Effective governance subject to  implementation of reforms

LAHORE: Governance challenges faced by many countries worldwide are global in nature, although its effectiveness is subject to reforms that our government should implement.

There are few reforms that should be instituted at the global level, such as those related to climate change or epidemics, but these issues have a little to do with our day to day problems, like poor sanitation, unemployment, hunger and inequality. The oft-repeated common complaint that governance is too expensive conceals the fact the current governance style is a conspiracy among national and international elites against the common citizen.

Our problems that are domestic in nature cannot be fixed through the rules made by international institutions, which operate for the benefit of vested interests in the same way as our domestic institutions do. For instance, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) conducts surveillance on the economy of each of its members to detect economic vulnerabilities and imbalances. Its yardstick for members of the European Union is in sharp contrast to the recipe the Fund suggests for the countries, like Pakistan. 

The IMF dares not recommend harsh measures for Greece, Spain or Italy because European governments are the large stakeholders in the IMF. The massive bailout package the IMF’s board approved for Greece despite its refusal to implement the recommended reforms was in contrast to the approvals the board granted for the release of mere $500 million per quarter for Pakistan.

In the context of global governance, it seems though there is a need for effective transnational institutions, yet it is unlikely that vested interests would loosen their grip on the institutions any time soon. Still, the globalisation of trade, travel and telecommunications accompanied with the web of multination corporate and financial institutions demands a transparency in globalisation of reforms. The first step towards governance is to introduce meaningful national and local reforms. 

The need for domestic reforms cannot be underscored. Some experts claim that private sector is the major opponent of reforms. They ignore the fact that bureaucracy has a vested interest in continuity of the current system. 

Of more than two million bureaucrats in Pakistan, half are involved in public dealings. Everyone knows that a file does not move without greasing the palms of a bureaucrat. When you have to meet a mid-level officer, you have to bear the cost of cooperation of his assistants, down to peon. 

There is a bureaucratic self-interest in all the government affairs from sanctioning of utility services to transfer of property and from admitting child in a government school to the treatment of a dear one in state-run clinic. The official permissions, permits and licences all have additional costs apart from the government fees.

With so much at stake, the biggest resistance to the reforms comes from the bureaucracy. Whenever an honest bureaucrat initiates a transparent measure the corrupt bureaucracy opposes it tooth and nail, instigating their years-old clients in private sector to start protests. Thus, electronic supervision of production is vehemently opposed by those who underreport production in connivance with the bureaucrats. 

Same thing happened in imports where under-invoicing is a norm, providing a level-playing field to the importers. But, the bureaucrats added to a huge number of the palm greasers. It is not in their interest to check the under invoicing. It is now clearer than ever that bureaucracy resists reforms.

As far as international institutions are concerned they usually turn a blind eye to the violation of the rights of the citizens. The governance is at its worst in the digital technologies. 

Citizen might ignore or meekly protest on these violations by the international institutions. Populism, in fact, echoes the aspiration of the people for resolution of the economic grievances. However, most populist leaders after elections are less interested in tackling these issues as there is an absence of true and prudent reforms.