Page 7 Is it the joint responsibility of the PSC and MPA to address potential job losses arising from the integration of AI, even when such changes may lead to greater efficiency? Should they prioritise the potential financial benefits to the taxpaying public — such as a reduction in public sector wage costs — resulting from AI implementation? At the same time, is it also their role to safeguard the morale and motivation of the public sector workforce, ensuring that innovation does not come at the expense of people or productivity? Or should the PSC and MPA review the public value provided to citizens? We must also address the social costs of displacement of public sector workers. Governments do not have the luxury of ignoring any addition to the unemployment numbers as this could be an exercise of moving employees from the Public Service wage bill to the social services balance sheet. The PSC and MPA, in collaboration with agencies responsible for digital transformation, e-Government, and ICT, share a responsibility to assess the impact of AI on both government efficiency and the citizens it serves. To fulfil this role effectively, PSCs and MPAs must strengthen their capacity, and this involves building knowledge, skills, and practical understanding of how AI can be applied to enhance public service delivery. While improved technology may reduce public sector wage costs, potential job losses must also be addressed through competency-based recruiting, reskilling and support. Safeguarding workforce morale is essential to maintaining a committed and effective public service. Achieving the right balance between innovation, fiscal responsibility, and human dignity is key. To lead in this new reality, MPAs and PSCs must embrace strategic roles that go beyond their traditional operations whilst conducting their affairs within constitutional provisions. They must help to shape and champion inclusive national AI strategies that align innovation with societal priorities. CARICAD supports the building of digital capacity across the public service as essential — public officers must be trained in data literacy, tech governance, and, dare I say, human-AI collaboration. Recruitment policies must be updated to prioritise interdisciplinary skills to attract new talent committed to public values. Moreover, agile governance practices – like pilot projects and experimentation – should be encouraged where possible, and include feedback loops, ensuring AI systems reflect the lived experiences and needs of citizens, especially marginalised groups. Just as important, there must be a consistent commitment to monitor and evaluate AI’s impact over time. This evolution requires a leadership ethos grounded in integrity and vision. MPAs and PSCs must act as stewards of human dignity, not simply managers of systems. By embedding fairness, transparency, and public engagement into the heart of AI reforms, these institutions can preserve trust in government at a time when it matters most. It is not our belief that AI should replace empathy, or accountability – instead, it should amplify them. In conclusion, the digital age calls for institutions that are resilient, ethical, and future-ready. MPAs and PSCs must continue to rise to this moment, not by leaving change to chance, but by actively shaping the future with courage, deliberate action and purpose. Their leadership will determine whether AI becomes a tool for the public good or a technology for disconnection. The responsibility is immense but so is the opportunity to build a smarter, fairer, and more human-centred public sector.
8 Publizr Home