A Message from a World Bank VP

(Published in Kantipur, Nepali National Daily on November 26, 2003) By KEN OHASHI, World Bank Country Director for Nepal, based in Kathmandu This is the eleventh in a series  of opinion pieces on Challenges Facing Nepal's Development.

Mieko Nishimizu, previous Vice President for the South Asia Region at the World Bank, was in Nepal recently for a farewell visit. Over the six and one half years that she was the VP for this region, she visited Nepal nearly 10 times and closely followed the developments here. Many of you may remember some very tough messages that Mieko, as she is known to her friends in Nepal, has delivered over time about "crisis of governance" and "Kathmandu as an island of prosperity in the sea of poverty," among others. Wherever she saw a committed reformer, however, she was unwaveringly supportive. She knew many of the reform champions personally. She had her finger on the pulse of the reform process in Nepal.

When she met Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa this time, she praised the quality of the reforms that have been implemented in the last few years. Many of the reforms—for instance, in primary education (i.e., community management of public schools), public expenditure management, financial sector—have been "first rate" by international standards. "Nepal should be proud of its achievements, " she said. She also praised the ability of Nepal to give continuity to these reforms despite the many changes in governments during the last several years and the difficult security situation. These reforms are necessary to restore the trust of the people in the government, and protect the integrity of Nepal as a nation state.

Mieko then noted that this time, she felt "there was something very different" about the reform leaders in the Civil Service. "There was more positive, 'can-do' energy." Her instinct told her that this had a lot to do with the PM's leadership. He seemed to be a leader who has a clear vision and knew how to delegate. She told the PM that she was convinced that "you articulate clearly what you expect from the ministers, what you expect from the civil servants, and what you expect the minister and civil servants to work on together." A proper distribution of responsibilities between the political and administrative levels of the government, under the leadership of a PM who sets a clear direction, was critical for effective functioning of the government. This focuses the ministers on the policy level matters, and creates the space necessary for the Civil Service to implement the policies and deliver day-do-day services to the public, without undue political interferences. Mieko thought this is what is happening under the PM, and that is why the reform leaders at the civil service level seemed energized.

She suggested that it would be important to "institutionalize" this distribution of responsibilities. Perhaps some legislative changes would be necessary to delineate the roles of the ministers and those of the Civil Service. I think her observation and suggestion are right on the mark.

Mieko has often said politics in Nepal must move from a patronage-based politics of the past to more public-oriented politics in which "good governance is good politics." Patronage-based politics does not need a strong Civil Service. If anything a strong Civil Service would get in the way of using (abusing, really) public resources for patronage. But in the age of transparency, which effective media and information technology increasingly force on every country, if political leaders want to gain confidence and support of the people, they must deliver good public services and implement sensible public policies. This cannot be done without an independent and professional Civil Service. Independence is an important element because without a measure of independence, most civil servants will be afraid to give honest, professional views to the ministers who could fire or transfer anyone who did not agree with him or her. Political ministers who are serious about good policies, on the other hand, need technically sound analysis of alternatives. In fact, the stronger and more political the government, the stronger and more independent the Civil Service must be. A strong and political government will have an ambitious agenda of policy changes. Significant changes in policies demand that much more rigorous analysis of pros and cons of various policy choices.

In the past, if anything, there seemed to have been a role reversal. Many ministers seemed to be more interested in day-to-day administrative decisions like procurement and transfer of staff (of course, you all know why). In the void created by the political leaders, some well-meaning civil servants were left to worry about policies, but clearly, without political leadership, they could seldom go very far. If Nepal wants a better government, this will not do.

The time has come to stop lamenting the weaknesses in Nepal's Civil Service and start thinking about building a strong and independent Civil Service. Whatever one's views may be on the current political situation in Nepal, one thing is clear. Most Nepalis recognize that the way the politics worked over the past decade was not exactly what they wanted and they want a truly democratic system to emerge. It seems to me what they aspire to is precisely what Mieko had often talked about—"good governance is good politics." This demands a strong and independent Civil Service. Despite its many weaknesses, Nepal's Civil Service has many competent, strong, and committed civil servants. There is a foundation to build on.

The critical first step toward a strong and independent Civil Service will be the formal clarification of the roles of the ministers and civil servants. If this can be achieved during Prime Minister Thapa's tenure, "It could be an important legacy you would leave for Nepal." That was Mieko's parting message. An important page in the World Bank's engagement with Nepal has closed, but a new page for Nepal's good governance may be opening up.