Are tribunals obsessed with blame?

Zaph0d

I like tribunals. They reveal lots of interesting stuff, they're pricey but they're entertaining.

The thing is, they seem to be structured around identifying culpable parties rather than correcting the root causes of these problems. This is hardly surprising as they are a branch of the justice system, run by judges and barristers, whose business is operating trials, not carrying out investigations or designing fixes. Is there a better way?

Well what would happen is you ran a business and found that a million quid had gone missing? First thing is you'd plug the hole with some stop gap measure to stop the problem getting any worse. Then you'd carry out an investigation to find the root cause of the problem. You'd then change your systems to prevent this problem happening again. You'd make sure the cost of your investigation was kept low in proportion to the cost of the problem itself. Finally you'd see if there was anyone you should sue or pass to the police. But the blame is always an afterthought and less important than fixing the consequences and cause of the problem and learning from the experience.

Now, if you do all this but you neglect to learn from the experience and fix the root cause and then it happens again, someone in management needs to be fired.

I wouldn't suggest that a government should be run like a business but in the case of investigating problems, I think government could learn something from the private sector.

In the case of the corruption tribunals, the only thing anyone seems to care about is whether Ray Burke or Liam Lawlor is going to prison. But what is to be done about the problems they created or to prevent future politicians carrying out the same tricks? How should tribunals be changed?

Don't use judges or barristers?
Set budgets in advance related to the financial size of the problem?
Change the emphasis from investigate and blame to investigate and fix?

What would you do?