Whilst welcoming the motivation behind the Manual and the transparency it brings to the workings of Government, the Committee says that in practice the Manual may be treated as having greater authority than originally intended, particularly where its content extends beyond matters purely for the Executive. All the work of the Executive, including the Cabinet Manual , is subject to scrutiny by Parliament. The fact that the document is primarily directed at the Executive does not exempt it from this scrutiny. The Committee makes some practical suggestions for specific improvements to the text, focusing particularly on the chapters covering government formation and ministers and Parliament. The Committee also challenges some of the specific content of the draft: the failure to include the convention, acknowledged elsewhere by the Government, that Parliament should have the opportunity to debate decisions to commit troops to armed conflict; guidance on when a Prime Minister should resign following a hung Parliament. The Committee recommends that the House should hold a regular debate on the Manual. The Committee felt, despite dissatisfaction with parts of the original draft, there was no reason to delay production of an approved version. The new version need not be perfect as it will be subject to further review.Report, Together with Formal Minutes, Oral and Written Evidence Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Political and Constitutional ... The Cabinet Manual is more in the nature of a plumbing or wiring diagram, or a usera#39;s manual.
|Title||:||Constitutional Implications of the Cabinet Manual|
|Author||:||Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Political and Constitutional Reform Committee|
|Publisher||:||The Stationery Office - 2011-03-29|