The former federal health minister was hip-deep in laudatory press clippings after her letter, offering to share responsibility with department officials should the commission find them at fault in the tainted blood scandal, unaccountably fell into the hands of the news media. Coming as it did just as the nation's television screens were filled with the sight of General Jean Boyle, in testimony before the Létourneau inquiry, blaming his subordinates for the endless parade of petty deceptions that have characterized the military's handling of the Somalia affair, Ms. Begin's "act of courage" seemed a rare example of moral clarity in public life.

Mind you, she didn't quite accept †responsibility for the disastrous mishandling of the nation's blood supply during her time as minister in the early 1980s -- indeed, she described as "blameless" the three senior bureaucrats Mr. Justice Horace Krever has named among those he may find responsible, along with "my department in general." She only said that if they were found culpable, so should she.

And while commission lawyers had announced last May that she would not be among those cited in its final report, it was not until late August, three months later, that Ms. Bégin found the courage to write to Judge Krever.

What was she doing until then? Losing a lot of sleep, she told an interviewer. Reading up on ministerial responsibility. And, of course, visiting her ethicist. Only then did the woman who spent seven years as a minister of the crown decide, as she put it in the letter, †that "the notion of 'ministerial responsibility' is the cornerstone of our executive government." Still, she did it. Now if only †she could share this wisdom with some of her Liberal colleagues, starting with David Collenette. The present Minister of National Defence can hardly be held to account for the crime that is ostensibly the subject of the Létourneau inquiry, the murder of a Somali national by members of the now-disbanded Canadian Airborne Regiment, which occurred while he was still in opposition. But since then the affair has broadened, as it became clear that the Airborne's extra-curricular activities were made possible by a military culture steeped in secrecy, paranoia and hostility to the civilian power, a culture that plainly flourishes to this day.

Mr. Collenette has been Minister for three years now. It was his task, as Minister, to get at the rot in National Defence. It was he who promoted Gen.

Boyle, last December, to the job of Chief of Defence Staff, with the mandate to clean house, a task in which he has proven singularly inadequate. And all the while that the doleful Gen. Boyle, looking for all the world like a dog who's been sick on the couch, has been disavowing responsibility before the inquiry and the nation, it has been Mr. Collenette who has been backing him up. Indeed, the general had not yet finished testifying before the Minister had declared he was "doing a good job" and would continue.

Thus is the buck passed, up and down the chain of command. Gen. Boyle did not know what his underlings were up to; they lacked integrity, kept him in the dark; he cannot be held at fault. After all, the general protested, if senior officers were forced to resign every time someone made a mistake, then where would we be? And if the general is blameless, as Mr. Collenette is so quick to insist, then how are we to blame his boss?

This is exactly why ministerial responsibility was invented. It was to take away from ministers the excuse of ignorance. It was to deny to them or their subordinates the strategy of "deniability," the practice of not telling those above you what you are up to -- in their own best interests -- a habit that starts at the top and soon spreads throughout the bureaucracy. Of course a minister cannot be expected to know what every single member of his department is up to at every moment of the day. But if he knows he will pay with his job for their misdeeds, he can be expected to take a much closer interest in their affairs than otherwise.

This isn't just a moral imperative. It is the vital democratic check on the institutions of government. It is the elected minister, not his staff, not even his generals, who must ultimately bear that responsibility, if responsible government is to mean anything. If he cannot perform that task, he should resign.