Bureaucrats’ Ability and Accountability
Government should consider the formation of public vigilance committees, states Prabhakar Kulkarni
The Union and state governments are appointing bureaucrats to head all government departments as well as semi-government organizations. They are expected to work efficiently in order to implement various development programmes, for which funds are allotted by the respective governments. Whether they are working successfully and up to the government’s expectations should to be monitored periodically in order to assess their ability and accountability. This is necessary, as the bureaucrats have been given perks and other facilities, and discretionary powers which must be judiciously used by him, since all this is in the interest of the public.
The need to monitor bureaucrats’ accountability has already been felt by the Union governments and state governments have been asked to follow the required process. But no active efforts seems to have been made. Hitherto, both the appointments and evaluations of their work progress were either overlooked or carried out arbitrarily without proper and critical consideration. This could be because of political convenience rather than ability criterion might have been given priority while appointing bureaucrats as heads of various government departments and semi-government bodies. This is not expected by the policy makers. And, instead of political convenience, ability and proven track record should be considered while selecting bureaucrats.
Bureaucrats have a good academic record. Their career graph reads according to the requirements of various cadres that each one enters according to their academic qualifications. But their actual work experience is more important than mere academic distinction. They head all government departments, semi-government organizations as well as municipal corporations as Commissioners. They are given certain official powers so that they need not wait for government sanction at every stage of development. But as heads of departments or commissioners, their activities are not always considered satisfactory. Their lacuna in working style or in the decision making process comes to the surface when people or social organizations or political parties resort to agitations. These agitations are either suppressed by police action or sidetracked by verbal assurances which are seldom followed by positive decisions or actions. This is the scenario witnessed periodically at almost all government departments and semi-government organizations.
In fact, proper care should be taken while appointing bureaucrats as heads of departments and semi government organizations. Their track record and field of expertise should be first assessed to know about their work experience and ethics, and only then should they be assigned new positions or promoted. This is because without ability and expertise in the concerned field or department they may not feel quite in tune with their work within the department. Even the choice can be given to them if they accept the responsibility to carry out it quite efficiently and to the satisfaction of both the political bosses as also people for whom they are working.
As heads of government department they should periodically assess working of their subordinate officials and employees at all levels so that there need not be any lacuna in working at various levels of the administration. Even public complaints for delay and corruption at the lower level of the administration should be viewed seriously by them as heads of departments and they should keep constant vigil for nipping corrupt practices in the bud. The practice so far seems to be to hold the concerned officials or employees at the lower level responsible for their disservice and to take action as and when complaints come of the surface either by public commotion or news stories ventilated through electronic and print media. The fact that complaints reach the media indicates that there is no internal vigilance and bureaucrats as chief of the departments are not active enough to see what is happening within their offices. Public complaints are increasing day by day and almost all government departments and semi-government organizations are being exposed.
It is not merely the bureaucrats heading the departments but also the secretaries of the concerned departments seated in the state Mantralaya are expected to take note of what is going on in their departments at the regional and district levels. At present there is no such system to keep vigilance from the secretariat level. This is because whatever appears in the newspapers or is projected on the electronic channels is either not seen by the concerned secretaries or overlooked on the pretext that the matter can be considered as and when they are approached about the same . This is obviously not the correct way of managing the departments. To be responsive to grievances is the only way to be vigilant in time and to curb whatever lacunas are projected by the media. There is a system to inform the state secretariats about reports against government departments through the state information department. But while the department does accordingly, the relevant newspaper cuttings are either overlooked or neglected by the concerned secretaries.
The state governments want targets to be fixed and to evaluate the actual implementation by assessing their performance annually. In order to be responsive to the government’s expectations, bureaucrats must carry out various development programmes in consultation with experts in the field and the people’s representatives like MLAs, MPs and municipal corporators, so that there need not be any lacuna at any level. While consulting the people’s representatives like MLAs or MPs, there should not be any discrimination like those belonging to ruling parties of opposition parties. Once, elected they all represent their electorate and hence should be duly respected for their opinions and suggestions. There should also be transparency at every level, so that no secrecy is maintained and there should not be any scope to get exposed by information demanded under the Right to Information Act. Complaints voiced in ‘Lokshahi Din’ also indicate a lacuna in the particular government departments, the heads of which should take immediate action on the complaints without neglecting or throwing them in the ‘pending’ baskets. The reports and complaints submitted at the district level platforms like ‘Lokshahi Din’ should be viewed at the Secretariat level so that the secretaries of those particular departments know what is happening in their departments at the district level.
The state governments should consider the formation of public vigilance committees at the district level with the participation of experts in various fields, academicians and social activists or their organizations. These committees could be silent observers of what is going on in the government departments, and should inform the government and department secretaries directly, periodically submitting comprehensive reports on the state of affairs, and the goings on in various government departments. If the administration is improved with such practices and vigilant observations, there will not be discontent among people about the administration’s lethargy and way of working and the state government will be well-equipped with the informative material of each government for assessment of the respective bureaucrats’ ability and accountability.
+++++++++
Prophet and Laws!
By Francis Rodrigues
The telephone roared. My parrot screeched and fell off it.
“Idiot!” I snapped, took the call, then put the phone down.
“That”, I said, “was the the ‘Herald’ editor. He wants to know why you did not predict World Cup winners like Paul.”
“The apostle Paul,” said Cocky, “was a prophet. I am not!”
“Aaargh!” I cried, “Not him… Paul the octopus. In fact, he got all eight predictions right; even the finals. Now if you had done that, we would all be millionaires.”
“Actually,” she said, “for your information, I too correctly predicted the score before every World Cup match.”
“Whaaat?” I said, “Before every World Cup match?”
“Yes,” she smirked, “Before every match it was… nil-nil.”
“Aaargh, that’s dumb.” I cried. “But why can’t you be like Paul?”
“Excuse me, “ she spat, “I’m not an eight-legged monster.”
“That’s not the point,” I said, “Every ‘desi’ pavement has a fortune-telling ‘tota’. In India, parrots are famous prophets.”
“That’s just a con job,” said Cocky. “The pandit sees a card favourable to the sucker, quietly slips some birdseed under it and those idiot ‘totas’ peck on that card.”
“Ya right!” I said, “Even in Singapore, a budgie named Mani predicted Holland would win the World Cup.”
“So,” she cackled, “Mani wasn’t on the money, ha ha! What did they do after he failed – eat him as budgie puree?”
“You’re a dead loss!” I cried, “Can’t you predict anything?”
“Indeed, I can,” Cocky cried, “My prophet’ability is beyond doubt. What exactly did you want predicted?”
“A ha,” I said gleefully, “Can you predict the next World Cup results? Which country will win the title?”
“India!” she sniggered, “Ha, that was really easy!”
“Whaaat?” I gasped. “Except for Baichung Bhutia and Derek D’Souza, India has no real footballers.”
“Oh,” she sighed, “I thought you meant the cricket World Cup!”
“Hellooo!” I cried, “Stick to football, auntie! Now… can you predict if Digu will win the next Goa election?”
“Of course he will,” she spat, “He just has to wear Mickky’s old bandana or buy a hat from Sharad or Jose Philip.”
“Whaaat?” I gasped, “From football to hats? Are you nuts?”
“Au contraire,” she smiled, “Digu won with BJP in 2005, with Congress in 2007, now he only has to wear the NCP hat and, like football, he’ll win due to his… hat trick!”
“Pathetic,” I sniggered. “Any predictions about your death?”
“Sure,” Cocky cackled, “Paradise… I mean… parrot’dies!”
“Last chance,” I snapped. “I’m broke! Can you predict today’s ‘matka’ number? No jokes; it has to be a sure thing.”
“Shore-chor… whatever,” she cried. “Playing ‘matka’ is breaking the law, but still I can predict it. Okay, the opening number is 04 and the closing number is 20. Go… bet on it.”
“How can you guarantee that as a sure thing?” I gasped.
“Because… 420,” she cackled, “is a… ‘chor’ thing!”
The popat always knows.
[If you just arrived: Langoti ‘Long’ John Silva is a globe-trotting Goencar, always accompanied by his wise-cracking parrot Cocky]
