Monday, April 13, 2009

Review of the public sector

Some people think that the recent cases of food poisoning in the markets reflect slackness in enforcement of cleanliness and health by the National Environment Agency.

But, the underlying problem is a deeper one. In recent years, many government agencies have reduced their manpower in the bid to cut cost. We now have insufficient number of people to enforce the law. This applies not only to this Agency but to many other government bodies as well.

It is one thing to cut down cost and manpower on unnecessary activities and red tape. It is a separate matter when the cost cutting lead to cutback in essential services and enforcement of regulations.

Are the reduced manpower put to better use in society? This is hardly the case. Many of the excess manpower find work in the financial and property markets. These financial experts, advisers and agents help to build up a big bubble that has now burst. Many of them have now lost their jobs or face the prospect of being retrenched.

We need to rethink our approach towards the use of manpower in our society. Public service is an essential source of employment. They can do useful work and can be for the good of society.

Does the reduction of manpower in the public sector lead to lower cost for the public? This may not be the case. Too often, the reduction of manpower is followed by huge expenditure on computer systems, management consultants and high salaries for the top people that run the agencies.

We need to reflect on this matter as well. Are we using the public funds properly? Is there a correct balance between employing people to do useful work or replacing them by expensive systems and so-called talents?

Tan Kin Lian

Protecting a democratic institution

The recent change in leadership in AWARE (Association of Women for Research and Education) has raised issues of concern. The old leadership, comprising of volunteers who has worked for many years to build up the values and stature of the organisation was unexpected toppled by a group of new members who voted in a new committee  at the annual general meeting.

To my collection, this type of unplanned leadership change has occurred in some other organisations in the past. The new leadership represent the views of a small group of people who attended the annual general meeting, and does not reflect the membership at large.

What can be done to preserve the democratic nature of an organisation and ensure that the elected leaders reflect the values of the membership?

Here are a few possible approaches:

1. Nominations for elected office should be submitted at least 14 days in advance of the general meeting. The nominees should be required to submit a statement to show their background and their plans for the organisation.

2. Voting should be allowed for all members, rather than those who attend the general meeting. With today's technology, it should be quite easy to vote through the internet. Those who attend the meeting can vote on the spot.

Many organisations in Singapore are weak. People are not prepared to serve in the committee. Each general meeting see the return of a few of the well known figures. Occasionally, an upset election results create big news.

We have to address these long standing problems. It is time for us to build stronger democratic institutions in Singapore.

Tan Kin Lian

Annual General Meeting of NTUC Income

The Annual General Meeting is scheduled to be held at 6 pm on Friday, 29 May 2009 at the Auditorium, 7th level, NTUC Income Centre, 75 Bras Basah Road, Singapore 189557.