The civil service is constantly being reformed, but government is not improving. The one thing that is not being done is to address the relationship between civil servants and ministers. This issue has been addressed in New Zealand where ministers and civil servants both report to parliament, but have separate and defined responsibilities. A similar system has been proposed in a report published in 2006 by the Institute of Public Policy Research entitled 'Whitehall's Black Box'.

Such a change is unlikely to happen here, unless the government has sufficient incentive to make it happen. Parliamentary pressure would be required.

If the New Zealand solution is felt to be too elaborate, then parliament should at least ensure that someone is held to account for failures of government. For example:

• If a serious failure is judged to have arisen as a result of an explicit instruction from a minister, the committee concerned should recommend that the minister be sacked, even if he or she has moved on in the interim. The House should vote on that recommendation.
• If the failure is due to civil servants following what they believe to be the minister's wishes, but without obtaining an explicit instruction, then they should be held responsible. In serious case the Prime Minister as ultimate head of the civil service should be required to ensure that the individuals concerned are identified and disciplined.
• If the failure is due to inadequate resources, then the committee's first job is to ascertain whether the consequences of denial of resources were spelt out to the relevant politician.