Eddie Teo – The ethos of an era

There is an article in the ST on 28 Apr by the Eddie Teo, the Chairman of PSC on the ethos of a bygone era, the things that the Civil Service breathed and lived by. The story of the Civil Service is best summarized by what Eddie Teo said in these paragraphs.

‘There was already a strong ethos of incorruptibility. I recently met Mr David Rivkin, President of the International Bar Association, who asked how our ethos of zero tolerance for corruption was imparted to, and sustained in, the public service. I told him there had been no training classes or brainwashing sessions.

But public servants watched and followed the examples shown by our political masters.  We were incorruptible because they were incorruptible. We saw that they lived simple, frugal and unostentatious lives and dedicated themselves totally to nation building and improving the lives of Singaporeans. All the older public servants who worked closely with our pioneer generation political leaders will have stories to tell about their frugal habits. To people like Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Dr Goh Keng Swee, there was no such thing as work life balance. Work was life, and life was work.’

These few paragraphs sum up the ethos and philosophies of a time not too long ago that seemed strangely different from what it is now. And it is only a couple of decades apart. The difference in ethos and values and the motivations of the Civil Servants are simply glaring. And they lived and work and developed a new ethos by the living examples of the political masters today.

Though apparently the message of an incorruptible, merit based and impartial Civil Service is still there, the essence and practices are starkly different from the days gone by.  Indirectly Eddie Teo touched on the new values and aspirations of a new generation of people that looked at life differently and wanted to live life differently and these would and must affect their work style and ethos as civil servants.  Affluence and opulence are the new aspirations and wide income gap is good as it allowed the top to indulge in the decadence of wealth and an extremely good life of plenty.

What makes the new civil servants today are greatly influenced by the affluence of a better time and also by the examples they see in their political masters. They follow the leaders and whatever the leaders do would and must rub down on them. The civil servants of today are not the same as the civil servants of yesteryears, crafted by a confluence of changes from many dimensions.  The aspirations are not similar and the ethos, have they changed?

Policies and political decisions were and are made by politicians. Civil servants are now expected to defend political decisions, in a way compromised to take sides with the politicians. This is a big diversion from the past when the political masters were confident to take a stance and make their own defence.

The emerging problems facing civil servants today is the possibility of a change of political fortune and new political masters on the horizon. How would such a change affect the impartiality of civil servants, their loyalty to party versus dedication to the service of the people, and their tenure of service? Would it affect the ethos of the Civil Service? A relatively less politicized civil service like the British system would provide better continuity than a politicized civil service that would have to go with the flow of political realities, serving the wrong masters of the land. They would have difficulties to stay relevant and remain in the Civil Service when the political masters changed. They are now in the same sampan as the political masters, to float or sink together.