Opinion: A case for planning commission |29 December 2014
Seychelles is a fast developing nation committed to securing a better future for the people by providing a stronger and more vibrant economy. The Preamble to the Constitution of Seychelles casts an obligation on the State to “participate actively in the sustainable economic and social development of our country.”
The administrative machinery of the State is well defined and its bureaucracy is predominantly based on rationality, merit and professionalism. Apart from traditional subjects like Finance, Defence, Health, Education and the like, the modern State functions have embarked upon unconventional themes such as Environment, Risk and Disaster Management or even Quality Control. The dimensions of State activities have multiplied enormously putting added responsibility and greater accountability on the executive.
Policies in the ministries may be designed on sectoral lines in keeping with their specific needs and compulsive constraints. Very often the divergent goals of different ministries and the multiplicity of approaches and processes pursued by them have created conflicting situations and even hurdles in the smooth and proper administration of the State to attain the ultimate welfare of the people. To resolve such inevitable conflict in administration and to ensure a balanced and coordinated executive function many modern States have devised a centralised mechanism “to plan, prioritise and direct national activities through effective coordination, monitoring and evaluation by providing advisory services” to achieve sustainable socio-economic development of the country.
Recognising the need for such a comprehensive planning body the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the UN as early as in 1958 established the Economic Commission of Africa (ECA) to promote economic and social development of the 54 member States including Seychelles. A survey by the ECA revealed that because of ‘incomplete and inaccurate information and conflicting goals, the outcomes of State administrations are more random than planned, more idiosyncratic than systematic and due more to ad hoc opportunities than to strategic long term planning.” In pursuance of the obligation created by the ECOSOC many African countries have established a central planning body i.e. the Planning Commission, the latest being one in the Republic of Namibia by virtue of the National Planning Commission Act, 2013.
In Seychelles too there is a Planning Authority which makes decisions regarding development in spheres such as housing, hospitality projects, industrial undertakings and land use and utilisation. It is one of the 14 Authorities, not recognised as a ministry or a department, but as a parastatal agency. Its scope and functions are neither comprehensive nor long-term perspective oriented. It lacks independence as the Minister for Land Use and Housing has controlling power over the Authority. The Planning Authority performs executive functions like any other government department and its decisions are liable to be amended, altered or even scrapped by the minister who is the appellate authority. Far from conforming to the status of a comprehensive national planning body, the Planning Authority is no better than the planning cell of the Ministry of Land Use and Housing. It ranks along with the Licensing Authority, the Fishing Authority or the Ports Authority. Apart from Seychelles, in many countries of the world public policy planning roughly refers to a town and country planning with limited scope and restricted authority under an overriding political power. Even President James Michel rightly recognises some of the inherent shortcomings of the Planning Authority which cannot act as a catalytic agent in shaping the comprehensive socio-economic goal of the country unless it is restructured.
Against this dismal background and in consideration of the government’s earnestness to achieve a predetermined set of development objectives, it is essential to establish an independent, politically neutral and professionally competent national Planning Commission with the following objectives.
•Efficient exploration and assessment of the material and human resources of the country;
• Capacity development for augmentation of deficient resources;
• Determining priorities among eligible but competitive alternatives;
• Formulating plans for the most effective and balanced utilization of resources;
• Monitoring plan implementation;
• Evaluation of plans, and
• Policy research and advisory services in key thematic fields.
As these mandates are comprehensive and of far-reaching consequences these must be fitted into a reasonable time frame which in most countries has been accepted as five years although sometimes there are annual plans to address specific themes of urgent and unusual nature such as prevention of AIDS or reconstruction consequent on a natural disaster. Being objective in approach, independent in action and neutral in opinion the proposed Planning Commission may set a modest and realistic goal by supporting a growth path which addresses the vulnerabilities that impact on people’s life. While ensuring a minimum standard of living and providing a hundred square feet home for every Seychellois, the Commission may transform the country’s economy by doubling the per capita income at the end of two five-year plan periods with a 10% annual growth rate.
Art. 66(4) empowers the National Assembly to make any law conferring any executive function on a person other than the President or on an authority. The Planning Commission, therefore, may be established by virtue of a statute duly passed by the National Assembly. But as it is not like a body corporate or any other parastatal agency it is in the fitness of things that the Planning Commission be a creation of the Constitution like the Ombudsman (Art.143), the Electoral Commission (Art.115) or the Auditor General (Art.158) and it “shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other person or authority in the performance of the functions as such”. The constitutional creation will impart permanence, unique authority and political neutrality to the Planning Commission to facilitate its function as an independent body.
The President, being the head of the government, may be the ex-officio chairman of the Commission with the Vice-President acting as the vice-chairman exercising all or most of the powers of the chairman independently because the President also functions as the head of State. The Commission shall have three members – an eminent economist, a reputed technocrat with administrative experience and a retired bureaucrat with long and distinguished career. The members should be selected by a collegium consisting of the President of the Republic, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief of the apex court. Ministers of key departments such as Finance, Environment, Land Use and Housing, Tourism and Natural Resources and Industry may be the co-opted members of the Commission so that there will be greater scope for interdepartmental parleys and coordination. The Commission may set up expert committees to aid and advise on specific issues so as to facilitate realistic plan formulation. The most important functionary of the Planning Commission is the Secretary who besides being the administrative head of the office has to interact, liaise and deal with heads of different Government departments and ministries. He should, therefore, be in the rank of a senior principal secretary to the government deputed to the Commission on a fixed tenure in order to command compliance and maintain the dignity and respectability in a hierarchical system.
The concept of five-year plans for the development of the national economy was first envisioned in 1928 in the USSR although in later years several capitalist States have emulated the stereotype of central planning by setting integrated economic goals for a finite period of time. Even Nazi Germany too adopted this practice in its four-year plan (1936-1940) designed to bring Germany to war-preparedness. Planning is, to a certain extent, a regimentation; but, as justified by the Russian proponents, in the greater national interest practically every aspect of economic life will have to be so rigorously controlled by the State machinery that individual liberty and freedom of enterprise might suffer a ‘temporary’ eclipse. Yet in a democratic country like Seychelles planning is an open process. The makers of the plans are not dictators, but responsive to criticism and suggestions. Unlike the present-day Planning Authority the proposed Planning Commission does not make ‘decisions’ that might be subject to appeal before the concerned minister or be challenged in a court of law. In its purely advisory capacity the Planning Commission makes only ‘recommendations’ that are neither mandatory nor binding on the government.
Planning is an economic necessity, a compulsion mellowed by political prudence. Our political leadership has to regenerate a people that had been shockingly misgoverned during a long spell of alien rule. Our innocent people have to be awakened after centuries of apathy, indolence and poverty. We have to initiate ambitious economic programmes setting up high yet achievable targets.
Harihar Panda
Au Cap