9
THESE are the highlights of the last 50 days of Pakistani politics: use of far from decent language by a politician while challenging his opponents from atop his container, apparent fabrication by another politician while responding in parliament to the objections of opposition leaders, the mockery that federal ministers made of their stature by ridiculing their opponents and the verbal spat in which one parliamentarian called another a “dirty rat”. Such behaviour has resulted not only in discrediting the politicians but further undermining our faith in this country’s fledgling democracy.
When senior leadership resorts to such tactics, the lower ranks are bound to up the ante. Absence of constructive criticism and consensus building is one aspect of the behaviour that was exposed in the recent political tumult. This lack of astuteness on the part of politicians is not limited to the choice of words alone. Politicians are found at sea in administrative and procedural spheres as well.
For example, when PTI parliamentarians recently decided to tender their resignations in the National Assembly, some of them addressed their resignation to the party chairman instead of the speaker. Conspiracy theorists might say it was intentional but the fact of the matter is that it was not. They simply were not aware of the rules of business. Ignorance of this sort is not limited to one political party; it is across the board.
Most politicians are clueless about the workings of government.
The cluelessness of politicians about the workings of the government machinery and policymaking is often a topic of banter among civil servants serving with them. This lack of understanding of rules and regulations almost always leaves the majority of politicians at the mercy of the bureaucrats’ advice.
In all fairness, politicians are not to be blamed for this gap, as there is hardly any infrastructure that focuses on training and grooming them for more responsible positions in government. On the contrary, the individuals recruited by the government as civil servants go through extensive trainings right from the first day in service till the fag end of their careers. A civil servant must successfully complete various training courses to move up the bureaucratic hierarchy. Though the effectiveness of these training programmes can be questioned and there is much scope for improvement, something is better than nothing.
Now consider the politicians’ ascent to pivotal positions. A candidate winning an assembly seat in the general elections moves straight to parliament in a matter of weeks, and from there can be elevated to a position in cabinet without any substantial preparation for the portfolio he is going to look after. How can we expect them to perform any better when training and capacity building is considered an exercise in futility by most and ranks, if at all, really low on the priority list of the movers and shakers in government?
The National School of Public Policy is responsible for training civil servants in Pakistan. Since politicians are also public servants their training should also be brought under its ambit. However, unlike the case for civil servants, the cost for training the politicians should not be borne by taxpayers.
The objective of this training should be to familiarise the candidates with the workings of government and to emphasise the importance of concepts like state secrets, diplomatic ties, protocol, religious tolerance and media handling. It should help bring home the realisation that being good at constituency politics and electioneering is not what democracy is all about. Actually, it is just the springboard from where we take a leap of faith.
Efforts have been made for capacity building of politicians in the past as well but the scope of all such efforts has been very limited. The National Defence University, formerly known as National Defence College, had introduced training programmes for parliamentarians with little success: once in office it becomes hard for parliamentarians to maintain the seriousness of purpose and requisite focus for such trainings. Civil society organisations such as the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency, Liberal Forum Pakistan and Aurat Foundation have also come up with training manuals and workshops for legislators. Their efforts, though commendable, cannot match the impact of institutionalised training under government patronage.
Therefore, it is imperative to legislate on the issue to make the completion of a self-financed six months’ training course part of the eligibility criteria for running for parliament. Needless to say, training all candidates rather than only the successful ones would inculcate a civilised political culture in the longer run.
The introduction of such trainings would not turn things around instantly. Change is not an overnight process, but no matter how long the journey, it begins with a single step.
The writer is a former civil servant.
Published in Dawn, October 23rd, 2014
