Archives

by Lionel Wijesiri

The need to foster and sustain high levels of ethics in our public sector has now come into full focus. There is, almost nationally, a lurking suspicion that some public servants (both members of the public service and their political masters) have been lining their pockets at the public's expense, and calls for the monitoring of assets of senior public sector decision-makers in particular, are now heard. These suspicions are fuelled by scandals with serious moral implications, revealed almost daily.

The pressures on the public service come from varied quarters. Increasing privatisation and the contracting out of traditional government functions; the devolvement of responsibility, including financial responsibility, within public service organisations; greater pressures for openness and more intensive media scrutiny of the public sector; a greater and growing intensity of lobbying by those anxious to capture government business; and an increased willingness on the part of members of the public to complain when the quality of service is poor--all these have contributed to this increase in awareness of the need to take steps to bolster the ethical basis on which the public service functions.

Underpinning concern is an increasing suspicion - frequently with solid evidence to support it that the standards in public life are declining. This suspicion would have stoked up by the change in the way the public views public administration. What was once a purely administrative relationship has been transformed into a commercial one: public administration has come to be viewed as provider of certain goods and services, with the citizens transformed into customers. In so doing, the spotlight has been cast on aspects such as efficiency, products and quality, perhaps diverting attention away from matters less capable of measurement, such as attitudes and convictions. Moreover, public servants live in the real world, and the changing attitudes in our own communities, and the growing ambivalence as to what is, and what is not, acceptable conduct, serves only to make the task of ethics management both more difficult and more necessary.

Ethics-based approach

Ethics are important in any organization, but there are particular reasons why they are especially important in public service. Our Public Service through numerous Acts has statutory power with which it is charged in a variety of ways to respond to the needs of the government and the community.

Public servants must be able to account for the way in which they exercise that power, and to meet the expectation that they will perform their public office in accordance with accepted principles. Within the framework of Sri Lankan Constitution, the principles that are seen as essential to the proper functioning of the public service include party-political impartiality, a fairness in dealings with members of the public in the sense of decisions being based on equitable treatment, and an employment policy that is also based on merit rather than on political patronage or nepotism.

The ethical soundness of those standards and values is especially important because of the position of trust, power and privilege which public servants hold, and the resulting obligation not to breach that trust and not to misuse their power or abuse their privilege. Their obligation to behave ethically flows too from the monopoly they have in the provision of many services. The citizens as claimants of government benefits, for example, cannot obtain those benefits elsewhere if they are unhappy with the standard of service they are receiving. This places an additional responsibility on public servants to be responsive to the needs of the public. Public servants have, in effect, to meet a more demanding challenge with a more far-reaching impact than is the case with most professions.

The trust protected by ethical behaviour is not one that exists just between the public and the public service. It supports the public's confidence in the government and in the democratic process, too. High ethical standards also contribute to the efficiency and effectiveness of the government.

Integrity of the public servant can come under pressure in a variety of ways, not only stemming from straightforward corruption but also, and above all, from an improper use of power. And the "improper use of power" is a broad concept, one that embraces degeneration, decay and erosion of standards of conduct, escalating into fraud and corruption.

US approach

Increased concern about corruption and the decline of confidence in public administration has prompted the present government to review its approach to ethical conduct of the public service. To be effective, over-all responsibility for public ethics development and training must be vested clearly in a particular Department of government. Theoretically, this subject should fall under the purview of the Ministry of Public Administration.

However, in a novel experiment (and in the wake of the Watergate scandal) the United States in 1978 created the Office of Government Ethics (OGE).

The OGE provides policy leadership and direction for the ethics program for the public sector. This system is a decentralised one, with each department having responsibility for the management of its own ethics program. This responsibility rests with the head of each department who, in turn, designates a Designated Agency Ethics Official or "DAEO" who is responsible for the day-to-day management of the ethics program.

The OGE has issued a uniform set of Standards of Ethical Conduct for public servants that apply to all officers and employees. These regulations contain a statement of fourteen general principles that should guide the conduct of Government employees. Central to these principles is the concept that public service is a public trust. Government employees must be impartial in their actions and not use public office for private gain. These regulations also contain specific standards that provide detailed guidance in a number of areas: gifts from outside sources, gifts between employees, conflicting financial interests, impartiality, misuse of position, facing political pressure and outside activities.

The rules are enforced through the normal disciplinary process. The Office has also implemented uniform systems of financial disclosure. These systems are enforced throughout all departments and are subject to periodic review by the OGE.

The OGE maintains a close liaison with the ethics officials through its desk officer system. Each OGE desk officer has portfolio of Ministries and Departments that he or she serves by providing information, advice and programme assistance. The OGE also regularly conducts reviews of Ministries' ethics programmes and makes appropriate recommendations for improvement of financial disclosure systems, counselling and advise, training and other programme matters.

The OGE regularly conducts training workshops for ethics officials both in Washington, DC and in cities throughout the United States. The OGE has established an ethics information centre at its office that makes educational materials available to all departments. It has a newsletter and it holds an annual ethics conference to exchange information and build a strong ethics community. An electronic bulletin board provides an abundance of information to the ethics community in a fast, convenient and direct way.

In recent years a number of other countries have followed the US lead, including Argentina and South Africa.

Monitoring Assets

As suspicions of public officials has grown - fed by revelations of the ways some have looted our countries hard-earned resources or suspicions about the origins of funds for the luxuries they enjoy - so, too, has grown the belief that the assets, incomes and liabilities of public officials ought to be monitored.

Years ago, we have tried to combat public service corruption through our ordinary criminal law, but found it inadequate. Then we made it compulsory for all public servants and all those in public office, including politicians, to make a declaration of assets upon assumption of office and from time to time thereafter to make fresh declarations. Once the declarations were made, they were available to the Attorney General, or to any member of the public on payment of the requisite fee. The question of gifts and hospitality was also controlled.

Sadly, the solution did not work right. Today, the problem is more severe than it was two decades ago. In today's world, however, governments are introducing more meaningful public disclosures. Thailand is a good example. South Africa is a second, which has introduced a scheme for the monitoring of all parliamentarians (including Ministers). There, a compromise has been reached in an effort to meet legitimate claims to privacy. Certain disclosures are made openly and publicly; some are made as to the substance of the interest but the actual value is disclosed privately; and the interests of family members are disclosed, but in confidence. The argument for the last is that members of a parliamentarian's family have a right to privacy, and it should be sufficient for the disclosure to be made on the record, but not on the public record.

Political Influence

There are aspects of a public servant's relationship with a politician that can particularly give rise to situations requiring ethical judgment. Trust is the vital element in the relationship between politician and public servant, and both should avoid damaging that trust by behaviour that does not meet a high ethical standard. It should be possible in that relationship to discuss ethical issues openly.

The people elect governments, and it would be a peculiar perversity if government policies, in many cases endorsed by the Parliament, were nevertheless not implemented because a public servant had a different view about the interests of the people.

Of course, a source of potential difficulty can arise when public servants believe they are being asked to perform a party political role. An essential characteristic of the government servant is its party political neutrality. Clearly, however, public servants should understand that they cannot work in a political vacuum. As a very experienced minister said, "The public service cannot avoid politics any more than fish can avoid the water in which they swim".

It is not proper, however, for public servants either to adopt party political stances - even in defence of the politician - or to refrain from giving frank and honest advice in an attempt to avoid disapproval. The former would diminish the ability of the government servant to serve governments impartially, while the latter, apart from being unhelpful to ministers, would offend against a basic ethical value, which in effect justifies the existence of a career public service.

Justified concern might arise, nevertheless, where a public servant feels under pressure to determine the rights of a case, or to redirect grants or other services in a way that could not be justified under a reasonable interpretation of the legal framework for the program and any established guidelines. The public servants should never be placed in a position where they are asked to take responsibility for a decision, which they do not feel they can defend as being fair, consistent, and in the public interest. That is the politician's responsibility.

In all sensitive situations involving ethical issues, it is essential that public servants, even if their perceptions or understandings are found to be faulty, receive a serious hearing and are in no way discouraged from approaching their superiors when they are concerned.

Restructuring

With the installation of the new government, a concerted programme of administrative restructuring has been embarked upon with the aim of correcting the distortions brought about by the previous regimes and establishing a public service that will efficiently and effectively deliver services and focus on integrated development.

The process of administrative transformation and restructuring is a difficult, complex, time-consuming and costly exercise. Of the many problems, which will undoubtedly be encountered along the way, one is of particular importance. This relates to the availability of resources.

Sri Lanka already spends a relatively high percentage of its GDP on the public service, and the Government has indicated its commitment to bringing this percentage down over time. Only a few additional resources will therefore be available for the transformation process. Careful planning is required to ensure that the rationalisation process leads to increasing efficiency and cost-effectiveness without penalising and reducing services to disadvantaged and deprived communities.

A number of related strategies can be used for this purpose: We can redirect human and other resources away from less desirable programmes and administrative tasks towards service provision for the least resourced areas and groups at national, provincial and local level;

We can introduce new strategic models for financial management to support this process, by refocusing departmental budgets towards the delivery of services to the public and to meeting outputs required;

We must realize efficiency savings from increased productivity and the elimination of duplication and waste;

We must establish innovative partnerships between the departments, local communities and the private sector.

Responsibility

Public servants have a responsibility to upgrade the quality and significance of public service and guard its traditional values. If they fail they will no longer inspire those young people who wish to serve in the public interest. Unfortunately the tarnished image of 'bureaucracy' means that public service is now less likely to be seen as a vocation in which one can do good and serve one's fellow citizens.

A public service, which fails to recognise its distinctive responsibilities, has lost its way. Our public servants must not let that happen.

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager