Latest news with #InstituteforGovernment
Scotsman
26-07-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Why having a public inquiry into Sandie Peggie-NHS Fife case would be a terrible idea
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... How we will miss it when it is over. Over the summer, the Sandie Peggie employment tribunal has been as reliable a source of comedy as any end-of-the-pier show. If only the basis for it wasn't so important and serious. We will have to await the outcome but one thing is certain, someone will call for a wider inquiry. It might be into the policy or practice but some sort of investigation will be demanded. That would involve more lawyers and expense, only to produce some recommendations which would be ignored and then forgotten. That's how things work nowadays. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Figures from the Institute for Government show that before 1997, there were never more than three public inquiries running in the UK at the same time. At the moment, there are 21 – the highest number ever. A public inquiry into the case involving nurse Sandie Peggie, seen at the Scottish Parliament, and NHS Fife might prove to be an expensive waste of time (Picture: Andrew Milligan) | PA Trams inquiry lasted nine years From the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry to the Covid-19 Inquiry, on the surface they have become the natural means of establishing the facts in matters of public interest. Alternatively, they are a handy means of kicking the can down the road. Take the long-running Edinburgh Trams Inquiry. Lord Hardie's probe into why the city's tram project was £400m over budget and five years late was started in 2014 and ran longer than the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War. It took nine years to report and cost more than £13m. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The report concluded there had been 'a litany of avoidable failures' and that 'poor management and abdication of responsibility on a large scale have had a significant and lasting impact on the lives and livelihoods of Edinburgh residents, and the reputation of the city'. When the report was finally issued in September 2023, Lord Hardie wasn't available to answer questions from the media but he did issue a 48-minute video statement on YouTube. To date, it's been viewed a grand total of 694 times. Lessons learned? Of course that is no way to measure the success of these things. We should look instead at the changes made, the individuals punished and the lessons learned for the future. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad What are they? The actions of some individuals were heavily criticised but no one lost their job. Instead City of Edinburgh Council said they'd already made changes to ensure the same thing couldn't happen again and the Scottish Government said: 'The inquiry took too long, was too costly and in some instances the evidence heard does not support the conclusion drawn.' So what was the point when the bungling and the hopeless duck and weave out of the way long before a conclusion and the competent have already changed things to avoid a repetition? Let's see where we get to with the Scottish Hospitals and the Covid-19 inquiries but the idea that ineptitude will be punished or processes will change feels like wishful thinking.
ITV News
21-07-2025
- Politics
- ITV News
What are public inquiries and how many are ongoing?
The government has said a public inquiry will be established into the Battle of Orgreave - the fifth to be announced in 2025. The announcement of this inquiry brings the total number of ongoing public inquiries to 23, more than at any time before. Concerns have been raised by members of the public, as well as MPs and ministers, over the ever-growing number, cost and length of time they take to complete their work. So what do public inquiries achieve, and, after this latest announcement, is the government too quick to push the inquiry button? What is a public inquiry? Public inquiries are set up by government ministers and aim to investigate "events of major public concern or to consider controversial public policy issues." There are two types of public inquiry, statutory and non-statutory. Statutory inquiries in the UK are launched under the Inquiries Act 2005 and have legal powers to compel evidence and witness testimony. Typically, they are used for serious matters of public concern and are often led by judges. Non-statutory inquiries have no legal powers and rely on voluntary cooperation. They are faster and more flexible, but can be less effective if key witnesses refuse to take part. Through the analysis of documents, as well as evidence and testimony from relevant parties, inquiries seek to establish a legal record of what happened, who bears responsibility and what recommendations can be made to prevent something similar from happening in the future. Do we need them? There are often widespread calls for public inquiries in the wake of serious events. Many see them as a vital tool in seeking answers and bringing all responsible parties together in one investigation. Responding to calls to reform the system, the government claimed recent public inquiries have been "considered to be an independent, legitimate and trusted method of investigating complex issues of deep public concern. "They have shown to be a way to shed light on injustices of the past, provide a means for victims and survivors to finally have their voices heard, and to help rebuild trust in national institutions." But cabinet minister Nick Thomas-Symonds acknowledged "there is serious and growing criticism of their cost, duration, and effectiveness." The government claims that, in the financial year 2023/24, the cost to the public of ongoing inquiries totalled more than £130 million. Statutory inquiries that produced their final report in the last five years took, on average, nearly five years to do so. How many public inquiries are there? With the announcement of the public inquiry into the Battle of Ogreave, the UK now has 23 ongoing statutory inquiries, including the Infected Blood Inquiry. According to the Institute for Government (IfG), since 1997, there have never been fewer than five public inquiries running at any one time. Three of the 23 - the Orgreave Inquiry, the Independent Commission on Grooming Gangs and the Finucane Inquiry - have been announced, but are yet to begin. The IfG claims that between 1990 and 2025, 90 public inquiries have been launched – compared with only 19 in the 30 years prior. Whilst public inquiries vary greatly in length, the shortest ever recorded was less than a year. The Hammond Inquiry ran from September 2006 to June 2007, investigating allegations of corruption by Peter Mandelson over the handling of two foreign brothers' UK passport applications. Currently, the longest recorded inquiry was into Hyponatraemia-related deaths, which took over 13 years to complete. Could things change? In 2014, the House of Lords reviewed the public inquiry process and made 33 recommendations to reform it. The coalition Conservative and Liberal-Democrat government at the time accepted 19 of these, but failed to implement a single one. Reporting again in 2024, the Lords' Statutory Inquiry Committee reiterated many of these recommendations but disagreed with the 2014 suggestion that all new inquiries should be established as statutory. It concluded there were several benefits to non-statutory inquiries, particularly the ability for victims to address the chair directly, rather than through legal counsel as required by statute. The current government has accepted the latest report's findings and agreed that the inquiry process needs to be improved. It confirmed its intention is 'to build on this important work with a wider review of the policy and operational framework around public inquiries,' promising a further update to parliament in due course.
Wales Online
22-06-2025
- Politics
- Wales Online
Keir Starmer update as PM issues warning ahead of crisis meeting
Keir Starmer update as PM issues warning ahead of crisis meeting The PM will chair a meeting of Cobra, which holds sessions over matters of national emergency or major disruption LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM – JUNE 19: UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer with Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa of Bahrain (not pictured) ahead of bilateral talks at 10 Downing Street on June 19, 2025 in London, England. (Photo by Jordan Pettitt-) (Image: 2025 WPA Pool/Getty ) Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer will chair a Cobra meeting on Sunday afternoon following the US strikes on Iran. Such meetings are held for matters of national emergency or major disruption, according to the Institute for Government. The PM said there is a 'risk of escalation' following the US strikes against Iran, both in the Middle East and 'beyond the region'. He called for a return to diplomacy. It comes hours after Donald Trump, US President, announced the US had bombed three nuclear sites in Iran using B-2 stealth bombers. The UK Prime Minister said earlier today that Iran must return to the negotiating table after the strikes. There was no British involvement in the US action but the Government was informed in advance of the strikes, which involved B-2 stealth bombers and submarine-launched missiles. Iran has since said it never left talks and criticised USA for its 'dangerous' escalation. Speaking this morning, Sir Keir Starmer said: 'Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat." Article continues below He did not say whether he supported the US action. This morning, Secretary of State for Business and Trade, Jonathan Reynolds admitted the UK could now face a heightened risk of terrorism in the wake of the US action. He would not say the UK supported the military action nor whether he believed the US strikes were legal. Asked on the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg if the US action was a good thing, he said: 'The outcome. It isn't the means by which anyone in the British Government would have wanted to see this occur.' Pushed on whether the US strike was legal, he said: 'It is where we are today.' Article continues below COBRA - or COBR - meetings are held to discuss serious and urgent matters. The Institute for Government's website says: "COBR's purpose is high-level co-ordination and decision making in the event of major or catastrophic emergencies, including natural disasters, terrorist attacks and major industrial accidents or disruption. Depending on the emergency, officials and agencies most closely involved will already be handling many of the immediate decisions – for example, in a terrorist attack the emergency services and security services will already be responding, while in the event of floods or other natural disaster the Environment Agency, local authorities and emergency services will be coordinating immediate action."
Rhyl Journal
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Rhyl Journal
John Major urges misconduct crackdown, warning of falling political standards
Sir John led the Conservative government between 1990 and 1997, which was mired in accusations of 'sleaze' following a series of parliamentary scandals. In response, he set out the Nolan Principles, a code of conduct which all politicians and officials must abide by, and the Committee on Standards in Public Life to advise the prime minister on ethical standards. A majority of those in public life still follow the principles, he said, but the minority who do not should face consequences. 'Too often, there are none,' Sir John said, speaking at the Institute for Government think tank's one-day conference to mark the 30th anniversary of the Nolan Principles. Pointing to the Partygate scandal which rocked Boris Johnson's government, as well as scandals facing the police, the Church of England, and public services such as the Post Office, Sir John warned of slipping public standards, and insisted 'a re-set is essential'. He added: 'Today, scepticism does not fairly describe the public mood: a more accurate description would be a mixture of cynicism and disillusion that stretches across most of our public institutions ‒ the Church, Parliament, police, public service and press among them. That is not healthy in our public life. 'The Committee on Standards in Public Life has reported that social and political trends have coarsened standards. That is true, but put too gently. 'Standards have been undermined by being ignored, by being broken, by public figures who put personal or political interest before public virtue.' Many of the watchdogs put in place to prevent abuses of power are unable enforce their edicts, Sir John suggested. 'It has been our past practice to offer guidance on good conduct – and trust it will be delivered. That was the Nolan approach. 'But experience has taught us that no rules can deal with individuals prepared to ignore them and, sometimes, sanctions are required,' he said. He welcomed moves to bolster oversight of ministers with an independent adviser on ministerial standards, and the parliamentary commissioner for standards to oversee MPs. But Sir John said the Advisory Committee on Public Appointments (Acoba) stood in 'stark contrast'. The watchdog, which gives politicians, their advisers and chief civil servants advice on whether or not jobs they take up after leaving public life are appropriate, should be 'put on a statutory basis, and given deterrent powers', he said. He also called for a thinning of the number of special advisers who act on behalf of ministers, and warned that House of Lords appointments in recent years had not passed the 'smell test'. 'There should be no free pass to becoming a legislator,' Sir John said, saying the upper chamber should not contain legislators unable or unwilling to take part in scrutinising law changes. The former prime minister also suggested reports American businessman Elon Musk had planned to give a multimillion-pound donation to Nigel Farage's Reform UK political party would have left it a 'wholly-owned subsidiary of foreign money', as he criticised the dangers of political donations. 'We need to refresh protections, and close off this pipeline before it becomes a serious political problem,' he added. Sir John closed his speech by warning that Britain's 'widely envied reputation for being free of corruption and bad practice' was at risk. He added: 'I regret the slow erosion of that reputation – which we would once have thought indestructible. It is time for us to reverse this trend before the damage becomes beyond salvage.'
The Guardian
27-04-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on GPs: the importance of being face to face
That members of the public value access to in-person GP appointments sounds like a statement of the obvious. But the findings of an Institute for Government report about general practice in England have more complex implications too. One striking finding is that waits for appointments seem to matter less than is often assumed. Successive governments have pushed for same-day consultations. If this was done to please the public, the research suggests they should not have bothered. Surprisingly, it found no statistically significant relationship between patient satisfaction and length of wait. For many people, there is no substitute for a face-to-face conversation with the family doctor who they may have known for years. A higher number of online and telephone consultations is correlated with lower satisfaction. The shift away from in-person consultations, which accelerated during the pandemic and has not reversed, has coincided with falling confidence in general practice – though the reduction on spending on primary care, relative to hospitals, must also be factored in. Appointments with other staff do not boost patient satisfaction to anything like the same degree. Once again, this finding raises a question over recent policy, which has been to substantially increase the 'direct patient care' workforce, including pharmacists, in England's 6,200 GP surgeries. The most popular appointments of all are those in smaller practices with higher numbers of GP partners. People's preferences are not, in themselves, a mandate for change. This study found that practices with higher satisfaction scores also meet more targets. But measuring outcomes in primary care is complicated and previous research has raised doubts about some of the care offered by the smallest practices. That said, the report highlights the importance of personal contact in healthcare, as in other public services. Under the new public management ethos that emerged in the 1980s, strenuous efforts are made to make health, education and social security systems work like businesses. Increasing efficiency and productivity are the goal. Human interactions are tightly managed with the aim of suppressing demand. Objectors to this approach have long argued that the emphasis on outputs is overly narrow, creates perverse incentives, and devalues much that is important. As Ambulance, the BBC's Bafta-winning documentary series, shows week after week, what many people need more than anything else in their interaction with public services is a feeling of connection. As the paramedic Nimah Shyr-Nai said in last week's episode, 'everyone's got a story in the end'. A recognition that care quality is to do with relationships lay behind Labour's promise to 'bring back the family doctor'. But this is easier said than done. Given ongoing difficulties in recruiting enough GPs, ministers need to ensure that other primary care staff are equipped to meet people's needs – while also training more doctors. Policymakers must reject efficiency as the sole measure of success and rebuild public services around human connection. It should not be seen as utopian, or nostalgic, to advocate for public services that value relationships. These do not all need to be in person. Automation can streamline services and help different people, and age-groups, meet their needs in various ways. But John Donne's famous assertion that 'no man is an island' still holds. We are all connected, each 'a part of the main'. That matters in public services, too.
