Cabinet and meritocracy Meritocracy Must for

good governance

A wish of the entire majority in this country comprising of the honest citizens
would be that there would truly be “Good Governance” in the country
Selections to important positions should be purely on their own merits
With all due respect to President and Hon Prime Minister, they may require
some honest, competent apolitical advisers to suggest the composition!
2018-03-17

A leading newspaper, which is 100 years old, quotes in its March 13 edition on
page 5 that a minister had said that “Scientific Cabinet reshuffle after President
returns.”
During the recent past the topics of much interest, discussion and debate have
been on Constitutional Amendments, National / Unity Government, Electoral
Reforms, investigations on abuse, bribery and corruption, Cost of Living and Local
& National elections,!

Many an article has been written and published along with media conferences
with very little outcome!
However, on the presumption that all these have been dealt with or attempted to
have been dealt satisfactorily or otherwise being resolved, much thought has to
be given to what happens with the so-called Cabinet Reshuffles.

Respective election manifestos have been debated, publicized and popularized

with loads of promises and good intentions. How many of these become realities
with the cooperation of “nation loving citizens” more than with those with one’s
own self-interests would be a good guess!

A wish of the entire majority in this country comprising of the honest citizens
would be that there would truly be “Good Governance” in the country.

This concept is not a prerogative of one political party or a group of them, as it

has been in existence for quite some time and practised for better or worse. At a
time when the future is not known, predictions being made, which political
party(ies) would predominate, who should be the President, the Prime Minister,
Leader of the Opposition etc, it is time to open public debate on how “Good
Governance” could be maintained. The election manifestos would have to, not
only include same but also indicate how such would be implemented.

There are many publications, theories, regulations on Good Governance. They will
not produce the desired results if those responsible for such implementation are
not appointed appropriately.
It is of paramount importance that “Good Governance” should be operative from
both top and bottom, at all levels and from all sides!

Selections to important positions should not be on political bias, influence family

connections and friendships but should be done purely on their own merit. It is
this aspect of MERITOCRACY, I wish to highlight as the main ingredient for Good
Governance, whichever political party, alliance or paramount dominate.

Merit is quite rightly often rated high for spiritual merit, thereafter for academic
and professional. While this is correct, the last paragraph of this article would also
refer to other aspects of merit relevant to Good Governance.
In the appointment of Heads of Institutions in the Public Sector, Chief Executive
Officers, Advisors, Commission/Council/Board members the keyword and
criterion should be MERITOCRACY i.e. in simple words those possessing
meritworthy qualities and those with

(i) a proven track record on the subject,

(ii) (ii) current involvement in the subject and
(iii) (iii) a good vision, based on merit alone, irrespective of race, caste, creed,
friendship, relationship, wealth/generosity, old school/campus ties etc.

As an apolitical citizen though many an article was written and published

conveying views on Electoral Reforms under different themes, only a fraction of
same would have been considered and implemented so far. We often hear the
President, Hon Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers, recognised Political Party
Leaders, inviting professionals to interact with Statesmen and Politicians in
decision making, it gave me at least some courage to write an article once again
and sincerely hope that suggestions may be considered.

The general public at the outset should accept as history has shown that the
country needs both Statesmen and Politicians. The consideration of such would
depend on President and the Prime Minister in the formation of an effective
reasonably sized Cabinet of Ministers.

With all due respect to President and Hon Prime Minister, they may require some
honest, competent apolitical advisers to suggest the composition!

Also, the views of the MPs in Parliament could be sought through a secret ballot
by the President and the Prime Minister to identify the suitable persons
irrespective of “Party Politics”.
The decisions may not result in 225 happy Members of Parliament and there
would also be a few thousand loyalists also discontent but there would be a few
million quite content if correct decisions are taken. The first challenge would be
to have a reasonably sized Cabinet of Ministers of about 25 M.Ps given the
portfolios while undoubtedly a large amount would be disappointed unless they
have the consolation of deputy ministries.
Much thought has to be given to what happens with the so-called Cabinet
Reshuffles
Such a downsized Cabinet of Ministers from the general public’s viewpoint would
not be just economic cost cutting, but from the point of view of “Good
Governance,” it will be effective coordination and output oriented. At the
moment lack of coordination of allied Ministries have cause conflict and retarded
progress.

If the reduction in emoluments and benefits could aggrieve some by losing their
portfolios, such could be compensated to the deserving ones, either by increasing
the emoluments to the deputy Ministers from the net savings of the downsized
Cabinet provided the net result is definitely “Good Governance”. Some deserving
Seniors may be even appointed as “Senior Ministers” without portfolios but to
oversee a group of Ministries.
These divisions are very similar to those prevailing in neighbouring India, the S.A.
regional countries and in many other countries in the developed world.

However, in the event through the provisions of the 19th Amendment for a
National Government, the number of Ministries may not be critical, but for
effectiveness of coordination of the subject areas under each portfolio listed
below, it would be essential to have at least a competent person in the rank of an
Experienced Minister to coordinate each of the main subjects.

Meritocracy has deep meaning in more than one way as “eye-openers” when a
current candidate has openly expressed that individuals are now seen better
through these elections. Perhaps they are seen as Statesmen, Politicians or
Opportunists and it is here that the voters too will have to have their eyes fully
open as they vote in the future!
There are many publications, theories, regulations on Good Governance. They
will not produce the desired results if those responsible for such
implementation are not appointed appropriately
In this connection during the Presidency of Mr Elmore Perera, at the Organization
of Professional Associations (OPA) about a decade ago, in 2008 a team of which I
was a member, deliberated on a rational and scientific basis and a proposal for a
25 member Cabinet of Ministers was formulated as follows, which has been
subsequently deliberated at the National Movement for Social Justice.
Proposal for a 25 portfolio Cabinet of Ministers

 SUGGESTED CABINET MINISTRIES (25)

 SUGGESTED DEPUTY / STATE MINISTRIES (60)
1. Defence.
(i) Defence,
2. Foreign Affairs.
(i) Foreign Affairs
3. National Unity.
(i) National Unity & Integration
4. Good Governance,
(i) Good Governance (ii) Fraud & Corruption investigations
5. Public Administration.
(i) Public Administration
6. National Planning, Finance, External Resources and Economic Affairs.
(i) National Planning (ii) Finance (iii) External Resources (iv) Economic Affairs
7. Regional Development, Basin Development, Local Government and Poverty
Alleviation.
(i) Regional & Basin Development (ii) Local Government (iii) Poverty Alleviation
8. Public Security, Law & Order.
(i) Public Security, (ii) Law and Order
9 Parliamentary Affairs, Justice and Constitutional Affairs.
(i) Parliamentary Affairs (ii) Justice (iii) Constitutional Affairs
10. Environment & Infrastructure Development.
(i) Environment development (ii) Infrastructure Development
11.Transport.
(i) Highways (ii) Railways (ii) Airport & Aviation (iii) Sea Ports & Waterways
12. Urban Development, Housing & Construction, Disaster Management,
Reconstruction & Rehabilitation.
(i) Urban development (ii) Housing & Construction (iii) Disaster Management (iv)
Reconstruction & Rehabilitation
13. Power & Energy.
(i) Power & Energy (ii) Renewable & Alternate Energy
14. Information, Media & Communication.
(i) Information & IT Development (ii) Media & Communication
15.Natural Resources, Earth Sciences, Industries, Science & Technology.
(i) Natural Resources & Earth Sciences (ii) Industries, (iii) Science & Technology
16. Land, Forestry, Wild Life, Territorial Waters & Extended Economic Zone.
(i) Land (ii) Forestry & Wild life (iii) Territorial Waters (iii) Extended Economic Zone
17. Irrigation, Water Supply, Water Management & Drainage.
(i) Irrigation & Water Management (ii) Water Supply & Drainage
18. Food, Agriculture, Plantations, Livestock & Fisheries.
(i) Food (ii) Agriculture & Plantations (iii) Livestock & Fisheries
19. Trade, Commerce, Consumer Affairs & Co-operatives.
(i) Trade, Commerce & Cooperatives (ii) Consumer Affairs
20. Education & Human Resource Development.
(i) General Edu (ii) Higher Edu (iii) Tech Edu & Voc Trg(iv) Prof Edu
21. Health.
(i) Health (ii) Indigenous Medicine
22. Human Resource Planning & Environment.
(i) Human Resources Planning (ii) Environmental Planning
23. Heritage, Culture & Tourism.
(i) Culture & Heritage (ii) Tourism
24. Children, Women, Elders, Disabled, Family, Welfare & Social Services.
(i) Family, Children & Women’ Affairs (ii) Elders & Disabled, (iii) Welfare & Social
Services
25. Youth Affairs & Sports
(i) Youth & Skills development
(ii) Sports

As a finality on the activity of a Cabinet which would display its efficacy though
MERITOCRACY where the main objectivity should be honesty and integrity,
coupled with humility, creativity and credibility, in order to have validity,
productivity and prosperity to the country, without the citizens facing undue
austerity, should be the reality of such an entity and these facts are placed for
posterity !
The author is currently the Chancellor, University of Vocational Technology,
former Vice Chancellor of University of Moratuwa and of Open University of Sri
Lanka, Past President of the Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka, former Chairman,
of the Tertiary and Vocational Education Commission and Chairman, Institute of
Construction Training and Development (ICTAD).
Posted by Thavam