Previous ministers who were not reappointed in the new cabinet, those who kept their posts and those appointed for the first time are all keen to serve their country and do their jobs as they accepted to shoulder such huge responsibilities. We can but think positively about public servants and ministers in particular. However, is this how things are evaluated or is this how an observer should judge the previous cabinet or a newly appointed one with agendas yet to be disclosed? Has the previous government filed a ‘statement’ listing its achievements and failures? Has the government filed a clearly defined program for its achievement or addressed the public before ending its tenure regarding its achievements, and apologized for its mistakes or justified them?
None of the above was ever done by the outgoing cabinet, nor by any of the previous ones. It will not be done by the current cabinet or the following ones, either. Such facts make a ministerial position more of an honor through which ministers go unharmed and as sure-footed as peacocks. Unless we have a means of assessing a minister’s performance and measure his success or failure, things will remain the same regardless of the formation of the cabinet. The government has become like a train that stops at certain points where some passengers get off to be replaced by others.
The parliament’s monitoring of the government’s performance has proved to be ineffectual so far. It has never fixed any problems. It remains nominal and verbal as long as the government is capable of neutralizing the parliament through some of its members, which results in us remaining the same with an outgoing or incoming cabinet.
Has the previous government filed a ‘statement’ listing its achievements and failures?