Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Former ministers should be held accountable if policies go wrong after they leave office, says major think tank

Proposal suggests architects of policies would be directly accountable for problems to improve public trust

Jennifer McKiernan
Monday 15 October 2018 00:06 BST
Comments
Jeremy Corbyn asks Theresa May if she felt 'the slightest pang of guilt' when Amber Rudd was forced to resign over Windrush

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Ministers should be forced to explain themselves to MPs if policies go wrong - even if they are no longer in office, according to a think tank.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has demanded scrutiny be beefed up by allowing Westminster select committees to recall MPs for a grilling.

The IfG report suggests the architects of policies - such as the "hostile environment" or failed probation reforms - should be directly held to account to strengthen public faith in institutions.

IfG senior researcher Benoit Guerin said officials could also be called on, particularly when foreseeable risks were not flagged up to the minister.

He said: "Governing has become increasingly complex, but that is not an excuse for negligence.

"The public's dissatisfaction with the Government's response to Windrush and other scandals shows that there are dangerous weaknesses in the current accountability system.

"These can be addressed, and we suggest steps the Government should take to strengthen accountability."

Other recommendations include clarifying what people get for the money spent on public services, improving specialist skills across Whitehall to prevent repeated failures and better scrutinising the links between local public services.

Public Accounts Committee chairwoman Meg Hillier welcomed the report, which she said echoed many of her own recommendations.

The Labour MP said people need to be willing to "step up" when things go wrong and there should be more pre-scrutiny of plans to prevent taxpayers' money going to waste.

She said: "These are all big challenges for the Government which it needs to take notice of and take action on and I hope it will carefully consider the IfG's report."

Conservative former cabinet minister Dominic Grieve said he hoped the recommendations would be acted upon.

"The report highlights serious and systemic problems that seem to beset the civil service and its relationship with politicians and ministers which are capable of being addressed," he said.

"They have the capacity to greatly improve the quality of governance that we can deliver."

Sir Ian Cheshire, the Government's lead non-executive, added the recommendations would improve the governance of the civil service so it is "better equipped to meet the challenges ahead".

A Cabinet Office spokesperson said: "The government is proud of its commitment to continuing to strengthen accountability mechanisms, including through the recent introduction of accounting officer system statements.

"Ministers' accountability to Parliament and the public for the decisions and actions of their department is deeply rooted in our constitution and set out in the Ministerial Code."

Press Association

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in