Select Committees: Understanding and Regulating the Emergence of the ‘Topical Inquiry’

Prescott, C.

doi:10.1093/pa/gsz040

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The origin of SO.152 was when the Select Committee on Procedure (1978, para 5.7) reported that there was a 'strong desire' for a more effective means of scrutinising 'the expenditure, administration and policy of government departments' . The provisions of SO.152 give select committee's broad powers which can lead to controversy as outlined by Prescott (2019). In the main, these relate to the immunity of select committees to 'make potentially damaging findings about private individuals or firms without risk of legal reprisals ' (p. 897).…”

Section: Select Committeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing the Scrutiny Role of Select Committees: The House of Commons Health and Social Care Select Committee’s New Independent Expert Panel

Peckham

Dacre

Appleby

et al. 2022

Parliamentary Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report on a recent innovation for one Departmental Select Committee. While government policy commitments are well publicised, little attention is paid to the quality of commitments made or to assessing progress against those commitments. In 2020, the Health and Social Care Select Committee commissioned an Expert Panel to conduct independent, in-depth evaluations of government progress on selected policy commitments. The first evaluations in 2021/22 assessed commitments in maternity, mental health and cancer services, and workforce and it was the first time a government department has been systematically graded against its own commitments. This is an important new method of scrutiny with the potential to complement and enhance the work of Select Committee inquiries. This paper reviews the development of select committees highlighting issues relating to their operation and, in particular, assessment of evidence. We describe the innovation of the Expert Panel and its role in reviewing policy commitments and discuss implications for parliamentary scrutiny, leadership and improvements to health service.

show abstract

Section: Select Committeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing the Scrutiny Role of Select Committees: The House of Commons Health and Social Care Select Committee’s New Independent Expert Panel

Peckham

Dacre

Appleby

et al. 2022

Parliamentary Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparing evidence use in parliaments: the interplay of beliefs, traditions, and practices in the UK and Germany

Geddes

2024

Policy and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article draws on rich qualitative data from two national parliaments—the UK House of Commons and the German Bundestag—to examine knowledge practices in political institutions. This is an important topic, not only because parliaments play a significant role in democratic decision-making, but because it sheds light on debates about how such decision-making is based on and interacts with knowledge and evidence. By adopting an interpretive analytical approach, I analyze the ways in which those practices are shaped by the beliefs and values of parliamentary actors. Indeed, in better understanding everyday practices, beliefs, and ideational traditions, it also contributes to better explaining how components of political and parliamentary cultures contribute to knowledge use more broadly. In the House of Commons, MPs draw on a highly trusted and independent parliamentary administration; meanwhile, committees have become fruitful avenues for MPs to develop policy expertise and engage with knowledge and evidence in a non-partisan way. In the German Bundestag, MPs also develop policy expertise—in fact, they interpret their role as specialists in a “working” parliament—but their knowledge practices are more openly partisan through the structuring role of parliamentary party groups and the skepticism of “neutral” advice from research services. Consequently, committees tend to be sites of political bargaining and conflict, rather than evidence-gathering. In both cases, parliaments’ knowledge practices are shaped by wider webs of beliefs about the role of MPs within the institutions. This suggests that knowledge use in political and policy settings is shaped by broader cultural factors.

show abstract

Select Committees: Understanding and Regulating the Emergence of the ‘Topical Inquiry’

Cited by 2 publications

References 4 publications

Enhancing the Scrutiny Role of Select Committees: The House of Commons Health and Social Care Select Committee’s New Independent Expert Panel

Enhancing the Scrutiny Role of Select Committees: The House of Commons Health and Social Care Select Committee’s New Independent Expert Panel

Comparing evidence use in parliaments: the interplay of beliefs, traditions, and practices in the UK and Germany

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About