I think it is worthwhile remembering the Crichel Down affair instead of indulging in tautological blogs. These are the facts as gleaned from internet sources.

On July 28, 1954, Sir Thomas Dugadale, then UK minister of agriculture and fisheries, resigned from office after a public inquiry was very critical of official procedures and practices.

Sir Thomas – who said he had nothing to do with the original decisions – nevertheless assumed responsibility and quit. He told Parliament: “I, as minister, must accept full responsibility for any mistakes and inefficiency of officials in my department just as, when my officials bring off any successes on my behalf, I take full credit for them.”

His resignation was seen as a courageous and selfless expos-ition of the doctrine of minister- ial accountability.

In the history of modern parliaments, the Crichel Down affair takes on momentous significance and has been described as a ‘political bombshell’.

The public inquiry into the Crichel Down events revealed a catalogue of ineptitude and maladministration. While, the underlying case was, in the scale of things, trivial, it is regarded as one of the key events leading to the creation of the post of Ombudsman.

Crichel Down was probably the first instance of close and very public scrutiny being directed in the UK at a minister of the Crown in the execution of his duties.

Dugdle’s resignation went down in history as an honourable, even heroic, one: a minister taking responsibility for civil servants’ actions, which would lead to the perceived code of individual ministerial responsibility. However, in papers released 30 years after the affair, it was found that Dugdale had known and approved of his civil servants’ actions and had, to an extent, passed the buck to them himself.

It was also found that the inquiry was inaccurate and biased, led by a former Conservative candidate who was very against civil servants and State interference.