THE BARBADOS PUBLIC SERVICE came under the microscope recently when the Public Service Amendment Order was debated in the Senate, and, of course, the issue of public sector reform reared its head.
At a time when productivity and the need to execute the people’s business in an efficient and expeditious manner is a critical component of the strategy to bring about recovery, the debate was an eye-opener in many respects.
The Senate behaved as a true second chamber should. Among the speeches, there were the views of a former public servant whose constructively critical eye allowed him to make an important contribution to the debate. And the chamber was also able to benefit from the observations of a captain of the private sector, at whose desk the buck stops and who therefore understands that inefficiency and maladministration have a financial cost.
Senator Orlando Marville, who was once a civil servant, charged that the Civil Service was dysfunctional, that it was the old colonial Civil Service and that nothing had changed fundamentally. We suspect that the outspoken senator knows what he is talking about, but it was still a shock to hear that the service was not a place for “anyone with imagination”, and that “imagination is discouraged”.
The picture we are being given is that in the 21st century we are operating a service for the public interest, but in which our methods are largely outdated. What is more is that our bright young people, educated at public expense and with higher degrees and professional qualifications, are not encouraged to use their creative and learned skills for the improved delivery of public service.
This is clearly a recipe for standing still, frozen in time and encumbered with the tools of yesteryear while tackling the problems of an electronic age in which more efficient methods of doing business are the norm at technical and at human resource levels.
How can we expect to match our competitors if we are so handicapped by our own inaction, and what has happened to public sector reform, which was supposed to tackle these matters?
Senator Geoffrey Cave’s outstanding contribution benefited from his experience in the private sector managing an enterprise that has had to respond in a timely manner to market conditions. His comments are worth their weight in gold. In his view we have a bureaucracy with too many layers, and reform is needed.
We agree with Senator Cave.
It simply takes too long to get decisions out of Government – wading through the mass of red tape and the layers of bureaucracy contributes significantly to this delay. The private sector could not survive using these outdated methods, and as Senator Cave also emphasized, reform does not mean sending home people, “because that is not good for the country”.
His solution is to think of efficient employment, and in this respect he remarked that the Private Sector Agency had sent various recommendations to the Prime Minister calling for a committee on efficiency.
We are not aware of what has been recommended, but no harm can be done and much good may come from examining the private sector’s recommendations, along with other views that are currently being considered for public sector reform. And time is of the essence.