Big Brother by ALEX F. PATIO: Public administration

==== I know that some people will jump on me for this, but I believe that not all public administrators in the land are corrupt or dishonest, stupid or incompetent====

Since the real decision-making power in government has shifted from politics (who gets elected) and even from legislation (what laws are passed) to technical administration, a new citizen movement has erupted upon the scene demanding more participation in the processes of administration. To me, this is perfectly natural and desirable. Citizens have gone, have been forced, where the action is.
Public administrators, with rare exceptions, view citizen participation in government processes with fear and loathing. They see it as a waste of time and money, a source of confusion, and the cause of headaches. Public participation seems too irrelevant to the intellectual and scientific quality of their work. After all, administrators may be compelled to cater to congress, the press, and big business lobbies, but why should they have to interact with ordinary people who contribute nothing to the work they do?
Administrators are wrong to hold this view, I think, but I am not about to invoke the constitution or even courtesy to justify public participation in government. Instead, I wish to appeal to the self-interests of public administrators. I accept their self-interests as perfectly natural. They would not be human if they did not put their self-interest first. So let us skirt mere ethics here and get down to brass tacks.
For the purpose of discussion, I am going to assume that public administrators want to do a good job of serving the public interest. I know that some people will jump on me for this, but I believe that not all public administrators in the land are corrupt or dishonest, stupid or incompetent. Clearly, some are but many are not. Those administrators who are desirous of fulfilling their responsibilities under law are the people I have in mind. Why should they shoulder the admittedly heavy burden of public participation when there are so many ways to evade it?
As I see it, citizen participation and effective public administration go hand in hand. Properly performed, both tend to clarify and reduce the technical complexity in which most government programs are mired. Citizens ask the same basic questions that administrators must ask if they are doing their job right. For example, citizen groups concerned with environmental pollution ask these questions: How much pollution is there? Where does it come from? How does it affect us? What is being done about the problems it causes? Is the situation getting better or worse? If worse, why?
To administer a program, administrators must also employ such basic, clear questions. In a sense, administrators should ask such questions of their subordinates the first thing every morning. To have any chance of getting straight answers, it certainly helps to have people on the outside persistently asking the same questions. If we lose sight of the basic questions, we will all sink in the quagmire of technology, administrators included.
Aggressive citizen action and vigorous administration combined can make a refuse to proceed system respond. Pressure must be consciously orchestrated from the top and the bottom, from inside and out, to make things happen. Administrators, after all, must be wary or they will soon fall under the sway of their subordinates, or of vested interests, or of collusion between the two. To protect and exercise power and initiative, they need room to maneuver. Citizen groups can help provide this flexibility by entering the fray from another direction. They serve as countervailing force against both the technocrats and the vested interests. This can help the administrators buy time to work their own wills. Otherwise, they run the risk of winding up as puppets.
Along with the good news, a prudent administrator will want to hear all the bad news too, simply because it is politically safer than remaining in ignorance. Since broad and diverse participation has the effect of increasing the options open to administrators, and thereby their flexibility and power, they should be prepared to put up with its drawbacks. Yes, public participation is a time-consuming process. But it is a good use of time. Just as it takes fine wine years to mature, it takes a long time to hammer out good public policy. And the process, when completed, delivers policies that stand a chance of actually working in the cold, hard reality of the world.
Since, as I have observed, here in the City of San Fernando, we are lucky enough to have a smart and responsible administrator in the person of Ferdinand Z. Caylao, “Fer” to friends ,who always extends his hands in friendship and cooperation to the public waiting at his door, demanding to be admitted to the process of administration. Rest assured, the public will not be weakened if they do, but rather strengthened. To our dear city administrator, keep up the good work! We salute you for doing exemplary job.