FROM OVERSEER TO OVERLORD

Feb 07, 2012 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

 

In time, the Leader of the Opposition will come around to understanding the wisdom of the decision of the Ministry of Local Government to rotate overseers. The rotation policy has merit. Familiarity it is said builds contempt. It can also encourage complicity. Overseers that have been around for too long can become overlords, and this is something that we should avoid. Rotation helps to ensure that no overseer feels that he or she is a permanent fixture, does not get too comfortable or becomes too powerful and immovable. Rotation keeps things in flux. No one is allowed to become too comfortable or too complacent.
There has never been any great objection to the rotation of Regional Executive Officers. So why should there by objection to the circulation of overseers within the local government system?
Such changes are healthy for both the system and the overseers themselves. For the system, it allows for fresh perspectives. A new person comes in, they are new to an area and want to impress.
On the other hand, someone who has been around for too long may begin to take things for granted. Rotation ensures that no one feels that they are immovable and therefore can do as they please. It allows for the overseers to get to know new areas and new systems. This is good for their own careers. They can work in a new area, and make an impact in those areas just as they had in other areas.
An overseer being rotated should be happy. It is a new opportunity to work with other people, to know a different community and to grow and become a better administrator. The opportunity to go into a new area is a challenge that every overseer should relish.
So why the quarrel? Growth and change is good for everyone. And this rotation policy is good for the local government system. It should be encouraged.
Some will even argue that Regional Chairpersons should also be rotated. Unfortunately, this cannot happen because elected officials cannot be rotated; appointed officials can. But would it not be interesting if consideration is given to also rotating some Regional Chairpersons. That of course is not likely to happen, not so long as these persons are elected on the basis of them being on their party’s list of candidates for elections.
Perhaps, one day, this humongous system of regional administration will be disassembled and in place some professional regional directors to administer collectives of village councils ( now called neighborhood councils) as business entities.
There are of course many reasons for the present objections to the rotation of overseers. Some regions feel that the overseers are very familiar with their neighborhoods and to remove them and put a fresh face is going to lead to problems. That is a poor excuse.
If there is any neighborhood democratic council that cannot be run by a new overseer then something is wrong with that NDC. Things should be such that any person should be able to come in and take over at any time. It is just like running a business. If one employee is absent, the business should not be shut down. It has to go on. Systems and institutional memories have to be in place to ensure that there is not a dependence on one particular individual.
If it is found that there are overseers when rotated cannot function in their new environment, then it will be the obligation of the ministry to decide whether those persons are competent to function in the system. If they are not, then they should be removed.
One reason why there may be objection at the regional level of the rotation policy has to do with political suspicion. Regional administrations are political turfs. And therefore many within the region view attempts by central government to rotate overseers as attempts to politically interfere within the regional administrations. Suspicion therefore greets the actions of the central government.
Some regions may also feel that overseers from other regions are unsuited to work in their areas. If such situations exist, there is need for greater dialogue between regions and for regions to find ways of interacting or even having joint projects. This will help also to smooth things over.
There is equally a need for ongoing dialogue between central government and the regional administrations to reduce this level of suspicion.
If there is such insecurity over a simple matter of rotating overseers, when are we ever going to reach the stage, which the opposition wants to see, of a government of national unity?
If there is such anxiety over rotation, what is going to happen when the opposition is invited into government?
Allow the rotation to work and see what develops! The electorate, it is said, voted for change. Let us see how this set of change turns out!

---

---