G Fraser-Moleketi: Annual Conference of South African Association of
Public Administration and Management (SAAPAM)

1 November 2007

Conference Theme: 'Sustaining Good Governance'

South African Association of Public Administration and Management (SAAPAM)
President, Professor Tito Khslo
The Chairperson and members of the SAAPAM Board
Academics, colleagues, distinguished guests
Ladies and gentleman

All protocol observed

The annual South African Association of Public Administration and Management
(SAAPAM) conference has become a standard item on the calendar of our public
administration knowledge community in South Africa. It offers the opportunity
for the intellectual and practitioner communities in this subject area to
engage and hone our thinking and sharpen our discourse. I wish to thank you for
inviting me again to address this 8th Annual SAAPAM conference. I trust that we
will use the discursive space offered by this conference to once again
contribute to the evolving South African field of Public Administration.

It also comes at an important moment because as India, Brazil and South
Africa (IBSA) we are in the process of developing an approach to Public
Management discourse as developing nations and nations of the south.

Ours is a very dynamic field, characterised by ongoing changes in response
to the perpetual changes in the environment in which we are expected to
operate. As has been the case so many times over the past decades we are
currently in an intense period where internationally the search is on for
deepened theoretical understanding in terms of our discipline. Those of you,
who are following the evolving international literature at the moment, would
have picked up on this. The International Review of Administrative Sciences
carried a mini-symposium on this quest of finding what it terms a 'New Public
Administration Theory' in its first quarter journal of this year. It used the
prestigious 2006 Braibant lecture by Jocelyn Bourgon to anchor the
discussion.

Bourgon's argument is essentially that although it offers some sound
foundations for public administration, traditional public administration theory
is challenged on a number of fronts. These include issues related to
flexibility and responsiveness, the perceived divide between politics and
policy implementation, as well as accountability frameworks for a new era in
which high levels of distrust between citizen and government prevail. However,
she also concurs with many others that New Public Management (NPM) Theory which
succeeded Traditional Theory and that derives its intellectual foundations from
Public Choice Theory equally fails to serve as a viable theory for public
administration in the 21st Century. This failure she attributes to the fact
that NPM theory started wholly from the wrong value propositions, namely
private sector values unsuitable to the public domain.

Bourgon is, however, not a lone voice in terms of the current search for a
better theoretical base that will also result in better practice. In a recent
Festschrift for Gerald Caiden, the editorial team led by Demetrios Argyriades
uses the work of Caiden over half a century to point to the shortfalls of more
recent thinking and the urgent need to return a more informed, public focused
theory, if the subject area is to be restored to a flourishing field. The
editors specifically show how a tradition of comparative public administration
which located issues of the administrative state in specific national and
regional political and economic contexts has faded away, to be replaced by a
propensity to elevate managerial techniques and tools in the abstract as the
content of our subject discipline. The intellectually anaemic status of this
has eroded the standing of our subject area immensely – internationally, but
also in the South African context.

Ours is therefore an era of searching for better options. With it goes a
responsibility in our intellectual community to rise to the occasion to
formulate and test a new public administration theory that will both be capable
of explaining practice but also to guide the direction of things to come and
how best for practice to respond to contextual challenges. The responsibility
is to prepare a cadre of public servants equipped to function in the prevailing
and future situation.

If we look at the current debate, it is possible to extract some of the
pointers to the direction in which the thinking is emerging.

The first aspect is the ethical and values base of public administration. In
this regard there is a return to issues of a public orientation where shared or
common interests of citizens are the compass, rather than a philosophy
dominated by private and individual interests. It is an orientation searching
for social justice, something that the neo-liberal philosophy that underpins
NPM has patently failed to achieve. Testament to this failure are growing
inequities both on individual level, but also mirrored on a global level in the
growing gap of prosperity between the economically strong regions of the world
and those classified as developing or under-developed.

This return to public interest does not mean hostility to issues of
efficiency and – particularly - effectiveness. It is rather that these are seen
as means to ensuring that the available resource base is deployed and managed
in a way to serve the public and human development agenda, to promote social
justice and enhance quality of life.

The second pointer is the centrality of citizens and the changes that this
will mean in terms of ways of working. Greater direct accountability to
citizens, more opportunity for participation and direct involvement in the
delivery process, for example through social contracts and so forth. I have
spoken often about this aspect and I think it is not contentious in our
context. I will therefore rather concentrate on the third and final pointer to
the future of public administration.

Marcel Pochard in discussion to Bourgon's suggestions for future public
administration theory, points to the extensiveness of the role of the state,
particularly in the future. He argues that this role will go much beyond the
limited perception of delivery of services, either through direct or indirect
means. In Pochard's words: "The state has missions even more demanding and
compelling which consist in ensuring the control of all the forces and threats
that weigh upon the world and are very varied and formidable - the power of
ideologies or extremisms of all kinds the power of hidden forces such as drug
networks or mafias which undermine states and constitute an ever present seed
of disorder and conflict – powers connected with fantastic perspectives opened
up by scientific discoveries, whether they concern genetic manipulation or the
diversification of the methods of mass destruction, to confront these powers
and threats we need strong states and public authorities capable of rising to
the challenge and acting effectively, both at their own level and at the level
of the world as a whole this role of public authorities seems to us more
decisive for the future than that relating solely to everyday needs of
citizens."

Pochard argues that this role will make different demands on the public
administration than the service delivery role. It will demand again more of the
traditional nature of administration, i.e. a capability to draw on the full
range of traditional prerogatives of a public power in terms of regulation,
control and sanction. It will also have to rely on strong, highly competent and
impartial public servants capable of intervention, free of arbitrariness and
ones able to stand up to 'titans.' Given this power, authority and
administration will have to be subjected to control commensurate with such
responsibility and power, keeping it entirely respectful to the rule of
law.

This future scenario turns out to be depressing when the analysis of
Archyriades et al. regarding 'capacity deficit' is read simultaneously with
such need. Drawing on the works of Caiden the editorial team argues that one of
the most significant contributors to the capacity shortfall is the sharp
decline in public service professionalism, with repercussions in terms of
performance, prestige and most of all, integrity. Fraud, self-serving
orientations and the lack of character and commitment to speak 'truth to power'
seem to have become dominant features of modern day administrators.

In addition to these 'new' demands on capacity, even with respect to the
more traditional servicing role, we fall short. Thus during the past year the
discussion internationally in our knowledge community has centred on finding
ways to restore trust in government and public institutions. The Africa Chapter
of the 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government holds the view that
government performance, meeting the needs of its citizens, is more than likely
the single most important factor that influences trust in governance
arrangements in a country. It also noted that public servants as a collective
are thus logically at the centre of the future of African countries and their
people. Trust in government would grow exponentially if public servants
deliver, in a professional manner, services to the public. The opposite can
only lead to socio-political instability and the denigration of human
rights.

The responsibility for us as leaders in the public administration
intellectual and practitioner community to shift to another gear, extremely
fast, is therefore undeniable. Having pointed out the markers in the future
direction of public administration, as is currently unfolding in the
international discourse, I would like to highlight some of the initiatives that
we as government are currently taking, either in national context or in terms
of continental initiatives we drive and/or support - initiatives which, in my
opinion, are responding to some of these future demands. This is not a
comprehensive list of our doings. It is rather illustrative, and I would like
to urge you to read my budget vote speech and the annual reports of the
respective entities that fall in the Ministry if you are interested in a more
comprehensive overview.

Allow me to highlight the following developments and initiatives:

* In March this year over 40 African states and African members of civil
society, business and academia adopted the Ekhurhuleni Declaration on Fighting
Corruption. The declaration calls upon African people to reassert traditional
communal, egalitarian and democratic values and to ensure that these values are
infused in all the instruments of government and form the basis of a national
integrity system that counters the rampant pursuit of individual gain. The
mainstay of our values is to be found in the Constitution, we must always
respect that. Batho Pele espouses these values in the most tangible manner
possible – caring, belonging and serving. This is such a practical expression
of the traditional communal, egalitarian and democratic values that the
Ekhurhuleni Declaration calls for.

* As a continent Africa is demonstrating her ability, willingness and
innovation in championing good governance through the African Peer Review
Mechanism. The African Peer Review Mechanism is an instrument voluntarily
acceded to by Member States of the African Union as an African self–monitoring
mechanism. Its primary purpose is to foster the adoption of policies, standards
and practices that promote political stability, high economic growth,
sustainable development and accelerated sub-regional and continental economic
integration.

As you would know South Africa was recently reviewed in Ghana in July 2007.
The review was hailed as a success and South Africa was praised for its good
practices in various areas. As is the case always, there is room for
improvement. The report also raises critical issues of importance for South
Africa to consider in order progressing further along the road and we have
addressed these in South Africa's comprehensive African Peer Review Mechanism
(APRM) Programme of Action (PoA).

The APRM is an innovative way of demonstrating leadership on good governance
to the region and the world. It is a process from within Africa, owned by us as
Africans and giving effect to our own values, which is traditionally more
focussed on community, humanity and social justice than many other thought
constructs that tends to dominate. It allows us as African societies to play a
significant role in asserting ourselves in the development of new methodologies
through which Africa's public administration defines good governance and
development. In other words, for us in Africa this calls for a new kind of
public administration scholar, academic or intellectual who is capable of
understanding the multiple challenges that hinder our countries' development. A
scholar whose research and intellectual arguments point towards finding
solutions to such challenges while maintaining a desire for a departure from
the status quo towards a new paradigm for Africa's development.

* Within the South African context our search for a more socially just and
publicly spirited orientation is captured in our discussion and initiatives
with respect to the developmental state. In the South African context, the
state is constituted by a popular alliance of democratic forces that functions
through a set of political and institutional arrangements with a primary focus
on the eradication of poverty through shared sustainable employment-generating
growth. State-society relations have been transformed and embedded in a
'People's Contract' that involves participation, dialogue, engagement and
accountability by all the social forces in society.

* There is no doubt that at the core of principles and prerogatives for a
developmental state are the ability of government to improve the quality of
lives of ordinary citizens. It is thus incumbent upon the government to
initiate intervention programmes in order to achieve this feat. One of the key
challenges of the Public Service is to maximise efficiency and effectiveness in
service delivery. It has come to the attention of government that one of the
handicaps in service delivery is lack of suitable skills by functionaries of
the state. For this reason, the Human Resource Development System (HRDS) vision
2015 should advocate for programmes aimed skilling, up-skilling and reskilling
the Public Service corps for better performance and service delivery.

* The new Human Resource Development (HRD) Strategic Framework is a
milestone in government effort to enhance performance and service delivery
through capacity development. The Strategic Framework has designed, as one of
its pillars for strategic intervention, a capacity development pillar that
focuses on developing human capital for high performance. Areas of strategic
intervention for capacity development include, amongst others:

* an integrated Adult Basic Education and Training (Abet) Framework
* e-learning for the Public Service
* establishing a national Public Service Academy, through the leadership of
South African Management Development Institute (Samdi) with provincial
chapters
* fostering partnerships with Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and Further
Education and Training Colleges (FETCs)
* fostering learnerships, internships and traineeships.

* Key to the government's agenda is the delivery of basic services to
improve the lives of the citizens and for ongoing social and economic
upliftment. We have noted that current delivery initiatives are hampered by
weaknesses in numerous areas including, amongst others: national frameworks and
policies that do not extend to local government in the areas of service
delivery and public administration and management, a continued 'silorised'
approach in the delivery of services resulting in poor integration of delivery
efforts across government, and, marked differences in remuneration and
conditions of service in the public service and Local Government which make
mobility and transfer of functions difficult. To address these challenges, the
Single Public Service (hereafter referred to as 'the SPS') concept was
mooted.

In its conceptualisation, the SPS is seen as a critical and strategic
intervention of government to further enhance and strengthen the capability of
the system of government (across the three spheres) to be able to successfully
deliver on the State's developmental agenda. For enhanced service delivery and
better integration of efforts, the SPS is based on the fundamental premise that
the institutions across the three spheres of government that comprise the
machinery of State have to be strategically aligned and harmonised to
complement one another so as to more effectively fulfil the needs of South
African society.

At this stage it is important to signal that a furore has arisen based on
the lack of understanding of our government's decision to take this route. We
took this decision against convention and debates in the continent about
decentralisation which is touted as a panacea to all service delivery
challenges. Our decision to have a unified public service and to grow the state
in order to ensure that it is capable of meeting its development agenda came at
a time when the world was still at the grasp of a New Public Management
influence which advocated for shrinking government.

We took this decision because we believe that developing countries in Africa
and elsewhere in the world need strong governments that lead administrative
systems that bolster government efforts, and implement their policies with
expertise, compassion, efficiency and effectiveness. Compassion is a critical
element because it takes compassion to understand and to champion the interests
of the poor and the under privileged who are largely dependent on their
governments for livelihood. We identified that key to the challenges that are
faced by government in service delivery is lack of integration and
co-ordination to ensure effectiveness of government efforts and initiatives on
the ground.

We then resolved to create a seamless service delivery system which creates
a single window of access to services for citizens. It is motivated by our
desire to ensure that citizens have easy access to services. Through the single
public service citizens will be able access critical services closer to their
localities. The SPS will also ensure a fair distribution of human resources and
expertise to strengthen the capacity at those points of access particularly at
local level.

The SPS therefore is part of the government's strategic vision aimed at
strengthening the service delivery capacity of the State by broadly integrating
the three spheres of government into a common institutional framework. It is
about creating an integrated public service with harmonious systems, conditions
of service and norms which will reduce fragmentation and promote more efficient
coordination between the different spheres of government, thereby facilitating
seamless service delivery to our people. Some of the benefits of the SPS
includes the easy mobility of staff between the three spheres of Government
thereby facilitating appropriate deployment of skills and allocation of
functions where needed.

From the citizen's perspective, the State is constitutionally bound to
ensure that services are in fact delivered to the citizens and, that these are
of a high quality and delivered to their convenience. This challenges the State
to find the most effective methods and channels to deliver these services
within the system of government. It calls for a dynamic, modern delivery model
and system that begins to cluster these services, to the convenience of the
citizen, through a 'single window,' be this physical structure or in
cyberspace.

Last, but by no means the least, I want to highlight our experience with
GEMS, the Government Employees Medical Scheme. It is a practical example of a
return to a public orientation, away from a dominant paradigm of private and
individual interest. Created in 2005, GEMS is a health insurance plan that
provides equitable access by public service employees to affordable healthcare
benefits. GEMS and a new medical assistance policy for public servants were
introduced by Government to redress past imbalances which saw lower earning
public service employees, the majority of whom are black and female, excluded
from enjoying access to a vital benefit. At face value it would appear that
GEMS is merely a new employee benefit for public servants, but on closer
inspection the implementation of GEMS lends significant support to broader
social imperatives. Besides providing medical scheme coverage to over 500 000
employees and their families, the scheme is exemplary of a publicly inspired
development orientation. It also:

* enhances the productivity of public service employees
* GEMS, provides healthcare benefits and disease management programmes to
employees which in turn improves their health and well-being – enhancing
productivity
* contributes to employment and skills development
* over 50% of its 400 call centre agents are previously disadvantaged,
unemployed matriculants and graduates
* promotes broad-based Black Economic Empowerment
* the scheme's procurement processes centre on Black Economic Empowerment (BEE)
and leading suppliers and partners have been selected on criteria which include
their empowerment credentials
* responds to the challenges of the second economy
* more than 50% of GEMS membership did not enjoy medical scheme membership
beforehand. By providing cover to these employees and their families and
including them in the medical scheme or health insurance market, GEMS
contributes to reducing the patient load in the public sector. More of the
public sector's resources are therefore available for those who critically need
and rely on them
* ensures that the public sector discharges its responsibilities as a critical
player in the growth, reconstruction and development of our country
* since inception GEMS has already contributed to growing the medical scheme
beneficiary base and it is anticipated that in the long term it will grow this
base by up to 14% - a critical tool as our medical scheme industry has not
succeeded in growing over the last few years
* in addition, GEMS has shown the private healthcare sector a feasible solution
to growing the medical scheme beneficiary base whilst offering affordable
benefits with reduced administrative expenditure.

In conclusion

Archyriades et al implore for a reinvention of our public administration
discipline if we are to achieve the core objectives of promoting social justice
and enhancing quality of life. If we are to fulfil the civilising mission of
public administration the discipline must put itself on a new path and in the
words of the authors 'rescue the public sector.' It must restore to the
institutions of government and governance the capacity to plan, to think, to
weave the future and to lead responsibly. The question is whether we as the
public administration community in South Africa, represented by this SAAPAM
conference and the delegates present assume this responsibility and are capable
of discharging it honourable? We owe one another an answer and time will be our
witness.

Thorough and ongoing engagement and exchange between academia and
practitioners is fundamental if we are to rise to the challenge. Intellectual
cross-pollination and knowledge sharing is critical in our quest to take the
public administration discourse to a higher level. It is through sustained
partnerships with the public administration and management institutions that we
can gain latitude and progressively improve governance in our institutions.
This is where I want to refer again to the kind of discussions we are having at
IBSA, where we are saying that as developing nations we must ensure that we are
at the centre of the debate. We will continue to work with the SAAPAM
constituency to share knowledge and to set the tone for a progressive public
administration agenda. I wish you a productive conference.

Issued by: Department of Public Service and Administration
1 November 2007