Theories abound why the government is directionless. Little gets done, notwithstanding government's stirring renewals of resolve. Gap between promise and performance is growing. A Government's real currency is its credibility. It has got sharply devalued.
Is there anyone, for instance, buying government's repeated assurances that 2020 will miraculously bloom into the year of growth, bringing in jobs and a lower cost of living?
It is a long list of things not happening, from a billion trees to ten million jobs to five million houses. Railways, PIA, Pakistan Steel, DISCOs, Utility Stores, could not have been set right in a jiffy, but hasn't there been a long enough period to roll out a credible roadmap to their future?
We have thrown some forty odd task forces, and an equal number of ministerships, at the 'vision' of a Naya Pakistan. None have much to show for. Indeed, the growing legion of skeptics is beginning to pine for Purana.
That things are not moving in the right direction is widely accepted. Even some of the Ministers privately share this view. What is puzzling is the 'why not' of it; despite an amenable umpire, an opposition in disarray, and a fair external environment.
Is it the wayward leadership? Too cumbersome and cluttered an agenda? Dysfunctional government machinery? Or, what is defying good governance more structural in nature?
Let's look at the government machinery first. They say the problem is with the sinews of the machinery, the bureaucracy. It doesn't have the right skill sets; it is reeling from years of politicization; it is scared, feels insecure and is easy to corrupt.
Let's look at FBR as a test case.
It does not have a 'babu' heading it. The Chairman is a highly regarded professional whose integrity is beyond question. He has the support of the right quarters and no one can be accused of undue interference in the working of his organization. He is free to make any changes to his team. The law also allows him to hire experts from outside.
There may be tiddly-pom differences on taxing retailers or small traders, but by and large Chairman FBR has adequate autonomy in matters of policy and personnel. So none of the standard explanations, alibis if you prefer, of bureaucracy not pulling its weight - non-professional at the helm, politicization or interference or insecurity, or the fear of NAB subverting decision making - seem to apply to FBR.
And yet FBR is not cutting the mustard.
It may have exceeded last year's collection by some 16% but it is far below target, despite the bounty of Rs750 billion by way of higher tax rates, new taxes, and roll-back of exemptions to the five export sectors. Amnesty scheme, inflation, growth in number of filers ought to have lent support as well; as also, if you forgive our being the baneful 'party-pooper', not refunding all that was owed to the exporters.
The public perception of FBR hasn't changed much either. It is still seen as unfriendly - the behemoth to be feared, certainly not the one to be trusted - and by no stretch of imagination a paragon of virtue. It is also perceived to be a bumbling creature, as evidenced by the FASTER 'innovation' in making refunds easier and timely.
The other departments and agencies didn't get the kind of support FBR got but there is not too great a mismatch in their respective outcomes. This suggests the problem is elsewhere.
The suspicion then meanders to the quality of Leadership. Criticism revolves around lack of experience and insufficient preparation; that it has been too embroiled with political battles to find the space for serious governance; that an unwieldy agenda with priorities shifting on a daily basis has paralysed the government machinery.
That may all be true, but does it explain all? Not too long ago, when we didn't have such debilitative encumbrances, were we being better governed?
What we have been witnessing is a steady decline in governance. We keep trying all kinds of therapeutic solutions, some imported some indigenous, without making much of a dent. Both policy formulation and its implementation have been lackluster. With every move a new faultline emerges. Public dissatisfaction is closing in to the point of giving up.
Let's face it. The real issue is that of capacity, much more than lackadaisical leadership or unrealistic ambition level or a bureaucracy not 'co-operating' -whether out of fear of NAB or 'loyalty' issues. It is not even the intrusiveness of the de facto power, however unwarranted, spoiling the broth. And if it is the international organizations denying us sufficient policy space it is because our policy failures invited them in.
Things are not getting done because we don't know how.
Decay of institutions is our default response. True, and who could disagree with Douglas North on the nexus between institutions and development, or Acemogluand Robinson on Why Nations Fail. But we need to drill deeper: what led to this institutional atrophy.
While there is merit to the theory of an 'over developed' organ constraining the growth of others - in our case this overdeveloped organ is all over the place - but to us the real answer is the consistent decline in the abilities of the builders and guardians of institutions: the civil service.
That is what solves the riddle of things not happening: not inept leadership, not politicization, not NAB (though they all contribute), but an incapacitated civil service.
How do we stiffen the steel frame? For starters, stop abusing them. They are perhaps more sinned against than sinning.
Their problem is they don't know 'how'. And that's where we need to help them. They can neither be substituted - we have tried inductions from outside but it never helped (especially when brought in at the top; although some who came in at mid-level rose to prominence) - nor done away with.
We are afraid the ideas that the Reforms Committee has been coming up with do not frontally address the issue of capacity. Security of tenure is not capacity enhancement, nor is the sophomoric proposal to implant 'experts' from outside between the Minister and the Secretary.
Proper career planning, constant re-tooling, and esprit de corps are areas that the Committee should focus on. Otherwise, it will be the leadership to blame!
Comments
Comments are closed.