The 'pondlife' of executive agencies: Parliament and informatory accountability

David Judge, Brian Hogwood, Murray McVicar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Agencies attract the attention of MPs unequally. In focusing upon ‘informnatory responsibility’, as a prerequisite of ministerial responsibility in an era of executive agencies, the article reveals that there is no simple model or pattern of informatory responsibility, whether measured by parliamentary questions, letters from MPs, or extent of contact between ministers and agencies. Those agencies which attract the sustained interest of MPs often require elaborate mechanisms of response to deal with the sheer volume of questions and requests for information. In tumrn, this may have pathological organisational consequences for working practices and staffing tasks particularly if the agency is responsible for policy delivery in a politically sensitive area. Conversely, those agencies which attract little or no interest from MPs raise the neglected question of what does ministerial responsibility ‘mean’ in these circumstances? The article concludes that a more exacting perspective of inforinatory accountability is needed: one that places the emphasis not only upon the regularity of the flow of information and upon the consistency of explanation to parliament, but also takes into account the interactions of agencies and their ‘constituencies of accountability’.
LanguageEnglish
Pages95-115
Number of pages21
JournalPublic Policy and Administration
Volume12
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1997

Fingerprint

parliament
responsibility
staffing
regularity
minister
contact
interaction

Keywords

  • politics
  • parliament
  • executive agencies
  • Members of Parliament
  • MP's

Cite this

@article{5c59aa217f3c46c5ae6293fb19bd456c,
title = "The 'pondlife' of executive agencies: Parliament and informatory accountability",
abstract = "Agencies attract the attention of MPs unequally. In focusing upon ‘informnatory responsibility’, as a prerequisite of ministerial responsibility in an era of executive agencies, the article reveals that there is no simple model or pattern of informatory responsibility, whether measured by parliamentary questions, letters from MPs, or extent of contact between ministers and agencies. Those agencies which attract the sustained interest of MPs often require elaborate mechanisms of response to deal with the sheer volume of questions and requests for information. In tumrn, this may have pathological organisational consequences for working practices and staffing tasks particularly if the agency is responsible for policy delivery in a politically sensitive area. Conversely, those agencies which attract little or no interest from MPs raise the neglected question of what does ministerial responsibility ‘mean’ in these circumstances? The article concludes that a more exacting perspective of inforinatory accountability is needed: one that places the emphasis not only upon the regularity of the flow of information and upon the consistency of explanation to parliament, but also takes into account the interactions of agencies and their ‘constituencies of accountability’.",
keywords = "politics, parliament, executive agencies, Members of Parliament, MP's",
author = "David Judge and Brian Hogwood and Murray McVicar",
year = "1997",
doi = "10.1177/095207679701200208",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "95--115",
journal = "Public Policy and Administration",
issn = "0952-0767",
number = "2",

}

The 'pondlife' of executive agencies : Parliament and informatory accountability. / Judge, David; Hogwood, Brian; McVicar, Murray.

In: Public Policy and Administration, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1997, p. 95-115.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The 'pondlife' of executive agencies

T2 - Public Policy and Administration

AU - Judge, David

AU - Hogwood, Brian

AU - McVicar, Murray

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - Agencies attract the attention of MPs unequally. In focusing upon ‘informnatory responsibility’, as a prerequisite of ministerial responsibility in an era of executive agencies, the article reveals that there is no simple model or pattern of informatory responsibility, whether measured by parliamentary questions, letters from MPs, or extent of contact between ministers and agencies. Those agencies which attract the sustained interest of MPs often require elaborate mechanisms of response to deal with the sheer volume of questions and requests for information. In tumrn, this may have pathological organisational consequences for working practices and staffing tasks particularly if the agency is responsible for policy delivery in a politically sensitive area. Conversely, those agencies which attract little or no interest from MPs raise the neglected question of what does ministerial responsibility ‘mean’ in these circumstances? The article concludes that a more exacting perspective of inforinatory accountability is needed: one that places the emphasis not only upon the regularity of the flow of information and upon the consistency of explanation to parliament, but also takes into account the interactions of agencies and their ‘constituencies of accountability’.

AB - Agencies attract the attention of MPs unequally. In focusing upon ‘informnatory responsibility’, as a prerequisite of ministerial responsibility in an era of executive agencies, the article reveals that there is no simple model or pattern of informatory responsibility, whether measured by parliamentary questions, letters from MPs, or extent of contact between ministers and agencies. Those agencies which attract the sustained interest of MPs often require elaborate mechanisms of response to deal with the sheer volume of questions and requests for information. In tumrn, this may have pathological organisational consequences for working practices and staffing tasks particularly if the agency is responsible for policy delivery in a politically sensitive area. Conversely, those agencies which attract little or no interest from MPs raise the neglected question of what does ministerial responsibility ‘mean’ in these circumstances? The article concludes that a more exacting perspective of inforinatory accountability is needed: one that places the emphasis not only upon the regularity of the flow of information and upon the consistency of explanation to parliament, but also takes into account the interactions of agencies and their ‘constituencies of accountability’.

KW - politics

KW - parliament

KW - executive agencies

KW - Members of Parliament

KW - MP's

U2 - 10.1177/095207679701200208

DO - 10.1177/095207679701200208

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 95

EP - 115

JO - Public Policy and Administration

JF - Public Policy and Administration

SN - 0952-0767

IS - 2

ER -