Good piece from @Dannythefink making same point that @timd_IFG made yesterday.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/top-advisers-should-come-out-of-the-shadows-fk72gk3rd

Like it or not (many don’t, the PM does) Cummings has power.

Accountability and transparency require we be told more about what he actually does.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/ministers-are-responsible-actions-special-advisers-–-including-dominic-cummings

The doctrine of ministerial accountability is why advisers, usually, don’t appear in public and don’t normally have to account directly. Ministers are elected so the buck stops with them.

But another spad, David Frost as Brexit negotiator, has already changed that.

Cummings latest puts more pressure for change.

In his defence, he talked about the many decisions he takes and how important his role is.

Yet we don’t really know what committees he sits on, what meetings he leads, how the structure of No.10 works and who reports to him.

So we could start with far greater transparency about senior advisers in No.10. MPs can and should ask for this.

Senior officials appear in front of select committees. There is an argument that PM’s senior advisers do also.

There should be caution in how far you go.

Ministers are elected.

Political advisers as decision makers without the full accountability to Parliament would be different system.

And this is not true of all advisers. Many serve ministers, are there to support, advising on policy but not public figures and in the end do not make decisions themselves.

Just adding more figures to blame if things go wrong would not help. Ministerial accountability is impt

But some current ministers, and also Cummings, have raised question about accountability in civil service and occasional frustration about that.

So I’m sure they will understand the need for better transparency and therefore clearer accountability for powerful advisers also