David Frost must face the same scrutiny as other Brexit negotiators

Conservative MP Nigel Mills has now twice asked the government whether the UK’s chief negotiator with the EU, David Frost, will appear in front of the House of Commons’ committee on the relationship with the EU. Michael Gove, the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the top minister at the Cabinet Office, has committed to ask Frost, but he could not guarantee that Frost would agree to speak to the committee. Mills may have to wait a while longer to get an answer to his request.

As Frost is a special adviser to the prime minister, it is ultimately Boris Johnson’s choice whether Frost appears in front of the committee. But it is not acceptable for parliamentary scrutiny to take place only if the government chooses to oblige.

Brexit negotiators have consistently made themselves available for parliamentary scrutiny

Since the 2016 referendum, both the UK and the EU have shown a willingness to face scrutiny. Frost’s EU counterpart Michel Barnier faces regular questioning sessions in the European Parliament, as well as making statements to the press after each round of negotiations during the withdrawal and future relationship phases.

Olly Robbins, Frost’s predecessor as the UK’s chief negotiatior, appeared regularly before the now defunct Exiting the EU Committee, initially as DExEU permanent secretary and subsequently as the prime minister’s chief Europe adviser; he generally accompanied the Brexit secretary rather than appearing alone. Their boss Theresa May discussed her Brexit strategy with the Liaison Committee – the only committee that can summon the prime minster – a number of times. And the chief negotiations adviser at the Department for International Trade, Crawford Falconer, has also answered questions from the Commons’ International Trade Committee, alongside the department’s permanent secretary, Antonia Romeo.

But since Johnson took over last July, the government has been reluctant to face parliamentary scrutiny. Frost is not the only key individual who has not answered questions: Johnson himself has not yet found time to appear in front the Liaison Committee – and the ongoing delay in re-establishing this key committee after the election means that the government is subject to less scrutiny than usual.  If the prime minister is setting the negotiating strategy, and Frost is doing the negotiating, it seems odd that Michael Gove it is sent to answer questions on how negotiations are progressing.

David Frost’s role in the government’s Brexit negotiations may be clear but it should be scrutinised

Gove himself has made clear that Frost works for the prime minister. This clarity is helpful: at the start of the Brexit process, under Theresa May, there was confusion over whether the prime minister or her Brexit secretary David Davis was in charge of the negotiations. This confusion was compounded by the fact that Olly Robbins combined his role as permanent secretary at the Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) with being May’s chief Brexit adviser – an arrangement that proved unsustainable.

Clarity in roles and accountability is important when it comes to scrutiny and, as the Institute has argued, it is important that those conducting the negotiations are close to the prime minister, have clear roles and responsibilities and understand their objectives. The role of Brexit secretary no longer exists and, as Gove said, the Brexit negotiator reports to the prime minister, so arrangements in the Johnson administration appear to be much more straightforward than under May. As a result, the scrutiny of the negotiations should be similarly straightforward – but Frost’s status as a special adviser, appointed by the prime minister, has added a complication.

There is nothing to stop special advisers appearing before select committees

Unlike Robbins or Falconer, Frost is not a civil servant. But this difference in status does not mean that he should not face the same level of scrutiny, even if it is extremely rare for special advisers to appear before select committees. The government’s guidance states that if a committee ‘wishes to take evidence from any particular named official, including special advisers, the presumption is that ministers will seek to agree such a request’^[1].Frost already has an unusually high profile for a special adviser – he issues government statements from his personal twitter account – and as such it is not unreasonable that he should face extra scrutiny from parliamentarians.

Former ministers and officials all recognise the benefit of parliamentary scrutiny, no matter how uncomfortable it may be in the moment. And scrutiny of the Brexit process at this key moment in the negotiations is essential, with the government refusing to extend the transition period despite governments across Europe being consumed in their response to the coronavirus outbreak. With a secure parliamentary majority, the government can afford to show some of its working to MPs. If the prime minister is too busy, or reluctant, to appear before a committee of MPs, there is no reason why his chief negotiator should not be willing to face questions on the most important international negotiations conducted in his name.