Fire Dina Pule now: DA

Paul Hjul said:
praising the "corporate way" is one of the greatest faults of the current way of not doing business. Government tries to emulate corporate thinking very often and all it does is inherit large corporate stupidity.
Countless large companies have played screwball with their shareholders - and the public - demanded bailouts and sought special concessions. SAA is a company, General Motors is a company, the entire banking industry that took performance bonuses for performing the act of destroying the sector came from companies. On the other hand Mauritius Government is not a company and nor is Botswana's government.
Click to expand...
Hmm... perhaps i should have used bold and red text.
Inevitability said:
I have been banging that drum ever since I got a job and underwent a performance evaluation.
If only we lived in a world where governments were run like large corporates (in terms of performance evaluation).
Click to expand...
fixed!
 
^ responding to VegOtter's post in the first instance and a general practice rather than opposing performance evaluation.

BUT the problem of performance evaluation frequently having perverse incentives built in shouldn't be forgotten either.

Moreover part of the reason why much of "private business" can work the way it does is because it can go bankrupt, because we have insolvency laws that protect bankruptees at creditors expense and with the government being the protector of said debtors. Government departments unfortunately can't go bankrupt and be dismantled for the next one to fill its place.
 
O I would like to see classical performance monitoring and accountability in place in the public sector.

M'Lord I submit the Order of Court dated Y directing the Department of Justice to do X by Z. Z has passed and the relevant officials have failed to comply with said Order. My client has issued process on said officials as the First through Twelve Respondent as well as the Minister who is politically responsible for the Department giving notice that my client is bringing an application for a rule nisi to show cause why they should not on the return date be declared to be in contempt of Court and: (a) Ordered to appear before the Honourable Court on a date determined by the Registrar to show cause why they should not be committed to gaol for a period of 30 days; (b) be interdicted and restrained from receiving any remuneration directly or indirectly from the State until they have purged themselves of said contempt; (c) be barred from instituting any legal proceedings in the Honourable Court until they have purged themselves of said contempt. The said return date has arrived M'Lord and the Respondents have failed to answer. I submit that a proper case has been made.

That would be some proper accountability. The Minister of Justice in gaol because of a series of failings for which the buck ultimately lies with the political head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X