By Captain CoCo
Something strange is happening in the way criticism of public institutions is sometimes spread today. A message suddenly appears in one WhatsApp group, then moves to another, and soon many people are discussing the same “problem”. It may look like an ordinary message shared by the public. But sometimes, one cannot help wondering whether such messages are really spontaneous or whether they have been carefully prepared and circulated for a particular purpose.
A recent message criticising the Inland Revenue Department is a good example. The message appears to suggest that the main problem facing the Department is a lack of ICT expertise. It creates the impression that the Department is technologically backward and unable to provide modern digital services. There is no doubt that the Inland Revenue Department has problems. Taxpayers have faced difficulties with online systems, communication, access and certain services. These problems should not be hidden. They must be openly recognised and properly corrected.
But the important question is this: Is the real problem simply a lack of ICT professionals?
Perhaps it is not.
A modern tax administration cannot be transformed simply by hiring more programmers, buying new software or giving another large technology project to an outside company. Technology is only a tool. What really matters is how an organisation plans, manages and uses that technology.
If a taxpayer cannot obtain a simple service, the problem may not necessarily be the absence of an ICT expert. The problem could be poor planning, unclear responsibility, weak coordination between divisions, outdated procedures or a failure to understand what taxpayers actually need. Sometimes, the deeper problem may be leadership.
An organisation can have talented ICT professionals and hardworking officers. But if there is no clear direction, effective coordination, creative thinking and strong decision-making, even the best technology will not solve the problem. Technology cannot compensate for poor management.
This is why the discussion should go deeper than simply asking whether the Inland Revenue Department needs more ICT professionals. We should also ask whether the organisation has the right people in the right positions, whether decisions are being made based on competence and whether the available talent is being properly recognised and used.
The public also needs facts, not carefully prepared messages that simply create the impression that a particular government institution is incapable. We should ask simple questions. Who designed the system? Who approved it? What were the requirements? What went wrong? Who was responsible for fixing the problem? What has been done to ensure that the same problem will not happen again?
There is also another danger. When an institution is repeatedly criticised, the public can gradually be made to believe that the officers already working there are incapable. Then the proposed solution becomes more consultants, more contractors, more companies and more external projects. Sometimes outside expertise is genuinely needed. But criticism should never become a convenient way of creating the impression that an institution can be saved only by giving projects to outsiders.
Sri Lanka cannot afford to waste public money because of poor management. At the same time, the country cannot afford to destroy the confidence of capable public officers by blaming every institutional problem on them.
The Inland Revenue Department collects the money that supports the country. Taxpayers are being asked to contribute their hard-earned money to national recovery. In return, they deserve systems that are simple, reliable and efficient. They deserve to pay their taxes without unnecessary confusion. They deserve digital services that work and clear answers when they need help.
That is why the Finance Minister should look not only at the technology but also at the leadership and management behind that technology. Are the right people holding the right positions? Are decisions based on competence? Are capable officers being properly used? Are institutions being strengthened, or are they being allowed to become so weak that outside solutions appear to be the only answer?
These are not personal questions. They are questions about public money, public service and public responsibility.
The real problem may not be that Sri Lanka lacks talented ICT professionals. Perhaps the bigger problem is that we sometimes fail to recognise, empower and properly use the talent we already have.
So, before we say that the Inland Revenue Department lacks ICT expertise, perhaps we should ask a more important question:
Does the Department really lack ICT professionals—or does it lack the leadership to use its people, systems and technology intelligently?
Captain CoCo is watching.
And this time, the question is not simply, “Who broke the system?”
The question is: “Who benefits when the public is told that the system is broken?”