Former President Pranab Mukherjee is one of India’s most astute politicians, having served in various capacities in the government for several decades. In his speech at Ahmedabad’s Indian Institute of Management (IIM) this weekend he targeted the inefficiency of the country’s bureaucratic system. The bureaucracy, he said, was the biggest hurdle in India’s development story and needs to rectify. Pranab Mukherjee is one of the most experienced - perhaps the most experienced - of India’s politicians, and has worked closely with civil servants of all hues. His statement about India’s governance parameters, merits attention, as he knows it will be interpreted by both the ruling party and Congress. State elections are underway and BJP as the incumbent, is being attacked by Congress for non-delivery. No matter what the government of the day plans, and no matter what political parties announce, finally the onus of execution depends on the bureaucracy. Unfortunately the bureaucracy is not selected on the basis of its execution capability, but on a test- based meritocracy. They may have a high test IQ, but they lack the ability, capability or the skills for the job. Hence they write wonderful proposals, put down great observations on files, but know nothing about project management.

COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

Unfortunately, the two Administrative Reforms Commissions, one in 1966 and the other in 2005, were eye washes managed by the system, which was to be reformed. The mandate was to assess the working of the government machinery, to study the planning structure of the government at all levels and streamline district administration, among other issues. Yet, nothing substantial was achieved. There have been many attempts by successive Prime Ministers to sort things out by way of GoMs, among other measures, but the bureaucracy has thwarted it at every stage, without politicians even realising that the rug has been pulled away. Pranab reflected on the lack of coordination among the various organs of the government, ministries and even between departments within the ministries. The in built weakness of intelligence is its lack of capability to accept inputs or work in a team. The system of intelligent people fails to coordinate, or work together. Egos of varying size derail development and delivery of plans, and given India’s size and diversity, it is this that paralyses the system. But it would have been better if the former President had also reflected on his performance or his party’s role in creating this system. He said that the bureaucracy is used to working in silos. The need of the hour, clearly, is to put in place an officialdom, which nurtures democratic values and works towards inclusive development. To reform the bureaucracy, a systemic reform of selection, recruitment and training is needed. It’s ironic that IIM Ahmedabad is another example of a testing system, but it does not produce entrepreneurs, neither do all its graduates become CEOs. But there is still hope for bureaucratic systems if they heal themselves.