By reducing the cadre in the public service aimed at weakening of the public service, the previous government had devalued itself in the eyes of the public. Instead this government will strengthen the public service and motivate public servants to service to implement the development policies of the present government, President Chandrika Kumaratunga declared at the ceremony held to recruit into the public service, 42,000 graduates who had been unemployed.

There have been all hurrahs and no opposition or criticism to this move although some sceptics may have withheld their opinion on it. Indeed there can be no opposition or criticism to the employment of 42,000 young men and women, considered the intelligentsia of this country, who had been educated from kindergarten and right through school and university at state expense but were idling.

In Sri Lanka, the public service from colonial times has been the prime choice of employment for most people except for the very affluent. It afforded security of employment till the time of retirement, stability, a fair degree of independence till the sixties, a reasonable income, recognition in society and a stress free job. From the sixties, Swabasha educated graduates found this a haven and their pinnacle of achievement was to be an executive in the administrative service.

However, the universal trend in recent times has been to reduce the size of the state services – reduce government – as institutions such as the World Bank and IMF have advocated and increase privatisation. It has been pointed out that in most countries, state bureaucracies have been found to be inefficient, corrupt and an impediment to development, particularly in Third World countries.

Sri Lanka after Independence maintained a fairly efficient public service run on the lines of the British Civil Service. It was not as efficient as people wished it to be, but within the limits it did perform creditably well. But politicians – particularly those after 1956 – wanted rapid progress and they declared that bureaucracy ('Niladharivadaya') was the main obstacle to progress and destroyed the system that existed without finding a better replacement. The Civil Service was done away with, and a political bureaucracy where politicians made puppets of state bureaucrats dancing to their tune, became the order. Now this puppetry is continuing with vigour much to the detriment of this country.

Despite the reverence paid to the public service by many, it is also subject to intense criticism of the public who have been victims. 'The Island' has been, over the years, carrying letters of protest by the public, almost daily, on the public service. Yesterday, in our Opinion page we carried a letter by a retired army officer protesting against the Pensions Department not replying to his letters regarding emoluments due to him. He had written four letters to the Director of Pensions but not even received a reply. This kind of inefficiency, nonchalance and uncaring attitude towards the public is common in the entire public service and the Pensions Department seems to be the biggest offender. The complaints against the Pensions Department made in the press over the years have been innumerable but no action has resulted.

Why? Is it because this much-exalted public service is incurable of the diseases afflicting it? There is a College of Administrative Studies and we hear of many courses and seminars in public administration being held regularly and some of our public servants are sent to prestigious schools of administrative studies abroad but all that seems to have had no positive effect on the bureaucracy.

In contrast the private sector, be it a humble 'bath kade', vegetable stall or a blue chip company, works to near full capacity and is of utmost efficiency. If they fail, they wind up and disappear at no expense to the public.

The question following the recruitment of these graduates is: Since they are to be absorbed into the public service, are they to follow the beaten track of the present and past incumbents? Public servants may correctly argue that politicians prevent them from doing the job with their interference. Whatever the honourable sentiments expressed by President Kumaratunga at the recruitment ceremony, it would, indeed, be a miracle if political interference ceases.

Thus, it seems very likely that another 42,000 new recruits will be recruited to the same moribund service which is of little benefit to the people.

President Kumaratunga's advice to the graduates to work free of political prejudices is very commendable. It would have been more convincing had other political leaders other than government politicians been invited to the ceremony.

Countries that depended heavily on the state services have over the years collapsed mainly because of the inability of their bureaucracies to perform. The Soviet Union and other European satellites that collapsed are examples. We have experienced the burden of colossal White Elephants such as the CTB, CWE, state-owned plantations, and many industrial corporations running at losses costing the state billions of rupees. Fortunately, some of these have been privatised or closed.

Are we going back to the same era of sponsoring state-owned enterprises and enlarging the state sector at great cost to the people?

Undiluted raw capitalism is not the answer. The privately-owned transport system, given the freedom of the wild ass, is a good case against uncontrolled private enterprise. There should be regulations imposed on the private sector. Perhaps, we can learn from China, where state-owned enterprises run alongside capitalist enterprises.

The 42,000 graduates, we are told, are to be trained in various fields of administration. We only hope that they can be trained in new fields such as running of new enterprises rather than be absorbed into an army of pen pushers.