Conclusions and recommendations
A written constitution?
1. The
draft Manual sets out to chronicle current procedure in government
based on statute, convention and other rules and practices. No
objective analysis can construe this document to be the start
of a written constitution. (Paragraph 7)
Clarity of objectives
2. We
recommend that the Cabinet Office should explore the possibility
of disaggregating these three elements within the Manual in a
way which will demarcate the particular functions of each section.
The Cabinet Manual should be focussed on becoming a comprehensive
and authoritative reference work for civil servants to advise
their ministers. The educative and polemical elements should be
an incidental consideration. (Paragraph 12)
3. The name Cabinet
Manual, in the context of what is primarily intended to be
a consolidation of guidance materials for the Executive, is potentially
misleading and certainly a misnomer. Its title should be changed
to better reflect its contents and objectives. . (Paragraph
14)
Single source of information
4. We
recognise that personal information about individuals should not
be subject to publication; particularly where there is no longer
an overriding public interest in its disclosure. However, given
that Cabinet Secretaries have gone on to draw lessons to inform
current practice from this information we see a strong case for
an appropriately edited or redacted version of the Precedent Book
to be made publicly available. At a minimum we recommend that
the draft Cabinet Manual should credit material which derives
from the Precedent Book. (Paragraph 21)
Source material
5. If
the Cabinet Manual is to achieve its stated ambition to be an
authoritative guide to how government works it will have to properly
reference its sources of authority. (Paragraph 28)
6. We recommend that
the Cabinet Manual should be accompanied by a second volume modelled
on the Directory of Civil Service Guidance or the Precedent Book
which, progressively, should come to consolidate conventions,
guidance and other rules and practices in a more comprehensive
and detailed fashion as a functional handbook for civil servants.
(Paragraph 30)
The status of the information
7. Large
parts of the draft Manual rest on conventions and other practices
which have no statutory basis. However, a significant minority
of the draft Manual is based on statute and common law of some
kind. To that extent, the practice described in the draft Manual
will be prescriptive. We recommend that the Cabinet Manual should
distinguish more clearly between the different categories of information
which are contained in the text. This will make explicit the fact
that its various provisions are not in any way endowed with equivalent
political, constitutional or legal equivalence. (Paragraph
33)
Established convention versus new practice
8. The
Manual should be more explicit about new practices introduced
by an incumbent administration. If it does not do so there is
a risk that the Manual will level out the status and value of
established conventions as distinct from new practices and endow
them with equal status.. (Paragraph 37)
Contested practices
9. Excluding
elements which are in some way contested would diminish the scope
and value of the draft Manual. However, it should not be assumed
that inclusion in the Manual should be taken to mean that it represents
settled practice. It will be particularly important for officials
to be alerted to possible controversy in particular areas. The
Cabinet Manual should ensure that conventions and practices which
do or may give rise to contention in their application should
be appropriately flagged in the document. (Paragraph 42)
New Zealand and evolution
10. We
expect the UK version of the Cabinet Manual will evolve in form
and content over time. As the New Zealand precedent shows, guidance
becomes more useful in times of political uncertainty or controversy.
The draft chapter on the formation of government has amply demonstrated
that in this country. We would expect that in future other events
may call into question different parts of the Cabinet Manual which
will need to be tested against the circumstances prevailing at
that time and adjusted accordingly. (Paragraph 45)
Revising the manual
11. In
our view a major revision of the Cabinet Manual will inevitably
have to follow a general election as a result of re-issue of the
Ministerial Code, machinery of government changes and related
questions about the organisation of government. A revised hard
copy edition at this point is likely to coincide with the most
significant period of reform to government practices during the
lifetime of a Parliament. (Paragraph 48)
Endorsement
12. The
Cabinet Manual, as a guide to government practice, should be left
to officials to update and to review at regular intervals as chroniclers
and record keepers—subject to proper and regular consultation.
It should not be for the Cabinet to approve or endorse it but
it will be for ministers to decide how far they can and should
take account of the precedents in the Manual. (Paragraph 52)
13. We welcome the
dialogue through which the Cabinet Secretary has sought to engage
the relevant select committees of Parliament in his consultation
over the draft Cabinet Manual. It is a dialogue we wish to see
continue as the document evolves. It will also provide Parliament
with a useful means by which to scrutinise good practice and the
standard of our public administration. However, we do not consider
that it is appropriate for Parliament to seek to endorse what
is a guidance document for ministers and civil servants. (Paragraph
54)
| 
