On Wednesday 5 March a proposed parliamentary framework for the remainder of 2008 was distributed by the ANC to the Chief Whips of all other parties.
It proposes that from the 30 June (once budget debates end) there will only be another two plenary sessions for the rest of the year consisting of a total of 15 sitting days. The rest of the time will be allocated to committee and constituency periods.
The ANC Chief Whip and Deputy Chief Whip argued that the Leader of Government Business and the presiding officers had identified 90 pieces of legislation that had to be passed during this year. Therefore they suggested that the rest of the year should be dedicated to discussing and drafting this legislation in committees and that Parliament merely convene to pass the legislation decided on by committees.
This proposal was supported by all opposition parties except the DA.
Parties were informed today that the actual number of bills to be processed within this substantially reduced timeframe is 102. Only 34 of these bills are currently before Parliament, 13 bills approved by Cabinet are yet to be introduced and a staggering 55 bills have yet to be approved by Cabinet.
The proposed schedule is entirely unrealistic, especially when it is considered that Parliament has only passed a total of 112 bills in the last three years. In order for the legislation to be processed by 24 November, Cabinet will have to ensure that the 55 bills are introduced in Parliament by the 2nd of June which again does not leave much time for the proper processes to be followed.
Even if Parliament is able to meet this target it would reduce it's functioning to that of a mere rubber stamp, as there would be much-reduced scope for proper public participation, debate and deliberation.
Included within the schedule of bills are highly significant pieces of legislation which will have a major impact on South Africa's future. These include, but are not limited to, legislation abolishing floor crossing, legislation to create a single public service, the Expropriation Bill and the General Law Amendment Bill which will disband the Scorpions.
The people of South Africa deserve a Parliament that will treat the Parliamentary process with respect so that all voices are heard and fundamental democratic principles of consultation and participation are upheld.
In addition to the grave consequences that this schedule will have for the legislative process, there are arguably even more serious implications for Parliament's equally important oversight role. Section 42(3) of the Constitution states: "The National Assembly is elected to represent the people and to ensure government by the people under the Constitution. It does this by choosing the President, by providing a national forum for public consideration of issues, by passing legislation and by scrutinizing and overseeing executive action."
This proposal to effectively shut down Parliament completely undermines Parliament's constitutional obligation to hold the executive to account. Members of Parliament would no longer have at their disposal a range of tools such as parliamentary questions, debates, motions, member's statements and speeches to hold members of the executive to account for their actions.
The ANC and other opposition parties will argue that oversight equates to undertaking visits in constituencies. While this is important, it is not the primary function of oversight, which is to scrutinize the actions of the executive at a national level. It should not be forgotten that MPs are elected by their constituencies to represent their interests in Parliament; if the institution effectively does not sit for six months MPs will fail to fulfil this duty.
Furthermore, as the Eskom crisis illustrates, it is evident that there is a desperate need for increased, rather than reduced oversight over the executive at the national level. No one should therefore be led to believe that a reduced parliamentary programme of this kind will enhance oversight, when it will have precisely the opposite effect.
Taxpayers foot a daily bill of R3,2 million for MPs salaries and their support staff. If, as proposed, there are only 15 sitting days for the remainder of the year, citizens are entitled to ask whether they are receiving a reasonable return on their considerable investment.
While the real motive behind the reduced programme it is not entirely clear, the likelihood is that it is driven by party political concerns. The motive may be a desire to shut down the space for the opposition to hold the government to account as the ANC leadership battles to hold the disparate factions of that party together. Shutting down Parliament would mean shutting down a "third front" in the form of the opposition role played by the DA. There is also an argument that the ANC is intending to hold an early election, possibly in October.
However, what is most probable is that the ANC is keen to use this extended constituency period to send MPs to their constituencies to ensure that the party is ready to contest elections next year. It is obvious to all that the party is deeply divided, and six months dedicated to repairing these divisions would go a long way to rescuing the ANC. Such time would also afford ANC MPs time to engage in the politicking required to ensure their re-election.
Regardless of what the actual motives may be, there is no question that the ANC's own interests are being put ahead of those of Parliament. This yet again highlights just how compromised the Speaker of Parliament, Baleka Mbete, is in this regard. Her pivotal leadership positions within the ANC mean that it is highly likely - if not probable - that she will put the interests of the party that she leads ahead of those of the institution she is constitutionally obligated to protect.
It is for this reason that I will move the following substantive motion in the National Assembly this afternoon:
- That the house notes the Speaker of Parliament's appointment as both chairperson of the ANC and the ANC's Political Committee
- Further noting that the National Assembly Guide to Procedure 2004 argues that ‘although affiliated to a political party, the Speaker is required to perform the functions of that office fairly and impartially in the interest of the Assembly and Parliament;
- Resolves that an ad hoc committee be appointed to investigate the implications of the Speaker's dual role for Parliament.
Statement issued by Ian Davidson MP, Democratic Alliance Chief Whip, March 18 2008
