Ethics and Integrity Commission: a new chapter in public standards oversight
A new chapter in public standards oversight has begun with the Government’s announcement of the Ethics and Integrity Commission, replacing the long-standing Committee on Standards in Public Life, writes Melanie Carter.
- Details
On 21 July 2025, the UK Government announced the creation of the Ethics and Integrity Commission (EIC), which will replace the Committee on Standards in Public Life (CSPL). This institutional change is part of wider efforts to restructure the public standards framework and consolidate oversight mechanisms under a single administrative umbrella. The initiative stems from a manifesto pledge made by the Labour party and which was first floated in public discourse by Angela Rayner whilst in opposition in 2023. The stated objective of the reform is to simplify existing arrangements and improve coherence across standards-related bodies in government. It is a major part of its aim "to restore confidence in government and ensure ministers are held to the highest standards", and has stemmed in part from a number of scandals surrounding those in public office over the recent years.
A structural overhaul
In place of creating a wholly new public body, the Government has chosen to reconstitute the Committee on Standards in Public Life (CSPL) as the Ethics and Integrity Commission (EIC). This approach may reflect a strategic response to criticism surrounding the proliferation of arm’s-length bodies — often referred to as quangos — particularly in the wake of the 2024 General Election. By reworking an existing institution, the Government aims to streamline oversight mechanisms while maintaining continuity in the principles underpinning public life.
The EIC will continue to promote the Seven Nolan Principles of Public Life, first formalised by the CSPL in 1995. However, its role is now set to expand beyond its predecessor's remit. In addition to its existing standards-promoting function, the Commission will coordinate with other ethics bodies, produce annual reports on the state of public standards for the Prime Minister, and serve as an accessible point of contact for the public and professionals seeking guidance on ethical frameworks in government. While this may enhance cooperation across institutions, some commentators point out that the arrangement still falls short of true integration. Crucially, the EIC will not have powers to investigate individual cases or enforce standards — functions that remain the domain of other regulatory bodies.
As part of the restructuring, the Government has confirmed the dissolution of the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA), which previously oversaw post-government employment and attracted widespread criticism for its limited authority. ACOBA’s responsibilities will now be divided: the Civil Service Commission will supervise the career moves of former civil servants and special advisers, while oversight of former ministers will fall to the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards. This redistribution suggests a more segmented model than the unified ethics regulator originally proposed in opposition. Although the Government argues that this arrangement will minimise redundancy and improve procedural clarity, its practical effectiveness remains to be seen and will likely attract further scrutiny as implementation progresses.
Clarifying oversight and improving transparency
As noted, the EIC is designed not to investigate specific cases but to formalise cooperation and coordination across the different ethics institutions. A central feature is the Commission’s role as a “one-stop shop” for the public. This is intended to simplify navigation of standards enforcement and improving awareness about which bodies handle what. We will still have a number of regulators overseeing the actions of ministers, officials and MPs namely the Civil Service Commission, the Commissioner for Public Appointments, the House of Lords Appointments Commission, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, the Parliamentary Standards Committee, the Parliamentary Commissioner, the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists, the Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests, and of course, soon to be joined by the new EIC.
Ministerial accountability: severance reform
Another key feature of the reform involves changes to ministerial severance payments. Under the new framework, ministers who serve less than six months or return to office within a three-month window will forgo severance pay. More notably, those who leave office due to serious breaches of the Ministerial Code will be expected to relinquish these payments entirely. However, the criteria for what constitutes a “serious breach” remains subject to the discretion of the Prime Minister. This maintains an ongoing concern around impartiality and the absence of independent adjudication.
Looking ahead
From a legal perspective, several questions arise. The EIC’s lack of statutory authority may hinder its capacity to compel compliance or impose sanctions, raising doubts about its long-term effectiveness. Further, the reassignment of post-employment oversight functions across separate bodies may complicate procedural clarity and accountability. It is also currently unclear whether severance clawback provisions will be in play and if so, whether they are enforceable, and what avenues might exist for judicial review or challenge if disputes emerge.
Ultimately, while the creation of the EIC may signal an attempt to consolidate ethical guidance and increase visibility, the reforms appear incremental rather than transformational. Without legal enforcement mechanisms or independent powers of investigation, institutional credibility may rest heavily on political will and behavioural norms rather than structural guarantees. The implications of these changes – particularly around lobbying, post-service employment, and ministerial conduct – are likely to develop gradually and merit close observation.
The success of the EIC will rely not only on institutional design but also on the commitment of ministers and public officials to uphold the principles of public service. As Pat McFadden, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and the senior Cabinet Office minister overseeing the reforms rightly observed: “The public will in the end judge politicians and government by how they do their jobs and how they fulfil the principles of public service.”
Melanie Carter is a Partner and Head of Public & Regulatory at Stone King.
Jobs
Police Misconduct & Vetting Solicitor
Locums
Poll
Events
15-09-2025 10:00 am
08-10-2025 10:00 am
Directory
