The Paradox Of Dr. Ashley Bloomfield In The Covid-19 Pandemic

Abstract

One of the paradoxes of today is the phenomenon of the Director-General of Health’s prominence as a public servant during the Covid-19 pandemic. His cult-like status, alongside numerous reforms’ developments, has questioned the general anonymity of those working in the public service. This also impacts the vicarious responsibility of ministers and political neutrality of the public service. In this paper, I analyse how these elements are expressed for chief executives and their ministers both presently and in recent decades. I conclude that anonymity and vicarious liability adopt a residual character within our constitutional framework, whereas political neutrality remains a pillar of our constitutional system. While our current expressions have mostly deviated from traditional Westminster conceptions, the pandemic is no anomaly to recent history’s expressions of these conventions. Rather, it reconfirms existing trends.

These three elements are branches that have traditionally upheld classical forms of individual ministerial responsibility. They are inextricably linked, both contributing to and reinforcing each other. With these conventions’ current trajectories, the protections that traditional expositions of individual ministerial responsibility provided are no longer assured today. I analyse these risks before concluding that their status has not yet led to a vacuum in ministerial responsibility or politicisation of the public service to the extent feared by critics. Crucial underpinnings of individual ministerial responsibility have not been altered, although misunderstandings have been created over the nature of the constitutional convention. Particularly in crises, demarcations between ministers and chief executives become unrealistic, with reforms and societal shifts furthering this momentum. These risks must not be minimised nor maximised. As these trends serve as fodder for those within the political realm without a large reaction from constituents, I conclude that current trends will continue without any reduction in intensity for the foreseeable future, even as constitutional relationships and accountability lines evolve.