Should the Secretary of State for Education resign over the exams fiasco? I guess your answer depends upon your view on the doctrine of ministerial responsibility.

Back when I was a mere lad studying at the LSE, the leading case on the subject was only about 12 years old. This was what has become known to historians as the Crichel Down affair. It resulted in the resignation in 1954 of the then Minister of Agriculture following a public inquiry that was critical of his Department over the handling of parcel of land acquired for wartime use, I think for an airfield.

Mr Dugdale resigned, telling Parliament that “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.”

Such resignations, although honourable, are rare, and most Ministers tend to try and tough it out after something has gone wrong that is until their continued occupation of ministerial office becomes such an embarrassment to the government that the Prime minister makes it known that they should quit. Many, of course, don’t survive the next reshuffle.

This is a Prime minister that can be ruthless when he wants to be, as we saw in the run up to last year’s general election. However, I guess there have been so many mistakes this year since the start of the pandemic that any loss of a single cabinet minister might trigger demands for other heads to roll. Perhaps as with the changes to PHE, Ofqual’s days are numbered, and, perhaps, it will be returned to the DfE, much as happened to teacher training a few years ago.

What happens with the GCSE results between now and the weekend, and the cost of any bailout of universities resulting from the fallout of the A level –U-turn may well seal the fate of Mr Williamson.

Following on from the Crichel Down affair, the then Home Secretary, Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, suggested that ministers should not be held responsible for actions that they did not know about or of which they disapproved. However, they still needed to tell parliament what has happened, so that the legislature can discussed with full knowledge of the facts. I expect the Education Select Committee to hold a hearing sooner rather than later. At present, all we have is trial by media.

Ought the Secretary of State have known about the consequences of a policy of preventing grade inflation when there were no examinations to mark? Is knowing in principle, but not asking about the consequences a defence? The court of public opinion seems to think not. If it became clear that a minister had been briefed of the consequences, resignation would seem inevitable.

More likely we will lurch towards the beginning of September with the hope that re-opening of schools would be another disaster. If it is, then surely changes will be necessary.

Since writing this post, the Head of the Qualifications Agency has departed, as has the Permanent Secretary at the DfE. This is the highest civil service post in the DfE. By early evening on the 28th August no Minister has resigned.