Louis Farrugia, chief executive of the Farsons group and one of Malta’s captains of industry, hit the nail on the head when he bravely stirred Malta’s stagnant waters the other day and made an urgent case for civil service reform. Interviewed in another section of the press (The Times’ Business Supplement, 21 July) he recalled that “he has spent years repeatedly calling for reform in various sectors, ranging from the public sector to port operations”. He stressed that... “the civil service needs major investment to bring it out of mediocrity to excellence”.

“I am sometimes disappointed by the lack of understanding of the importance of doing things thoroughly and properly and fairly. The civil service still has a long way to go,” he emphasised.

And he proceeded to elaborate: “We have a culture in this country of blaming politicians. I blame them for not developing a professional civil service to make sure that things work and that we do not always have to ‘incemplu il-Ministru’ (phone the minister)” he added.

Mr Farrugia has pinpointed the ailment. It is remedies that are needed.

Old burning topic

Civil servants are the artificers who run the engine of executive government. They are supposed to be in charge of the software and hardware of the administration and are immediately responsible for the ‘hidden wiring” of the system.

The word ‘supposed’ is used advisedly because, in reality, their role is more often than not usurped by politicians who do not only expect full visibility and claim control when the going is good, but who blame their underlings each time an ill wind blows.

This broad issue has been the subject of national debate on more than one occasion. It was a burning topic 15 years ago when the Fenech Adami administration was considering a thorough public service reform.

At that time, the Chamber of Commerce contributed its pennyworth of advice. It was never taken seriously. The fish continues to stink at the head to this very day,

The Chamber started from the premise that one could not have an efficient public service without a motivated and competent staff. The exigencies of modern government demand a professional civil service with the necessary specialized qualifications where broad managerial and administrative responsibilities are involved.

It was stressed that, in order to meet present-day demands, the civil service must strengthen the system of recruitment, intensify career training and offer opportunities of promotion to officers who back up their experience with qualifications.

Abuse of political patronage

Security of tenure, status and protection from abuse (especially by politicians) were indicated as important considerations. It was also pointed out that abuse of political patronage was leading to a situation where experienced and/or efficient civil servants resigned or lost their drive.

It was suggested that there should be a form of machinery whereby civil servants could take up their grievances involving politicians.

One sentence from the Chamber’s memorandum ran as follows:

“The brain drain resulting from abuse of political patronage would be reduced if some independent overriding authority or a Civil Service Ombudsman could be set up. While the employer would still be free to dismiss, he must pay compensation if he abuses his powers.”

The Chamber endorsed the view that it was necessary to dissuade politicians from intervening constantly in day-to-day operations of the service. It made a case for the drawing up of a clear demarcation line between the rights and responsibilities of ministers and parliamentary secretaries, and those of civil servants with managerial and executive functions.

None of this rubbed, either then or since.

I recall the statement of a member of the civil service training agency, the Staff Development Organisation, holding forth in the Administrative Review (Spring l992) declaring that “the notion of a politically neutral civil service in Malta is a utopian concept, to which neither civil servants nor politicians can afford to hold on!”

He believed that it was not possible, in the prevailing social and political circumstances, to reverse the trend of a political civil service.

“Matters were negatively predisposed by the civil service colonial past, But various factors made things worse, including the seemingly unstructured allocation of ministerial portfolios, the obscure delineation of political and administrative role, and bureaucrat bashing,” he declared.

Continues on page 20

Constitutional void

He also held that “the politician-administrator relationship is not helped by the fact that the country’s Constitution does not address the delineation of political and administrative roles or patterns of authority and organization in government. Whereas the Constitution gives the minister ‘general’ but not specific direction and control over government departments, nothing is said about what should remain the civil servant’s preserve.”

At the same time it was noted that although politicians have the opportunity to oversee administrative details, parliamentary control of ministers is very weak.

Parliament is simply not geared to probe behind the scenes of ministerial and departmental activity. At the same time, there are extremely effective ways of neutralising unwelcome parliamentary scrutiny.

Time has stood still and nothing has changed since the early 1990s. If anything, the politicians have consolidated their hold.

It explains why the engine hasn’t worked, and why it cannot work as it should unless it is properly serviced.

Wailing and crying over spilt milk does not help matters.

The point is to clean the Aegean stables and bring the Maltese civil service into the 21st century

[email protected]