BOOK REVIEW / A good moment to put the House in order: 'Westminster: Does Parliament Work?' - John Garrett: Gollancz, 17.99 pounds

AFTER a week in which, for the first time in more than 10 years, the prospect of parliamentary defeat has forced the Government to change its mind over a major policy issue, the publication of a first-rate book putting the case for parliamentary reform is highly topical.

As a senior Labour MP and management consultant specialising in examining public institutions, John Garrett is well qualified to investigate the effectiveness of Parliament. He starts from the only too realistic assumption that, despite its proud history, the modern British parliament is usually far too weak to challenge an autocratic executive. Provided it has a working majority, a government almost invariably gets its own way. The author succinctly sums up the present situation: 'In practice, the purpose of our Parliament is to provide the members of a government and to scrutinise its proposals and its actions - to the extent that government will allow.'

John Garrett is suitably scathing about the extent of Parliament's failure. He shows how badly drafted bills are pushed through without adequate scrutiny, how billions of pounds are authorised on the nod, and how ministers and civil servants often escape effective questioning. He believes that MPs are ill-equipped to carry out their functions properly. He concludes: 'There is still a lot to be done to shift the style of the House of Commons from theatre to serious and penetrating scrutiny of government.'

Garrett's proposals include the strengthening of investigatory committees, improved procedures for financial control and audit, the timetabling of controversial bills by an all-party committee chaired by the Speaker, more sensible hours of work, and improved facilities and resources for MPs.

What is new about the Garrett package is its up-to-date perspective and its comprehensive scope. He clearly demonstrates how the transfer of powers to the European Community, the explosion of information and the demand for a new constitutional settlement are transforming the environment in which Parliament operates; and skilfully links together individual fights, the redress of grievance, legislative scrutiny, policy investigation and freedom of information to show how Parliament could become far more effective at holding the executive to account.

If I have a criticism, it is that John Garrett is too pessimistic about the prospects of reform, even under a Conservative government. He underestimates the beneficial impact of television on the chamber. If they have not yet eliminated the hooligan behaviour of too many middle-aged adolescents, the cameras have at least brought the key parliamentary debates into the living rooms of the nation. Politicians now have to compress their key arguments into succinct and vivid phrases. I suspect that the medium also rewards those MPs who put their case in a reasonable manner.

Television has certainly given a fillip to the select committees, whose in-depth questioning suits the medium's format. These committees were first set up in 1980 by the then Leader of the House, Norman St John-Stevas, following the report of the reforming 1977-78 Procedure Committee, and have, on the whole, been a success. The recent grilling of the Chancellor of the Exchequer by the Treasury and Civil Service Committee, and the confidence placed in the ability of the Industry Committee to provide an independent review of the Government's pit closure programme and energy policies, illustrated the value of the investigatory committees. Parliament now has the opportunity to build on their achievements.

The new political climate, in which a government with a majority of only 21 has lost authority, is conducive to parliamentary reform. An unofficial cross-party alliance between opposition MPs and dissident Tories could succeed in making Parliament not only less subservient but also far more effective in scrutinising the executive. What is now needed is a dash of independence and, above all, a sensible plan of campaign. John Garrett has already done a service to parliamentary reform by setting out so lucidly what needs to be done.