Publication	Sunday Independent
Date	2005-11-27
Reporter	Douglas Gibson
Web Link	www.sundayindependent.co.za

Ben Turok admits that our parliament has major weakness and tries to defend ANC MPs who fail to hold the executive to account ("The system isn't perfect, but MPs try", The Sunday Independent, November 21 2005).

In doing so, he completely underestimates the "uncritical, sycophantic, obsequious conformity" that Archbishop Tutu warned against last year.

Turok disagrees with the idea that reforming the electoral system would encourage ANC MPs to be more accountable to the public than to their party bosses. He argues that there is no evidence that constituency systems produce more independent MPs. One wonders how he would explain British Prime Minister Tony Blair's terror bill being rejected by many of his own Labour MPs two weeks ago.

The Democratic Alliance supports the idea of a mixed constituency and proportional representation electoral system, on the basis that it would go some way to promote accountability without sacrificing the constitutionally enshrined principle of proportionality.

But reforming the electoral system alone is not enough to improve oversight. Some simple changes to parliamentary procedure could make MPs more effective and transform parliament from a lapdog of the governing party to a watchdog of executive power.

Question time, for example, could be reformed to promote more vigorous debate. For the most part, this would just mean reintroducing some of the rules that were abolished when the ANC, tired of the DA's dominance of question time, used its majority to change the rules.

Interpellations (15 minute "mini-debates") were abolished by the rules committee in 2000. So was the system of placing questions on the order paper on a first-come, first-served basis.

Previously, questions were not apportioned according to party strength in the legislature, as they are now. Both interpellations and the first-come, first-served system had ensured that question time was an opportunity for proactive MPs from any party to engage ministers on topical issues.

Under the old rules, an unlimited number of follow-up questions could be put to ministers. The new rules reduced the number of follow-ups to four, lessening the possibility that the president or a minister would answer uncomfortable questions satisfactorily.

Some ministers have made question-dodging a fine art *1.

The DA, through its involvement on parliament's oversight task team, is pushing for questions to be allocated on a first-come, first-served basis, the re-introduction of interpellations and the removal of the limit on the number of follow-up questions.

The committee system has also been found wanting on occasion. Executive interference in the health portfolio committee during the Sarafina II Aids play scandal, and meddling by ANC heavyweights in the investigation by the standing committee on public accounts of the arms deal, have been low points of this parliament.

Aside from political interference, committees are constrained by a lack of resources and a poor understanding of their role as oversight bodies. The committees are also given limited input in the budgetary process, with the power to either accept or reject a budget, but not to amend it. As a result, budgets often get approved as a formality with little input from the committees.

To increase the capacity of committees, every MP should be assigned his or her own researcher. If the cost is prohibitive, then specialist researchers should be employed to assist groups of members of the committee. Committees should also be given the power to amend a budget, and regulations should be submitted to the relevant portfolio committee for approval.

Another potential weak spot is the independence of the speaker. There is nothing inherently wrong with the speaker being a member of a political party, but the speaker should not sit on the ANC's parliamentary management committee, the body that determines the ANC's strategy and tactics in parliament.

This year the speaker has struggled to convince us of her impartiality, with several odd interpretations of the rules.

Most recently she protected the deputy speaker when the latter abused her position by phoning members of the opposition to cross the floor.

She has also not allowed key questions to be put to the president about his role in the arms deal *1, and has yet to agree to a debate on the "Oilgate" scandal. Most significantly, she protected former deputy president Jacob Zuma by not allowing him to be questioned on the Shaik trial.

If the speaker wants to avoid the perception of impartiality in her dealings in the house, she should recuse herself from the ANC's parliamentary management committee.

There is scope for a great many innovative measures to improve parliament's oversight capacity. The DA has at least 17 concrete proposals that would give parliament back its "teeth". Mr Turok and his colleagues would do well to come up with some proposals of their own.