The answers on questions on accountability Essay

The answers on questions on accountability - Essay Example The feeling of accountability amongst the government personnel has been critical in Britain ranging from previous decades in history. Many people have gone to greater extents and in situations where decisions are difficult to make to the extent of resignation from their various responsibilities. Individuals feel that the situations might be unfortunate yet they have to do what is to be done. In normal situations, the conventional understanding of ministerial accountability, in which ministers are answerable to Parliament and departmental administrators emerge before parliamentary committees on behalf of their minister, works well (Smith 2006). Â  This shows that the accountability feature among the officials in a given department or sector is transferrable and should be handled throughout the system as a dependent factor on all attributes. To confirm on this claim, there is a valid rationale in posing that accountability should be evaluated as to originate from all the politicians a s well as the departmental heads associated with the observable practices. According to Smith, accountability is a factor that should involve no discrimination in its evaluation and this forms one part of argument of this paper that is subject to argument basing on critical reasoning from the logics displayed. Real accountability is observed as being precise in identifying the source of mistake observed in the management and departmental administration. In a given department, there are individuals with different abilities and hence performance output in various sections. An individual, research or evaluation process cannot assume that the fault from one area in the department is always a fault from every official (Smith 2006). Moreover even if a fault in a single sector of the administration attributes to detrimental effects on other parts, the analysis by the commission should identify the ultimate source of the fault and deal with it independently. The magnitude of liability can t herefore vary on the actual source of the fault. For instance, in a situation where a mistake from one individual or department leads to errors in several other departments or the whole ministry, the liability cannot be compared with the case where a fault leads to an error in a single and smaller section of the department (Osbaldeston 2005). In case the situation goes out of hand, nevertheless, and when public disagreement results, some start to query this perceptive of ministerial responsibility. The non directional questions associated from divergent sources implies on the prevalent notion on the conception of accountability in the government. Recent arguments, such as the need for the review of the considerations of accountability arose with the support initiative and the Human Resources and Development Canada grants and donations program, have resulted in disappointment over determining who was responsible and thus in the end accountable. Â  This has resulted into some individ uals to question whether there is need to be higher accountability of senior public servants, most notably deputy ministers, before parliamentary committees. Â  Opinions on this matter are classified, and the government has constantly protected the traditional perception of accountability (McGrath 1985). The question pertaining to the reality or mere inspirations of account