Parliament and Public Money

  • John McEldowney
  • Colin Lee

Abstract

Parliament often seems at its weakest in the control and scrutiny of public money. Taxes and duties are raised, and public money is spent, with formal parliamentary authority. However, such authority is almost invariably granted in the form proposed by the Government. While suggestions for reform have often focused on ways to give the House of Commons a greater institutional involvement in these processes, progress has been more marked in the retrospective scrutiny and audit of Government’s expenditure decisions. Scrutiny is now much more complex and sophisticated, although parliamentary mechanisms have struggled to keep abreast with the growing range and complexity of the taxation system and public expenditure.

Keywords

Income Malaysia Toll 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    B. Crick, The Reform of Parliamen. (1968 edition), Weidenfeld & Nicolson, pp. 238–39.Google Scholar
  2. 4.
    M. Ryle, ‘Supply and other Financial Procedures’, in S. A. Walkland, ed., The House of Commons in the Twentieth Centur. (1979), pp. 329–425.Google Scholar
  3. 9.
    E. L. Normanton, Accountability and Audit in Government. (Manchester, 1966).Google Scholar
  4. 12.
    Ann Robinson, ‘The Treasury and Civil Service Committee’ in G. Drewry, ed., The New Select Committee. (2nd Edition, Oxford, 1989) pp. 268–318Google Scholar
  5. Ann Robinson, ‘The Financial Work of the Select Committees’ in G. Drewry, ed., The New Select Committee. (2nd edition, Oxford, 1989), pp. 307–318Google Scholar
  6. P. Baines, ‘Financial Accountability: Agencies and Audit’ in P. Giddings, ed., Parliamentary Accountability: A Study of Parliament and Executive Agencie. (London, 1995), pp. 95–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ann Robinson, Parliament and Public Spendin. (London, 1978).Google Scholar
  8. 13.
    Ann Robinson, ‘The House of Commons and Public Expenditure’, in S. A. Walkland and M. Ryle eds., The Commons Toda. (London, 1981) pp. 154–174; Ann Robinson, Memorandum to the Select Committee on Procedure (Finance), Session 1982–83, HC 42–II.Google Scholar
  9. 15.
    National Audit Office, Financial Auditing and Reportin. (London, 2003).Google Scholar
  10. 16.
    David Heald and Alasdair McLeod, ‘Public Expenditure’ in The Laws of Scotland: Stair Memorial Encyclopaedi. (London, 2002), para. 520.Google Scholar
  11. 19.
    National Audit Office, Corporate Plan 2003–04 to 2004–0. (London, 2002), para. 1.2.Google Scholar
  12. 20.
    NAO, Helping the Nation Spend Wisely, Annual Report 2002–03 (London, 2003).Google Scholar
  13. 22.
    Lord Sharman of Redlynch, Holding to Account: The Review of Audit and Accountability for Central Governmen. (London, 2001).Google Scholar
  14. 24.
    J. McEldowney, ‘Audit Cultures and Risk Aversion in Public Authorities: An Agenda for Public Lawyers’ in R. Baldwin ed., Law and Uncertainty Risks and Legal Processe. (Kluwer, 1997), pp. 185–210.Google Scholar
  15. Also see J. F. McEldowney, ‘The Control of Public Expenditure’, chapter 15 in J. Jowell and D. Oliver eds., The Changing Constitutio. (Oxford, 2004) pp. 375–400.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • John McEldowney
  • Colin Lee

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations