The ministerial code is not completely effective in practice at securing the proper accountability of ministers to parliament. Whilst there are resignations when departmental matters go wrong these are too infrequent in number to represent true accountability from this provision, and too often Ministers are able to shift blame onto individual civil servants rather than assume true managerial ministerial responsibility themselves. In comparison provisions 1.1 and 1.2f do seem to be more effective as the majority of resignations are for conflict of interest or financial/sexual misconduct. Arguably however these resignations are a result of intense media pressure on the minister to do so, rather than because the ministerial code is effective at …show more content…
This is evident in the example of the multiple prison break outs under the supervision of Michael Howard, the Home Security in 1995. Here, the Director General of the Prison Service Derek Lewis was sacked by Howard as Howard stated accountability and responsibility lay with him as he was in charge of the day to day operations. Howard therefore despite managing the department was only accountable in the sense that he had to explain to parliament what happened, and even then he ‘failed to lay a full report of what happened before Parliament’ There was no consequences for the incident occurring under his management despite the fact that arguably he could have been negligent in his management role to know more about the operational failings within his department . The important question that this then raises is whether ministers should be held to account for mistakes they didn’t personally make but happened under their management or for things that they didn’t know but ought to have known. In this prison case ‘the home secretary became responsible for virtually nothing, the cause was tied to the responsibilities of the Director General’ rather than the responsibilities of the Home Secretary. Whilst Derek Lewis undoubtedly made mistakes, …show more content…
As a result of the departments failure to work efficiently ‘many farmers didn’t receive their payments and suffered significant financial losses’ . RFA were held fully accountable for these mistakes and their chief executive was dismissed. DEFRA and the minister in contrast were not held at all accountable despite the fact that it was DEFRA’s responsibility to ensure all farmers were paid. This evidences that once again ministers were able to evade accountability despite that fact that they were managerially responsible for the failure. Ministers are frequently able to do this by using one scapegoat rather than accepting responsibility between all those who had been involved with the mistake, in this case both DEFRA and RFA. As the select committee stated ‘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 failures in public service…we recommend new guidance to make clear to ministers what they should do to take responsibility in the event of serious departmental failure’ , in other words provision 1.2b has not done enough to ensure
“Jail employees may be legally liable for their actions” (Clear, Reisig, Petrosino & Cole p.77). This is relevant to the first half of the class because as we discuss corrections it’s important to know who is responsible within the system. I chose it because I experienced a warden stepping down for the actions of another staff member. Everyone should be responsible for their own actions but “Supervisors, including wardens can be liable for the actions of their staff members (Clear et al., p.78). I understand that an administrator should be
However the reality showed that the government failed in its objectives. Ironically the problem of this “Super Department” was that it wasn’t planned prior to its introduction. As George Brown stated “I think it is a pity that we didn’t produce a ‘Blueprint’ setting out precisely what we wanted to achieve”. The treasury also went out of its own way to make the work of the new department fail, reports suggested that Brown’s phone was bugged to allow the Treasury to keep track of the dealings he made and the dealings of the office.
I selected the article “Duty to Warn and Protect: Not in Texas” for review, as it applies to the state in which I reside. The article cites Texas Health and Safety Codes, based on a 1999 Texas Supreme Court ruling that states counselors do not have a duty to warn or protect. Having a duty to warn and protect is defined as protecting clients or others from perceived harm (Jackson-Cherry & Erford, 2014). An example would be that a client tells their counselor in a confidential session that he is considering stabbing his ex-girlfriend. The duty to warn would mean the counselor should notify authorities and the ex-girlfriend thus breaking confidentiality. The duty to protect would be to admit client to a facility for the client to be assessed for a propensity for violence towards the ex-girlfriend. This became important after a 1969 incident where a counselor, had a client expressed harm towards a girl and the counselor contacted the authorities, yet never contacted the girl, who was subsequently killed by the client a few months later, known as the Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California case (Jackson-Cherry & Erford, 2014).
“Objectively public administrators are accountable to both their superiors and the citizenry— proximately and routinely to the former but ultimately and more importantly to the latter” (Cooper, 2012, p. 198). A situation at Corcoran State Prison was challenged with a situation wherein dual obligations conflicted. Corcoran State Prison became the center of a serious ethical scandal that consisted of illegality, injustice, endangerment, corruption, and conspiracy. Two corrections officers of Corcoran, Steve Rigg and Richard Caruso, were faced with the question of where their loyalty lies— with their superior or with the citizens they serve?
Not Criminally Responsible on account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD) is a legal defence by excuse mostly used in countries such as Australia and Canada. It is well stipulated in criminal laws of such countries where a defendant may argue that they should not be held criminally responsible for breaking the law on the grounds that they are were mentally ill at the time when they committed the criminal offence (Penney, 2013). The issue of NCRMD may only arise on the following occasions (1) the accused committed the act or omission that formed the basis of the offence without motivation or intent and (2) at the time of the act or omission, the accused suffered from a mental disorder which made him/her incapable of fully being aware of the the nature, character and consequences of the act.
As I read through Chapter 2, it is easy to see that legislation over the years has impacted my education in some way, shape, or form. There were a couple of points and legislations that stuck out to me in this reading assignment. First, I can see how the establishment of the Parent-Teacher Association in 1897 made a positive impact in my educational experience. My parents were always really involved and supportive of various school activities, whether that was through my mom being a helper in my elementary classrooms or both of my parents being members of the Booster Club when I was in high school. I think this helped show me how important education really was and led to unending support from them. Second, there are several “newer trends” that
and local government were responsible for failing to respond immediately in the after math of the
Submission of this exam/assignment certifies my compliance with the UHCL Honesty Code that I signed at the start of the semester. I pledge on my honor that I have complied with this policy, inclusive of not acquiring unauthorized information or assistance, not providing others with unauthorized information or assistance, avoiding plagiarism, avoiding conspiracy avoiding fabrication/falsification, avoiding abuse of resources and materials, and reporting the academic dishonesty of others.
Over the coarse of the MSW program from being a first year master's level student to a second year student if have grew from waiting for a clinician to take charge in instructing me to now being able to competently make take initiative in treating and communicating effectively with other with other mental and physical health professionals and patient's family members with the consent of the patient. I am able to identify gaps in services and address concerns confidently to other professionals in hopes of finding solutions. Being able to identify and manage my own values to be sure not impose my beliefs as an interference against the client's self determination.Effectively I follow protocol as of facilities ranging from admission, to treating, and discharging. When engaging in research studies with participants, I inform the subjects, explain the purpose and process and gain consent if participant is willing and guarantee confidentiality.
The environment we found ourselves in was ever changing and required all employees to be flexible and work co-operatively. It was particularly important in my role as Team Leader to understand and demonstrate the linkages between the Departments work areas and incorporate them into our planning and decision making. This was most evident in the new Integrity Policy Framework that related directly with my Division and the greater agency. During the initial stages of this policy taking effect it was integral my team and the greater Employment Suitability team understood our role in implementing the policy. I utilised my team members expertise in their ability to effectively communicate to stakeholders the new requirements, including the new Employment Suitability Clearance (ESC), which is designed to provide assurance to the community that there is minimal risks associated with individuals or their circumstances which may cast doubt on their ability to support the agency and maintaining the Departments commitment to integrity and security of Australia’s borders. The new policy also stipulated that anyone working for the Department had to hold a minimum Baseline level security clearance. This was a huge change for my team as it meant that more then 7000 clearances needed to be initiated. With a small team and such a large body of work to complete, it was integral for me to ensure I was providing regular updates to my managers and my team as to the current workload and expected timeframes of completion. This allowed for all team members to be across what was expected of us and to provide reportable data to the Executives. By maintaining open communication channels with my team and managers we were able to efficiently initiate the required clearances whilst maintaining a high level of attention to detail and excellent customer
The United States codes title 18 deals with criminal and penal code of the federal governments. This deals with federal crimes as well as criminal procedures. On the other hand title 8 deals with the roles of the aliens and nationality in the United States code. Both codes can directly be linked to terrorism on title 18; the criminal acts can take the form of terrorism attacks while in title 8 the aliens can be involved in terrorism activities.
Jonathan Edwards wrote a Code of Conduct that shows the ideals and expectations of the Puritans. Taking these ideals and translating them into modern language are the bases for ideals that are expected of Americans however it is not written. In the Puritan Code of Conduct translated into modern language is to live life to the fullest. Teenagers and adults too, except that our time alive is limited and to make the most of it. People who want to be happy do what they want to be happy. Another example is code 3 which translates into think before you act. Every action has a reaction. The reactions can be good or bad, it is a choice to way out the good and the bad. The last example is code 1 which translates into time goes by fast so make the most
The objective of this essay is to critically evaluate why followers and public give too much credit or blame to leaders for organisational outcomes. The content of this essay comprises an analysis of what makes leaders effective and how followers view the leaders’ influence on organisational outcomes. I will discuss a number of theories (attribution, contingency, initiation and consideration) and examples of leaders from international organisations; including James Burke Chief Executive Officer of Johnson and Johnson and Tony Hayward Chief Executive Officer of British Petroleum (BP). These leaders influenced their employees, the public and world media and were subjected to credit or blame.
After going through the uniform civil code I directly concluded that the article 44 which talks about uniform civil code is against the certain provision of fundamental right. The uniform civil code define a single law for all the religion even for hindu and muslim then why only it’s for Hindu does the religious law of the muslim is above the constitution??. As every one is the citizen of this country of the country so the law should be a single for everyone. There have been a several example that the triple talaqh issue is violating the provision of fundamental right especially article 13 and article 21 which define equality and liberty. The women can’t survive throughout their life with small chunk of money and even due to some extra religious
There is a House of Commons Select Committee for each department within Whitehall. These were set up to scrutinise government and hold them to account. The formation of these committees consist of a minimum of 11 members and look at three aspects of each department – Administration, Policies and Spending. With this established, we will be looking at the policy aspect of scrutiny and evaluate how much Select Committees influence the content of legislation. The paper will be structured by starting with the analysis of current literature on this topic and trying to pinpoint what has already been stated about the influence select committees have