Opinion The dithering government

All of this is known. Why aren’t we doing anything about it? With public expenditure as UPA’s hallmark,why isn’t the government doing something about administrative reforms? Yes,there was the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC),with 15 different reports. Indeed,the consultation paper takes us down the recommendations of several committees and commissions,beginning with Gopalaswamy Ayyangar in 1949 and A D Gorawala in 1951.

However,why has the history of implementation been one of omissions? Whatever be one’s ideological leanings,most people will agree core public goods and services are law and order,some areas of social infrastructure (primary health,school education) and some areas of physical infrastructure (roads,electricity,water). Unlike the India of the 1950s,in most of these,physical access is no longer a problem. In some of these segments,private delivery options also exist. Possible choice through private delivery,increased incomes and greater awareness have led to enhanced demand that public expenditure become transparent,accountable and efficient.

Notwithstanding some isolated instances of success,including those on e-governance,the government is a reluctant reformer,which is why administrative reforms (civil service reforms are a sub-set of those) haven’t got off the ground. The government reforms when countervailing pressure is brought on it — and whether it is the citizen-government or enterprise-government interface,’government’ typically means local government,rather than State or Centre. Yes,there are successful instances of countervailing pressure by civil society (both NGOs and the media). However,they are localized in some geographical regions and are usually urban-centric. We still don’t quite know how these can be replicated and up-scaled. Therefore,the government continues to dither in withering away.