Improving Parliamentary Scrutiny of Public Appointments

Since 2007, candidates for 50 of the most senior public appointments in the UK have been scrutinised by the relevant House of Commons Select Committee before ministers confirm their appointment. Committees regard pre-appointment scrutiny as a chore, but our research shows it has real impact. Candidates have not been appointed as a result, and others have been forced to resign. Since the Grimstone review in 2016 gave Ministers more scope for political patronage, parliamentary scrutiny is all the more important. Committees could be more effective if they were more selective, but also more systematic in their approach to pre-appointment scrutiny. They could range beyond the Cabinet Office list of the ‘top 50’ appointments; and they could use questionnaires to candidates to help decide the issues they wish to discuss, or whether to hold a hearing at all.