Reviewing the review: a three-dimensional approach to analysing the 2017–2020 review of the House of Lords investigative and scrutiny committees

Figures & data

Table 1. A three dimensional approach to reviewing the review.

Dimension	Direction	Tension	Tradition
Inter-Institutional	Upper House to Executive	Unelected peers scrutinising elected members of government.	‘Self-denying ordinance’ – Lords committees would focus on fine detail and avoid courting controversy.
Intra-Institutional	Upper House to Lower House	Primary scrutiny structure provided via Commons select committees.	‘Complementarity’ – an emphasis on ‘added value’ and ‘difference’ (i.e. long-term, less-partisan, etc.)
Extra-Institutional	Upper House to Public	The legitimacy of appointees operating at the apex of a democracy	‘Scrutiny by stealth’ – select committees in the Lords did not court public or media attention.

Table 2. Comparing the pre and post 2021 scrutiny committee system.

Pre-2021 Sessional Committees		Post-2021 Sessional Committees*
Committee (estb.)	Sub-Committee(s)	Committee	Sub-Committee(s)
European Communities (later ‘Union’) Committee (1974)^i		European Affairs Committee
	EU Financial Affairs		Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland
	EU Internal Market
	EU External Affairs
	EU Home Affairs
	EU Justice
	EU Energy and the Environment
Science and Technology (1980)		Science and Technology Committee
Constitution Committee (2001)		Constitution Committee
Economic Affairs Committee (2001)^ii		Economic Affairs Committee
	Finance Bill
Communications Committee (2007, sessional since 2013)^iii		Communications and Digital Committee
International Relations Committee (2016)^iv		International Relations and Defence Committee
		Public Services Committee
		International Agreements Committee
		Industry and Regulators Committee
		Built Environment Committee
		Justice and Home Affairs Committee

*Plus three ad hoc or ‘special inquiry’ committees running each session.

ⁱHouse of Lords Procedures for Scrutiny of Proposals for European Instruments Committee (HL 194, 1973).

ⁱⁱIt evolved from an ad hoc select committee established in 1998 to monitor the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee. While it mainly conducts inquiries into topical areas of economic policy, since 2003 the committee has also established a sub-committee most years to inquire into selected aspects of the draft Finance Bill.

ⁱⁱⁱLiaison Committee (HL 135, 2013, para. 12).

^ivLiaison Committee (HL 47, 2015).

Table 3. Reviewing the review: three dimensions, three disjunctures.

Dimension	Direction	Tradition	Disjuncture
Inter-Institutional	Upper House to Executive	‘Self-denying ordinance’ – Lords committees would focus on fine detail and avoid courting controversy.	Although not necessarily courting controversy, at the heart of the reform agenda is a desire to shift towards a more systematic and stronger scrutiny system in the House of Lords which is unlikely to be welcomed by any executive.
Intra-Institutional	Upper House to Lower House	‘Complementarity’ – an emphasis on ‘added value’ and ‘difference’ (i.e. long-term, less-partisan, etc.)	How the Lords can develop a cross-governmental focus in light of a highly fragmented and siloed governmental structure with numerous barriers and blockages remains unclear.
Extra-Institutional	Upper House to Public	‘Scrutiny by stealth’ – select committees in the Lords did not court public or media attention.	The ambition in relation to public engagement is arguably the most novel and striking element of the reform programme but how this will be resourced or how questions of democratic legitimacy will be managed remain imprecise.

HL 194. (1973). Select committee on procedures for scrutiny of proposals for European Instruments, 2nd Report of Session 1972–73.

 Google Scholar

HL 135. (2013). Review of select committee activity and proposals for new committee activity. Liaison Committee. 1st report of session 2012-13. House of Lords.

 Google Scholar

HL 47. (2015). An international relations committee. Liaison Committee. 2nd Report of Session 2015-16. House of Lords.

 Google Scholar