Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, which swiftly ended the
Cold War that had lasted for close to half a century, marked an era
when the world was split into two camps the Capitalists and the
Communists. Whilst democracy can be said to be the best form of
government, exemplified by the economic and socio-political
success enjoyed by third world countries that have modeled their
form of governance after the United States of America (USA),
inherently all forms of governance democracy, communism and
even monarchy are the same. All of them stress the importance of
teamwork and partnership to bring about not just political stability
but also economic and social success. Similarly, the concept of
ministerial responsibility is relatively important to the United
Kingdom. Thus, the ministers must be careful with the decisions
they make as they have to take up the responsibility when a wrong
decision is made. This essay will attempt to examine this concept by
giving examples as in economically, politically, socially and legally.
The convention of individual ministerial responsibility antedates the
modern party system. It developed at a time in the nineteenth
century when British high politics came to be understood as
involving disinterested public service. The growth of mass parties
and the welfare state have changed the nature of the convention,
but it remains an important aspect of the UK political system and
the uncodified convention. A leading authority in this area, Rodney
Brazier has outlined the main areas of ministerial responsibility.
Broadly, each Minister is responsible for his private conduct, the
general conduct of his department and acts done (or left undone) by
officials in his department.
It is common for the Minister of Parliament and peers to demand
that certain ministers resign or to be sacked if they have failed to
perform their duty. This means that the ministers must go if they
failed was at is height just after the Second World War. Some
ministers resigned even when they were not personally at fault as
this is a modus operandi that all the ministers have been conducting
in the Parliament. They resigned as they took responsibility for what
the departments did or did not do. Such a doctrine is defended on
the grounds that it forces the ministers to keep an eye on each
other. Thus, when a minister makes a mistake, he or she may be
compelled to tender his or her resignation. This is evident when Sir
Thomas Dugdale resigned over the Crichel Down Case in 1954
which represented an example of a traditional, or perhaps extreme
view of the convention of ministerial responsibility. However, this
convention was restated shortly afterwards by then Home Secretary
Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe. Ever since this case, the government has
tried to create a distinction between a ministers duty to account to
Parliament for the actions of their department and their individual