It is an irony of modern history that even when governments and leaders covet more and more power, many of them zealously pursue neoliberal economic policies that essentially believe in the reduced role of governments. Globalisation, liberalisation and privatisation, which became the dominant economic sutras in the last decade of the 20th century, were premised on the inefficiency of the government and its machinery, and the implicit efficiency of the market. As Francis Fukuyama observes in Liberalism and its Discontents, faith in “the superior efficiency of markets evolved into something of a religion, in which state intervention was opposed as a matter of principle.” After three decades of neoliberal policies, it is now being increasingly recognised that even for markets to function effectively and equitably, there have to be regulatory systems that ensure transparency and accountability.
This inalienable role of governments was brought into sharper focus during and after the pandemic. Even prior to the pandemic, liberal economic policies and globalisation had become suspect. While the developments promised by the liberal economic reforms remained elusive, they distorted the socioeconomic situation and created conspicuous inequalities. Corporate oligarchies have begun to dictate policies to governments. However, the pandemic has shaken this cosy cohabitation and reinforced the crucial role of governments. In the post-pandemic period of economic recovery, governments in Europe and Asia as well as in the United States have been increasingly sensitive to the deprivation of their people, and have formulated social and economic policies aimed at correcting the distortions.
Sadly, in India, no such egalitarian eagerness is visible at the national level. On the other hand, there is a debate at this level on “the freebie culture vs fiscal prudence”. The pandemic has demonstrated that what citizens expect in times of crisis is not a government that stands aloof but an administration that is visible, benevolent and responsive. Post-pandemic, the twin dimensions of growth and welfare have gained importance. In the backdrop of high inflation, job losses, agrarian crises, widening inequalities, high hunger index, and increasing social tensions, the utterances of some of our leaders ridiculing ‘revadi’ culture and invoking stringent lessons of fiscal prudence become outdated.
Over and above the post-pandemic stagnation and allied complexities, the power of emerging technologies that have opened up new opportunities and threats has further defined the role of the government. The new digital technologies do not, by definition, respect national boundaries, though major players toe government regulations purely out of business interests. Bureaucracy finds itself in a strange land of possibilities and constraints. On the one hand, social expectations for better service delivery are on the rise even as powerful technologies offer unprecedented opportunities to serve better.
More than any period in human history, this century has gifted us technologies with unprecedented intelligence and unbelievable speed. Governments today have a need and an opportunity to re-engineer systems and processes to discover a new pace and poise of administration and law enforcement. It is now possible to provide relief and services to citizens based on objective parameters and with utmost transparency and efficiency. Even as our leaders wallow in self-laudatory pronouncements about the country’s shining achievements, and showcase the benefits of e-governance, the fact remains that corruption is all-pervasive and the rights of the citizens are still a matter of condescension. The erroneous presumption that greater application of technology is per se better governance is doing enormous damage to bureaucracy. Technological application for the convenience of government departments is not a bad idea, but to infer that it has always improved the life of the citizen is far-fetched, if not perverse.
If the new technologies including Artificial Intelligence and social media have to be optimally utilised for achieving citizen-centric governance reforms, firstly there has to be an unequivocal commitment and clarity at the national level—cutting across party differences—that a people-first approach is the primary principle of governance. Unfortunately, the default setting of today’s governance appears to be still controlled by the need to gradually withdraw from several sectors, and socially divisive politics that makes secularism almost an offence. Secondly, technology alone has only limited utility in an atmosphere of non-negotiable rigidity. The enormous potential of the existing and emerging technologies cannot be harnessed in an administrative ecosystem where procedures, presumptions, practices, precedents, and precautions of a different century are still held as sacrosanct and their violations are used to selectively target erring officers. The corrupt in the administrative set-up imaginatively misuse these controls to their selfish advantage.
While a truly IT-enabled administration would ideally invalidate the need for human interface and subjective interpretation, we still ritualistically use technology without recognising the need for doing things at the click of a mouse. Admittedly there have been areas where dealings with the government have become faster and more objective, but the manuals and regulatory labyrinths continue as built-in neutralisers. For instance, delegation of decision-making and financial powers to personnel at various bureaucratic levels is even today unthinkable in the government where delegation is like a miser’s gift. Drastic delegation has already been practiced in private and commercial sectors, thereby rendering greater customer satisfaction. The financial powers that a branch manager of a bank enjoys will be mind-boggling to the government. Gloating about the gains of e-governance—without any radical resetting of mindset, repudiation of ancient practices and emancipation from archaic thought patterns—is an insult to technology and citizens. Especially when citizens look towards governments for more.
K Jayakumar
Former Kerala chief secretary and ex-VC, Thunchath Ezhuthachan Malayalam University