published in the HM Treasury and Cabinet
Office Departmental Reports and on their websites. Supplementary
detail about their activities is regularly provided, for example,
through answers to Parliamentary Questions.
Ministers are subject to Parliamentary accountability;
officials are subject to the usual accountability mechanisms and
as set out in the Civil Service Code and the Cabinet Office
Guidance on Departmental Evidence and Response to Select Committees
The Government is grateful to the Committee for its
support for the work of the Delivery Unit and the Strategy Unit.
Recommendation at paragraph 256
We agree with the Minister for the Cabinet Office
that the flexibility of the structure of the centre of government
is an asset. We also recognise the value of an "incubator
role", where the Cabinet Office develops units and functions
that are consequently transferred to the relevant government departments,
but we fear that the Cabinet Office has tended to function less
as an incubator and more as a dustbin. The fact that policy units
for which no other home can be found have been placed in the Cabinet
Office underlines the constitutional importance of ensuring that
the Cabinet Office and the units within it are properly held to
account. (Para 66)
Government response
The Cabinet Office has a solid history of undertaking
projects of vital national importance and then bedding them out
into home departments when they are up and running. Examples include
Better Regulation and counter-terrorism. All units are properly
held to account and we will ensure this continues.
Recommendation at paragraph 257
We recommend that a review of the units that have
accrued to the centre be undertaken by the Government, including
an examination of the rationale for each unit's continued existence,
and for its location at the centre of government rather than in
a department. In order to ensure that the Government are properly
held to account, we recommend that a copy of this review be sent
to this Committee and also, should they wish to receive it, to
the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee. We
also recommend that the same review process be repeated regularly.
Appropriate mechanisms should be put in place to ensure that those
units that remain are held to account in an effective manner.
(Para 67)
Government response
The Government welcomes the Committee's recognition
of the value of the 'incubator role' that allows the Cabinet Office
to develop units and functions prior to their being transferred
to the relevant government department. It keeps the structure
and units of the Cabinet Office under review. However, the Government
does not believe that a formal review would be appropriate or
necessary at the current time. The evidence of both the Cabinet
Secretary and the Minister for the Cabinet Office explained the
dynamic nature of the Cabinet Office, which naturally tends towards
the priorities of the Government of the day. This has at times
led to a necessary widening of strategic objectives and to functions
being incubated in the centre. It is right to continue this approach
and to move functions on at the appropriate time.
Recommendation at paragraph 258
We believe that special advisers have an important
role to play in the work of government, but that it is necessary
to ensure that advisers fulfil an appropriate function that complements,
rather than diminishes, the role and responsibilities of ministers
and civil servants. Transparency should apply to the work of special
advisers. We welcome the provision for a Code of Conduct for special
advisers included in the Constitutional Reform and Governance
Bill. This Code should include a procedure to limit the numbers
of special advisers. We recommend that the Government should define
the role of special advisers, and prevent a recurrence of the
1997 Order in Council giving advisers the power to instruct civil
servants. We will pay particular attention to these issues when
we conduct our scrutiny of the Bill. (Para 84)
Government response
The Government welcomes the Committee's conclusion
that special advisers play an important role in government. The
Government is open and transparent about the function and numbers
of special advisers. The existing Code of Conduct for Special
Advisers clearly sets out what special advisers can and cannot
do, and the basis of their relationship with Ministers and permanent
civil servants. The Ministerial Code makes clear the restrictions
on the number of special advisers who can be appointed. The Government
publishes an annual statement to Parliament on the number and
cost of special advisers.
The Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill currently
before Parliament would put this on to a statutory footing by
making provision for a code of conduct for special advisers and
for a report on special adviser numbers and costs, both of which
would be laid before Parliament. The Bill also specifies that
special advisers are appointed to assist Ministers, and makes
clear the restrictions on their activities.
Recommendation at paragraph 259
We reaffirm that structures of accountability
should mirror structures of power. We reaffirm that the structure
of accountability should mirror the structure of power. Greater
prominence in the role of the Prime Minister should be mirrored
by increased transparency and more effective accountability. Whilst
we welcome the biannual appearance by the Prime Minister before
the House of Commons Liaison Committee, we do not believe that
this goes far enough in securing the parliamentary accountability
of the Prime Minister's Office. (Para 97)
Government response
The Government believes that No10 Downing Street
is one of the most open and accountable prime minister's offices
in the world. The Prime Minister is accountable to Parliament
through his weekly appearance at Prime Minister's Questions. In
addition to being open to Parliamentary questions, in the same
period since they took up office, the current Prime Minister has
already given more statements to Parliament than his predecessors
(33 by end February 2010), allowing all MPs to debate and question
him directly on the subject as they see fit. In addition to debates
of the Queen's Speech, the Prime Minister has introduced a statement
to parliament on the draft legislative programme and reduced the
power of the Executive through constitutional reforms set out
in the Governance of Britain document and the current Constitutional
Renewal and Governance Bill. In common with all members, he is
an elected Member of Parliament, accountable to his constituents.
Since 2002, the Prime Minister has appeared twice a year before
the Liaison Committee. This allows members of the Committee, on
behalf of Parliament, to hold the Prime Minister to account on
topics of their choosing. The Prime Minister's most recent appearance
was on 2 February 2010, when members questioned him on the themes
of the fiscal deficit, invigorating democracy, counter-terrorism
policy, foreign affairs and being Prime Minister.
Recommendation at paragraph 260
We do not support the calls for the creation of
a separate Office of the Prime Minister, or an Office of the Prime
Minister and the Cabinet, because we do not believe that this
would significantly enhance the effective functioning or accountability
of government. Instead we recommend that "Supporting the
Prime Minister" should remain a core function of the Cabinet
Office, so long as there is full transparency in the way in which
the Cabinet Office fulfils this role, and so long as accountability
mechanisms effectively reflect the importance of this function.
(Para 110)
Government Response
The Government welcomes the Committee's support for
the Prime Minister's Office remaining an integral part of the
Cabinet Office and for supporting the Prime Minister remaining
one of the Cabinet Office's core functions.
Supporting the Cabinet
Recommendation at paragraph 261
We reaffirm our belief in the importance of Cabinet
government, which plays an essential role in upholding the principle
of collective ministerial responsibility. (Para 128)
Recommendation at paragraph 262
We believe that the Cabinet committee system remains
an essential part of the UK's government structure, as part of
the system of collective ministerial responsibility. In order
for Cabinet committees to function effectively, we believe that
they should be mirrored by committees of officials. We ask the
Government to clarify the extent to which Cabinet committees continue
to be supported in this way. (Para 137)
Recommendation at paragraph 263
We reaffirm the constitutional importance of the
principle of collective ministerial responsibility. Executive
responsibility should not lie solely with the Prime Minister,
not least because accountability mechanisms are not designed to
reflect such responsibility. In the light of the trends and changes
described above, it is important that the principle of collective
responsibility is maintained. (Para 153)
Government response
The Government agrees that the Cabinet, collective
Ministerial responsibility and the Cabinet Committee system remain
essential parts of UK government.
Cabinet Committees are supported by official-level
meetings both informal and formal. Formal committees of officials
are established for most Cabinet Committees and are organised
and chaired by the Committee Secretariat when required. They are
attended, in the main, by senior civil servants, and enable the
Secretariat and Departments to monitor progress on actions from
previous Committee meetings and prepare the Committee forward
agenda, including resolving potential differences and testing
the effectiveness of Committee papers. Further detail is available
at
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/98307/guide_to_cabinet.pdf
The Prime Minister recently constituted three new
Committees to focus on the Government's priorities: National Economic
Council (NEC), Democratic Renewal Council (DRC) and Domestic Policy
Council (DPC). Each is mirrored by a committee of senior officials
chaired by the Cabinet Secretary.
Recommendation at paragraph 264
The increasing recognition of issues involving
more than one department has placed pressure on the traditional
departmental delivery model. In order to ensure that structures
of accountability mirror structures of power, Parliament should
ensure that its accountability mechanisms adapt to the changing
nature of policy formation and delivery. Government should ensure
that the mechanism of the policy formation and delivery process
remains transparent. (Para 154)
Government response
The Government agrees that transparency and accountability
are key to the work of government, and that accountability structures
need to adapt to reflect changing roles and responsibilities,
including shared roles and responsibilities.
Recommendation at paragraph 265
We believe that the post of Minister for the Cabinet
Office should be maintained in order to ensure that the work of
the Cabinet Office is transparent, and to ensure that Parliament
is able to hold the Department to account in an effective way,
but are concerned that the responsibilities of the Minister in
relation to the Cabinet Office are at present ill-defined. We
recommend that the Government reassess the current function of
the Minister for the Cabinet Office to ensure that the postholder's
responsibilities accurately reflect and account for the strategic
role that the Cabinet Office plays. (Para 163)
Government response
The Minister for the Cabinet Office is responsible
for and gives strategic direction to the Cabinet Office, including
oversight of the department's three core objectives:
· Supporting the Prime Minister
· Supporting the Cabinet
· Strengthening the Civil Service.
The evidence of both the Cabinet Secretary and the
Minister for the Cabinet Office explained the dynamic nature of
the Cabinet Office, where the focus is on the priorities of the
Government of the day; this has at times led to a necessary widening
of strategic objectives. For example, the Minister for the Cabinet
Office is also responsible for co-ordinating Government action
in relation to social exclusion and the Third Sector.
The Prime Minister of the day regularly reviews all
Ministerial functions and responsibilities.
Recommendation at paragraph 266
In the case of the proposal to abolish the Office
of Lord Chancellor in June 2003, the Cabinet Office was unable
to ensure compliance with proper constitutional norms in the adoption
of a change of such constitutional significance. It is particularly
disturbing that these failures occurred without there being any
external crisis which might explain, far less justify, such failures.
Consideration should be given by the Cabinet Office to means of
ensuring that such failures do not recur. (Para 214)
Government response
The Government does not accept that putting forward
its proposal was not in accord with constitutional norms. It set
out its proposals in June 2003. There was extensive consultation
and debate on various aspects of the Lord Chancellor's role before
the Government submitted its proposals to Parliament for scrutiny
and approval through the Constitutional Reform Bill in February
2004. As the Cabinet Secretary set out in his letter of 1 December
2009 to the Committee, the Cabinet Office consulted senior officials
in the Lord Chancellor's department and the (then) Prime Minister
discussed his plans with Lord Irvine in early June 2003. The Cabinet
Office did not consult senior members of the judiciary prior to
announcement and it would not, as the evidence explains, have
been right for the department to undertake consultation with the
judiciary without the involvement in it of the Lord Chancellor,
which—for the reasons Lord Irvine and Lord Turnbull have
explained to the Committee—was not possible at the time.
The Cabinet Office will continue to consider carefully
any future changes that, if implemented, would have constitutional
implications. Where possible, the Cabinet Office will consult
on the merits of any change with their legal advisors in the Treasury
Solicitor's Department and the Parliamentary Counsel Office, and
with Departmental officials, who will be aware of the views of
key stakeholders. However, due to the sensitivity of some proposed
changes, this will not always be possible until a late stage.
To do otherwise could be destabilising for the ongoing business
of Government and undermine the Prime Minister's ability to appoint
his Cabinet.
Recommendation at paragraph 267
Whilst we accept the general proposition that
the ability to undertake machinery of government changes should
remain as a prerogative power of the Prime Minister on behalf
of the Crown, this should be subject to a number of provisos.
In the case of the proposal to abolish the Office of Lord Chancellor,
the fact that it marked a constitutional change of great significance,
with implications for both Parliament and the judiciary and that
the post could only be removed by statute, meant that it required
totally different handling. (Para 215)
Government response
The Government accepts that this required different
handling, in the sense that important aspects of the changes,
including some of constitutional significance, could only be made
with the agreement of Parliament through its consideration of
the Constitutional Reform Bill.
Recommendation at paragraph 268
We recommend that the Cabinet Office should play
a formal role in investigating the likely consequences of any
machinery of government changes, particularly those with constitutional
implications. (Para 216)
Government response
All machinery of government changes are a decision
for the Prime Minister or the Cabinet Secretary, acting on his
behalf. The Cabinet Secretary, supported by civil servants in
the Cabinet Office, is responsible for providing advice to the
Prime Minister on machinery of government changes, and when doing
so carefully considers the full range of implications, including
constitutional implications, and structures his advice to the
Prime Minister accordingly.
Recommendation at paragraph 269
We further recommend that parliamentary scrutiny
of machinery of government changes should be enhanced, and that,
as a minimum requirement, the Government, advised by the Cabinet
Office, should be required to set before Parliament a written
analysis of the relevant issues and consequences relating to a
proposed machinery of government change with constitutional implications,
and that an oral ministerial statement be made in Parliament.
We affirm the value of the scrutiny work of parliamentary committees
in this context, and recommend that relevant committees of both
Houses be given the opportunity to scrutinise proposed changes,
both before and after they take place. (Para 217)
Government response
The Government believes that the Prime Minister of
the day should continue to be able to act quickly to change the
structure of the government and to appoint Ministers to the roles
he thinks most appropriate. However, changes are not made lightly
or in a vacuum. The Government has taken significant steps in
recent years to improve the transparency of the machinery of government
process and believes that the current accountability mechanisms
in place are sufficient for effective parliamentary oversight
and scrutiny.
All significant changes are now announced to Parliament
by a Written Ministerial Statement which is accompanied by detailed
background material placed in the Libraries of both Houses. This
provides a starting point for Select Committees and the Government
has committed that Ministers will make themselves available to
any Select Committee that wishes to examine the implementation
of any changes. The Cabinet Office also published in January a
best practice handbook on machinery of government changes, which
provides advice for civil servants on both the process for taking
decisions and on the implementation of any changes. The handbook
is available on the Cabinet Office website.
Strengthening the Civil Service
Recommendation at paragraph 270
We find persuasive the arguments which we have
heard that the current arrangement where the Cabinet Secretary
acts as Head of the Civil Service has worked well. We therefore
recommend that the Cabinet Secretary should continue to fulfil
the function of Head of the Civil Service, and that the Cabinet
Office should retain responsibility for managing the Civil Service.
(Para 231)
Recommendation at paragraph 271
We note the Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell's
assertion that he has "all the personal authority I need",
and agree with his assessment that much "depends on the engagement
between the individual Cabinet Secretary and the Prime Minister
of the day as to how they use their Cabinet Secretary." Nonetheless
we note with concern the evidence we have received suggesting
that the authority of the Cabinet Secretary has diminished. The
Cabinet Secretary has a vital role to play in ensuring the effective
operation of government, and should retain the authority needed
to fulfil this function with the full support and backing of the
Prime Minister. (Para 242)
Recommendation at paragraph 272
We note the work undertaken by the Cabinet Office
in delivering Capability Reviews of departmental activity. We
believe that the Cabinet Office is the most appropriate department
to undertake this work. (Para 249)
Government response
The Government welcomes the Committee's endorsement
of the arrangements under which the Cabinet Secretary acts as
Head of the Civil Service and the Cabinet Office is responsible
for managing the Civil Service and carrying out Capability Reviews
of departmental activity. There are no plans to change these arrangements.
The Government shares the Committee's view that the
Cabinet Secretary has a vital role to play in the effective operation
of government, and that Prime Ministerial support and backing
for the Cabinet Secretary role is essential. The Government does
not agree with the suggestion that the authority of the position
of Cabinet Secretary has diminished.
Conclusion
Recommendation at paragraph 273
In undertaking this inquiry we have considered
a complicated and at times confusing web of offices, structures,
jobs and personalities. This complicated picture should not obscure
the fact that the operation of the centre of government is of
unique and vital importance to the effectiveness of the UK's system
of government. We repeat our view that structures of accountability
should mirror structures of power. Our recommendations have sought
to ensure that where structures of power have shifted, structures
of accountability are adjusted accordingly. As the General Election
approaches, we call on all political parties to bear this principle
in mind. (Para 250)
Government response
The Government agrees that the Cabinet Office and
the centre of government have a key role in ensuring an effective
and coherent response to a constantly changing pattern of opportunities
and challenges. It agrees that transparency and accountability
mechanisms should be kept under review to reflect current organisational
structures and functions.
| 
