Admission Speech MPA II on September 22, 2006

Dear Participants,

Dear Guests,

It gives me much pleasure to welcome you all to the FHR Institute this evening for the Ceremonial Admission to the MPA Governance Program 2006-2007. I congratulate the Participants who successfully went through a rigorous procedure of screening and selection by the Admission Committee of the Institute of Social Studies in The Hague.

By way of introduction to the program I have chosen to share with you some thoughts which I hope, will remove any doubts any of you may still have about the relevance of this program and its usefulness for your own future career and for the development of our country.

My observations have to do with six overriding challenges which I have identified coming out of the Multi Annual Development Plan, the recently approved MOP. These challenges have to be properly addressed in order for us to achieve the MOP development objectives. The challenges are all related to the issue of Governance, the theme of the program you are about to embark upon in ten days time.

The first challenge is about public policy making. We do not have a shared long term development vision and strategy yet. Efforts to that effect, over the last three years, have not even resulted in defining an agenda for a national dialogue on the matter; a dialogue with the involvement of all stakeholders such as the private sector, trade unions, civil society and NGO’s.

Additionally, Government’s policy-orientation on the main international developments, globalization and trade liberalization, is weak. Those who are responsible for policy making have only a fragmented understanding of the current international legal and economic policy framework. This framework is therefore only being haphazardly ‘translated’ in the national legal and economic context, in which the MOP has to be implemented. New global standards, which also we have to comply with, are therefore only poorly observed in our governance activities.

Our public policy is also deficient in identifying how to deal with the changes in the patterns of production and distribution resulting frpm global economic integration. And we also do not yet have a national debate let alone a national policy designed to take advantage of the rapid advances in information and communication technologies.

Highly qualified expertise is of paramount importance to operate effectively in the new international legal and economic order. Finding the right policies for issues high on the national agenda will demand more input of expertise rather than only input of experience and common sense and more reliance on policy than on politics.

It is therefore highly relevant that acquiring skills to analyze complex national issues, understanding the ‘new legal and economic rules of the global game’ and formulating national policy options, are all important learning objectives of the program.

The second challenge addresses the poor legal content of the activities of public institutions and consequently of society at large. Since we became independent in 1975 our legal system is becoming practically isolated and our judicial practice is not complying with decent standards of legal protection. And we have not yet been able to establish rules and regulations to guarantee objectivity and integrity of our public institutions. Discipline for law enforcement at all levels of society is marginal to almost absent.

The MOP dictates that these shortcomings in our legal order will have to be addressed. But the big question remains and that is, ‘how will we resolve these shortcomings without a legislative tradition of our own and without a tradition of self-regulating practices and self-governance? Adding to the complexity of this is the informal sector with its prejudicial impact everywhere.

The program will not address our legal system as such, but it will encourage you to appreciate the relevance of norms of international legal standards for translation into our national legal system. The program will contribute to the widening of your horizon, your scope of knowledge and your understanding of the forces and dynamics of the social and political order and it will enhance your appreciation of observance of the rule of law as a basic characteristic of responsible governance.

The third challenge is our failure to recognize the added value of cooperation between the different ministerial departments on the one hand and between the institutions of the public sector, the private sector and civil society on the other hand. In most instances the interface between the different ministries and departments has characteristics of a Chinese wall rather than those of a coordination network.

It is generally recognized that, due to globalization and privatization, the scope of both the public - and the private domain of society are changing. And thus, in their interface, there is need to set the boundaries clear between these two domains and not let them just linger. A clear framework must be established to avoid overlap and to ensure maximum advantage of complementarities. The ‘mapping’ of this so-called shared public domain is an important issue and stands out prominently in the MOP and in a number of sector plans.

Ensuring maximum advantage of complementarities presupposes effective partnerships at policy making and policy decision levels, in the production and distribution of public goods and in the sharing of knowledge and information. The hurdles to be taken in creating these partnerships include the lack of a shared perception of what is considered of common interest, the historical preference for political partnerships over partnerships that are governance focused and the discrepancy of available expertise between potential partners.

Therefore, communication, coordination and cooperation and their relevance to enhance the effectiveness of partnerships at the various levels of governance, will be recurring issues in the MPA program.

The next overriding issue is good governance. Good governance is imperative in to-days world. Citizens rightly expect their governments to conduct their affairs efficiently, without waste and in a transparent, predictable and accountable manner. And over the last decade aid from international donors became conditional on good governance.

Implementing and sustaining public sector reform to instill these norms in the governing and managing of the civil service is a huge task. It assumes redefinition of the role of government, retreat by government from commercial production activities either through privatization or through partnerships with private entities. It also assumes as a corollary of ‘less state and more market’ establishment of an appropriate regulatory and control framework to prevent and correct excesses of the market.

It also requires a new balance in the allocation of tasks in public sector institutions between policy making, policy implementation, support and control. And finally, the success of this paradigm shift will be highly dependent on a culture – change, a fundamental change of values and norms prevailing in these institutions.

We do not yet have a clear roadmap for public sector reform and unless all the evidence is nothing to go by, this roadmap will unfortunately not be a homegrown strategy but an imported one which society will not own. The existing hesitance to adequately address the adverse social consequences of public sector reform and the covert resistance to overcome the current legal, political and social barriers will only leave the lack of urgency to drag on.

This MPA program will prepare you to become individuals, who do not experience change as a threat but see it as an opportunity to go after. And with this mindset you are likely to become the governments ‘agents of change’.

Then there is as a next challenge, the ineffectiveness of public sector organizations. Responsibilities at the political level and at the civil servants level are confusing and unclear. Processes and systems are bureaucratic. The flow of information and the sharing of expertise are poor. In general public sector organizations do not have targets and objectives. They are inflexible and lack clear, consistent and transparent organizational - and communication structures within which civil servants can use their talents and skills; they miss clear missions. E-governance, for efficient and effective conduct of business, has not been introduced hardly anywhere as yet.

This Master in Governance program is run in an effective, efficient and most of all disciplined manner. You will get used to modern means of communication and information and you will work in teams structured to encourage peer support. You will enjoy this and by making it part of your working live, you will become a role model as a ‘team-worker’.

But you will also become a role model in terms of learning. I already noted that public sector institutions tend not to make full use of talent, knowledge and skills. The Government finds it hard to recruit and retain well educated professional and technological staff. There are explanations for this; one is undoubtedly the disparity in remuneration and rewards between the public and the private sectors. Other explanations are the lack of clear criteria and standards for recruitment, no or little performance recognition and no career planning. But at least of equal importance is that public organizations do not encourage continuous professional education and do not provide programs for in-service training.

As a result of this Master in Governance program you will distinguish yourself from your colleagues because you will have experienced the joy of learning and you will radiate this in your working and social environment.

I congratulate you again with your admission to this wonderful program and I am confident that all of you will complete the program successfully and already now I look forward to welcome you here again for your graduation on Friday, May 28, 2008 at 07.30 p.m.

Thank you for your attention.