Departmental Select Committees

The idea of departmental select committees in the House of Commons was floated as long ago as the Haldane Report in 1918 and periodically mooted by figures from both left and right as varied as Amery and Laski in the inter‐war years. It was raised again during the wartime investigations of the Machinery of Government committee, only to be shot down by the then Cabinet Secretary, Sir Edward Bridges, on the grounds that it would constrain the frankness with which the Civil Service could advise ministers. Departmental select committees were not to be introduced until 1979. Ten years ago the Institute of Contemporary British History organised a symposium to review their progress. On 31 January 1996 in committee room 10 at the House of Commons the ICBH, in conjunction with the Hansard Society, held another seminar to re‐examine the development of the departmental select committee system, its successes and failings. It was chaired by George Cunningham (Labour MP 1970–82, SDP MP 1982–83). The principal participants were Sir Peter Kemp (Deputy Secretary, Treasury 1983–88, Next Steps Project Manager, Cabinet Office, 1988–92), Douglas Millar (Clerk of Select Committees, House of Commons since 1994), Dr Ann Robinson (author of Parliament and Public Spending, head of the policy unit at the Institute of Directors [IOD], 1989–95 and Director‐General of the National Association of Pension Funds Ltd since 1995), Robert Sheldon (Labour MP since 1964, Financial Secretary to the Treasury 1974–75, member of the Public Accounts Committee [PAC] 1965–70 and 1975–79 and chairman since 1983, member, Public Expenditure Committee 1972–74, and member of the Treasury and Civil Service Committee [TCSC] 1979–81) and Sandy Walkington (head of corporate affairs at BT [British Telecom] plc), with further contributions from Peter Riddell (assistant editor: politics, The Times, since 1993), Chloe Miller, Sean McDougall, Tim King and Chris Stevens.

Territories of scarcity and creativity: a critical view of informal settlements and emerging tactics under conditions of scarcity in Nairobi, Kenya and Quito, Ecuador

This thesis explores the processes through which scarcity is constructed in informal settlements and how conditions emerging within its limits gives way to particular socio-spatial phenomena and influence the emergence of self-organisation and creative strategies from a non-expert perspective. At the same time, this thesis deconstructs these emerging tactics (reactive and transformative) in a diagrammatic way to generate a critical study of their potential for socio-spatial change that goes beyond the everyday survival. Most people associate scarcity with “not having enough” of something, most usually of a material nature. In contrast, this paper is based on the premise that scarcity is a constructed condition, therefore exploring it beyond its immediate manifestation and illustrating its discursive, distributive and socio-material components. In this line, the research uses Assemblage Theory as both an approach and a tool for analysis. This approach allows the research to depart from everyday narratives of the residents, and gradually evolve into a multi-scalar, non-linear reading of scarcity, by following leads into different realms and unpacking a series of routine events to uncover their connections to wider processes and particular elements affecting the settlement and the city as a whole. For this purpose, the research is based on a qualitative, flexible and multi-sited methodology, using different case studies as testing grounds. Collected data stems from a 11-months ethnographic fieldwork in informal settlements in Ecuador and Kenya, analysing the socio-spatial practices and strategies deployed by the different actors producing the built environment and arising from everyday and latent experiences of scarcity. The thesis examines the multi-scalar nature of these strategies, including self-building and management tactics, the mobilisation of grassroots organisations, the innovative ways of collaborating deployed by different coalitions and the reformulation of urban development policies. As outcomes of the research, the thesis will show illustrative diagrams that allow a better understanding of, firstly, the construction of scarcity in the built environment beyond its immediate manifestation and secondly, the way that emerging tactics a) improve existing conditions of scarcity, b) reinforce the status quo or c) contribute to the worsening of the original condition. Therefore, this thesis aims to offer lessons with both practical and theoretical considerations, by firstly, giving an insight into the complexity and transcalar nature of the construction of scarcity in informal settlements; secondly, by illustrating how acute conditions related to scarcity gives birth to a plethora of particular phenomena shaping the territory, social relationships and processes; and thirdly, by identifying specific characteristics within the informal that might allow for new readings of the city and possibilities for socio-spatial change under conditions of scarcity.

Transparency and Public Involvement in Animal Research

To be legitimate, research needs to be ethical, methodologically sound, of sufficient value to justify public expenditure and be transparent. Animal research has always been contested on ethical grounds, but there is now mounting evidence of poor scientific method, and growing doubts about its clinical value. So what of transparency? Here we examine the increasing focus on openness within animal research in the UK, analysing recent developments within the Home Office and within the main group representing the interests of the sector, Understanding Animal Research. We argue that, while important steps are being taken toward greater transparency, the legitimacy of animal research continues to be undermined by selective openness. We propose that openness could be increased through public involvement, and that this would bring about much needed improvements in animal research, as it has done in clinical research.

Digital evidence as a means of proof before the International Court of Justice

This article discusses the use of digital evidence as a means of proof before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The absence of specific Court rules and procedures for digital evidence (with the exception of Practice Direction IX bis) is not necessarily an obstacle to its production and evaluation before the ICJ, as the general evidentiary rules can also be applied to digital evidence. The article first looks at the rules on the production of documentary evidence and then examines the specific issues related to audiovisual evidence. Finally, it examines the admissibility of digital evidence unlawfully obtained by a litigant through unilateral transborder access to data. The article concludes that, even if specific regulation may be needed as to the specific way in which authenticity and accuracy of digital evidence are to be established, the particular facts of the case and the grounds of challenge can vary widely, and it is doubtful that any regulation could be sufficiently flexible to deal with this in advance.