Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner

Evidence To National Assembly For Wales’ Committee On Standards Of Conduct

Assembly measure to establish a statutory role of Commissioner for Standards: second consultation, on the proposed Measure.

I wish to respond briefly to the Committee’s invitation to give further evidence in relation to its second consultation, on its draft proposed Measure.  I support the vast majority of the of the provisions set out in the proposed Measure and think that the Measure will achieve the overall purpose and aim identified by the Committee.

Section 1(5) - renewability of appointment

I note that there is provision for multiple terms of appointment and I wonder why this option has been chosen by the Committee, as provision for a single, longer term without renewal now seems to be becoming the norm for Parliament-supported office holders in the UK and Commonwealth1.  The Wicks Committee (Committee on Standards in Public Life) in its 2002 Report2 on Standards of Conduct in the House of Commons, examined this issue in relation to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and decided that problems were best avoided and independence best protected by having a single term of five to seven years.  The Scottish Commission for Public Audit, in its First Report 20083, has recommended a single 8 year term for future Auditors General in Scotland, so as to avoid any perceived or real threat to independence through pressures associated with reappointment.  The 2007 Report of the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee into the Regulation of Conduct in Public Life4 also supported single, non-renewable terms of 5 - 7 years for ethical watchdogs.

I recommend further consideration of this issue.  The matter is currently under consideration in the Scottish Parliament in relation to the various Parliament- supported bodies, including the Standards Commissioner post, and the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body has stated its support for a change to single term posts.

Section 1(6)(b) - removal from office

I suggest that it would be desirable to state the possible grounds for removal from office on the face of the legislation, e.g. inability, neglect and misconduct.  This is so as to demonstrate that there is protection, over and above the voting threshold required, from arbitrary dismissal by those (Assembly Members) who are under the scrutiny of the Commissioner.  A Commissioner could become unpopular simply by dint of doing a thorough job.  Independence would be protected by proper grounds having to be established before dismissal could take place.  A Commissioner, being an appointee and not an employee, cannot make use of employment legislation to protect his or her interests, and he or she is more vulnerable in a single chamber legislature than at Westminster, where two Houses are involved in a vote for dismissal.  

Dr J A T Dyer
Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner
5 January 2009

Footnotes

Gay, O. and Winetrobe, B.K. (2008).  Parliament’s Watchdogs: At The Crossroads.  Constitution Unit, UCL. ISBN 978-1-903903-49-0.

2 Committee on Standards in Public Life (2002).  Standards of Conduct in the House of Commons.  Eighth Report, Cm 5663.

3 Scottish Commission for Public Audit, first Report 2008 (Session 3). Review of the Corporate Governance of Audit Scotland.

4 House of Commons, 2007.  Public Administration Select Committee, Fourth Report (Session 2006-07):Ethics and Standards: the Regulation of Conduct in Public Life.