Skip to main content

Objects and Questions

  • Chapter
The Future of Parliament

Abstract

In this section we reflect on the different ways in which Parliament ‘scrutinises’ the work of Government and the State. Scrutiny, and the associated concept of accountability, have become more and more prominent in the work of Parliament in the last half-century. It might, superficially, be thought that the increased emphasis on ‘scrutiny’ is a consequence of the diminished significance of other roles, reflecting a decline in the power and prestige of Parliament. That may be an over-simplification but it does give us a clue to the meaning of ‘scrutiny’ in the Parliamentary context because it draws on what scrutiny is not. It is not to control, but to review; not to countermand, but to comment; not to command to do, but to invite to reflect. It is logically dependent upon action taken, policy announced or intended – even the apparent exception of pre-legislative scrutiny is the scrutiny of a document (the draft bill) produced by the government.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. A. L. Lowell, The Government of England. 1919, Vol 1, p. 332

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. N. Chester and N. Bowring, Questions in Parliament. Clarendon Press, 1962, p. 269.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967. For an authoritative history of the Office, see Roy Gregory and Philip Giddings, The Ombudsman, the Citizen and Parliament. Politico’s, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See W. B. Gwyn, ‘The British PCA: Ombudsman or Ombudsmouse?’, Journal of Politics. 35, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Philip Collcutt and Mary Hourihan, Review of the Public Sector Ombudsmen in England. Cabinet Office, April 2000; Third Report from the Select Committee on Public Administration, 1999–2000, HC 612, July 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  6. See Mark Franklin and Philip Norton, Eds. Parliamentary Question. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), pp. 52–59.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See Procedure Committee, Parliamentary Questions. Third Report of Session 2001–02, HC 622, TSO, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2005 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Giddings, P., Irwin, H. (2005). Objects and Questions. In: Giddings, P. (eds) The Future of Parliament. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230523142_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics