Finally the agitation that was brewing for banning the CSAT (Civil
Service Aptitude Test) as part of the Civil Services Examinations (CSE)
exam has died down. The street protestors say that CSAT is loaded in favour of the
English speaking urban class and it spoils the chances of
the rural folk who have not had the privilege of a convent education. While the Government tried many tactics- some of them were (a) announcing that the marks of CSAT will not be counted
for merit; it will be only be qualifying in nature (b) the test will be
administered in Hindi also. And finally, the Government bowed down to
all interested parties and decided to conduct the test in all 22
languages in Schedule 8 of the Constitution of India.
Now just imagine
what a nightmare it could be for UPSC which administers the test ! It would be difficult to maintain secrecy and integrity of the exam process if a
question paper has to be translated into 22 languages. Large number of translators/printers etc could be privy to the questions and might constitute a potential source of leakage of questions. Secondly it is not clear how many
of the Civil Services aspirants will be utilizing the translated
papers. That is democracy for you in the Indian republic. We have no choice but to implement an illogical, mass-driven
solution. Many ex-bureaucrats have criticized the Government's decision
to marginalize English. They believe that English is the language of the future and we could be driving ourselves into a corner if we choose bureaucrats who do not possess communication capabilities in English. One could argue that these critics were all benefited by
the St Stephens/IIT brand of education and are being elitist. Others
argue that European countries have bureaucrats who are ignorant in
English- aren't they proud of their language and heritage ? Aren't they running their
countries well? Some others argue that the Chinese are on a mission
mode to make their large population learn English. Aren't they the
next super power ?
I complete 24 years in the Government. The first few years were
traumatic. I always felt I didn't bargain for this and I certainly
deserved more. That had to do with my job (which hardly counts as part of the bureaucracy)- it is not like any other regular government job. However I got lucky as far as the
kind of assignments I handled. Two long term courses,(one abroad),
several difficult tasks, foreign trips, a stint in the Ministry etc; for someone who didn't go to St Stephens or IIT, I think I got
more than what I deserved. I still can't help feeling that the Indian Civil
Service is the most poorly organized and shabbily planned administrative mechanism
one could think of.
The Civil Service as it exists today is
probably one of the original legacies of the British which we chose not
to tinker with because it suited the goals of the elite in it. The steel frame of bureaucracy is a cosy club of the
elite of Civil Service, who manage to corner top posts in every
conceivable Ministry and finally retire to become Governors and
Information Commissioners. Some time back there was an interesting debate on
television on civil service reforms.There were academicians,
journalists, Officers from the Armed Forces and IPS and some IAS
Officers. Some eminent panelists pointed out that the Indian Civil
service as it exists today is not equipped to deal with the highly
complex public policy aspects of governance. In the 1940s, a generalist might have been able
to run Telecom, Railway, Defence or Power Ministry. Today's
challenges are diverse, complex and requires experience and domain knowledge. Almost immediately a young IAS Officer piped up to object. He
said Alan Mulally moved from Boeing to
Ford and turned around the company. He said that emphasis on domain knowledge and specialization would often result in tunnel vision. He said that he could use the advice of the specialists but a wide range of administrative experience of a generalist service like the IAS is required to run Central Ministries.
However running Ford can hardly be compared to running a diverse country like India. The bureaucracy in every developed nation have moved far from its' colonial/imperialist strait jacket and have started placing a lot of emphasis on lateral entry, short term contracts for public policy tasks, domain knowledge and skills that one brings to the job. None of the above seem to apply to Indian Bureaucracy.
An
umbrella exam for all sorts of services appear to be the most illogical
thing in a multidimensional public policy domain. While a technocrat
migrating from Aircraft manufacturing to cars might strike us
as logical, the same is not true of a migration from Food and
Civil Supplies to Telecom. There are Police, revenue, diplomatic and
Accounts services which are inducted from the same examination and
allotted ranks according to their merit cum choice. Each of these
services require different skill sets and domain knowledge. Depending on the public perception of these services, promotion prospects and power one wields, each service is pegged into an uneven hierarchical slot. However since all aspirants are recruited from a common exam, we have
Computer Engineers metamorphosing into Finance and Accounts
experts, doctors working as Police Officers and veterinary doctors as
diplomats. While all these categories can indeed work as IAS (for which
what skills are required stumps me even now, considering the wide range
of jobs they are allotted to during their service)
Anyway while the debate rages on as to how to induct Civil Servants,
this blogger has an alternate point of view. Has anyone thought why are
we recruiting Officers into 28 plus different services through one
common examination ? Why are Finance, Personnel, diplomatic services
staffed through a single examination ? Isn't it better to have different staffing pattern for
various services. What is probably required
is to breakup the Civil Services into several examinations instead of
one. The Police and para military forces can have a two stage
recruitment process wherein physical fitness is an important element. They could then be
allotted to State Police Services and Para-military organizations with a
proviso that they specialize in one function and move to other areas for a limited period to acquire perspective. Presently almost every para military organization is headed by IPS Officers on deputation from State Governments, which largely serves to spoil the chances of internal Officers who have grown with the organization. This leaves a largely disgruntled force with very little stakes in the Organization. Except for a handful of services which allot Secretary level posts to specialized services, almost all Departments are headed by Generalists from the All India Services. This has spawned the culture of elitism of the All India services in cornering posts outside their domain.
The diplomats may take an examination with emphasis on International relations. To get into the Finance, Accounts or Revenue services, a CA or ICWA may be prescribed as a minimum requirement. Limited mobility across different domains may be permitted so as to prevent tunnel vision. What about the IAS ? This service may be reinvented to manage Districts in States and Development Ministries in the Centre. The IAS alone may be recruited through the present Civil Service examination. Streamlining of revenue and land records, town planning, public distribution, garbage treatment etc are important skills that need to be imparted to these bureaucrats. Their postings into Central Ministries may be restricted to Development Ministries at the Centre and not Ministries like Defence, Home, Finance and Telecom, which require specialized knowledge and skill sets. More importantly, at least 25% posts in all Central Ministries may be reserved for lateral entrants to be recruited by UPSC purely on domain specialization. This lateral entry can be open to Academicians, Journalists, Private sector technocrats and such like. Anyway this theory might not find a resonance with the Brahmins of Indian Civil Service since it demolishes their citadel. The cadre system is such a rigid exclusive club into which promotees, lateral entrants etc are not welcome. It is important to break the elitism of these services to generate emphasis on tasks and not individuals. The system as it exists adds value to generalist Officers by exposing them to different domains, while we need specialist Officers with some multidimensional exposure to add value to the system.
The diplomats may take an examination with emphasis on International relations. To get into the Finance, Accounts or Revenue services, a CA or ICWA may be prescribed as a minimum requirement. Limited mobility across different domains may be permitted so as to prevent tunnel vision. What about the IAS ? This service may be reinvented to manage Districts in States and Development Ministries in the Centre. The IAS alone may be recruited through the present Civil Service examination. Streamlining of revenue and land records, town planning, public distribution, garbage treatment etc are important skills that need to be imparted to these bureaucrats. Their postings into Central Ministries may be restricted to Development Ministries at the Centre and not Ministries like Defence, Home, Finance and Telecom, which require specialized knowledge and skill sets. More importantly, at least 25% posts in all Central Ministries may be reserved for lateral entrants to be recruited by UPSC purely on domain specialization. This lateral entry can be open to Academicians, Journalists, Private sector technocrats and such like. Anyway this theory might not find a resonance with the Brahmins of Indian Civil Service since it demolishes their citadel. The cadre system is such a rigid exclusive club into which promotees, lateral entrants etc are not welcome. It is important to break the elitism of these services to generate emphasis on tasks and not individuals. The system as it exists adds value to generalist Officers by exposing them to different domains, while we need specialist Officers with some multidimensional exposure to add value to the system.
And the next theory of reform might strike my handful
of readers as apostasy. In these days of vigilante justice and
corruption allegations against prominent Babus, probably what is
required is more autonomy and not too many oversight agencies. Every
oversight agency inter alia creates an elite which specializes in asking
questions without really knowing anything about the subject. Every oversight agency is the resting place of the lazy bureaucrat who raises objections/ observations on government time. This
humble Babu holds the view that incompetence and not corruption is what
plagues the bureaucracy. And incompetence stems primarily from a lack of
experience for specialised tasks and in turn spawns corruption. If
building permits are issued without specific zoning of areas, if garbage
is handled unscientifically, if clean drinking water is still a rare
commodity and if environment is brutally plundered to build SEZs,
somewhere behind lurks deep incompetence of the generalist Babus fed by the colour of
money flashed by unscrupulous businessmen. Indians are unique in the
belief that more policing is the answer to the ills of corruption. Hence
the cries for death penalty, hanging without trial and the creation of
strong institutions with powers to police and punish swiftly. The right
to Information Act has acted as a more effective barrier to misuse of
power than any amount of policing.
Lastly, the utilization of
technology. To manage a country of gargantuan proportions, it would
either take too many Babus or the aggressive use of technology. It is nobody's case to appoint too many
Babus since it can always lead to corruption and other ills. Seeding existing
processes with technology would be the most revolutionary change waiting
to happen.These changes cannot happen with the existing bureaucracy which has a vested interest in maintaining status quo. Well that would be the subject of another blog...
PS: I didn't go to the foundation course at National Police academy in 1989 since my employer (A nationalized Bank) refused to relieve me at short notice. I never bonded with probationer civil servants from other services. Although I married a batch mate from the Railways, I hardly feel any sense of belonging to the Civil services. Recently reunion of 1988 and 1989 batches in NPA/ NADT etc were held. When I saw photographs of such reunions I thought -may be I missed something. But then I realize that I never belonged here. Now I have even stopped claiming that I am from the Civil Services examination !!
No comments:
Post a Comment