9 November 2022: Lord Evans - A

To get to be Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life you must have to be “a trusted pair of hands”, more than just “a good egg”, and even more connected than the National Grid, in Whitehall at least. Lord Jonathan Evans may well be the madarin’s mandarin in this regard, but given the recent run of events involving parliamentarians – from the top down – then having any responsibility for standards may be an increasingly thankless task. After all, how far can the meanings of words like honesty, integrity, and accountability be stretch to preserve their credibility and sustainable meanings.

His CV is enlightening. It included him being Director of MI5 between 2007 to 2013. This was after a long history in the security services. The Committee he chairs is an independent non-departmental standing committee sponsored by the Cabinet Office. Part of the role is to promote the Nolan “7 Principles”, but they do not deal with individual cases of possible breaches. The role covers all public service across the country, not just politicians and top officials. The Committee links to related bodies and roles such as the Independent Adviser on Ministers Interests and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. The latter body does carry out investigations related to politicians while civil servants are covered by the Civil Service Commission. Ultimately, it is the Prime Minister who decides what happens if there are seen to be breaches of a code or standard.

Recent reports from his Committee point to the need to continue to emphasise standards, and this seems to be supported by the public. The Nolan Principles have been in place since John Major called for a set of standards to be established, almost 30 years ago. The 7 Principles are: Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty, and Leadership. Thinking again of recent times, there do seem to be ways for some of our leaders to interpret these high and earnest standards in very flexible ways. The Standards are embedded throughout Governments and Parliaments. They are part of recruitment processes, training, cultural development, and more. “The tone from the top is critical” on these matters he stated, without a hint of sarcasm or wryness.

Counsel focussed on parts of a recent report from the Committee as these relate to the investigations of the Inquiry. This included situations of how to handle matters when things go wrong, and the importance of learning from mistakes. Misleading information should be corrected, and the public need to be made aware of difficulties arising from errors, including the actions to be taken to overcome the problems. It was seen as a matter of balance to find the correct mix between setting statutory regulations and imposing monitoring processes. In its recent report the Committee recommended that there should be a review of the enforcing of ethical standards to create a more rigorous and consistent compliance system. This was in line with the recommendations of the Boardman Report (which was looking at the Greensill matter).

It was suggested by the witness that the current system was a mix of ethical principles and practical arrangements, which had worked well overall, but there was a view to place some aspects of Standards enforcement onto a statutory basis. There was also a call for a range of sanctions to be specified, rather than some kind of overarching or automatic need for a Minister to resign if there is a problem in her or his Department. Basically, the recent report recommendations are to ensure that the facts are placed in the public sphere and there is a more robust system to impose the Standards. The recent report has been submitted to the Government and a response was expected and promised. However, this has not been forthcoming despite suggestions that it was being “worked on”.

Counsel then concentrated on the topic of the “Duty of Candour” which has come up in relation to the matters covered by the Inquiry, particularly in the Health sphere. The witness knew about the issue of candour. He noted how this concept fitted well with aspects of the Standards overseen by his Committee.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

26 July 2023: Sunak - A

And in walked the Prime Minister (PM), at exactly 2pm. One minute later the Chair enters. Sir Brian said a few words of thanks for the special circumstances related to access people had to endure due to the additional security arrangements. The PM gave the oath following his own religious affiliation. Counsel contextually reviewed how the witness had stated that his knowledge and involvement relied on other Ministers, however he had received more recent briefings in preparation for the appearance today. The first questions went straight to the communications from Penny Mordaunt when she was Paymaster General (PG). These highlighted in strong terms the need for action at the time and not to delay. Before answering, the witness wanted to say how he recognised this was, “An appalling scandal … people have suffered for decades” (and other fine words not backed up with action). In relation to the letters from the PG, he did not see them under the normal situation of a triage to filter the c...
Read more

25 July 2023: Dunn - B

Questions from core participants: Was there an investigation into the newspaper leaks? She was not aware of one, but that would have been taken forward by the Cabinet Office. (Fox and chicken coop comes to mind.) What are the main elements being used to come up with the leaked figures? She was not able to say but would get back to the Inquiry with that information. On psychological support, will the research be made publicly available, and when? She expected it would be and was expected in August. The research was understood to have been commissioned in 2022, but the need was highlighted in 2020. Why did it take so long to get to the point of commissioning the work? She said there was a process of “ongoing dialogue” after which it was decided that what was required was more ongoing dialogue. (That’s not exactly how it was phrased.) The Chair referenced himself as having, on several occasions, expressed the hope that he can recognise how everyone in the UK, including England, was benefi...
Read more

17 November 2022: Panel on finding the undiagnosed - A

Another panel of leading medics were assembled to address the issue of how to find people who are still undiagnosed. There was one from each of the four nations: Professor Graham Foster (England); Professor John Dillon (Scotland); Doctor Brendan Healey (Wales); and Dr Joanne McLean (Northern Ireland). As usual, for each witness there was a brief review of their respective roles and responsibilities. The situation in England started with a description of the HCV elimination initiative and its arrangement involving the pharmaceutical companies which was lauded by the English witness but seemed curious. For their cooperation, the pharma companies get anonymous, headline data on patients. There is a three phase elimination programme in England. Phase 1 is about oral therapies. Phase 2 is about risk groups. It involves an incentivised process to encourage the identification by re-engagement with patients who had had a positive test but had not been treated. It involved about 50,000 people. ...
Read more