Ineffective state sector needs urgent cultural reset

By Rienzie Wijetilleke
(rienzietwij@gmail.com)

Sri Lanka like many other countries has multiple economic challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but it is important to understand that these challenges were not caused by the pandemic; they were exacerbated by it. Sri Lanka has struggled to attract foreign direct investment despite being considered a frontier economy, and relies heavily on remittances from migrant workers. We have a large bloated state sector that does not add anywhere near enough value to Sri Lankans in their day to day lives. Many will agree that the sector as a whole is ineffective, inefficient and unproductive. We have borrowed heavily for infrastructure and development projects, some of which are not yielding adequate revenue or benefits for the people. We have high tax rates on businesses and consumption, and that restricts investments, expansions and the consumption cycle. The bureaucracy has introduced numerous barriers to starting new businesses, and there is no culture of cutting edge research and development and virtually no scope for innovation. The poorest areas of Sri Lanka have remained the same for decades; upward social mobility occurs for a select few in the middle class but is non-existent for the poorest whose lives have not improved for several decades. Whether you need to start a business or build a house, there is no shortage of obstacles to tackle from the Grama Niladhari level to the local government authorities right up to the minister; people are sent from pillar to post for the most routine work.

As much as the pandemic has destroyed economic prospects in 2020, we must accept that our issues will not disappear even after we contain the spread of the virus. Sri Lanka has lacked a national framework for development, with ad hoc policies leading to a borrow-and-spend culture, awaiting the next construction boom to give an illusion of development. The elected political leadership has succeeded in amending the Constitution; they have a huge majority in Parliament and a clear mandate to do whatever is necessary for the common good. Against this backdrop, I believe that we must start setting reasonable short, medium and long-term goals and build a private sector culture around the way our ministries and its ministers operate.

In line with corporate norms, the Prime Minister or the President should appoint a Special Cabinet Minister without a specific portfolio to monitor the progress of each ministry and whether they are performing in line with the targets set out by the Prime Minister. This is the type of supervision that must become part of the culture of public service. There should be quarterly updates and reports provided to the Executive and to the Parliament. If a Ministry shows a consistent inability to meet these preset targets, then hard decisions need to be taken.

Anybody involved in the corporate sector, at any level, can attest to the multiple ‘key performance indicators’ (KPIs) that they must achieve each year. The checks and balances (audits), the progress meetings, brain-storming sessions, interdependence on different teams with varying skill sets, all built upon a structure that is moving in a single direction toward pre-set objectives. Sri Lanka has no shortage of organisations that not only established themselves during dire economic circumstances, but thrived and grew to be major local, regional and international players. There is a culture of excellence that exists in Sri Lanka’s private sector, and now we need to transfer this culture to the state sector. As fantastical as it sounds, it might be the only way to dig the country out of this current mess.

All eyes should be focused on the new Cabinet and how they organise themselves to work for the country. We have a Minister for Labour, Education, Health, Transportation, Trade, Agriculture, Plantations, Tourism, Ports etc. How many of these ministries have successfully managed themselves over the past several years and even decades?

Is the labour force better equipped to meet the challenges of the technological revolution? Have gaps in vocational training been plugged? Have conditions for workers improved? Has our education system been updated or the curriculum modernised? What is the plan for tourism? According to some estimates, tourist arrivals are not expected to recover to pre-Covid levels for two years. Have agricultural policies made Sri Lanka more self-reliant, more sustainable? Why does Sri Lanka have a public transport system and a private bus mafia with neither of them operating in a manner that can be described as a public ‘service’?

Many of the Cabinet Ministers are career politicians, with plenty of experience. However, the public has little faith in them; all hope rests on the President and the Prime Minister. Strong management is the key to success, not micro-management, not top down authoritarianism; A well-crafted policy delegated to professionals within a structured institution is the only way forward. Members of the Cabinet have track records, some running into several decades. Review their performances and note what they have achieved and where they have failed. Ascertain reasons for failure to perform and see how to rectify these issues.

The President and the Prime Minister must set targets for each Minister, prioritize the most pressing issues in each ministry bearing in mind at all times that the raison d’être of these expensive offices is to meet the social and economic needs of the people, the ultimate pay masters. Senior Ministers should provide detailed plans to the Prime Minister, stating what they hope to achieve and how, within a specified time frame. There should be cost-benefit analyses conducted and the Prime Minister should decide what the priorities are, in line with national objectives and take strict action against ‘non-performers’. Perhaps, the Prime Minister can rank his top five ministers every 3-6 months, based on specific KPIs and publish the list so the people can see who is working for them, and more importantly, who is not.

Unless we change the culture of public service, we will exist in a perpetual state of fire-fighting, running from one emergency to the next. Sri Lanka’s public sector still operates with a colonial mindset, officials at every level of government behave like governors and not as public servants. We see how the people are treated at public offices and institutions, every Sri Lankan has witnessed firsthand the bureaucratic inertia of most of the ministries. Absenteeism, lack of supervision and accountability, disorganised or nonexistent information systems and unproductive officers are just some of the hallmarks of Sri Lanka’s public service.

What is truly disappointing is that there are so many intelligent, well-meaning patriots whose best efforts are often diluted by their inefficient peers. Political appointees diminish a public servant’s aspirations as they usually hit a ceiling and cannot meaningfully progress, which leads to demotivation. Entering Sri Lanka’s public service requires passing a competitive written examination (Ceylon Administrative Service Examination), which is known to be extremely challenging and thus, we can assume that those who enter the state service are some of the brightest and most academically gifted individuals in the country. However, once you gain entry to the state service, complacency seems to set in, and it, more often than not, leads to a sense of entitlement that is also exuded from the very top. If the Secretary or the Minister does not challenge their staff and set an example, this will be reflected in the performance of the ministry as a whole. This culture exists and needs to be eradicated urgently.

It is a strongly held belief that in the state sector, three people are required to do one person’s job with no visible results whereas in the private sector, one person does the job of three people with visible and measurable results. A Cabinet Minister receives many entitlements and benefits–– vehicles, housing, security, staff, offices and seemingly unlimited expense accounts, all at the people’s expense. To these Cabinet Ministers, we have to add Deputy Ministers, Junior Ministers, State Minister, Governors, Mayors, Provincial Counselors; the list goes on. Is it too much to ask that the privileges that accompany these lofty positions are justified with the delivery of some tangible results within a reasonable time frame?