Callisthenics and maybe even yoga? Expectations on what babus must do next are high. Yet remember this system is 63 now, and under ordinary circumstances (Cabinet secretaries exempted) should be near set to retire. The fact is that the concept of a “changing bureaucracy” is an oxymoron. Indian bureaucracy is today in a

bind. Besides being set into a template of inertia and dysfunction, ours seems mired in more mud than flowed in Leh. India’s “steel frame” envisioned by the British has sadly now come to stand for both venal and mega corruption, lack of transparency and sheer inefficiency. Still, even within the immovable mountains of the Indian bureaucracy, there has been some movement in recent years which seems to be gathering some urgency. Worthies outside the system have suggested more drastic solutions. N.R. Narayana Murthy of Infosys, for instance, suggests “off with their (collective) heads”, but for the moment they doggedly endure.
Of course, from time to time every government has had to dabble in administrative reforms to ensure they keep the system afloat. The energies released as a consequence of liberal economic policies seem to make “reforming government systems” an imperative once again. The Indian babu has been shafted by something foisted on him — economic reforms. Changes in the economic structure have raised new demands for different kinds of control and accountability in the civil services. What we are seeing today is in a sense a post-trauma disorder that verges on the disorderly. The cry has gone out into the wilderness it seems, to usher out a creaking old bureaucracy and replace it with a well-oiled, “citizen-centric” system, in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s words. But Dr Singh’s voice is a lone one. Nobody around him quite knows what to do — or can even begin to initiate it.
“When in doubt about how to administer, you must regulate.” This is the new mantra as market forces rush in where investment feared to tread. From aviation to railways, from banking to telecom, the gold rush urge of global enterprise has battered down old rule books. Buoyed by rising consumer expectations, government has had to throw open sector after sector (BlackBerry, are you listening?). Politicians reluctantly are coming to know that an unhappy consumer is a nasty voter. So rules have to be drowned and the pell-mell of a bull rush is shattering most of the comfort-zones of babus of yore.
With rules erased riotously, the administrators of yore are left on strange shores with little cover. So what do they do? Set up regulatory authorities — ah, what bliss! The idea is jobs for the boys all over again. This time Nirvana — after your tour of terrestrial duty! The same babu who wasn’t allowed to administer is now made regulator. And for those with bigger ambitions (read secretaries with that extra chutzpah and clout) there are super regulators on the way.
Thus was born a new string of IT industry-sounding acronyms. Industry-specific regulators have sprung up everywhere, such as the Insurance Regulation and Development Authority (IRDA), Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi), Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB), Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC), Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) etc, that are making their presence felt. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has just got underway and the Central Information Commission (CIC) is spearheading the RTI “revolution”.
It’s always been that when push comes to shove, the babus of yore have always deployed their reflex action to block and then come out with the minimum damage control. The Right to Information Act of 2005 is one such outcome. It is significant to remember that RTI, warts and all, came into existence as a consequence of sustained extraneous pressure, primarily from civil society. Politicians who made it now continue to bask in its glory, leaving the poor babus to fend for themselves. As whistleblowers abound, the din seems to be growing louder like the much-hated vuvuzelas at the recent soccer World Cup. It’s now becoming harder to keep the skeletons from rattling out of the cupboards. The RTI activists are now clearly the Fifth Estate, at a time when babus had barely begun to grapple with the vociferous Fourth Estate!
When talking of bureaucracy, there is no doubt that size matters. The size of the bureaucracy in India has been static as far as the top is concerned for a reasonably long period now. The intake into the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) had kind of plateaued and over the last few years there have been studies suggesting that the extent of interest and enthusiasm among fresh applicants is waning. Questions have been raised about the quality of the top bureaucracy, namely the IAS, and questions have also been raised about the levels of efficacy and control that they have been able to bring to bear. But these are merely straws in the wind. The fact is that in basic outline the changes may have been substantive, but the control and overarching influence of the IAS continues to hold sway.
The iron fist of IAS predominance of course remains a sore sticking point, as does the debate over generalist versus specialist babus or about the need to downsize babudom in general. Most of these and other issues have been deliberated many times over while drawing up the big, fuzzy reforms agendas. Clearly, reinventing the bureaucracy seems to be the call of the 21st century.
Debate is raging between downsizing bureaucracy and upscaling skill sets. The nation is keen to see people at the helm with foresight, savvy, a modicum of national pride and, if possible, some accountability. It is a daunting task, but one we must revisit to retain our national sanity.