CONSTITUTION UNIT MONITOR 53 FEBRUARY 2013 Commission on a Bill of Rights reports The Commission on a Bill of Rights delivered its report to the repeating their commitment (first announced by Cameron in 2006) government in December. It did not offer a strong or unanimous to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a UK Bill of way forward. Rights; and Labour and the Lib Dems committed to its retention. On the central issue, seven of the commission’s nine members came Sir Leigh Lewis, chairman of the Commission on a Bill of Rights, down in favour of a UK Bill of Rights. Such a bill would incorporate talked about the report at a Constitution Unit Seminar on and build on all of the UK’s obligations under the European 24 January – see website. Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and would provide no less protection than is contained in the current Human Rights Act and the devolution settlements. Some of the majority also believed EXECUTIVE that a UK Bill of Rights could define more clearly the scope of some rights, and adjust the balance between different rights. The most powerful arguments for a new constitutional instrument were the lack of ownership by the public of the existing Human Rights Act, and the opportunity which a UK Bill of Rights would offer to The Cabinet Office review of the Committee for Standards in provide greater protection against possible abuses of power. Public Life The two members opposed to this conclusion – Helena Kennedy The Committee for Standards in Public Life (CSPL) was established QC and Prof Philippe Sands – felt that the time was not ripe for in response to the Cash for Questions scandal in 1994. To underline a UK Bill of Rights, and the majority had failed to identify any his concern the Prime Minister established it as a permanent body. shortcomings in the Human Rights Act. They remained open Since its establishment it has published reports on such matters to a UK Bill of Rights, so long as it carried no risk of uncoupling as standards of conduct for MPs and peers, special advisers, MPs’ the UK from the ECHR. But they feared that one of the principal expenses and allowances, and most recently on the longstanding arguments relied upon by the majority—public ownership of debate over party funding. rights—would be used to promote other aims, including the diminution of rights, and a decoupling of the UK from the ECHR. The Cabinet Office has asked Peter Riddell, Director of the Institute for Government, to conduct a review of the committee. CSPL chair Devolution played a large part in the commission’s deliberations. Sir Christopher Kelly has argued publicly for his committee to maintain Any future debate on a UK Bill of Rights must involve the devolved its permanent status so that it may remain independent and can administrations, and respect the different political and legal traditions launch its own inquiries. in different parts of the UK. It should not interfere with the separate development of a Northern Ireland Bill of Rights (required by the But the review comes at a bad time. The government has been Belfast Agreement, and the subject of protracted negotiation over pushing to abolish as many public bodies as possible. The Westminster the last 10 years). It should also be sensitive to the different legal landscape has seen a proliferation of regulatory bodies, or ‘constitutional tradition in Scotland, and issues raised in the independence debate. watchdogs’, such as the Electoral Commission and the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. Moreover, it remains unclear what The minority were concerned that a premature move to a UK Bill outstanding issues remain for the committee to examine. of Rights would be contentious and possibly even dangerous, with So the case for the continued existence of the committee is difficult unintended consequences. to make. It may be that Peter Riddell recommends abolition, a downgrading of its status or merging the committee with some of Beyond the core issue, the commission broadly agreed that a the other regulatory bodies. UK Bill of Rights should also include responsibilities; that it should include additional rights beyond those in the Human Rights Act; and that the mechanisms should be broadly similar to those in the Blog: www.constitution-unit.com Human Rights Act (declarations of incompatibility, and no strike Facebook & Flickr: Constitution Unit down power). In these respects and in recommending a UK Bill of Follow us on Twitter: @ConUnit_UCL Rights, the commission reflected the similar recommendations of the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, in their 2008 UCL Department of Political Science Constuon report on a British Bill of Rights. Director: Professor Robert Hazell CBE Unit Blog Deputy Director: Dr Meg Russell www.constuon-unit.com Nothing further is likely to happen in this Parliament. The government www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit remains divided, with the Conservatives critical of the Human Rights Email: [email protected] Act, and the Liberal Democrats staunch defenders. Even if there were Phone: +44 (0) 20 7679 4977 a clear way forward, there is no appetite left for big constitutional reforms under this government. In the run-up to the next election the parties will differentiate on the issue, with the Conservatives Monitor 53 | Constitution Unit Newsletter | February 2013 | ISSN 1465–4377 | Page 2 Civil Service reform This may, of course, be a healthy development in that it is perhaps foolish to pretend that every member of any government agrees with everything Since the publication of the government’s plans for civil service reform the government does. But as the next election approaches, there must in June 2012 (noted in Monitor 52), there have been a number of be a question mark over how effectively the government will be able to developments. Francis Maude, Minister for the Cabinet Office, has govern if the coalition partners are seeking to spend more energy on continued to push for greater government involvement in the selection making their views distinctive than they are on forging agreement. and appointment of senior officials, citing the civil service’s apparent inability to deliver on the government’s policies. PARLIAMENT Maude’s complaints about the civil service coincided with the cancellation of the competition for the West Coast Mainline franchise by the new Transport Secretary, Patrick McLoughlin, in October 2012. McLoughlin stated that he had been forced to do this following the discovery of mistakes made by officials in the tendering process. HOUSE OF LORDS A number of civil servants have since been suspended. An independent report suggested a number of failings by officials, but also that Lords reform: time for smaller changes? resources at the Department for Transport were stretched as a result of the government’s spending review. Following the collapse of the coalition’s bill in August, talk of major Lords reform is off the agenda, at least until the general election. In November 2012, it was reported that No 10 had rejected the potential Meanwhile, peers (and some MPs) are keen to maintain pressure for appointment of David Kennedy, currently CEO of the climate change smaller changes. Conservative MP Eleanor Laing (a former member committee, as Permanent Secretary of the Department of Energy and of the joint committee on the government’s draft bill) has taken up Climate Change. This raised the possibility of political interference in civil Lord Steel’s private member’s bill in the Commons, although this still service appointments. And in late December, the performance targets of awaits a Second Reading. The bill would allow members to retire, and Whitehall’s permanent secretaries were published. forcibly remove those who fail to attend or have been convicted of serious criminal offences. But it has little chance without government 2012 ended in stalemate however, with the Civil Service Commission’s backing. Peers are also considering whether further changes could be response to Maude’s suggested reforms. The commission stated that introduced without legislation, for example via standing orders, changes while Secretaries of State could be more involved in the appointment to allowances (e.g. ending payments to those aged over 85), or even process, they could not impose a candidate on a department as this passage of declaratory motions (proposing a cap on the chamber’s size, would amount to politicisation. or that members should retire after a certain age or length of service). Such changes would not have legal force, but could help create new Parliament has also taken interest in the work, responsibilities and conventions. Such imaginative thinking seems necessary, given the accountability of civil servants. The House of Lords Constitution difficulty of agreeing a bill. Committee published its report on the accountability of civil servants in October 2012. It made cautious note of the government’s proposed Discussion also continues about internal procedural reform. In a reforms, but affirmed the need to maintain the key principles of open debate on working practices on 1 November, many peers pressed for competition and merit. The Public Administration Select Committee has implementation of the remaining elements in the report of the Leader’s also launched a full inquiry into the future of the civil service, which will Group chaired by Lord Goodlad (see Monitor 48). These include the begin this year. possibility of a legislative standards committee, and a backbench business committee like that in the Commons. As some peers pointed Collective cabinet responsibility and the coalition out, the government previously resisted progress on the basis that large-scale reform was planned. That excuse no longer exists, so As the coalition marks its halfway point with the publication of its mid-term continuing pressure is likely on the new Leader of the Lords, review, one under-appreciated consequence of coalition government Lord Hill of Oareford.