ANÁLISIS E INTERPRETACIÓN DE LOS DATOS

It is widely acknowledged that civil services can function properly only within the framework of well designed administrative structures and processes with clearly defined roles of executive units, adequate horizontal and vertical coordination systems, clear lines of accountability and transparent policy making mechanisms.

Therefore, civil service reforms are often made part of wider administrative reforms or are accompanied by comprehensive reform measures in the administrative environment.

As we have indicated at the beginning of this chapter the first concepts of administrative reform were developed in the Russian Federation as early as 1997- 1998. Administrative reform was officially launched in July 2003 by the Presidential Decree N 824 “On Measures to Implement the Administrative Reform in 2003- 2004”. In the same month the Government set up the Commission on Implementing Administrative Reform headed by the Deputy Prime Minister.

The decree of the President 824/2003 formulated the main objective of the administrative reform – “to raise effectiveness of the public administration in particular in providing services for citizens, enhancing the rule of law, removing administrative barriers in dealing with the business sector”.

The same decree defined the following measures aimed at improving efficiency of the activities of the government and creating a more favourable climate for business:

- reduction of government intervention into activities of businesses, including abolition of excessive government regulation;

- elimination of duplication of the functions and powers of the government agencies;

- creation of a new structure of government with clearly separated functions of policy making, regulation, supervision and control; of managing government property; and of providing government services to citizens and legal entities;

- delineation of powers and authority between federal and regional levels of government.

In the years 2003-2005 funding of administrative reform from the federal budget amounted to USD 7 million each year (Otechestvennyie Zapiski, 2004:179).

In spring 2004 within the framework of the administrative reform a comprehensive restructuring and reorganisation of the Federal Government was launched which turned out to be much more radical than most observers predicted. In fact this was the largest reorganization of the Russian government over the last 40 years.

A three category system of federal executive bodies has been introduced comprising ministries (“setting the rules”), services (“enforcing the rules”) and agencies (“implementing the rules”).

on civil service (adopted respectively in 2003 and 2004) by State Duma Deputy V.Yuzhakov – “both laws are laws about bureaucrats, drafted by bureaucrats and in the interests of bureaucrats” (ibid).

4.12 Administrative Reform

It is widely acknowledged that civil services can function properly only within the framework of well designed administrative structures and processes with clearly defined roles of executive units, adequate horizontal and vertical coordination systems, clear lines of accountability and transparent policy making mechanisms.

Therefore, civil service reforms are often made part of wider administrative reforms or are accompanied by comprehensive reform measures in the administrative environment.

As we have indicated at the beginning of this chapter the first concepts of administrative reform were developed in the Russian Federation as early as 1997- 1998. Administrative reform was officially launched in July 2003 by the Presidential Decree N 824 “On Measures to Implement the Administrative Reform in 2003- 2004”. In the same month the Government set up the Commission on Implementing Administrative Reform headed by the Deputy Prime Minister.

The decree of the President 824/2003 formulated the main objective of the administrative reform – “to raise effectiveness of the public administration in particular in providing services for citizens, enhancing the rule of law, removing administrative barriers in dealing with the business sector”.

The same decree defined the following measures aimed at improving efficiency of the activities of the government and creating a more favourable climate for business:

- reduction of government intervention into activities of businesses, including abolition of excessive government regulation;

- elimination of duplication of the functions and powers of the government agencies;

- creation of a new structure of government with clearly separated functions of policy making, regulation, supervision and control; of managing government property; and of providing government services to citizens and legal entities;

- delineation of powers and authority between federal and regional levels of government.

In the years 2003-2005 funding of administrative reform from the federal budget amounted to USD 7 million each year (Otechestvennyie Zapiski, 2004:179).

In spring 2004 within the framework of the administrative reform a comprehensive restructuring and reorganisation of the Federal Government was launched which turned out to be much more radical than most observers predicted. In fact this was the largest reorganization of the Russian government over the last 40 years.

A three category system of federal executive bodies has been introduced comprising ministries (“setting the rules”), services (“enforcing the rules”) and agencies (“implementing the rules”).

Ministries were made responsible for the delivery of Government Program objectives within their area of competence. The main preoccupation of Ministries is to “set the rules”, undertaking policy analysis and drafting legislation;

Services were entrusted with “enforcing the rules” through supervision and regulatory activities;

Agencies were assigned the task of “implementing the rules” through service delivery and management of state property.

The number of ministries has been reduced from 24 to 15. The number of Deputy Prime Ministers was cut from six to one. By the Prime Minister’s decision 146 government commissions, advisory committees and groups have been dissolved. Regular weekly meetings of the Cabinet were opened to the press during fixed periods of time. However, the total number of executive bodies at the federal level has increased from 53 to 72.

Apart from a number of key regulatory bodies, such as the Federal Financial Markets Supervision Service and the Federal Anti-monopoly Service which report to the Prime Minister, all Services and Agencies were subordinated to a specific Ministry. Simultaneously staff reductions were announced at the level of ministries. For example, within the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade the number of departments has been cut from 58 to 16, the number of Deputy Ministers from 17 to 2 and total staff by 300.

Such a radical restructuring process could not fail to increase uncertainty and insecurity among the majority of civil servants and in most cases led to a significant reduction in their performance.

In accordance with the introduction of the three categories system of executive organs a review of the functions of federal government bodies (functional reviews) was conducted in 2003-2004. The Government Commission headed by Deputy Prime Minister screened over 5600 functions. Out of this number 800 were found excessive, 350 duplicating and 500 requiring reduction of the scope of application (World Bank, 2005:110).

Implementation of administrative reform in the regions proceeded at a slower rate with only 21 Subjects of the Federation (regions) adopting a programme of administrative reform by 2005.

One of the peculiarities of the administrative reform in Russia was that it was launched prior to the elaboration of the reform’s concept. A Presidential advisor admitted at that time that there did not exist a document where the goals, tasks and mechanism of administrative reform were outlined (Otechestvennyie Zapiski, 2004:86).

The concept of administrative reform and action plan for the years 2006- 2008 were developed and approved later by the Government Resolution N 1789 of 25 October 2005. These documents defined the following priority directions of reform activities:

- development and introduction of service standards;

- changeover from funding of government agencies based on their budget estimates to allocation of funds for specific programmes to be implemented; - enhancement of senior executives’ rights to redistribute funds between

budget items and to use the payroll at their discretion; - wider usage of information technologies;

Ministries were made responsible for the delivery of Government Program objectives within their area of competence. The main preoccupation of Ministries is to “set the rules”, undertaking policy analysis and drafting legislation;

Services were entrusted with “enforcing the rules” through supervision and regulatory activities;

Agencies were assigned the task of “implementing the rules” through service delivery and management of state property.

The number of ministries has been reduced from 24 to 15. The number of Deputy Prime Ministers was cut from six to one. By the Prime Minister’s decision 146 government commissions, advisory committees and groups have been dissolved. Regular weekly meetings of the Cabinet were opened to the press during fixed periods of time. However, the total number of executive bodies at the federal level has increased from 53 to 72.

Apart from a number of key regulatory bodies, such as the Federal Financial Markets Supervision Service and the Federal Anti-monopoly Service which report to the Prime Minister, all Services and Agencies were subordinated to a specific Ministry. Simultaneously staff reductions were announced at the level of ministries. For example, within the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade the number of departments has been cut from 58 to 16, the number of Deputy Ministers from 17 to 2 and total staff by 300.

Such a radical restructuring process could not fail to increase uncertainty and insecurity among the majority of civil servants and in most cases led to a significant reduction in their performance.

In accordance with the introduction of the three categories system of executive organs a review of the functions of federal government bodies (functional reviews) was conducted in 2003-2004. The Government Commission headed by Deputy Prime Minister screened over 5600 functions. Out of this number 800 were found excessive, 350 duplicating and 500 requiring reduction of the scope of application (World Bank, 2005:110).

Implementation of administrative reform in the regions proceeded at a slower rate with only 21 Subjects of the Federation (regions) adopting a programme of administrative reform by 2005.

One of the peculiarities of the administrative reform in Russia was that it was launched prior to the elaboration of the reform’s concept. A Presidential advisor admitted at that time that there did not exist a document where the goals, tasks and mechanism of administrative reform were outlined (Otechestvennyie Zapiski, 2004:86).

The concept of administrative reform and action plan for the years 2006- 2008 were developed and approved later by the Government Resolution N 1789 of 25 October 2005. These documents defined the following priority directions of reform activities:

- development and introduction of service standards;

- changeover from funding of government agencies based on their budget estimates to allocation of funds for specific programmes to be implemented; - enhancement of senior executives’ rights to redistribute funds between

budget items and to use the payroll at their discretion; - wider usage of information technologies;

- increasing transparency and accountability of government structures. The reform implementation mechanism was modified to allow for a more decentralized approach where each ministry or Subject of Federation developed their own programme based on methodological support provided centrally. Also a competition based principle of funding reform implementation from the state budget was introduced. The 2006 state budget allocated an equivalent of approximately 18 million USD for this purpose.