header-logo header-logo

24 May 2018
Issue: 7794 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Inquiries under scrutiny

Little evidence that recommendations are being implemented

Despite spending at least £239m since 2005 on inquiries the government makes no attempt to oversee whether objectives have been achieved or recommendations implemented, according to a National Audit Office (NAO) report published in the week the Grenfell Inquiry began hearing from victims’ families.

The report, Investigation into government-funded inquiries, published this week, found that departments vary in how transparent they are about actions taken in response to recommendations. For example, of the eight inquiries examined by the NAO that made recommendations, readily accessible information on progress was only available for half of these.

The report found that all inquiries face the challenge of maintaining public confidence and keeping within an acceptable timescale and cost. The average duration of the 26 inquiries completed since 2005 was 40 months. According to the report, departments were not able to provide evidence that they had consistently monitored and scrutinised the cost and progress of the inquiries they sponsored.

Moreover, no single department is responsible for running inquiries across the government and there are no formal criteria to determine the type of inquiry. Following two parliamentary select committee reports, the Cabinet Office and Ministry of Justice have committed to various actions to improve the effectiveness of inquiries but none of these commitments have been fulfilled. The NAO report cites, as an example, the recommendations to share best practice from inquiries and publish guidance for inquiry chairs.

The costs for the ten inquiries examined by the NAO ranged from £0.2m to £24.9m. Legal staff costs were the biggest expense—an average of 36% of an inquiry’s cost, although this varied from less than 1% for the Morecambe Bay Investigation to 67% for the Mid Staffordshire Inquiry.

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry, led by retired Court of Appeal judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick, opened in September 2017. It will look into the deaths of 72 people in the fire and aims to determine: what happened, why, and what can be done to prevent anything similar happening again. The first part of the inquiry will look at how the fire developed, and the second part will look at how the tower became exposed to the risk of a major fire.

Issue: 7794 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll