The Public Sector: Crying out for a better leadership!

(Published in l'express of 09.05.2023)

I've known Mr Romooah-the ex-director of the National Audit Office, when he was working at the Treasury; the recent audit reports have shown his mettle ; there are very few like him left in the public service these days.Over my past twenty five plus years in the public service, I happened to come across very few of such bedrocks, such champions of good governance. More common was a public sector peopled with little emperors reigning supreme, unchallenged and unaccountable, over their submissive fiefs.

 

Many of those who are in position of authority in the public service , are there not necessarily because of their competence but out of their proximity to the levers of power or because of our type of selective selection based on politics and seniority, mixed with community and caste.

 

There is only one single route for one’s career path in our public service -toe the line as the boss is always right; if you want to be promoted or benefit from all kinds of allowances, extra budget allowances, selective boards of public bodies, foreign missions, etc., you have to go one step further , you have to bootlick, to be totally subservient to the emperors of the public service.

 

A major part of the pie in the public service is shared among the bootlickers , the political appointees , other “protégés” and the “chatwas” au "bon vouloir" of the emperors, leaving the crumbs for those who have no choice but to unwillingly toe the line.

 

As for the "recalcitrants" , the ones who refuse to fall in line or even dare to oppose the uni-directional, me-know-everything authorities, based on hierarchy rather than competence, they tend to have a more risky career path. The authorities will not waste any time in ganging together their yes-men and henchmen , using all their repressive apparatus to mow them down, the nonconformists; and as for the outward rebels, they will very soon find themselves facing all kinds of fake charges or departmental enquiries for some kind of leakage of important documents. (Planting is very common in the public service much before the blunder of the Striking Team exposed such planting publicly). The subversive elements , the “frondeurs”- usually the best and more creative elements of the public service- are then publicly humiliated by colleagues before being sidelined or kicked out of the service as a result of these framed charges and enquiries.

 

We have been through that at the Ministry of Finance(MoF); we, mostly from the Ministry of Economic Planning and Development (MEPD), opposed openly the Mansoor-Sithanen tandem and the whole clique running the show at the Ministry, especially the ones known as the “errand boy” of Manraj,  the “boutiquier” who paid a heavy price for shielding and defending his boss on the Medpoint scandal, and the long-term adviser cum budget speech writer who has made his mark over the years in consistently sending the incumbents to “karos cannes” because of the flawed and dubious budget policies and programmes. 

 

We had criticised the merger of the cadres of economists, accountants and economic analysts -an integration without clearly putting structures in place that would take advantage of their specialist skills . They had made a joke of the the Programme Based Budget and the Public Sector Investment Programme(PSIP), proceeding by trial and error, without any substantive analysis by economists, to support the haphazard increases or cuts in expenditures and explain the rationale of a prioritized list of much-needed infrastructure projects.(In many countries this function is carried out by a Planning Commission or the Ministry of Planning; here the MoF is judge and party on the basis of policies that are not encrusted in a medium to long term vision or Plan). 

 

Morever, the MoF did not have the capacity to carry out in-depth sectoral analysis , provide assistance to line ministries to ensure that their policies, strategies and projects are in line with the overall macro-economic framework, or to undertake research on new sectors and formulate action plans and make evidence-based policies. There was no holistic and cohesive policy framework aligning specific sectorial needs to national priorities to promote sustainable growth. 

 

The Ministry of Finance had to evolve from mere number crunchers bogged down in fire-fighting and routine work to proper economic analysts, involved in strategic thinking and research, in the evaluation and assessment of the impact of its programmes and policies and in advising government accordingly. With the advent of this government we went from bad to worse. The decision of this Government to do away with Programme Based Budgeting was a most retrograde decision. The PBB approach needed to be thoroughly reviewed, but it should not be jettisoned. 

 

We were one of the few who highlighted and rebelled against these states of affairs/ shortcomings and the “kadnasing” of the Ministry of Finance ; and today when you have a look at the way MoFED is being run  by the top people in administration and the decision takers on the technical side of the ministry, you can easily conclude that our emperors in the civil service choose their lieutenants not for their honesty or competence but for their pliability and loyalty.

 

At a time when we have to re-energise the public sector , when honest employees are crying out for better leadership, we are sorry to say that we are building a country of "suiveurs", of bootlickers , of "rodeur-boutes"….But, we are also proud to say that some of us , like Mr Romooah, were not among these useless lots…

 

 The main purpose of this article is not to pick on the individuals but to point out that the Ministry of Finance has had at its helm mainly stooges at the service of the private sector or the political elite or other lobbies for such and such projects and programmes (the Road Decongestion Programme or the Metro Express LRT..) privileging short term political gains and populist measures over good fiscal governance and rectitude that would have put the economy back on a more sustainable fiscal path and rapid recovery.

 

Indeed, the Ministry could have secured its independence by a) formulating responsible and sound macroeconomic strategies and policies in line with its long term vision , b) adhering to fiscal discipline, c) preventing our inexorable slide into debt distress and c)  assuaging our fears of the unsustainable expenditures on prestige projects and social benefits that were poisoning business confidence and compelling us to live precariously, constantly under the threat of being downgraded by the rating agencies ....

 

...and the irony is that our Minister of Finance, who has specialised in poverty analysis, seems to be more apt at pushing large swathes of the population into poverty with his irresponsible policies of "converting the BoM into an ATM" to finance the high budget deficits that have resulted in the continuous depreciation of the rupee and the relentless rise in the cost of living. 

 

That's what our PM was bragging about at his 1st of May gathering- that  barely outdid our Party Malin if we exclude the foreign workers, the crowd lured by the briyani, the rum, the trip to the beach and the fatly rewarded “bater bis”, chatwas and turncoats-    that "Nous avons epargné le pays d'une crise sociale". No Sir,  you , your Pada and your BoM boy, because of your irresponsibility and incompetence, have landed us all in a cost-of-living crisis. With the inflation rate still in double-digit territory- a failure by an undercapitalised BoM to control the inflationary pressures and expectations - there are reasons to believe that the worse is not yet over.

Most relevant



• Balkrishna Kaunhye

  Will the new director of the National Audit Office live up to the expectations or at least do not do less than what his predecessors did ? 

  

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 5 w
• Prakash Neerohoo

  The NAO and the DPP are so far the two institutions that are not under political control. So far the holders of these offices have exercised their responsibilities with due diligence and a sense of fairness, integrity and honesty that are expected of them. While the DPP is living up to his role without fear or favour, there is no guarantee that the NAO will continue the tradition of fearless and objective examination of government’s books. It would be a huge setback to transparency, indeed a tragedy for the country, if the NAO were to follow directives from the PMO. The absolute independence of the NAO is crucial at a time when financial shenanigans are being deployed to loot public funds.

  

  2

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 5 w
  • Harry Phoolchund

    Prakash Neerohoo do you think they care? The whole ethos of this government is total subservience to the PM and la cuisine.

    

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5 w
  • Prakash Neerohoo

    Harry Phoolchund this is the central issue, control of institutions by a political party against all standards of good governance and with concomitant corruption and influence peddling. This is the reality that many people don’t see as they are blinded by partisanship. We cannot have a party State funded by public funds.

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5 w
• Raj Ramlugun

  Thanks, Ratan. Very well said! I like this sort of candid and courageous testimony based on firsthand experience rather than highflown analyses always in the reactive mode. Bel bel angle, franse, but rarely do we see people who are or have been in the ‘system’ share their personal experiences while they were in the system. Or, even after retirement. Why this mentality? Afraid or trying to always play it safe to stay in the good books of those in power or who may be in power tomorrow ? Trust me, if we had more people among the elite running the system daring to share their experiences and denouncing the rot in the system, our governance and accountability culture would have made marked improvements since long. No, many in the public service or SOE/SCE, even when kicked out, will choose to remain silent/discreet…. awaiting for cosy appointments somewhere .. irrespective of the regime in power. Typical of the rotten opportunistic and venal culture plaguing our institutions… and the country. Mostly among the so-called class of elite/ professionals/intellectuals. That’s the great boon of having so many academic highfliers in our country, but with near zero courage to assert their integrity & independence when put to the test of fire. 

  

  4

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 5 w
  • Edited
• Nalini Burn

  I, at first as lecturer and researcher at UoM, while also being active in a few NGOs, then as UN consultant intermittently over the years- including periods of attachment to ministries here, can corroborate what you say Rattan...

  Sadly, I have observed it over more than quarter a century in many other countries, under the thumb of IMF IBRD prescriptions, EU, USAID falling in line as main funder...

  Mauritius went further downhill after late 2014 when Razoir abolished PBB..Now those institutions are more nuanced about their destruction of ministries of planning, introducing quasi-market practices within the state. But the dilapidation, corrosion and yes, corruption of these assets is too far advanced...

  Recently, the BoM and Stats Mauritius are others losing integrity...

  

  2

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 5 w
  • Edited
• Cadress Dorsamy

  Many studies have been carried out on the rail project (call it metro leger, LRT, Metro Express whatever) but none of them has stated that it is feasible or the solution for road congestion. We see the results now...

  

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 5 w
• Harry Phoolchund

  Excellent analysis, of a sad state of affairs, Rattan Chand . The question is will the opposition be better in government? Isn't it time for the opposition, particularly the Labour Party and PMSD, to come from with an alternative strategy as to how they will govern? A strategy that is credible and which the electorate finds inspiring? Prakash Neerohoo Arvin Boolell Rakesh Bhuckory

  

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 5 w
  • Raj Ramlugun

    Harry Phoolchund The rot and sclerosis are at the leadership level. In all these so called traditional parties. The leader is owner of the party and when in power, they become owner of the government and country. And yet, there are many armchair intellectuals and cronies who still find that those leaders are the only alternative we have to oust this government ( BLD). What an honour to PJ to make him feel so strong when the Opposition fails to rally the mass around them for lack of credibility and real engagement on the ground ( proactively) on fundamental societal and national issues. 

    

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5 w
    • Edited
  • Active

    Rattan Chand

    I don't think they have time for that now as they are more busy in getting their front bench right(sic). I do not have much hope as they are going to rely on the same kind of people- the same stooges at MoFED ! Whether a Sithanen, Uteem or Duval at MoFED, it won't make any difference-business as usual.

    

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5 w
    • Edited
• Vinaye Ancharaz

  It's always good to hear it from the horse's mouth! And you, Rattan Chand, you've been a stallion - a mustang, must I say - in the public service. You were a rare breed. I knew you for less than a year during my short stint at MEPD, but I remember you as a smart economist, a hard worker and a man of scruples, and you haven't lost any of those values...contrary to some of your former colleagues. Unfortunately, the public service of today is choked with gullible officers who put their interests before those of the Civil service! And, in a culture that can be likened to a bag of crabs, they pander to their bosses in the hope of being rewarded with nominations! If one did some research on who the lucky nominees are, one wouldn't be surprised to find that a few bag the most luring posts...the few who are closest to the top chefs of the public service! What policies or out-of-the-box thinking can we expect from these conformists? When you get a headache, you don't chop off your head, do you? PBB had some flaws that needed ironing out. It didn't deserve to be thrown out! If it was, it's only because it served some purely political interests. Just like they removed the statutory ceiling on debt! And we know the consequences...

  

  2

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 5 w
  • Edited
  • Prakash Neerohoo

    Vinaye Ancharaz interesting to hear from two economists who were in the field. My time in public service in Mauritius was very short but I did see the signs of the rot setting in. That’s why I left the public service in Mauritius and emigrated to Canada where I have worked in the public service for 25 years. I can see the difference in governance between the two countries. Of course, nothing is perfect in my adopted country but there are standards of good governance based on meritocracy and business ethics.

    

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5 w
• Motee Ramdass

  Bravo , Mr Rattan the country needs people like you . Unfortunately there are only a few left ,nevermind our country deserves better than " chatwas".

  Congratulations keep it up.

  

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 4 w

Write a comment…