‘Nothing wrong with making IB chief a governor’

One of the promises of the UPA government was to usher in administrative reforms to improve the delivery systems. Cabinet Secretary, B K Chaturvedi, who has spent 40 years in the civil service, has been trying hard to make it modern and efficient so that it fits better with the new economic and social environment. In an exclusive interview with Sanjay Kapoor Hardnews, in his office in the Cabinet Secretariat, Chaturvedi spoke on the controversies surrounding the appointment of governors, empanelment of secretaries, the Soli Sorabjee report, and e-governance. Excerpts:

When you joined the Indian Administrative Services 40 years back, you must have thought of bringing about a few changes. Now, as a top bureaucrat and head of the civil services, have you been able to bring about those changes?

Well, I have been able to bring about some changes and others are on the anvil. I can say that I have been able to point things in the right direction and this will take things forward, make the service richer, bring back old values, and make things more effective.  Let me elaborate: we have been trying to fix tenure for the officers to make them more accountable, so that they can work fearlessly.  We have changed the all India service rules. We have identified some posts in which we will have fixed tenures.  We have written to the state governments about these posts and we hope that they will agree, otherwise the central government can notify these posts.  This has been a major issue with us.

The second most important thing is the need to constantly upgrade skills.  We have recently launched a programme in which we are collaborating with foreign universities like Harvard University and Duke University in the US to improve the skills of our officers. Another area that I am concentrating on is to increase the tenure of secretaries to the government. Now they have tenures of only two to three years, where they do two jobs where they are unable to contribute to either. Most of their time goes in the finalization of the pension papers.  I have tried to speed up the level of empanelment at all the stages, and do the empanelment of outstanding officers  – officers with impeccable records – so that we are able to identify about 30 to 40 officers in each batch. We can then offer them tenures of four to six years, so that they can do two tenures effectively in which they will be able to contribute more and will be answerable.

This move has caused a lot of heartburn for the bureaucracy. They feel that other than the four or five identified posts which have fixed tenures, the other posts are not important…

You are talking about a different set of issues.  What you are mentioning is jobs of fixed tenures related to Defence and Security issues.  We wanted other posts too, but our legal advisor, attorney general and the ministry felt that it would not be correct. You must have read in the papers that we have just empanelled some officers as secretaries; this is part of the same move.  Earlier, quite often, we found that we had to go in the order of seniority and the next person did not have an appropriate job falling vacant in the month, so we were a little constrained.  Now, we empanel the whole batch, which we would have done in any case in the course of six to eight months.  This gives us flexibility.  This enables us to give a person who is junior the opportunity to take up a job for which he is suitable, in case it falls vacant.  Say, for example, if the post of the Secretary Civil Aviation has fallen vacant and there is an officer who we consider suitable but he is way junior, we can still place him.  Earlier, we couldn’t because his turn had not come. This has helped us to put all the round pegs in round holes rather than square pegs in round holes.

We are in the process of amending the rules of writing the annual confidential report.  Once these rules get notified, the process will come into operation and the officers will be watched for four or five years before they can take up a certain job.

There are certain misgivings that people have about this eminent persons group.  I am coming to the Soli Sorabji Report on Police Reforms. The belief is that if you have the civil society activists or other people who have a different opinion deciding the appointment of police officers, then it devalues the authority of the government. Will the government accept this report in toto?

 The Soli Sorabji Report talks about reforms in the police.  Many of the reforms are eminently possible and good.   But in the case of police reforms, the states have a point of view, which is that since they (police) are answerable to the legislature, the Chief Minister should have control.  In a democracy, ultimately, the control is with the people and since the people’s representatives are elected, the control should be with    them. On the other hand, Soli Sorabji and others argue that we must have an independent police, as in other democracies like the UK, Germany, France, etc., where the police works in an extremely independent environment. So how do we ensure the same independence and professionalism in the police in our country? These are some of the issues in the Soli Sorabji report.  The committee’s recommendations are being examined by the government. 

So it hasn’t been decided as yet whether you will accept the recommendations in totality?

No. The government is examining all committee suggestions. Even if the central government accepts most of the recommendations, the states also need to agree.  What are the changes suggested? Once the 1861 Police Act is modified, based on that, the states would consider it. We can only suggest a model to them and they can make their own decisions thereon. The Police should be left to professionals and be answerable and accountable for delivering the goods.       

The general impression is that the bureaucracy is insensitive, corrupt and not doing well for the people. How do you look at this? Do you think there is a real problem?

Corruption is a real problem.  The Transparency International Index has placed us at 70. Earlier we were at 80.  Even 70 is very high. We cannot claim to be happy with this situation. Efforts are on to see that we reduce corruption by gradually putting all the services rendered by the government in the public domain, in an e-governance mode, so that performance is reviewed and becomes people-friendly and effective. Recently, there was a report by the World Bank on doing business with India and we were ranked at 134. We have taken several initiatives and are reviewing our procedures.

We are planning to set up 100,000 common service centers throughout the country. These e-kiosks will enable better access to the common man through the electronic mode.  These will be run privately and 30 to 40 percent of their business will come from the government.  These kiosks will be the focal points        for issuing caste certificates, birth certificates, death certificates, certificates related to land reforms; driving licenses, ration cards, etc. Many of the things the government does can be done though these e-kiosks.  The idea is to decentralize services and make them more people-friendly.

But is this actually happening?

Yes. As far as e-kiosks are concerned we will be able to move on.  Once public and private services are available through e-kiosks, there will be local pressures on the state governments. E-governance is increasingly becoming a fact.  The Railways is a success story.  If you recall, earlier railway reservations used to pose a problem.  Today, they are easy.  Also, take the case of land records. In many states like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, etc., you just have to pay Rs. 15-20 and all records of land are available through an e-service. The issuing of passports is another example of e-governance.  People should now be able to get a new passport in 15 days and renewal of passports done in three days. Similarly, many other procedures are being reviewed and more services are getting computerized. We are working on machine-readable passports and applications can be deposited in many places; they can be put on e-mode and made more accessible.  If e-mode is available and acceptable to the people then the interface between the bureaucracy and the people is lessened. Till the interface is there, the problem of corruption and officers taking money will remain. It is a constant battle and we hope that in the coming years we will be able to win the battle and reduce corruption by using cutting-edge technology.

Does it worry you that the bureaucracy is getting more politicised? As the leader of the bureaucracy, how do you respond to this politicisation?

This worries me. This has eroded the value of the bureaucracy, of an independent civil service whose job is to give advice impartially, fairly and in a manner that is in the best interests of the state and the centre. But measures are being taken to take care of this also. We must appreciate that this is reflective of the society we are living in - but that cannot be an excuse for anything.  We are working on the value system of the IAS officers. We are trying to recruit them at a younger age and we put them through suitable training programs.

What do you do to officers who are taking part in political programs and aligning themselves with any one party? Like it has happened in Uttar Pradesh? What action will be taken against them?

As far as this is concerned, it certainly violates the conduct rules. These are actionable points and convey wrong signals. And yes, these are issues against which action should be taken.

Recently you appointed the Intelligence Bureau (IB) director within eight days of his retirement as a governor? Do you think this is an acceptable practice? 

From where do you appoint a governor? You can’t do so always from amongst the politicians.  Either you appoint from the police, the IAS officers, from the Army or from the public. Whether it is in eight days or three months it doesn’t make a difference. If an IB officer has certain knowledge and information that would make him a good and useful governor, what is wrong about appointing him? There is no quid pro quo; it is only if there is a suspicion of a quid pro quo that there is cause to worry.

A lot of retired bureaucrats are cramped because they can’t take up a job right after retirement. Are you taking another look at these service rules?

We have already looked at these service rules. The cooling-off period has been reduced from two years to one.  We won’t be doing away with the one-year cooling-off for now.