INTRODUCTION:

Acceptance of governmental authority is referred to as legitimacy. This vote of confidence in the

administration demonstrates the ruling party's ability to carry out its responsibilities honestly and
consistently make the right judgements.However, the government occasionally makes mistakes in
judgement and fails to carry out its responsibilities.The public is outraged and distrustful of the
government as a result of this.This leads to accountability, which allows us to ensure that the
government is carrying out its responsibilities correctly.Accountability needs both the Government's
reaction and parliamentary questions.If the administration does not respond to the questions, they face
a vote of no confidence and must resign.

Accountability leads to:1:Checks in balances of powers.:Upholding constitutionalism.Increase in Public’s

trust.:Increase legitimacy of the Government.:Aim of limitation is achieved.

2-The role of Monarch:-

The Queen's authority is currently severely restricted. Because of its lack of administrative power, the
Crown is rarely held accountable for anything. In practise, however, she is only allowed to do so if she is
the leader of the winning party in the elections and can command and lead the House of Commons. One
of the Queen's rights is the ability to choose any minister as Prime Minister in the House of Commons
(HOC). In actuality, the Prime Minister is chosen by Parliament through a vote of confidence.The Prime
Minister is answerable to the Crown because the Queen appoints him or her.Every week, the prime
minister hosts the queen .important and ceremonial questions are not asked

3-The Role of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet:

The prime minister is responsible for selecting cabinet members and assigning them to tasks and
agencies that best suit them. The Queen must also receive "advice" from the Prime Minister, which she
cannot dismiss or ignore. The Prime Minister is also required to respond to questions from opposition
party members in Parliament in order to learn from the Prime Minister's mistakes and make him or her
aware of them. The Prime Minister selects the senior members of the House of Commons (HOC) and
House of Lords (HOL) who comprise the Cabinet.The Cabinet takes decisions on parliamentary
legislation. There is periodically a power struggle between the cabinet and the prime minister, which
generates a schism or disagreement between the two.As a result of this schism, it becomes difficult to
form a good administration. When both political parties fall short of securing a majority of votes during a
coalition, both parties must admit that cooperation is required to achieve a well-run administration.
Both leaders currently have the right to appoint their own Cabinet ministers. This was demonstrated by
the collaboration between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats (2010-2015), in which each
Party chose its own Cabinet members.
4-Collective Ministerial Accountability:

•The Cabinet is held together by the collective ministerial accountability convention, which is based on
three main concepts. 1:Unanimity, which Cabinet members must strive for and must have their full
support. Cabinet ministers must pay attention to the government's remarks about the decisions they
intend to make on a variety of issues. If a minister refuses to work with the government or refuses to
listen to what it has to say, he or she will be forced to resign. Tony Blair's decision to send troops to
invade Iraq in order to start a war was one of several ministers that resigned over the years because
they refused to comply with the administration..Robin Cook, a cabinet minister, resigned because she
did not want to be a part of this government decision. •However, this is not always the case. When the
majority of ministers oppose the government's action or decision, you may not be required to support it.
As a result, the decision of the majority, rather than the government, will be implemented.

•Conflicts over economic reform in 1910 and the EU's continued membership in 1975 serve as examples
of how the majority decision is always made. 2:Confidentiality:-The ministers must maintain the
confidentiality of any information discussed during the discussion unless otherwise stated. This is
demonstrated by the AG v. Jonathan Cape case, in which the heirs of Richard Crossman requested
permission to make public information on the topics discussed in meetings. The solicitor general
declined the request and even requested a restraining order, which was ultimately overturned, because
the confidentiality concept is not regarded as a legal duty.

3:Confidence:

The outcome of the government's term is determined by a vote of confidence or a vote of no

confidence. The ministers must support the government in their vote. The government is officially
confirmed after gaining a vote of confidence from the ministers. If not, there will be a vote of no
confidence, at which time the administration will have to step down. The Prime Minister's Government
has occasionally been forced to resign as a result of a vote of no confidence. Take Prime Minister
Callaghan as an example. His government was ousted when he failed to gain the support of the
Parliament.

5. Ministers' Accountability to the Parliament:

Each minister will be responsible for their own actions even though they are all part of the same
Cabinet. This is due to the size and scope of the government, which prompted the creation of numerous
departments to handle various aspects of it. However, these divisions require a manager who can direct
them and delegate tasks to them. To guarantee that each ministry is effectively led in its function, the
prime minister selects particular ministers for particular ministries. To hold ministers liable to the
Parliament, the "Individual Ministerial Responsibility" (IMR) convention was devised.
The competent minister must respond to questions submitted by the Parliament.There had been no
penalties in the past when the minister refused to answer the questions.Because the IMR is a
convention rather than legislation, the minister will face no criticism for it.Similarly, former British Prime
Minister Tony Blair refused to answer questions on the Iraq War.

Nonetheless, this convention is already showing signs of progress, thanks to the media's assistance in
establishing accountability through its impact on public awareness. Ministers are now more keen to
answer questions in order to decrease public pressure on the prime minister and other members of his
government. If the minister admits their mistakes and wrongdoings, they will not be forced to resign
right away; instead, they will be given time to find solutions. If they are unable to resolve the issues, the
Prime Minister or Parliament will call for their resignation.. •Three key criteria influence how
responsible ministers are:1: When the Civil Servants department makes a mistake, the minister who
served as the department's head is held accountable. When the department has disclosed several
financial irregularities (corruption), the phrase "financial irregularity" is used. 3. Personal misconduct
refers to a minister's completely reprehensible behaviour. Many ministers have left the church as a
result of this convention over the years. Liam Fox is an excellent example since he invited untrustworthy
individuals personal advisors into confidential discussions. Stephen Byers is also failing in his trade
business area.

-Civil Servants: •Because they have little control over the Civil Servants who work for their ministries,
the Ministers do not accept responsibility for their mistakes. Given the realities of the circumstance, an
immediate response was needed. To react to questions and address this issue, the civil servants were
kindly invited to the Parliament and the parliamentary committees. They will only be questioned
regarding the minister in accordance with "The Osmotherly Rules."

7 More methods to be accountable

•If one technique of performing accountability cannot be employed for any reason, there are several
other options.Among them are parliamentary committees, Accountability is postponed and held in the
"Parliamentary Committee" if opposing interests of the ruling and opposition political parties prohibit it
from taking place during parliamentary sessions. Backbenchers from Parliament are invited, as are a
smaller or equal number of delegates from the government and opposition parties. In this method,
accountability is held in a more courteous manner.2: Judicial review, in which the courts are charged
with adequately scrutinising government acts. 3: The Ombudsman's office, which conducts
investigations and reports to Parliament on governmental actions. They also offer responses.

4: The Freedom of Information Act of 2000, which makes public accountability data available.

5: PMQs, in which members of the opposition party and Parliament question the prime minister about
the state of the government.They take place once a week.
Conclusion:

•Although if the majority of the accountabilities are carried out according to conventions, all of these
methods of accountability show that UK government accountability has strengthened over time.