Case Study; Departmental Select Committees

There are 19 Departmental Select Committees each one being concerned with a specific area of Govt. responsibility eg: Business innovation and skills; Children Schools and Families; Defence; Culture Media and Arts; Energy and Climate Change; Health; Transport etc
They were introduced in 1979 in an attempt by Parliament to reassert control over the Executive
They examine the expenditure administration and policy of the individual Govt. departments and then they report back to the House of Commons
They deliberate in public and can provide expert knowledge on a particular subject
Most meet once a week for approx. 2 hours
DSCs usually have between 11 – 14 members and they are elected by all of the members of the House of Commons (unlike legislative Committees – no Govt. ministers/front bench opposition members are allowed and whips do not attend)
The Chair of the DSC is usually someone with great influence – he/she receives a salary for this role
The Govt. party has a majority on DSCs (membership = same proportion as seats in HoC) – BUT members are expected to behave in an non-partisan/neutral fashion
Reports of the DSCs are, if possible, supported unanimously and carry great weight – there is often great publicity e.g.: recent report of the Public Accounts Committee on the government’s handling of the ‘bonfire of the quangos’
DSCs have considerable powers – they can call for ministers, civil servants and external witnesses/official papers in their investigations

Investigate the work of govt. departments to determine whether they have acted efficiently/effectively
Consider major departmental policies and determine whether they are well considered and have taken account of public opinion
Consider proposed legislation – not with a view to blocking it, but to consider whether it is likely to be effective
Consider matters of major public concern that fall within the remit of the Committee
Investigate any serious errors or omissions made by the department
Occasionally, to propose future legislation
The DSCs have an adversarial style and can be quite aggressive – ‘witnesses; have no notification of the questions they will be asked
DSCs have a small number of support staff assigned to them to undertake research/admin (DSCs do NOT exist in the HofL)

They are probably the most effective way of calling the Govt. to account
Can call expert witnesses/ministers etc
They deliberate in public – transparent scrutiny
Now that selection of membership = by ballot (since March 2010) – there is less opportunity for Whips to have influence = the DSCs are therefore more independent
They do speak up against the Govt. eg: the Health Select Committee recently criticised the Govt.s proposals for NHS reform
They aim to work together and to produce reports that are unanimous
The Liaison Committee (made up of heads of all DSCs) can question the PM twice a year

HOWEVER

They lack any real power and vary in quality – have been called the dog that never bites
The convention of Collective Responsibility means it is difficult to really examine how policy decisions were made initially
They can call ministers to give evidence – but cannot force them to do so
They cannot discuss current legislation
Civil Servants can withhold information if it is not ‘in the interests of national security’ to release it
It is quite common for ministers to ignore Select Committee reports
It would be better if their powers were strengthened eg: give them quasi-judicial powers to demand to see papers, and enforce witnesses to swear an oath of truth – also give them more time and better resources