The appointment of ministers from outside Parliament should be subject to much greater scrutiny, the government has been warned.

A report from the Commons public administration select committee published today has called for pre-appointment hearings, with the potential for debates and votes in the Commons chamber.

It also recommends that peerages awarded solely to enable people to take jobs in the government should be renounced when their holders cease to be ministers.

The committee said that such appointments should remain "exceptional", warning that there should not be a large increase in the number of ministers in the unelected House of Lords.

Its intervention came in a report on the 'Goats' - the ministers appointed by Gordon Brown to his 'Government of all the talents'. Most have now resigned, within a few years of their appointments, but retain seats in the Lords.

They include surgeon Lord Darzi, who was made a health minister; Lord Carter, an ex-Ofcom chief made communications minister; and Lord Jones, who was made trade minister after many years as head of the CBI.

The PASC said there was a "strong argument" that Lords ministers should be made accountable in some way to all MPs.

Currently they are only open to scrutiny by those MPs sitting on a select committee covering the same specialist area, although the Commons procedure committee is considering the possibilities of giving MPs greater access to Lords ministers.

The committee has warned: "The use of the House of Lords to appoint ministers from outside Parliament gives prime ministers potentially presidential powers of appointment, without the checks and balances that would apply in a presidential system.

"Such appointments can be justified if they bring clear benefits to government, but they should be exceptional.

"When making such an appointment, a prime minister should set out clearly to the House of Commons why the appointment has been made from outside, under what terms, and what he or she expects the minister to achieve during their time in government.

"Moreover, the appointment should be subject to scrutiny by the House of Commons. This could involve a select committee hearing and report.

"If the committee was not satisfied with the appointment, it could recommend a debate and vote on the floor of the House."