Ayn Rand famously said,
“If a businessman makes a mistake, he suffers. If a bureaucrat makes a mistake, you suffer.”
A businessman cannot force you to buy his product. If he makes a mistake or incurs a loss, he suffers the consequences. However, if a bureaucrat makes a mistake, taxpayers suffer. In business, the customer is the ultimate boss. In government, sadly the taxpayer is not.
One month into Narendra Modi’s new term with the NDA-led government, the flaws of his previous tenure are now apparent. The past month has been challenging for the Modi government. Two weeks after the 2024 Lok Sabha election results, two trains collided in North Bengal. Shortly after, medical students made nationwide protests against irregularities in the NEET examinations.
The worst news was on the infrastructure side. Modi’s claims of infrastructure development were mocked by the monsoon season. Airports in Guwahati, Jabalpur and Rajkot reported roofing issues or canopy collapses, and a person was killed due to a canopy collapse at Delhi airport.
But the story doesn’t end here. In the last one month, as many as 15 bridges collapsed in Bihar, ruled by the BJP and its ally JDU. According to government data, 8,756 people died between 2018 and 2022 due to public infrastructure failures.
Modi has sought to tether his image as a nation- builder. Despite Modi’s $100 billion annual infrastructure spending over the past three years,the reality of these projects is now apparent.
Certainly, a bigger issue was completely ignored by Modi in the last 10 years: systematic reforms.
Modi’s focus on presenting a grand image of himself and India has been overshadowed by substantial achievements. Terms like AmritKaal (Immortality Period) and VishwaGuru (World Guru) exemplify this rhetoric. But a country doesn’t run on rhetoric or PR but, rather, on the effectiveness of the system.
Indian bureaucracy : A taxpayer liability
The bureaucratic system in India often mirrors a feudal structure, where power is centralized and decision-making is opaque.
In 2012, a Hong Kong-based consultancy ranked Indian bureaucracy the worst in Asia. This perception persists, with bureaucrats rarely held accountable for their actions, fostering negligence and irresponsibility. The system rewards political loyalty over competence, discouraging meritocracy and promoting inefficiency. Political interference undermines impartial decision-making, favoring certain groups and persecuting opponents.
For example, judges and civil servants have joined the BJP after favorable decisions for the party. Even the Supreme Court judge ( Rajan Gagoi ) is not left.
This nexus between bureaucracy and politics burdens taxpayers, who bear the cost. In 2017, India spent 10.18 trillion rulpees ($125 billion) on government employees’ salaries, pensions and allowances, comprising 8.15% of GDP. This spending outweighs allocations for education, health and defense, yet performance expectations are unmet.
Failures in infrastructure and public services highlight bureaucratic inefficiency. Bridge collapses, airport mishaps, train accidents and exam paper leaks demonstrate these shortcomings. The Indian bureaucracy, meant to support governance, has now become a taxpayer burden and a hindrance to progress.
In April, GST collections hit a record 2.10 trillion rupees, a 12% year-on-year growth, the highest since its rollout. India’s highest tax rate is 33% and Delhi adds 20% indirect taxes to that. Canada’s highest rate is 54.0%. While the UK and China both levy their highest taxes at 45%, India hardly provides effective services such as free healthcare, free education and social security as those countries do.
According to Bloomberg Economics, Modi plans to spend 44.4 trillion rupees ($534 billion) on new infrastructure projects in the next two years. Without proper accountability mechanisms and systemic reforms, this spending risks being a waste of taxpayer money. India must transition to a better system before setting ambitious agenda.
Capunisum: better model of bureaucratic governance
Capunism is a bureaucratic system that merges the best aspects of market forces and public service. It offers a framework where market forces and bureaucratic structures work together for mutual benefit.
Singapore stands as a stellar example of this system, demonstrating how a well-designed bureaucratic structure can lead to remarkable socio-economic development and public service efficiency.
Singapore is a British colony that bears much resemblance to the Indian and British administrative system. But In 1995, the Singapore government launched the Public Service for 21st Century initiative (PS21), which focuses on institutional ethos such as innovation, quality, customer service and staff well-being.
Singapore’s government recognizes the importance of decentralization and the distribution of decision-making powers. Each department operates with clear missions and objectives, and teams have specific, measurable targets.
Decentralization empowers subordinates to complete complex tasks effectively, fostering a culture of accountability and innovation, while rewarding high performers.
To attract and retain the best talent, Singapore invests heavily in education and offers competitive compensation for public servants. Bureaucrats’ salaries are aligned with private sector standards. This ensures that decisions are made based on expertise and the public good rather than personal gain. This technocratic approach ensures that merit-based appointments and promotions are given. Only competent and hardworking individuals are rewarded, thus reducing corruption and inefficiency.
India can learn from Singapore’s example , by embracing meritocracy, decentralization, investment in talent, continuous improvement and anti-corruption measures. This approach can transform India’s bureaucratic system into an engine of innovation and efficiency, making it more accountable, transparent and responsive to citizens’ needs.
This will prevent the pitfalls of rigid bureaucracy as seen in India’s case. Rather than the system itself picking the winning and loser, the role of the system will become that of a facilitator, which will create a level playing field for all participants. The winners and losers are decided by performance, not by allegiance to authority.
More importantly, the state of a country’s economy will always be a reflection of what its system promotes. The American system promotes innovation (innovative economy ); the Chinese promotes scale (export-oriented economy); while the Indian system promotes inefficiency and sycophancy.
Until systemic reforms are made, Indian taxpayers will continue to suffer, regardless of government’s good intentions.
.
every bureaucrat is an unofficial fund raiser for some politician or the other (after taking their own cut)
till the politicians clean up their act it will never happen
the only right thing they do is pay taxes on their official income. that’s it. that too by force of the govt