The late United States Senator and presidential candidate Eugene McCarthy once said, “The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency.” It is almost impossible to find any positive support about the government bureaucracy and the civil servants that occupy those positions of authority.
Yet when you look at stable countries that have weathered all manner of political and social upheaval and chaos, the nations that are able to survive are those with the strongest nonpolitical government institutions.
In 2010 Belgium experienced a period of 589 days without an elected government. The parliamentary system failed to achieve a majority-ruled government and there was effectively no one in political power. But driver’s licenses continued to be issued. Public-health services continued. Roads were still repaired. As the first few weeks passed, there were dire predictions that the country could actually fail and fall into anarchy, affecting all of Europe. This did not happen.
Granted that a caretaker government run by a former prime minister was installed to handle day-to-day affairs, for nearly two years there were no Belgium politicians managing government affairs.
Of course, the bureaucracy is often one of the most corrupt, wasteful, abusive and even dangerous ideas ever conceived in human history. But then again, the same might be said about politics. However, we can certainly find examples of when both can bring out the best of what society can be.
The problem may be in the unholy alliance between “politics” and “government”. The bureaucracy depends on the politicians for its daily bread. The politicians can use the bureaucracy to further their own agendas. The politicians, though, hold the upper hand. Queen of the Seven Kingdoms—Cersei Lannister from the television series the Game of Thrones—said this: “What good is power, if we can’t protect the ones we love?”
Speaker of the House Pantaleon D. Alvarez wrote a letter to the Bureau of Customs (BOC) commissioner “strongly” recommending the appointment of an individual for the position of “Customs Operation Officer V”. This is not a high-level position, requiring three years of experience and a bachelor’s degree. The salary grade is 20, or P43,250 per month.
Why then would it be necessary for the fourth-highest ranking member of the government to offer a suggestion for a midlevel promotion to the head of a government agency? Does Alvarez deserve the intense vitriol that he is getting? Maybe, or maybe not. But you can certainly understand the concerns from the staff of the BOC wondering what the next strong recommendation letter will be about. More important, what will be the potential “quid pro quo”—a favor expected in return for something—for accepting or rejecting the recommendation?
A well-run and honest bureaucracy is essential to the application of the rule of law at an administrative level. It is what ensures that things get done but also what ensures that they get done in as fair a way as possible. How can the public trust the bureaucracy that they have to face every day if the politicians have the ability to influence the organization?
Politicians should let the bureaucracy do its job. Yes, it needs to monitored, punished for failure to perform, and rewarded for a job well done. While not illegal, or perhaps improper, maybe it is time for elected officials to step back from any direct intervention in “government”.