Consensus politics bad for public service delivery
Consensus is currently the buzzword in Kenya’s political lexicon. The two leading coalitions have burnt the midnight oil reaching out to aspirants and asking them to shelve ambitions and instead support rivals.
There is nothing wrong with consensus. It is allowed in a democracy as are issuing direct tickets to aspirants and nominations.
Still, the most democratic method of picking any candidate in a contest with multiple candidates remains voters casting their ballot for their preferred candidates.
While such an exercise is not immune to manipulation, it is the safest for enhancing party democracy.
However, the logistics involved makes this an expensive process that cash-strapped parties are keen to avoid. There are other risks associated with the nomination process.
They include protracted appeals if results are contested followed by a likelihood of alienating supporters of the disgruntled loser. To avoid such a scenario, parties embrace consensus which is cheap and helps avert the potential of an acrimonious fallout.
The consensus model seems to be what both Azimio and Kenya Kwanza have embraced. More than any other party, United Democratic Alliance (UDA) has been on a “consensus breakthrough” announcement blitz as aspirants in Nyamira, Meru, Mombasa and Nairobi, among others, are shelving their ambitions in support of rivals.
These “generous” acts of sacrifice are often presented to the world at Deputy President William Ruto’s Karen residence.
Azimio has its share of consensus. The most prominent was recently in Mombasa where businessman Suleiman Shahbal withdrew his bid for the Mombasa governor seat in favour of Mvita MP Abdulswamad Nassir. Former Prime Minister Raila Odinga mid-wifed the process.
While consensus is good for political parties, it bodes ill for the government’s commitment to effective service delivery.
It is a threat to optimum performance in the civil service and might hamstring government operations due to a lack of commitment to duty.
The majority of the aspirants currently “shelving” their ambitions to support rival candidates are not driven by a deep sense of nationalistic altruism.
This is political survival at its finest. These are candidates keen on avoiding nominations that would deny them any bargaining power if they lose fairly. For their “sacrifice”, they are promised “something”.
The coalition that oversaw the consensus agreement will be beholden to the candidates who shelved their ambitions. The rewards come after elections.
They are in the form of appointments into critical sectors in government. They will land in parastatal boards, commissions, SAGAs and other key dockets. Granted, some of the candidates appointed to these offices will have the required qualifications.
Others might not. Trouble creeps in when the appointees feel they are not obliged to respond to the calls of public service because the operating belief is that their current appointment is a direct reward for sacrifices made.
In short, their appointments have more to do with being honoured for political service to a political party than a directive to serve the public.
To most aspirants harbouring political ambitions, the offices are converted into hibernation bays as they bid their time, getting ready for the next electoral cycle to plunge back into elective politics.
Such an outlook will ultimately do little to improve the quality of service delivery. If anything, it is likely to act as an inhibitor for a government that is keen to endear itself to the voters through excellent service delivery.
Some appointees assume office accompanied by loyal supporters who are given professional-sounding titles like Special Advisor, Liaison officer and Diary Handlers.
At a time the country is reeling under the weight of a bloated public wage bill, every employment and government appointment should be geared toward maximum service delivery.
After all, Kenya’s economy can ill afford to sustain unproductive workers who wriggled their way into posh positions courtesy of not vying.
Service delivery must be at the heart of every appointment. The coalitions should ensure the election aspirants whose parties feel indebted to and are appointed to positions in the civil service undergo rigorous induction to internalise their new responsibilities.
They must understand those appointments are sacrosanct duties to offer the best they can to Kenyans.
Rewarding them merely to honour pre-election agreements without insisting on delivery will be counterproductive to any political party that comes to power with a promise to enhance service delivery.
—The writer comments on topical issues
