Get on with it

To paraphrase Karl Marx, the reformers so far have only interpreted the problems of the bureaucracy, the point is to change it. Successive governments have placed civil service reform at the centre of good governance, and many committees have submitted proposals in this context. The Core Group on Administrative Reforms headed by the cabinet secretary is just the latest one. Most of its recommendations are, unsurprisingly, similar to that of others: reduction in recruitment age, a broadbased entry examination, periodic appraisal of officers. But it may be asked, if there’s such wide agreement on what is required, why is there delay in implementing these ideas?

Much has gone wrong with the civil service since the ’50s when Sardar Patel hailed it as the steel frame. Politicisation, corruption and sheer apathy have transformed the civil servant into an unrecognisable mutant of predecessors once hailed as enlightened agents of change. The flip side is the inability of government and public sector enterprises to utilise the talent and experience of its administrators. Poor training schemes, marginalisation by leaders and the absence of a mechanism to protect the tenure of exceptional officers lead to demoralisation. And without a responsive administrative network the delivery of basic governance is impossible. Reformers all have the right idea. The absurd move by various regimes to raise the age of entry and make entrance tests as objective as possible have skewed things. Training imparted to recruits prepares them abundantly for their first, district years. But that one-shot programme can hardly set them up for later engagement with national issues. And a system that achingly adheres to the seniority principle obviously comes laden with disincentives.

The PM has taken a lead in promising comprehensive reform. It is time to proceed with basic changes and then consider more innovative ones — such as inducting non-government personnel wherever expertise is required. Hopefully the Core Group will along the way see that demanding awards for “meritorious officers” is a most Stalinist exercise.