---

Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

The chairman's role was simply to advise. He is a very distinguished gentleman—he is the dean of the London Business School, and he was head of the Government resources office in the Treasury—and he simply gave me advice. Obviously, I am not going to reveal who was on the shortlist or what happened in the discussions, but I can say that, ultimately, the decision was mine and no one else's. I listened to his advice and that of Tim Burr, the then Comptroller and Auditor General, who was also on the selection panel as he was not a candidate himself. Nick Macpherson, the permanent secretary to the Treasury, also gave me his advice. I chaired the meeting, and I made the decision: I appointed the new Comptroller and Auditor General. Then, however, my decision had to go to the Prime Minister, and I give him credit for acting promptly, because, within a week, he had approved the appointment. So he, too, had a lock on the process. Of course, it is not surprising that he approved the appointment, because Nick Macpherson was part of the process. If I had insisted on appointing someone who was obviously not qualified, the Prime Minister would have vetoed it. So we each had a lock on it, and that is a very good process. It might sound democratic to suggest that the House as a whole should vote for the Comptroller and Auditor General, but that would go against everything that I have been arguing for—namely, that the Opposition and the Government should both have a lock on the process. If the House as a whole voted on the appointment, the Government party would effectively appoint him.