Between Known Faces and New Faces

Nigeria is counting down to another season of general elections. Election is about choice of candidates, parties, programmes and policies, all represented by faces of actors. Behind any face are antecedents.
So, in the emergence of any electoral candidate, the questions that will be normally asked are:
What are his antecedents? What interest does he represent? What is his experience? In totality, what can he offer? For us in Nigeria, we must ask, for what are the faces we project for public offices known? Ideally, antecedents, interest and experience should be enough to sell a candidate.
Irrespective of the political, the purpose of government remains the same: providing services and ensuring that all socio-economic deliverables are distributed justly and equitably. Also underlying this imperative is the notion of the social contract: the agreement between the ruler and the ruled. There is only one way of meeting this social contract: ensuring distributive justice in service provisioning and access to privileges and opportunities.
How well this seemingly utopian objective is achieved will be dependent on the quality of elected leaders at the executive and legislative arms of the government strengthened by the professionalism and impartiality of appointed judicial arbiters. But this also depends on the leadership training, recruitment and selection process of the nation.
When we harp on leadership, we are not concerned with just the political leadership. We are rather interested in leadership recruitment in all its ramifications, because in the final analysis, the various state institutions sum the totality of players who are all involved in the governance framework as critical stakeholders of which the government is just a driver. Therefore, the quality of choice, representation, participation and contribution in public management in any country, the effectiveness and the efficiency of the service provided by its public managers, the reach and the impact as well as their relevance to public and societal, needs are underpinned by some fundamental values and require rigorous training.
Central to this notion is the idea of providing service for the greatest good of the greatest number. By the greatest number, we do not mean just the majority, but inclusiveness.
Even those that would not be beneficiaries or justifiably excluded from the service will have some understanding and sympathy and are, therefore, carried along in the decision making and implementation processes. To attain such height, we must begin to reevaluate our values and practices in public management.
Here, we may ponder to ask: What is the depth of our understanding of service? How do we arrive at the resolve to provide one service and not the other? What yardstick should we use to exclude one group and include another? What factors were considered in the determination of the timing and delivery of the public goods or services?
The advanced countries of Europe and North America are today at an enviable stage of development, with higher standard of living and encouraging life expectancy, enjoying the best and most efficient infrastructures as they also utilize and manage their resources and endowments in a way that does not compromise their existence now nor jeopardize the needs of the future generation.
That is as they meet today’s existential needs, they are also aware of the danger of over exploitation of their natural habitat without re-investment in conservation or preservation of the environment. This is the kernel of sustainable development.
Therefore, if our service delivery must assure sustainable development in the country, satisfying the needs of the citizenry and at the same time mitigating unavoidable negative externalities, patriots and professionals have to rethink their approaches to managing the nation’s resources with a view to arriving at the most effective, efficient and economical strategies of service provision.

*this was published in the Daily Times dated Friday, December 12, 2014