Westminster and the Xiezhi: An Integrity Branch?
6/6/2022
Unlike the original Westminister tradition, the Chinese Imperial Civil Service had a set of dress codes for officials: a way, so to speak, to distinguish the different classes and ranks within each class.
Each rank had its own belts, hats and trim. The top rank had two stately cranes soaring above clouds, and the lowest rank had a pair of earth-bound quails pecking the grass. The military ranks tended to rely on tigers, bears and the like.
According to Huang (1981) and Hucker (1966), the censorial officials—those who supervised the integrity of the government mechanisms —had a simple uniform, identical for all members, regardless of rank, that displayed the Xiezhi on the right-hand side over the heart. Those who know Chinese scholarship will know that the Xiezhi could detect good from evil through their sense of smell – and would act ferociously when it decided something immoral had occurred.
The Xiezhi—or censorial system—was organized as a separate branch of government. Its goal was to maintain oversight of all governmental activities. It was charged with enforcing proper behaviour and balancing the inbuilt tensions between judges, policy advisors, budget holders, and central and local officials.
If we use Rhodes’s version of the Westminster model, the Xiezhi would sit outside the system but embrace it.
The success of the imperial tradition as a system of public administration is still seen today, and it is often attributed to the power and vigilance of the Xiezhi.
The question for the Westminster model has always been who oversees how the component parts work in harmony, and in the case of Aotearoa-New Zealand, what happens when executive parts (the accountability of ministers to parliament and the constitutionally independent bureaucracy nested in a non-partisan and expert civil service) become too strong for the other three parts, and relatedly if the institutional cultures and behaviour in the bureaucracy become problematic.
Maybe the questions are: Do we need a xiezhi? Do we need a fourth branch of government? What might an integrity branch look like?
References
Ray Huang, 1587, A Year of No Significance: The Ming Dynasty in Decline, Yale Uni P,
Newhaven (1981) pp53-54.
Charles O Hucker, The Censorial System of Ming China, Stanford Uni P, Stanford,
California (1966) p3.
Disclaimer
These are my evolving thoughts, rhetorical positions and creative provocations. They are not settled conclusions. Content should not be taken as professional advice, official statements or final positions. I reserve the right to learn, unlearn, rethink and grow. If you’re here to sort me neatly into left vs right, keep moving. I’m not the partisan you’re looking for. These in...
Read moreAhakoa he iti kete, he iti nā te a …
Kia ora, and welcome I’m starting a blog. I’m as surprised as you are. This is a place to jot down my evolving thoughts about public administration, policy, and delivery in Aotearoa: beneath the surface and between the relays of elected and unelected officials. It will be about the undercurrents. Not the tired critiques or the glossy promises, but the patterns, tensions, compromises,...
Read moreThe First Four
Before I begin, I want to mihi to Hon Shane Jones. In the House yesterday, he reminded us of the first four rangatira who first stepped into Parliament on behalf of Māori. He did more than recite names: he called us to remember them properly, to see them as political actors who helped shape the country. In 1868, four Māori leaders: Frederick Nene Russell, Wiremu Katene, John Patterson, an...
Read moreGetting Regulation Right: Being Res …
Regulation often gets a mixed reputation. Some see it as unnecessary red tape, slowing things down and making life harder for businesses and communities. Others worry that it's too weak and fails to properly protect people and the environment. What both views have in common is frustration with regulation that seems disconnected from the real world. But good regulation doesn't have...
Read moreWas I Too Quick to Judge the Nine Q …
I was pretty critical of the last government for refusing to name outcome areas or set any shared targets for the public management system. They didn’t want to be pinned down. They said it was about flexibility and complexity, but in practice, it made it hard to know what mattered, who was responsible, or what success even looked like. And most importantly, in today’s always-on political e...
Read more