Committee publication · Special Report · 4 June 2026 · HC 178

1st Special Report - Ministerial Statements and the Ministerial Code: Government Response

From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Inquiry: Ministerial Statements and the Ministerial Code

Summary

This is the Government's response to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee's January 2026 report on ministerial statements and the Ministerial Code. The Government partially accepts key recommendations, agreeing to broaden the Code's language on accountability but rejecting calls to replace 'should' with 'must' and resisting Parliament's role in rewriting the Code. It acknowledges the changing media environment while defending flexibility in announcing major policy.

Key findings

Government agrees to broaden the 'General Principle' in Chapter 9 of the Ministerial Code to reflect ministerial accountability principles already in Chapter 1, ensuring consistency throughout the document.
Government partially accepts the recommendation on restricting major announcements when the House is not sitting, but asserts it cannot always notify Parliament first due to events during recess and maintains commitment to making details available at the earliest opportunity.
Government rejects the recommendation to replace 'should' with 'must' in the general principle, arguing not all announcements can be made to Parliament first (e.g. when House is not sitting).
Government partially accepts that ministers must explain exceptional circumstances when major policy is announced elsewhere first, but maintains flexibility regarding recess, timing constraints, and Opposition days.
Government rejects the recommendation to add a requirement for the Prime Minister to issue written statements on ministerial conduct breaches, asserting the Ministerial Code is the Prime Minister's document, not Parliament's.

Government position

Partially accepts key recommendations with qualifications. Accepts: broadening Chapter 9 language, using written ministerial statements more effectively, acknowledging the 'in session' definition. Partially accepts: restrictions on announcements during recess (while defending flexibility), requiring ministerial explanations for exceptional breaches. Rejects: replacing 'should' with 'must' (cites practical impossibility), Parliament's role in rewriting the Code (asserts it is the Prime Minister's document), and mandatory written statements on ministerial conduct decisions (defends PMQs and Liaison Committee as sufficient scrutiny mechanisms).

Tone

Procedural

Topics

ministerial-accountabilityparliamentary-proceduregovernment-transparencyministerial-codeparliamentary-scrutiny

Key actors

Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Prime Minister, Leader of the House of Commons, Chief Whip, Speaker, House of Commons, Liaison Committee, Procedure Committee

Notable line

“The contents of the Code are a matter for the Prime Minister, rather than Parliament - and successive governments have taken that approach.”

Key Quotes

“The Government agrees that the wording of the 'General Principle' in Chapter 9 should be broadened to reflect the principles of ministerial accountability to Parliament which are already set out in Chapter 1 of the 2 Ministerial Code.”
— Government · On updating the Code's language on accountability

“The Government partially accepts this recommendation and agrees with the Committee's definition of 'in session'. As the Committee has recognised, it is not always possible to notify the House of the most important announcements first, for example where the Government is responding to events during recess.”
— Government · On announcing major policy when Parliament is not in session

“The Government rejects the recommendation at paragraph 35. As the Committee itself has recognised, it is not always possible for the Government to make announcements to the House first, for example, when the House is not sitting.”
— Government · On replacing 'should' with 'must' in the general principle

“The Code sets out the Prime Minister's expectations of all who serve in government. The contents of the Code are a matter for the Prime Minister, rather than Parliament - and successive governments have taken that approach.”
— Government · On Parliament's role in revising the Ministerial Code

“The Government welcomes the Committee's recognition of the changing media environment and the importance of the Government being able to effectively communicate policies to the public they serve.”
— Government · On modernising the Code to reflect contemporary communications

“The Prime Minister is already regularly held to account by Parliament for their decisions. There are established and robust mechanisms for the House to scrutinise such matters, most notably through Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) and appearances before the Liaison Committee.”
— Government · On why no written statement requirement is needed for ministerial conduct decisions

View original document →

Source · parliament.uk record ↗