If Macau Business was to theme its issues, this edition might take the rather unsexy title of “The Macau Public Administration’s Black Issue”.

A look at this month’s line-up of reports, and particularly those in our Politics section, paints a far from pleasing image of Chief Executive Fernando Chui Sai On’s team.

We certainly did not set out to prepare the “Black Issue” but there have been several breaking stories over the past few weeks that focus on the way the public administration handles itself in important circumstances.

The Commission Against Corruption dealt the government harsh criticism when it issued its judgement on the Labour Affairs Bureau raid for illegal workers at a television station’s headquarters. There was additional criticism when the commission wanted to know how a MOP32 million contract for an exhibition in Beijing went to a company with strong ties to the government, with very little justification.

The way the government abruptly reversed gear regarding the new public bus service tender has also raised eyebrows.

Much the same could be said about Vitor Ng’s swift move from leading the Macau Foundation to becoming fulltime president of the Macau Science Centre or Secretary for Administration and Justice Florinda Chan’s “Gravegate”.

The bottlenecks in manpower supply created by the government’s imported labour policies have also been questioned recently. The delays in the opening of Sands China’s projects on Lots 5 and 6 in Cotai are the most recent expression of that policy.

Creaky machinery

Looking at the bigger picture, these problems are linked to the way the Macau administrative machine works.

Read the Commission Against Corruption reports and it becomes clear that several senior officials are not fully aware of how to properly follow administrative procedures, sometimes adopting ad hoc solutions that don’t meet the rules.

Questionable options can create “suspicion of ‘behind-the-scenes scheming’ wholly damaging to the reputation of the administration,” as the commission stressed in the inquiry into Primedia’s MOP32 million contract.

It would be easy to apply any number of motives to these administrative mistakes but the reason our government officials most often use is that the former Portuguese administration didn’t adequately prepare them for handling the territory’s matters after the handover.

Whether that is true or not, a decade has passed and a new generation of civil servants is making its way through. It is time to drop the excuses and – in cases of gross error – begin holding people accountable.

Investment in danger

A public administration that delivers proper results in a timely and correct fashion is of no minor importance. In a small economy such as ours, the administration plays a role disproportionate to bigger jurisdictions in making sure businesses grow and prosper.

At a time when both the Central Government and Mr Chui are stressing the need to diversify the economy, a slick administrative machine is extremely important in attracting investors.

Casino operators are in no position to complain about the existing administrative bottlenecks. If they do, they endanger their presence in the world’s biggest gaming market.

But what of the industries that the government is fostering to diversify the economy; the convention operators, entertainment companies or cultural industries promoters? In these sectors the territory is competing against Hong Kong, Singapore and the mainland.

For smart investors, the rule of thumb is to evaluate the efficiency and reliability of the public administration, before making any investment. By that measure, Macau loses out.