The warnings of Reginald Dumas, retired head of the Public Service, expressing concern about inefficiencies within the administrative arm of the Government should encourage attention and perhaps some tangible action on the quality of management there.
The Government, through the Public Service, is the largest employer in the country, but systems and management processes within its vast bureaucracy have not kept pace with standards for enterprises operating on that scale. While the Public Service is not a single organisation, there are enough commonalities and linkages between all the arms of public sector governance that it should be able to leverage its scale of operations and resources better than it has.
Earlier in the decade there were efforts at instituting best practices in management principles within the Public Service but that initiative withered with the change in government three years ago.On May 14, speaking at a Chamber of Commerce Expo, Minister of Public Administration Carolyn Seepersad-Bachan announced the start of a new effort at transforming the administration of the Public Service, promising that 12 pilot projects would be launched in June.
This is a critical time for the Public Service as it begins the process of adjusting to an influx of 6,500 recruits, one tenth of the overall strength of the sector's employee population. There are still 2,500 vacancies in the service waiting to be filled.The public sector is pincered between having large numbers of new employees and working to change the work habits of career public servants, not all of whom wish to change the status quo.
In February 2011, addressing the Public Accounts Committee, San Fernando City Corporation treasurer Ranu Seudat lamented individuals in senior positions in the Public Service who had been appointed on seniority, not skill."They don't know what they are doing," Ms Seudat said.
Add to this mix Mr Dumas' concerns about ministers boasting of their skills at micromanaging their sectors into action, a situation that runs counter to the principles of the Public Service, which is constituted to manage and execute the minutiae of Government's strategic directives.
In far too many cases in which people who are not public servants get involved in administrative matters, questions about transparency and accountability have tended to arise and operational shortcuts have offered too many opportunities for self-interest to trump proper procurement procedures.
One notable expression of this need to intervene in public sector governance is the tendency of ministers to become involved in the operations of state boards. Is this an error of procedure on the part of a new government's ministers or, with a staggering 150 state boards currently appointed, a way of creating a parallel and more malleable alternative to public sector bureaucracy?
The unwillingness of the Government, and its predecessor, to press for proper procurement procedures and more transparent bidding processes only serves to reinforce the perception that the systems of the public service, designed to safeguard the treasury, are something to be circumvented, ignored or frustrated rather than lubricated through a commitment to greater management capacity and operational efficiencies.
