The document discusses parliamentary committees in the UK and their role in holding the government accountable. It explains that much of the work of parliament is done in committees, which examine issues in detail. In particular, it focuses on select committees, which scrutinize government departments and policies. Select committees can call witnesses and demand documents. While they potentially provide powerful oversight of the government, their effectiveness is limited by lack of resources and willingness to fully criticize the ruling party. The document analyzes arguments that select committees both enhance and hinder government accountability. Overall, it presents a nuanced view of the potential and limitations of parliamentary committees in the UK system.

1. Accountability

2. Learning Objectives
• To understand how parliament holds the
government to account
• To investigate the roles and powers of
parliamentary committees
• To assess whether committees hold the
government to account

3. Committee System
• A large part of the work of the House of Commons and
the House of Lords takes place in committees, made up
of around 10 to 50 MPs or Lords.
• These committees examine issues in detail, form
government policy and proposed new laws, to wider
topics like the economy.
Select Committees
Joint Committees
General Committees
Grand Committees

4. Select Committees
• Select Committees work in both Houses. They
check and report on areas ranging from the
work of government departments to
economic affairs.
• The results of these inquiries are public and
many require a response from the
government.

5. Joint Committees
• Joint Committees are committees consisting of
MPs and Lords.
• They have similar powers to Select Committees.
• Some are set up on a permanent basis, like the
Joint Committee on Human Rights.
• Other appointments are for specific purposes,
such as examining draft proposals for Bills on
subjects ranging from gambling to stem cell
research.

6. General Committees
• The main role of General Committees is to
consider proposed legislation in detail.
• They include all committees formerly known as
Standing Committees.
• This committee system allows faster processing
of Bills and is unique to the House of Commons;
the Lords meet as a whole House in this function.
• The committees reflect the political makeup of
the House. The government always has a
majority.

7. Grand Committees
• Grand Committees give MPs the opportunity to debate
issues affecting their region.
• The Commons has three Grand Committees which look
at questions on Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Grand Committees in the Lords debate Bills outside the
Lords Chamber.
• The Committees function in a similar way to the
Commons Chamber, with ministerial statements and an
opportunity to question the Ministers.
• Every MP representing a constituency in the region is
entitled to attend Grand Committee meetings.

8. Task:
In your groups of 4 you will be assigned one
type of committee. You must examine;
• How do they work?
• Membership
• Roles & Powers
• Examples
You will be expected to feed back your
information to the rest of the class.

9. Analysis & Evaluation
How effectively do Select Committees hold the
government to account?
• Introduction
• Effective because…
• Not effective because…
• Any other issues?
• Conclusion

10. Introduction
• Definition of Select Committees
• Roles
• Powers
• Link back to question
• Direction of argument

11. Introduction
Select Committees scrutinise government
departments; including their polices, activities
and spending. They conduct enquires and
publish reports, to which the government must
respond. They can call for any witnesses and
any documents. This, in theory, makes them a
very powerful body with some arguing that
Select Committees are the single most effective
way in which parliament holds the government
to account.

12. Effective because…
Ministers arguably become more accountable.
Regularly embarrass the government over things
they’d rather were not brought up. They have
produced a no of scathing reports including
The “Westland Affair” and “Arms to Iraq”
They generate more information for MP’s and
Parliament as ministers and civil servants can be
forced to attend.
MP’s often work across party lines so there is more
cooperation here.

13. Examples:
Arms to Iraq
• The Arms-to-Iraq affair concerned the uncovering
of the government-endorsed sale of arms by
British companies to Iraq, then under the rule of
Saddam Hussein. The scandal contributed to the
growing dissatisfaction with the Conservative
government of John Major and may have
contributed to the electoral landslide for Tony
Blair's Labour Party at the 1997 general election.
• Following the first Gulf War of 1991 there was
interest in the extent to which British companies
had been supplying Saddam Hussein's regime
with the materials to prosecute the war. Four
directors of the British machine tools
manufacturer Matrix Churchill were put on trial
for supplying equipment and knowledge to Iraq,
but in 1992 the trial collapsed, as it was revealed
that the company had been advised by the
government on how to sell arms to Iraq. Several
of the directors were eventually paid
compensation.
Westland Affair
• The Westland affair was a British political controversy of
the 1980s which rocked the Conservative government of
Margaret Thatcher. It related to the troubled British
helicopter manufacturer Westland. Faced with economic
difficulties, Westland was forced to contemplate
accepting a buyout from another company or group of
companies. An initial offer was made by the American
firm Sikorsky, and another followed from a European
defence consortium.
• The Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, and the Westland
board of directors favoured the American offer but some
members of the cabinet, including Defence Secretary
Michael Heseltine, were concerned about increasing
Britain's military dependence on the United States and
supported the European offer in the hope that a
substantial European defence industry could be
sustained.
• These divisions within the government led to the
resignation of Michael Heseltine as well as fellow cabinet
member Leon Brittan. The dispute foreshadowed later
more substantial divisions within the Conservative party
over European integration and the party's traditional
Atlanticist outlook

14. Not effective because…
Diverted attention away from the Commons, the
Chamber has become lacking in numbers.
Select Committees often lack the time, resources,
staff, expertise, and perhaps above all, the will to be
more than a mild irritant to the government.
Often the government just ignores the criticisms and
recommendations of the committees
2000 a joint report criticising arms sales to Zimbabwe
They cannot force people to speak

15. Examples:
Arms Sales to Zimbabwe
• The government broke its own and the European Union's arms
sales rules by granting seven licences for the sale of Hawk aircraft
spares to Zimbabwe in February 2000. The breach is regarded as so
serious that the committee report recommended that future arms
sales licence applications should be subject to prior scrutiny by four
committees. The proposal, rejected by the Foreign Office,
embarrassed the foreign secretary, Robin Cook, who was battling to
retain his ethical foreign policy within Whitehall.
• The granting of the licences undermined an EU resolution on arms
sales to Zimbabwe - of which Britain was a co-sponsor - instituted
because of the country's instability and its intervention in the
Congo civil war. The committee's report said that the Hawks were
used in Congo and that "there remains a clear risk that they might
be so again".

16. Any other issues?
The balance of party power on the committees
reflects that of the Commons as a whole and so
backbenchers of the governing party are usually
the majority. They generally want to become
front-benchers and so may be unwilling to fully
criticise and make accountable the executive.
Reformers say they need bigger budgets,
stronger powers, and more capacity to
conduct research.

17. Conclusion
How effectively do Select Committees hold the
government to account?

18. EXAM FOCUS
What are Departmental Select Committees?
How effectively do they preform their role of
scrutinising the Executive? (10 marks)
This is a 10 mark question: You will be awarded up
to 7 marks for Knowledge and Understanding
(discussion of a range of issues and quality of
explanation) - You will be awarded up to 3 marks
for your intellectual skills eg: ability to explain the
nature of the arguments and ability to link them to
the question asked