1. Giving evidence to Select Committees
Background to presentation. Context, and why we are doing this.
2016

2. Select committees at Westminster
In the Westminster system: a select committee is a committee of members of either House (or both) appointed to investigate a matter, deliberate on it and report to the House.
Select Committees have a cross-party membership and work by consensus wherever possible.
In the Commons: departmental select committees are appointed to scrutinise the spending, policy and administration of Government departments. They are one of the most widely known and public means by which Parliament holds Government —and, increasingly, bodies outside Government—to account.
There are also cross-cutting Select Committees – such as the Public Accounts Committee or Environmental Audit Committee.
Committees work through “inquiries” – these are often quite broad examinations of an area of Government policy or public interest.

3. High-profile Commons inquiries
Treasury Committee: fixing LIBOR
Culture, Media and Sport Committee: News International and phone-hacking
Recent high profile inquiries in the last Parliament include: Banking crisis (Treasury) and Phone Hacking (CMS)—note that both these inquiries examined private sector organisations whose activities had a significant impact on the general public.

4. Call for written evidence
How Inquiries Work
Call for written evidence
Issues the Committee wants to know about
Oral evidence
Witnesses give evidence in public and on the record
Publish report
Government must respond in 2 months
Select Committees choose what subjects they want to inquire into.
They gather information (referred to as “evidence”) and agree a Report, which is made to the House of Commons and published.
The first step is to publish a “call for written evidence” – an open invitation to make submissions to the Committee. This sets out the inquiry’s terms of reference and the questions the Committee is particularly interested in.
The Committee will then meet with some of the people who have submitted evidence – either formally (“taking evidence”) or informally through visits, private meetings, attending events and so forth.
Evidence taken by Committees is covered by Parliamentary privilege, which protects freedom of speech in parliamentary proceedings. If you would like to tell a Committee something that is sensitive, please consult the Committee staff first. Committees will often be flexible.
The information collected as part of this process will inform the Committee’s report. This is drafted by the Committee secretariat on behalf of the Chair and agreed by the Committee as a whole.
The Government is obliged to respond within two months. Some reports can change Government policy – for example, the Environmental Audit Committee’s report on Microplastics led the Government to bring forward a domestic ban on microbeads.

5. 1. As a Specialist Adviser.
How can you contribute?
1. As a Specialist Adviser.
Openings are advertised on Committee websites and Twitter feeds.
Specialist Advisers
Select Committees can appoint Specialist Advisers to assist them in their inquiries.
The role usually consists of a mixture of briefing the Committee, commenting on written briefs and draft reports and providing tailored pieces of advice in response to Committee’s questions. The role pays an honorium and rarely involves more than a day’s work in a week.
Academics can make excellent specialist advisers. Many of the tips on submitting evidence also apply.
Openings are usually advertised through a Committee’s twitter feed or press notice list. Some appear on the parliament.uk website.

6. How can you contribute? 2. Written Evidence
Calls for evidence on Committee website.
Submissions welcome from anyone.
Written Evidence
The call for evidence will give a deadline for the submission of written evidence. There is a word limit of 3,000 words. If either of these are problematic, please get in touch with the Committee’s staff. (deadlines are usually flexible, but early submissions may have a greater impact)
Submissions should be made through the Committee’s website. (electronic portal)If the Committee agrees to publish your submission, it will appear here and may be referenced in the Committee’s report.
You do not have to respond to every issue or question set out in the terms of reference. It may be that you have specialist knowledge on only one aspect of these. That is fine. And indeed can be valuable if you are an expert on this issue.

7. Submitting written evidence
1. Be concise and relevant:
Keep to the word limit (3,000 words or less)
Include a summary and address the “so what?” questions
Use the Terms of Reference
2. Make policy recommendations
Don’t just diagnose the problem
3. Write for an interested non-expert, avoiding:
Too many acronyms
Jargon
Politicised language
A good written submission can be key to being invited to attend an oral evidence session. Remember that this might be the first time either the Committee, or the Committee staff, have heard of you or your research. Think about how you can use your written submission to ‘sell’ yourself as a potential witness.
WRITTEN EVIDENCE TO A COMMITTEE BECOMES THE PROPERTY OF THE COMMITTEE> SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE!
Committees usually request that written submissions are no longer than 3,000 words. Some will publish longer pieces but some will reject them. Either way, keeping it below 3,000 is generally advisable. If your submission isn’t concise, the likelihood of it being read by the Chair or the Members is lessened.
Include a short summary which briefly outlines your submission – including any key recommendations. Address the “so what?” question here – why is your research important to take into account for this inquiry?
Think about how your research applies directly to the topic of the inquiry: if possible, relate it directly to the questions in the terms of reference.
Make recommendations and policy suggestions. Committees receive a lot of submissions that offer excellent diagnoses of the problem. However, the aim of an inquiry is usually to produce a report that makes recommendations to the Government on helpful policy changes. Offering solutions will help to make your submission stand out.
Since the word limit is relatively small, you need to focus on what you individually can add to the inquiry. You don’t need to provide a lot of background information on the topic that is widely available – we already have access to that. Focus on producing recommendations and providing evidence for why these should be taken up.
You should write as though you’re writing for an interested, intelligent layperson – a good comparison would be the sort of language you’d use if you were writing a blog post based on your research. Try to avoid jargon, too many acronyms, and so on.
Try also to avoid using politicised language. Committees are cross-party, and effectively influence their work and recommendations you need to come across as politically neutral and impartial.

8. How can you contribute? 3. Oral Evidence
Calls for evidence on Committee website.
Submissions welcome from anyone.
Oral Evidence
The Committee will decide who it wishes to hear oral evidence from. It may also decide to conduct a visit or hold other forms of informal information gathering such as round-tables or private briefings either inside or outside Westminster.
Evidence taking usually takes place at Westminster. Committee Members sit around a horseshoe. The most high-profile evidence sessions tend to be highly adversarial ones with Ministers or those accused of wrong-doing. Most hearings are not like that. The Committee’s aim is to collect information to inform their scrutiny of Government. So they are more like a conversation. Not an interrogation.

9. Oral evidence sessions
What are the main points that you want to get across?
Try to answer the question you are asked…
But it is OK if you can’t (or if you can’t right now)
Avoid politicised language and jargon
Your written evidence can play a big part in demonstrating whether you’d make a good oral evidence witness. Focus on being clear, concise, impartial, and practical.
If you’re invited, it is a good idea to watch some footage of the Committee taking evidence from academics and experts. The tone of these sessions is usually quite different to the confrontational sessions that tend to make the news!
Come with a very clear idea of what the most important things you would like to tell the Committee are: try to think of three key points. These can be drawn from your written evidence. Don’t assume that all, or indeed any, of the Committee Members will have read your evidence.
The Committee will have been briefed on who you are and what they should expect to get from the session, and the Committee staff will usually arrange to talk to you beforehand to discuss what to expect.
However, the Members can ask whatever interests them and follow lines of questioning as they see fit in the session. You may end up being asked questions you don’t expect to answer!
You should expect Members to press you to explain your comments further, or to say what the implications of your answers are for policy.
Don’t feel that in answering these questions you have to confine yourself to your immediate specialism: there are likely other areas around this that you still have a very informed view on. You should feel free to answer questions or contribute to questions asked of others as you can.
Equally, if you don’t know something, or it is so far out of your area of expertise that you don’t feel comfortable answering, it is OK to say that. This also applies if you are asked for facts or figures that you don’t immediately have to hand: you can tell the Committee that you will provide these later, as further written evidence.
Try not to express your views in excessively partisan or politicised terms. It is likely to annoy Committee MPs – even those who might be sympathetic to your views – which can lead to a less helpful evidence session.

10. Parliamentary privilege
It is your duty to speak truthfully to select committees, as you would in a court of law
However, nothing that you say to a select committee can be used against you in a court of law. You cannot be sued or fired as a result of something you say in a parliamentary proceeding.
Example: conflicting evidence on the impact of Lariam (Defence Committee)
Government challenged evidence received by an expert. Was not defamatory but could potentially have become difficult if the Government had said, we know that Lariam is bad for you but we prescribed it nevertheless. They could not have been taken to court for this.

11. Why contribute? Who benefits? 1. We do 2. You can
Select Committees want
Good evidence
To reach a wider cross section of potential witnesses
Our reports are as good as the evidence we receive
Academics can get
Access to MPs, and a chance to contribute to and influence a select committee report. Every select committee report goes to the relevant government department so it is an opportunity to have your recommendations go straight to the government!
And it can get your ideas in the public domain before they are published.
“in conclusion I hope you all go out there and make plenty of money to contribute to your alma mater

12. Summarise a recent piece of work you have done (think of this like writing a blog) what are the (three) key messages you want to get across? (5 minutes)
Based on your summary. If you could make one policy recommendation, what would it be (5 minutes)