Former PSD delegation: Quick reduction of ministry numbers, populist action and with consequences

Former PSD President Albanian Pantina has spoken of the possible consequences the country will have in the event of reducing the number of ministries.

According to Pantina, the number of ministries should be reduced but not in the way it has been started, since it would only cause chaos in civil service.

There is no doubt that the past government has been too large in terms of ministries, ministers and, in particular, deputy ministers. But the reduction in the number of ministries in the way it has been presented to the public so far by the two parties negotiating to form it is not real reform, and it does not guarantee a reduction in its spending or increase in efficiency. Moreover, it would cause chaos, especially in civil service. Joining two or more ministries in one could reduce from the very beginning just a few political positions (the minister, deputy ministers and political advisers) but not even the positions of civil servants who essentially make up a ministry”, wrote Pantina on Facebook.

She says the quick mode of reducing ministries does not increase efficiency, nor does it lower budget spending, but it is only popular action with many consequences.

“While reducing ministries should take place gradually. Initially, three ministries, which are completely unnecessary, have had to be eliminated from the 21 number of ministries to 18. While until the next two years it will be wiped out and another 3 ministries and the number will drop to 15. Before the ministries are eliminated, staff” needs to be resystemised, Pantina stressed.

Full Facebook Post of Albanian Pantina

The number of ministries should definitely be reduced, but the starting is completely wrong.

This way of reducing ministries neither increases efficiency nor lowers budget spending is only populist action with many consequences.

There is no doubt that the past government has been too large in terms of ministries, ministers and, in particular, deputy ministers. But the reduction in the number of ministries in the way it has been presented to the public so far by the two parties negotiating to form it is not real reform, and it does not guarantee a reduction in its spending or increase in efficiency. Moreover, it would cause chaos, especially in civil service. The union of two or more ministries on one could reduce only a few political positions from the beginning (the minister, deputy ministers and political advisers) but not even the positions of civil servants who essentially make up a ministry. A very large number of directors and divisions within ministries must be erased, and another number will be re-organised. And this will take time and will undoubtedly cause much disappointment to civil servants who have regular work contracts, and no one can throw them on the street. Add here the fact that the Independent Civil Service Supervisor Council is currently out of operation, and cannot investigate the possible complaints, the only way that remains for civil servants are strikes and protests can accompany the government since our first day.

Is it possible to make reforms in public administration and reduce the government? Of course I do. But this should be done by those who are really aimed at building a professional administration and a functional government and not just political profit.

First: Deputy Prime Minister (or if there are two deputy prime minister) should also be responsible for a minister, so there is no need for deputy prime minister without portfolio.

Each minister has the minister/management and alone A VP.

Each minister (or its deputy minister) does not need more than 3 advisers.

While the reduction of ministries should take place gradually. Initially, three ministries, which are completely unnecessary, have had to be eliminated from the 21 number of ministries to 18. While until the next two years it will be wiped out and another 3 ministries and the number will drop to 15. Before the ministries are eliminated, civil staff must be re-tapped in positions similar to those held because they have been guaranteed by law.

At the same time (even early) a large number of independent agencies, which are unnecessary and budget burden for too long, should be closed or melted into ministerial dictatorships.

To do this requires a plan drawn up by people with knowledge and experience, but above all it takes sincere will and intention, which we have not yet seen in election winners.