Government and Select Committees

All the politicians want an inquiry into banking, the form of which is in dispute. This blog will therefore not comment on the specifics, but on the principle.

It has become a feature of modern government that ineptitude is an integral component. This is because the quality of politicians has fallen to such a low ebb. The fall-back for controversy is the Public Inquiry led by a judge, which takes painstaking evidence over months and months. When it has finally sifted through the millions of words, the Report is published and recommendations made. By this time the world and especially the modern digital world, has moved on. For example we still await the findings of Chilcot, although few ordinary folk recall why it was set up.

The government, still in the grip of its mid-term blues, proposes a Parliamentary Inquiry over the LIBOR fallout led by the Chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, but composed of a broader membership, including peers. There is some confusion at Westminster about its status in the wider scheme of parliamentary things. What is needed is a permanent structure for this kind of investigation which is quicker and much less expensive than the quasi courts of the big Public Inquiries. Essentially the requirement is for inquiries in public.

The Parliamentary Select Committees provide the ideal vehicle at reasonable cost. They command increasing respect, are held in public and are largely bi-partisan. What is needed is for them to be able to examine witnesses under oath. Add that and a few minor powers and you have a ready and coherent response to controversy, which is both timely and cost effective. Because all the members of such committees are elected MPs, there is a welcome connection with voters, lacking in so much of our fabric of State.