Premium
This is an archive article published on March 28, 2005

Lowest link is the weakest link

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s intention to seek “basic structural improvements in the way government works” within the next...

.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s intention to seek “basic structural improvements in the way government works” within the next two years, does not appear radically different from what others before him have attempted. Save for one difference. This time it is a man, who was once part of the official structure and is therefore privy to its innermost workings, who is attempting a course correction.

In the larger debate on streamlining the bureaucracy, a critical question not asked since Rajiv Gandhi’s candid admission of official corruption at the Congress centenary celebrations in 1985: how do you reform the lower bureaucracy, which represents the face of the government? They constitute the delivery systems designed to fuel development initiatives. When all plans to combat unemployment, food-for-work programmes, housing and sanitation have been approved on paper and outlays, allocated, it is the lowly district rural development agency officer who holds the key to implementation. It is the district health officer who constitutes the backbone of the health services. During the Gujarat riots, efforts of some principled SPs to stop the carnage failed because the final authority lay with hundreds of sub-inspectors and assistant sub-inspectors active on field duty. It is they who had decided to abdicate their authority or worse, join the mobs.

The PM’s reforms is, in other words, applicable to barely the top 10 per cent of the government. The critical question is what happens to the 90 per cent? There are two interlinked issues here. There can be no reform without them being implemented first at the top. But the kind of reforms the PM envisages would not address the twin scourge of rampant corruption and inefficiency. As Laloo Prasad Yadav now realises — like Chandrababu Naidu and Digvijay Singh before him — much of the anti-incumbency feeling stems from the inability of the lower administration to deliver. Behind the catch-all ‘anti-incumbency’ facade lie endless projects remaining unimplemented for several years.

Story continues below this ad

Government audits reveal how funds meant for welfare programmes are regularly siphoned off for political campaigns, how contractors and builders have benefited from the nexus between the influential local mafia and the lower bureaucracy. This is not to suggest that high level functionaries are exempt from such behavior, but the structure of the system is such that it is difficult, if not impossible, to maintain a control over far-flung areas or to monitor plan implementation schemes in an effective way.

How does this model work? Major development plans like the Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojna, or the Indira Awas Yojna, as indeed numerous others, have a common theme. They are all administered by the elected panchayati raj in consort with the lower bureaucracy. Panchayati raj institutions constitute the bedrock for the implementation of all developmental programmes in rural areas. While it is the panchayati raj institutions which identify beneficiaries, influence project selection and monitor programmes, it is the job of the lower bureaucrat to execute the projects.

What is the reality? The rural development ministry’s annual report for 2003-2004 acknowledges that “there are long delays in holding panchayat elections, frequent suspension/supercession/dissolution of panchayat bodies, lack of functional and financial autonomy, inadequate representation to marginalised and weaker sections and meager, occasional and tied government grants have crippled the functioning of panchayats” and not allowed them “to function as institutions of local self-governments”.

The nodal agency designed to head anti-poverty programmes, for example, is the district rural development agency (DRDA). A DRDA is headed by a project director, an official of the rank of additional district magistrate (ADM). It is the ADM who has to ensure that the targets set by New Delhi are met since all funds are routed through that office. Several Lok Sabha MPs claimed in ’04 that targets meant to reach their constituents under MPLADS had been frittered away because there was no administrative back up locally.

Story continues below this ad

This all pervading official apathy manifests itself in different forms. In small towns, for instance, government offices work in an atmosphere of utter ad hocism. There is no information available on officials supposed to attend to people’s grievances, no names of officials on duty or well-laid down responsibilities assigned. The much venerated right to information laws remain a mere formality outside the corridors of power.

How does one reform here? It is quite easy to collar a high-profile bureaucrat in Delhi and grab the headlines. Several administrative reforms commissions, both at the Centre and in the states, have overlooked the critical aspect of reforming the lower bureaucracy. For the PM, this is a challenge not to be resisted.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement