One of my greatest regrets is that I opted out of public service before my time was fully up. I was left with no choice; as that was a requirement for me to join Mimos Berhad based on a contractual offer they made and also, as made conditional by the Public Services Department (JPA) to accept that offer.
Nevertheless, one former chief secretary to the government privately advised me not to leave as he had plans to appoint me a secretary-general. I asked when; and offered my tongue-in-cheek reply; “Based on ‘kulitfication’ and after seven years?” I was only 48 years then; and I had a full career future ahead of me.
I was already the ‘best student’ in one of two senior officer promotional courses at the National Institute of Public Administration (Intan); so what else was really needed to prove either capability or capacity? The Intan courses use a 360-degree evaluation system, including deploying more senior colleagues.
This column is my considered views about that an effective chief secretary should be like, based on my almost 40 years experience in public policy work. The last good chief secretary was the former one who publicly reintroduced the CS Lewis definition of the concept of ‘integrity’, after Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Pak Lah) first popularised it.
The chief secretary is also ex-officio chairperson of the Integrity Institute of Malaysia (IIM), apart from many boards of directors. He is even ex-officio president of the Public Services Golf Club or KGPA. Most public service boards also have institutional appointees and other so-called independent others. I wonder how independent these appointees really are, especially since we see and take note of all the mess around us with bad purchasing and investment decisions.
Regardless, it appears that most of these ‘ex-officio appointees’ appear not to understand some very basic words like ‘responsibility’ or even ‘accountability’. What do I really mean? These are board members who are to give direction to the many government-linked boards of directors, but obviously they, too, have lost their sense of direction.
Whose responsibility and accountability?
The chief secretary is the only permanent cabinet member and holds the ex-officio appointment of chief secretary to the cabinet. He has an entire cabinet division to support him in all his work. He can actually transition beyond even prime ministers and cabinet ministers. In the past, no prime minister would ever consider a cabinet reshuffle without a discussion about the idea with the chief secretary.
I do not know how much moral and ethical corruption has taken place on this practice now. Maybe, having been in power for 58 years, the Umno PM does not ever need to consider the chief secretary worthy of any opinions, when his future is only determined by Umno members and leaders.
In other writings, I have argued against the current and continuous abuse of the Auditor-General’s Report; by the public service not seriously taking action against obvious wrong-doers and wrong-doing. The current chief secretary is reported by Malaysiakini to have said :
“This case involved five government servants, two of them have retired. Since they have retired, they have escaped (punishment).” That’s why we must identify the (malpractice) earlier on. If it is not crime-related, disciplinary action cannot be taken against those who have retired.”
Sorry, Mr Chief Secretary, I cannot accept your excuse, as your senior colleague and as a tax-paying Malaysian. You are the most important public servant, and you are not meant to be a political appointee. You should be the most professional and responsible person within the public services, and the one who determines the appointment, promotion, and retirement of all other public servants. You chair or are a member of all promotion boards.
Therefore, you cannot be publicly giving excuses, as you just did.
Sorry, Sir, but the buck stops with you. You are not elected and do not owe any loyalty to cover even the ministers for the wrongful instructions. Please do not collude with the culture of irresponsibility and lack of accountability made so visible by 1MDB.
Even the appointment of the chairperson of the Elections Commission is not just a PM’s privilege. If the person selected has zero credibility or is a card-carrying Umno member, you can put your foot down and say ‘No’.
Look for yourself at the current state of confusion about the Election Commission and their conduct. Can you ever imagine our forefathers accepting the reality of a government commission being taken to court? To me, these are unthinkable realities, and they only tell me that your portfolio as the chief secretary is no longer an effective one.
If you are not cautious, you are slowly but surely becoming the chief ‘idiocrat of an idiocratic cabinet of ministers’. I have defined this coinage before and do not plan to do it here again.
Sir, by design of the British system of good governance, you are also the de facto interim prime minister or chief executive when the current government of the day is dissolved. If you cannot understand that, or if you do not know that, please resign from this portfolio as you are not capable of leading to serve this nation-state we all love.
Juniors cannot check on seniors, Sir
Dear chief secretary, I read somewhere that you told new government officers to keep their eyes on bosses and not to do things that are not right, legal, or irresponsible. Really? Is this your serious advice? Is that your way to make them accountable and responsible officers? What if the ‘instructions’ come from political ministers or their secretaries? What are the junior officers to do, when even you appear unable to control the senior officers?
After all this, everyone agrees and repeats excuses to explain why senior officers can escape after wrongdoing. Do you not chair the pensions committee at JPA; why not simply stop all pension actions until the wrongs are righted? Surely you can do this?
And surely, you know how to review the Auditor-General’s Report even before it is tabled in Parliament; especially if you tell the auditor-general that you want to take action against all wrongdoing before it is tabled? As the key and relevant management do you not have a right to review the Audit Report and make your responses?
Sir, why do you not simply admit that you have no political will to address these issues because of the full implications of such serious action? Is it not easier to close one eye and let this matter repeat itself until some other chief secretary addresses them?
Sir, I am sorry but as an ex-public servant who has high hopes and great respect for the Diplomatic and Administrative Officer (PTD) service, I am disgusted to see the slide down the slippery slope of moral decadence. May God bless Malaysia.
