Tuesday, December 01, 2015
Why government must hire more
We expect that civil servants must be competent, yet instinctively recoil from paying them well.
Of course implementation of the Seventh Pay Commission’s recommendations will have a fiscal impact. Even if this works out to an additional 0.65 per cent of GDP — and the odds are that the estimate will prove to be understated — it would be a mistake to begrudge civil servants and pensioners the additional money.
Now, public opinion anywhere in the world has no obligation to be logically consistent and India is no exception. We think the government must deliver public services, despite us knowing that it is bad at doing this. We expect that the procedures must be carried out by-the-book, but we still engage those “consultants” and hangers-on near the regional transport office and the sub-registrar’s office.
An index of our attitudes
It is no wonder then that our attitudes towards remuneration, of public officials, is self-contradictory. We expect that civil servants must be competent, yet instinctively recoil from paying them well. This attitude extends towards elected representatives too. Once on a television show, former Union Minister and Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar responded to my argument for realistic pay packages for Members of Parliament by saying that they should be paid the Rs.500 that was set during Mahatma Gandhi’s time. Similarly, there are many people who scrutinise the accounts of non-government organisations and express shock that their staff are paid “that much”. A direct consequence of this logically inconsistent attitude is that politicians who are honest have trouble maintaining themselves and their offices, civil servants yield easily to temptation and non-profits find it hard to recruit good talent.
It is no wonder then that our attitudes towards remuneration, of public officials, is self-contradictory. We expect that civil servants must be competent, yet instinctively recoil from paying them well. This attitude extends towards elected representatives too. Once on a television show, former Union Minister and Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar responded to my argument for realistic pay packages for Members of Parliament by saying that they should be paid the Rs.500 that was set during Mahatma Gandhi’s time. Similarly, there are many people who scrutinise the accounts of non-government organisations and express shock that their staff are paid “that much”. A direct consequence of this logically inconsistent attitude is that politicians who are honest have trouble maintaining themselves and their offices, civil servants yield easily to temptation and non-profits find it hard to recruit good talent.
Nitin Pai
Widening governance gap
In any country, the economy and society are usually ahead of the government, which causes a governance gap to emerge. In India, this gap is wide and growing. The only way to narrow it is by increasing the quality and, yes, the quantity of public officials. We do need to minimise government to maximise governance, but that refers to the scope of what the government does; not how many people the government employs.
In any country, the economy and society are usually ahead of the government, which causes a governance gap to emerge. In India, this gap is wide and growing. The only way to narrow it is by increasing the quality and, yes, the quantity of public officials. We do need to minimise government to maximise governance, but that refers to the scope of what the government does; not how many people the government employs.
Despite the perception that our government is overstaffed, the reality is that India has very low numbers of civil servants who are necessary to carry out the basic functions of government. The Seventh Pay Commission refers to this in its report, noting that in the United States, the federal government has 668 employees per 1,00,000 population. In comparison, the Union government employs 139. This is not even considering the fact that under India’s constitutional structure, the Union government has a bigger charter than its American counterpart.
India has one of the lowest ratios of government employees to population in the world. In a World Bank study in the late 1990s, Salvatore Schiavo-Campo, Giulio de Tommaso and Amitabha Mukherjee found that less than 1.5 per cent of India’s population was employed in government, which was behind countries such as Malaysia and Sri Lanka (4.5 per cent) and China (around 3 per cent). In fact, government employment ratios in the rich and better governed West are much higher: around 15 per cent in Scandinavian countries and 6-8 per cent in the U.S. and western Europe.
It turns out that richer countries have more government employees when compared to the poorer ones. In trying to explain why this might be so, the legal scholar, Richard Posner, posits that “[perhaps] the relation between a nation’s economy and the percentage of its public workers is determined by a political and social culture that determines what tasks are assigned to government, what incentives and constraints are placed on public workers, and who is attracted to public service. Maybe, with the right combination, public service can be as economically productive as private enterprise.”
Anyone who finds too much traffic and too few traffic policemen; too many foreign policy issues and too few diplomats; too much garbage and too few city officials; too many stray pigs and too few pig catchers (there is only one in entire Bengaluru) will attest to the fact that we actually do need more public officials. The shortage of officials is something that runs through the Union, State and local governments. In the Union government alone, the Seventh Pay Commission reports, there is an overall vacancy of around 18 per cent. It is unable to fill even the sanctioned strength, leave alone raising the numbers to levels adequate to deliver adequate baseline governance.
So, if we are concerned about improving governance, we should be really concerned about how to add strength to the machinery of the government. When you have only around 130 police personnel and 1.2 judges per 1,00,000 population, and you need at least 200 of the former and 10 of the latter, asking whether they are being overpaid misses the point.
Will better pay, perks and pensions be enough? By no means.
Restructuring the bureaucracy
In all the debate over the Pay Commission’s recommendations, what you do not hear is the need to implement the recommendations of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), another commission that submitted a series of reports to the Union government through 2009. By no means radical, it still offers several concrete proposals on restructuring the bureaucracy. The civil service will resist change, but it is up to the political leadership to insist that the Pay Commission and the Administrative Reforms Commission are two sides of the same coin. With better remuneration, there is an accompanying need to modernise government machinery. Unfortunately, the United Progressive Alliance government went cold on this. The Narendra Modi government would do well to use the opportunity created by the Pay Commission to implement the recommendations of the Reforms Commission.
In all the debate over the Pay Commission’s recommendations, what you do not hear is the need to implement the recommendations of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), another commission that submitted a series of reports to the Union government through 2009. By no means radical, it still offers several concrete proposals on restructuring the bureaucracy. The civil service will resist change, but it is up to the political leadership to insist that the Pay Commission and the Administrative Reforms Commission are two sides of the same coin. With better remuneration, there is an accompanying need to modernise government machinery. Unfortunately, the United Progressive Alliance government went cold on this. The Narendra Modi government would do well to use the opportunity created by the Pay Commission to implement the recommendations of the Reforms Commission.
Restructuring the bureaucracy involves, as Posner argues, a review of what government employees do, what incentives they face and what type of people are attracted to the job. Many regulators believe their job is to limit the industries they regulate. Unless they are given a new song sheet that explicitly changes their mandate to ensure competition and fair play, they will continue their old ways. Given his comments on the railways, Mr. Modi does not appear to believe in getting the government out of business. That still leaves room for corporatisation and also freeing ownership from direct management of businesses by civil servants. Every civil servant running a business is a civil servant taken away from policymaking and governance.
Today, except for a few departments, we neither appoint nor promote civil servants based on their performance. There are many other criteria — from preventing nepotism to promoting social justice — but the Indian government is perhaps the only organisation in the country where “doing the job well” ranks as being relatively unimportant to one’s career prospects. Contrast this with the humble tea stall, where the proprietor is first concerned about the integrity and competence of his employees. An edifice constructed on badly designed incentives cannot be expected to deliver the desired outcomes. Implementing the Administrative Reforms Commission report is the first step in bringing about change of this nature.
Expect the next weeks and months to be consumed by debates on “edges”, panels, allowances and pensions that the various civil, paramilitary and military services get. There will be a lot of heartburn, jealousy, genuine grievances and ill-will. These are the inevitable result of an unreformed bureaucracy, but of little consequence to the larger public interest.
What the Modi government should do is announce that, henceforth, India will have a combined pay and administrative reforms commission, reflecting a new mindset. One that is ready to pay its public officials well, increase their numbers, invest in building competency, and, in the same breath, restructure government machinery to remain current with the times. That would do wonders for minimum government, maximum governance.
(Nitin Pai is director of the Takshashila Institution, an independent think tank and school of public policy.)
Source: The Hindu, 01-12-2015
On World AIDS Day, resolve to fight HIV through preventive care
It is 27 years today since the global community recognised World AIDS Day. Since 1988, December 1 has provided an opportunity for people worldwide to unite in the fight against HIV, show support for people living with HIV and commemorate people who have died from AIDS. This day serves as a reminder for the public and policymakers that HIV has not gone away — there is still a need to sustain awareness and education, fight prejudice, and improve prevention and care efforts.
This World AIDS Day is particularly significant because in July we lost Suniti Solomon — a pioneer who documented the first cases of HIV in India and dedicated her life to a crusade against the virus. As a physician, scientist, humanitarian, mother and wife, she was passionate about combating the stigma and discrimination that keeps HIV in the shadows, allowing it to spread.
In 1993, this resolve led Solomon to establish the YR Gaitonde Centre for AIDS Research and Education (YRG CARE), which has been instrumental in shaping India’s comprehensive response to the HIV/AIDS challenge. Today, YRG CARE’s successful model of prevention programmes, laboratory services and support programmes have drawn international acclaim and measurably advanced efforts against HIV/AIDS.
I had the honour of working with Solomon for several years. In close partnership with the ministries of science and technology and health and family welfare, our collaborative efforts have helped to foster a unique end-to-end approach spanning a continuum of interrelated and integrated activities focused on community research preparedness, product and technology creation, and ensuring equitable access and care to those directly impacted by HIV/AIDS.
The insights we’ve gained from this work have proven beneficial for broader efforts against other poverty-related, tropical and neglected diseases. It has also fostered the development and coordination of an India network for biomedical research as well as a powerful suite of north-south and south-south collaborations that share knowledge, and strengthen capacity and capability in Sub-Saharan Africa as well as in India.
This systematic approach has been very fruitful. It has increased harmonisation between various stakeholders in support of result-oriented national priorities and led to the development of new strategies that are mitigating the health system constraints and advancing public health goals across a variety of diseases.
I’m certain that when Solomon identified the first HIV case, she could not have imagined how that discovery would inspire a nation and benefit society in so many ways.
Today, as we remember all those who have lost their lives to HIV and take stock of the progress we’ve made, Solomon’s legacy reminds us that even with the most intractable public health challenges, focus, commitment, partnerships and a clear vision are critical ingredients to making positive lasting change. We have to keep up the commitment to ensuring that her legacy continues to benefit the world far into the future.
Rajat Goyal is country director, International Aids Vaccine Initiative. The views expressed are personal
Source: Hindustan Times, 1-12-2015
Practising Compassion
DHRUVA BHARGAVA
|
Today's world is gloomily painted with instances of violence, hate and intolerance. Erroneously , at some point, things have gone off-course. Organised faiths have not been able to steer us towards peaceful living. Divide and disconnect are only increasing. Experiencing compassion is rare today .It's considered a trait of the weak. Our priority for unrestrained development over empathetic considerations has created an unbridgeable abyss within and outside us. We have, thus, lost track of love and kindness that essentially bind us with our inner Self and with others.
Practicing compassion requires creating space within. But compassion and ego cannot coexist. Compassion powerfully connects us within and without, enabling us to view things holistically . As our perspective widens, it allows us to appreciate difficulties and miseries of others too. As we become considerate, we feel less hurtful and simultaneously heal ourselves of the wounds we usually attribute to others.
Our minor incremental acts of empathy , consideration and kindness firmly entrench us in compassion. Heartfelt compassion crosses the barrier of mind and reaches soul and is not retained merely as memory but as an impression on soul. So, the one who deeply experiences compassion often feels an impulse of expressing the same towards others. As humans, we have a responsibility to cultivate, practice and propagate compassion and ensure that it's practised by our future generations too.
Practicing compassion requires creating space within. But compassion and ego cannot coexist. Compassion powerfully connects us within and without, enabling us to view things holistically . As our perspective widens, it allows us to appreciate difficulties and miseries of others too. As we become considerate, we feel less hurtful and simultaneously heal ourselves of the wounds we usually attribute to others.
Our minor incremental acts of empathy , consideration and kindness firmly entrench us in compassion. Heartfelt compassion crosses the barrier of mind and reaches soul and is not retained merely as memory but as an impression on soul. So, the one who deeply experiences compassion often feels an impulse of expressing the same towards others. As humans, we have a responsibility to cultivate, practice and propagate compassion and ensure that it's practised by our future generations too.
Find Out What You Are Really Worth
Marguerite Theophil
|
Sharing takes many shapes and forms, from the ostentatious to the anonymous or silent, each with its own motivations. A few of them can touch and inspire us. A story that stays with me is one about the poet Pablo Neruda. When he was still a little boy, Neruda discovered a hole in a fence board while playing in the yard behind his house. He looked through the hole and saw a bit of land much like that behind their own house, uncared for, wild.He says of what happened next: “I moved back a few steps, because i sensed vaguely that something was about to happen. All of a sudden a hand appeared a tiny hand of a boy about my own age. By the time i came close again, the hand was gone, and in its place there was a marvellous white toy sheep.“
Now this toy sheep's wool was faded, its wheels had fallen off. To Neruda, “All of this only made it more authentic. I had never seen such a wonderful sheep.“ He looked again through the hole but the boy had left him this `gift' and disappeared. So young Pablo went to his house and brought out a little `treasure' of his own a perfect pine cone which he adored.He set it down by the hole in the fence for the unknown boy.
“I never saw either the hand or the boy again. And I have never seen a sheep like that either. The toy i lost finally in a fire.“ But, as Neruda, who has commented on this incident several times, reminds us: “This exchange of gifts ... settled deep inside me like a sedimentary deposit ... I have been a lucky man. To feel the intimacy of brothers is a marvellous thing in life. To feel the love of people whom we love is a fire that feeds our life. But to feel the affection that come from those whom we do not know, from those unknown to us, who are watching over our sleep and solitude, over our dangers and our weaknesses that is something still greater and more beautiful because it widens out the boundaries of our being, and unites all living things.“
Wealth, among American Indian people, narrated, in a book called `The Sacred: Ways of Knowledge Sources of Life', is not seen as the accumulation and keeping of money or goods or land. For most Native American cultures, it tells us, to be wealthy meant that one had lived well carefully, with knowledge which had enabled the individual to hunt well, sew well, bring up children well, and if necessary, to fight well, depending on one's responsibilities. It had a line i saved in my notebook that was a precious teaching: To be wealthy meant that one had much good; enough to give away. To feel one has “Enough good to give away“ what a beautiful concept! Then there is a lovely story about the philanthropic Moses Montefiore, an outstanding figure of the 19th century in Britain. Someone once asked him, “Sir, what are you worth?“ He reflected for a while, and then named a figure. “But surely,“ his questioner demanded, “your wealth must be much more than that.“ With a smile, Moses replied, “You didn't ask me how much i own. You asked me how much i am worth. So i calculated how much i have given to charity this year. You see,“ he said, “we are worth what we are willing to share with others.“
Now this toy sheep's wool was faded, its wheels had fallen off. To Neruda, “All of this only made it more authentic. I had never seen such a wonderful sheep.“ He looked again through the hole but the boy had left him this `gift' and disappeared. So young Pablo went to his house and brought out a little `treasure' of his own a perfect pine cone which he adored.He set it down by the hole in the fence for the unknown boy.
“I never saw either the hand or the boy again. And I have never seen a sheep like that either. The toy i lost finally in a fire.“ But, as Neruda, who has commented on this incident several times, reminds us: “This exchange of gifts ... settled deep inside me like a sedimentary deposit ... I have been a lucky man. To feel the intimacy of brothers is a marvellous thing in life. To feel the love of people whom we love is a fire that feeds our life. But to feel the affection that come from those whom we do not know, from those unknown to us, who are watching over our sleep and solitude, over our dangers and our weaknesses that is something still greater and more beautiful because it widens out the boundaries of our being, and unites all living things.“
Wealth, among American Indian people, narrated, in a book called `The Sacred: Ways of Knowledge Sources of Life', is not seen as the accumulation and keeping of money or goods or land. For most Native American cultures, it tells us, to be wealthy meant that one had lived well carefully, with knowledge which had enabled the individual to hunt well, sew well, bring up children well, and if necessary, to fight well, depending on one's responsibilities. It had a line i saved in my notebook that was a precious teaching: To be wealthy meant that one had much good; enough to give away. To feel one has “Enough good to give away“ what a beautiful concept! Then there is a lovely story about the philanthropic Moses Montefiore, an outstanding figure of the 19th century in Britain. Someone once asked him, “Sir, what are you worth?“ He reflected for a while, and then named a figure. “But surely,“ his questioner demanded, “your wealth must be much more than that.“ With a smile, Moses replied, “You didn't ask me how much i own. You asked me how much i am worth. So i calculated how much i have given to charity this year. You see,“ he said, “we are worth what we are willing to share with others.“
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)