By: Dr Metod Berlec
The first hundred days of Janez Janša’s fourth government were marked by efforts to assess the state of the country it inherited from the Golob government and its predecessors. This involved not only reviewing budget items, but above all exposing the systemic anomalies that had accumulated within the public sector over the past three decades.
If Slovenia’s independence was a story of political courage, the present moment is a story of managerial prudence: the state must know how to allocate its people, its responsibilities, and its regulations. In presenting the budget revision, Janša highlighted the inefficient allocation of personnel as Slovenia’s central development challenge. The figures are telling: since 1991, the number of public-sector employees has increased by more than half, with 196,123 people currently employed in the public sector, while the economy is reportedly seeking 150,000 workers. The paradox is evident: in a country with record-low unemployment, social expenditures continue to grow exponentially. However, the issue is not the numbers themselves but the results they fail to produce. Primary education provides an illustrative example. Despite a substantial increase in the proportion of teaching staff since 2002, educational outcomes have deteriorated, as discussed in a separate article. A similar situation exists in healthcare, where growing employment levels have not delivered the expected relief to the system. Gross wage expenditures in the public sector increased from €4 billion in 2015 to €7.72 billion in 2025, a rise of 92.8 percent. If current trends continue, they are expected to approach €10 billion by 2028. According to Janša, this situation requires strategic measures of the kind envisaged in the coalition agreement’s development-oriented agenda. For this reason, he argues that Slovenia urgently needs structural reforms.
One of Prime Minister Janša’s strongest criticisms was directed at bureaucracy. Slovenia has more than 22,000 regulations, creating an opaque forest of rules in which even legal departments struggle to navigate. According to Janša, this is no longer merely a matter of political will but one of systemic sustainability. A state drowning in its own regulations cannot effectively serve its citizens. For that reason, Janša’s announcement of restructuring and decentralising the public sector is entirely justified. It represents an attempt to return to a basic principle: the state should perform only those tasks that are necessary, and it should perform them well. Duplication of responsibilities, fragmented authority, and administrative overgrowth have become costs that Slovenia can no longer afford. Particular emphasis is now being placed on defence. Through the budget revision, Slovenia has for the first time allocated a genuine 2 percent of GDP to defence, a commitment that had previously been announced on multiple occasions but never fulfilled.
One hundred days are not enough to implement structural reforms, but they are enough to diagnose the condition of the state. And that diagnosis, according to the author, is clear: Slovenia needs an efficient public sector that genuinely serves its citizens, together with a strong economy that creates the conditions for development. Under Janša’s leadership, the government is promising rationalisation, the elimination of duplicated functions, greater transparency, and better work organisation. As a result, the debate over public-sector efficiency has been placed at the centre of political discussion. And that, regardless of political preferences, is presented as a step that Slovenia needs.