Evidence taking under the microscope: How has oral evidence affected the scrutiny of legislation in House of Commons committees?

Abstract

Bill committees in the British House of Commons have long had an unenviable reputation as weak scrutinising bodies. Reforms made in 2006 allowed committees scrutinising government bills to receive written and oral evidence on a routine basis. They had the potential to bolster the scrutiny of government legislation, bringing greater legitimacy to the scrutiny process and increasing the policy knowledge of committee members. This article examines the impact of the oral evidence taking process on the work of bill committees between 2006 and 2010. It finds that oral evidence sessions have changed the scrutiny behaviour of MPs, acting as a vehicle for the formulation of substantive changes to government bills and as an additional opposition scrutiny and debating tool. Ultimately, it considers whether the introduction of oral evidence sessions may be increasing the capacity of committees and MPs to make an impact on government bills.