The Hindu Business Line : Minister-Secretary relations — II : Getting the best of Ministers

Much of the present malaise of the body politic can be traced to the degeneration in the mettle of the administrative class. But the process is not irreversible. It is possible to infuse the administration with dynamism and vitality once the sanctity of good governance is upheld by administrators and politicians alike.

THE rationale of the civil services coming into their own in the present context is underlined by the fact that there are many newcomers among Ministers who may not be well-versed in rules and regulations, and who, in their natural exuberance to prove themselves, may overlook the bounds of prudence and propriety.

There are as many as 200 MPs who have entered Parliament for the first time and 79 are within the age-group of 25-40. They are all full of enthusiasm and idealism, eager to make a mark.

The civil services should cultivate the empathy to understand their legitimate aspirations and anxiety to keep their constituents satisfied and help them channel their energy along constructive lines.

Officials with a human face!

Whether the Ministers are seasoned or raw, the pathway to mutually reinforcing relations is winning their trust and confidence. The most important aspect of a civil servant's relationship is absolute loyalty to the Government, manifest devotion to duty as also willingness to go beyond the call of duty in fulfilling a commitment, and total absence of bias of any kind.

This is easier said than seen, because the quality and calibre of the civil service and civil servants also, like those of the politicians, are on the decline. It was unthinkable barely 20 years ago that an IAS officer would be convicted for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, or that officers recruited to the All-India Services would be implicated in atrocious misdeeds.

Recently, three IAS officers sent as Observers by the Election Commission to watch over the conduct of elections in a State, were reported to have created a fracas, demanding five-star comforts and blowing up nearly a lakh of rupees of public money in luxurious bashes.

When supposedly well-trained officials themselves are remiss in observing a modicum of responsibility, Ministers' lapses should occasion no surprise.

Officials can earn the respect of the political class, in general, and Ministers, in particular, only by being exemplars in small and big things that make for a service-oriented personality: Punctuality, prompt disposal of files, sensitivity to the grievances of citizens.

It is not simply that economic reforms should have a human face; officials too in their behaviour should have a human, not an ogre's, face! In addition, they should also be positive and cooperative in their attitude, and precise, professional, objective and intelligible in explaining to the Ministers the implications of proposals.

Once they build up this type of rapport, Ministers too will defer to their views on the pros and cons of converting their ideas into tangible, concrete plans of action and the need to avoid situations where they are likely to fall foul of established rules and procedures.

The civil services can also gently and inoffensively groom their political masters so as to enhance their public appeal and parliamentary performance.

In the US, the President and Cabinet Members (called Secretaries) rehearse their major public or policy speeches (such as the State of the Union Address to both Houses of the US Congress) and media conferences before their officials who are unsparing in their suggestions for improvement.

Simple formulas

There is every chance that the perceptible improvement in the educational profiles of MPs and MLAs with each election will bring about a corresponding rise in the quality of interaction between Ministers and elected representatives, on the one hand, and their policy advisers in the higher civil services, on the other, paving the way for a convergence of approaches and objectives.

However, conflicts are inherent in any human organisation, and where persons drawn from divergent (political and administrative) backgrounds have to make adjustments with their separate work cultures, as in a government, tensions and tantrums are occupational hazards. Their severity can nevertheless be mitigated by a few simple formulas put into action.

One method usefully tried in the Indian context is to have the Minister deal with files in the presence of the Secretary; this way, the Minister is able to get clarifications on the spot and the Secretary pre-empts some busybody in the personal secretariat leading the Minister astray out of either ignorance of the nuances or extraneous motives.

Since the reputation of a Minister is made or marred by the manner of his handling of questions, motions and debates in Parliament, on days when the House is in session, it is good for the Minister to have an intense briefing and coaching conference with all the senior officials, including the technical experts concerned, on matters included in the day's business.

It used to be the practice of most Ministers in the era of Nehru and Shastri to have early morning meetings every day with all senior functionaries of their Ministries so as to be fully au fait with the significance of issues and events.

This practice is worth reviving, if it has fallen into desuetude. This is what has made the United Front Government in West Bengal so cohesive and enduring.

There, not a day passes without the Chief Minister and his colleagues meeting among themselves and with the leading lights of the parties they represent and exchanging information and ideas on the proposals and problems, regardless of whether they are major or minor, coming up before the Government or the State Assembly.

During meetings with important visitors who call on him, the Minister should keep his Secretary and the official in charge of the subject matter with him. It is advisable for the Secretary and his associates in the Ministry to keep a chronological record of their discussions so as to be able to keep a watch over the follow-up action.

Standing up to bullying tactics

So far so good. But what if there occasionally come along pig-headed or unscrupulous Ministers who are determined to have their way, however objectionable it may be? Or, when a Minister, for reasons he considers sound, orders a course of action about whose wisdom the Secretary and his colleagues are unconvinced?

It is open to the civil servant in either case (if the order is not patently illegal) to put his opinion down in writing against the order, advancing clear and cogent arguments, and it is equally open to the Minister to over-rule him in writing on the strength of his own reasoning.

In such an event, the Secretary should carry out the decision without stalling. At least in a small percentage of cases, it may be possible to stop the Minister in his tracks if the civil servants firmly insist on their right to record their dissent.

These days, I understand, Ministers and Secretaries are leary of leaving evidence of disagreements on record, with the result, what often appears on file is a bland noting to the effect that the matter was discussed at length in the Minister's room, and it was decided that such-and-such an action should be taken.

If the Minister's order is blatantly irregular, illegal or liable to be construed as a criminal offence, the civil servant should immediately blow the whistle and refuse to comply. To make this possible, the Government should accord the highest priority to the passing of the proposed Protection to Whistle Blowers Act either as an Ordinance or as an enactment in the current session of the Lok Sabha itself.

A good part of the present malaise of the body politic can be traced to the degeneration in the mettle of the administrative class, both at the Centre and in the States. The process is not irreversible. It will certainly be possible to infuse the administration with dynamism and vitality once the sanctity of the fundamentals of good governance is upheld by administrators and politicians alike.

The need for this has never been more vital than now in view of the polity having become hostage to the deadly mixture of the pulls and pressures of unholy alliances and criminalisation of both politics and inner recesses of Governments themselves.

These have so aggravated the conditions that players in the economy are losing their nerve, not knowing where they stand, and people are losing faith in democracy itself.

The return of the civil service to its old role of a standard-bearer and a steel frame is all the more urgent because of the notoriety the country is acquiring for being nearly at the bottom of the index of human development and at the top of the scale of corruption.

If the credibility of the civil services as an institution is at an end, there will be nothing standing between the country and chaos.

(Concluded)