What should ministers do? Should ministers focus on fixing urgent problems or invest in solving future ones? Should they listen to the experts or should they listen to the voters? Should they deliver a budget surplus or invest in infrastructure? The answer to all of these questions will depend on the advice they receive and the way they weight different forms of evidence. How effectively this advice can be put into practice will depend, at least in part, on what consideration has been given to implementation issues during the formulation of the policy. And what improvements are made to future iterations of the policy will depend on the quality of evaluation of the policy. This chapter is concerned with the different aspects of policy work, with a particular focus on the forms of advice that a minister may receive and the ways in which conflicting types of advice might be resolved.

The role of those who give advice to ministers, be it an adviser, a concerned interest group or a constituent writing to a member of parliament, is complex and multifaceted. But one aspect of the relationship between policy advice and policy making is relatively straightforward: only members of parliament can vote on legislation. In relation to the authoritative choice model of policy making that was outlined in Chapter 1, the distinction is clear – advisers advise and members of parliament decide.