Attention Bureaucracy!

[Godoo]

Comment

By Tasneem Noorani

Bureaucracy is like the engine of a car. If it is efficient, effective and in a good state of repair, the car runs fast and does not break down. You can paint the car and polish it and make the exterior look great and gloat over its glamour, but if you do not look after the engine, the car ain’t going anywhere.

That seems to be the state of affairs in Pakistan. Because the bureaucracy, like the engine is under the bonnet and is hidden from sight; there is, therefore, no sense of urgency to look into the issues facing the bureaucracy. Simply because the powers that be are assisted by a few good samples of bureaucracy, they do not seem to notice the catastrophic decline in the quality and morale of the actual bureaucracy in the main body.

It appears that morale and quality of bureaucracy is in a slow nose dive, and because the decline is gradual, there is no urgency in the govt. to address the problem. It is like a plane at 20,000 ft with its nose down. It is only a matter of time before it hits the ground.

Seeing the latest CSS result the other days set me thinking. The boys in the two top slots have opted to join the police. They see physical comfort, power and societal recognition in police, and their decision makes eminent sense personally for them, but they are lost to the country for ultimate superior policy making in education, health, finance etc, functions which require more academic excellence than simply policing. We have devised a system where the best are joining uniformed force, while only the second best will be available for other more important functions of the state. Officers who, tomorrow, will hold the posts of Secretaries of Finance, Education or Health at the federal and provincial levels would be lower in order of merit than officers who will be DIG or IG. Which civilized country of the world follows this approach? Do we want to be the exception to every rule?

While the DMG has been battered into submission and have received more than their share of ‘bureaucracy bashing’, youngmen have not stopped joining it. But perhaps we are not getting the best, which is a worrying thought as these youngmen are the ones who will be trained and given experience to occupy the top slots in the country in due course.

The demoralization in bureaucracy, especially amongst the younger ones, is evident from the fact that a large number of them opt for the NGOs and multilateral agencies, on deputation, rather than stay in the mainstream, because it does not allow them to get the kind of experience at the junior level, that they used to get earlier on. This state of affairs applies to most service groups, as each one is looking for an escape to side jobs, which repose less responsibilities, less humiliations and more financial rewards. In the process the general public, which deals with the mainstream, as always, is the looser.

Even though I have no intention of writing on the devolution system, on which so much has already been written, I am compelled to make one observation and that is that because of the devolution of financial powers and involvement of the top district government management in the release of funds, it appears that the incidence of corruption at the junior bureaucratic level, so rare in the not-too-distant past, is now much more prevalent. This is understandable as most human beings will behave similarly in similar environment. If you have devised a system where the temptation is great and you have not given the pride in service as in the years of yore, there will be a far greater percentage of officers who will fall for the temptation. Loss of a small percentage of funds of the government is a non issue, the worrying factor is that these youngmen will tomorrow be at the nationally responsible policymaking position, along with all their lucrative propensities.

At the Federal Secretariat, matters need urgent attention too. A few years back, for various reasons, which were of prime importance then, recruitment of fresh Section Officers, as part of the Secretariat Group, was stopped. With the result that at least too hundred or so posts of Section Officers, which is the initiating level of all proposals, as well as their examination, have been lying vacant. Only recently the government has decided to hire retired Section Officers to fill the gap. The quality of decision indicates the knee-jerk attitude of the government to bureaucratic issues. What is the long-term decision to tackle this issue, I am not aware of.

While a number of improvements in the system may require resources, political resolutions and a strategic direction (like whether to have an elite service or not), some steps do not require any of these and are still not being done. One such thing is the issue of tenure of office. This pertains to all levels, starting from a patwari in a village to the Federal Secretary. I can say with some certainty that the average tenure ranges from about eight months in the case of patwari/SHO to about fourteen to sixteen months in the case of a Federal Secretary. This encompasses the full range of civil bureaucracy.

Now imagine an SHO trying to control his area, and doing a good job, when all he has is eight months to get to know his area, the crooks and the angles of his charge, in some cases even his legal responsibilities and powers he enjoys. Similarly imagine a Federal Secretary contributing towards his policymaking role when all he has is fourteen to sixteen months to settle down, to tour, to get to know his lower formations, to understand his Minister etc. Resultantly the government servant is left to look over his shoulder, to prevent the next guy replacing him too early and doing the minimum patch work, essential to survive in his job. Has the government done anything to reverse this trend and ensure at least a three year term for everyone, as stipulated in the government Estacode. Fact of the matter is that no one feels responsible for such issues.

There have been service reform commissions and committees; the two that come to mind are the ones headed by Mr. Hamid Nasir Chatha and Mr. Fakhar Zaman. Both took months to deliberate on proposing service reform, while the bureaucracy and the public waited expectantly. In the end, the recommendation were hardly implemented. The ones which were implemented, like reducing the number of tiers in the federal secretariat by abolishing the post of Additional Secretary, were gradually reversed.

There can be no final word on improving the bureaucracy, but unless the govt. lifts the bonnet and takes notice of the urgent repairs required by the ‘engine’, lthe ‘car’ that is Pakistan a’nt going anywhere.

(The writer is a former federal secretary. All sitting and former bureaucrats are welcome to send their views on this article).

[aamerkhattak]

salam dear!
well u have posted some thing which at least i dont agree.
its not like that the ppl in police,DMG or any other group of CIVIL SERVICE is superior than other one.First of all plz correct ur nomenclature here.
as for my experiecnce and knowledge is concernd so i thnk interview marks are given on psychlogical results and if ur suitable for any grp(XYZ) then ur placed according to that.so there z no question of superiority got my point if u have any doubt then u can ask any senior!
coz vn ur selected in css therez diff of few marks b/w topper n last one to b seated in CSA.so how u compare abilities of them........for us its one n same thing.........
for police u must have aptitude n some qualities
for DMG still u must have different qualities and same for accounts and others....so how one can compare and say such things..........
if any one wid qualities of customs dnt have qualities of police or DMG etc then can v say he z not able to perform best in field?????it isznt like that SIR.
now i dont have such time to write in detail........vn i go thro ur complete script will reply in more details.......
thnks for the patience

aamer khattak