“The first thing we will do is end the politicization of public administration”

What is the main problem of public administration now?

— There is a first element, the demography has crushed us. We are now 8 million and these new citizens are consumers of public services. The second element is the aging of the population, which consumes more public services. And the third element is also the aging of public employees, 50% of whom will retire in the next ten years. The situation is critical.

Lack of resources and public employees, then?

— Things are not always solved with more resources, but with a more effective and efficient management system. If you put more resources into an outdated model, you may not notice a better quality.

What is the change in model and system?

— This is what the commission will work on, but for example if you don’t have stability with the commanders because they are all chosen by free appointment and are changed with each change of government – and in Catalonia lately it is very frequent -, there is no kind of continuity Knowledge and a lot of time is lost. Countries with more continuity in professional managers have better institutional and service quality.

What do you mean when you say public manager?

— In the general sub-directorates, which are positions of free appointment in which you have to be an official, but the Government can discretionarily and arbitrarily dismiss and appoint whoever it wants. Therefore, there is a certain politicization of this area: it is not often appointed on meritocratic criteria and it is not clear that these people have the competences for which they have been chosen. And, aside from that, our ambition is also for an important part of the general directions to be for management professionals.

How many general directions would it affect?

— In half. The criterion we propose is that the most technical ones are for professional public managers. This means officials from the Generalitat, from other administrations or from outside. The important thing is that there is a meritocratic selection.

How do you guarantee meritocratic selection?

— There are two mechanics. One is that the public manager must prove that he has the skills according to the curriculum and an evaluation. And the other model is that every time there is a vacancy, a commission is formed that looks at the CVs and makes a selection of who has the best profile. One or the other or a mixture should be decided.

With the current system, have the parties placed unprepared people for positions of public leadership?

— The parties place their clientele, affiliates, etc., in the general directions, this is obvious; and that many times they do not have the skills is also evident. When the government is changed, senior officials and councilors must be changed, yes, because it gives democratic legitimacy, but the key issue is how far this political direction should go. That it reaches all directorates and general sub-directorates (among civil servants) is excessive politicization. With the reform, the first thing we will do is put an end to this: positions in the technical field will be recognized and only professionals will be able to be placed in these positions.

This reform of the public manager has already been heard other times by previous governments and it has never happened. Does the fact that the general directors who appoint the parties contribute to their funding through salary hinder this change of model?

— Reform is difficult because parties do not usually go against their interests. The more freedom and flexibility in hiring and firing people, the more power and ability to influence. Therefore, the fact that the Government party decides to take this step is a gesture of institutional and political generosity. This will give legitimacy to the reform. Until now there had been no such courage.

And with this new system, will the positions of public management contribute to the financing of the parties through the financial letter?

— I have always been against this. It is obvious that there cannot be this type of tie because they will be chosen meritocratically as professionals, not arbitrarily and almost clientelistically as has been done until now. Symbolically, this is terrible, even for politics, but in the professional sphere it is inadmissible.

You also talk about an administration simplification task force. Are these cuts?

— No, this is the fight against bureaucracy, which is like cholesterol: the administration needs it, because there is a guarantor and legal security part, but we have to fight the bad part. Rapid proposals will be made to try to eliminate some procedures that do not provide added value in public management. What we have in mind is that in months a kind of omnibus type of law or transversal regulatory simplification can be presented where changes to various legislations are proposed to speed up procedures. This will be the second test of life.

Are you confident of gathering enough political support?

— It is true that the political landscape is highly complicated and makes majorities very difficult, but it is difficult for me to think that the parties can go against the professional public administration, something that is wanted to be incorporated into the budget support law, because it is still that it is a fraud, they all have it in their political programs. I find it even more difficult that they could be against a simplification law to better serve the public.

You want things to happen from 2025.

— We are action-oriented. If things start to be noticed from January 2026, it will be too late. My idea is that in ten months a third of the proposals that will be included in the commission’s final report have already been implemented, another third are already starting to be implemented and there is a third pending, for example a new public employment law, which will be slower.

He has previously said that half of public employees will retire in ten years. How is the generational succession prepared?

— We must change the selection processes. Now tests are based solely on rote knowledge, and are enormously slow.

Can it be done with the current legislation?

— We have certain limits, but the Public Employee Statute gives flexibility. By regulation, significant transition changes to the new model can be made. We need faster, but strictly meritocratic election systems.

Pos an example.

— Instead of everything being based on a very extensive syllabus, the syllabus must be significantly reduced. And establish a new test system, which can be more of skills; for example, the European Union does an intelligence test and a psychological test to see if you are capable of working collaboratively, in addition to a test to assess digital proficiency.

Will the officials who depend on the Parliament or other statutory institutions be affected by the reform of the public administration?

— No, this is Montesquieu. The legislative power has independence, they govern their administrations and have a special regime.

But the majority of the Parliament that will reform the legislation of the civil servants who depend on the administration of the Generalitat is the same that could change the conditions of the civil servants of the Parliament.

— As the Government and the commission I chair, we cannot. Now, common sense would dictate that their regime should be very similar. But this happens to all employees who depend on the legislature in Spain and in the world; they have a set of job advantages that I consider unjustified because from a technical point of view they do a very similar job to other public employees.