The Report
of the Iraq Inquiry
7.
The Prime
Minister was and is responsible for the Code
and for
judging whether
Ministerial
behaviour is consistent with its standards.
8.
The
Ministerial
Code encapsulates
the role of Cabinet Committees in identifying,
testing and
developing policy options; analysing and mitigating risks; and
debating and
honing
proposals until they are endorsed across government. Cabinet
Committees are
relied on
every day to keep the process of policy-making moving.
9.
Although the
practice of using Cabinet Committees has been a constant
feature
over many
decades, the number of Committees, the subjects they consider
and
the way in
which they are used has evolved, and has varied from Prime Minister
to
Prime
Minister.
10.
Discussion in
full Cabinet meetings differs from that in Cabinet Committees.
Cabinet
would not
normally be expected to explore the detailed aspects of a
policy.
11.
In his
Statement of
Reasons for the
exercise of the executive override under
Section 53
of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the ‘Ministerial Veto’) to
prevent the
disclosure
of the minutes of meetings of Cabinet on 13 and 17 March 2003, Mr
Jack
Straw, Lord
Chancellor from 2007 to 2010, set out the then Government’s
perspective
on the
functions of Cabinet.
“Serious
and controversial decisions must be taken with free, frank – even
blunt –
deliberation
between colleagues. Dialogue must be fearless. Ministers
must
have the
confidence to challenge each other in private. They must ensure
that
decisions
have been properly thought through, sounding out all the
possibilities
before
committing themselves to a course of action. They must not feel
inhibited
from
advancing opinions that may be unpopular or controversial. They
must not be
deflected
from expressing dissent by the fear that they may be held
personally to
account for
views that are later cast aside.
“Discussions
of this nature will not however take place without a private space
in
which
thoughts can be voiced without fear of reprisal, or publicity.
Cabinet provides
this space.
If there cannot be frank discussion of the most important matters
of
Government
policy at Cabinet, it may not occur at all. Cabinet decision taking
could
increasingly
be drawn into more informal channels, with attendant dangers of
lack of
rigour,
lack of proper accountability, and lack of proper recording of
decisions.
…
“The
[Information] Tribunal thought that the deployment of troops was a
hugely
important
step in the nation’s recent history and that Cabinet should be
accountable
for it. I
also believe that to be the case, but accountability for this
decision – as for
any other
Cabinet decision – is properly with the Government as a whole and
not
with
individual Ministers …
268