Pennington, who writes for Asean Today, highlighted a 2015 World Bank report in which Singapore was ranked as the world’s best for government effectiveness. Malaysia, on the other hand, came in 43rd.
“This variation in performance is due to the lack of a proficient civil service that enables Asean nations to work as efficiently,” he said in a commentary carried by the portal today.
He pointed out that the vast number of civil servants in Malaysia puts the economy under pressure, adding however that the government had no plans to reduce these numbers.
Noting that 90% of civil servants in Malaysia are Malays, Pennington said this could also result in a civil service “that will work to further Malay interests first rather than Malaysia’s”.
Singapore, on the other hand, had made significant achievements due in part to its willingness to pay its civil workers well, he said.
“High wages, in theory, eliminate corruption. Singapore grasped this concept quickly and paid its officers well.”
Singapore is also willing to embrace new technology while its Public Service Division (PSD) has designed programmes for training, expert coaching and deployment opportunities, he said.
Under the PSD programme, trainees are able to obtain hands-on experience in a variety of roles with different agencies and ministries.
These factors contribute to the efficiency of the Singaporean system, which needs only 84 thousand officers compared to the 1.6 million officers in Malaysia.
“Just 1.5% of Singapore’s population works in the civil service, compared to 5.1% of Malaysia’s and 2.3% of Hong Kong’s,” Pennington said.
In February, reports said Malaysia had the most bloated civil service in the world, with Second Finance Minister Johari Abdul Ghani saying there is one civil servant for every 19.37 people in the country.
A Borneo Post report at the time said the proportion of civil servants to the national population in other countries such as Singapore is 1 to 71.4 people; Indonesia 1:110; Korea 1:50, China 1:108, Japan 1:28, Russia 1:84 and the United Kingdom 1:118.
Johari acknowledged that payments would continue to increase in future while the government’s revenues would gradually decline, but said the number of civil servants would not be reduced.
“We will not reduce our existing civil service. Instead, we should encourage civil servants to undertake more jobs in their respective departments to increase their productivity,” Johari was quoted as having told Oriental Daily.
The South China Morning Post meanwhile said in August that one of the reasons Malaysia was stuck in the middle income trap was the massive size of its civil service.
While such a large service had the effect of buttressing the government and making Malaysia more stable, it also hampered efforts to transform the government, making Malaysia more stagnant, said the report.
It warned that if the civil service was not reduced, it might result in a government financial meltdown.
Pennington said although Singapore’s model was not perfect, it was a good one to emulate.
“In Singapore, a job in the civil service is perceived to be respectable and well-paid. The same is not true across Southeast Asia, particularly in Cambodia and Myanmar. Reforms must also bridge this perception gap if they are to work.
“Every country has a different history, no two systems of governance – or civil service – are identical, and there are unique cultural, ethnic and demographic challenges to consider.
“Nonetheless, there are still plenty of reasons for Asean nations to emulate Singapore’s policy of taking the best elements from what works elsewhere to improve their system,” he said.