FIT - The Campaign For Integrity and Trust in Public Life
Manifesto
1.
We believe that radical steps have to be taken to ensure Integrity
and Trust in public life.
The proportion of people who trust British governments 'to place the needs of
the nation above the interests of their own party' fell to 16% in 2000 and has
fallen further since (British Social Attitudes survey).
Politicians as a class are perceived now to be serial liars and public faith in
the political process is ebbing fast.
As Tony Wright MP wrote in his book 'British Politics: A very short
introduction' (2003): 'All the textbooks talk about Parliament's role in scrutiny
and accountability but frequently fail to get inside the skin of an institution
whose members have a quite different agenda. They all want to be promoted
at best, and re-elected at worst.'
The public wants office-holders to be more honest about policies and services
(Sir Alistair Graham, Chair, Committee on Standards in Public Life, 2004).
2.
We believe that the House of Lords should be replaced by a
credible and powerful House of Standards.
The future of the House of Lords is something of a dilemma for all parties. If it
is reformed as an elected second chamber it is likely to clash all too frequently
with an elected House of Commons. If it is reformed with most Members
being politically appointed, this greatly enhances the patronage in the gift of
the Prime Minister and is likely to be whipped like the Commons..
We would like to see a new House, of around 240 members independently
appointed on merit and reflecting a wide range of expertise, geographical
spread and ethnic and religious diversity. Their task would be to ensure high
standards of integrity and trust in public life. The name of the House: the
House of Standards.
They would be paid, and upon appointment renounce all political affiliation
and all other paid interests during their fixed five year term - and for five years
beyond that.
The members would be appointed by an elected Commission who would also
be responsible for review of the working of the House of Standards and
individual member performance.
In insisting upon and safeguarding integrity and trust in all aspects of public
life the House of Standards would work to restore trust in politicians and the
political process and thereby repair the covenant between those who govern
and those who consent to be governed.
3.
We believe that the upper House should have the power and
authority to increase parliamentary accountability
The House of Standards would be responsible for overseeing all matters
concerned with standards, including the standards of proposed legislation,
standards of public appointments and honours and standards of government
and executive integrity.
The powers of the House of Standards would include overseeing all areas of
scrutiny, including government audit, select committees, public inquiries and
Royal Commissions. It would also be responsible for monitoring PFI and PPP
and similar financial instruments involving the commitment of public
resources.
The House of Standards would enhance the present House of Lords role by,
providing pre-legislative, legislative and post legislative scrutiny to improve
bills and would return them if not fit or ready (evidence, costing, consultation,
feasibility etc).
A special group of Privy members of the House of Standards would be
appointed to review defence and security matters so as to assure the public
as to the evidence for decisions to become involved in conflict.
4.
We believe the Upper House should champion the integrity of the
civil service and combat inappropriate political influence
Members of the House of Standards would be at all times independent of the
political process, would safeguard the independence of the Civil Service and
offer protection to public interest 'whistleblowers.'
5.
We believe holders of public office should act solely in the public
interest.
They should not do so in order to gain financial or other benefits for
themselves, their family or their friends. Nor should they succumb to pressure
to toe a party or corporate line where they do not believe it to be in the public
interest. The public interest duty and political independence of the Civil
Service would be protected by a strong Civil Service Act.
For Civil Servants, holders of public office and politicians we would like to see
the Standards of Integrity in Public Life, strengthened, extended and
rigorously enforced, with personal performance monitored.
The ten standards would be – selflessness, integrity, objectivity,
accountability, openness, honesty, leadership, independence, confidentiality,
corporacy. The full version is at the end of this document.
6.
We believe that our parliamentarians should be committed fully to
their role
To reduce the likelihood and perception of conflict of interest all members of
the House of Parliament (Commons and Standards) should renounce all other
paid roles and commit 100% of their working time to their role as member on
behalf of the people. MPs would no longer take on paid roles as advisors,
consultants, journalists or lobbyists.
7.
We believe that political influence should be open and honest.
The actual and perceived inappropriate influence of commercial interests on
governments and political parties needs to be eliminated. To achieve this we
propose that political parties should be solely funded from the public purse
based on a party payment electorate vote taken annually.
Parties would be accountable to the electorate for how they spent their
money. This would raise the interest of the public in the performance of
political parties and enable them to regularly reflect their views. Smaller
parties would also receive funding. Individual party members would be able to
give of their voluntary (not paid for by a third party) time and expertise but not
of their money over and above a capped individual membership fee.
8.
We believe that whistleblowers should be listened to and
protected.
All too often whistleblowers are attacked personally to avoid organisational
and political embarrassment. This leads to collusive cover ups and failure to
learn from mistakes. It discourages others from being open and honest about
what is wrong. All those who act clearly from a belief in the public good should
be protected and their concerns openly and thoroughly investigated. This
would be one of the responsibilities of the House of Standards.
9.
We believe that Ministers should be personally liable for any
statement put out on their behalf
The aim would be to end off the record anonymous briefings by making
ministers personally liable for any statement, action or omission put out on
their behalf by their department which results in damage to an individual. A
short time limit would be allowed to enable ministers to correct any misleading
statements or briefing.
10.
We believe that the BBC is an important bulwark of independent
news and reporting.
We would seek to ensure this independence from the political process by
appointing the Governors through the House of Standards and requiring it
through its charter to resist all external political or commercial attempts to
influence or censor its coverage.
Jw. 4.1.05
The Ten Commandments for Public Life
1.
Selflessness
6.
Honesty
Holders of public office should act
solely in terms of the public interest.
They should not do so in order to gain
financial or other benefits for
themselves, their family or their
friends.
Holders of public office must give
priority to protecting the public interest
above corporate or personal interest.
They should publicly declare any
conflicts to take steps to resolve them
to protect the public interest.
2.
7.
Integrity
Holders of public office should not
place themselves under any internal,
external financial, corporate or other
obligation which might affect their
ability to pursue the best interests of
the purposes the organisation is there
to serve
Leadership
Holders of public office should
promote and support these principles
by leadership and example
8.
Independence
In carrying out public business,
including making public appointments,
awarding contracts, or recommending
individuals for rewards and benefits,
holders of public office should make
choices on merit.
Each individual is independently
responsible for upholding these
standards and should ensure their
independence from conflicting internal
or external pressure. Where this is not
practicable they should clarify the
circumstances in which potentially
conflicting interests would have
priority and ensure openness as to the
detail and resolution of such conflicts.
4.
9.
3.
Objectivity
Accountability
Holders of public office are
individually and corporately
accountable for their decisions and
actions to the public and should not
allow pressures for coporate behaviour
to undermine individual accountability
5.
Confidentiality
Holders of public office should
maintain confidentiality for all matters
properly deemed confidential after
careful consideration of the wider
public interest in openness and the
requirements of Freedom of
Information legislation.
Openness
10.
Holders of public office should be as
open as possible about all the decisions
and actions they take. They should
give reasons for their decisions and
restrict information only when the
wider public interest clearly demands.
Corporacy
While organisations can rightly expect
corporate behaviour in pursuit of their
legitimate aims, the corporate
responsibility to the public interest
must always take priority
6