Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Select Committee

The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Select Committee, previously known as the Public Administration Select Committee, is a committee designated by the British House of Commons. Its purpose is to scrutinize reports from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, address issues pertaining to the quality of administration delivered by civil service departments, and explore various matters concerning the civil service, primarily in England and Wales, as well as constitutional affairs.

It is the principal select committee to which Cabinet Office ministers are accountable and thus handles pre appointment and accountability hearings for independent officers, with an independent civil society or cross departmental role, such as the First Civil Service Commissioner, the chair of the UK Statistics Authority and the chair of the Charity Commission.

The committee chooses its own subjects of inquiry, within its overall terms of reference; however, it seeks evidence from a wide variety of individuals and groups with relevant interests and experience. The members of the committee are elected by their peers from any political party, and the committee itself mainly publishes its results through reports and making its recommendations known to the government.

Membership
Following the resignation of William Wragg in 2024, the committee has no chair. Wragg had served as chairman since being elected in January 2020, defeating fellow Conservative MP David Jones by 335 to 183 votes. A ballot will take place in May 2024 to elect a new chair. The members of the select committee are:

2017–2019 Parliament
The election of the chair took place on 12 July 2017, with the members of the committee being announced on 11 September 2017.

2015–2017 Parliament
The election of the chair took place on 18 June 2015, with the members of the committee being announced on 6 July 2015.

2010-2015 Parliament
The election of the chair took place on 10 June 2010, with the members of the committee being announced on 12 July 2010.

Reports
A March 2004 report considered the prerogative powers of Ministers.

A major report published in July 2011 addressed procurement of Information Technology by the government and found there was an over-reliance "on a small 'oligopoly' of large suppliers", which some witnesses before the Committee had described as a 'cartel'. An independent comment given prominence in the report described the UK as "a world leader in ineffective IT schemes for government". The Office of Fair Trading investigated but did not find sufficient evidence either to confirm that suppliers had been acting in breach of competition law, or to exonerate them. The government welcomed "the Committee's interest in and support for government Information and Communication Technology" and in response noted in particular that the government was "in the process of breaking the contractual lock-in which places the majority of ICT business with a small group of major systems integrators", and "working to improve the quality of its ICT management information".

Reports published in 2021 include The role and status of the Prime Minister’s Office, published in June 2021.

In 2022 the committee reported on government ethics. Committee chair William Wragg stated a "robust" system was needed to uphold standards "with proper sanctions for those who break the rules". The committee was also concerned the government maintained its coming ethics adviser would not look into what happened round Suella Braverman's resignation. MP's on the committee stated the government should not be able to decide what the adviser, not yet appointed, could investigate. In its report, the committee also stated there should be legal action against former ministers who broke rules through taking certain jobs after leaving officed. Former ministers should look for advice from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments but ministers cannot be made to accept this committee's advice. The record of the current government was strongly criticised. The committee want the ethics adviser to be able to carry out inquiries into historical behaviour.