🏠 Home Detailed notes Scrutiny grid Predicted Q1(b) notes

How to use this

Two grids on the same template. The first is empty - print it, fill in each cell with a one-line note while you revise. The second is a worked example to check yourself against.

Each cell asks one question: does this row strengthen the column quality (mark +) or weaken it (mark -)? Then add a one-line note saying why. The plus and minus columns are deliberately not pre-printed - your judgement is the work.

Independent of the whips = does the committee work free of party management? Expertise and evidence = does it build subject knowledge and take evidence? Forces a response = must the government formally engage with its work? Changes policy or law = does its work actually change outcomes? Media profile = does its work reach the public? Cross-party working = does it work across party lines? Effective overall = your overall judgement on this committee.

Parliamentary committees - judgement grid +   -

Empty version. Print and fill in.
Committee+   - Independent of the whips Expertise and evidence Forces a response Changes policy or law Media profile Cross-party working Effective overall
Select
committees
Liaison
Committee
Public Bill
Committees
Public
Accounts
Committee
Backbench
Business
Committee
Lords
committees
How to use the grid in an essay. Pick the column the question is asking about (most exam questions on committees turn on Independent of the whips, Changes policy or law, or Overall effectiveness). Read down that column. Group your essay paragraphs by the cluster the column produces - not by committee-by-committee description, which the examiner marks down.

Parliamentary committees - judgement grid +   -

Filled version. Use this to check your own grid - and tap any cell for the full detail behind the judgement.
Committee+   - Independent of the whips Expertise and evidence Forces a response Changes policy or law Media profile Cross-party working Effective overall
Select
committees		 +Post-Wright 2010: chairs elected by secret ballot of the whole House, not picked by the whips. +Members build subject knowledge across a parliament; evidence is taken on the record. +Government responds to reports - the convention is within 60 days. -Around two-thirds of significant recommendations are not implemented. +Windrush (Home Affairs) and the mini-budget hearings (Treasury, October 2022) led the news. +Reports are usually agreed unanimously across party lines. +The strongest sustained scrutiny the Commons does - within the implementation limit.
Liaison
Committee		 +Composed of the elected select committee chairs. +Each chair questions the PM on their own committee's territory. +The Prime Minister attends - the only committee that questions the PM directly. -Three sessions a year rarely change policy. +The 2024 questioning of Sunak on Rwanda was widely covered. +Chairs from all parties share the session. -Profile without power - the PM controls the answers.
Public Bill
Committees		 -Whipped and partisan; membership reflects party balance. -Reconstituted for each bill - no standing expertise builds up. -No report-and-response cycle; amendments are simply voted on. -Nearly all successful amendments are introduced by the government itself. -Line-by-line scrutiny attracts almost no coverage. -Votes follow the whip almost without exception. -The weakest link in legislative scrutiny.
Public
Accounts
Committee		 +Chaired by an opposition MP by convention. +Works with the National Audit Office on value-for-money evidence. +Government answers every PAC report through a Treasury minute. +Departments change spending practice under PAC pressure. +Spending failures make headlines. +Audit work is largely non-partisan. +Usually rated the most effective committee of all.
Backbench
Business
Committee		 +Created by Wright 2010; schedules debates the government would not choose. -Schedules debates rather than conducting inquiries. -Backbench motions do not bind the government. -Symbolic wins - the government can ignore the vote. +The 2011 Hillsborough debate showed real agenda power. +Backbenchers across parties bid for time together. -Agenda-setting, not accountability.
Lords
committees		 +Peers face no constituency or career pressure; many are crossbenchers. +Former ministers, scientists and judges - the deepest subject expertise in Parliament. +Government responds to Lords reports as it does to Commons ones. -Influential on technical detail, ignorable on politics - no mandate behind it. -Rarely covered. +The least partisan committees in Parliament. +Quietly effective on technical and long-term questions.
What the filled grid shows. Read down the columns. Independent of the whips splits the grid exactly where the essay splits: select committees, the PAC and the Backbench Business Committee on one side (all reshaped or created by the Wright reforms of 2010), Public Bill Committees on the other. Changes policy or law is the disagree side's column: even the strongest committees see around two-thirds of significant recommendations ignored. The judgement line: committee scrutiny has real teeth for exposure and evidence, weak teeth for outcomes - visibility without enforcement.
See also
David Clayton Tutoring | davidjclayton@proton.me