EDITORIAL: Looming new cabinet: Action is what counts

 

In Summary

• But the anxiety is not entirely  sincere – that, all the people in the  crowd of the anxious  want changes because they believe that  the dropping of some officials and their replacement would herald positive, and even revolutionary changes.

It is in human nature to be excited about changes in the leadership of key governance institutions. The  anticipated Cabinet reshuffle fits into that framework.  But the anxiety is not entirely  sincere – that, all the people in the  crowd of the anxious  want changes because they believe that  the dropping of some officials and their replacement would herald positive, and even revolutionary changes. Some derive pleasure from seeing those they dislike tossed out, and  their replacement (even if not wholly on merit)  with acquaintances who they believe or hope would dole out favours to them, by manipulating their positions.

So, in speculations centred on  who would be ‘In’ and ‘Out’ of particular outfits or dockets,  a mixture of sincerity and ill-will is apparent. Our thesis is that, the  President, as supreme appointing authority,  should strive to settle for the best possible individuals  as service providers at the helm of particular posts, for the public’s collective good.

Minimising mess

In doing so, however, he cannot be, and shouldn’t be expected to be, a miracle performer; he counts on subordinates tasked with scouting for good talents, drawing short-lists, and advising the top-most boss on who is best suited for which post.

We also count, by extension, on the wisdom  and discretion of the  ultimate decision maker to narrow down to individuals who would not disappoint him or the public over whom he presides.

It’s against those considerations that we hope the anticipated new Cabinet will  be an effectively  and efficiently  ticking dynamo for running government affairs.

We hope, by extension, that it wouldn’t have under-performing members of the sort that trigger periodic, more-or-less fashionable  calls for reshuffles, for this disgraces the President, upsets wananchi,  and lowers the esteem of the country in the eyes of the rest of the watchful  world.

A point that merits revisiting, though, is that, in executing  the political accountability principle, some  otherwise exemplary  performers  bear the burden of inept subordinates unfairly by being rendered circumstantially jobless. It’s prudent then, that the public refrains from passing sweeping judgements on all those who are dropped or leave on their own accord, and instead pursue the case-by-case approach.

For it is not humanly possible for a minister to conduct close, day-today, week-by week  monitoring of the  numerous activities under one’s docket. Which brings us to the  additional crucial need of creating strong monitoring,  virtually round-the clock  monitoring mechanisms under which shortcomings or flaws can be detected, arrested and acted upon.

Much as the accountability principle remains valid and must be enforced,  officials at  various levels on the hierarchical chain must discharge their roles as best they can, and keep in check any wayward, and in some cases sabotage  tendencies, and swiftly book those who fail the test. This way,  the mess into which government activities are often plunged, would at best be avoided, and at worst, minimised.