| |
The
Prime Minister: Government can change a previous decision
Who
says that decisions taken on wrong premises cannot be
changed? Certainly not the Prime Minister. In fact, as
reported by a local daily with respect to the inauguration
of the Ferney valley, the PM is said to have taken the
engagement to preserve the valley because of its natural
beauty and its unique biodiversity, pointing out that it was
a difficult decision to take because a loan had already been
negotiated with the African Bank of Development and the
contract allocated to a Chinese firm. But
he took matters in hand for, as he remarked, ‘certains
pensaient qu’on ne pouvait pas changer une décision prise
mias j’étais convaincu qu’on pouvait trouver une
alternative.’
This
is indeed a very bold statement coming from the head of
government, and it brings hope that things need not be
written in stone but that, if new facts and evidence come to
light, the government is not only prepared to but actually
can reverse decisions previously taken if this is in the
larger interest of the country. It will be recalled that
there was a similar controversy about a new roundabout at Le
Caudan, and that even after a feasibility study came to a
particular conclusion, government decided otherwise. This
sends a strong signal that public funds will not be allowed
to be wasted.
In
fact, change is happening all the time, as modern management
gurus teach, and it is in line with good management to
change whenever this is deemed necessary. This is
particularly so in issues relating to public affairs because
one wrong decision can have a widespread negative impact,
besides involving sums of money that could have been put to
better use. In many instances, such money is borrowed and
thus have to be repaid back, meaning that public debt is
contracted which is then passed on to future generations.
This
is as important as the tumble-down effects that the wrong
decision produces, with often irreversible damage being
done. The Ministry of Education is one sector where the
Minister has been prepared to go out regularly in the field
and engage in dialogue with several stakeholders, besides
continuously reviewing with all his technical advisers all
the major issues before coming to sound decisions. What may
appear as controversies that are given wide coverage should
in fact be seen as a salutary public exercise which takes
into consideration new elements that come up. And most
importantly, the Minister boldly goes into the field instead
of sitting in his ivory tower, actively interacting with all
concerned and being prepared to go for more plausible
alternatives.
Coming
from someone who has been in been an academician in charge
of the Faculty of Law and Management at the University of
Mauritius, this is not surprising. Both his example and that
of the Prime Minister should be an eye-opener to other
ministers, some of whom have a tendency to have a tendency
to pay attention to one-sided versions and are thus led to
take erroneous decisions. In sectors where a lay minister
has no knowledge about and familiarity with the issues at
hand, it is all the more important to seek proper advice and
not take hasty decisions. This seems like overstating the
obvious, but it is necessary to keep reminding our
decision-makers that they bear a great responsibility
towards the country and are the prime custodians of public
funds, and that they have to make sure that such funds are
judiciously allocated.
TP
Saran
|
