The system is burdened both by the flaws imposed from above and by the exaggerated demands of those it is intended to serve
Madhya Pradesh politician Shivraj Singh, who later became Chief Minister of the state, recounted a personal experience in his maiden speech in the Lok Sabha in 1999. He recalled being invited by villagers in his constituency to a lavish reception in his honour after he was elected to the Assembly the first time. At the reception, several of the village elders spoke in turn to highlight their problems. One particular problem was mentioned by each: the village well urgently needed de-silting. They wanted him to use his clout with the Chief Minister to get this done as soon as possible.
Shivraj Singh asked how much they had spent in organizing the reception. Fifty thousand, they said. And how much would the cleaning of the well cost, he asked. “Not more than five thousand,” was the reply. He then asked why they had spent so much on the reception instead of getting the well cleaned themselves. Instantly, everyone was on their feet, telling him that it was their duty to honour him while cleaning the well was the job of the government.
His narration of the incident in Parliament was to emphasize the burden that had come upon the state administration due to the changed attitudes and expectations of the people. But, though Shivraj Singh had put his finger on the pulse of the people, he had not understood the malaise afflicting the entire administrative structure, turning it into a non-functioning apparatus of governance. He did not reform the system even after becoming Chief Minister and winning a second term.
Everyone wants government and civic bodies to remove garbage from their localities and no one wants a garbage dump near their homes. Yet no one wants to walk to a garbage dump located at a distance. The poor throw their garbage in front of their homes, the rich throw it at the back of their homes. The poor cannot throw it at the back as they have no back doors and the rich would not throw it in front as a matter of social etiquette. But both expect the civic body to pick up after them. This change in the people’s attitude and the burden it imposes has not been addressed either by parties that have ruled or those aspiring to rule.
In the past, the community was not so heavily dependent on the state for basic tasks. Mahatma Gandhi used to tell the people that governments existed to help citizens carry on their functions and not to carry them out for them. However, the economic model that was adopted after Independence transferred all routine civic functions and works to the public sector. Politicians took over all functions, to be implemented through the public administration.
The administrative structure was retained as left behind by the British without changes for the democratic system that India adopted. The structure had been meant to serve the British Empire in India. The new government retained the institution of the District Collector with a total centralization of all functions in one individual. Nothing moves in the district administration unless approved or sanctioned by the Collector. He also has to perform a quasi-judicial role. And he is expected to attend to visiting high officials, politicians and ministers. Yet he is not an independent organ in the mechanism of governance for he is expected to function in unison with and on the directions of the state headquarters. He has to obtain secretariat approval for everything he approves!
The prohibitive nature of lawmaking adds delays in implementation, leading to rampant corruption at every stage in administration. Unless the concerned person is bribed to use his administrative power to get the well cleaned, the villagers cannot hope for clean water. So, instead of bribing with money, the villagers sought to influence him through use of political power!
The introduction of decentralized political power through Panchayati Raj was one more distortion as it introduced a conflict in power-sharing. The idea behind Panchayati Raj was decentralization of power so that the people had more voice in local development and it could be speeded up. But Panchayati Raj was again dependent on the centralized structure of administration and the bureaucrat is always loathe to part with his power or even share it for a good cause even if his or her intentions are not malefic. Two wings of the administration will not share power for implementation but they will for milking the system!
Schemes for Local Area Development that sanction specific funds at the disposal of MPs, state legislators and even civic body members were intended to authorize the representatives of the people to get badly-needed development work done without waiting for approval from the state headquarters. It was also intended to help the incumbent representative to nurse the constituency by creating demonstrative symbols of performance. Instead, the mechanism was exploited for more corrupt practices. Some parties even asked their members who were elected representatives to contribute to party coffers from their authorized funds!
The messy implementation of most welfare schemes intended to benefit the village poor reflects the nonfunctional nature of the administration. The system has become incapable of delivery because of the fundamental flaws inherent in it that need corrective measures. This fundamental issue did not find a place in the election manifestoes of parties though every party promised freebies to the poor that were to be delivered through the almost defunct system.
It has also become a costly administrative system that is maintaining nearly 20 million families of employees in various wings of the government and public sector services. They enjoy the best social security and terminal benefits of any body of employees. And this does not include the money some of them mint, using their office and power.
Corruption is generally bribery for manipulating an individual and public office held by that individual to gain benefits that are manifold compared to the illegal benefits delivered in the process of manipulation. It is a deal between individuals and often cost-effective. Distortions that political parties are bent upon introducing in the economy with a promise of largescale diversion of resources for nonproductive usage and for purpose of consumption by a select group of citizens is nothing but corruption on a large scale and offered openly in the garb of policy.
Every party promises to eliminate corruption. Yet it has expanded its tentacles to almost every aspect of administration. Checks and balances were devised by the British. They treated Indians as dishonest and corrupt and hence felt the need to keep them under control. More than the system of checks and balances, punishment meted out to those not only found but also suspected of being guilty was severe and a deterrent. Now, punishing the guilty is more difficult because of the Constitutional protection that employees enjoy. In fact, the checks and balances system is used as an excuse for delays and consequential cost overruns and is also a cause for spreading corruption in the system. All three have contributed their share to making administration ineffective.
Political parties are adept at coining catchy new slogans. One such slogan of the BJP is su-rajya, a concept of good governance. But it does not define how good governance will be delivered without drastic change in the administrative system. Su-rajya did not even find mention in the party manifesto.
No party has mentioned the inherent contradiction between Panchayati Raj’s concept of political decentralization and the administration which is a centralized apparatus. Two administrative reforms commissions in five decades have not made any recommendations to introduce cohesion by eliminating contradictions that are apparent.
The administration’s ineffectiveness in implementing programmes and delivering results affects every aspect of normal life. The adoption of global economy norms forced the government to remove legal, fiscal and other administrative shackles and free human creativity. However, the administration still stands in the way of even progress! It has kept over 10 per cent of voters out of the system for they could not get enrolled or get voting cards delivered. Most of them are poor and traditional but confirmed voters.
Yet no party has shown concern that such a large number has been kept out of the electoral system. There were campaigns urging everyone to vote but none to include those poor who were left out of the system for no fault of theirs.
The idea behind Panchayati Raj was decentralization of power so that the people had more voice in local development and it could be speeded up. But Panchayati Raj was again dependent on the centralized structure of administration
Distortions that political parties are bent upon introducing in the economy with a promise of largescale diversion of resources for nonproductive usage and for consumption by a select group of citizens is nothing but corruption on a large scale and offered openly in the garb of policy
