Deliberative Accountability in Parliamentary Committees

The study explores the quality of deliberative accountability in the British Parliament, focusing on respect, non-partisanship, and reciprocity. It uses a multi-method approach to measure these metrics, including quantitative text analysis, qualitative coding, and interviews. The merging of the "what," "how," and "why" provides a novel template for studying accountability and deliberation.

Format: Hardback
Length: 288 pages
Publication date: 14 March 2022
Publisher: Oxford University Press

In recent years, there has been a significant surge in demands for greater accountability in public policymaking. However, this increased accountability has coincided with a decline in trust in governments and politicians. By delving into the core of public accountability, specifically the rationale provided by policymakers for their policy decisions (i.e., deliberative accountability), this research provides an empirical pathway to understanding why more accountability may not necessarily lead to greater public trust.

The focus of this study is on the British Parliament, where both the Treasury Select Committee and the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee conduct hearings on monetary policy, financial stability, and fiscal policy. The primary objective of these hearings is to challenge policymakers to explain their decisions, fostering a deliberative dialogue. However, the question arises as to how we can assess the quality of this deliberative accountability. To address this, three metrics are explored and measured: respect, non-partisanship, and reciprocity.

The research employs a multi-method approach, encompassing quantitative text analysis to evaluate the verbatim transcripts of committee hearings, qualitative coding coupled with an experimental design to assess the role of nonverbal communication in the hearings, and interviews with the MPs, peers, central bankers, and Treasury officials who participated in the hearings. The first method focuses on measuring the content of what was said, while the second examines how the words and arguments were expressed. The third component provides a more reflective "why" component by prompting participants to explain their motivations. By merging the "what," "how," and "why," this research offers a novel template for studying both accountability and deliberation.

The findings of this study shed light on the complex dynamics between public accountability, deliberation, and trust. It reveals that while increased accountability can enhance transparency and promote democratic legitimacy, it may not necessarily lead to greater public trust. The study highlights the importance of considering the broader context in which policy decisions are made, including the political environment, public opinion, and the media. Additionally, the research emphasizes the need for policymakers to engage in meaningful dialogue with stakeholders, to provide clear and comprehensive explanations for their decisions, and to demonstrate a commitment to transparency and accountability.

In conclusion, this study contributes to our understanding of the complex relationship between public accountability, deliberation, and trust. By focusing on the heart of public accountability, specifically the rationale, this research offers an empirical route for understanding why more accountability may not always deliver more public trust. The findings of this study have implications for policymakers, civil society
society, and scholars interested in promoting greater accountability, democratic legitimacy, and public trust in policymaking.

Weight: 628g
Dimension: 240 x 165 x 24 (mm)
ISBN-13: 9780192847874