Monday, November 01, 2021
Time to review who polices government ministers
Policing of the conduct of government ministers is an important function that we have consistently got wrong both at Westminister and in the devolved administrations.
Understandably, there have been widespread calls for reform of the system after Boris Johnson’s previous adviser on ministers’ interests, Sir Alex Allan, resigned after a report into the conduct of Priti Patel, the home secretary, was ignored.
Following an investigation into allegations that Patel engaged in bullying behaviour, Allan found she had “not consistently met the high standards expected of her”, but a government statement said the PM had full confidence in her and considered the matter “closed. I am aware of similar issues in other nations, though nowhere as serious as the Patel incident.
Now, as the Guardian reports, a wide-ranging review by the independent committee on standards in public life , chaired by former spy chief Jonathan Evans, has recommended that the prime minister should no longer be the only person who can give permission for ethics investigations into his own conduct and that of ministers.
Evans has made nine recommendations, including major changes to the ministerial code of conduct, which is overseen by the prime minister:
At the moment, the PM is the only person with the power to order investigations into the conduct of ministers, including himself, and is the one to appoint the independent adviser who carries out investigations.
However, the committee on standards in public life said the independent adviser on ministerial interests should instead be appointed by a panel made up predominantly of independent members.
It also recommended that the adviser should be able to initiate their own investigations, have the authority to determine breaches of the code and see their report published within eight weeks of submission to the PM.
On the ministerial code itself, the report said it needed to have a constitutional footing laid down in law, with any revisions subject to advice from the independent adviser, and possible sanctions for breaches should be set out including apologies, fines and asking for a minister’s resignation.
The committee also recommended a strengthening of the advisory committee on business appointments (Acoba), which governs the revolving door between government and the private sector by advising on lobbying and jobs taken on by former ministers and officials.
It said the current ban on officials and ministers lobbying for two years after leaving their post should be able to be extended to up to five years, and any work for a lobbying firm should be included in the ban, rather than just a prohibition on direct lobbying.
“The lack of any meaningful sanctions for a breach of the rules is no longer sustainable,” the report said, suggesting injunctions against lobbying work could be sought or means of recouping severance or pension payments.
Thirdly, it said there needed to be further reforms to the powers of the commissioner for public appointments, which oversees jobs for top civil servants and at public bodies, to make sure appointment panels are independent.
Evans, a former director general of MI5, said the committee had concluded that the “current system of standards regulation is overly dependent on convention”. The recommendations were necessary to “restore public confidence in the regulation of ethical standards in government”, he added.
If we are to restore trust in standards in public life then it is vital that these recommendations are implemented in all of the UK's Governments.
Following an investigation into allegations that Patel engaged in bullying behaviour, Allan found she had “not consistently met the high standards expected of her”, but a government statement said the PM had full confidence in her and considered the matter “closed. I am aware of similar issues in other nations, though nowhere as serious as the Patel incident.
Now, as the Guardian reports, a wide-ranging review by the independent committee on standards in public life , chaired by former spy chief Jonathan Evans, has recommended that the prime minister should no longer be the only person who can give permission for ethics investigations into his own conduct and that of ministers.
Evans has made nine recommendations, including major changes to the ministerial code of conduct, which is overseen by the prime minister:
At the moment, the PM is the only person with the power to order investigations into the conduct of ministers, including himself, and is the one to appoint the independent adviser who carries out investigations.
However, the committee on standards in public life said the independent adviser on ministerial interests should instead be appointed by a panel made up predominantly of independent members.
It also recommended that the adviser should be able to initiate their own investigations, have the authority to determine breaches of the code and see their report published within eight weeks of submission to the PM.
On the ministerial code itself, the report said it needed to have a constitutional footing laid down in law, with any revisions subject to advice from the independent adviser, and possible sanctions for breaches should be set out including apologies, fines and asking for a minister’s resignation.
The committee also recommended a strengthening of the advisory committee on business appointments (Acoba), which governs the revolving door between government and the private sector by advising on lobbying and jobs taken on by former ministers and officials.
It said the current ban on officials and ministers lobbying for two years after leaving their post should be able to be extended to up to five years, and any work for a lobbying firm should be included in the ban, rather than just a prohibition on direct lobbying.
“The lack of any meaningful sanctions for a breach of the rules is no longer sustainable,” the report said, suggesting injunctions against lobbying work could be sought or means of recouping severance or pension payments.
Thirdly, it said there needed to be further reforms to the powers of the commissioner for public appointments, which oversees jobs for top civil servants and at public bodies, to make sure appointment panels are independent.
Evans, a former director general of MI5, said the committee had concluded that the “current system of standards regulation is overly dependent on convention”. The recommendations were necessary to “restore public confidence in the regulation of ethical standards in government”, he added.
If we are to restore trust in standards in public life then it is vital that these recommendations are implemented in all of the UK's Governments.
