• Exam body thwarted over reforms, committee says
• Ministers knew of test problems at earlier stage

Ed Balls’s interference increased the likelihood of the collapse of the Sats system, according to MPs in the first report to officially accuse the schools secretary of playing a significant role in the fiasco.

His department micromanaged the system and prevented the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) from reforming the tests, the report says. But ministers later claimed that they had not been involved and could not be blamed when the tests failed.

The parliamentary committee responsible for schools said Balls and his ministers knew of the problems earlier than has been acknowledged and established a testing system on a scale that made it vulnerable to failure every year. The marking of Sats – taken by 1.2 million children in England – collapsed last year under the auspices of the American firm ETS, which had its contract terminated.

An independent inquiry commissioned by the Department for Children, Schools and Families and the exams watchdog Ofqual, led by Lord Sutherland, said ETS was ultimately responsible, but heaped blame on the QCA for failing to prevent the escalation of the problems. Balls subsequently scrapped all tests for 14-year-olds and science papers for 11-year-olds.

Ken Boston, the then chief executive of the QCA, had his offer of resignation refused and was eventually fired after Sutherland reported last December. Boston accused Balls of being more involved than had been acknowledged and “sexing up” evidence against him when he appeared before the select committee in April. The report largely backs his version of events.

Barry Sheerman, the chairman of the children, schools and families select committee, said: “The whole process got muddled because there wasn’t a clear line of responsibility. This led to a situation where this [the QCA] was clearly not an independent organisation.

“It’s too easy for Ed Balls and Jim Knight [the then schools minister] to say ‘It wasn’t me, guv, it’s an independent body’. QCA wasn’t independent. If someone is looking over the QCA’s shoulder all the time watching and observing them, even if it’s informally, quietly, beneath the radar, you can’t claim it’s independent.

“Ed Balls and Jim Knight were ultimately responsible for the quality of these bodies. In a system of ministerial responsibility, Ed and his ministerial team can’t escape totally.”

The report attacks the DCSF’s parachuting of observers into bodies such as the QCA, after evidence that they regularly instructed bodies about ministers’ opinions. Observers should be banned from Ofqual, and non-governmental bodies should have a memorandum to establish lines of responsibility, it recommends.

However, it also suggests that leaders of quangos should be better prepared to stand up to ministers.

Boston said the report was fair and balanced. “The key issues are the need for an NDPB [non-departmental public body] … to be given a clear and broad remit and then allowed to deliver that remit against agreed objectives.”

The schools minister Vernon Coaker said: “We are pleased that the select committee has endorsed Lord Sutherland’s independent inquiry, which shows that the test contractor, ETS, was responsible for the disruption to the 2008 tests, and that there were also failings in the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.

“Major changes have now been made … with a new test contractor for the 2009 test cycle, a new chief executive, a new remit in place and, most importantly, 99.9% of test results were returned to schools on time this year.

“It’s now time to draw a line under 2008 and get on with the important job of making sure our assessment system is the best it can possibly be.”

A statement from the DCSF said: “We have already acted on Lord Sutherland’s recommendation that we clarify the role of DCSF observers in QCA meetings.

“It is central to Ofqual’s credibility and effectiveness that it is, and is seen to be, independent of ministers. But the department has a close interest in Ofqual and its work, because what Ofqual does impacts on delivery of government policy.

“It is therefore right that DCSF and DBIS [Department of Business, Innovation and Skills] officials should attend the Ofqual committee … as observers and be able to advise the committee, when requested, about the government’s views.”

This week the QCA became the Qualification and Curriculum Development Agency, after its watchdog responsibilities were devolved to Ofqual. A spokesperson said: “QCDA remains committed to working with the DCSF and our various partners to ensure that accurate information is available on each child’s achievements.”