Since coming to office the government of Prime Minister Perry Christie led the public to believe that it was not in a position to govern as it wished because the government was left in dire financial straits. This thought was on the minds of many businessmen and the attentive public when we learned that the government intends to give civil servants $5 million in salary adjustments in a matter of days.
After asking the country to understand that there was a freeze on hiring in the public service and that austerity measures were in place, the signal coming from the government appears to be duplicitous to say the least. Compounding this was a decision by the government to rent bleaches for Junkanoo at $ 1 million an increase in seed money given to Junkanoo groups. Along with other so-called unnecessary expenditures – including the travel of certain officials, it appears that the government has a “fork-tongue” problem.
While it is expected that a new government should honour promises or contracts made by a previous government, it is not expected to succumb to pressure which is not in the national interest. Is it understood that the Free National Movement government promised an increase to the leadership of the Bahamas Public Services Union. However, with the government running a deficit of $20 million a month and with revenue collection down considerably, the increase should not have been extended at this time and the contract should have been re-negotiated whether Christmas was coming or not.
The Christie government has to make up its mind. It is either in a cash crunch or it is not. It cannot be seen to be governing by the politics of the moment – seeking to appease various constituents to remain popular. The government must always do what is right and operate in the national interest.
The reality in governing the Bahamas today is that the public sector is in urgent need of reform. It is a well known fact that the civil service is grossly overstaffed with the lion’s share of the national budget going to personal emoluments. Any government content with such a state of affairs or hesitant to reform the sector is unfit to hold on to power as the national interest is not being served.
The public has become increasingly critical of the services they expect to receive from public agencies, whether these be for drivers’ licences, payment of taxes, hospital care, education of children and administration of schools, or the disposal of garbage from neighbourhoods. The demand for quality of all services for which the public pays – or even to which they feel entitled – without direct payment, has become a widespread instinctive response. The public as a customer has high expectations of service providers, as much from the private sector as from their own public institutions.
Rather than getting smaller, the size of the government is apparently about to increase. With the appointment of new boards and commissions, these entities much be properly staffed and resourced if they are to be effective. Without the necessary staff requirements, those appointed to serve would be frustrated and the intended objectives could be compromised.
Beyond the cost of running the public sector, there is a need for a new organizational culture. Whether we examine public perceptions, identify changing roles and expect new norms of behaviour from the political directorate, high-level administrators, junior clerks, service commissions and others – the long term outcome of a public sector reform process has to come to grips with questions of culture. The way things are done as habit and routine, how rewards and punishment are selectively discharged, whose charisma and style receive praise or condemnation… These aspects taken in their totality constitute a culture – in the public sector nurtured by a wider political culture.
Dr. Patrick Gomes, Director of the Caribbean centre for Administration and development in Barbados writing on the need for reform and innovation in the public sector says, “Fundamentally, the questions are rooted in how – the methods, strategies, programmes, by which the ‘organizational cultures’ in public bureaucracies can be made to bend – to be recast into new moulds and reconstructed so that new or alternative values and norms be the measures of success. The pre-conditions are in motion already, the consciousness of the public, the growing dissatisfaction with sloppy service and expectations that there will be “value for money” in all aspects of public services.
The tasks ahead for the government call for mobilising resources and charting a vision of a future to make the government more productive and efficient while at the same time expanding the economy, giving it more depth and breath to meet the needs of a growing population.
Insight, The Bahama Journal
