Free from political puissance

Though 'bureaucratization' is an epithet, bureaucracy actually is the most scientific organization of governance in the world. Hierarchy of authority, salaried careers, impersonal nature of jobs, and written rules — the characteristics of Weber's bureaucracy — distinguish a government institution from a corporate entity. Efficiency, responsibility and accountability are supposed to be the basic characteristics of work culture in bureaucracy necessary for 'good governance'. But sadly, the traditional socio cultural institutions in third-world countries, seem to have surreptitiously customised bureaucracy, as irresponsibility, and inefficiency, not to mention corruption have sneaked into the work culture. Frustration often greets citizens in availing of even simple public services like clean water, power, roads, drainage or benefits of schemes such as subsidised ration, health insurance, and social security; so much so that a common man prefers approaching the nearest politician to a government functionary to get his work done faster.

It is reported that over 20 lakh applications were received on the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) in 2020, as against 18,67,758 in 2019 and 15,86,415 in 2018. Over 60 lakh complaints were from states and UTs between 2020 and 2022. It was commendable that the government successfully launched a dedicated portal for 'Special Campaign' on the disposal of pendency from October 2 to October 31 last year. However, the digital divide in the country doesn't provide equal opportunity for all people to seek relief through proper channels, especially when more than 50 per cent of the population is either semi literate or illiterate. Crowds with grievances swarming around the District Collector's office is a common sight in all states. Though the content and the relief prayed for may differ, the most common in all of the grievances is either inaction or incompetence or corruption in delivery agencies. It points to the deeply entrenched unprofessional and degenerative work culture in the system that generates more grievances than it solves. Though many states have periodic mass contact and grievance redressal campaigns on the field, in reality, mostly the applicants are disposed of rather than their applications.

The recommendations of the second Administrative Reforms Committee (ARC, 2005) namely, Right to information, ethics in governance, promotion of e-governance and citizen-centric administration marked the beginning of envisioning a citizen-friendly work culture in government delivery mechanism. Identification and repeal of archaic Acts and rules and the use of information and communication technology were emphasised as means to ensure citizen-friendly work culture. No doubt, today thanks to RTI, increased use of IT, media coverage and judicial activism, considerable improvement in work culture is visible. However, much is still left to be desired as a large number of complaints on delays in disposals, denial of benefits of schemes, malpractices, and corruption are common across all states.

One of the main problems in government machinery is the absence of team spirit since the hierarchy of authority is conveniently misconstrued by officers as a reward for status and glory for life. Delegation down the ladder, aversion to participatory decision-making, passing the buck and blame games dilute responsibility and destroy the spirit of duty. A multi-layered power hierarchy with duplication of work shrouds individual accountability. For lower-level functionaries, by and large, work means mere presence in the office from 10 to 5, no matter what the output is. Files pile up unattended for months unless the controlling superior strongarms the concerned staff. Public holidays which account for almost a quarter of total working days in a calendar year on account of dozens of festivals and regular weekends the employees are entitled to, not to mention long tea breaks and lunch breaks during work days, make matters worse by breaking the momentum of disposals. Strategic sudden strikes by Unions just before the polls paralyse the entire system for days. Many departments surrender substantial chunks of the budget every year as unspent. Job security, routine pay hikes irrespective of performance and, vocal trade unions breed a sense of indispensability in public servants. Moreover, Section 197 of CrPC which shields a public servant against persecution for acts done in the discharge of 'official duty' is a security cover. On the other side of the fence, an employee of the corporate sector works day in and day out to deserve a hike in pay or position and, all the same can be given a golden handshake anytime. Of course, comparing public service with corporate work is no better than comparing apples and oranges; yet professionalism and accountability distinguish the latter from the former. No wonder, outsourcing private professional services has become a practice today in the government.

The blurring of the line between the Executive and the Legislature has by and large weakened, if not demolished, the institutions at the grassroots level. Lawmakers and politicians irrespective of party identities regularly pressurise the functionaries in the machinery to 'deliver' irrespective of rule position. Failure to humour them often leads to unpleasant consequences including transfers of officials which naturally affects the work culture. Being a public good-oriented organisation, bureaucracy, of course, cannot remain immune to political influences. But there is a difference between the developed countries and the third world in this regard.

In developed countries, bureaucracy and political leadership have an interdependent and complementary relationship. In France, higher-level bureaucrats help to shape political events and determine political outcomes - the 'technocracy'. A large number of elected representatives to the French National Assembly have a bureaucratic background. In the United States, around 3,000 appointments on higher and lower levels of government are political, including judges and ambassadors. It is a strange complex relationship between politicians and government servants with separated institutions sharing powers and functions with politics and administration. In the British Whitehall model of bureaucracy, the politicians depend on bureaucrats both for policy advice and for the implementation of the policies, a close partnership akin to India. In Germany, bureaucrats have personal responsibility for the common public interest; there exists a distinction between political leadership and the administration which is an overlap in the UK. Western nations have strong bureaucracies, and political leadership prefers 'responsive competence' to 'neutral competence' in bureaucrats for obvious reasons. However, it is 'political intervention' on principles rather than 24/7 'political interference' driven by politics of identity — a curse in developing countries. The former is positive and essential in a democracy to push forward the agenda of development whereas the latter eats into the very vitals of work culture. It is high time political leaders appreciate the distinction and sensitize their ranks accordingly.

Good governance is impossible without improving the work culture. Empowering citizens and ensuring greater transparency have to be flagship programs to reduce the gap between citizens and administrative entities. Constant monitoring of the performance and dialogue with trade Unions will gradually usher in citizen-centric administration. The superiors need to act as trendsetters to ensure competition and professionalism in the subordinates. The New Public Management (NPM) in Australia and New Zealand is a business model of governance where public services delivery like water, power, health, transport, construction activity etc are managed through a partnership with private companies rationing the role of the bureaucracy to mere policy making and monitoring. Though an innovative experiment, it should not however be confused with privatisation or asset monetisation. Of course, overnight radical changes are impractical in countries like India with monumental state machinery in place. Nevertheless, improvement is always possible through trial and error.

The writer is a former Addl. Chief Secretary of Chhattisgarh. Views expressed are personal