CONTENTS Westminster Sessions 10TH-12TH November 2009 Tuesday 10th November 1) Governance, Professor John Greenaway………………………………….Pg 4 2) Models of Government in Westminster Parliamentary Systems and Governance in the UK, Professor Robert Hazell ………………………...Pg 11 3) Hot Topics for 2010, Rt Hon Hilary Armstrong MP, Mr Peter Bottomley MP, Mr Paul Keetch MP……...………………………………………….…....Pg 16 4) Strengthening Parliamentary Democracy, Mr Hugh Bayley MP, Ms Sian Dixon, Mr Greg Power………………………………………………...…Pg 22 5) The Scrutiny Role of the Media, Mr Simon Hoggart, Mr Norman Smith..Pg 28 6) Justice and Human Rights, Rt Hon Baroness Butler-Sloss GBE, Mr Alex Wiles, Lord Dubs…………………………………………………...…….Pg 31 Wednesday 11th November 1) Young People and Politics: Engaging the Next Generation, Mr Tom O’Leary, Mr James Bartle, Miss Barbara Soetan……………………………......…Pg 35 2) Representing Diversity, Professor Baroness Young of Hornsey OBE, Mr Ashok Viswanathan……………………………………………..…………Pg38 3) Delegates Forum: Ethics and Accountability in Public Life……….……..Pg 44 4) Elections and Electoral Systems, Mr Keith Best, Mr MNark Stevens…….Pg 50 5) Freedom of Information, Mr Bob Castle, Mr Norman Baker MP……..…Pg 55 Thursday 12th November 1) The Role of the Opposition, Rt Hon Michael Howard QC……………….Pg 60 2) Scrutiny of Financial Institutions, Mr Michael Fallon MP, Mr Paul Double, Mr Paul Sizeland……………………………………………….……...….Pg 64 3) Political Parties and Engaging the Electorate, Lord Soley, Mr Andrew Rosindell MP………………………………………………………….…..Pg 70 4) Engaging with Civil Society, Mr Vijay Krishnarayan, Mr Chandu Krishnan, Ms Laura McCann……………………………………………………..…Pg 74 5) The Committee System, Ms Jacqy Sharpe, Mr Mike Gapes…………..…Pg 79 6) Working with Business and Industry, Ms Sally Muggeridge, Mr Bill Olner MP, Mr Ian Pellow…………………………………………………..……Pg 84 Brussels Sessions 16th-17th November 2009 Monday 16th November 1) Overview on UKREP’s Work on Development, Governance and Trade, Mr Martin Reynolds……………………………………………………..……Pg 87 2) UK Engagement with European Parliament, Mr Paul Heardman ..........Pg 93 3) Welcome Address to the European Commission, Mr Charis Xirouchakis ………………………………………………………………………….…Pg 98 2 4) Introduction to the Organisation and Work of the EU’s Institutions: Their roles and Functions, Mr Jo Vandercappellen…………………………………Pg 100 Tuesday 17th November 1) Welcome, Mr Jamie Andreu………………………………………...Pg 109 2) Briefing on Trade, Mr Ivano Casella……………………………….Pg 110 3) Presentation on the Impact of the Financial Crisis on Developing Countries with a Particular Focus on ACP Countries, Mr Phillipe Latriche ………………………………………………………………...……..Pg 114 4) Briefing on the European Commission’s Work on Climate Change, Ms Rosario Bento Pais………………………………….……………....Pg 117 5) Welcome and Introduction from the Vice-President of the European Parliament, Mr Libour Roueek MEP, Bill Newton-Dunn MEP, Anthony Teasdale……………………………………………………………..Pg 122 6) Briefing on the Presidency from the Swedish Permanent Representative to the EU, Mrs Zofia Tuckinska………………………………..………Pg 127 7) Briefing and Discussion with Members of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly, Martin Callanan MEP, Frank Engel MEP………………………………………………………………....Pg 130 8) Briefing and Discussion with Members of the Trade and Foreign and External Relations Committees, Robert Sturdy MEP, Giles Chichester MEP, Syed Kamall MEP, Frank Engel MEP…………………….....Pg 134 3 TUESDAY 10th NOVEMBER 09 Session 1 - GOVERNANCE Speakers: Professor John Greenaway, School of Political, Social and International Studies, University of East Anglia Chairman: Mr Andrew Tuggey DL, Secretary, CPA UK Branch Mr Andrew Tuggey DL welcomed delegates, emphasising that the seminar would be about the Westminster system rather than Westminster itself. Governance in Westminster had obviously faced one or two challenges recently. This had been a learning experience for everyone. He introduced Professor Greenaway, an expert on governance. Professor Greenaway thanked Andrew Tuggey. It was a great honour to be asked to speak at the seminar even if it meant leaving sunny Norwich, where the University of East Anglia was based, for the gloom of London. He was at the seminar to give a political scientist’s view of the nature of governance. His expertise was in Western European politics but delegates would no doubt broaden the discussion in the question and answer session. Traditional definitions of governance were clear: government was the instrument for governing; governance was the process of governing. However, in the last 20 or 30 years the term governance had come to be used in a different way. There had been major global shifts in the nature of public administration and governance in the world. These changes had considerable implications for democracy, good governance and the role of parliamentarians. In the 1950s and 1960s the nation state was the sole focus of authority and democratic legitimacy. (Many delegates’ countries were under colonial rule in this period but aspired to self –determination and nationhood.) Political parties and parliaments were the key to politics, which was based on ideologies. Governance was done by hierarchical bureaucratic administrations, although career patterns of civil servants did vary across Western Europe. The public and private sector were two distinct institutions. Professor Greenaway remembered being asked by a career adviser whether he wanted to join the public or private sector. There were clear lines of accountability – through ministerial responsibility to parliament in the Westminster tradition and through administrative courts elsewhere. In the 1980s and 1990s the meaning of governance changed. One factor in this change was increasing globalisation, including cultural and financial. Particularly in Western Europe, the traditional building blocks of politics – class, gender and ethnicity - were eroded and people took on much more varied and complex social identities. The media also became more diverse and less hierarchical. Before there had been a small number of state run channels. The rise of new media, in particular the internet, was also important. This could be seen in the last US Presidential election campaign where the internet had been used to mobilise the grassroots. 4 The nation state was now much less of a key decision-making body. Far more power could be found at a global level, indeed it was often said that many transnational corporations had budgets greater than those of small countries. International bodies, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, were very influential. The European Union (EU) had emerged as a major actor. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) were also of considerable importance. One of the Professor’s PHD students was doing a very interesting comparison of policy making by the EU and NAFTA on genetically modified foods. Beneath these higher level organisations were multi-level governments. In the previous session the speaker had spoken, quite rightly, about the importance of devolved institutions. There were many layers of governance in the UK: the EU, the national government, regional and local government. Governance was now about complicated negotiated exchanges between systems of government. There were more actors involved. Legal frameworks were less important than negotiations and networks. There were also no prejudgements about the logical priority of governance within levels of government. The barriers between the public and private sectors had become increasingly blurred. The state was now less of a sole provider, with NGOs, charities and business groups playing a very important role in healthcare and education, for example. There was an increasing interchange between the civil service and business. In the 1930s this had been unknown, indeed frowned upon, but since the 1980s it had been positively encouraged. There were now partnerships between the public and private sectors, such as Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs). It no longer made sense to ask whether individuals wanted a career in the public or private sector. The influence of the new right meant that people now talked about public management rather than public administration. There was much more of an emphasis on officials needing to be susceptible to market forces. Targets were set for the delivery of services. Many countries now had quasi markets in health and education – for example league tables for schools. The civil service had previously been military like, but such hierarchical administrations were being supplanted by networks and exchanges. Far more policy making was done through networks based on the exchange of resources, whether it be money, expertise, democratic legitimacy or operational capacity. Policy areas were now far more interconnected. Rather than having one department responsible for a particular policy, like agriculture, there were far more complex forms of governance with a messy panoply of actors – for example agencies working with departments. Sustainability and climate change was a mega or meta policy which covered many other areas of policy, since the world was now in the age of a great environmental crisis. The idea was also increasing that governments were not good at everything. Two US academics, for example, had suggested that governments should steer rather than row the boat. Many writers saw the changes in governance as a good thing. However, the changes did pose some problems. Lines of accountability were now much more