THE EMPER R HAS NO CLOTHES A PROPOSAL TO BOLSTER THE AUTHORITY OF SELECT COMMITTEES ANDREW TYRIE JANUARY 2020 Open Access. Some rights • The text is not altered and is reserved. used in full As the publisher of this work, Demos • The work is not resold wants to encourage the circulation of our work as widely as possible • A copy of the work or link to its while retaining the copyright. We use online is sent to Demos. therefore have an open access policy which enables anyone to access You are welcome to ask for our content online without charge. permission to use this work Anyone can download, save, perform for purposes other than those or distribute this work in any format, covered by the licence. Demos including translation, without written gratefully acknowledges the work permission. This is subject to the of Creative Commons in inspiring terms of the Demos licence found at our approach to copyright. To the back of this publication. Its main find out more go to conditions are: www.creativecommons.org • Demos and the author(s) are credited • This summary and the address www.demos.co.uk are displayed Published by Demos January 2020 © Demos. Some rights reserved. 76 Vincent Square, London, SW1P 2PD T: 020 3878 3955 [email protected] www.demos.co.uk Charity number 1042046 3 THE RT. HON. LORD ANDREW TYRIE As MP for Chichester (1997 – 2017), Andrew Tyrie served as Chairman of the Commons Treasury Select Committee (2010 – 2017), Chairman of the Liaison Committee (2015 – 2017), and Chairman of the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards (2012 – 2013) whose recommendations for the reform of governance in major financial institutions, now implemented, are widely held to be transforming business practice in financial services. Andrew has also held board roles in investment management and property firms. He was previously Special Advisor to Chancellors of the Exchequer Nigel Lawson and John Major. Andrew Tyrie has been Chairman of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) since June 2018. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr Michael Grenfell, Professor David Howarth, Tony Peto QC, Eve Samson, Dr Paul Seaward, Juliette Smith, Gavin Thompson, and the Rt Hon Lord Young of Cookham CH for their comments on an earlier draft. 4 FOREWORD Andrew Tyrie was the most formidable Chair of a Commons Select Committee ever. Without resorting to the grandstanding or hectoring of some of his colleagues, he held to account those responsible for the financial crisis and, as Chair of the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards, identified the remedies. Courteous, well-briefed and persistent, he cut through the defences of those who appeared before his Committee, and then steered his Committee towards unanimous conclusions. Virtually all have been accepted by the Government. He stretched to the limit the current powers of Select Committees, but has concluded that they are proving inadequate to the task. In ‘The emperor has no clothes’ he exposes the weaknesses in the current settlement, and argues for reform. As someone who chaired the Standards and Privileges Committee for 8 years, I have had my share of recalcitrant witnesses; I agree with his analysis and his promotion of possible solutions. At a time when many in Parliament are also coming publicly to share his concerns, his solutions will be of interest to MPs – and to the wider public who follow these important Parliamentary and constitutional issues. The Rt. Hon. the Lord Young of Cookham CH October 2019 5 INTRODUCTION Select Committees are the To perform this job, Select success story of Parliament over Committees have started to make the last decade. Election of much fuller use of their theoretical Chairmen by secret ballot of the powers, which are extensive, whole House – introduced by the particularly the power to summon incoming Coalition Government witnesses and produce papers. In – has been seized by several turn, some – particularly witnesses Select Committees to boost their and people and institutions authority. As a consequence, of whom papers have been scrutiny of the executive, and demanded – have challenged wider public life, is both more Parliament’s right to make such effective and more meaningful, demands. A few have ignored and increasingly seen to be so. or frustrated those demands. Select Committees are extending Parliament’s bluff is now being their influence and developing a called. This paper argues that the capacity to set Parliament’s agenda time has come for reinforcement in new ways. of those powers to give them full practical effect. This is now essential if Select Committees’ crucial, and relatively new, roles – closer to the centre of political life – are to be entrenched. What follows sets out how to accomplish it. 6 IS THE STATUS QUO TENABLE? SUMMARY IN MORE DETAIL In a nutshell, it isn’t.1 Doing nothing is the easy option. It avoids the risk of unsettling the The apparently recondite constitutional balance between issue – of the enforcement by Parliament and the UK courts (if Parliament of the powers of Select legislation were used to bolster Committees to obtain papers Committee powers) or the and cross-examine witnesses – European Court of Human Rights has high stakes attached. Select finding the House’s procedures Committees have been helping were incompatible with the to restore Parliament’s credibility, UK’s international human rights becoming again part of “the grand obligations, which might happen inquisition of the nation”. They are if there was no legislative basis for crucial to the long-term future and their use. It is primarily for these health of Parliamentary democracy reasons that not much, so far, has in the UK. been done. Committees cannot do their job Those who advocate doing nothing fully now: there is a gap between might also argue that, in most real powers and appearances. The cases, papers are supplied willingly, Parliamentary magic to secure and people are ready, or even compliance with requests for eager, to give evidence. people and papers is wearing off. It is not just that Select Committees However, the experience of the are already constrained; the last twenty years has shown that, constraints are likely to get worse. just at the moment when powers An assertive executive, supported of compulsion are most needed by a reasonable Parliamentary – during the most high-profile majority, would be happy to let it inquiries, on matters of greatest deteriorate. concern to the public – they have 1 The fact of the inquiry launched by the Privileges Committee in 2016 suggests that they have concerns. Appendix 2 sets out their terms of reference. 7 often been found to be wanting. • in its 2016 report on BHS Some examples: the Work and Pensions Committee noted that • the Government succeeded “Advisers citing issues of in preventing a timely and full legal privilege and client investigation into the origin of confidentiality acted as a bar the Iraq War by the relevant to us gathering information” Committees – Defence, and and that in some cases a very Foreign Affairs. They were wide interpretation of these unable to see what and concepts was used.6 As set out whom they felt necessary. in evidence to the Standards Congressional inquiries into Committee, Sir Philip Green the same question in the and Ian Grabiner have refused US, by contrast, were more to comply with an order from 2 effective; the Women and Equalities Committee.7 In many • the Culture, Media and Sport cases, these are the type of Committee noted that it investigations which may have “repeatedly encountered an contributed to the restoration unwillingness to provide the of Parliament’s reputation for detailed information that we doing the job the electorate sought, claims of ignorance or expects of it. lack of recall, and deliberate obfuscation” in its 2010 What was once an open secret inquiry into Press Standards, on Committee Corridor is now 3 Privacy and Libel. In 2011, becoming increasingly obvious to in its subsequent inquiry into a wider public: the only practical News International and Phone consequence of refusing to comply Hacking, the Committee had with a Committee summons, or a 4 to use the power to summons call for papers, is reputational. And 5 the Murdochs; that cost will vary, depending on the individual concerned. For some 2 I did a relatively detailed comparative study of Parliamentary/Congressional scrutiny of the decision to go to war in Mr Blair’s Poodle goes to War, 2004, Centre for Policy Studies. The Iraq war was an interesting and rare test case for a comparison of the respective powers of Westminster and Capitol Hill. Each demo- cratic body was seeking to establish the truth about the decisions to initiate the same war. 3 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmcumeds/362/362i.pdf 4 The scope and limits of these powers has yet to be codified although, under various standing orders the Chamber gives wide-ranging powers and formalities to obtain evidence, call witnesses and submit reports to the House as a whole. These powers are therefore derived from those of the whole House. The latter can be traced back at least as far as the 16th century. 5 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmcumeds/903/903i.pdf, para 4. 6 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmworpen/54/54.pdf, para 87. 7 http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/commit- tee-of-privileges/select-committees-and-contempts/written/103502.html 8 – such as the head of a public It would be a matter for the body, or a major government House of Lords to decide whether contractor – to be held in contempt to replicate any new system may bring about the end of their brought in by the Commons.