26 March 2004
Senior parliamentary watchdogs this week launched a broadside at the Labour government, criticising ministers for continually blocking Commons committees from cross-examining senior policy advisers on key issues.
The annual report of the Commons' liaison committee, published on March 22, attacks the government for its failure to provide access to spin doctors and advisers, and juxtaposes their treatment with the wider freedoms afforded to Lord Hutton during his inquiry into the death of David Kelly.
The panel, made up of the chairs of the 34 parliamentary committees, concludes that 'more co-operation from the government is needed if [select] committees are to hold the executive fully to account'. In particular, MPs note that access to Number 10's policy advisers is poor, and so is 'the availability of current policy reviews and reports'. The dispute over access to Number 10's advice team is long-running and centres on the growing power of unaccountable advisers, such as former director of communications and strategy Alastair Campbell.
Hutton's inquiry broke new ground in providing access to Campbell and other senior members of the government's advisory staff. Yet the defence and foreign affairs select committees recently complained that they were denied similar access to personnel during their inquiries into the Iraq war.
Liaison committee chair Alan Williams said: 'After seeing what the Hutton Inquiry was given, we are determined that Parliament should receive government co-operation as fully as an inquiry set up by the government itself.'
Criticism of government does not stop at Number 10's door, however. Home Secretary David Blunkett is exposed as having blocked MPs' attempts to question government scientists over the response to global terrorism, and for attempting to dissuade other departments from co-operating.
The Treasury also comes under fire for its reluctance to allow departmental officials to attend hearings on other departments. MPs believe that it could do more to help, because of its key role in funding and co-ordinating 'joined-up' government.
The government has committed itself to a review of parliamentary access.
Scottish civil servants to escape Brown axe
Civil servants in Scotland look set to escape the swingeing cuts due to be imposed in England. Finance Minister Andy Kerr has said there is no need for a Gershon-style review in Scotland.
His disclosure followed several days of confusion over what impact last week's Budget statement by Chancellor Gordon Brown might have on government staff north of the border.
On Budget day, Scottish officials of the Public and Commercial Services union voiced concern over Scotland's potential share of the thousands of job cuts announced by the chancellor in tandem with the Gershon efficiency review.
In January, First Minister Jack McConnell had appointed a senior private sector consultant, Nick Parker, to lead a performance and innovation unit. Its first task would be to look at efficiencies across the public sector.
Other consultants with practical experience and a proven track record in the public and private sectors would follow, Kerr said. He added: 'There is no need for a Gershon-style review in Scotland – we are using examples and advice from the public and private sector to secure these savings.'
The minister stressed the determination of Scottish ministers to maximise investment in frontline public services by securing sustainable efficiency savings. He warned that: 'We are going into one of the toughest Spending Reviews for some time.'
Eddie Reilly, Scottish secretary of the PCS, said this week there was a need for clarification and he would be writing to ministers.
Reilly told Public Finance: 'As a union we are extremely concerned about how the issue was handled in the chancellor's speech, and there still seems to be a lack of clarity on the part of the Scottish first minister and minister for finance in relation to the impact on Scottish departments.'
Scottish Tory leader David McLetchie said McConnell appeared to be at odds with Brown.
'We have a pretence of a review in Scotland, but nothing that bears any relationship to the rigorous examination undertaken by Gershon,' McLetchie said.
Department's late accounts due to 'lack of skilled staff'
The Cabinet Office had so few financially skilled staff that it became the only Whitehall department to fail to submit its accounts on time, the National Audit Office has found.
The office's accounts for 2002/03 have been 'disclaimed' by the NAO. It was the only department to which the NAO applied this criticism, and was one of only three departments whose accounts were qualified because of uncertainty about their truth and fairness.
But in the cases of the Ministry of Defence and the Department for Work and Pensions, this was due only to insufficient evidence about specific aspects of their programmes.
The office's accounts were 'rendered for audit too late for a full audit to be completed' for the January 31 deadline because of 'a critical shortage of staff with sufficient accounting and financial management skills to prepare a resource account, combined with the absence of automated accounting systems'. The latter is particularly embarrassing, since the office is the body charged with driving the e-government initiative.
It was also found to have overspent and had to seek retrospective parliamentary authorisation.
PFmar2004
