Engaging with Parliament: what is good Select Committee evidence?

One way of trying to make an impact with one's research is to use it to provide evidence and information to one of Parliament's Select Committees. Victoria Honour offers some insight into how these committees and their inquiries work, and how academics can engage with them; including practical advice on how to structure and present written evidence, and information on what academic training and further resources are available

What do serious case reviews achieve?

Although there had been some earlier public inquiries, the inquiry into the death of 7 year old Maria Colwell in 1973[1] was a critical episode in the history of child protection in the UK. It was this inquiry that led to the formalisation of inter-agency child protection procedures, the establishment of Area Child Protection Committees, and the creation of a child protection register. It also sparked off a long line of public inquiries into serious and fatal maltreatment, more recently superseded by statutory Serious Case Reviews (SCRs) carried out by Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCBs). The public outcries over the deaths of Victoria Climbié and Peter Connelly highlighted the fact that, in spite of all the time and resource spent on these reviews, the problems of severe child abuse have not gone away. This begs the question of whether we have truly learnt anything from the reviews and whether anything has changed as a result

Reports of Parliament’s decline much exaggerated

The last decade has seen a series of significant innovations in the way Parliament holds government to account, mostly involving the House of Commons, but in some cases the House of Lords as well. They include: More resources for select committees; The introduction of ‘core tasks’ for select committees in the Commons setting out their work objectives; More select committees in both houses, holding more inquiries and producing more reports; The Prime Minister holding twice-annual oral evidence sessions with the House of Commons Liaison Committee, which comprises the chairs of the various Commons select committees; The introduction of public bill committees for more effective legislative scrutiny in the Commons; Greater transparency for executive financial accountability to Parliament; A Commons backbench business committee, to some extent loosening the grip of the executive, via the whips, on the Commons timetable; Elections for Commons committee members and chairs, again lessening the influence of the whips; Pre-appointment hearings by Commons committees for preferred candidates for major public appointments; and The placing of powers previously exercised under the extra-parliamentary Royal Prerogative on a statutory basis, making Parliament the ultimate authority. Most notably, the Civil Service is now regulated by an Act of Parliament

Professionalism Panels are Active, But Use is Still Sparse

Most circuits around Florida have set up local professionalism committees to review complaints against lawyers, but only a few have actually received any complaints, according to reports filed with the Supreme Court’s Commission on Professionalism. The Bar’s Attorney Consumer Assistance Program (ACAP), though, has around 250 complaints pending about unprofessional actions by lawyers, and has fielded more than 1,600 inquiries about lawyer conduct that may include professionalism issues

Conservation, biodiversity and world heritage reef advisory committee 9th meeting 2002

A summary document is prepared after each meeting of the Reef Advisory Committee (RAC) to inform other advisory committees serving the Authority, and persons generally (including the public), of the business of the RAC. The document forms part of the records of the meeting and so its content is limited to matters raised in the meeting, and, where necessary, background details given to the meeting. Any inquiries should be referred to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority’s (GBRMPA) RAC Secretariat, or to the appropriate Member

Global intelligence, co-operation versus accountability: new facets to an old problem

The most important recent change within the realm of intelligence and security services has been the expansion of intelligence co-operation. The growing connectivity between both foreign intelligence services and also domestic security services means that we might speak - not just of growing international co-operation - but perhaps even of global co-operation. This essay considers the complex interplay of intelligence and globalization since 1989. It argues that there is an obvious tension between a developing global style of co-operative activity and the traditional mechanisms of oversight, which have tended to be national. Accordingly, it moves on to discuss the recent efforts by national, regional and international systems of inquiry to examine issues that involve intelligence co-operation. It suggests that while formal committee-type mechanisms have limited purchase, they are not the only options for oversight in a globalized context

Creative tension: parliament and national security

Overview: This paper argues that enhancing parliament’s role in national security will reinforce executive accountability, improve the quality of public debate over national security and serve to strengthen the foundations of Australia’s parliamentary democracy. There are several measures that would materially improve parliament’s role in the conduct of national security:  enhance respect for parliament as the forum for consideration of national security issues by utilising the parliament’s existing procedures to more fully consider issues of foreign affairs, defence, intelligence and border security develop parliamentarians’ education in national security by providing a new members’ orientation program focussed on national security examine parliament’s exercise of war powers  encourage parliamentary diplomacy  a material improvement in parliament’s role demands more attention to increasing the human and financial resources available to key national security committees undertake an examination of national security committee mandates, particularly in intelligence oversigh

Submission in response to the Australian Government’s Consultation Paper on the Establishment of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse

A submission in response to the Australian Government\u27s Consultation Paper on the Establishment of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Introduction We are a team of academics and researchers, from the disciplines of historical studies, social work and archival science, who have substantive years of experience working on projects exploring the legacy of Australia\u27s institutional \u27care\u27 of children. Our work in this space, particularly since the release of the Forgotten Australians report in 2004, has involved ongoing engagement with a broad range of stakeholders, including care leavers, support and advocacy groups, past and current providers of out-of-home care, state and federal government departments, and cultural institutions. We welcome the opportunity to make a submission in response to the Australian Government\u27s Consultation Paper on the Establishment of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Our submission discusses the vital importance that records will play in this Royal Commission, with particular reference to records in the custody of past providers in religious, charitable and government sectors. We submit that records are a key issue for this Royal Commission