The Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee was established in June 2010 to consider political and constitutional reform. Over the last five years the Committee has scrutinised the Government's substantial programme of political and constitutional reform - which included fixing the term of a Parliament, bringing forward proposals for recalling MPs, establishing a register of third party lobbyists and implementing Individual Electoral Registration. The establishment of a dedicated select committee to consider these matters has brought additional parliamentary scrutiny to a substantial part of the Government's programme. Should the next Government plan to take forward constitutional reform, a select committee be established to examine the Government's proposals, to keep the progress of any political and constitutional reform under regular review, and to continue the work this Committee has undertaken. The Committee has also highlighted the extent to which it has engaged the public with it's work through consultations and increased use of social media, online surveys and informal events. This public engagement is one of it's greatest innovations, and something which it encourages other committees to adopt in the future

This report summarises the key areas of the Committee's work over the past five years. It draws out the areas where progress has been made and where their successors might wish to press in future. The Committee has assiduously followed the taxpayer's pound wherever it was spent. Since 2010 they held 276 evidence sessions and published 244 unanimous reports to hold government to account for its performance. 88% of their recommendations were accepted by departments. In many cases they successfully secured substantial changes, for example with the once secret tax avoidance industry. They secured consensus from government and from industry that private providers of public services do have a duty of care to the taxpayer, and in pushing the protection of whistleblowers further up the agenda of all government departments. By drawing attention to mistakes in the Department for Transport's procurement of the West Coast Mainline, more recent procurements for Crossrail, Thameslink and Intercity Express have all benefited from more expert advice and a more appropriate level of challenge from senior staff. After discovery in 2012-13 that 63% of calls to government call centres were to higher rate telephone numbers, the Government accepted our recommendation that telephone lines serving vulnerable and low income groups never be charged above the geographic rate and that 03 numbers should be available for all government telephone lines. They also secured a commitment to close large mental health hospitals.

This Oxford Handbook ambitiously seeks to lay the groundwork for the relatively new field of comparative foreign relations law. Comparative foreign relations law compares and contrasts how nations, and also supranational entities (for example, the European Union), structure their decisions about matters such as entering into and exiting from international agreements, engaging with international institutions, and using military force, as well as how they incorporate treaties and customary international law into their domestic legal systems. The legal materials that make up a nation's foreign relations law can include constitutional law, statutory law, administrative law, and judicial precedent, among other areas. This book consists of 46 chapters, written by leading authors from around the world. Some of the chapters are empirically focused, others are theoretical, and still others contain in-depth case studies. In addition to being an invaluable resource for scholars working in this area, the book should be of interest to a wide range of lawyers, judges, and law students. Foreign relations law issues are addressed regularly by lawyers working in foreign ministries, and globalization has meant that domestic judges, too, are increasingly confronted by them. In addition, private lawyers who work on matters that extend beyond their home countries often are required to navigate issues of foreign relations law. An increasing number of law school courses in comparative foreign relations law are also now being developed, making this volume an important resource for students as well. Comparative foreign relations law is a newly emerging field of study and teaching, and this volume is likely to become a key reference work as the field continues to develop.

This collection of essays by leading academics, lawyers, parliamentarians and parliamentary officials provides a critical assessment of the UK Parliament's two main constitutional roles-as a legislature and as the preeminent institution for calling government to account. Both functions are undergoing change and facing new challenges. Part 1 (Legislation) includes chapters on Parliament's emerging responsibilities for pre-legislative scrutiny of government Bills and for evaluating proposed legislation against explicit constitutional standards. The impact on legislation of the European Union and the growing influence of the House of Lords are also examined. Part 2 (Accountability) investigates how Parliament operates to scrutinise areas of executive action previously often shielded from effective parliamentary oversight, including national security, war-making powers and administrative justice. There are also chapters on parliamentary reform, including analysis of the House of Commons 'Wright reforms', parliamentary sovereignty, privilege and the European Convention on Human Rights, Euroscepticism, and parliamentary sovereignty and the regulation of lobbyists. The book will be of interest to anyone who is curious about the work of Parliament and is aimed at legal academics, practitioners and political scientists.

In 2012 the House of Commons introduced a new 'core task' for all select committees that focused on public engagement as a distinctive and explicit factor of their work. This report focuses on how the select committees have responded to the new core task. Three core conclusions emerged: a) there has been a significant shift within the select committee system to taking public engagement seriously and this is reflected in many examples of innovation; b) this shift, however, has not been systematic and levels of public engagement vary significantly from committee to committee; and c) a more vibrant and systematic approach to public engagement is urgently needed but this will require increased resources, a deeper appreciation of the distinctive contribution that select committees can make and a deeper cultural change at Westminster. This report therefore details innovations in relation to the use of social media, the structure of inquiries and innovative outreach. Public engagement has not yet been fully embedded into the culture of parliament but there is evidence of significant 'cracks and wedges' that can now be built-upon and extended during the 2015-20 Parliament. Clearly the focus of the committee and the topic of the inquiry will have some bearing on the approach to engagement adopted but a more expansive and ambitious approach across the board is to be encouraged. This report leads to a ten-point set of inter-related recommendations but they can all be connected in the sense that the existing social research demonstrates a clear desire on the part of the public to 'do politics differently'.

In this report the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) calls for a 'People's Ombudsman' and says the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO), which investigates complaints against the NHS and other government departments and agencies, is outdated. Citizens should have direct and more user-friendly access to the Ombudsman. None of the Ombudsmen created since the PHSO's operations were established in legislation 47 years ago have adopted the same restricted model as the Parliamentary Ombudsman. As a priority, the restriction on citizens' direct and open access to PHSO, known as the MP filter, must be abolished (as is already the case in respect of NHS complaints). PHSO must be able to receive complaints other than in writing: such as in person, by telephone or online, just as is expected of any normal complaints system. PHSO should have powers to investigate areas of concern without having first to receive a complaint from a service user. Parliament should strengthen the accountability of PHSO. PASC, along with other Departmental Select Committees, should make greater use of the intelligence gathered by the PHSO to hold Government to account. A consultation should be held on the creation of a single public services ombudsman for England. At the same time, there must be a distinctive ombudsman service for UK non-devolved matters.