Service reforms

Adviser for Institutional Reforms Dr Ishrat Husain has at last lifted the curtain from his much-awaited reform package for the country's civil service.

In an interview, published by The News on May 10, he gave the outline of some fundamental changes in the structure as well as the terms and conditions of the Central Superior Services.

Three features stand out in the proposed reforms. First is the idea of fast track promotions to the high flyers while bypassing the below average performers and eventually retiring them before the maximum age limit, presently fixed at 60.

There is another major change in the offing aimed at loosening the hold of generalists like the Pakistan Administrative Service, the direct descendant of the ICS, CSP and DMG cadres.

Dr Ishrat cited the lack of specialist knowledge in the bureaucracy as a major handicap in the nation's progress as specialists such as engineers, doctors, scientists and others do not get timely promotions or other incentives to effectively plan or execute projects in their domains.

A third feature pertains to changes at the recruitment level by eliminating the bulk of CSS aspirants through tests based on Multiple Choice Questions, by carrying out further screening in psychometrics tests to shortlist around 2000 candidates for the written examination. Efforts will be made by adding some special subjects for the candidates, so that those selected have some basic knowledge of service assigned to them.

It is not clear at this stage how far the government can go in adopting these recommendations. Which is why it is rather premature to give definitive views on the package. However, some scrutiny is in order so that the changes do not lead to disfiguring the premier services even further.

The idea of linking pay raise and promotions to high performers and early retirement to slow coaches cannot guarantee a more efficient civil service. As opposed to the corporate sector where an executive can prove his worth by showing higher production or profit, a civil servant's performance is less tangible and can be a matter of perception. Incentives are available in customs and income tax services. That is not helping raise tax revenues. If the annual performance reports are going to remain the criterion for fast-track promotions, the officers may resort to win over the reporting officers. A new evaluation system would have to be evolved to minimise nepotism.

Dr Ishrat also spoke of reducing the support staff at lower levels to make way for more posts of officers to benefit from e-governance. Any plan to reduce posts of clerical staff and naib qasids is likely to be resisted by politicians as recruitment to those categories helps them dole out jobs among their constituents. Besides, if the government is already woefully short of revenues, increasing posts of scale 17 upwards does not make sense.

The military's system of up or out does not apply to the civil service because the armed forces have a well-developed system of reemployment or other benefits to help the transit to retirement. Looking back, we need to remember that independent Pakistan inherited a part of the steel frame that ran the administration of the entire Subcontinent.

In his newly published book ‘Dau Minar’ (Two Minarets), veteran civil service officer Masud Mufti explains at length how a small group of officers helped build the infrastructure of a nascent country in a short span of time. Pakistan came to be cited and followed as a model of progress by countries like Korea and Malaysia.

The reforms group would do well to identify the factors which led to a degradation of the civil service under successive regimes so as not to commit similar errors in the future. It should be recalled that the Quaid directed the civil servants to perform their duties without fear or favour and promised them job security in return.

The contrary happened over the decades as both civil and military rulers wanted to scare the senior officers into toeing the line. More of the same practice of sowing insecurity through fast promotions for some and early retirement for others cannot bring up the diminished morale in the service caused by political interference.

The practice of changing chief secretaries and IGPs is a clear example of violating the Quaid's guidelines for getting the best results from the civil administration.

Dr Ishrat's interview has not attracted much attention even though he has floated ideas which need to be thoroughly discussed. At one point, he said: "We have to move towards a blended approach in which the relative strengths of the generalists and specialists are optimally utilized. Therefore, at the time of induction, we shall create incentives for candidates to match their preferences with some prior domain knowledge..."

Interesting figures were released by Dr Ishrat, like 23,000 non-cadre officers having dim prospects of promotion as compared to 6,000 cadre members who join various groups through the CSS system. Indeed, efforts must be undertaken to promote and empower the specialists. Reserving top jobs for generalists may be anachronistic. But the idea that some departments are prone to corrupt practices because of a lack of bright service prospects, and better job conditions would lead to less corruption does not sound convincing.

Yet another alarming idea in these reforms is that increments could also vary, depending on the performance of officers. The high performers will earn an annual increment of 20-25 percent, those with satisfactory performance would earn 10-15 percent raise and those found below average would be given no increment. While unsatisfactory performance should lead to none or deferred promotion, denial of increment in the officer's current pay scale sounds discriminatory and can lead to litigation. It would be preferable to err on the side of caution.

Email: saeed.saeedk@gmail.com