2. Introduction
2.8 Explaining the Public Sector
According to William Thornhill “the public sector represents a group of institutions having in common some reliance on the power of the state, from which they can justify their activitie” (Thornhill, 1995: 1)
He further explains that:
The public sector is comprised of bodies which rely for their existence or their powers, sometimes both, on the authority conferred on them by the state in varying degrees through some formal process. It is their ability to invoke, in greater or lesser degree, the compulsive power of the state which brings them within the public sector, and in so far as that power exists it falls to be dealt with through the recognised processes of political control in a democracy (Thornhill, 1985: 2).
This suggests that the public sector is directly under the control of the government.
It is important to note that the term „administration‟ is in some way or another related to both the public and private sector (Bain, 1996: 9). Thus, the terms public sector and public administration will be used interchangeably in this chapter.
Erwin Schwella opines that the public administration of a state is made up of those structures and processes functioning within the society with the aim of facilitating public policy formation and the efficient and effective execution of the policies decided upon. Public functionaries – political office bearers and civil servants – have to directly work towards the promotion of the public interest and general welfare. The relevant functionaries are given authority and public resources to pursue their aims and these are not to be used for personal or sectional gains (Schwella, 1991: 52). The public functionaries, thus, have to serve as “the general population in the public interest” (Good, 1959:497). This means those public
60
functionaries have to act with justice and fairness towards all and sundry because they are in the position of trust (Schwella, 1991:52).
In the public sector, civil servants ought to follow the rules and regulations that govern the public sector; otherwise their actions will be seen as unethical. This point hints at the key difference between public and private sector. It is saying that the public sector is unlike the private sector, where the owner of a company or a sole proprietor not only make the rules but picks and chooses which one to follow and which one to discard. Rules in the public sector are followed strictly and specifically in the interest of the general public. According to Hummel, “in the public service, as distinct from private enterprise, the answer is surprisingly easy:
the ultimate standard for the public service worker or manager is what is good for the republic” (Hummel, 1989: 856),
2.8.1 The Difference between the Public Sector and the Private Sector
Ths thesis observed at the introduction of this chapter, that the public sector is better explained when contrasted with the private. Therefore the difference between the public sector and the private sector is discussed in this section.
These two sectors differ in a number of respects. One of the most important distinctions is outlined by Thornhill, “exposure to political direction and scrutiny. It is the most obvious aspect of the public sector which distinguishes it from the private sector” (Thornhill, (1985: 4) Cloete explains that:
The political office-bearers decide which matters should be regarded as matters deserving action from public institutions. These matters cannot be left to the whim and fancy of the individual or private entrepreneur, but must be attended to by public officials acting under the supervision of the political office-bearers who are in turn responsible for governing society. The work comprising public administration is, therefore, carried out by the political office-bearers and their subordinates (Cloete, 1997:63).
Subordinates are the civil servants, who receive political direction and work accordingly.The private sector is not supervised by any person.
61
Public accountability further distinguishes the public sector from the private sector.
In thepublic sector, civil servants are expected to be accountable to the people they are serving. This is not the same in the private sector, because private sector employees are not accountable to the general public and are only accountable to the owner of the business. In the public sector it is expected that civil servants will give account of their stewardship. This is not debatable, because if there is no public accountability, officials can be sued in a court of law. According to Thornhill, the initiative for securing accountability lies with those to whom it is due; it is not a matter where the persons or bodies held accountable can decide what aspects of their activities they will make available for external examination” (Thornhill, 1985:
5). In the private sector, the issue of the outsiders (the general public) challenging their accountability may not arise except perhaps in the case of an uncommon takeover bid (Thornhill, 1985:5).
Another factor which distinguishes the public sector from the private sector is the principle of equal treatment of citizens. In the public sector it is expected that there should be no discrimination in terms of treatment of all citizens, who are supposed to be treated fairly and equally whether they are family members, relatives, friends or business associates of civil servants or not. According to Thornhill, “discretion is often denied to officials in the interests of fairness and equality, and this is frequently contrasted with the ability of private businesses to show preference to some clients” (Thornhill, 1985: 5).
The issue of job security is much more guaranteed in the public sector than in the private sector. According to Nnoli, “it is usual in the public administration, when civil servants are recruited, they are retained in the service until their retirement;
promotion is mainly by seniority and so on” (Nnoli, 2000: 57). He further contends that such benefits sometimes do not apply to performance, because no matter how inactive officials may be, they remain on the pay roll until retirement. In contrast, in the private sector, an official can be dismissed from the service at any time (Nnoli, 2000:57). Thus, there is no job security in the private sector.
62
Another distinguishing factor between the public sector and the private sector is in the area of ownership. In terms of ownership, the public sector is seen as collectively owned by all citizens. This is different from the private sector in which different people establish their own companies and, thus, are the sole owners of the company. Sometimes, groups of people may come together for the establishment of a joint company. The private sector concerns those people that have their private business while the public sector is for the general public (Thornhill, 1985: 6).
The issue of profit motive is yet another factor that can be raised to distinguish between the public sector and the private sector. The primary aim of the public sector may not be profitmaking, but rather to see that citizens are not in any way exploited. The public sector is there to see to the welfare of the general public. In the case of the private sector the primary motive, basically, is to make a profit from business. Cloete, points out:
As regards the objectives of private and public institutions, however, there are fundamental differences. It will be found that the purpose of a private business concern is to make a profit – usually on the capital invested on it – for the individual owner, the small number of owners or the shareholders. This factor of profit serves as the overriding, concrete and exact criterion when all the stages of the activities come under review in a private concern; in other words, when attention is given to the determination of objectives (policy- makers), organising, staffing, financing, devising of work procedures, and exercising control (Cloete, 1997:62).
Cloete‟s submission here is that private institutions are primarily defined by their profiting making orientation. Private individuals go into business to make money;
their service delivery and the fact that they serve the public are all secondary. This is why it is hard to see any private business owner continue with the business when it ceases to bring in profit no matter how important the services it offers to the public.
63
The control of expenditure is another factor that may be used to distinguish between the public sector and the private sector. Thornhill observed that “the rigidity of the financial control in the public sector contrasted with the practice in private enterprise which allowed more scope for individual and unplanned expenditure” (Thornhill, 1985:9). Although this point is correct, it has to be added that in recent times, especially because of the economic crises all over the world and the growing size of private enterprise, the private sector has seen a greater need for control of expenditure. Nevertheless, the level of expenditure control in the public sector is higher when compared with the private sector.
Having explored some of these major differences between the public and the private sectors, we can therefore formulate our working definition of the public sector in this thesis as follows: the public sectors are those establishments of the state that have the walfare of the citizens as the underlining logic of its existence.
Thus, the purpose of the public sector is undermined the moment the general welfare of the people is compromised. The use of public good for private gratification is the major characteristic of corruption and this above all is what makes corruption a major problem of the public sector.
Having established our working definitions of corruption and the public sector in this chapter, the next chapter will focus on African culture, investigating whether the claim that certain African cultural practices contribute to corruption can be justified.
64