Kulman Ghising Raises Alarm Over Excessive Government Advisors, Citing Fiscal Waste and Bureaucratic Strain

In a recent press conference, Kulman Ghising, the Chairman of Ujyalo Nepal Party and a figure widely respected for his transformative tenure at the Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA), has sharply criticized the current government's administrative practices. Ghising alleged that ministries are becoming increasingly overcrowded with an excessive number of private secretaries and advisors appointed by ministers, leading to a severe shortage of workspace for regular government employees and raising significant concerns about fiscal prudence and administrative efficiency.

Ghising's remarks highlight a growing apprehension within political and public circles regarding the burgeoning size of ministerial support staff. He claimed that some ministers are currently employing as many as five to seven salaried private secretaries, in addition to dozens of unpaid advisors. This practice, according to Ghising, directly contradicts the government's stated objective of reducing public expenditure by streamlining the number of ministries. Instead of achieving cost savings, he argued, the proliferation of these positions is inadvertently escalating government costs and creating an environment ripe for inefficiency.

The former NEA Managing Director emphasized that the influx of these additional personnel is not merely a matter of space but has profound implications for the morale and operational effectiveness of the civil service. He voiced concerns that the increasing interference from private secretaries and advisors could undermine the established bureaucratic hierarchy, leading to a decline in the motivation and performance of career civil servants. Such external influence, he warned, makes it challenging to uphold good governance and ensure smooth administrative functioning. Ghising underscored that bureaucracy thrives on a clear hierarchical structure, and any undue external intervention risks destabilizing this crucial mechanism.

Drawing a stark contrast, Ghising recounted his own experience while serving as a minister, where he managed three ministries with the support of just one salaried private secretary and a single unpaid advisor. This personal anecdote served to illustrate that effective governance and administrative management do not necessitate an army of support staff, thereby questioning the necessity and justification for the current trend. His experience suggests that a leaner, more focused approach to ministerial support is not only feasible but potentially more efficient.

Beyond ministerial appointments, Ghising also extended his critique to the provision of private secretaries for Members of Parliament (MPs). While acknowledging that the original intent might have been to enhance the working capacity of elected representatives by providing competent support, he lamented that in practice, this provision is often exploited as a means to provide employment opportunities for personal acquaintances and close associates. He argued that MPs, who are expected to serve the public with dedication, should ideally be able to fund any necessary secretarial support from their own salaries, rather than burdening the state with additional expenses. This perspective challenges the current system, advocating for greater personal accountability and fiscal responsibility among elected officials.

Ghising concluded his address by urging the government to undertake a serious review of the policies governing the appointment of private secretaries and advisors. He called for systematic reforms aimed at controlling government expenditure, reinforcing administrative discipline, and prioritizing good governance. For investors, these issues are not merely political rhetoric but fundamental indicators of a nation's economic health and stability. A government perceived as fiscally irresponsible or administratively inefficient can erode investor confidence, deterring both domestic and foreign capital. Conversely, a commitment to transparency, efficiency, and prudent financial management signals a stable and predictable investment environment, crucial for long-term economic growth and market stability. Ghising's statements, therefore, resonate beyond political discourse, touching upon core principles that underpin a robust and attractive investment landscape.