92. Integrity of decision making is at the heart of integrity
The importance of integrity and the criteria for integrity are based on the core activity of SPs and the organizations they work for, which is decision making. If decisions are not taken with integrity, then the decision-making process, the SP, and the organization are defective. SPs should therefore avoid any infringement of integrity of decision making, such as corruption, fraud, leaks of confidential information, and inappropriate intervention.
The question of why integrity is important and what integrity criteria are based on can be answered by thinking of the core activity of an organization.The core activity of an organization, institution, party, administration, or council is decision making. Such organizations are in essence mechanisms for making decisions on distribution of power, what is good and right, and how best to use resources.
If decision making is the core activity of an organization, then integrity of decision making is at the heart of the integrity of the organization. If decisions are made without integrity, then decision making is not sound, optimal, or functional; instead it becomes improper, imbalanced, unacceptable, and irresponsible. In such cases the power to make decisions is not applied well.
A great deal of activity that is seen as lacking integrity can be explained by the way in which it infringes the integrity of decision making. For example, corruption lacks integrity because less good decisions are taken in exchange for bribes. Intimidation and blackmail lack integrity, because people are put under pressure to make decisions they otherwise would not make. Conflicts of interests lack integrity because decisions are influenced by the different interests, or at least appear so. Consciously ignoring relevant information shows a lack of integrity, because this means the best decision will not be taken. Fraud lacks integrity because a false impression is given, leading to damage to the quality of decision making by others, or in the case of vote rigging to corruption. This is why integrity of elections is so important and why, according to Hillary Clinton, SPs have a moral obligation to ensure integrity of elections.529
Leaking information can also be seen as an indication of a lack of integrity. When information is leaked decision making procedures are undermined. One minister commented, “There are also ‘leaks’ regarding cabinet consultations. The deliberations of cabinet are confidential for good reasons. This protects internal consultation. Internal consultation needs to be frank and free, without being exposed to publicity; open and candid, but not public. Democracy is about direct and public consultation between ministers and parliament. Untimely publication of unpolished and incomplete policy resolutions frustrates consultation with parliament. […] Leaking confidential information is destructive to the quality of government and democratic rules.” Even leaking inaccurate information can indicate a lack of integrity, for instance if the aim is to damage someone.
Another form of inappropriate behavior that harms integrity in decision making is inappropriate intervention. A party chair once asked two party members on a parliamentary investigative committee to gain advance insight into a report by the committee in order to put pressure on a minister in his party to soften a judgment. One of the committee members responded resolutely, “If you are part of a investigation committee, you keep quiet to your wife, your dog, and the party chair.”530 A governor was even voted the most corrupt governor of the year in the US for inappropriate interference in decision making with respect to the state collective bargaining board.531 SPs in high positions can find it particularly difficult to avoid getting mixed up in the decision making of others in areas where they have no authority. For example, it appears that Tony Blair received many letters from Prince Charles on politically sensitive issues, much to his displeasure. Charles also became emphatically involved in public debates on topics such as fox hunting and genetically modified food. Blair felt that the crown prince was overstepping constitutional boundaries in doing so. According to Blair’s press secretary at the time, Blair was so irritated by this that he even accused the prince of “screwing us”.532
In short, in determining integrity, we can take an organization’s decision making as a starting point and from this we can infer when its integrity is in doubt, damaged, or undermined.