A good day for Parliament and the Prime Minister

It is not often that, in a single day, the reputation of Parliament, MPs, the system of government and the personal standing of the Prime Minister are all improved. But the grilling of Mr Blair by the Liaison Committee of select committee chairmen made yesterday a good day for British politics.

The public will take time to notice that a sea change in political accountability has occurred, but, for once, we were reminded that politics could still be an honourable profession worthy of serious reporting and remains the absolute bedrock of our democratic process. So three hearty and unreserved cheers for Mr Blair's bold decision to be the first Prime Minister since the Second World War to submit himself to this comprehensive and detailed scrutiny. He has been slow to change his mind, in spite of repeated requests from Tony Wright's Public Administration Committee over the last two years, but even he has been stung by the constant criticism that he has given the impression of seeking to bypass Parliament.

There is no doubt that the large majority, which this Government has enjoyed since it took office, has been as much to blame for the demise of parliamentary debate in the Commons chamber as any alleged attempt by Mr Blair and his ministers to regard MPs as an inconvenience. All sides know that the outcome of divisions are certain to result in government victories. Even a substantial rebellion on the government benches over legislation has never resulted in a defeat for the whips. The focus of attention has clearly shifted away from the chamber, and even the weekly exchanges at Prime Minister's Questions have lost their impact.

Mr Blair made a rod for his own back when, on taking office, he reduced these from twice-weekly 15-minute sessions to one 30-minute session. In fact, Mr Blair made a reasonably convincing case yesterday that he has actually answered more oral questions than his predecessor, John Major, and has certainly volunteered far more statements.

But, on Mr Blair's own admission, Prime Minister's Questions have become 80 per cent point-scoring and theatre. Yesterday's hearing covered the style of government, public services, international affairs, Europe, Northern Ireland and political engagement with the voters. Mr Blair sat shirt-sleeved, alone without advisers, and appeared as candid as circumstances permitted. Gone were the point-scoring and the ya-boo that overshadow his appearances in the the Commons. In return the inquisitors concentrated on matters of substance, behaved with courtesy and conducted themselves constructively.

These MPs are the greybeards of Westminster. Many have served for nearly 20 years – several for more than 30. Most have never held ministerial office and have proved conclusively that work on select committees can be as challenging and rewarding as holding a government post. At a time when the cult of youth seems to dominate the selection of candidates, it was good to be reminded how important it is for Parliament to be represented by a group whose major characteristic is wisdom rather than ambition.

The focus of parliamentary scrutiny will clearly move to select committees as a result of yesterday's initiative. Many purists, including me, may lament the demise of the chamber, but it is as well to face up to the reality that a modern parliament, if it is to be held in high public regard, is probably now better able to scrutinise government through these committees.

The committee chairmen are, of course, on a learning curve. Sometimes, through excessive courtesy, they allowed Mr Blair to stray away from answering questions they had put. He was asked about higher education but replied with an answer about primary schools. Next time, next January, there will probably be fewer subjects covered and more chances for follow-up questions to ensure that he is not let of the hook.

Did we learn anything we did not already know? Yes. We learnt more about the interaction between Mr Blair and his ministers: that he believes in a strong centre to ensure that departmental ministers carry out agreed decisions. In a candid moment he let slip that the Cabinet was not the forum where he would first learn of a departmental issue or problem. One could say that this reinforces the view that collective cabinet decision-making no longer exists. That is probably an over-simplification; as he pointed out, he has doubled the number of cabinet sub-committees.

Mr Blair was firm in his resistance to suggestions that special advisers should appear before the committees; he can expect to be pressed on this in the future. He reiterated the constitutional view that only ministers should be accountable to Parliament. But he may have to yield to the suggestion put by Archy Kirkwood (of the Work and Pensions Committee) that, since Gordon Brown's influence has an impact on so many departments, the Chancellor should submit himself to greater scrutiny. At present Mr Brown answers only to the Treasury Committee. Perhaps he should attend the Liaison Committee, or the appropriate subject committee, when it is clear that he, rather than the minister concerned, is the principal driver of policy.

All in all, this was an advance for the political process – and a net gain for Mr Blair's reputation. Maybe the other two main party leaders, who yesterday were left out of the equation, should consider volunteering themselves for similar scrutiny. That would really set the process alight.

mrbrown@pimlico.freeserve.co.uk