Since taking office, Keir Starmer has used his opening answer at Prime Minister’s Questions very differently from his predecessors. In this post, Ruxandra Serban and Tom Fleming explore how Starmer’s approach to opening PMQs compares to that of other post-1997 Prime Ministers.
Continue readingConor J. Kelly and Etain Tannam discuss the new Irish coalition’s programme for government and what it means for UK-Irish relations. They conclude that while the disagreements between London and Dublin that characterised the Brexit period are dissipating and political relationships have noticeably improved in recent years, several challenges remain which will require strict adherence to the structures of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.
Continue reading
Complaints about declining standards of government scrutiny by parliament have been commonplace in recent times – particularly during the troubled years of Brexit and Covid. But how can such claims be objectively assessed, and crucially, have scrutiny standards since recovered? Constitution Unit Director Meg Russell addressed these questions in a recently published journal article, summarised here. She concludes that there is significant cause for concern, and that standards actually worsened under Rishi Sunak, once the Brexit and Covid crises were over. To reverse the decline, both government and parliament need to act.
Continue readingConstitution Unit Director Meg Russell is one of the authors of a new UK in a Changing Europe report, The Brexit Files: From Referendum to Reset, which was published today. In this post, Meg examines the role of parliament in the withdrawal process, and argues that the sidelining of parliament that was seen throughout the Brexit process continued throughout the Johnson and Sunak premierships. She concludes that MPs must work to ensure that the current government’s commitment to greater parliamentary scrutiny is given full effect and parliament’s reputation with the public is rebuilt.
Continue reading
Peter Riddell discusses the publication of the updated Ministerial Code which he says is welcome, though overdue, and is only the first step towards a more wide-ranging programme to strengthen the framework for standards in public life.
The Ministerial Code is the guideline to standards of behaviour expected of ministers and has become the reference point whenever allegations are made about misconduct by ministers in office. It has been overseen since 2006 by an Independent Adviser (originally on Ministers’ Interests but now renamed as the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards). The Code has been a mishmash of standards of conduct and advice on the conduct of everyday government business, reflecting its origins as Questions of Procedure for Ministers (its name until 1997). This confusion has now been sorted out as the Code is now in three sections: Standards of Conduct, Ministers’ Interests, and Ministers’ Procedures of Government.
The other major general plus is the prominence given to the Seven Principles of Public Life (the Nolan principles) in both the Prime Minister’s Foreword and in the first chapter on standards, though there was a brief mention of them in the last Prime Minister’s version of the Code in December 2022. These principles are inevitably general but leave no doubt as to what unacceptable conduct is, especially when supplemented by more specific codes in particular areas such as public appointments, the civil service and special advisers. This clarity is a gain after some of the ambiguity in the final version of the Boris Johnson premiership.
Continue reading