Kate Wilkinson's resignation from the Labour portfolio today in the wake of the Pike River Royal Commission's report was the right thing to do.
For the first time in many years in New Zealand, a government minister has resigned over the actions (or more precisely) inactions of their department. Once upon a time, ministers in our Westminster system of government were held responsible for everything that went on in their departments. Ministers could be (and were) held accountable for everything that was done in their name by even junior officials.
In 1988, though, the fourth Labour Government's state sector reforms changed all that.?
Government departments had their policymaking and operational functions split. Chief executives became responsible for the day-to-day operation of their agencies and this included the performance of their staff. Ministers were designated as the "clients" who merely paid for policy advice from their departments. Policy advice and services were designated as the main "outputs" that departments were responsible for delivering to their sole customer, government and, hence, taxpayers.
The application of free market principles to state policymaking and service delivery effectively privatised government and constitutional processes. According to critiques of the state sector reform process published during the late 1990s and early 2000s, this process created a greater focus on managerial rather than ministerial responsibility. Unsurprisingly, this caused confusion, particularly when it came to pinning responsibility on ministers for departmental failings.
I remember that this issue of ministerial versus departmental responsibility came to the fore in the wake of another West Coast tragedy - the Cave Creek disaster of 1995 in which 14 polytech students lost their lives due to a walking bridge collapse. At that time, opposition parties tried to force the resignation of then Conservation Minister Dennis Marshall over his department's failure to put in the necessary number of screws that could have held the footbridge together. Eventually, after much pressure, Marshall took full responsibility and resigned.
Today, Kate Wilkinson has revived that constitutional principle. It is one that we have inherited from Britain where ministers have resigned to take responsibility for the failings, in some cases, of lower ranking officials (who have in many cases lost their jobs as well). I remember a famous UK case where, in 1982,?the then Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington resigned over the Foreign Office's failure to adequately warn the UK Government (including Carrington himself and then PM Thatcher) of the impending Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands. Carrington left despite the fact that he had done nothing wrong personally - he felt a moral obligation to resign over his department's failings. Similarly, Marshall and now Wilkinson have followed his example within the New Zealand context.
This now raises a pertinent issue. Today, Sue Bradford summed this up in a succinct Facebook posting where she argued that Social Development Minister Paula Bennett should resign over her department's failings with its IT kiosks. Even though no lives have been lost due to some faulty privacy settings, Bradford correctly identified that the same constitutional principle applies to Bennett as much as it does to Wilkinson. And, moreover, what of John Key's overall responsibility for the GCSB? He can't just blame the brain faders within that agency for not fact checking on Kim Dotcom's residency status before spying on him. Ultimately, Key is legally accountable (that's right, it's in the GCSB's governing legislation) for everything that goes on within the GCSB and the other intelligence agencies for which he has ministerial responsibility.
Therefore, in resigning over Pike River, Wilkinson has, quite rightly, not only reasserted an important constitutional principle but set for both Key and Bennett an important precedent. If Wilkinson has taken responsibility for the inactions of her department, then why don't Key and Bennett do the same. Put simply, this means that both the Prime Minister and Social Development Minister should resign their intelligence and welfare portfolios respectively, with immediate effect.
All opposition parties should be baying for further ministerial blood in the House tomorrow. I have no doubt that they will be!?
(NB: I will be blogging more on the Pike River report itself in the days ahead).
?
?
?
nba trade deadline ncaa tournament marchmadness mike d antoni nba trade rumors 2012 ncaa tournament schedule laurent robinson
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন