Andreas Whittam Smith: Why don't ministers resign when things go wrong?

When there is no accountability at the top, an attitude of 'anything goes' becomes endemic

Is the failure of government ministers to resign when things go wrong one of the reasons for the present shambles?

I ask this because the recent disasters share certain characteristics. Different though the loss of computer discs with confidential information concerning half the population is from, say, the failure to screen out illegal immigrants from government jobs or the Labour Party's mishandling of big donations, they each demonstrate carelessness and irresponsibility on a grand scale. So the question arises whether the lack of accountability at the top of government has substantially weakened self-discipline lower down.

As an example of prescience, turn to what a parliamentary committee had to say in March about the failure of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to learn how to operate a new system of subsidies so that farmers were paid on time. Farmers had to take out bank loans while they waited. They suffered a financial loss of some 20m. The parliamentary committee began by observing that "some of those in the leaderships most closely involved, in particular the former secretary of state, Margaret Beckett, the former permanent secretary, Sir Brian Bender, and the director for sustainable farming, food and fisheries, Andy Lebrecht, have moved on unscathed or stayed in post". Mrs Beckett was afterwards promoted by Tony Blair to Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Sir Brian, again with Mr Blair's agreement, moved sideways to become permanent secretary at another department. Mr Lebrecht is still doing more or less the same job.

The committee went on, in a passage that now resonates loudly, "a culture where ministers and senior officials can preside over failure of this magnitude and not be held personally accountable creates a serious risk of further failure in public service delivery".

Now wind the film forward from 2005 to the summer of 2007, when an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in cattle was traced back to the malfunctioning of a government laboratory in Surrey, managed by Mrs Beckett's former department. It does hang together, I think. Where there is no accountability at the top, an attitude of "anything goes" becomes endemic.

Further proof comes from a worse case of government incompetence and refusal to take responsibility that directly touches the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown. This concerns the administration of the tax credit system, designed by Mr Brown when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. It randomly overpaid and underpaid those who were due to receive benefits. At first, the Government attempted to seize back overpayments from recipients. This caused so much distress that the Citizen's Advice Bureau reported: "In the most extreme cases, families had been threatened with repossession or eviction, and bureau staff had had to arrange Salvation Army food parcels for others because they did not have enough money left to buy food." It went on: "Some families had been forced to give up work because they could no longer afford child care, while others had been forced to take out high-cost loans in order to repay tax credit overpayments."

As Paymaster General from 1999 to 2007, Dawn Primarolo was responsible for the maladministration of the tax credits system. Like her colleagues at Defra, she moved on unscathed. Mr Brown appointed her Minister of State for Public Health in July 2007. When the actions of government ministers can cause poor families such terrible misery, yet none of them pays the price, can one be surprised that sloppy behaviour becomes the norm, and that a year or two later the very same department lost computer discs crammed full with people's personal details?

If I am right that, where nobody is held accountable for his or her actions, then nothing gets done well, what should Mr Brown do? At present he appears like a man hurtling down a raging torrent, vainly trying to find something to grab so that he can save himself.

I suggest that making the Ministerial Code much more draconian might be the strong action he needs to take. The Code lays down standards. But the section on ministerial accountability is weak. It merely says that "ministers have a duty to Parliament to account, and be held to account, for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments and agencies." I would like it to state something like this: "Ministers will be held accountable for policy errors that harm the public interest or cause distress to vulnerable citizens."

The difference between the two clauses is illustrated by the National Health Service. Paying the consultants more money for doing less work damages the public interest by misapplying taxpayers' funds. Putting elderly patients into mixed sex wards causes distress to the vulnerable. In both types of case, the Code should further state: "The Prime Minister would ask for the resignation of the minister responsible." I cannot think of anything more likely quickly to improve the performance of government.