Thank you.
O'Brien and Bosc states on pages 32 to 33:
Responsible government has long been considered an essential element of government based on the Westminster model. Despite its wide acceptance as being a cornerstone of the Canadian system of government, there are many different meanings attached to the term “responsible government”. In a general sense, responsible government means that a government must be responsive to its citizens, that it must operate responsibly...and that its Ministers must be accountable or responsible to Parliament....
In terms of ministerial responsibility, Ministers have both individual and collective responsibilities to Parliament.... The principle of an individual ministerial responsibility holds that Ministers are accountable not only for their own actions as department heads, but also for the actions of their subordinates....
This principle is further upheld on page 139 of the second Gomery report, which was entitled Restoring Accountability – Recommendations, wherein Judge Gomery states and I quote, “...Ministers need to understand clearly that they are accountable, responsible and answerable for all the actions of their exempt staff”.
It's interesting that Judge Gomery did not simply refer to ministerial accountability there in reference to the actions of exempt staff. He took pains to list the three forms of ministerial responsibility—accountability, responsibility, and answerability—the last one being the most important.
Opposition members have argued that you could have a political staff member, who is ultimately responsible to a minister, come here to this committee to be answerable to Parliament. In fact, Judge Gomery clearly indicates that is not a proper definition of the powers of a committee, when he says ministers are answerable for the actions of their exempt staff.
These principles are longstanding in our system. In fact you are a scholar of parliamentary tradition. When did the concept of ministerial responsibility develop?