Insights into the psychological interface between public servants and Ministers

by Chandra Wickramasinghe

The writer would at the outset wish to provide a brief historical backdrop which would enable the reader to have a clear understanding of the dynamics of the relationship and the manner in which it has evolved over the past several decades.

During the colonial period, when the island was a part of the straddling British empire, the administrative apparatus was modelled on the one that obtained in the mother country. The interaction between the officials in the higher echelons of the administrative hierarchy and the centre, was facilitated by virtue of the majority of these higher level officials being Britishers and the relationship being informal and easy though overtly rigidly structured and formalized.

Local social elite

The few Ceylonese high ranking officials were drawn from the "Europeanized" local social elite who were for the most part discharging their duties in the characteristically obsequious manner of "rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's", with exceptionable alacrity.

The total population of the island being relatively small and the socio-economic structure being geared to meet the well defined goals and objectives of the British Empire, the entire structure of government worked with predictable efficiency to the smug satisfaction of the colonial masters.

With independence and at least during the first few years following independence, no radical changes were seen in the structures of the administrative system as the local political elite who had donned the ruler's mantle was quite content to continue governing the country in the same old haute politique, cavalier style, as long as they possibly could manage doing so, in the face of the increasing tide of popular expectations, which found enthusiastic expression in the periodically held hustings.

Veritable watershed

They were mostly gentlemen of means and leisure who took to politics out of a sense of obligation and high altruism, often ending up impoverished for all their pains. Many among them, were feelingly patriotic and selfless, in stark contrast to their present day self-seeking, self-centred and insufferably overbearing counterparts.

1956 indeed, marked a veritable watershed in the social, political and economic history of this country. The new government that was swept to power had the full backing of the rural masses, urban workers and the restive middle class, which clamoured for radical changes to be effected in the entire governmental structure, paving the way for the severe erosion of the power bases of the powerful social elite. There was a new awakening of the ordinary masses to the consciousness of the power that inhered in them to change their rulers at voting time.

The years that followed, witnessed sweeping changes in the positioning of the administrative bureaucracy vis-a-vis the ruling politicians. Many politicians came to be increasingly drawn from different strata of society and comprised a heterogeneous lot. In fact, at the beginning some of the Members of Parliament were quite unused to the new political environment and were at time befuddled by the new public recognition, authority and perks of office that were suddenly thrust upon them.

A social and political milieu which was quite alien to them, made a few behave somewhat indecorously and at times even outrageously, much to the embarrassment of even their own party members and the amusement of others.

Parallel change

There was a parallel change that was easily discernible in the formal administrative structures as well, where the benefits of free education threw open the doors of university education, opening up new vistas to talented children from rural and less privileged backgrounds. These changes were inevitable and even necessary.

What was however lacking, was the wisdom of foresight and the prudence of political management which would have ensured a more tempered approach and given the right directional shifts to national policy, in the larger interests of the country, in the longer term.

In this respect, it must be said that India acted with admirable practical wisdom and despite the popular and importunate sectarian demands made on highly charged political, religious and social issues, struck out boldly and determinedly on a path of intense pragmatism which has borne fruit in the remarkable economic and political stability that country enjoys today.

Distressing trend

A distressing trend observed in the mid-nineteen seventies and thereafter is the lack of knowledge, competence and initiative shown by the majority of the officers who came increasingly to man the higher echelons of Ministries and Departments.

This could primarily be sourced to decisions made earlier on, on crucial national policy issues, sorely lacking in foresight and made often for short-term political gain. In this respect, a fatally flawed educational system tops the list.

Education, which was free, was consciously geared to meet the social demand leading to countless graduates being churned out of universities, lacking in the required skills, knowledge and breadth vision to effectively man positions of responsibility and authority in the administrative system.

They cannot of course be faulted as they were merely the unfortunate victims of a skewed national educational system which successive governments merely tinkered with, shying away from confronting the core issues, lacking in courage to boldly formulate a national policy consonant with present day economic realities.

Pragmatic approach

One sees on the other hand, a laudable and refreshing change in the pragmatic approach of the present Government to the full range of educational policies, by giving them a practical orientation, equipping students with marketable skills along with a sound and broad based knowledge to make them useful and responsible citizens.

These fresh approaches and initiatives may not expectedly, find favour with a few vociferous extremist elements who feel threatened by the deep inroads into their power enclaves such new policies are bound to make over time.

One despairs at the lethargy, bordering on indifference, that seems to pervade the entire system of public administration in the country today. The hiatus of competence observed at practically all levels, could only be attributed to certain fundamental shortcomings in the processes of recruitment, training, promotion and the absence of constant in-service skills development programmes.

Although many young administrators are intelligent and clever, their lack of communication skills and analytical ability are indeed a paralyzing drawback to the development of their full potential.

The current programmes of induction training and in-service management development, are often badly structured and inadequate to match-up to the rigours and the demands of the high level positions they come to hold. Exposure to intensive communication skills development and well structured management development programmes, both here and abroad, seems possible short term remedial measures one could think of.

Discipline low

Discipline in the public service today, is at a pathetically a low ebb and would reflect only the rank indiscipline in the society at large. One fervently hopes that the Administrative Reforms Committee would address these issues and boldly recommend policy changes which would not only arrest these declining trends but would further pave the way to turning things around and saving the public the exasperating delays, stemming from lethargy and downright inefficiency and the indignities and the discourtesies, they are made to suffer in their day to day transactions of official business.

These deteriorating trends have been even more conspicuous in the country's political system particulary after 1978 with the introduction of the sweeping constitutional changes which brought in the P.R. system, replacing the time tested Westminster model of electoral representation under which latter system, constituents of an electorate were able to elect their own representative to Parliament.

The P.R. system paved the way for a new political autocracy with a generous sprinkling of the new rich, many with dubious credentials, flaunting wealth and influence and displaying little genuine interest in national issues and even less interest in the people they represent and driven by an overweening desire to aggrandise personal wealth and power.

Many politicians undergo a veritable "sea change" once they enter Parliament. They quickly acquire a new set of values hitherto alien to them, which equip them to skilfully dodge or skirt round the burning issues of the day.

They further distance themselves, from the people by cultivating a hauteur and arrogance which they feel would effectively keep the "hoi polloi" at bay. Disengenuity and duplicity become a part of their political therapy. Ironically, the people themselves are not unhappy to be deluded and seduced by the extravagant promises held out before elections.

They do indeed deserve the government they get!. Politicians have now become a set of self-seeking individuals, who in the scathing words of the Bard, "play such fantastic tricks before high heaven, as make angels weep".

Wealth is being increasingly looked upon nowadays, as a necessary prerequisite to the acquisition of political power. These almost compulsive predispositions are being re-inforced by the P.R. system. It is said that an aspirant requires nowadays, around Rs. 30-40 million to contest a Parliamentary seat successfully.

The President herself so inobliquely and tellingly said the other day that some M.PP. come to Parliament to make money. How very true. Their unbridled propensities to acquire wealth are indeed truly astounding. I believe they have to make money to redeem the debts they incurred fighting the election. Then again, they have to recoup enough to contest the next election and stash away sufficient wealth to keep the family fires "roaring" in case they suffer defeat at the hustings.

There are of course the exceptions; politicians of dignity, candour and probity. But these are few and far between. A via media may be sought in future constitutional changes, that would incorporate an admixture of the Westminster system and the P.R. system which would portend a healthier and a more democratically representative approach to the entire electoral process.

(To be continued)