Minister of State, Joseph Harmon, in his recent charge to permanent secretaries and upper management officers, called on them to improve their performance. For quite some time the society has been calling for the public service to be restored to a place where efficiency, effectiveness, and courtesy are hallmarks. That the minister is reinforcing this call should be seen as acknowledgment of the public’s call and therefore justifiable.

The realisation of the desires of the government as it relates to the performance of public officers ought to factor in the various issues that contribute to compromising quality delivery of government’s business. From time to time questions are raised as to the political climate within which public servants are asked to operate.

It is not a well-kept secret that at times decisions and the implementation process are filled with personality and partisan political positions. Operating in such a climate can deny public officers giving of their best and upholding professionalism because the atmosphere does not lend itself to these realisations. Non-implementation of some government programmes in many instances is stymied not because of the absence of guidelines and public officers unaware of their roles but hesitance in making decisions.

This could be the result of the lack of self-confidence or not wanting to be visited with the wrath of an intemperate minister.
The public service was established to be insulated from such occupational hazard but to deny the prevalence of these features and their impact on compromising professionalism and integrity of the workers cannot be overlooked. In our society where there exist limited employment opportunities and persons have financial commitments to meet, few will want to walk away or be terminated. In this environment the public servant in the discharge of his/her duty is being caught between a rock and a hard place.

While expectations are held of them, though not unreasonable, should they have a grievance the infrastructures are absent or not allowed to function properly. Public servants need the surety that they are free to function consistent with public service rules and guidelines. And where they are asked to act in conflict with these, should they be disciplined for failing to comply, recourse for justice should be available. This is another way of building confidence.
It may be opportune as the minister stresses the importance of performance and service that the institutional structures to ensure and protect these, function simultaneously.

The 2016 Commission of Inquiry into the Public Service made known the importance of confidence building and effective management to the delivery of public service. The report noted that key to these are the employer having meaningful engagement with the workers’ representative (i.e. the trade unions) and ensure establishment of the Public Service Appellate Tribunal. Where these and others are absent exhortation will not bring the desired results.

Even as appointed public servants are expected to professionally discharge their duties where a parallel contractual service exists alongside them-who would not have gone through the system as they would have and are being treated better- such creates insecurity and compromises professionalism. Another issue often overlooked is that the service takes its cue from the political leadership, which is another aspect of public service. In our society leaders are expected to set the tone through example.

The appointed public servants’ professionalism will only shine when the elected servants’ actions create the space for it to happen. In societies as small as ours, where politics becomes personal and territorial, the lines between the policymakers and executors could become blurred during the day-to-day execution of duty. It is not unheard of where ministers will immerse themselves into administrative activities, unmindful that their role is that of policy development, from which the programmes will flow, and the public servant executes.

Recognition by ministers of government that there are distinction of roles and responsibilities between them and appointed public servants, though their activities are intertwined, would allow for each to be given the space and respect the role of the other. An effective public service is key to good governance. Effort by Minister Harmon, while commendable, should not stop at the level of the appointed officers but equally extend to elected officers. Cultivating a new public service requires holistic approach. The society is capable of doing it.