Introduction
Dynamics of Minister-Secretary Relationships in Indian Public Administration – A democratic setup is normally guided by the election manifestos of the political parties that later become guiding principles of public policies. This is where the elected officials are accountable to the electorate, and any noncompliance of such manifestos leads to defeat in elections. Therefore, the elected officials are cautious in fulfilling the promises made to the people during elections and express a desired state of action through public policies. However, because public policies have wider ramifications for the government and the society, the elected officials depend on the seasoned civil servant who not only brings expertise to their position but also guides the elected official to smoothly move ahead with public policies. This is the norm of any democratic government, particularly a parliamentary form of government.
Minister-Civil Servant Relationship in India
Minister-Civil Servant Relationship in India – In India as well, the role of an elected official and a civil servant has been smooth in the sense that the former expresses his/her desired state of action, which is ably supported by the latter in the form of advice and expertise. This is where the relationship between the minister and the civil servant assumes importance in the light of effective functioning of the government machinery. The roles and responsibilities are simple: The elected official—minister—lays down the policy, and it is the duty of the civil servant—secretary—to implement the same with all earnestness. The permanent civil servant furnishes to the administration the indispensable element of continuity and expert knowledge; hence, his/her advice will be informed and objective, and the final decision of the minister and the government is made after giving full consideration to such informed and objective criticism (Patel 1996).
The Politics-Administration Relationship
The issue of the minister–secretary relationship is the microcosm of the politics–administration relationship in India. This is where one needs to understand the obligations of the minister, who carries a popular mandate to fulfill the promises made to the electorate. The responsibility of the minister is to come out with public policies that can benefit society at large. The formulation of public policy is to be supported by the secretary, who brings immense experience and expertise to the position. The secretary is expected to provide unbiased advice and guide the minister in the formulation of public policies. The conventional maxim lays down that the administrator has an instrumental role, and the ultimate determination of policy is the politicians’ cup of tea (Vajpeyi and Kaul 1993).
Historical Context and Bureaucratic Precedence
Historical Context and Bureaucratic Precedence – However, in the context of India, the typical dimension of public administration is that bureaucracy preceded democracy, which led to tilting of the scale in favor of the former. This means that the secretary, although obliged to take orders from the minister, is in a favorable situation when case issues of accountability and ethics come to fore. The minister takes the criticism, and the secretary safely hides behind, and this anomaly has led to friction between them that leads to delays and bad blood in public administration.
Changing Dynamics in Minister-Secretary Interactions
Changing Dynamics in Minister-Secretary Interactions – Of late, the overall scenario seems to have changed as more and more civil servants are either pliable to the ministers or the ministers look for pliable and gullible civil servants who would toe the line of the minister during the formulation of public policies. The free and unbiased advice from the secretary has been replaced with safe-play by the civil servants at all levels. One needs to understand various differences between a political representative and a civil servant, which normally come in the way of smooth interaction between them. A political representative or a minister is a person from a political background who is affiliated with a political party. Because the minister enjoys the powers and positions only on the basis of the popular mandate, he is expected to be accountable to the electorate. Further, the minister is expected to face the electorate every 5 years on the basis of his performance and seek re-election, and a debacle in re-election means going into oblivion from political life.
Differences in Accountability and Tenure
Differences in Accountability and Tenure – However, the case of a civil servant or secretary is different in the sense that he is employed for life and is assured of the salary and pension throughout his active employment with the government. In case there is a tie between the views of the minister and the secretary, the views of the minister prevail, and the secretary is expected to toe the line of thinking of the minister. The civil servant is protected from political and public accountability, and it is the minister who faces questions from the opposition party and the people. The secretary, as a part of maintaining secrecy and confidentiality, is not expected to speak to the people. This is where the civil servant or secretary is shielded and protected; hence, they enjoy more immunity than the minister.
Conclusion
Such differences in their position and functions have led to some problems in the relationship between them, which have been effectively tackled in the recent past by posting more pliable officers in key positions. In some cases, even the district-level officers are posted by taking into account the views of the ministers who represent the district. Therefore, in most cases, the relationship between politics and administration is one of smooth sailing, although there are always some stormy relationships here and there.