The Institute for Government (IfG) has published commentary on the Privileges Committee’s inquiry into Boris Johnson and what it reveals about Parliament’s attitude towards ministerial accountability. The IfG has stated that the critique of the process and legitimacy of the Committee inquiry by Boris Johnson, his legal team and his supporters is notable, as it reflects a pattern of responses to ethical scandals in which the adequacy of the Commons standard process has been questioned. In the commentary, the IfG has argued that ‘Parliament’s role scrutinising government is central to our democratic system’ and that it relies upon minsters abiding by the ministerial code and the rules of the House of Commons. The IfG has suggested that ministers are doing so less, and that there are ‘worrying signs’ of a decline in the importance of truth-telling in Parliament. The IfG has asserted that the conclusions of the Committee will be revealing of what MP’s think should be expected of ministers, and the whole House’s views on the matter will be seen in the unwhipped vote on any recommendations.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published an insight paper on constitutional entrenchment and parliamentary sovereignty, where the Sir David Williams Professor of Public Law at the University of Cambridge, Alison L Young, discusses the most effective way of making constitutional principles more difficult to overturn. In the paper, Young has argued that an alternative means of entrenching constitutional principles could be found through collaboration between Parliament and the courts, supplemented by ‘the reinforcement of political entrenchment by the executive’.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published a report on benefits of a more transparent approach for Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer, if either win the next general election. The IfG has highlighted how both Sunak and Starmer can use 2024 as an ‘opportunity to reset transparency’. The report recommends integration of transparency in the day-to-day work of government departments; a long-term focus on transparency by ministers; equipping civil servants with skills required for a transparent approach; and holding permanent secretaries accountable for their department’s performance regarding transparency.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published a report, 'Reorganising district councils and local public services: options and challenges'. The report covers the government's current plan to replace two-tier systems of county and district councils with single-tier unitary authorities and examines the risks, challenges and opportunities this poses for local government and service delivery. The report also draws lessons from past reorganisations and sets out recommendations for local and central government to manage transition smoothly.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published a report examining how the government could improve co-ordination across England's special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system. The report concludes that the government's ambitions for earlier intervention and greater inclusion will require stronger central government leadership and improved co-ordination between education, health and local government. It warns that, without changes to the design of the SEND system, fragmented delivery will continue to contribute to rising costs, poorer outcomes for children and greater conflict between services.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published a new statement on ministers who are new parents receiving more support. The IfG states that government should look at strengthening the Ministerial and Other Maternity Allowances Act 2021. The IfG makes recommendations on how to improve the Ministerial and Other Maternity Allowances Act 2021. The current Act has limitations in its scope, excluding expectant or new parents who aren't pregnant themselves, and lacking provisions for ministers to share parental leave with their partners. To address these gaps the IfG recommends that the prime minister should consider revising the legislation to expand its coverage.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published a comment piece recommending that the government legislate for a national system of all-out council elections to replace the current system where 85 of England's 317 councils hold elections by thirds. IfG argue that the ongoing local government reorganisation (LGR) programme, which is replacing England's 21 county councils and 164 district councils with unitary authorities, provides an opportunity to modernise electoral cycles.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published a report examining government plans for using public procurement to drive innovation and support its core policy missions. With over £400bn spent annually on goods, services and works, public procurement is seen as a powerful tool, but the report warns that current practices are not geared towards achieving long-term, mission-oriented outcomes. The analysis highlights several barriers, including unclear objectives, limited involvement of commercial teams in policymaking, inconsistent commercial capability across government departments, lack of planning and low-quality data. The report outlines recommendations for cultural, organisational and practical changes to address these challenges. On the government’s plans for further legislative reform, the report warns against adding complexity and undermining the aim of simplifying the regulatory regime. It recommends ensuring that any further procurement legislation prioritises standardisation and clarification for both contracting authorities and suppliers.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has reported on how Eluned Morgan will be nominated as First Minister of Wales. Eluned Morgan was nominated as the new party leader by Welsh Labour members on 24 July 2024 and will now face a vote in the Senedd on 6 August 2024, where a new First Minister will be nominated. The report provides comment on various topics including how Welsh Labour elected its leader, the process to appoint a new First Minister, who stood to succeed the previous First Minister, Vaughan Gething, and how previous First Ministers of Wales have been chosen.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has reported on flaws in the model of independent oversight of government functions and the need for independent inspectors to be able to publish separately from those they scrutinise. This follows the dismissal of the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, David Neal, by James Cleverly after Neal gave interviews on the backlog of unpublished reports in the Home Office. Jill Rutter of the IfG has suggested that Parliament ‘does not necessarily do a great job in ensuring’ that independent overseers ‘have the powers and authority they need to do their jobs effectively.’ The IfG has argued that Parliament must ensure that independent inspectors, commissioners and watchdogs have the budget and powers necessary to effectively perform in their respective roles. Additionally, the IfG has said that inspectors should have the power to publish their own reports, or their departments should be obligated to publish the report within a specified period of time and thereafter report to Parliament on how the department has responded to the findings.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has explained how the government should set out its priorities in the upcoming King’s Speech 2024. Firstly, it notes that the government should define its new priorities with the manifesto being translated into defined and measurable outcomes accompanied by a timeframe. It further states that the government should strengthen the evidence base of each outcome by explaining what the government is doing already, how effectively is it addressing policy problems and how is it spending public money. Finally, IfG recommends that the government announces its priorities and resolves trade-offs whilst holding itself accountable.

The Institute for Government (IfG) has published a report calling for reforms to the UK’s public inquiry system, warning of rising costs and limited impact. With 27 inquiries underway and cumulative costs since 2005 exceeding £730m, including £192m for the Covid‑19 Inquiry, the report highlights duplication, excessive legalism and delays that leave victims waiting years for answers. According to the Institute, ministers’ vague decisions on scope and appointments often lead to sprawling inquiries, while budget and time limits have proven ineffective without departmental cooperation. The report recommends clearer guidance in the Cabinet Manual, a stronger Cabinet Office Inquiry Team and a formal decision-making framework to ensure inquiries deliver timely lessons and justice.