Former prime minister Sir John Major has said anti-corruption watchdog the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments should get statutory footing and the power to punish former officials and ministers for breaking its rules.
Major’s comments came at an Institute for Government event marking three decades since the Committee on Standards in Public Life’s launch of the Nolan Principles – created following a wave of sleaze in 1990s politics.
The ex-Conservative Party leader touched on a range of issues he believes are still required to improve public trust in officials, MPs and peers. Reform of Acoba was given particularly high profile.
He said the body, which vets jobs sought by former ministers and senior civil servants for two years after they leave government, lacked teeth to make sure its rules are adhered to.
“I hope Acoba can be put on a statutory basis, and given deterrent powers,” Major told the event. “As of now, Acoba has no power of enforcement whatsoever.”
Major noted that “high profile figures” had ignored Acoba advice – although he did not name names.
Had he chosen to do so, former PM and foreign secretary Boris Johnson would have been one individual he could have identified for failing to seek approval for a post-government job.
Major said former Acoba chair Eric Pickles had been right to argue that a system with “no demonstrable or tangible deterrent for non-compliance” could have “no credibility”.
“In essence, they can be told not to take the job and they’ve said ‘were doing it’ and did,” Major said. He added that the list of very senior figures who have broken the business appointments rules without consequences were “not all parliamentarians” – with the clear implication that at least some high-ranking former senior civil servants have done so.
Major also voiced fears about the vetting process for work taken on by former officials who are not important enough to be subject to Acoba’s overview.
“A steady stream are leaving public service for the private sector with little or no oversight,” he said. “That may not yet present a serious problem, but does merit scrutiny of officials who may have been privy to sensitive policy. That often reaches down beyond the highest level.”
'There should be no free pass to become a legislator’
Elsewhere in his speech, Major voiced concerns about the distribution of peerages, arguing that the House of Lords Appointments Commission needs “an upgrade”.
“There is no way, in recent years, that the appointment of peers passes any form of democratic ‘smell test’,” the ex-PM said. “Amidst worthy appointments, others seem eye-wateringly inappropriate for the job they’re asked to do.”
Major said it would be “reassuring” if all candidates proposed for peerages by party leaders were investigated by Holac to assess both their suitability and their commitment to undertaking the work of House of Lords.
In the week that former cabinet secretary Simon Case had his peerage confirmed, alongside two former second permanent secretaries, Major said he believed that the peerages given out to former senior civil servants also deserved more vetting.
He said those appointments, typically “unscrutinised nominations” and regarded as exceptional appointments made on the express wish of the prime minister of the day, were also based on an unsatisfactory footing.
“I welcome top civil servants going to the Lords, since they are likely to be valuable in revising legislation,” Major said. “I would, however, wish to be sure that Holac also scrutinises their suitability and commitment. There should be no free pass to becoming a legislator.”
‘Spads should become less political’
Major, who was prime minister from 1990 to 1997, also told this morning’s event that ministerial special advisers have become too political and should be told to rein-in their activities.
His speech included reflections on the growth in recent years of “excessive lobbying” by ministers and spads for the addition or removal of potential candidates for public appointments.
Major said it would be “far better” if all lobbying from within government was restricted to ministers, who are accountable to parliament.
“Special advisers, it seems to me – although perhaps I am very old-fashioned about this – but special advisers are there to advise not enforce,” he said. “Although – from what I have seen and heard – some have little understanding of that distinction. It would be wise to remind them of it.”
Major added: “Fewer special advisers – with more experience of their subject and less personal political ambition – might serve the nation a little better.”