This Report welcomes and responds to the Government's proposal to involve select committees in public appointments by inviting committees to hold non-binding pre-appointment hearings with nominees for key positions. The Report clarifies the purpose of these hearings: to expose nominees to parliamentary and public scrutiny before the final ministerial decision on the appointment, to increase the likelihood that those appointed will be effective in their accountability to Parliament and the public. The Report also establishes criteria to determine which posts should be subject to these hearings, and identifies major auditors, ombudsmen, regulators and inspectors, as well as those responsible for the appointments system itself; along with appointments normally made on merit but where Ministers have chosen not to follow the usual processes. Finally, the Report responds to concerns about involving select committees in public appointments, including several raised by the Commissioner for Public Appointments, and proposes ways of managing the risks identified, largely through a framework of clear protocols to be agreed between the Government and the Liaison Committee, and also by monitoring and reviewing the effect of the hearings on public appointments over time.

The extension to other Realms of the reserve power to refuse a dissolution

Party Patronage and Party Government in European Democracies brings together insights from the worlds of party politics and public administration in order to analyze the role of political parties in public appointments across contemporary Europe. Based on an extensive new data gathered through expert interviews in fifteen European countries, this book offers the first systematic comparative assessment of the scale of party patronage and its role in sustaining modern party governments. Among the key findings are: First, patronage appointments tend to be increasingly dominated by the party in public office rather than being used or controlled by the party organization outside parliament. Second, rather than using appointments as rewards, as used to be the case in more clientelistic systems in the past, parties are now more likely to emphasize appointments that can help them to manage the infrastructure of government and the state. In this way patronage becomes an organizational rather than an electoral resource. Third, patronage appointments are increasingly sourced from channels outside of the party, thus helping to make parties look increasingly like network organizations, primarily constituted by their leaders and their personal and political hinterlands. Comparative Politics is a series for students, teachers, and researchers of political science that deals with contemporary government and politics. Global in scope, books in the series are characterised by a stress on comparative analysis and strong methodological rigour. The series is published in association with the European Consortium for Political Research. For more information visit: www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr The Comparative Politics series is edited by Professor David M. Farrell, School of Politics and International Relations, University College Dublin, Kenneth Carty, Professor of Political Science, University of British Columbia, and Professor Dirk Berg-Schlosser, Institute of Political Science, Philipps University, Marburg.

This report considers the experience of some three years of holding 'pre-appointment' hearings by select committees to examine the 'preferred candidate' for certain public appointments before that appointment is confirmed. Whilst the committee considers the experiment a success they do recommend a number of changes. They propose a three tier list: Posts in the first tier are those considered to be of sufficient constitutional significance as to require a process which is effectively a joint appointment by Government and the House of Commons. Posts in the second tier are those which the committee proposes should be subject to an enhanced an improved version of the current process, and which should be subject to an 'effective veto' by the House of Commons or its committees. For posts in the third tier, pre-appointment hearings should be at the discretion of committees.

The Congressional Record is the official record of the proceedings and debates of the United States Congress. It is published daily when Congress is in session. The Congressional Record began publication in 1873. Debates for sessions prior to 1873 are recorded in The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States (1789-1824), the Register of Debates in Congress (1824-1837), and the Congressional Globe (1833-1873)

Legislatures are arguably the most important political institution in modern democracies. The Oxford Handbook of Legislative Studies, written by some of the most distinguished legislative scholars in political science, provides a comprehensive and up-to-date description and critical assessment of the state of the art in this key area.