That word responsibility is in the air. So is that other R word, resignation. There have been calls for the resignations of Coalition ministers Fiona Nash and Scott Morrison at the federal level and Labor minister Joy Burch in the ACT.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
But the only public figure who has resigned is a public servant, Australian Electoral Commissioner Ed Killesteyn.
Responsibility is a difficult concept. There is a difference between personal responsibility and formal responsibility. Personal responsibility comes in response to personal involvement and mistakes for which a person should be held accountable.
Formal responsibility comes through a chain of command in which a senior person must take responsibility for things that have happened on their watch. This is sometimes summarised in the pithy saying "the buck stops here".
Without responsibility there can be no accountability for one's own actions or the actions of those for whom one is responsible. And accountability is crucial in any organisation.
In democracies, accountability is a core principle and it is put into practice in Australia's system of responsible government through the concept of ministerial responsibility. This has two parts, collective and individual ministerial responsibility. The former applies to governments as a whole while it is the latter that is the focus of present discussion.
Professor Patrick Weller, an acknowledged expert, has unpacked this difficult concept as follows: "Ministers are answerable for actions of their departments; they need to explain what has gone wrong and ensure problems do not recur - but they will never be held personally or vicariously responsible for failures within the department."
So when should ministers resign or be dismissed?
"Ministers will resign only if they are personally involved,'' Weller says. ''They may have lied to Parliament and been found out; they may have been implicated in a scandal; or they may have failed in their duties of head of department in a way that touches on them personally."
Resignations are intensely political. This applies to both demands for resignations and resistance to such demands. Resignations are often resisted for practical reasons, such as a belief that the minister is otherwise a capable person doing a good job. John Howard lost too many ministers and parliamentary secretaries early in his government (in hindsight often for fairly trivial reasons) and this has stiffened Tony Abbott's resolve to try to keep his team intact.
In the ACT an added reason is the small pool from which ministers are drawn. To lose a minister or two to resignation would be a structural disaster for an ACT government.
Ministerial resignations and dismissals have become disconnected from policy and administration. In recent times ministerial resignations have usually come about because of personal mistakes or misdemeanours, such as conflict of interest.
There was an avalanche of ministerial resignations late in the Gillard-Rudd Labor governments, but these were almost always collateral damage from leadership contests. Ministers resigned or were sacked because of apparent disloyalty to the leader of the day or because of an unwillingness to work for a newly elected leader.
Accountability and responsibility and their associated consequences of dismissal or resignation are important concepts both in politics and in the wider community.
For that reason, contrary to the narrow meaning of ministerial responsibility, I'd like to see higher standards of responsibility in ways that could lead to more resignations and dismissals.
Such standards should be applied not just in politics but also in major community organisations, including business, trade unions, churches and the armed forces. Such an application would be welcomed by the community and would help to rebuild falling levels of trust in these institutions.
Perceptions are important, not just in conflict-of-interest
situations, and at the moment there is a widespread perception of major institutions, including politics, that rather than the buck stopping with the person in charge there is a lot of buck-passing.
That is, there is a perception that no one takes responsibility. When someone is dismissed it is often someone well down the chain of responsibility. Those at the top who are moved on are sometimes rewarded with lavish golden handshakes (business) or kicked upstairs to the Vatican (the Catholic Church).
In the process of such ''symbolic'' resignations some good, capable people will suffer but it is important that the right message is sent to the community. Killesteyn took responsibility for the lost votes fiasco in the West Australian Senate election, which has led to the need for a fresh election at great cost and inconvenience.
He did the right thing but even his arch critic, Clive Palmer, said he felt sorry for him. That is as it should be in such cases. The AEC had lost credibility and needed to rebuild community confidence in its undoubted abilities.
But this standard of responsibility should be applied not just widely but with flexibility. No case is black and white. Resignations should not necessarily be career-ending. Even a return to the back-bench need not be permanent.
Political leaders have options other than dismissals. Redeployment to another portfolio is one that shows the minister has taken responsibility and the government has heard the message. This involves a dose of humble pie by all concerned and should be accompanied by a proper heartfelt apology from the person concerned.
At the moment rather than apologies ministers too often use weasel words such as clarification, correction of the record or ''for the sake of completeness''. Perception should be taken seriously in matters of accountability. We should apply high standards of accountability in politics but do so with sensitivity. And the community itself should apply equally high standards in non-government organisations, too.
John Warhurst is an emeritus professor of political science at the Australian National University.