4th Report - Ministerial Statements and the Ministerial Code
Select Committee
Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
HC 1036
9 January 2026
Government response
1st Special Report - Ministerial Statements and the Ministerial Code: Government Response · published 4 Jun 2026
Recommendations & Conclusions
9 results
1
Conclusion
Accepted
Ministerial Code reaffirmed as suitable for government policy announcement principles
Conclusion
The general principle in the Ministerial Code relating to important announcements of government policy has recently been reaffirmed when the Prime Minister republished the Code in October 2025. We concur that the Ministerial Code is a suitable document to contain …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government agrees the general principle in Chapter 9 of the Ministerial Code should be broadened to reflect ministerial accountability principles from Chapter 1, committing to update the language at the next available opportunity.
2
Conclusion
Accepted
Uncertainty surrounds appetite for new House Protocol on ministerial statements
Conclusion
Ministerial accountability to Parliament is well established irrespective of its inclusion in the Ministerial Code. Nevertheless, it is uncertain whether there is a current appetite to replicate the principles in relation to ministerial statements in the form of a new …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government agrees that the General Principle in Chapter 9 of the Ministerial Code should be broadened to reflect ministerial accountability principles from Chapter 1, and commits to updating the language at the next available opportunity.
3
Conclusion
Accepted
General agreement on Ministerial Code expectations serves everyone's best interests
Conclusion
Even though the Ministerial Code is a government document, it is in everyone’s interest for there to be general agreement of the expectations flowing from its letter and spirit. (Conclusion, Paragraph 17)
Government Response Summary
The government agrees with the committee's observation and commits to updating the language in Chapter 9 of the Ministerial Code at the next available opportunity. This update will broaden the 'General Principle' to reflect and ensure consistency with Chapter 1 on ministerial accountability.
4
Conclusion
Accepted
Frequent accusations of Ministerial Code breaches create an undesirable situation
Conclusion
We believe the current situation where the Code sets a high bar for expectations which is regularly subject to accusations of being breached is undesirable. (Conclusion, Paragraph 18)
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the Committee's concerns about the Ministerial Code setting an undesirable high bar for expectations and commits to updating its language.
5
Conclusion
Accepted
Ministerial Code fails to effectively encapsulate ministerial accountability to Parliament
Conclusion
We believe that as currently drafted the Ministerial Code does not encapsulate effectively the general principle governing the relationship between ministers and Parliament. The general principle would be better framed around general government and ministerial accountability to Parliament. Any direction …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government agrees the Ministerial Code's "General Principle" wording should be broadened to reflect ministerial accountability to Parliament and commits to updating the language in Chapter 9 at the next available opportunity.
12
Recommendation
Accepted
Ministerial Code's 'Parliament first' principle needs modernisation to reflect changed media environment.
Recommendation
However, the media environment has changed significantly in recent years, and the provisions on the need to make the most important statements of government policy to Parliament first have remained substantively the same since the Code was introduced in 1997. …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government welcomes the committee’s recognition and acknowledges concerns about the Ministerial Code as currently drafted, committing to update its language to reflect the 'Parliament first' principle at the next available opportunity.
20
Conclusion
Accepted
Concentration of statements and urgent questions limits time for other House business
Conclusion
Sitting time is finite and there will always be a tension between the various demands of the House. Statements and urgent questions play an important role in the effective scrutiny of government, but in concentration they can significantly affect the …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government notes the conclusion, explaining its current practice of balancing oral statements with other parliamentary business and avoiding them on Opposition days where possible, while acknowledging that Urgent Questions are a matter for the Speaker.
24
Recommendation
Accepted
Enhance use of written ministerial statements to inform Members of document publication
Recommendation
We encourage the Government to make more effective use of written ministerial statements to inform Members about the publication of documents related to major government announcements, even when those announcements may themselves be the subject of an oral statement. (Recommendation, …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government accepts the recommendation, committing to update the House through written ministerial statements and encouraging departments to table written statements alongside oral ones.
25
Conclusion
Accepted
Sanctioning individual ministers for Ministerial Code breaches remains problematic due to shared responsibility
Conclusion
For most breaches under the Ministerial Code in relation to paragraph 9.1, it is difficult to conceive of the circumstances that would result in sanctions against an individual minister, given that the Code specifies the Prime Minister as being a …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government states the Prime Minister is already regularly held to account by Parliament through established mechanisms like PMQs and Liaison Committee appearances. These forums provide ample opportunity for Members to question determinations on ministerial conduct and sanctions.