Parliamentary statement by the sponsoring Minister

If a Minister proposes to cause a public inquiry to be held under the Inquiries Act 2005, or if he has done so without making as Parliamentary statement, section 6 requires him to make such a statement as soon as reasonably practicable. The statement must set out the identity of the Chairman and whether there are to be other Panel members and, if so, how many. It must also set out the terms of reference. It may be oral or written.

Such a Parliamentary statement must also be made if the terms of reference of a public inquiry operating under the Inquiries Act 2005 are amended, or if a public inquiry established outside the Act is converted to one under the Act: see sections 6(3) and 15(8).

Relationship with sponsoring department

Where a public inquiry is established by a Minister then his department is regarded as the sponsoring department. It will have the responsibility of funding, of finding premises, of sounding-out the Chairman and Panel members, and probably of finding the Secretary and Solicitor. It may need to give the public inquiry access to contracts which it has for the provision of IT and the like. It is likely that the department itself will have materials and may be able to provide witnesses that go to the matters under investigation. The funding obligation is obviously a continuing one for the life of the public inquiry and the sponsoring department will need to monitor expenditure closely. During the life of the public inquiry the Minister may exercise a number of powers under the Inquiries Act 2005. He may suspend it under section 13. He may authorise or refuse to pay expenses under section 40. He may issue restriction notices under section 19. He may terminate the appointment of a Panel member under section 12. He can bring the public inquiry to an end under section 14. In exercising any of those functions he will no doubt be guided by advice from the sponsoring department. At the conclusion of the public inquiry the Chairman will report to the Minister and any recommendations contained in the report will considered and, if apt, acted on by the sponsoring department.

Despite all of those nurturing, facilitating and monitoring functions, the sponsoring department, its Minister and the public inquiry must nonetheless maintain the independence of the public inquiry. Perhaps more importantly, the public must perceive that the independence is maintained. Manifestly, that is not easy. In practice the sponsoring department is likely to nominate one or more of its staff to act as the inquiry liaison officer. He will have had no dealings with the matters under investigation and may report directly to the Minister.

A better model may be to separate the public inquiry entirely from the department of the Minister who establishes it. The Ministry of Justice could be the sponsoring department in all cases save those where the matters under investigation directly concern it. The question would arise whether the Ministry of Justice could recharge the costs to the establishing department but it is easy to see the advantages of one department overseeing the costs of all public inquiries.

Accountability to Parliament

In practice Members of Parliament tend to ask questions about the progress of public inquiries, and the responsible Minister will obtain the information necessary to answer those questions from the public inquiry.