Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
snip....
2. Changed the Ministerial Code so that honesty/integrity are not part thereof;
You will, of course, be aware that this was a recommendation of the Committee on Standards and Public Life,,,
Snip...
|
No, it wasn't...
The Committee recommended, on the Ministerial Code
Quote:
|
First, the code’s provisions on ethics and standards should be separated from those detailing the processes of cabinet governance. The Ministerial Code should be a code of conduct of ethical standards for ministers, akin to MPs’ and peers’ codes of conduct, based on the Seven Principles of Public Life.
|
Johnson ignored the recommendations that would provide balance and oversight to his and Ministers' roles - he chose not to grant the Independent Adviser full autonomy to initiate investigations into potential breaches of the ministerial code - the adviser will still need to be granted permission from the Prime Minister. There were four recommendations on the Ministerial Code and the Independent Adviser on Ministers' Interest, but he only choose the one that would lessen the impact of punishment for breaches, rather than the whole package which provided holistic oversight and governance...
Quote:
The Committee believes that further reform is necessary to the Ministerial Code and the role of the Independent Adviser. First, the code’s provisions on ethics and standards should be separated from those detailing the processes of cabinet governance. The Ministerial Code should be a code of conduct of ethical standards for ministers, akin to MPs’ and peers’ codes of conduct, based on the Seven Principles of Public Life.
Second, though the code must be owned and issued by the Prime Minister, rather than Parliament, an obligation in primary legislation for the Prime Minister to publish the Ministerial Code would grant the code a more appropriate constitutional status. The Independent Adviser should be consulted in any process of revising and reissuing the code, as has occurred in the past.
Third, now that the code is explicitly subject to a system of graduated sanctions, it should detail the range of sanctions that the Prime Minister may issue in response to a breach. We recommend that those sanctions include apologies, fines, and asking for a minister’s resignation.
Fourth, the appointments process, powers, and remit of the Independent Adviser should be strengthened. The Adviser should be appointed through an enhanced version of the current process for significant public appointments, where there is a majority of independent panel members. The Adviser should be able to initiate their own investigations and have the authority to determine breaches of the code. The Adviser’s findings should also be published no more than eight weeks after a report has been submitted to the Prime Minister. Meaningful independence is the benchmark for any effective form of standards regulation and current arrangements for the Adviser still fall below this bar.
|
But you knew that, and were just repeating the Party line...
He also the ensured the Nolan Principles, which have formed the basis of the standards expected of those in public life for nearly 30 years, no longer featuring prominently in the Ministerial Code.
The Committee recommended that there needs to be greater independence in the regulation of the Ministerial Code, which lags behind similar arrangements for MPs, peers, and civil servants, but nothing happened to those recommendations...
Quote:
The Independent Adviser should be able to initiate investigations into breaches of the Ministerial Code.
The Independent Adviser should have the authority to determine breaches of the Ministerial Code.
|
https://assets.publishing.service.go...Accessible.pdf