Executive oversight of the UK constitution: Lords Constitution Committee report

Approximate read time: 10 minutes

On 4 July 2025, the House of Lords is due to debate the report of the House of Lords Constitution Committee, ‘Executive oversight and responsibility for the UK constitution’, published in January 2025. The government response to the report was published in March 2025.^[1]

1. Background to the committee’s inquiry

The committee launched its inquiry in October 2024. The committee’s report noted that in recent years the committee had raised concerns about the “strains placed” on the UK’s constitutional arrangements.^[2] It said these had resulted from the “Covid pandemic and the ongoing implementation of the outcome of the Brexit referendum, or through the actions of ministers and Prime Ministers”.^[3] The report stated that the reasoning for this assertion was set out in the committee’s previous reports:

• ‘COVID-19 and the use and scrutiny of emergency powers’, 10 June 2021, HL Paper 15 of session 2021–22
• ‘United Kingdom Internal Market Bill’, 16 October 2020, HL Paper 151 of session 2019–21
• ‘Brexit legislation: Constitutional issues’, 9 June 2020, HL Paper 71 of session 2020–21

The committee said that, with the election of a new government in 2024, its inquiry had examined the current structures within the executive to safeguard the constitution and offered recommendations for improvement.

2. Committee’s findings

2.1 Current constitutional arrangements

The report noted that although the UK does not have a single codified constitution, it nonetheless has a constitution in the form of a set of laws, statutes, conventions and practices.^[4] The committee highlighted the definition of the UK constitution it had given in its first report, published in 2001, that the set of laws and conventions:

[….] create the basic institutions of the state, and its component and related parts, and stipulate the powers of those institutions and the relationship between the different institutions and between those institutions and the individual.^[5]

The committee said the unwritten nature of the UK constitution was a strength that allowed for “pragmatism and evolution”.^[6] However, the committee also contended that this meant the constitution was “vulnerable to erosion and challenge” as it relied on “individuals respecting and complying” with constitutional norms and conventions.

The report said the prime minister has ultimate responsibility within the government for upholding the constitution.^[7] They are supported in that role by various officials, such as the cabinet secretary as head of the civil service, and by the law officers (including the attorney general) and the lord chancellor.

The committee noted that the constitution was also safeguarded by a “multitude of guardians”, which included Parliament and the courts.^[8] The committee said various advisory bodies also had a constitutional role, for example, the “Civil Service Commission, the House of Lords Appointments Commission (HOLAC) and the Commissioner for Public Appointments”.

2.2 Civil service

The committee also noted the importance of the civil service as a source of constitutional advice to ministers. The committee said the cabinet secretary played a particularly significant role in supporting the prime minister in safeguarding the constitution. As such, the report recommended that the role “should be set out as part of the cabinet secretary’s official responsibilities”.^[9]

The committee also said the Propriety and Constitution Group (PCG) within the Cabinet Office had a key role in providing advice to the civil service and ministers.^[10] The committee noted that the PCG had been moved between the Cabinet Office and the then Department for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities several times under the previous Conservative government, before being moved back to the Cabinet Office by the current government. The committee recommended that the PCG should remain as a permanent function within the Cabinet Office. This would allow expertise and institutional memory to be built up and would enable it to become a “centre of excellence” on constitutional matters.^[11]

2.3 Attorney general

The committee said the law officers were the “definitive source of advice on legality” for the prime minister and therefore had a significant constitutional role.^[12] The committee reiterated the recommendations it had made in an earlier report on the law officers that the attorney general must “place their duty to the rule of law above party political considerations”, and that their oath should be amended to “reflect the primacy of their duty to the rule of law”.^[13]

2.4 Senior minister with responsibility for the constitution

The committee said although the central responsibility for safeguarding the constitution was vested in the prime minister, as Pat McFadden, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster had stated in evidence to the committee, in practice the prime minister is a “very busy person”.^[14] In that context, the committee recommended there should be a senior minister responsible for advising the prime minister on constitutional matters.^[15] The committee said that in its previous report on the law officers it had recommended this role should be undertaken by the lord chancellor. The committee claimed whoever was appointed should be a “senior and authoritative figure” whose advice on constitutional matters “cannot be lightly disregarded”.^[16]

2.5 Status of advisory bodies

Given the informal nature of the UK’s constitution, the committee said there was a distinction to be made between lawfulness and constitutional convention. A convention was an “unwritten norm which governs behaviour”.^[17] Conventions impose obligations, but they are not generally enforceable by the courts. The committee claimed that if the prime minister, or any other minister, violated a convention the “only possible sanctions are political in nature”. Given the risk that “individuals might neglect or abuse” their constitutional responsibilities, the committee said the role of the “courts and political controls such as elections are not sufficient safeguards in and of themselves”. The committee therefore contended that “more formal” safeguards were necessary.

To that end, the committee recommended putting the role of advisory bodies, such as HOLAC, onto a statutory footing.^[18] The committee said the government should review the current status of advisory bodies and consider whether giving them a statutory role would be “desirable”.

2.6 Council of the Nations and Regions

Finally, the committee considered the role of the Council of the Nations and Regions. The council brings together the UK government, the devolved governments, the mayor of London and the English mayors of combined authorities.^[19] The government has said the purpose of the council is to tackle “some of the biggest and most cross-cutting challenges the country faces”. It met for the first time in October 2024, and is due to meet twice a year.

The committee said it was “unclear who within the government is responsible” for managing the council.^[20] The report recommended that the government should set out who is responsible for it, as clarity was important “even if responsibility is dispersed”. The committee also said the government should explain how it would ensure that areas of England not currently represented on the council “do not suffer a deficit of opportunity” to have their interests represented.

3. Government response

The government response to the committee’s report was published in March 2025.^[21] Ministers said they it welcomed the report and said that the government was “committed to upholding the constitution”. However, the government said there were “intrinsic strengths” to the UK’s constitutional arrangements, including the “importance of flexibility” within the uncodified system.^[22]

3.1 Civil service

The government agreed the cabinet secretary had an essential role in advising ministers on the constitution, but it said the role was already “well understood and respected” within government. Consequently, it made no commitment to amend the cabinet secretary’s official responsibilities in line with the committee’s recommendation.^[23]

On maintaining the Propriety and Constitution Group in the Cabinet Office, the government agreed there was “value in an established centre of expertise” on constitutional matters, but it made no further commitment to maintain the current structure of the PCG.

3.2 Attorney general

On the role of the law officers, again the government agreed that they played an “essential role” in ensuring the government obeys the rule of law.^[24] However, ministers noted when the current attorney general, Lord Hermer, had been sworn in, the oath had been revised to include an explicit commitment to uphold the rule of law.^[25] The government made no commitment to amend the oath further.

3.3 Senior minister with responsibility for the constitution

The government disagreed with the committee’s recommendation to appoint a senior minister with responsibility for constitutional matters.^[26] The government said that, as the committee had noted, ultimate responsibility for overseeing the constitution remained with the prime minister. However, the government said responsibilities were also dispersed among other ministers, such as the chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, the paymaster general and the minister for the Cabinet Office. The lord chancellor also has a responsibility to protect the independence of the judiciary. Therefore, the government did not support giving responsibility for constitutional advice to a single minister. It said:

The government believes that given the breadth of issues that could be considered “constitutional”, the constitution is effectively safeguarded by ensuring that responsibility is shared across a number of ministers and departments each with their own expertise.^[27]

3.4 Status of advisory bodies

On the status of advisory bodies, the government made no commitment to place them on a statutory footing. The government claimed that, although it kept ethics bodies under review, it had already taken measures to “strengthen the standards landscape”.^[28] The government highlighted the updated ministerial code issued by the prime minister in November 2024, and that the independent adviser on ministerial standards had been given powers to initiate their own investigations of ministers’ conduct. The government said this showed that “strengthened protections” could be made within the conventions of the uncodified constitution.^[29]

3.5 Council of the Nations and Regions

On the Council of the Nations and Regions, the government said the council’s terms of reference were clear that the prime minister chaired the council.^[30] The secretariat for the council is located within the Cabinet Office, and the government said the secretariat “works closely with the representatives of the council” to plan and deliver meetings.

In terms of outcomes, the government response noted the prime minister had said that the council should be a “meaningful, focused partnership and deliver tangible outcomes”.^[31] It said the first meeting of the council had resulted in a “suite of actions” that members of the council were delivering.

On the representation of English regions on the council, the government said the deputy prime minister had written to all areas in England without a devolution agreement and invited them to come forward with a proposal. It said new mayors established through that process would be eligible to attend the council. The government said it was also working productively with local government leaders to “identify and tackle strategic challenges” facing local government in England.

4. Read more

• House of Lords Constitution Committee, ‘Protect the constitution, says Lords committee’, 28 January 2025
• Baroness Drake (former chair of the House of Lords Constitution Committee), ‘Ministers must boost safeguards to protect UK constitution from abuse’, Times (£), 30 January 2025
• Michael Cross, ‘Lords committee says ‘senior and authoritative figure’ must guard constitution’, Law Society Gazette, 28 January 2025
• House of Lords Library, ‘Roles of the lord chancellor and the law officers: Lords committee report’, 20 June 2023
• House of Lords Library, ‘Use and scrutiny of emergency powers during the coronavirus pandemic: Constitution Committee report’, 14 June 2022

---

Cover image from Wikimedia.