The current Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, Ann Abraham, has announced her intention to retire. Dame Julie Mellor is the Government's preferred candidate for the post. A pre-appointment hearing was held on 6 July 2011 and the Committee has concluded that Dame Julie Mellor has both the professional competences and personal independence necessary to fulfil the role

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.

Ombudsmen are a global phenomenon. They are also a critical part of the public law frameworks of modern liberal democracies. This is the first edited collection to examine the place of the ombudsman in the modern state. It brings together key international scholars to discuss current and future challenges for the Ombudsman institution and the systems of government within which they operate. The book is international in scope with authors heralding from most continents - Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, South Africa, Germany, and Austria. This global analysis is both in-depth and expansive in its coverage of the operation of Ombudsmen across civil and common law legal systems. The book has two key themes: - The enduring question of the location and operation of Ombudsmen within public law systems in a changing state, and - The challenges faced by Ombudsmen in contemporary governance. This collection adds to the public law scholarship by addressing a common problem faced by all avenues of public law review – the evolving nature of modern public administration.

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

The current Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACoBA) lacks adequate powers and resources; does not have appropriate membership for its function; and should be abolished. Instead, the Committee says, Government should legislate to establish statutory ethics regulation with a code of conduct and enforceable statutory penalties, overseen by an independent ethics Commissioner. The new Commissioner would also take over the role of the Prime Minister's Adviser on Ministers' Interests - who advises on ministerial conduct. PASC also renews their call for the power to initiate investigations into the Ministerial Code on his or her own initiative. Enforceable statutory penalties should be introduced for failing to comply with the Commissioner's recommendations. Government reforms are implementing increasingly close working between public servants and the private and voluntary sectors. Changes to public service delivery - including the outsourcing of public sector functions and the active promotion of "interchange" between sectors-are blurring the boundaries between the public sector and other organisations. This could present greater opportunities for public officials to use their position for personal gain, and may give rise to public concern about the probity of former, and serving, public officials. The Committee says that ACoBA's procedures are "opaque" and not helpful to departing public officials who may need guidance about what appointments may be regarded as inappropriate for them to take up and does nothing to deter misleading and damaging mis-reporting of individual cases

This report forms the Committee's response to Sir David Normington's consultation on reforming the regulation of public appointments, and looks at further issues relating to the recruitment and pay of public appointees. The Committee welcomes the broad thrust of Sir David Normington's proposed reforms, including the proposal to streamline the existing Code for Public Appointments and to adopt a lighter touch in regulating the public appointments process. It particularly supports his commitment to broadening genuine diversity in public appointments. The Public Appointments Commissioner, however, should be given a new remit to review Departmental appraisal systems, to ensure that underperformance by appointees is consistently addressed and that appointees who are not up to the mark are not reappointed. The Committee also supports the establishment of a government Centre of Excellence for public appointments, which would have the expertise to widen the pool of candidates applying for vacancies. Given their cost to the taxpayer, the Government should reduce the use of recruitment consultants for appointments to public bodies. Substantial savings could be made through utilising and developing the capabilities of existing human resources units in Government Departments and through the establishment of a Centre of Excellence. There is concern that the post of manager of top talent in Whitehall (Director General for Civil Service Capability) has effectively been abolished and its functions dispersed. This post should be re-established.

This Report has been compiled so that lessons may be drawn for future referendums. On 18 September 2014, the Scottish public voted for Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom. The roles played by civil servants in both Scotland and London in the Scottish referendum last summer were subject to criticism and controversy. The referendum campaign exposed two major issues: first, the question of how a unified Civil Service can serve both HM Government and the Scottish Government; and second, the challenges to Civil Service impartiality generated by the Scottish independence referendum. Particular concerns were raised about the Scottish Government's White Paper, Scotland's Future, which included a description of the SNP's proposed programme for government that was contingent upon their winning the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections. This did not uphold the factual standards expected of a UK Government White Paper and raised questions about the use of public money for partisan purposes. There was also concern that the publication of normally confidential advice by the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury called into question the impartiality of the Civil Service. The Committee concludes that parts of the White Paper should not have been included in a government publication. Civil servants should not be required to carry out ministers' wishes, if they are being asked to use public funds to promote the agenda of a political party, as was evident in this case.