Perks, Power, and Silence: The High Cost of Public Office

Opinion

By Jan Arden

On Monday last, a radio station hosted invigorating exchanges around the expenditures and salary packages, including such fringe benefits as travel/per diem, the nation incurs for our top political appointees and administrative brass at major state-owned corporations and our numerous parastatal organisations. Independently of what was promised in manifestos, not that they are irrelevant, there is no doubt that this is a conversation that needs to take place in all politburos when the nation is being prepared for tough times to come to sort out the mess left behind by the outgoing administration.

“Our elite civil servants vie for board appointments to top-tier state-owned enterprises such as Air Mauritius (or its Holdings),
Mauritius Telecom, or the State Bank where government certainly needs to have a watch. It is often said that when a Director-General is experienced and assertive, the board may become more of a formal presence, occasionally deferring to ministerial direction.
If so, it raises a legitimate question: how effective were they in anticipating or preventing the troubling practices now under investigation by the Financial Crimes Commission? Did they exercise their duty of oversight and speak up when necessary — or remain silent in the face of questionable decisions and ethical lapses?”

Some of the terms and conditions granted to previous grandees must have been so outrageous that neither MPs nor the public were allowed access to them. Claims of state secrecy or confidentiality clauses with commercial or private entities conveniently shielded figures such as the former Director-General of ICAC, the Speaker of the National Assembly, the ubiquitous accountants, a cohort of advisors, and the recipients of mind-boggling fees handed out left, right, and centre to legal men perceived to be MSM loyalists. On the transparency front, the public expects this government to do much better — even if the bar had previously been set so low.

Of course, there is merit to the catchy phrase I first heard fifty years ago in Singapore: “Pay peanuts, get monkeys.” In our context, how can we attract the country’s best brains to take the plunge and endure the pressures of political life — pressures that will inevitably affect their private, family, and professional lives for years to come? Moreover, the combined number of MPs, Ministers, and their advisors barely exceeds a hundred. Their salary packages would not place any significant strain on the national budget. They can certainly be justified if they are doing their jobs properly, but world tours with commensurate per diems, as entertained for instance, by the jolly crowd that bustled to the Dubai Expo at our expenses, should be reined in. So should the various allowances they voted for themselves at various times in the past be rationalized.

Do we really need to continue purchasing and maintaining a fleet of expensive ministerial vehicles — many of which end up in repairs at the Line Barracks — when Ministers and senior officials already benefit from 100% duty-free privileges every four years or so? Government has no business running (poorly?) a limousine garage. It should also have no compulsion in limiting engine capacities on our road and weather conditions for all duty-free cars. Our elites can certainly afford the extras they desire; those who wish to drive luxury brands like Porsche, Aston Martin, or Jaguar can pay the difference themselves, using their generous duty-free allowances.

While MPs and Ministers are but a handful, it was once estimated that we have around 400 parastatal bodies and state-owned entities, some of duplicate value and others of marginal interest, yet each comes with its own costly overheads — Chairpersons, Boards or Councils, and Director-Generals included. Do we need a sabre-rattling Elon Musk to go through that list and streamline it?

Our elite civil servants vie for board appointments to top-tier state-owned enterprises such as Air Mauritius (or its Holdings), Mauritius Telecom, or the State Bank where government certainly needs to have a watch. It is often said that when a Director-General is experienced and assertive, the board may become more of a formal presence, occasionally deferring to ministerial direction. If so, it raises a legitimate question: how effective were they in anticipating or preventing the troubling practices now under investigation by the Financial Crimes Commission? Did they exercise their duty of oversight and speak up when necessary — or remain silent in the face of questionable decisions and ethical lapses?

Indeed, these — and many other — questions deserve to be part of a broader conversation our leaders must engage in, even if only for the symbolic value of such reflection in a time of looming austerity.Read More… Become a Subscriber

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 16 May 2025