House of Commons: Sessional Returns - HC 1
House of Commons: Sessional Returns - HC 1

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2013-09-13

Total Pages: 350

ISBN-13: 9780215062277

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees. On title page: Returns to orders of the House of Commons dated 14 May 2013 (the Chairman of Ways and Means)

HC 111 - Lessons For Civil Service Impartiality From The Scottish Independence Referendum
HC 111 - Lessons For Civil Service Impartiality From The Scottish Independence Referendum

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Public Administration Select Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2015

Total Pages: 45

ISBN-13: 021508456X

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

This Report has been compiled so that lessons may be drawn for future referendums. On 18 September 2014, the Scottish public voted for Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom. The roles played by civil servants in both Scotland and London in the Scottish referendum last summer were subject to criticism and controversy. The referendum campaign exposed two major issues: first, the question of how a unified Civil Service can serve both HM Government and the Scottish Government; and second, the challenges to Civil Service impartiality generated by the Scottish independence referendum. Particular concerns were raised about the Scottish Government's White Paper, Scotland's Future, which included a description of the SNP's proposed programme for government that was contingent upon their winning the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections. This did not uphold the factual standards expected of a UK Government White Paper and raised questions about the use of public money for partisan purposes. There was also concern that the publication of normally confidential advice by the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury called into question the impartiality of the Civil Service. The Committee concludes that parts of the White Paper should not have been included in a government publication. Civil servants should not be required to carry out ministers' wishes, if they are being asked to use public funds to promote the agenda of a political party, as was evident in this case.

HC 110 - Who's Accountable? Relationships Between Government And Arm's-Length Bodies
HC 110 - Who's Accountable? Relationships Between Government And Arm's-Length Bodies

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Public Administration Select Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2014

Total Pages: 56

ISBN-13: 021507873X

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The controversy around the Government's handling of flooding last winter showed that arm's-length Government is confused and opaque. Organisational forms and names are inconsistent. Most public bodies answer to Ministers but some are directly accountable to Parliament. There is no agreement on how many types of body exist. There are overlaps and blurring between categories. Accountability arrangements and reforms so far have been ad hoc. The Government has reviewed non-departmental public bodies, but it should review all forms of arm's-length Government, including executive agencies and non-ministerial departments. The Government should establish a clear taxonomy of public bodies: constitutional bodies, independent public interest bodies, departmental sponsored bodies, and executive agencies. All public bodies should sit in one of the categories, so that it is clear how each is to be governed and sponsored. This is essential in order to clarify who is accountable for what. This would promote understanding of what is expected of relationships and explain the rationale for locating functions in particular organisational forms. Up to date, plain English statements of statuses, roles and relationships are needed even if the underlying arrangements are complicated. This is far from the reality in many cases, particularly in the NHS. With a budget of £95.6 billion NHS England is now by far the largest public body in England and its accountability should not be in any doubt, but it is still evolving. There is insufficient understanding across Government about how arms-length Government should work.

The Role of the Charity Commission and Public Benefit
The Role of the Charity Commission and Public Benefit

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Public Administration Select Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2013

Total Pages: 238

ISBN-13: 9780215058782

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

This report into the implementation of the Charities Act 2006 finds the Charity Commission being asked to do too much, with too little. The charitable sector is at the heart of UK society, involving millions of people and £9.3 billion received in donations in 2011/2012. Around 25 new applications for charitable status are received by the Charity Commission every working day. Among the reports findings are: one of the keys tests set by the Charities Act 2006 for determining charitable status-the public benefit test-is critically flawed; the Government should revise the statutory objectives for the Charity Commission, to allow the Commission to focus its limited resources on regulating the sector; the proposal to increase the financial threshold for compulsory registration of a charity with the Charity Commission should be rejected; charities should publish their spending on campaigning and political activity. PASC criticises the way the Charity Commission has interpreted public benefit under the Act. The Committee also considered the impact of face-to-face fundraising, or "chugging"-on the street or on the doorstep-and warns that self-regulation has failed so far to generate the level of public confidence which is essential to maintain the reputation of the charitable sector. The evidence was clear that the regulation of fundraising remains a concern for many members of the public. Two in three people have reported feeling uncomfortable as a result of the fundraising methods used by some charities.