So now it’s official, we have it right from the minister’s mouth that the public service needs a good shake-up. After constantly waffling around this truth, and following years of bragging about quality service charters, we are at least agreeing there are various obstacles in the way of efficient public administration. The acknowledgment of a problem should be a step forward towards addressing it. Or so I thought.

We come now to the second bit, that of how this situation is to be tackled. In the Budget speech, the Finance Minister said he wants to step up efficiency in the public sector by two per cent. And how is he planning to do this? He used four words: report, report, report and report.

A report to be submitted by all departments and public entities on how they will improve efficiency. Every department and entity is to prepare a strategy report on the reduction of 10 per cent in government arrears. A committee will be set up to examine procurement processes and present a report. An analysis of the government transport system followed by – you guessed it – a report with recommendations on use, planning, fuel and maintenance.

You really must have nothing substantive on how to tackle a situation if, in the mother of all speeches, you take the route of mentioning the commissioning of reports as action to be taken. This, after nearly a quarter of a century in charge of public administration. You don’t have to be prescient to anticipate that not much progress will be achieved in this manner. We all know the saying about resorting to the setting up of committees and ordering reports…

There is then the proposed policy of recruiting one employee for every two who leave the public sector, which is commendable. But experience in the area of public service engagement isn’t encouraging. For instance, the employment of parliamentarians as parliamentary assistants and other nicely paid public appointments wasn’t exactly an example of how to do more work with less people or of how to cut down on public expenditure.

That was when the Prime Minister tried to solve his internal party problems by using government resources and piling people and salaries on the Executive at the expense of the taxpayer.

There is also discussion on the salaries of CEOs and directors with public entities and quangos. Here the opposite of what is being proposed happens: One CEO gets the salary of two employees doing the same work at the same level in the civil service. So it is really one at the price of two and not two at the price of one.

It was good to hear that, finally, the government is admitting to another problem – also mentioned in my last piece here and pooh-poohed by some – about precarious conditions of work. The minister said he will be seeing to this situation with regard to employees with contractors who have work hived off to them by the government. Even here, the minister doesn’t tell us how and when this problem will be tackled. But, at least, it is acknowledged and that is an improvement on denying its existence.

Another problem we hear about all the time when speaking with people running small businesses is that of government-induced unnecessary bureaucracy. This is undoubtedly affecting Malta’s competitiveness negatively. One direct casualty of this bureaucracy is the implementation of strengthening measures that are critical for enterprise. It took a very long time for action to be taken and it seems as though the government is flying by the seat of its pants in this area. Surely, that’s not the way to deal with this so-called motor of our economy.

Concluding his Budget speech, the minister reiterated: “We are choosing to control public administration expenditure instead of increasing taxes.” I don’t see how this expenditure will be controlled any time soon if the plan is to ask departments for reports. And it seems the government had given up on this pledge even as the Budget speech was being prepared, and opted for the latter alternative, as taxes have increased, with the concomitant negative effects. For instance, the increased tax on tourism will affect many people who depend on this sector for their families’ livelihood. The tax on cement, ditto. It will obviously have a negative effect on an already struggling construction industry.

Need I go on? The real work on the presentation of the Budget started in the government’s spin room after the minister’s speech.

Dr Dalli is shadow minister for the public service and government investment.