More than 20 years ago, a clerk strolled into a joint secretary's room without knocking, and asked whether the sheaf of papers in his hands could be filed under top secret. The officer took a look at the bundle, rolled his eyes and threw them to me. They were press releases.
I narrate this episode because everyone has very high hopes of the next government, especially if Narendra Modi heads it. But unless the new government tackles the two real problems - and, believe me, they have nothing to do with corruption - we will simply have more of the same.
The real problems are the twins of incompetence and indolence - mind-numbing, bewildering and ultimately panic-inducing in their extent. Ask any good minister or civil servant what stymied them and you will very likely be told that it is the ocean of incompetence in which they have to function. The sheer indifference and indolence of the average government employee overwhelm even the most dynamic of policy managers, who simply give up.
Manmohan Singh, who was fully aware of the problem, promised administrative reform. But, as with so many other things, inexplicably, he did nothing. In the decade since then, the problem has become worse - because the knowledgeable few have retired and been replaced, for the most part, by highly unsuitable persons in terms of both competence and attitude. They don't know what to do, and how to do it even after being told what to do. The examples range from the trivial to the important, from the laughable to the very serious. It's frightening.
This would have mattered less if the government's agencies were not so pervasively intrusive. Nor would it have mattered if the demands on the governments - Centre and state - had been fewer. But even as the demand side has burgeoned, the supply side has wilted. The machinery of government today is like a dead horse. Kick it, beat it, berate it and it will not get up. It can't. For all practical purposes, the government is alive only neck upwards.
This means that the 80:20 rule - which says in every organisation 80 per cent of the work is done by 20 per cent of the employees - has now become the 97:3 rule. Whatever we see happening by way of governance is because of a very few people.
This is the biggest problem that the next government must solve. The question is how, and the answer lies in the age-old rule: perform or perish. Today, no government employee or anyone working for an agency of the state can be sacked. It is this that must change.
It's the Constitution
This sounds drastic and politically suicidal; but, once the politicians realise that it is they who pay the price by losing in elections for the government employees' shortcomings, I am sure they will manage to agree.
As with so many other things, the problem lies in the Constitution, specifically Article 311, whose eventual effect has been to delink performance and accountability from tenure. Once you are confirmed in the government, you need not, if you so choose, do any work at all for the entire 35 to 37 years that you remain employed. Indeed, not only will you not lose your job, you will also be promoted till retirement, with all your benefits intact. In fact, you have to be a complete fool to work.
No wonder they say of a person who has got himself a government job, "uski to lottery lag gayi" - because around half of India's government employees also run thriving side businesses. The capital for expansion comes from speed money.
Article 311 says that "No person who is a member of a civil service ... shall be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to that by which he was appointed" and further that "civil servants cannot be reduced in rank" except after an inquiry, etc. It also adds that it must be practicable to hold an inquiry.
These rules were devised way back in 1919 after dyarchy was introduced. The idea was to protect the white sahibs from possibly vindictive brown bosses. They have been in place since then with wholly perverse consequences. It is time to change them.
To begin with, three detailed complaints against an employee should result in a suspension without pay. The employee should be given a full hearing, of course. But these things must be made time-bound - say, one week. Anyone who says it can't be done in seven working days must himself be suspended.
For far too long have we been blaming corruption as the biggest problem. But the fact is that there are laws against it and agencies to prevent it. The same cannot be said about incompetence and indolence. We need to act against these drones for whom we, as taxpayers, pay not only when they are in service - for oppressing us - but also for their pensions after they have retired.
In comparison, the various scams of the last decade fade into complete insignificance.
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
