Parliamentary revolt paves way for reform

19 Jul 01
The mother of all parliaments is having a difficult time with some of her more unruly offspring. Rebellious MPs are defying parental authority and, echoing the cry of teenagers everywhere, complaining that the way she does things is 'not fair'. But in

20 July 2001

The mother of all parliaments is having a difficult time with some of her more unruly offspring.

Rebellious MPs are defying parental authority and, echoing the cry of teenagers everywhere, complaining that the way she does things is 'not fair'. But in this case many agree that the anguished cry is wholly justified.

At issue is the system of select committees, the means by which the House of Commons keeps a watchful eye on the activities of government ministers. Committee members are supposed to monitor the progress of Whitehall departments and cast a critical eye over the consequences of government policy.

Gwyneth Dunwoody and Donald Anderson, Labour chairs of the transport sub-committee and foreign affairs committee respectively, have won huge respect among their peers for their fierce independence. Their reward has been a concerted effort by the government to sack them.

This manoeuvre, which was seen by many MPs as a blatant attempt to silence criticism of ministers' actions, provoked Labour's first Commons defeat since taking office in 1997.

On July 16 more than 100 of the party's MPs joined with the opposition to punish its leaders' bid to manipulate Parliament and thwart robust scrutiny – the supposed bedrock of the committee system.

As a result, what should have been the routine business of a new parliament – appointing members to sit on select committees – has become a test of strength between legislature and executive. Backbenchers have come to the conclusion that the government should not be able to hand-pick the MPs who scrutinise it. And suddenly the momentum for reform is building.

MPs from all quarters of the House are calling for an overhaul of the committee system, which dates from 1979. Outside Parliament, the Hansard Society, an influential think-tank, published a report last month calling for a larger network of committees, with chairs paid the same salaries as ministers. These would scrutinise Whitehall departments, their agencies and associated quangos.

The plan would give all backbenchers a committee post and offer an alternative career structure, helping to dispel the glamour of ministerial office that encourages many MPs to be unquestioningly loyal, the report argued.

Such calls for change have received extensive press coverage and, for the first time in ages, sparked a serious debate about the nature and role of the select committees.

The most important front in this battle is the question of who selects the MPs that sit on committees. At the moment, decisions are taken by the committee of selection, whose members are mainly whips for the three main parties. The committee operates on a 'gentleman's agreement', whereby its members do not challenge the nominations put forward by the whips of other parties. As a result, the government can ensure committees are populated by its favoured backbenchers.

Members of all parties now agree that this must change, and during the debate that resulted in the government's defeat, a procession of Labour MPs voiced that demand.

Former Labour minister Frank Field predicted after the vote that the government's bloody nose would lead to change. 'It will now be the engine for much wider change. The outlook for reform must now be better than it has been since the war,' he said.

Angela Browning, shadow leader of the House, took up the mantle with zeal. 'Appointments should not be a matter of patronage for the whips' office,' she told MPs. 'I welcome the watershed that has been reached. We have reached it because of genuine feeling on both sides of the House.'

The man to feel the heat of these reforming passions is Robin Cook, the recently appointed leader of the Commons, who is known to be a reformer by instinct. He will chair the modernisation committee as it conducts a review of the system and, in a speech to the Hansard Society on July 12, committed himself 'personally to drive forward proposals for reform'.

In response to the government's defeat, in what was technically a free vote, Cook has asked the committee to make an examination of the appointments system its priority and to report back in the autumn.

During Parliamentary questions the day after the backbenchers' show of strength, Cook seemed to accept that maintaining the status quo was not an option. 'I hope we will be able to take that momentum forward to achieve real reforms both in the ways the select committees are set up and the ways in which they are able to exercise their powers,' he said.

There is certainly a wealth of material to draw on. The liaison committee, comprising all the select committee chairs, produced a report in the last session outlining a wide range of reforms, including the suggestion that committees should be appointed by a panel of three senior MPs.

There is also the report on Parliamentary reform produced last year by the Norton Commission, set up by Tory leader William Hague to generate a constitutional reform agenda for the Conservative Party.

With such a diverse range of voices calling for the government to loosen its grip on the way Parliament does business, Labour will find it difficult to resist the momentum for change.

The question over the coming months is whether Cook can persuade his Cabinet colleagues to let go of the reins.

PFjul2001

Did you enjoy this article?

AddToAny

Top