A REPORT on the state of our civil service by the World Bank was the subject of an article, “Poor marks for civil service”, by fellow columnist, Azman Ujang last week.
All the concerns raised by the bank and others that the writer cited, including the auditor-general, a former senior cabinet minister, European Union ambassadors, a local think tank official and other notables, are nothing new.
The red light on these concerns – rampant leakages and financial mismanagement, lack of accountability, impartiality and openness, discriminatory employment practices, a non-racially inclusive leadership in key decision-making positions, untenable size, politicisation, etc – has been flashing for more than 30 years.
Survivors of the first (1989) National Economic Consultative Council should be able to recall the marathon sessions in debating these concerns of civil service shortcomings. Sadly, the many reform proposals arising from that august body were ignored by the government of the day headed by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. In fact, only one major proposal was adopted – that liberalising private higher education policy. This one single measure turned out to be a life saver for the non-Malay younger generation hitherto unable to access the public universities easily with the advent of the NEP.
Deciphering our civil service
To understand the nature and extent of the problems besetting the civil service, it is necessary to go back to the May 13 riots and the New Economic Policy which was implemented to correct the socio-economic imbalances that were officially claimed to be a catalyst in the bloody episode.
To achieve national unity, which was its primary goal, the NEP targeted the eradication of poverty and the restructuring of the economy by eliminating the identification of race with economic function.
There were to be two components of societal restructuring. The first was the creation of the bumiputra commercial and industrial community (BCIC) to ensure a viable participation of bumiputra individuals in the modern sectors. The target was that bumiputras would own and manage at least 30% of the total commercial and industrial activities of the economy by 1990.
This target, it needs to be emphasised, was a means to an end, namely to achieve better distribution of assets and income for the entire bumiputra community. It was never intended to create a special class of privileged bumiputras.
The second component was related to the restructuring of the civil service and was to ensure equitable non-Malay participation. The framers of the NEP possibly had a win-win scenario in mind. Establishment of a more multiracial civil service would serve as a quid pro quo for the momentous changes envisaged in the private sector.
On the first restructuring component, although there is some controversy over the present extent of bumiputra ownership and control of the corporate economy, there can be no doubt that great progress has been achieved.
The opposite, however, has taken place with regard to civil service restructuring. Not only has there been no progress but there has been a regression in non-Malay representation in the civil service with even the early post-Merdeka recruitment ratio of 4 Malays to 1 non-Malay done away with.
Malay – not bumiputra – dominance of the civil service at the higher ends of key sectors is so overwhelming and politically embarrassing that the detailed statistics on racial representation are virtually state secrets and inaccessible to the public and even media.
Why civil service restructuring never happened
It is easy to understand why the political elite in Umno would attach little importance to or ignore this component of the NEP. As for the non-Malay political elite, one would have assumed that the leaders of MCA, Gerakan, MIC and other Barisan non-Malay parties would have made this a non-negotiable part of the NEP implementation as the private sector restructuring was.
That they failed to do so speaks volumes of the quality of the non-Malay political leadership for the past 50 years.
Looking back now with the advantage of hindsight, if only a minuscule fraction of the public attention and resources that has gone into the restructuring of the private sector had been allocated towards the restructuring of the civil service, perhaps we would have long ago arrived at a higher stage of national unity, resilience and competitiveness.
Why was the promise of greater non-Malay representation in the civil service not fulfilled is yet to be definitively determined by scholars.
For me, an important clue to the answer to this seemingly difficult poser can be found in the terse explanation of a deputy cabinet minister when asked on the failure of his party to take a stand on the corporate equity controversy.
“We all went for the dangled carrots – some were very big, some small. You see, unfortunately I had financial obligations with an aging mother and family issues ...”
Kicking the can down the road
Today, the most important priority in civil service reform is no longer that of equitable or reasonable ethnic representation. That issue has to take second place to questions relating to the size of the civil service and its cost to the nation.
On this vital subject it is clear that nearly all politicians – including from the present government – would rather kick the can of worms down the road for another generation of leaders to resolve. This has worked to some extent in the past.
Unfortunately the can of worms can no longer be kicked away so easily.
Data from the Ministry of Finance shows that the bill for the nation’s civil service has increased dramatically during the past 10 years. Together the combination of salaries (referred to as emoluments) and pension payments ballooned from 33.2% of government operating expenditure in 2008 to 38.8% in 2014 and 45.4% in 2018. This huge increase happened despite steadily growing allocations for operating expenditure – RM153 billion in 2008; RM220 billion in 2014 and RM235 billion in 2018.
Given that the life expectancy of civil servants will increase further and with the continuing growth in civil service numbers (up from 1.2 million in 2010 to 1.7 million at latest count with this number not including staff from “off-budget” entities paid by the government) it will not require much to trigger a financial crisis in our national accounts.
To avert this looming crisis – all our decision makers are reminded that the total income tax collection from companies and individuals is not enough to pay for the salaries and increasing pension bill of civil servants alone – it is imperative that all new entrants to the civil service be required to enrol in the Employees Provident Fund instead of the government pension scheme. This proposal of belt tightening is suggested as a first step in the longer route to civil service reform.
Consequences of a financial meltdown
When the political leaders of Greece ignored the amber light that warned of an imminent financial crisis in 2007-08, the Greek population paid a heavy price in the way of austerity measures, unemployment, impoverishment, out-migration of its brightest and the longest recession in its history with some of its effects still experienced today a decade later.
Should we disregard the amber light flashing on our oversized and financially unsustainable civil service, we can expect similar grievous socio-economic consequences.
This article is the eighth in the series on the state of Malay dominance. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
