The Parliamentarian 2011: Issue Four - Constituency Development Funds

OF EXC RY

11

19

11

LENCE EL

A CENTU

Cover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:36 Page 1

~ C PA ~ 2

0

TheParliamentarian Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth

2011 | Issue Four XCII | Price £12

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS: Principles and guidelines for effective and accountable operations PAGE 314

PLUS The Canadian advantage PAGE 298

India’s Rajya Sabha and women’s empowerment PAGE 310

The Millennium Development Goals and parliamentary scrutiny PAGES 318

Building a dialogue between Parliament and enterprise PAGE 322

Inside front cover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:24 Page 37

Calendar of Events

2012 January 7-12

21st Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers of the Commonwealth, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and Tobago

30-31

FIPA Caribbean Workshop on Strengthening Parliamentary Oversight, Antigua and Barbuda

TBA

CPA Asia Regional Conference, Sindh, Pakistan

February 5-11

7th Annual Summary Residency Programme for PAC, Victoria, Australia

March 5-7

5th Annual E-Gov Africa 2012 CTO/CPA, Gaborone, Botswana

7-11

Asia Regional PAC, Maldives

12

Commonwealth Day, London and all Branches

14-15

Meeting of Parliamentarians of countries most vulnerable to climate change: Durban and beyond, Bangladesh

27-29

Post Election Seminar, Seychelles

April 16-21

Mid-Year Meeting of the CPA Executive Committee, Nuku'alofa, Tonga

The publication of a Calendar of CPA events is a service intended to foster the exchange of views between Branches and the encouragement of new ideas. Further information may be obtained from the Branches concerned or the Secretariat. Branch Secretaries are requested to send updates of this material to the Information Officer (pirc@cpahq.org) to ensure the Calendar is full and accurate.

Inside front cover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:24 Page 37

Calendar of Events

2012 January 7-12

21st Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers of the Commonwealth, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and Tobago

30-31

FIPA Caribbean Workshop on Strengthening Parliamentary Oversight, Antigua and Barbuda

TBA

CPA Asia Regional Conference, Sindh, Pakistan

February 5-11

7th Annual Summary Residency Programme for PAC, Victoria, Australia

March 5-7

5th Annual E-Gov Africa 2012 CTO/CPA, Gaborone, Botswana

7-11

Asia Regional PAC, Maldives

12

Commonwealth Day, London and all Branches

14-15

Meeting of Parliamentarians of countries most vulnerable to climate change: Durban and beyond, Bangladesh

27-29

Post Election Seminar, Seychelles

April 16-21

Mid-Year Meeting of the CPA Executive Committee, Nuku'alofa, Tonga

The publication of a Calendar of CPA events is a service intended to foster the exchange of views between Branches and the encouragement of new ideas. Further information may be obtained from the Branches concerned or the Secretariat. Branch Secretaries are requested to send updates of this material to the Information Officer (pirc@cpahq.org) to ensure the Calendar is full and accurate.

CPA Centennial medal advert:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:26 Page 281

CPA CENTENNIAL GIFTS CPA pens

This superb limited-edition medal celebrating the centennial of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association is now for sale on a ‘first come, first served’ basis.

Approximately 4.5 centimetres in diameter, the medal features a map of the world listing each of the nine Commonwealth regions on the obverse and, on the reverse, the ‘winds of change’ centennial logo.

Each medal is beautifully presented in an individual presentation box and comes complete with a numbered certificate of authenticity personally signed by the retiring Chairperson, YB Dato’ Seri Mohd. Shafie bin Hj Apdal, MP and the Secretary-General, Dr William F Shija.

Only 150 of these rare medals will ever be made and they are for sale at £40 plus £7.50 postage and handling (total £47.50). Please send your payment and delivery address to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom.

Queries regarding the medal can be emailed to hqsec@cpahq.org

contents:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:40 Page 282

CONTENTS

2011: ISSUE 4 310

314

Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth Vol. XCII 2011: Issue Four ISSN 0031-2282 Issued by the Secretariat of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SWIP 3JA, United Kingdom Tel: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 Email: hq.sec@cpahq.org www.cpahq.org Publisher: Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General Editor: Andrew Imlach Director of Communications and Research

COMMENT

MAIN ARTICLES

Inside Issues

Gender and constitutional responsibilities of Members of Parliament

The gender question – removing the stereotypes Page 284

View from the Chair Forging a stronger Commonwealth role for Parliamentarians Page 286

View from the CWP For men only Page 288

View from the Secretary-General Democracy at 50 Page 290

Assistant Editor: Lisa Leaño Front cover Women walking in the Thar Desert, Rajasthan, India Image: Shutterstock® Printed in: England by Warners Midlands, PLC; New Delhi by Jainco Art India, and Singapore by Times Printers Private Limited 282 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP Page 294

The Canadian advantage

Ms Shelley Glover, MP Page 298

Oil exploration in the Falkland Islands Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA Page 302

Women as agents of change in small societies Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC Page 306

India’s Rajya Sabha and women’s empowerment Shri S.N. Sahu Page 310

Principles and guidelines for Constituency Development Funds Page 314

The Millennium Development Goals and parliamentary scrutiny

Mr Kevin Deveaux and Mr Cédric Jurgensen Page 318

contents:Layout 1 12/01/2012 16:11 Page 283

318

322

NEWS Building a dialogue between Parliament and enterprise Mr Riki Hyde-Chambers, OBE Page 322

Strengthening Parliaments to reinforce democratic governance in South Asia Page 326

Research journal launched in Sri Lanka

Parliamentary news: New Zealand, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, India and Sri Lanka.

Page 339

Annual subscription (four issues) UK: £34 post free.

Worldwide: £36 surface post £42 airmail Price per issue UK: £12 Worldwide: £13 surface post £14 airmail Opinions and comments expressed in articles and reviews published in The Parliamentarian are those of the individual contributors and should not be attributed to the Secretariat of the Association.

Mr Neil Iddawala Page 330

Promoting sustainable forest management

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 283

Inside Issues:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:43 Page 284

INSIDE ISSUES

THE GENDER QUESTION – REMOVING THE STEREOTYPES The Editor’s note

“Gender” should not be another label for women’s issues. As gender analyses of government budgets and other studies have been discovering, programmes can unintentionally impact negatively or unfairly on men just as they can on women: Australia has taken steps to ensure parental support programmes do not discriminate against fathers who are the primary child carers, while Caribbean initiatives to promote post-secondary education have had to focus on recruiting young men because young women are flooding into universities on their own.

In terms of representation in Parliament, however, “gender” has meant more representation by women and it looks certain to continue to mean that for the foreseeable future. Many Parliaments and Legislatures now have the composition they will have going into 2015, the Commonwealth Heads of Government deadline for 30 per cent of seats being held by women, or more precisely, the second such deadline after the 2005 deadline was missed. Only a handful of Commonwealth national Parliaments have now reached the target, while most are a considerable distance from it and, in some cases, recent elections have moved them further away still.

We therefore focus on women in Parliament in this issue by looking at the goal of increasing the role of women in Parliament and by publishing articles from women Members on non-gender subjects and from men on women’s representation to help remove the stereotype that gender is only a subject for women MPs. Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP, Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament and Chairperson of the African Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, opens the issue with an assessment of the role that women should play in all Parliaments. Commonwealth Africa has two of the world’s leaders in the representation of women in Rwanda and South Africa, but also some of the world’s lowest levels of female representation. Ms Kadaga, however, argues that female representation is not just about numbers; women must also hold their fair share of important positions within Parliament if electing more women is to have real meaning, and if electing women is ever to become common enough to no longer attract special attention.

A truly representative female presence in Parliament will help ensure fair female participation in all areas of society outside Parliament, notes Ms Kadaga. Fair

284 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

treatment of all citizens is a goal of all MPs, regardless of gender, so the Ugandan Speaker urges all Parliamentarians to examine their Parliaments’ performance from this perspective rather than from a male-female adversarial point of view.

Government finance and macro-economic questions are not usually characterized as “gender” issues; so publishing an article on these subjects from a female MP helps to make the point that women should not be stereotyped either in Parliament or outside it.

Ms Shelley Glover, MP, the Parliamentary Secretary to Canada’s Minister for Finance, explains here some of the policies that have been instrumental in the success her country has had in dealing with the effects of the global financial crisis. Canada is held up as an example of an economy with the appropriate balance of government regulation and free market activity.

Considering how well its economy is performing despite being closely intertwined with the struggling United States market, Ms Glover’s account of regulation, financial management and economic stimuli provides valuable indicators to those seeking a prudent path to economic success.

Another path to economic success not normally associated

with gender can be found in the pursuit of oil and gas extraction.

Exploration is currently under way in the South Atlantic off the Falkland Islands and the Member of the Islands’ Executive Council responsible for its development, Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA, writes here on the care her British overseas territory is taking to maximize the benefits of oil exploration for Falklanders and to minimize possible adverse effects on the environment and the Islands’ people and its economy.

Moving into a new industry, especially one as highly technical and developed as the oil industry, can be daunting for any jurisdiction unfamiliar with the way it works, so the Falklands have brought in outside advice. Despite being small and isolated, the Falklands are very familiar with the problems that new industries can bring, having experienced the ups and downs of selling licences to fish its waters.

Ms Cheek reports therefore that the Falkland Islands are not rushing into oil exploration with unrealistic expectations, although Islanders are strongly asserting their right to develop their offshore resources in the face of Argentina’s continuing claims to sovereignty.

Making more women agents of parliamentary change is examined by a male Tasmanian

Inside Issues:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:44 Page 285

INSIDE ISSUES

The Parliament of Rwanda in Kigali has, along with South Africa, among the world’s highest levels of female representation.

Parliamentarian, Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC, whose jurisdiction currently meets the Commonwealth’s 30-per-cent goal. He writes here that the route into Parliament many Tasmanian women have taken historically has been through community activism, and not just women’s rights activism. Having a man write about women in Parliament serves to emphasize the points that gender is not only a female issue and that bringing more women into Parliament benefits both genders.

Another man, Shri S.N. Sahu, a Joint Secretary in the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, traces the advancement of women and women’s rights in India’s upper House. Although he notes that legislation to reserve a third of seats in the country’s lower House, the Lok Sabha, does not cover the upper House, the Rajya Sabha has been in the forefront of measures to empower Indian women.

The allocation of government funds to individual Parliamentarians to enable them to develop small but useful projects in their own constituencies is seen as a way of empowering them and of using their unparalleled local knowledge to help their communities. But this is not always the case. A group of

Commonwealth Members representing jurisdictions which have constituency development funds met earlier this year in Jamaica with academics and others interested in this process.

They produced a set of guidelines to ensure that constituency development funds are used properly in a process which is fully transparent and accountable. We publish the guidelines in this issue so all Members can consider whether constituency development funds are a blessing or a curse, a way to apply an MP’s exceptional local knowledge for the good of the community or an unfair advantage for incumbents.

The advancement of all sectors of every society is the ultimate aim of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), adopted by the United Nations and member governments as the world moved into the new millennium over a decade ago.

With the deadline for the achievement of the Goals now three years away, Mr Kevin Deveaux and Mr Cédric Jurgensen of the United Nations Development Programme’s Parliamentary Development programme examine in this issue the role that Parliaments and individual Members will need to

play if their countries are to achieve the 2015 target for all eight MDGs. One criticism that all Parliamentarians face is that they do not know how things work in “the real world” – meaning they are sequestered in Parliament and therefore do not understand how modern businesses work. For more than three decades the Industry and Parliament Trust has been working in the United Kingdom to ensure that Parliaments and the business world understand each other. That project has now expanded into Enterprise and Parliamentary Dialogue International to build links between Parliaments in other countries and their local business community. Mr Riki Hyde-Chambers, OBE, who ran the Industry and Parliament Trust and is now the Secretary General of the international organization of Dialogue Centres, describes how the process works and the principles which govern its activities around the world.

The Fifth Conference of Speakers, Parliamentarians and parliamentary officials of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation met in New Delhi in July 2011 to discuss a wide variety of subjects focusing principally on strengthening democracy in a

region which has a mix of wellestablished and developing Parliaments. We publish here a summary of the discussions contributed by a senior officer of the Lok Sabha Secretariat, Shri Jayadev Sahu.

The provision of information to Parliamentarians is a key method of support for the development of democracy. An innovative idea has emerged in Sri Lanka where a new research journal has begun publication by Parliament.

Assistant Secretary-General Mr Neil Iddawala explains this initiative, which he is leading.

Finally, young people are now the majority in the Commonwealth so involving them in Parliament will help to deepen each member country’s commitment to democracy.

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association therefore held its 4th Commonwealth Youth Parliament in September, this time meeting in the United Kingdom Parliament including a final debate in the House of Lords Chamber.

Three of the youth MPs write about the experience to conclude this issue in a gender-appropriate way: one of the three is a woman in a House where 47 per cent of the seats were held by women.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 285

View from the Chair:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:45 Page 286

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

FORGING A STRONGER COMMONWEALTH ROLE FOR PARLIAMENTARIANS universally acceptable alternative which does not In Perth in October, the Commonwealth Parliamentary undermine our financial position.

Association (CPA) was for the first time represented at Important though this is, I cannot help reflecting a Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting that our status in the eyes of Heads of Government (CHOGM) by a delegation drawn from its elected and others depends on what the CPA is seen to officers. Together with Vice-Chairperson Dr Nafisa achieve. I think we can greatly extend our reach and Shah, MNA, of Pakistan and Treasurer Hon. Marwick improve our impact. If the Commonwealth itself is Khumalo, MP, of Swaziland, I was honoured to be being challenged by the EPG to redefine its present at this important Commonwealth event. We priorities, the CPA can surely take some hints from were of course supported by our Secretary-General, Dr their report. We have, of course, our own eminent William Shija. persons in the form of a CPA Working Party This was a useful and interesting start on which we must hope to build. By the time of the next CHOGM in Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP charged with putting forward proposals for the CPA’s future development. I shall encourage all the Sri Lanka in 2013 I hope that the CPA will have a more Chairperson of the CPA members of our Executive Committee to do some recognized role.

Executive Committee and blue-sky thinking about the best strategy to carry The actual meeting of the Heads of Government is Member of the House of us forward. only a part of the proceedings. Surrounding them is a Commons, United Kingdom The central point to which we should hold firm is gathering of representation from a great many of the that we are elected Parliamentarians. Our main purpose in being organizations which exist under the Commonwealth umbrella. It is a great associated is to help each other further the principles of representative networking occasion; but next time round I would not wish to see the CPA parliamentary democracy and uphold the values which lie at the heart of in any sense lost in the crowd. We deserve a more prominent position. the Commonwealth of Nations. We cannot do everything on our own; but That said, we must earn it. Leaders recognize that the Commonwealth we can do more if we make alliances with others such as civil society itself is not prominent in the consciousness of a large percentage of its organizations and governments where we are perhaps better equipped to population. Understandably therefore, recognition of the work of the CPA deliver common objectives. is at a low level.

We are at our best when we maximize our human resource, engaging The report of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group (EPG), Members, Clerks and other officials in the provision of courses, seminars which had been mandated to examine options for reform, formed a major and conferences. But what are the most urgent needs and causes on item on the CHOGM agenda. which we should concentrate?

At the risk of being seen to harbour an inferiority complex, I was Empowering women, the special concerns of small states, keeping faith disappointed to find that the EPG report contained only one reference to with young people: all these are obvious and constitute a huge agenda in the CPA – and you had to get to page 128 to find it. Of all the 90 or so themselves. Yet we cannot afford to ignore development issues, climate bodies belonging to the Commonwealth family, an association of change and human rights. We must think through all these matters and Parliamentarians should surely attract greater attention. The CPA has the agree a strategy in which all our Regions feel happy and which they are potential to further many of the objectives proposed by the EPG. The committed. question is whether we are ready to grasp the opportunity.

If we can show that we are effective in reinforcing parliamentary One of the issues which I have inherited on becoming Chairperson of democracy and what is often termed soft diplomacy, we will boost our the Executive Committee is our Association’s status. Currently we are prestige and be noticed with enhanced respect. constituted as a registered English charity. This gives us considerable tax The CPA should settle for no less than being the pre-eminent relation in advantages. However, I recognize that some of our Branches are the Commonwealth family. uncomfortable with this status and I am committed to trying to find a 286 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from the Chair:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:46 Page 287

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

Above: The Chairperson of the CPA Executive Committee, Sir Alan Haselhurst (far right) with the CPA delegation for CHOGM: the SecretaryGeneral of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija (far left); Treasurer Hon. Marwick Khumalo, MP, (second from left) and Vice-Chairperson Dr Nafisa Shah, MNA. Below: The Prime Minister of Australia, Hon. Julia Gillard, MP, addressing participants at the 2011 CHOGM opening ceremony in Perth.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 287

View from the CWP:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:48 Page 288

VIEW FROM THE CWP

FOR MEN ONLY

Parliamentarians tick may be off target. I hope that after reading this piece I My dear fellow Parliamentarians, over the past few years, I have been am able to deflect the perception of our male colleagues more in line with privileged to be permitted access to the pages of this journal of the our reality.

Commonwealth Parliamentary Association where I I view the CWP as a vehicle for which women have been able to express my thoughts, ideas and Parliamentarians are taught not only good driving skills sentiments targeting mainly my sister but how to maintain the vehicle as well. As every driver Parliamentarians as my readers. This time, however, I knows, learning road safety and courtesy is important; am hoping to reach you, our male Parliamentarians, as but it is also essential to know how to manoeuvre when I endeavour to help you to understand where we fellow drivers will not give way or when other road users women Parliamentarians have come from, our trials are being down right discourteous. To continue the and how you can work with us as we strive to be analogy, the vehicle must be serviced regularly to agents of change for a better world. maintain top condition. Workshops and seminars are the I am drawn to sharing these thoughts after an service centres of this CWP vehicle and the funds from intense conversation I had recently with a colleague. I the CPA constitute the petrol that keeps the vehicle had been telling him how I felt undone when, as the running. As every driver knows, when other motorists Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians drive badly, it puts all other drivers at risk.

Chairperson, I was interrupted at least eight times Hon. Alix Boyd Knights MHA Though women in politics have come a long, long while delivering the CWP report at the General Chairperson of the way, there is still a great distance to travel. Without doubt Assembly during the CPA's 56th Commonwealth Commonwealth Women Parliamentary Conference in July 2011. Worse yet, I Parliamentarians and Speaker our male colleagues have assisted greatly in this regard.

After all, it is hard to be one of their number who – on complained, there was not one photographer at the of the House of Assembly, hearing the knocking, knocking, knocking of aspiring conference’s CWP's Business Meeting which was Dominica women Parliamentarians – opened the door so that being held at the same time as the Clerks-at-the-Table women could get in and, once in, proved their mettle. It is meeting. I have nothing against Clerks of Parliament, now fair to say that women in leadership roles all over the world have at the Table or otherwise; but the fact that the organizers of the conference shown that we have an important contribution to make and that we are felt comfortable about deploying their lone (as I was advised) available agents of change. conference photographer to attend to the requirements of the Clerks-atSo, when we tell you that: the-Table instead of taking photographs of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Business Meeting put a lot of things in perspective for • We feel slighted over a particular issue: Please listen to our argument me. And what was more, we were not even told about it so that we could and try to see our side of the discussion. Do not belittle our point of have made our own arrangements. view.

Naturally I was aghast when my said colleague told me that I was being • We are Parliamentarians, yes; but we are also wives, mothers and silly; he did not see any reason for me to be so upset. I said to him: “How grandmothers with additional duties to yours: Please acknowledge our dare you decide what should and should not upset me? Do you realize how multi roles. hard the CWP has strived to get the recognition it has thus far?” I went on • We need funding for important projects that are not obvious voteto explain to my colleague that as the current custodian of these gains, I catchers: Do not let us down. Remember society depends on all of us have an obligation not only to build on the gains but also to ensure that they to thrive. are not whittled away.

• We stand up in Parliament in support of legislation which will relieve the Since I share the notion that man's perception is his reality, I realized women of our country of the scourges of domestic violence, rape in that my colleague's reality as it relates to what makes women 288 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from the CWP:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:49 Page 289

VIEW FROM THE CWP

marriage and genital mutilation, and introduce harsher penalties for rape, incest and other such crimes: Stand by us in the name of and on our behalf of your mothers and daughters and sisters.

• •

•

We have stumbled and fallen because we are human: Be there to pick us up and help us to regain our footing.

Our personal path through politics to Parliament has been difficult and even fraught with danger: Encourage us and make a promise to yourselves to be more supportive of women candidates in the future.

We are next in line to make our contribution to a debate and we tell you that we have been up all night caring for our sick child: Step in and accommodate.

We are not enemies. Sharing the space in this universe as we do, we are partners in development, unity, peace and progress. Ultimately we have much more in common than we may have differences. I urge you, our male Parliamentarians – and our female Parliamentarians too – to remember always: Whatever one gender can do, two genders together can do even better.

And so, as 2012 is beginning, I wish all Commonwealth Parliamentarians a peaceful, harmonious, healthy and prosperous New Year. I also extend special season's greetings and the wish for a fruitful, collaborative New Year to the CPA Chairperson and my other colleagues on the CPA Executive Committee, and to the Secretary-General and the CPA Secretariat staff.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 289

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:51 Page 290

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

DEMOCRACY AT 50 Joining other post-50 independent countries, such as India, Pakistan, In Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth countries, there are countries Ghana, Nigeria, etc., the citizens of former colonies carry that celebrate independence every year. In 2011, a very negative and painful psychological images in their number of countries celebrated 50 years of minds as life goes on. Then of course such psychological independence. In the Commonwealth, two countries, effects are more intensive in black Africans, their Sierra Leone and Tanzania, celebrated 50 years of ancestors having suffered the untold physical, mental independence, having achieved independence in and social human pain of the African slave trade for 500 1961. For a country, one might ask: What does it mean years. As a citizen of a former British colony called to turn 50?

Tanganyika, now Tanzania (since 1964 upon uniting with In most countries, the achievement of Zanzibar and after Zanzibar’s revolution), I recall as a independence means gaining full democratic youth the wonderful and tumultuous independence freedom. For countries that gained and therefore celebrations on the night of 9 December 1961. This was celebrate independence every year, it usually means after the British Parliament had considered and passed a they were colonies of other countries. It generally Bill to give independence to the then Tanganyika. means that prior to independence they were forcefully Tanganyika became independent after first being governed by other countries or societies, against their Dr William F. Shija colonized by Germany (together with Rwanda and will. Unfortunately, the Commonwealth bears the Secretary-General of the background and linkage to colonial rule for several Commonwealth Parliamentary Burundi as German East Africa) from 1897, after the Scramble for Africa in Berlin in 1884. It then became a countries, even though the majority became Association British United Nations Trusteeship (Protectorate) in 1916 independent later on, and some turning 50 years now.

The Secretary-General’s

290 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:52 Page 291

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

after Germany was defeated and ousted from German East Africa.

The same approach and method was done for the independence of Sierra Leone, a Bill being passed in the British Parliament for its independence in 1961. Sierra Leone, having been established by the settlement of liberated and runaway African (there were no other) slaves between 1787 and 1792, as well as by the indigenous people, was colonized by Britain in 1808.

In both Tanzania and Sierra Leone, the major test of democracy at 50 was primarily the maintenance of peace. As with many countries in Africa, societies were not homogeneous at independence, hence the need to unify the people from multiple ethnic backgrounds, estimated to be 130 in Tanzania and 18 in Sierra Leone. The challenges before the first leaders of independent countries were therefore almost insurmountable, ranging from handling an uneducated but expectant population to a lack of physical infrastructure, poor health, the containment of ethnic conflicts and the need to formulate new modes of economic production and distribution.

This could lead to the conclusion that some societies, such as Tanzania, fortunately have had a relatively peaceful 50-year independence period; but others have gone through periods of military rule, violence and conflict, such as Sierra Leone.

It is good news that Sierra Leone has recovered from conflict to enjoy the fruits of a democracy that is maturing out of its 50 years of independence. The past two elections have been conducted relatively peacefully and Parliament is now functioning as an institution of peacebuilding through dialogue and the rule of law. The maturity that is being born out of the 50 years of democracy, regardless of the bumps and hurdles, is what the citizens need to realize as the fruits of independence.

What else should the citizens of the countries with 50 years of democracy and independence look for?

First, countries at 50 years of democracy should consolidate peace and national unity. To achieve this, leaders need to focus on promoting national

unity through education and youth development. No wonder at independence, or soon thereafter, single political party systems and a national language (Kiswahili) were adopted in countries such as Tanzania under the able leadership of Julius K. Nyerere, to promote national unity at the time. Currently, work should be carried out to strengthen existing constitutions, legal institutions and Parliament.

Secondly, leaders and citizens at 50 should strive to be economically independent; that is, individuals becoming less reliant on their relatives and friends. Governments should minimize and eventually cut off the dependency on foreign aid and recurrent budget subsidies. This means that societies will have to seriously fight off corruption, ease and enforce tax compliance, and teach the population to work and save. As markets are always important in economic activities, democratic countries at 50 need to promote regional integration, common markets and the infrastructure that goes with it. The infrastructure of colonies were at the bare minimum, structured just enough to transport raw materials from the interior to the sea ports for export to foreign industries.

Thirdly, leaders in democracies at 50 need to examine the educational curricula for their populations. It is believed that education is the singular weapon to fully liberate the citizens who were colonized just 50 years ago.

A good educational curriculum is meant to liberate the mind, accelerate the scientific benefits and restore the ruptured cultural and moral pillars of society. Leaders and citizens in democracies at 50 will also realize that educational curricula have to incorporate the high need for technical skills to sustain everyday human needs.

Fourthly, leaders and citizens in democracies at 50 should accept that change is inevitable. Whereas the leadership at independence worked to appeal to a less informed population, the situation today is very different. In the 1960s, even radio waves did not reach out to many village people.

Today we find an unbelievably large percentage of the same villages receiving high telephony connectivity. Likewise, modern communications

Commonwealth gallery Left: The delegates attending the 22nd Commonwealth Parliamentary Seminar in New Delhi, India.

Right: Dr William F. Shija (left) speaking with the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, MP, (right) during CHOGM in Perth, Australia.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 291

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:05 Page 292

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

technologies today have enabled many citizens to participate in democratic activities and to remotely engage their leaders and representatives. In Parliaments of democracies at 50, Members have also caught up with computer literacy to cope with the “worldwide school” through the internet.

Leaders in democracies at 50 need not only respond to the social media that are driving contemporary political events, but they also need to equip their citizens with trade and investment skills to take advantage of the emerging global economic trends. For example, a decade ago, one writer at the World Bank compared Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand as “Asian Tigers” with some of the emerging democracies/economies at 50 in Africa, such as Tanzania, Zambia, Ghana and Kenya, which were the “African Elephants”. This largely means that

democracies at 50, having been hugely exploited as colonies, are growing steadily. These emerging economies, however, need to engage with such other structures as the South-South co-operation, non-traditional economic partners and “rare commodity” production, where possible.

Fifthly, leaders in post-50 democracies need to be aware – and to accept – that income distribution is likely to dominate the next century’s politico-socio-economic paradigm. The demands that currently emerge out of the existing purely capitalist economic system show that greater numbers of people in the world feel that they are being exploited by a few individuals. They are demanding equity in the production and distribution of global wealth. This means that democracies at 50 should carefully guide their economic growth to match the social needs and demands of the

The Secretary-General’s From left to right: The Chairperson of the CWP, Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA; Dr Nafisa Shah, MP; Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP; and Dr William F. Shija, during the CPA Executive Committee meeting in December 2011.

The SecretaryGeneral (left) presenting a gift to the High Commissioner for Sri Lanka in London, H.E. Chris Nonis (right).

Dr William F. Shija (right) greeting former Clerk of the New Zealand Parliament and current Ombudsman, Mr David McGee (left). Mr McGee has also written two books for the CPA.

292 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:06 Page 293

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

population to avert violence and conflict.

Leaders of the countries that are enjoying democracy at 50 should take serious stock to sustain democracy in the next 50 years and beyond. I have suggested a few areas for consideration; but there could be more methods to be considered.

As more countries turn 50 in democracy in 2012, such as

Jamaica, Rwanda, Samoa, Trinidad and Tobago and Uganda in the Commonwealth, the lessons are clear: Whether a country was a colony or not, it is important for its leaders and citizens to respect democracy in order to bring peace and development to future generations. To do so successfully, the lessons of the past must be learned well and the choices for today and tomorrow clearly

identified and implemented.

I wish to end my end-of-theyear view on democracies at 50 by recalling my first term of five years of service as Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Truly, the past five years have been a very rewarding period for me. I have not only shared my experiences as a former Parliamentarian, but I have also learned more about the

Commonwealth and its peoples’ cultures and development. I wish to thank everyone for the support, friendship, hospitality and cooperation during my tours of duty in our Regions and Branches, the latest being Samoa. I look forward to another rich experience from all over the Commonwealth in the New Year, 2012, to be highlighted by the event of HM The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.

Commonwealth gallery

The Chief Executive Officer of the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization, Prof. Tim Unwin, (left) with Dr William F. Shija (right) following the signing of an agreement between the two organizations.

Former Member of the CPA Executive Committee, Mr Alan Ferguson, (right) signing the visitors' book with the Secretary-General (left) looking on.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 293

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:12 Page 294

GENDER ISSUES

GENDER AND CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBLILITIES OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT The gender issue is much more than electing more women to Parliament. It affects all aspects of parliamentary life and each of the responsibilities of all Members, says the Speaker of Uganda’s Parliament.

Rt Hon. Rebecca A. Kadaga, MP, in Kampala.

Ms Kadaga, a lawyer, is the Speaker of the Parliament of Uganda having served as Deputy Speaker from 2001 to 2011. She is the ViceChairperson of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Steering Committee of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and chairs the CWP’s African Region Steering Committee.

She has served in the Ugandan Parliament since 1996, holding several ministerial portfolios. This article is based on a presentation to a Zambia postelection seminar in November 2011.

Members of Parliament are elected by the population which comprises both men and women. It is the expectation of the population that their aspirations, needs and desires are reflected in the agendas both of the political parities as well as of Parliament. It is therefore also necessary that both genders be represented in Parliament. This has its roots in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 which provides in Article 2: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights, and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without discrimination of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status….”

Since then, several Human Rights Instruments have been promulgated in the United Nations, the African Union and other bodies.

294 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

In 1975, the First World Conference on Women called for the establishment of national mechanisms for the advancement of women. By 1985, 127 Member countries had established national mechanisms.

The question now is: has national machinery been set up in every country? If so is it working? If a country is party to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination (CEDAW), has it enshrined the CEDAW Convention in its constitution?

Most constitutions do not have a guaranteed quota for the representation of women, which probably explains why most Commonwealth countries have yet to achieve 30 per cent representation of women in their Parliaments as agreed by Heads of Government first for 2005 and now for 2015.

Again, if a country is party to CEDAW, does it fulfil the obligation to report on progress every four

Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP.

years? What does it report? Have we achieved equity in employment, education, in the economy, the professions, the civil service? What about in the armed forces?

Varied rates of women’s representation in Africa It is necessary for each Parliament to take stock and evaluate where it stands today. Has it created space for the 51 per cent of the population who are clearly underrepresented in the House?

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:12 Page 295

GENDER ISSUES

There is also another opportunity. In some countries, the Head of State can make special nominations to Parliament. There is in place a Southern African Development Community resolution which enjoins the Heads of State to facilitate 50/50 representation of both genders in all the SADC Parliaments by 2015.

In my other capacity as the Chairperson of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CWP) Africa Region I keep a pulse on the progress of participation of both genders in decision-making positions. To show that African countries are at different stages of compliance to the international instruments, I have reproduced a table (see Table

One) indicating the gender status of some Parliaments.

The breakdown of the 131 seats won by women in my own country in our 2011 general elections was: • • • • •

Constituency Representatives: 11 Women District Representatives: 12 Youth Representatives: 2 Representatives of disabled persons: 2 Representatives of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces: 2

Women in influential positions?

Out of women Members of

Parliament, how many are Chairpersons of standing or sessional committees? What chance do we stand for at least 30 per cent of the committees of a House being chaired by women Members of Parliament? Of the powerful committees such as Finance, Agriculture or Defence, are any of them chaired by a woman Member of Parliament? If this has not been done yet, will there be an opportunity to amend the Rules of Procedure to ensure at least 30 per cent, if not 50 per cent, of committee Chairpersons are women?

In my Parliament, I have made a proposal to the Rules Committee to consider parity in appointing the Chairpersons of the committees

Above: Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP, addressing delegates at an international conference in Kampala.

Left: The Parliament of Uganda.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 295

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:13 Page 296

GENDER ISSUES

Table One: Rates of women’s representation in Africa Country

Lower or Single House

Rwanda South Africa Uganda Mozambique Tanzania Namibia Lesotho Seychelles Malawi Mauritius Cameroon Swaziland Sierra Leone Zambia Kenya Ghana Botswana Gambia Nigeria

Elections 2008 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2010 2007 2008 2007 2011 2007 2008 2009 2007 2011

because when the Chairpersons were appointed, the male Members of Parliament took 85 per cent of the places. This was also because the Whips of the parties, who are responsible for designating the Chairpersons of Committees, were all men. There is one woman Whip of a small party. I expect to solve the problem when the Rules of Procedure of the Ugandan Parliament are amended to provide for parity when designating committee Chairpersons.

At the level of the caucuses, the public interest requires that our views merge on common issues.

Can we have an all-party Women’s Caucus? In Uganda, the Uganda Women’s Parliamentary Association (UWOPA) is an allparty caucus, currently headed by a Member of a small opposition party.

But this caucus also has male Members of Parliament who are subscribing Members. They pay annual fees, attend all the meetings and have been very useful in sponsoring important Bills such as the Bill Against Female Genital Mutilation which was sponsored in my Parliament by one

Seats 80 400 375 250 350 67 120 35 192 70 180 66 124 156 224 230 63 53 352

Upper House or Senate Women 45 173 131 98 126 18 29 8 40 13 25 9 16 17 21 19 5 4 13

Women % 56.3 43 39.93 39.2 36.0 26.9 24.2 22.86 20.8 18.84 13.9 13.6 12.90 10.90 9.38 8.3 7.9 7.5 3.69

of the male Members of Parliament who is a Member of the Women’s Parliamentary Caucus.

Constitutional roles and the gender lens The constitutional responsibilities of Members of Parliament cover our legislative, representative and oversight roles.

In legislation, Members of Parliament must always keep in mind that they represent the entire population – men, women, children, workers, miners, young and old.

Their interests must be viewed with a gender lens. One should always ask himself or herself how any proposed piece of legislation will affect both genders. For instance, just for the sake of argument, supposing there were riots relating to the economy, as has happened in many countries all over the world, and suppose Parliament was required to enact a law that imposes a curfew at 5:00 p.m. each day. One should use a gender lens to see, first, how this curfew would affect school-going children.

Would classes have to be cut short to meet the curfew? How would it impact on a poor worker who has

296 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Elections 2008 2009 ------2004 2007 --------2008 ------------2011

Seats 26 54 ------26 33 --------30 ------------109

to walk 10 miles from his or her workplace to reach home? What would be the impact of the curfew on a woman in the market, or a trader who is trying to eke out a living and who by 4:45 p.m. has not sold anything but needs money to

“On representation, Members of Parliament find time to relate with the entirety of their electorate through constituency consultations and outreach programmes.” buy food for her home? The curfew may be a good law to enforce security in a country; but it has far reaching effects on the population.

I want to give an example from the Uganda Parliament. At a time in the past we had a lot of financial

Women 10 16 ------7 10 --------12 ------------4

Women% 38.5 29.6 ------26.9 30.3 --------40.0 ------------3.7

institutions collapsing and leaving depositors with no fall-back position. The government brought a Bill to Parliament aimed at addressing the problem. The Parliament enacted a new law on financial institutions that set the minimum threshold of capital of Uganda Shillings 4,000,000,000 or at that time U.S.$4,000,000.

Later on after reflection, we realized that, at the stroke of a pen, we had by law locked out 51 per cent of the population from setting up a financial institution because there was no woman in Uganda who could raise the minimum capital. We also realized that no young person could marshal those funds. It became clear that it was probably only the foreigners who would be able to meet those conditions. We had not employed the gender and equity lens in making that law.

On oversight of Parliaments, the budget process is the key tool of parliamentary oversight over the executive. How are we distributing the budget? Take, for example, the defence budget: how much of it goes to the women and the youth of the country? The army is a

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:15 Page 297

GENDER ISSUES

people? Members must think back to their constituencies and see whether something is feasible. But the Minister had actually declared that the budget for 2011/2012 was dedicated to the youth!

The representation of women in the National Assembly of South Africa is among the highest in the region.

source of employment guaranteed under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; but how many women are employed in the defence sector?

Look at the health sector: Who are the major consumers of health services? These are women and children, so how much of the health budget is allocated to paediatric care? How much of it is allocated to obstetric care? Better still, is the health budget allocated according to the African Union’s Abuja Declaration which enjoins Heads of State to allocate 15 per cent of the budget to health? What about agriculture? Is the allocation in conformity with the Abuja Declaration? If it is not, what are we going to do about it as Members of Parliament?

Priorities, conditions and expectations I would like to give two recent examples from the Uganda Parliament. The Minister of Health had presented a budget in which 60 per cent of the spending was for capacity-building. We forced this money to be re-allocated to maternal health and cancelled the workshops.

The second example I would like to give was on the Youth Entrepreneurship Scheme where a sum of Uganda Shillings 44,000,000,000 was allocated to be managed by the Ministry of Finance. We forced them to relinquish the budget to the Youth Ministry. But what was even more important was the role Parliament played in alleviating the conditions

that the Minister of Finance had set for young people to access the funds: 1. That the applicant must have a minimum of an Ordinary Level Education Certificate (obviously this left out school dropouts); 2. That the business must be registered (how many people in Uganda have registered businesses?); 3. That the business must have been in existence for at least six months; 4. But the most interesting one was that the enterprise must demonstrate the capacity to employ six other young people.

How many enterprises run by adults employ at least six

If you unpack the conditions further, how many of young girls would meet all these conditions?

To cut the story short, we varied the conditions and also moved the funds to the Youth Ministry.

On representation, Members of Parliament find time to relate with the entirety of their electorate through constituency consultations and outreach programmes. It is also important that the public have access to Parliament; that they attend and participate in public hearings at meetings of committees.

Parliaments should broadcast their proceedings.

There are also civil society’s expectations. It should be possible for civil society to have an input into legislation, policy and programmes that are brought to Parliament.

It is also important that Members have adequate information in a timely manner to inform the debates. Parliament should facilitate adequate research services.

However, on the African continent, Members of Parliament are also expected to provide other services, such as roads, hospitals and schools. It is, therefore, important that the public is educated on the roles of the Members of Parliament vis-à-vis the role of the executive.

At a cultural level, Members of Parliament are expected to participate in funerals, weddings, graduation functions et cetera, and many times they are judged harshly by the electorate for failing to fulfil these cultural norms.

With sufficient and continuous education, information and explanations, I hope we that we shall graduate from this level.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 297

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:19 Page 298

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

THE CANADIAN ADVANTAGE Despite its close connections to the struggling economy of the neighbouring United States, Canada has weathered the global economic crisis better than most countries.

The Parliamentary Secretary in Canada’s finance ministry explains why a combination of careful regulation, prudent financial management and targeted stimuli including tax reductions has kept Canada in a strong economic position.

Ms Shelley Glover, MP, in Ottawa.

Ms Glover is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance. A former police officer, she has been a Conservative Member of Canada’s House of Commons since 2008.

She served previously as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and as Parliamentary Secretary for Official Languages.

Canada is a key leader in ongoing efforts to build a better financial future for citizens worldwide by helping to promote a more stable and resilient global economy. Much has been written about how our country weathered the most synchronized global downturn since the 1930s. As countries around the world confront the challenges facing the global economy, it may be useful to provide some insight into Canada’s experience and actions.

While Canada’s economy was side-swiped by the global recession, we are recovering better than most. Fortunately, we had a lot of advantages that mitigated the impact on our country.

Stable housing sector For example, we have a strong and stable housing sector that is quite different from the situation in many other countries. There are several factors, in fact, that set Canada apart.

First of all, we don’t have mortgage interest deductibility. We don’t encourage using tax policy to

298 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

increase risk in the housing market. Secondly, we have recourse mortgages in Canada.

This helps instil a sense of responsibility and discipline among homebuyers. Thirdly, we have very prudent lending standards, reflecting both solid management practices and strong supervision.

Fourthly, our originators, for the most part, hold the mortgages that they grant. And finally, we monitor the housing market constantly and very carefully.

Indeed, the government has intervened three times in the past three years to tighten the rules for our insured mortgage market. For example, earlier this year Canada reduced amortization periods, increased mandatory down payments and lowered the maximum loan-to-value ratio on refinancing. Canada’s lenders demonstrated responsibility and restraint throughout the global downturn. As a result, Canada did not suffer a single bank bailout or failure.

Equally important, and unlike the situation south of our border in

Ms Shelley Glover, MP

the United States, there was no notable change in the rate of payment delinquency among homeowners. Paying one’s mortgage is a strong Canadian character habit.

Sound financial sector For the fourth year in a row, the World Economic Forum rated Canada’s banking system as the best in the world. More recently, five Canadian financial institutions were named to Bloomberg’s list of the world’s strongest banks, more than any other country.

Canada’s financial system is

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:20 Page 299

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

Ms Shelly Glover, MP, (first left) and Minister of State (Finance) Hon Ted Menzies, MP, (centre, speaking) at a pension roundtable in a suburban Winnipeg store.

solid, with well-run companies based on sound risk management.

It is supported by an effective regulatory and supervisory framework.

In Canada’s case, we have an effective prudential supervisor in the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, who reports to Parliament through the Minister of Finance. The Superintendent has a clear mandate – to protect the interests of depositors and policy holders – and the tools and authorities needed to deal quickly and early when issues arise. The Superintendent supervises financial institutions on a consolidated basis, which includes all domestic and international subsidiaries of banks and insurance companies.

Secondly, there is the Governor of the Bank of Canada. The Governor is responsible for monetary policy and for oversight of systemically important payment clearing and settlement systems, and is the lender of last resort to the financial system.

Thirdly, there is the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation, which insures deposits and acts as the resolution authority for failed banks.

Fourthly, there is a separate Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, which we have had for many years now and is responsible for consumer protection.

These officials meet regularly with the Department of Finance and their job is to keep an eye on the system and watch for early warning signs.

At the same time, we are actively identifying areas in need of improvement.

Chief among them has been the absence of a national securities regulator. Our government is working with willing provinces and territories to establish a national securities regulator to offer better protection for investors, simpler processes for business and a more comprehensive framework for addressing systemic risks that arise from capital markets.

Fiscal advantage Canada also has a strong and credible fiscal track record. Our government paid down significant amounts of debt when times were good and kept our net debt-to-

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) ratio well below our G7 counterparts.

This gave us the capacity to inject $60 billion in fiscal stimulus into our economy when it was needed – our Economic Action Plan budgets of 2009 and 2010, including measures to provide liquidity.

On the world stage, the Canadian economy is coping relatively well in spite of the economic challenges we must face beyond our borders. Canada’s economic and fiscal fundamentals remain solid and sustainable.

•

We are the only G7 country that has recovered more than all of the output and all of the jobs lost during the downturn.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 299

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:44 Page 300

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

•

•

•

Both the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) forecast that our economy will be among the strongest in the G7 this year and next.

Only recently, Moody’s renewed Canada’s triple-A credit rating based on Canada’s – and I quote – “ economic resiliency, very high government financial strength, and a low susceptibility to event risk.”

More recently, that same top rating was affirmed by Fitch, with a stable outlook, citing a “culture of conservative policymaking” that allowed Canada to weather the global recession and recover faster than other countries.

In addition, international investors have also given Canada a strong vote of confidence with their own money. After a 10-year

absence, Canada returned to the global bond market in 2009-10 with two highly successful and oversubscribed offerings, one in U.S. dollars and the second in euros.

As with all foreign currency borrowing by the Government of Canada, the proceeds were used to fund Canada’s foreign currency reserves. They were not used to fund government spending.

In the same spirit of careful fiscal management, our government has designed initiatives to achieve substantial savings for taxpayers through greater efficiency and effectiveness in government.

According to the OECD, Canada’s total government net debt-to-GDP ratio stood at 30.4 per cent in 2010, compared with an average net debt of 66.2 per cent among G7 countries. Recently, the IMF Fiscal Monitor forecast that Canada will continue to have by far the lowest total government net debt-to-GDP ratio in the entire G7,

300 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

33.3 per cent in 2016 compared to the G7 average of 92.9 per cent.

Once it is fully implemented three years from now, our deficit reduction action plan will achieve at least $4 billion in annual savings, or five per cent of the $80 billion in programme spending being reviewed, and help the government to return to balanced budgets in the medium term.

Pro-growth economic agenda Among other pro-growth policies, our government introduced tax reductions, enabling employers and entrepreneurs to invest more of their revenues back into their operations. This tax advantage, that we targeted back in 2007, is now coming into full force, putting Canadian businesses at a real advantage just when they need it most – and just when Canadians workers need it most – to drive Canada’s economic recovery and future growth.

A cornerstone of this

advantage was our substantial reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate and the elimination of the federal capital tax.

We have been steadily lowering our federal corporate tax rate, from 22 per cent in 2007 to 15 per cent as of this coming Jan. 1. At the same time, we have encouraged the provincial governments in Canada to follow suit and lower their corporate tax rates to 10 per cent, establishing a combined federal-provincial tax rate of 25 per cent. This is helping to brand Canada as a highly competitive tax jurisdiction for business investment. Most of the provinces are on track to accomplish this.

As well, we introduced incentives to encourage provinces to eliminate their general capital taxes and by 2012 all such capital taxes will have disappeared.

These and other tax changes have allowed Canada to achieve an overall tax rate on new business investment that is substantially lower than that in any other G7 country.

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:44 Page 301

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

In addition, at a time when other countries were considering raising barriers to trade, Canada lowered them.

In Budgets 2009 and 2010, we eliminated 1,755 tariffs on manufacturing inputs and machinery and equipment, positioning Canada as the first country among its G7 and G20 partners to be able to boast that it is a tariff-free zone for manufacturing.

This means that Canadian manufacturers will be able to import goods for further production in Canada without the burden of tariffs and the costs of complying with certain customs rules such as rules of origin and drawback. This is giving Canadian manufacturers a competitive advantage in the global marketplace by lowering production costs, increasing competitiveness and enhancing innovation and productivity.

It is gratifying to note these efforts are being recognized.

Canada was recently named

the top global destination for business by Forbes, the U.S. business magazine. The top ranking marked a rise for Canada from fourth place in last year’s rankings, in large measure because of our reduced tax burden.

The magazine also ranked Canada in the top tier in protecting investors and in dealing with red tape – something our government has made a key priority – and highlighted that it is relatively easy to start a new business in Canada.

International leadership While Canada’s economic fundamentals remain sound, the risks to the global economy remain serious. It is crucial for governments to work together in a coordinated effort to restore growth and confidence and to create jobs. Both advanced and emerging economies have important roles to play.

At the height of the global financial crisis, the G20 showed

the international community that leaders could work together to deal with global instability. This organization must once again send a clear signal to the world that it is ready to take the strong actions necessary to maintain future growth and stability for all.

Canada has taken a leadership role in this global effort, including securing a commitment from advanced economies at the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto to fiscal plans that will at least halve deficits by 2013 and stabilize or reduce government debt-to-GDP ratios by 2016. In Toronto, the G20 agreed to four pillars of financial sector reform, including: a strong regulatory framework, effective supervision, transparent international assessment and peer review. Many countries around the world are taking their cue from the Canadian model.

Other key accomplishments stemming from Canada’s international leadership this year include being instrumental in

shaping reforms to the global financial sector through such international organizations as the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, and keeping global focus on the recapitalization of international financial institutions, allowing them to double their lending capacity and to be a central pillar of the global response to the financial and economic crisis.

Our government remains focused on what matters to Canadians – creating jobs and promoting economic growth. While Canada has the strongest job growth record in the G7 with approximately 650,000 net new jobs created since July 2009 and the IMF projecting that we will have among the strongest economic growth in the G7 over the next two years, we are not immune from global economic turbulence.

That is why we need to stay the course and remain focused on the economy.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 301

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:46 Page 302

OIL EXPLORATION

OIL EXPLORATION IN THE FALKLAND ISLANDS The exploitation of oil and gas resources can benefit the economy of any state, provided development is regulated and monitored properly. But knowing how to do that can be a major obstacle, especially for a small jurisdiction. A Member of the Falkland Islands Legislative Assembly explains how her South Atlantic territory is handling this potential windfall industry.

Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA, in Port Stanley.

Mrs Cheek, a former teacher and businesswoman, is the Member of the Falkland Islands Executive Council responsible for, among other portfolios, Mineral Resources. A Member of the Legislative Assembly since 2009, she previously served in the Assembly from 1997 to 2005.

The Falkland Islands are a United Kingdom Overseas Territory with full internal self-government and a population of 3,000. The Islands have traditionally relied on fishing, sheep farming and tourism as the main sources of income. However, their offshore geology has led to increased interest over the last 15 years and the Falkland Islands government is now hoping to exploit available hydrocarbon resources responsibly and sustainably by adopting industry and regulatory best-practice in environmental, health and safety, and socio-economic matters.

Exploration offshore Oil exploration in the waters offshore the Falkland Islands began in the mid-nineties, when seven licences were awarded to a number of consortia including big players such as: Shell, Amerada Hess and Lasmo. Six wells were drilled in 1998 and although oil

302 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA

shows were encountered, the low oil price at the time (around U.S.$10 a barrel) made further exploration uneconomical and the licences were wholly relinquished or taken up by smaller, independent partners.

Further licensing was carried out in the subsequent years under an “open-door” licensing system whereby operators could approach the Islands’ government and apply for licences rather than taking part

in a more traditional licensing round. Following extensive analysis of existing well results and additional seismic surveys, a rig was secured by Desire Petroleum in late 2009 to begin another round of exploration drilling.

The first well of this round was drilled in early 2010 and since then a further 14 wells have been drilled, including one in the previously undrilled South Falklands Basin.

The “Sea Lion” prospect, drilled by Rockhopper Exploration, was declared an oil discovery and additional testing and appraisal wells have produced encouraging results. However, much work remains before this prospect can be deemed commercially viable and, in the event that it is, several years of preparation would be required before production began in earnest. Another well, on Desire’s Liz prospect, was confirmed as a gas discovery.

Other wells have resulted in oil

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:47 Page 303

OIL EXPLORATION

Oil exploration in the Falkland Islands has increased since the mid-nineties.

shows and have shown there to be good quality reservoir rocks, which although not as promising, provide invaluable information for any future drilling that may take place in the area.

Effects onshore Although exploration operations so far have concentrated in the waters to the north of the Islands, 2012 will see the arrival of a dedicated harsh environment rig to drill prospects to the south and east of the Islands for a minimum of six months.

Exploration has had relatively little physical onshore impact in the Islands, and although dedicated storage and lay-down facilities have been built by the companies, the self-sufficient nature of the industry has not required any major development so far. In economic terms, however, oil exploration has had a significant impact on the Islands, with an estimated G.B.£10 million of additional turnover being injected into the local economy every year. Given that the Islands’ gross domestic product is around £104 million, this is no mean

amount! Such an influx of cash is, of course, very much welcomed by the Falkland Islands government, but it remains wary of any artificial inflation that may arise as a result.

The industry is licensed and regulated by the Falkland Islands government’s Department of Mineral Resources, which in turn reports to the Mineral Resources Committee, made up of two elected Members of the Falklands’ Legislative Assembly and senior civil servants. All approval and licensing decisions have to be sanctioned by the Mineral

Resources Committee before they are passed on to the government’s Executive Council and the Governor for ultimate approval.

Since the early nineties, the Falkland Islands government has employed the British Geological Survey as technical advisors, providing guidance on not only exploration and geological matters, but also licensing, legislation and tax regimes. Similarly, a Memorandum of Understanding with the United Kingdom’s Health and Safety Executive allows the Falklands’ government to seek

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 303

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:49 Page 304

OIL EXPLORATION

This page: Off-shore oil exploration is a high-tech industry which must be managed carefully to control the risks.

Right: Stanley Harbour in the Falkland Islands.

advice on health and safety matters and provides the manpower and expertise to carry out inspections on offshore installations. Additional advice is provided by the U.K. oil industry regulator, the Department of

Energy and Climate Change (DECC), via the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. This outsourcing of technical advice is inevitable given the limited expertise and resources available in the Falklands.

304 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

“Frontier” restraints on production and revenue While initial results have been encouraging, there are still a lot of unknowns to be determined before oil exploration can be deemed commercial in the

Falklands. The Islands’ remoteness means that the cost of logistics is considerable, as would be the cost of transporting any production away from the Islands; therefore the threshold at which a find can be deemed commercial is higher

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:51 Page 305

OIL EXPLORATION

than it would be in, say, the North Sea. The government is mindful of this and therefore has not factored any future oil production revenues into its long-term financial planning.

Should long-term oil production be established, the applicable fiscal system comprises of variable acreage rentals, a nine-per-cent royalty on production and corporation tax of 21 per cent on profits up to £1 million and 26 per cent thereafter. This is considered to be a very favourable fiscal regime by international standards and was originally set up as such to reflect the high-risk, frontier aspect of exploration in the Falklands.

It is envisaged that any oil production would be carried out by means of floating production and storage offshore vessels (FPSO), a system which requires no oil storage or processing infrastructure to be built onshore.

Any oil produced would then be transported to refineries by shuttle tankers without even touching the Islands. In the event that a gas discovery was deemed commercial, onshore infrastructure (such as a refinery) and the necessary pipelines would need to be built. However, the sheer cost of this and the Islands’ distance from markets make the quantities of gas required for a commercial

discovery too high to make it likely.

FPSOs are the preferred model of oil production development as they have the least impact physically, socially and environmentally.

Protecting the environment – publicly The environmental impact of any exploration and production is a very important factor to oil exploration in the Falklands. The Islands boast a pristine natural environment and an abundant range of wildlife, much of it coastal or marine, which the government is committed to protecting. Before commencing any drilling activities, operators are obliged to submit a comprehensive environmental impact statement (EIS) outlining how their operations may affect the local environment and planned steps to alleviate any impacts.

All EIS documents are made public and distributed to local environmental non-governmental organizations, interested government departments and other stakeholders, who are given 42 days to comment. Further to this, the government’s Environmental Planning Department can (and often does) engage an independent, external body to review the document and provide an impartial evaluation of

its contents. Although the Environmental Planning Department makes a recommendation to the Mineral Resources Committee on whether to approve an EIS, this recommendation is made entirely independently of the Mineral Resources Department, which in this instance simply acts as a conduit to aid the public consultation process.

Further to Environmental Impact Statements, operators submit oil spill contingency plans and waste management plans, which are again distributed among stakeholders. Again, the limited resources in the Islands are a factor when considering a response to an oil spill, and therefore as part of their oil spill response plans, all operators retain the services of specialist pollution prevention companies to airlift containment and dispersal equipment into the Islands in the event of an oil spill. With regards to waste management plans, there is a big emphasis on “zero-impact”, that is to say the onus is on the operators to ensure that as much of the waste generated by their activities as possible is not left on the Islands or in their waters but rather shipped back to where they can be disposed of safely and responsibly.

Special environmental guidelines have also been set up to mitigate the effects of seismic surveys on cetaceans. Additionally, independent observers have been placed on support vessels during well tests to observe bird interactions during periods of flaring.

An Offshore Hydrocarbons Environmental Forum encompassing government bodies, non-governmental organizations, oil industry representatives and local fishing companies has been created in order to identify and resolve any environmental issue that may arise. In addition, an Oil and Gas Development Forum has been formed to bring together local companies and the oil industry to discuss opportunities and maximize local participation in supporting hydrocarbons development.

The Falklands’ right to develop Exploration in the Falklands has received much media attention due to political tensions with Argentina over its sovereignty claim; it should be highlighted that much of this is down to media sensationalism.

However, although Argentina has introduced measures designed to hamper exploration in the Islands, such as a blockade contravening international maritime law, exploration has continued unhindered. Sadly, while it hasn’t affected oil exploration, the blockade has affected everyday life in the Islands. The disruption of alltoo-vital shipping links with the South American continent has driven up the cost of living due to the increased cost of importing goods, especially fresh fruit and vegetables.

Nonetheless, the Falkland Islands and U.K. governments have no doubt that exploration in the Islands fully complies with international law and it is the legitimate right of the Islanders to explore and exploit our natural resources.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 305

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:07 Page 306

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

WOMEN AS AGENTS OF CHANGE IN SMALL SOCIETIES Tasmanian women have a long history of becoming involved in elected politics through involvement in community organizations, says a Member of the Australian island state’s upper House.

Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC, in Hobart.

Mr Finch, a former radio broadcaster, has been an independent Member of the Tasmanian Legislative Council since 2002. He is the Third Deputy Chair of Committees.

Today Tasmania has women represented across all sectors of society. In many areas it is no longer newsworthy that a woman has reached a senior role in society.

The current Tasmanian Premier is a woman, Hon. Lara Giddings, MP, two of the six Supreme Court judges are women, with the first only appointed in 2005, and there are many prominent businesswomen and community leaders.

This situation has not been the norm over the more than 200 years since European settlement in Tasmania. It was not until 1948 that the first woman, Margaret E. McIntyre, was elected to Parliament. It was 1953 before two women were elected to the House of government, the House of Assembly.

How has Tasmania changed in

306 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

these 50 years that has led to the current situation?

Making history A major factor that affected the role of women in Tasmania has been greater access to education.

Enrolments at the University of Tasmania are now dominated by women with 14,233 of the 24,454 or 58 per cent of students enrolled during 2009 being female. This would suggest that the next generation of community and business leaders may be dominated by women as they will be the majority of the highly trained sector of the population.

History has also had an impact on the roles occupied by women in Tasmania with early European settlement, dominated by male convicts and their soldier guards, a predominately male society.

Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC

Although there were female convicts and a few free female settlers in the early decades of the nineteenth century, women were very much in the minority. This gave them a level of influence which grew as the European population increased.

Prior to European settlement women played a pivotal role in

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:54 Page 307

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

Tasmania’s first ladies: Dame Enid Lyons (left) was the first woman elected to the Commonwealth of Australia Parliament and later the first female cabinet Minister while Hon. Laura Giddings, MP, (right) is the first woman t Premier of Tasmania .

Aboriginal society as illustrated by this quote from Milestones for Tasmanian Women.

is shown by the continuity of their culture and we pay tribute to the women of Trowunna.”

“Aboriginal people inhabited Trowunna (Tasmania) for up to 40,000 years before white settlement and practiced a hunter and gatherer economy. Aboriginal women were recorded by the first French and British explorers as being outstanding hunters, harvesting a variety of seafood, birds, eggs and small land animals.

The Tasmanian Aborigines had a rich cultural and social tradition, made unique by their isolation from mainland tribes. Colonization by the English changed the landscape of Tasmania and almost destroyed the original inhabitants of Tasmania.

The resilience of Aboriginal women

There were notable women of influence including Lady Jane Franklin, wife of Governor and Arctic explorer Sir John Franklin, who not only influenced her husband’s policies but also influenced the middle and upper middle class European society at the time.

These early historical influences had a strong effect in a tiny and isolated society, and probably laid the foundations for a modern society where women and their opinions are a powerful influence. Women have always been agents of change in Tasmania throughout history and

across all aspects of Tasmanian life.

Securing the vote The women’s suffrage movement in Tasmania grew out of other organizations with interests in sanitation and temperance. The Women's Sanitary Association (1891) tried to bring about sanitary reform and the Woman's Christian Temperance Union (1892) tried to have liquor banned, but both were reportedly more successful in achieving the vote for women.

Feminism in Tasmania, along with its counterpart movements in other states, was largely a product of the twentieth century and can be dated from the late stages of the nineteenth century, fuelled largely by the demand for female

suffrage. The Woman's Christian Temperance Union took up the campaign for female suffrage in earnest by 1893. In 1896 members Jessie Rooke and Georgiana Kermode travelled the state organizing a series of public meetings that were addressed by Members of Parliament and other prominent citizens supporting a resolution “That the franchise be extended to the women of Tasmania as an act of common Justice”. A further tour undertaken

by Rooke in 1898 gathered thousands of signatures in favour of female suffrage. Petitions were presented to Parliament in 1895, 1896 and 1898 before the House of Assembly passed women's suffrage only to have it defeated in the Legislative Council.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 307

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:56 Page 308

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC, (left) pictured with the President of the Legislative Council in Tasmania, Hon. Sue Smith, MLC, (right).

The Tasmanian Women's Suffrage Association was formed in1903 by Jessie Rooke. It changed its name to the Tasmanian Women's Political Association as the upper House had assented to vote for women.

Tasmanian women gained the vote finally in 1903 after women had won the vote federally.

In 1904 all Tasmanian women became eligible to vote in House of Assembly elections after 1903 Constitution Act changed the eligibility term from "man" to "person". The franchise for the Legislative Council for owners of freehold of 10 pounds annual value or leasehold of 30 pounds was extended to women. South Australia was the first in Australia to give women the vote (1896), followed by Western Australia in 1900 and New South Wales in 1902. In the Australasian region, New Zealand was the leader by providing votes for women in 1893.

All of these jurisdictions were small communities and this may have been a factor in achieving this outcome.

A model for social change A good way to understand the level

of influence and effort that was required to achieve major social change is by examining the role of one of the main figures at this time, Jessie Rooke In 1896 she set out on a votesfor-women tour of Tasmania with the suffrage superintendent for the colony, Georgina Kermode. Not even the onslaught of severe winter weather could deter them from the 200-mile journey by draughty train and rickety coach.

They addressed large public gatherings, collected campaign funds and distributed leaflets, gaining thousands of signatures for their petition which was presented to Parliament at the end of 1896. The House of Assembly agreed but the Legislative Council frustrated the reform.

Jessie undertook a second tour in 1898 and collected more signatures. She became the Tasmanian president of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union in 1898 and was the most prominent Tasmanian suffragette.

In 1903 she formed the Tasmanian Women's Suffrage Association to mobilize women to vote in the coming federal election as the Commonwealth of Australia

308 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Franchise Act had been enacted in 1902. Apparently to avoid anomalies, the Tasmanian Legislative Council suddenly agreed the vote for white women in state elections. However, women did not become eligible to stand for election to either Tasmanian House until 1921.

Jessie Rooke became Australasian president of the WCTU until her death in 1906 and so was one of the first Tasmanian women to gain prominence outside the state. Ironically, she died before she could exercise her state voting rights.

belonged to several organizations which campaigned to influence government health, welfare and justice policies for women and children.

In 1937 she convened a statewide conference to co-ordinate efforts directed towards women and children which led to the formation of the Tasmanian Council for Mother and Child. She stood unsuccessfully for the Tasmanian Parliament in 1922, 1925 and 1943. Her achievements were recognized in 1935 when an Order of the British Empire was awarded to her.

The community welfare link As would be expected in the late 1800s and early 1900s the majority of the women prominent in Tasmania were particularly interested in matters of children and welfare. Many of the women who were active in politics also had community activities as their primary focus including Edith Waterworth, OBE. Her case study illustrates the interlinked strands of community and politics.

Edith Waterworth is best known for working to improve the welfare of women and children. She

Women enter Tasmania’s Parliament Although women were given the vote in 1904 and were able to stand for the state Parliament from 1921, it took a considerable time and the bravery and perseverance of many women in Tasmania to achieve election to office. In 1921, Alicia O'Shea-Petersen and Edith Waterworth stood for election and Annette Youl also stood in 1922, all unsuccessfully.

After this time there was considerable political engagement by women. A number of women

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:57 Page 309

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

ran as candidates and in 1948 Margaret McIntyre was elected to the Legislative Council almost entirely by male voters due to the restricted franchise for the Council.

Margaret McIntyre was a very influential citizen. In her speech to the League of Remembrance in Launceston 1948, she said: “As the world has been run by men for so long, and they do not appear to have made a very good job of it, isn’t it time we women tried to use more influence in national affairs? It is no use just sitting back and bewailing the state of the world and thinking how helpless each of us is to alter it. Everyone can do some little thing to help – mothers and teachers especially.”

Born in a tent in Maitland, New South Wales, where her geologist father was surveying coalfields, Margaret McIntyre’s aspirations were fostered by her mother, Caroline David, who was the first woman principal of Hurlstone Teachers Training College.

Margaret graduated from Sydney University with a Bachelor of Arts in 1907. She married in 1908 and had two sons and two daughters.

After the First World War the family settled in Launceston.

Margaret became involved in many community activities and her interests included baby care, health, youth, education and women’s issues. She was involved in dramatic productions and believed drama would help to foster team spirit in young people.

Margaret was active in many community groups, including lobbying for the establishment of community schools, and in 1947, she was awarded an Order of the British Empire for community services.

The next year, she stood as an independent for a seat in the Legislative Council and defeated the sitting Member with a clear majority. At that stage, voting for the Legislative Council was not universal but was subject to

property qualifications. The only women who were entitled to vote were returned servicewomen and nurses who had served in the First World War. She was elected at a tumultuous time in Tasmanian politics and during her first weeks of sitting was one of three Legislative Councillors who voted against an attempt to block supply.

Unfortunately, Margaret died in a plane crash less than six months after her election.

The case of Dame Enid Lyons indicates how women in a small community can often lead the larger nation in establishing rights and equality. She was the first women elected to the Commonwealth of Australia Parliament and then rose to become the first female cabinet Minister.

She said in her Maiden Speech in the House of Representatives in 1943: “This is the first occasion upon which a woman has addressed this House. For that reason, it is an occasion which, for every woman in the Commonwealth, marks in some degree a turning point in history. I am well aware that as I acquit myself in the work that I have undertaken for the next three years, so shall I either prejudice or enhance the prospects of those women who may wish to follow me in public service in the years to come.”

Born in a timber camp in northwest Tasmania, by 1915 she was working as a teacher at the age of 17 before she married Joe Lyons, then State Treasurer and Minister for Education and Railways. She gave her first political speech in 1920 to encourage women to be interested in politics.

Joe Lyons was Premier of Tasmania from 1923 until 1928.

Both Enid, by then the mother of seven children, and her mother stood for the Australian Labor

Party in the 1925 state election. In 1929, Joe entered the federal Parliament and became Prime Minister in 1932 at the head of his new United Australia Party. Enid, by then the mother of twelve, took on the role of the Prime Minister’s wife with her family spread across three states. In 1937, Enid was made a Dame Grand Cross of the Order of the British Empire. Joe Lyons died in office in April 1939.

In 1943, Enid was elected to the federal House and focused on family, welfare and women’s rights.

“Tasmania is a very different place in many ways now; but the important role of women in driving much of this change must be acknowledged.”

She became Australia’s first female cabinet Minister in 1949 when she became Vice-President of the Executive Council in the Menzies government. She retired from politics in 1951 but she continued to be active in public life working as a newspaper columnist, serving on various boards and commissions and publishing two autobiographies.

Modern politics In the last 30 years there have been a number of firsts for women in Tasmanian politics that mirrors a rise of influence of women in the broader Tasmanian community.

Tasmania is a very different place in many ways now; but the important role of women in driving much of this change must be acknowledged.

It is difficult to isolate the

importance of the smaller community in allowing this situation to develop; but it is hard to ignore the grassroots origins of many of these women. The small community often imposes an imperative for women to step up to more influential positions.

Since Gillian James became Tasmania's first female Minister in 1980 after serving as Deputy Speaker, other women have been appointed as Ministers and as party Leaders, including the first female Premier, Hon. Lara Giddings MP. The current makeup of Tasmanian politics shows a considerable influence of women and suggests that this will continue to increase into the future.

In the Legislative Council, six of the 15 Members are women, including the President, Hon. Sue Smith MLC. In the House of Assembly, six of the 25 Members are women, including the Premier, Hon. Lara Giddings. Hon. Michelle O’Byrne is Leader of the House in the House of Assembly. In cabinet, two of the eight current Ministers are women.

Women are also active in local government with representation increasing over recent years and programmes are being put in place to encourage further participation.

The percentage of women councillors rose to 27.4 per cent in the 2009 election from 23.8 per cent in 2007. A WomenCan campaign facilitated a range of events and activities designed to encourage and support women in running for local government.

In small communities like Tasmania the starting point for many political careers and community activists is in local government.

An effort to increase female involvement at this level is likely to provide a pathway to a fuller participation in civil society in Tasmania. The benefits of this activity take time to materialize but will certainly benefit the entire Tasmania community over time.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 309

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:58 Page 310

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

INDIA’S RAJYA SABHA AND WOMEN’S EMPOWERMENT When an issue such as advancing the political and other rights of women becomes bogged down in India’s popularly elected Chamber, governments turn to the upper House, ironically the Chamber that was designed to slow down not speed up legislation.

Shri S.N. Sahu in New Delhi.

Shri Sahu was a senior official and Press Secretary to the late President of India, Shri K.R. Narayanan, and served as Director in the Prime Minister’s Office.

He is currently Joint Secretary in the Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The views expressed by the author are his personal views.

In 1946 Mahatma Gandhi expressed regret that political parties were not doing enough to send adequate numbers of women to legislative bodies. In response to a question whether it was necessary to have large numbers of women in such bodies, he forcefully said: “I am not enamoured of equality or any other proportion in such matters….Seeing, however, that it has been the custom to decry women, the contrary custom should be to prefer women…to men, even if the preference should result in men being entirely displaced by women.…Women, and for that matter any group, should disdain patronage. They should seek justice, never favours….For men to take a lead in this much-needed reform would be

310 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

not a matter of favour but a simple act of belated justice due to women.”

The Constitution Amendment Bill in the Rajya Sabha The passage of the above Bill in the Rajya Sabha (Council of States) on 9 March 2010 to reserve for women 33 per cent of seats in the Lok Sabha (House of People) and state Assemblies represented the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi to work for justice and equality for women. As the 108th amendment to the constitution, it is a mighty step for the emancipation of Indian women and their political empowerment.

The motion moved in the Council of States to pass the Bill after so many failed attempts in the

Shri S.N. Sahu

Lok Sabha to make it a law bears significance in the context of the historic role played by the Rajya Sabha in becoming a legislative forum where some of the most farreaching socio-economic legislation originated. The day it would be enacted it would be hailed as the second most

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:59 Page 311

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

Women of the Rayja Sabha: The role of the former Deputy Chairman of the Rayja Sabha, Dr the Hon. Najma Heptullah, (left) was significant in guaranteeing female representation in the House; and Smt. Sonia Gandhi, MP, President of the Indian National Congress Party (right).

significant development after women got the right to vote.

Several Members of the Rajya Sabha, cutting across party lines, while participating in the debate on the Bill, referred to Dr B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of our constitution. Shri D. Raja remarked that gender equality must be the objective of the entire Parliament and nation. He fortified his argument by quoting Dr Ambedkar who in his address to thousands of women belonging to the depressed classes had said: “I measure the progress of community by the degree of progress which women have achieved.”

Dr Ambedkar, as the then Law Minister of India, drafted the Hindu Code Bill which was supposed to ensure women their legitimate rights which were denied to them for centuries. Its enactment would

have brought about an unprecedented social revolution in our country spearheaded by women.

Many organizations and conservative sections of society came to the streets and shouted “Down with the Hindu Code Bill”.

They were against equality and equal opportunities for women. Our first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was saddened by those developments. In a letter to Chief Ministers he wrote that even “as a considerable majority in Parliament at that time wanted to pass the Bill with minor modifications, they were helpless before a determined minority and therefore had to concede defeat for the moment”. Those words of Prime Minister Nehru sound so contemporary for our own time when the Constitution (One Hundred Eighth Amendment) Bill

2008 is facing stiff opposition only from a small group.

The Nehru government’s intention to make the Hindu Code Bill the law of the land was best reflected when it was incorporated in the address of the then President of India, Dr Rajendra Prasad, to both Houses of Parliament assembled together in 1952.

However, the arduous exercise of DrAmbedkar to frame the Hindu Code Bill did not go in vain. Its progressive content and reformative features commanded attention of all right-thinking people from across the nation.

Country-wide debate on those aspects moulded public opinion in its favour.

Hindu Law Reform Bills and Nehru’s observations Eventually many Bills incorporating

the basic ingredients of the Hindu Code were introduced in the Rajya Sabha. The Hindu Marriage and Divorce Bill 1952, The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Bill 1953, The Hindu Succession Bill 1954, and The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Bill 1956 became law after originating in the Council of States.

It is of extraordinary education to know that then Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was making profound remarks after the passage of each and every Bill introduced in the Rajya Sabha for protecting the rights of women.

When those Bills were passed he observed in a letter to the Chief Ministers on 15 June 1956 “there is something revolutionary about them” and “they have broken the barrier of ages and cleared the way somewhat for our womenfolk to progress”. Then he remarked: “I

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 311

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:05 Page 312

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

Mahatma Gandhi (left) expressed regret that political parties were not doing enought to send sufficent numbers of women to legislative bodies; The first Indian Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (right), championed the advancement of women in the Rayja Sabha.

have long been convinced that a nation’s progress is intimately connected with the status of its women.”

The observations of Pandit Nehru articulated in the mid-1950s brought out the significance of this legislation which the Rajya Sabha had the distinction of taking up first. In preferring the Council of States to initiate those historic Bills, the government of the day was underlining the image of the Council of States as a legislative nursery for progressive ideas and forces and for taking steps to advance women and heighten the prestige of our country at the global level.

The preferred Chamber for women’s legislation Five and half decades after the Rajya Sabha was chosen to introduce the Hindu reform Bills, it fell to it again to provide leadership for passing the Constitution (Hundred and Eighth Amendment) Bill 2008 for providing adequate space to women in the political field. While the House took

courageous and bold initiatives in securing the social and economic rights of women in the middle of the twentieth century, it took the giant leap for political empowerment of women in the first decade of the twenty-first century.

With the introduction and passage of the constitutional amendment in the Rajya Sabha to reserve 33 per cent seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state Legislatures, the nation realized that the Council of States as a permanent Chamber of our Parliament is of monumental significance in successfully taking up legislation which revolutionizes polity and society and which often is not accepted by some social and political groups.

When a legislative proposal is introduced in the Rajya Sabha it does not lapse as, unlike the Lok Sabha, the upper House is not subject to dissolution. Its continuation as a permanent Chamber of our Parliament is its unique and enduring feature and any legislation originating there

312 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

remains alive. While piloting the Report of the Union Constitution Committee in the Constituent Assembly, Shri N. Gopalaswamy Ayyangar had stated that the role of the second Chamber was not to be a clog to either legislation or administration.

The idea of a second Chamber is rooted in the fundamental notion that it would prevent hasty legislation. The Rajya Sabha has certainly prevented numerous hasty laws. However there are vested interests inside and outside Parliament which often prevent introduction of legislation envisaging bold social, economic and political reforms. In the particular instance of the legislation concerning the reservation of seats for women, the Lower House of our Parliament witnessed violent resistance when it was introduced in the 11th, 12th and 13th Lok Sabhas. It is in such situations that the Rajya Sabha, created to prevent hasty legislation, is preferred by the government to introduce Bills of far-reaching social and economic significance

to hasten the process of making these into laws for the benefit of society and nation. The role of Rajya Sabha assumes critical significance for expanding the scope of democracy and making it more inclusive and broad-based.

The Speaker of the lower House, Hon. Somnath Chatterjee, in his valedictory remarks at the end of the last session of the 14th Lok Sabha on 26 February 2009 stated: “Personally it is a matter of great regret to me that we have not been able, during my tenure, to pass the Women’s Reservation Bill which to my mind would have gone a long way towards genuine and effective empowerment of 50 per cent of our population. The Women’s Reservation Bill has now been introduced in the Rajya Sabha during the 2008 Budget Session to ensure that the Bill does not lapse with the dissolution of the 14th Lok Sabha.”

With the introduction of such legislation in the Rajya Sabha, it is

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:05 Page 313

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

kept alive and public opinion is created and moulded around it.

The Rajya Sabha acts as the mood manager of the nation for many legislative proposals framed by governments in the larger interests of the nation to take our country forward by extending justice to those who have suffered for centuries.

That happened to the Hindu Code Bill. The Code itself could not be made a law. But the laborious process of its drafting and the final shape in which it was presented to the nation reflected the intention of the then government to establish a liberal legal regime for women for addressing their concerns in relation to marriage, divorce, right to property, et cetera.

In successfully taking up the Hindu Code legislation for guaranteeing social and economic rights of women, the Rajya Sabha thus made a start in creating conditions for making women equal partners in the political sphere.

It has been well said that “women’s empowerment is not only a political issue but also a socio-economic issue”. In successfully clearing legislation for the social and economic rights of women, the Rajya Sabha was thus fulfilling the key aspects of women’s empowerment in the middle of the twentieth century.

The then Minister of Legal Affairs, Shri H.V. Pataskar, while moving the motion in the Rajya Sabha on 1 October 1955 for the Hindu Succession Bill, stated that for many years Indian women had not been treated on an equal footing. Then he noted with satisfaction that the speeches of Members of the Rajya Sabha almost expressed unanimity to grant equality to women so that all hindrances in regard to succession for women would be removed.

For example, Shrimati Lakshmi Menon, a Member of the Rajya Sabha and then Parliamentary Secretary to External Affairs Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru,

said that those opposing the Bill would realize that they could not hold back the change that was inevitably coming in favour of women.

In 1977 when the Rajya Sabha completed 25 years, a volume was published entitled “The Second Chamber: Its Role in Modern Legislatures” edited by Shri S.S. Bhalerao, the Chamber’s then Secretary-General.

Many of its women Members contributed articles to it, including Shrimati Leela Damodar Menon who catalogued its significant achievements and wrote: “What the Rajya Sabha needed the most was more women Members in its fold”. Her robust vision for the Rajya Sabha in terms of greater representation of women was as true for the House as it was for all legislative bodies of our country including the Lok Sabha.

Representation of women on parliamentary committees and in local government Members of the Rajya Sabha have always remained vigilant in taking up the cause of women’s representation on the committees of Parliament.

It was best exemplified in their actions on 29 August 1985 when the constitution of the Joint Committee of both Houses on the Bill to provide for the appointment of the Lokpal to enquire into allegations of corruption against Ministers was being discussed in the Rajya Sabha.

Several Members wanted representation of a woman Member of the House on that committee. The Law Minister admitted that when the matter was discussed no one thought of appointing a woman Member.

The Minister of Parliamentary Affairs was very candid in acknowledging that it was his mistake that he did not propose the name of a woman Member when he prepared the list. The then Deputy Chairman, Hon. Najma

Heptullah, noted that the whole House was conscious of the fact that a woman should have been included. She ruled that the particular rule permitted for the resignation of the Member from the proposed committee and the vacancy caused thereby could be filled by a woman.

To end the controversy, the Deputy Chairman ruled: “According to rule 72, a person will resign and the vacancy so created will be filled by a lady Member.” Eventually a woman Member occupied the seat vacated by a male Member after he resigned from the membership of that committee.

That instance of 1985 proved beyond doubt that Members of the House including its Presiding Officers did underline the issue of representation of women Members in a wide variety of activities of the House which includes the work done by committees.

The Rajya Sabha passed the Constitution (73rd and 74th Amendment) Bill 1991 which eventually became an act of Parliament constitutionally guaranteeing 33 per cent of seats for women in representative bodies across the nation at the local level. As a result, one million women are now elected to such bodies every five years.

Besides, the Rajya Sabha has passed many resolutions which asked for adequate representation of women in legislative bodies. The passage of the Constitution (108th Amendment) Bill to reserve 33 per cent of seats in the lower House of the Indian Parliament and the state Assemblies is a step in that direction.

Correcting the “lopsided” male view In India, seats are reserved for territorial constituencies. The Rajya Sabha as the federal Chamber represents not territorial constituencies but the states and union territories of our country so it is not possible to reserve Rajya

Sabha seats for women. In spite of such limitations, it is important to analyze the role of the Rajya Sabha to further the cause of women’s empowerment.

While doing so, it is pertinent to bear in mind that more women Members in both the Houses of Parliament would go a long way in achieving gender equality and justice in our country.

Our first Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, wrote in early 1950s: “I have been meeting our new Members of Parliament. There are over 700 of them as between the two Houses. I have noticed with great regret how few women have been elected. I suppose this is so in the state Assemblies and Councils also. I think we are very much to be blamed. It is not a matter of showing favour to any one or even of injustice, but rather of doing something which is not conducive to the future growth of our country. I am quite sure that our real and basic growth will only come when women have a full chance to play their part in public life. Wherever they have had this chance, they have, as a whole, done well – better, if I may say so, than the average man. Our laws are manmade, our society dominated by man, and so most of us naturally take a very lopsided view of the matter. We cannot be objective, because we have grown up in certain grooves of thought and action. But the future of India will probably depend ultimately more upon the women than the men.”

The passage of the Constitution Amendment Bill in the Rajya Sabha to reserve 33 per cent of seats for women is thus a step towards fulfilling the vision of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. It is certainly a great and bold beginning for women’s empowerment which will contribute to build a better India firmly based on the values of inclusion, justice and equality.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 313

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:08 Page 314

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS The allocation of government money to Parliamentarians to support projects for the advancement of their constituencies can be a controversial process unless it is run properly. A group of Parliamentarians and academics recommends how to operate them in an effective yet transparent and accountable way.

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) in collaboration with the State University of New York organized in June 2011 workshop to investigate the operations of Constituency Development Funds (CDFs) in various jurisdictions throughout the Commonwealth. The Workshop explored the operations of these funds by asking about: the efficiency of service delivery in constituencies, the extent to which such policymaking contributes to effective administration, and the best ways to enhance the accountability and transparency of policy making on such funds.

The Workshop, hosted by the Jamaica Branch of the CPA, brought together 11 Parliamentarians from the CPA’s Asian, Indian and Caribbean Regions. It followed on a similar workshop held during the CPA’s 56th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in Nairobi, Kenya, in September 2010. The latter meeting identified the growth of CDFs in

Commonwealth regions and highlighted the need for there to be a common set of guidelines for these funds.

The Parliamentarians attending the Jamaica workshop, together with civil servants and academics, compared the delivery of CDFs in their own jurisdictions as well as case studies from other regions.

The discussion revealed that, though there was great diversity in how the funds were administered and allocated, there was an overall consensus on the need for effective governance. The workshop therefore identified the following key principles and guidelines for CDFs. Introduction Parliamentary involvement in grassroots community development has grown considerably across Commonwealth countries. One important tool in this effort has been the Constituency Development Fund, which appropriates national funding for

314 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

MP-influenced, locally determined, constituency-level development.

CDFs become legitimate mechanisms of development through their creation in legislation.

They also facilitate the legitimate connection between Members of Parliament and their constituencies. A central hope behind CDFs is that local input promotes better targeting of projects to the needs of constituents, more attention to implementation and a way of holding government officials responsible for results by giving the capacity for development to MPs whose electoral fate will be locally determined.

CPA Members recognize that CDFs should include steps to eliminate opportunities for corruption and be part of comprehensive development efforts. Below are principles and guidelines for the operation of CDFs that are consistent with international norms and values about legislative performance and socio-economic development.

These principles highlight the importance of transparent project selection and implementation in a manner that enables citizens to work together for the development of their constituency, demand accountability and maintain regular oversight. Further, the administration and management of CDFs can empower provincial and district governments and professional experts to apply their own contextual knowledge to solve local development problems. CDFs also should foster public learning through monitoring and evaluation about what types of development projects are most successful in meeting the needs of citizens and promoting community development.

It is clear that the successful operation of any CDF is contingent upon strong MP involvement and leadership. As representatives of a constituency’s citizens, MPs play an essential role in facilitating citizen participation to make claims upon government services. In this role, MPs can ensure that CDF

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:08 Page 315

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

Providing clean sources of food and water is one of the recommended areas where funding could be allocated.

Principles and Guidelines for CDFs The following are general principles of good governance that should apply to all CDFs across cases.

technocratic experts. CDF initiatives should respond to local developmental needs. On this basis, CDFs require channels of input for local citizens and civil society at all steps in decisionmaking on CDFs. CDFs shall improve the wellbeing and livelihoods of constituents. The primary purpose of a CDF is to redirect additional resources to constituencies to solve socio-economic and humanitarian problems identified by citizens and elected representatives.

I. Responsiveness CDFs are a distributive policy tool designed to meet the development needs of citizens. Their success is contingent upon an inclusive process of consultation which fosters co-operation among constituents, MPs, and

• Civic participation in government and MP-constituent relations shall be improved through the operation of CDFs. • CDFs shall respond to constituents’ needs regardless of political party affiliation or their relationships to MPs and CDF

resources are used efficiently and honestly, with the intent to meet the public interests of their constituencies. Thus, the potential offered by CDFs hinges on the initiative of MPs and their dedication to empowering citizens to participate in their own development.

committees and/or implementers.

CDFs shall not be used vindictively to retaliate against any public official’s electoral opponents.

• Project selection and implementation shall be based on the needs of the people, who will be provided opportunities to communicate their diverse development needs to MPs and CDF committees and/or implementers for the duration of the project.

• Responsiveness can be achieved through a variety of means, including public forums and discussions about a community’s development needs. A responsive CDF process shall also solicit input from all legitimate stakeholders by regularly including them in project selection and implementation.

II. Transparency Transparency, as in the case of

CDFs, is the fundamental cornerstone of an open government that promotes citizen engagement. Transparency refers to the administration of government services in an open and publicly observable manner that creates opportunities for public participation. MPs, CDF committees and/or implementers shall open decision-making processes to the public.

• The process of CDF project selection and implementation shall be transparent. MPs and CDF committees and/or implementers shall consult constituents about local development problems and all possible solutions.

• All deliberative decisions made

by MPs, CDF committees and/or implementers and other bodies shall be open to the public. The flows of all CDF funds shall be transparent and traceable to

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 315

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:10 Page 316

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

Constituency development funds are often devoted to areas such as poverty reduction, and education as well as specific needs of individual constituencies. specific decision-making processes.

• All financial information regarding the use of CDF funds on projects shall be publicly available and documented according to standard and auditable accounting principles. Documentation of CDF funding shall be made publicly available in a timely manner.

• CDF programmes shall ensure ease of access for all citizens, who shall be allowed to make claims of redress and appeal regarding the CDF process according to government regulations.

III. Administration and Management CDFs shall be administered and managed in an efficient, effective and transparent manner.

In this regard, MPs and committees and/or implementers shall facilitate the process by mobilizing citizen participation, streamlining implementing mechanisms and proactively complying with them. Such actions ensure that CDF administration and management will be performed in a timely fashion and remain faithful to the intent of CDFs. • CDF funds shall be allocated to individual constituencies in a fair and equitable manner, regardless of MPs’ partisanship, gender, religion, race or ethnicity.

316 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

• CDF funds shall be released in a timely manner and CDF projects shall be completed in a timely manner. The release of funds shall not be employed as part of a legislative election campaign.

• CDF funds shall be channeled to a separate account of a public agency. Access to the funds shall be limited to officially authorized administrators. Funds shall be managed according to the best practices of public financial management.

• The structure of CDF administration shall be clearly defined. Each administering body at corresponding levels shall function with unambiguous legitimate authority, explicit responsibility and substantive commitments. The structure of authority will be clearly stated to

the public to ensure that citizens are knowledgeable about the decision-making process of CDF management.

• A set of policies and procedures shall be made public to guide the implementation of the fund and the projects.

• Funding shall be devoted to development in constituencies.

Funded areas may include poverty reduction, infrastructure, water, education, health care, sanitation and disaster mitigation, and shall address specific needs of individual constituencies.

• CDFs shall utilize all available technical expertise relevant to a particular project.

Governments should make available to CDF implementing agencies relevant technical expertise. For example, public

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:11 Page 317

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

health professionals should be consulted about any CDF project that seeks to improve the health care of constituents. Such expertise is essential to ensure that development projects are carried out in effective and efficient ways that improve livelihoods.

• CDF committees and/or implementers shall coordinate their projects with similar initiatives of local governments and agencies of the central government in order to avoid waste, utilize resources efficiently and strive for sustainability of local development.

IV. Accountability and Oversight Accountability and oversight play essential roles in promoting project quality, improving decision-making, and preventing

corruption and abuse of CDF funds. Proper oversight of CDF financing ensures fiscal probity and promotes accountability to the public among MPs and CDF committees and/or implementers.

• Within government regulations, MPs, CDF committees and implementers shall be held accountable for their respective roles, conduct and decisions in the process of CDF implementation.

• Procedures and/or legal regulations shall be put in place to hold CDF actors accountable.

• Appropriate entities with adequate monitoring and oversight capability shall be assigned responsibility for overseeing CDF implementation.

• Any findings and/or results of

investigations shall be released to the public in a timely manner.

V. Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and evaluation of CDF projects are essential tasks to help ensure learning about what actions are most effective in fostering constituency development.

Monitoring ensures that CDF projects are progressing toward their goal, while evaluation assesses the efficiency, effectiveness, impact and results of a CDF project. MPs, among other stakeholders, shall engage proactively in facilitating this process.

• Monitoring shall be performed throughout a CDF project to ensure that it is progressing towards its publicly stated goal.

Constituents and legitimate stakeholders shall be afforded opportunities to participate in the monitoring process.

• If a monitoring entity determines that a project is deviating from its stated goal; under government regulations, it shall make recommendations about adjusting implementation.

• Evaluation shall be conducted upon completion of projects by appropriate government agencies.

Evaluations shall be made publicly available to ensure that CDF committees and/or implementers are aware of the effectiveness of previous CDF projects.

• In addition to monitoring and evaluation, CDF projects will be subject to regular audits by appropriately designated entities for the duration of the project.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 317

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:13 Page 318

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY The Millennium Development Goals cannot be achieved in just over three years without strong, effective and sometimes innovative involvement by Parliaments, say senior officials in the field of parliamentary strengthening at the United Nations Development Programme.

Mr Kevin Deveaux and Mr Cédric Jurgensen in New York.

Mr Deveaux, a former Member of the Legislative Assembly of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia, is the Parliamentary Development Policy Adviser in the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Mr Jurgensen is a UNDP Parliamentary Development Adviser.

This article reflects the views of its authors and not necessarily those of the UNDP, its Executive Board or United Nations member states.

In September 2000, 189 world leaders pledged together, through the United Nations Millennium Declaration, to take appropriate measures by 2015 to reduce poverty and inequalities, fight diseases and illiteracy, and to protect the environment. They officially committed themselves to “making the right to development a reality for everyone and to freeing the entire human race from want”.

Beyond this general commitment, they agreed on a precise agenda: the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) comprising 8 Goals, 21 numerical targets and 60 quantifiable indicators to help governments develop appropriate strategies and allow civil society and international organizations to follow-up progress made on reducing poverty and hunger, improving the situation of disadvantaged populations and fighting climate change.

The universal approach of the MDGs was both innovative and fully in accordance with the role of the United Nations (UN) in the field of development. Thanks to

318 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Mr Kevin Deveaux

this global consensus on priorities for development, since 2000 serious progress has been made worldwide on poverty reduction, access to primary education and to safe water – even if in many developing countries child mortality and maternal health remain especially challenging.1 For instance, a woman dies every minute from complications related to pregnancy or during the six weeks following delivery; 99 per cent of these 500,000 deaths occur each year in developing countries.

Concrete results vary

Mr Cédric Jurgensen

significantly from one country to another, depending on economic and social constraints but also on the strength of political mobilization. For example, in many cases gaps appeared between the formulation of policies intended to achieve MDGs and their concrete implementation that require appropriate resource allocations on the ground. Such situations happen more often when civic and political engagement is not encouraged and when civil society is not able to effectively hold governments to account on budget and law-making. In India for

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:13 Page 319

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

the poorest and marginalized persons or groups, such as women or disadvantaged tribes.

The National Assembly of Nigeria (top) and the Parliament of Kenya (below) provide good examples for parliamentary mobilization on the MDGs.

instance, citizens’ mobilization has not been encouraged and the budget-making process suffered

from a lack of transparency, making it difficult to ensure that funds are spent in the interest of

Innovative parliamentary involvement In such contexts, there is evidence that, as for other political issues, Parliaments can play a strategic role to guide and scrutinize the policies conducted by governments, and then make the policy and budget formulation a more inclusive process in the interest of all citizens. Indeed, international agreements such as the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness in 2005 and the Accra Agenda for Action in 2008 have officially acknowledge that Parliaments, through their lawmaking, budgeting and oversight functions, have a central role to play in this process of monitoring actions undertaken by governments to achieve the MDGs. Nevertheless, Parliamentarians themselves are not always aware of their crucial responsibility in this process,2 and may not have the required resources and information to analyze the results and assess the relevance of a government’s programmes and activities in this field. Parliamentarians need to connect with civil society organizations in order to get the pertinent information and technical advice, and then pass Bills that address the remaining issues, amend inappropriate legislation or budget, and more broadly press their government through oversight activities.

The African continent, one of the most strategic for development, already provides many examples of interesting initiatives taken by Parliaments in order to improve their performance in monitoring MDG progress.

Several of these Parliaments have thus made important progress to engage more effectively with governments and dialogue with citizens on the MDGs, and this positive trend is especially strong

Millennium Development Goals 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, 2. Achieve universal primary education, 3. Promote gender equality and empower women, 4. Reduce child mortality, 5. Improve maternal health, 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, 7. Ensure environmental sustainability and 8. Develop a global partnership for development (http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/)

among Commonwealth Parliaments.

In West Africa, Nigeria is a leader and one of the most convincing examples for parliamentary mobilization on the MDGs. Indeed, the Nigerian House of Representatives has recently created a Committee on Donor Funds and an MDG Standing committee, enjoying the same political legitimacy, resources and powers as any other standing committee within the House, while the Nigerian Senate chose to establish an ad-hoc MDG Committee, which has less power and resources than a standing committee. These new committees have successfully engaged the government in a permanent dialogue, thanks to the existence of an executive structure specifically dedicated to the MDGs, as well as a separate budget allocated to the MDGs.3 In Eastern Africa, the most interesting case is probably the one of the Kenyan Parliament, which has created a strong MDG caucus that produces reports with statistics and useful information on a regular basis.

In southern Africa, full standing committees have not been created yet within Parliaments; but an MDG caucus has been established in Zimbabwe, while the

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 319

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:14 Page 320

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

The Millennium Development Goals were devised io help governments develop strategies to provide access to improved living conditions such as safe water, primary school education and maternal health care.

Parliament of Mozambique has undertaken numerous field visits that have increased awareness of MDGs among Parliamentarians – even if in the case of Mozambique there is no reporting system from the executive to Parliament, which also faces resource constraints. In South Africa, parliamentary capacity on MDGs has been strengthened in the case of gender equality thanks to a women’s caucus, but also more broadly thanks to an innovative report produced by Parliament and dedicated to MDGs. The function of the report is not only to collect and analyze relevant data on MDG progress, but also to be used by development stakeholders as an advocacy tool for development concerns.4 Many other innovative practices can be found on other continents.

For instance, in Europe, the

Serbian Parliament has created a Poverty Reduction Standing Committee, the chair of which participates in an MDG working group formed by the government.

In the Southeast Asia, the Lower House of the Philippines’ Parliament has established a Special Committee on MDGs that checks budget allocations on MDG areas and facilitates the passage of laws related to MDGs. In the Pacific, Marshall Islands’ Parliamentarians had the opportunity to participate in 2009 in an induction programme including a specific focus on MDG achievements and how Parliament can engage more effectively with the MDGs.

monitoring MDG progress need to be gathered, compared and

Engaging with citizens Lessons learned from all those national experiences conducted to enhance the role of Parliaments in

analyzed in order to identify best practices and recommendations that could be pertinent for most Parliaments.

320 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

“Parliamentarians need to connect with civil society organizations in order to get the pertinent information...and more broadly press their government through oversight activities.”

One of the most important points, in our opinion, is the need for Parliaments to connect with civil society organizations. Indeed, the implementation of national strategies to achieve MDGs clearly requires a strong mobilization of citizens, through these organizations, that can effectively raise awareness among Parliamentarians on MDG achievements and gaps. This participative and open approach is the most pertinent for democratic Parliaments to ensure all the population benefits from their work, as a truly representative institution, through parliamentary hearings or constituency visits and meetings.

Accelerating MDG implementation can be very challenging, or even impossible, in countries where Parliaments are not able, either for technical or

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:15 Page 321

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

political reasons, to pass pertinent legislation, for instance on children’s vaccinations, climate change or gender equality, or to effectively hold the government accountable on the way public funds have been allocated to maternal health, children’s vaccination and primary education.

The United Nations Development Programme, which in 2010 with partners including the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association created a new portal dedicated to Parliamentary Strengthening named Agora (www.agora-parl.org), is fully committed to the process of knowledge sharing for Parliaments, on MDGs as well as on other aspects of their work.

The UNDP has also, more specifically on MDGs, disseminated useful knowledge through a handbook jointly

produced with UN Millennium Campaign and published in 2010.

This handbook, entitled Parliamentary Engagement with the Millennium Development Goals,5 includes explanations about the MDGs themselves; but it also provides advice and guidance that can be easily used to ensure Parliaments are well informed about the MDGs and can explain why and how Parliaments can engage with the MDGs in the legislative process, the oversight function as well as through budget scrutiny.

The handbook also comprises numerous examples and a checklist that Parliaments can use as a tool to assess their own performance and identify the remaining weaknesses that need to be addressed.

The UNDP has a long history of working with the CPA in

support of Commonwealth Parliaments. From the Caribbean to Africa to South Asia and the Pacific, the CPA’s member Parliaments have benefitted from this partnership. With the deadline for achieving the MDGs by 2015 fast approaching, the UNDP stands ready to work with all Parliaments to ensure they are able to play their important role in meeting these important goals.

if 80 per cent of the MPs desire an increase in their Parliament’s involvement in and support of the MDGs, half of them do not believe that their colleague follow the progress or achievement of these goals (MPs speak out: A glimpse into Parliamentarians’ perceptions of the Millennium Development Goals, IPU, 2010).

3. “Analytical study of Parliamentary Mechanisms for MDGs”, report from the IPU in collaboration with the United Nations Millennium Campaign (UNMC), 2010.

4. South Africa, Millennium Development

Footnotes

Goals, Country Report for 2010, Concept

1. For instance, India not only harbours 301

Paper

million citizens living below the poverty line,

(http://www.statssa.gov.za/nss/documents/

but also 2.1 million of the 9.7 million children

Concept%20Paper%20for%20MDG%202

dying each year before they reach the age of

010%20Final%20Draft_2_3__aposteriori.p

five, as well as around 35 per cent of the

df).

undernourished children (“Local MDG

5. Parliamentary Engagement with the

Monitoring in India”, UN Millennium

Millennium Development Goals – A manual

Campaign/PRIA resource book, 2011).

for Use in Parliaments, 2010, UNDP/UN

2. According to a face-to-face survey

Millennium Campaign

conducted with a worldwide sample of MPs

(http://www.endpoverty2015.org/files/MC_

by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), even

web_version_HighRes.pdf).

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 321

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:17 Page 322

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

BUILDING A DIALOGUE BETWEEN PARLIAMENT AND ENTERPRISE Parliamentarians are often accused of not understanding the business world. Enterprise and Parliamentary Dialogue International, which started as an idea for the British Parliament, now works globally to ensure that MPs and business people really do understand each other, says its Secretary General.

Mr Riki HydeChambers, OBE, in London..

Mr Hyde-Chambers has worked with Parliaments for over 30 years. He developed the first business and Parliament Dialogue Centre in the Westminster Parliament, the Industry and Parliament Trust, as a resource for Members and senior officials in both Westminster’s Houses. In 1997 he became the founding Secretary General of the international organization of Dialogue Centres. He also directed the development of the first learning and development service for Westminster MPs and their constituency staff.

The international business world is acutely aware of the enormous changes that are taking place in the dynamics of the global economy: the growing interdependence between national economies; the changing geopolitical world where there are no longer two dominating super powers, a world where the only certainty is change.

While Parliaments see the impact of the changes in the policy issues and legislation they are called on to formulate, they do not have the same professional support mechanisms as the business world. Parliamentarians are by definition generalists, but they often have to operate as specialist professionals, while having little of the continuous professional development support that exists in other professions and the business world.

The Dialogue Centre concept was first thought of 33 years ago by a group of senior United Kingdom Parliamentarians and industrialists who, even then, were aware of the trends that are so strikingly evident today: highly

322 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

complex issues in policy and legislation relating to an everchanging world economy. They wanted to create a practical bridge of understanding between those who create the wealth of the country and those who set the operating framework. The result was the first Dialogue Centre, the Industry and Parliament Trust (www.ipt.org.uk) which I ran for most of its existence. Since then my colleagues and I have helped adapt the Dialogue Centre concept to a range of different cultures and economies ranging from Sweden, Finland, Belgium (both Wallonia and Flanders) to Spain and New Zealand. In Spain it was used to consolidate democracy following the attempted coup and in Northern Ireland to strengthen the Assembly during the peace process. Because the economy has no political baggage and they recognized the need to understand it, politicians of all nine parties participated in the Northern Ireland Assembly and Business Trust when they would not be seen publicly together.

Dr the Rt Hon. Lockwood

Mr Riki Hyde-Chambers

Smith, MP, Speaker of the New Zealand Parliament, has expressed the purpose of all Dialogue Centres when describing that of the New Zealand Business and Parliament Trust: “To improve understanding between the political and business arenas for the benefit of better government and greater prosperity of the economy. It is supported from the most senior levels of Parliament and business. Its aim is to inform, not indoctrinate and it is nonpartisan, therefore it is neutral. If it were not so, I would not have accepted the role of President.” (http://www.nzbpt.org.nz)

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:17 Page 323

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

Mr Hyde-Chambers during a visit to Mongolia.

Hands-on business experience for Parliamentarians Dialogue Centres are inclusive of all economic sectors, of every size of business from micro to multinational, of employees as well as employers. In countries in transition they will often include civil society in activities: all stakeholders in the economy.

Dialogue Centres have no agendas so do not advocate. All Centres work to facilitate a deeper understanding of issues, with the aim of contributing better informed decision-making in legislation and regulation for the public benefit and not special interests.

The understanding is created by programmes and activities of practical engagement and involvement between business and

Parliamentary practitioners. The approach is based on the well tested adage “Tell me and I forget, show me and I remember, involve me and I understand.” All business and parliamentary participants undertake to abide by the Enterprise and Parliamentary Dialogue International (EPDI) Code of Principles (see below) which underpins all activities.

The learning experiences work because they are bespoke and tailored to Members of Parliament or committee needs and level of knowledge.

A Member can have considerable experience of business, but may want to build on this knowledge or look at a completely different business sector. The process is managed to ensure a balanced learning

experience, reflecting parliamentary research departments. Like them our credibility relies on the quality and authenticity of outputs. Both Dialogue Centres and research departments need to produce robust, reliable, balanced and userfriendly information for Members.

Coping with change The Inter-Parliamentary Union in a recent report pointed out the paradox that democracy, both as an ideal and as a set of political institutions and practices, has either triumphed in most countries or is the aspiration of many of their citizens; but at the same time there has been widespread disillusionment with the results of democracy in practice that is shared by citizens of the “old”

democracies as much as by those of the emerging ones. Today this can be acute when democracies are called on to grapple with forces that often seem beyond their control, affecting their security, their economies and the livelihoods and well-being of their citizens.

Parliaments today have a key role in addressing this paradox, carrying all the expectations that democracy will be truly responsive to people’s needs.

For an individual Member in an established Parliament, this is challenging. It is exceptionally difficult for Members of Parliaments in countries in transition, where not only economies but also society and institutions themselves are undergoing change. Frequently in these countries there are not the

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 323

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:18 Page 324

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

Dialogue centres in places like Tusheti in northeastern Georgia help build up a network to link Members with local business people.

consultation mechanisms or support systems to enable Parliaments, let alone individual Members, to fulfil their role.

From our experience of the past 33 years it is apparent that the Dialogue Centre model first formulated for Westminster can be really useful both for established Parliaments and those in transition.

The range of ways in which this is achieved is illustrated by the work of the Business and Economic Centre (www.bec.ge) of the Georgian Parliament.

In established democracies, Dialogue Centres are funded from Parliaments and often through help in kind – Parliament providing a meeting room and office for ease of access. In addition there are strictly regulated and transparent

contributions from businesses.

Countries in transition usually require at least start-up donor funding as invariably Parliaments do not have adequate budgets.

Dialogue Centres are cost effective as they do not pay for contributors to programmes. The experience of practitioners learning from one another should be mutually and appropriately beneficial. This also means there are built-in quality controls. Neither Parliamentarians nor businesses people will give time if they feel there is no benefit.

On being invited to a country we carry out an assessment of the needs, particularly of the Parliament, and meet with representatives of all political factions or parties, the business

324 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

community and the Speaker to see if a Dialogue Centre could in fact help answer these needs and how it would need to be shaped. If we are invited to establish a Dialogue Centre it operates like a franchise.

The service is delivered by nationals chosen by EPDI and programmes developed according to the direction of a national advisory board.

The methodology, expertise, development and guarantee of integrity of the process are supplied by EPDI. The Board of the EPDI firmly believes that Dialogue Centres could be of real of use in a number of Commonwealth countries, both established and in transition, and has made the strategic decision to focus its immediate development

on the countries of the Commonwealth.

Georgia: Effective parliamentary practice helps the rural economy All Dialogue Centres in countries in transition have as a measure of their success the impact of their work on the rural economy.

Georgia is a good example.

The Chairman of the Agriculture Committee asked for assistance in raising the profile of the rural economy on the political agenda, the government being focused on encouraging inward investment. The Committee had never been out of Parliament let alone to Tusheti, in the northeastern Greater Caucasus Mountains of Georgia bordering

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:18 Page 325

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

Chechnya and Dagestan. In general, all Dialogue Centres build up the good will of a network of people who can provide pro bono assistance. In this case, we persuaded the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe to provide a flight in a helicopter they used to patrol the border of the conflict area, and the British embassy to pay for the fuel.

As a result the journey took 45 minutes instead of nine hours by road and we secured a full complement of committee Members for the visit.

Next we had to gain the confidence of the Governor of Tusheti who was deeply apprehensive and suspicious of interacting with Parliamentarians and wanted to divert everyone to a

fishing trip. It is critical to Dialogue Centres that no one feels threatened or that they are going to lose face. As a participant in the process, the Governor of Tusheti came to understand that engaging with the Dialogue Centre was beneficial to all parties involved, and could be a useful process for him.

Tushetians, like most mountain people, are self-sufficient and know exactly what would help them overcome their problems. It was therefore not difficult to find individuals willing to speak who would not be intimidated by the circumstances and could involve the committee Members in the realities of the situation in Tusheti.

The approach we used in Georgia was like a select committee of inquiry. In general, we use parliamentary procedures in programmes whenever we can, as often it helps to strengthen the procedure of a Parliament in transition. In this case, the issues raised in the Georgian Dialogue Centre were all economically based, ranging from restrictive procurement regulations requiring the large army base to buy all its foodstuffs from the capital instead of locally, to the local administration allegedly pocketing the money provided by the government to keep the roads passable in the winter.

In the final analysis, it is the Parliamentarians and entrepreneurs or civil society representatives using the Dialogue Centre who will achieve the outcomes. In Georgia, they showed a review of issues through a Dialogue Centre can achieve practical benefit: 1) Regulatory changes were made in Parliament enabling the purchase of food by the army locally.

2) A transparent tender process for the annual road renovation and clearance was established resulting in the road being open for much longer,

benefiting family’s incomes.

3) For the first time, the Tusheti villages were provided with first aid medical kits.

4) For the first time the region was provided with an ambulance.

5) The Governor’s office provided U.S.$5,000 to fund a pipeline construction for a micro hydro power station to generate power to the region.

6) A bridge is being constructed over the River Shenko by the Ministry of Defence and the Governor’s office.

7) New staff appointments have been made to the national park personnel, more in tune with the problems of Tusheti.

8) A non-governmental organization, the Union of the Development of High Mountainous Regions, has been created.

9) As a result of their observer status, the French embassy has funded a local nursery; and 10) Proposed legislation changing the historic boundaries, a sensitive issue, will be reviewed.

State in the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office responsible for Africa, the United Nations, Overseas Territories and Conflict Issues Dialogue Centres in established or new democracies adhere to the Code of Principles developed by the first six Dialogue Centres from the U.K., Belgium, Holland, New Zealand, Sweden, Finland and Spain.

Participating businesses and Parliamentarians give an undertaking to their respective Parliamentary Boards to adhere to it. It has been recognized by the EU and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly as a benchmark in transparent, noncorrupt relationships between enterprise and politicians.

• • •

• Driven by principles As a number of Parliamentarians have recognized, the process was as important as the outcome. For the first time, MPs experienced how they could be effective economic champions for a region and could see very practical outcomes to their work.

“I am delighted that the European Union supports the development of the Business and Parliament Scheme of Georgia as a transferable model for other emerging democracies,” said HE Mrs Nino Burjanadze, then Chair of the Georgian Parliament.

“Economic and democratic development should go hand in hand. I support the work that Dialogue International has been doing to build the capacity of Parliaments around the world,” said Mr Henry Bellingham, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of

•

•

•

•

•

•

The programmes are independent and non-partisan.

The programmes are mutually educational and informative.

The participants must receive no fee nor be liable for any expenses related to the programme.

The participants undertake to honour the time commitment required by the study programme.

The participants undertake not to promote partisan views while on a programme.

The Dialogue Centres support those outside the Parliament in being actively engaged in the democratic process in a legitimate, non-corrupt and transparent way.

Enterprises undertake not to use their participation for lobbying.

The programmes ensure that enterprises undertake to be as open and frank as possible.

Participants undertake to keep in confidence anything of a sensitive nature; and It is the responsibility of each national organization to monitor its programmes and to ensure their quality.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 325

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:20 Page 326

SAARC CONFERENCE

STRENGTHENING PARLIAMENTS TO RE-INFORCE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE IN SOUTH ASIA South Asian Speakers and MPs discuss the great challenges facing democracy in a region that now stretches from Afghanistan east to Bangladesh.

The Chair and the Table in the Lok Sabha.

The Fifth Conference of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Speakers and Parliamentarians was held in New Delhi from 9 to 12 July 2011, and was inaugurated by the Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, at a solemn function held in the Central Hall of Parliament House. The Speaker of Lok Sabha, Smt. Meira Kumar, MP, welcomed the distinguished gathering while the Speaker of the Parliament of Sri Lanka, Mr Chamal Rajapaksa, proposed the Vote of Thanks. The Speakers, Parliamentarians, Secretaries-General and Secretaries of SAARC Parliaments attended the conference.

The Speakers of the six other member countries that addressed the gathering were Mr Abdul Raouf Ibrahimi, President of the Wolesi Jirga, National Assembly of Afghanistan; Md. Abdul Hamid Advocate, Speaker, National Assembly of Bangladesh; Mr Lyonpo Jigme Tshultim, Speaker, National Assembly of Bhutan; Mr Abdulla Shahid, Speaker, People’s Majlis of the Maldives; Mr Subas

326 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Chandra Nembang, Chairman of the Constituent Assembly of Nepal; and Dr Fehmida Mirza, Speaker, National Assembly of Pakistan.

In his inaugural address, Dr Singh said the winds of democracy have swept across the length and breadth of South Asia but the picture was a mixed one. What was however common was the optimism about the future and the abiding faith of the people in universal adult franchise and free and fair elections. Dr Singh observed that the countries of South Asia faced common challenges of mass poverty, unemployment, lack of adequate healthcare, illiteracy and environmental degradation. Each of them had rich and varied experiences in tackling these challenges and they should learn from each other’s experiences, and reinforce each other’s efforts to deal with them. The SAARC countries had to learn to speak with one voice on the common challenges that faced them. These countries had to not only keep

pace with technology, but also harness its benefits to bring down the psychological barriers that separated them. Dr Singh said that South Asia was home to perhaps the most youthful population in the world and the region could reap a rich demographic dividend if it could equip its youth with the right skills, make them employable and channel their energies to productive ends.

The Prime Minister felt that perhaps no region was more vulnerable to the effects of climate change and other challenges to sustainable development than the South Asia region. Since regional cooperation was vital for improving the quality of governance in managing the natural resources, in preventing land and water degradation and in strengthening food, water and energy security, it should be done at all levels – bilaterally, sub-regionally and as a region as a whole. He pointed out that South Asia could not realize its full potential until and unless the differences were resolved peacefully and there developed the

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:20 Page 327

SAARC CONFERENCE

Left: The Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Smt. Meira Kumar, MP, delivering the welcome address; This page: Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, MP, delivering his inaugural address in the Central Hall of the Parliament of India.

culture of solving their problems themselves. The scourge of terrorism had taken a huge toll on the societies of the region and if not checked, would consume all of them. The Parliamentarians were uniquely placed to help inculcate the sense of a common South Asian destiny in their respective countries. Stating that India remained firmly committed to principles and ideals of SAARC, the Prime Minister asserted that India would go the extra mile to make SAARC an effective organization that benefitted all citizens of South Asia.

Smt. Kumar said that while SAARC was a dialogue between governments, it was important to recognize the role that Parliaments

and Parliamentarians played in giving another vital dimension to bilateral and multilateral partnerships. Since its inception, the Association of SAARC Speakers and Parliamentarians had powerfully resonated the spirit of solidarity that was the cornerstone of SAARC. The Indian Speaker said that in a region that comprised some of the most densely populated countries in the world and characterized by an overwhelming diversity of religions, languages and cultural identities, democracy alone could lay the foundation of harmonious coexistence. The use of technology, especially IT, to connect with people and obtain their feedback, was essential for effective dialogue

between Parliaments and the people. She emphasized that SAARC member states must remember that it was only through sustainable development that they could achieve inclusive growth and ensure stability in the region.

In the first session of the conference Smt. Kumar specially welcomed the President of National Assembly of Afghanistan as the new member of the Association. Dr Mirza became the Vice-President of the conference as Pakistan proposed to host the next event in 2012. Smt Kumar then informed the gathering about the decision taken at the meeting of the Speakers Council held on 9 July 2011 regarding amendment in the rules of the Association

providing for one-fifth representation of women MPs in the delegation from each member country. She also encouraged the Speakers Council’s decision that the women delegates attending the conference might form a group of women Parliamentarians who would work for the promotion of women’s causes and hold a meeting of women Parliamentarians of SAARC countries under the overall umbrella of the association.

The discussions The first three sessions of the conference were devoted to the subject Consolidating Democracy: Strengthening Trust between Parliament and the People.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 327

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:21 Page 328

SAARC CONFERENCE

Participating in the discussion Dr Mirza and one of the lead speakers pointed out that democracy could be consolidated if it was able to ensure free and fair elections, an independent Judiciary, a responsible and responsive Executive, a vibrant civil society, a free media and above all a strong Parliament. She further pointed out that transparency and financial accountability remained at the centre-stage of public trust and one such hallmark of the parliamentary system in Pakistan was the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition as the chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee, which enhanced people’s confidence in the Parliament. The presence of 22 per cent of women legislators in the National Assembly was a driving force behind social legislation in Pakistan. She envisioned a forum which would infuse a new life into SAARC in the same manner as the European Parliament. The second speaker, Mr Ibrahimi, informed that the transition to democracy had been a long road for Afghanistan and in its efforts towards consolidating democracy. Afghanistan enjoyed a free media, democratic elections and women and youth organizations, which played a vital role in the socio-economic and political life of the country. Shri K. Rahman Khan, the Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, India said when the members of Parliament performed their duties honestly and upheld the pledge made to the people Parliament would earn their trust and respect.

Mr Shahid said if democratic institutions were to remain relevant and win the confidence and faith of the people they needed to be transparent, result-oriented, timebound and people-centered. Mr Sheikh Fazlul Karim Salim, MP, Bangladesh, said Parliaments should contribute to the development of an inclusive society and facilitate progress. Shri Yashwant Sinha, MP, India, while

applauding the functioning democracy in all the member countries of SAARC, cautioned against the forces of instability threatening the democracy in South Asia and said that the lack of trust of the people in the democratic system of governance might prove catastrophic. Mr Sunil Handunnetti, MP, Sri Lanka, noted that trust between Parliament and the people could be built only if the basic needs of the citizens were fulfilled. Mr Laxman Prasad Ghimire, Chief Whip, Nepali Congress, highlighted the significance of an inclusive Parliament and elaborated on the initiatives being taken by the Constituent Assembly to make the Parliament of Nepal inclusive. Smt

“The SAARC countries had to learn to speak with one voice on the common challenges that faced them.” Dr Manmohan Singh, MP Maya Singh, MP, India pointed out that Parliaments must evolve with changing times and some system should be put in place to take account of the quantitative and qualitative performance of the Parliaments. Mr Anisul Islam Mahmud, MP, Bangladesh, referring to the lack of trust in the democratic system, called upon Parliamentarians to ensure that people’s trust in the democratic process should at least be retained, if not strengthened. Ms Nasima Neyazi, MP, Afghanistan, said democracy could be consolidated in Afghanistan with the active participation of women and youth.

She informed that there were 69 women members in the 249member Wolesi Jirga which exceeded the percentage of quota

328 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

reserved for women. Shri E.T. Mohammed Basheer, MP, India, elaborated on the various prerequisites for strengthening parliamentary democracy which, inter alia, included decentralization, transparency, freedom of press, inclusiveness, accountability, education, etc. Mr Mangala Samaraweera, MP, Sri Lanka, emphasized that sound democratic practices such as separation of powers, accountability and transparency, independent Election Commission, free media, right to information, etc., were vital to strengthening democracy. He also endorsed the proposal for the establishment of a South Asian Parliament made by the Speaker of the National Assembly of Pakistan. Ms Shahnaz Wazir Ali, MP, Pakistan, stressed on the commonalities of the SAARC countries, including their concern for sustainable development and proposed a committee of SAARC on development issues. Prof. P.J. Kurien, MP, India, stressed four points – poverty alleviation, decentralization of power, education and credibility of leadership – for strengthening democracy. He expressed the view that the proposal for a South Asian Parliament was worthy of consideration. Ms Kashmala Tariq, MP, Pakistan, said internal democracy within political parties was essential for strengthening democracy. Highlighting the threat of terrorism in the region, she asked for harnessing the potential of the youth.

Participating in the discussion, Dr Mahesh Joshi, MP, India, said that in order to strengthen democracy, the three organs of the state should deliver on their responsibilities and not interfere in each other’s domain. Shri Arjun Meghwal, MP, India, observed that strengthening trust between Parliament and the people required a strong Election Commission; Parliament’s power to constitutional amendment; compulsory voting, prescribing

educational qualifications for legislators and a model code of conduct for parliamentarians. Shri Nadendla Manohar, Speaker, Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, India advocated for the introduction of e-petition system as a measure to strengthen trust between Parliament and the people. He called upon the SAARC countries to give more attention to the MDGs and to focus on issues like environmental protection and wild life.

Summing up the discussions, Mr Tshultim highlighted the need to bring about transparency in governance in order to enhance faith and trust of the people in the parliamentary system. He reiterated that Parliament was the supreme institution of democracy and Parliamentarians had a very crucial role to play in strengthening democratic institutions.

Sustainable development In its fourth session, on 10 July, the conference commenced discussion on the second theme Sustainable Development in SAARC Countries: The Way Forward with Mr Subas Chandra Nembang, Speaker of the Parliament of Nepal in the Chair. In his introductory remarks, he said the governments of SAARC countries had to work for development while ensuring sustainability. Dr Sonam Kinga, Deputy Chairman, National Council of Bhutan, observed that development had to be sustainable and the benefits of sustainable development should not merely trickle down but spread out equitably. Referring to the experiences in his own country, Dr Kinga referred to Bhutan’s approach to sustainable development which was guided by an alternative model for development. The idea of Gross National Happiness (GNH), as advanced by the King of Bhutan, emphasized that human beings had a wide range of needs and material needs was only one

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:23 Page 329

SAARC CONFERENCE

The SAARC Speakers at the conference.

among them, the others being emotional, psychological and spiritual wellbeing.

Md. Abdul Hamid Advocate said that in an increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity in South Asia would be best achieved by fostering mutual understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation amongst the countries in the region.

To achieve sustainable development in the SAARC countries, it was necessary to address climate change and its negative impact as well as poverty.

Participating in the discussion, Nimal Siripala de Silva, MP, and Minister of Irrigation and Water Resources Management, Sri Lanka, expressed the view that any effort towards sustainable development had to be ecologically, socio-culturally and economically sustainable.

Availability of funds; political will; equitable growth; and wiping out terrorism in the region were imperatives for the achievement of sustainable development, he also stressed.

With Dr Mirza, Speaker of the National Assembly of Pakistan, in the Chair, the fifth Session continued the discussion on the theme. Initiating the discussion, Ms Ali emphasized the need for

common plans and strategies for the SAARC countries to tackle the challenges of chronic poverty, iniquitous distribution of wealth, unemployment, environmental degradation, management of biodiversity, urbanization, etc. She suggested that the South, including the SAARC countries, had to take a common stand in global forums on the issue of environmental protection and climate change. Shri Chongshen Mongkosungkum Chang, MP, India, said that a SAARC Commission on the lines of the European Commission, if put in place, would help to strengthen cooperation among SAARC countries.

Mr Al Haj M. Iqbal Safi , MP, Afghanistan, stressed that the SAARC Charter could be realized fully only when there was cooperation among the member countries in all respects. Ms Mabel Rebello, MP, India, made references to some of the best practices in the areas of health and child care in Indian states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu and pointed out that the SAARC countries could similarly evolve suitable models to bring about solutions to the challenges faced by the region, whether in meeting the MDGs, climate change or sustainable development. Mr Bhim Prasad Acharya, MP, Nepal, said that the main challenge before South Asia

was how to accelerate the pace of economic development without jeopardizing the environment for the future generations. Md. Motahar Hossain, MP, and State Minister for Primary and Mass Education, Bangladesh highlighted the various measures taken in Bangladesh towards sustainable development and elaborated the successes achieved in the MDGs such as primary education, reduction of child mortality and women’s empowerment.

Mr Shahid said that Maldives was most vulnerable to climate change and sea rise. He noted that climate change was a rights issue for Maldives and the Right to Life needed to be ensured to the people which could only be attained, taking recourse to a sustainable pattern of development. Shri E.T.Mohammed Basheer, MP, India, said that there was a close connection between economic development and environmental and cultural sustainability and these should go hand in hand.

He stressed the need to include environment related awareness programmes in the school curriculum. Mr Anisul Islam Mahmud, MP, Bangladesh, asserted that poverty alleviation was the most daunting challenge on the path of attaining sustainable development.

He noted that the South Asian countries were not able to respond to the emergent problems of illiteracy, unemployment, etc. and appealed to all concerned to create a South Asian Development Bank to facilitate the attainment of the goals of sustainable development.

Shri Nadendla Manohar, Speaker, Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, India drew the attention of the delegates to the problem of hygiene and sanitation in rural areas.

Ms Tariq called for enhanced co-operation among SAARC countries and noted that cooperation was about building bridges and sharing and caring.

She appreciated the initiatives

taken by India towards sustainable development and called upon India to take the lead in this direction.

In his concluding remarks, Md. Hamid said that there was unanimity amongst all the participants that the need for ensuring sustainable development was one of the prime challenges before all the SAARC countries. In this context, chronic poverty, climate change and its adverse impact on bio-diversity, unemployment, industrial pollution, lack of basic drinking water facilities, etc. were perceived as some of the immediate challenges.

It was unanimously felt that the propagation of democratic values, taking recourse to appropriate technology, addressing environmental concerns, proactive approach to bring about institutional changes, et cetera. could help in ensuring sustainable development, he added.

The conference concluded on 11 July when, in her concluding remarks, Smt Kumar said it was an educative experience for all Speakers and Parliamentarians to come together and exchange views on two very important subjects having a crucial bearing on the furtherance of democracy and development in South Asia.

She pointed out that it was the onerous responsibility of the Parliaments and Parliamentarians to strengthen the roots of democracy in the region. She also emphasized the need to learn from one another’s experiences in protecting individual rights and promoting democratic values, rule of law and justice to meet people’s aspirations.

Earlier the Secretaries-General of SAARC Parliaments and Principal Secretaries/ Secretaries of the Indian State Legislatures deliberated on two subjects: (i) Towards a paperless office: harnessing information and communication technologies in SAARC Parliaments; and (ii) meeting the information needs of the SAARC Parliaments.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 329

Iddawala:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:24 Page 330

RESEARCH JOURNAL

RESEARCH JOURNAL LAUNCHED IN SRI LANKA A new publication to expand the sources of authoritative information available to Sri Lankan MPs is published by senior parliamentary staff.

Mr Neil Iddawala in Colombo.

Mr Iddawala is the Assistant SecretaryGeneral of the Parliament of Sri Lanka.

Mr Neil Iddawala.

The first issue of a new research publication for Sri Lankan Members of Parliament was launched on 20 October 2011 in a ceremony in the Parliament Complex in Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte attended by Hon. Chamal Rajapaksa, MP, Speaker of Parliament.

The Research Division of Parliament commenced publishing the Parliamentary Research Journal to boost the legislative process and policy formulation. The theme is “Sri Lanka: Policy issues in the post-conflict era”.

The national Parliament is the forum where views reflecting all shades of political opinion are 330 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

expressed. Effective legislation is based on rational views. Therefore, lawmakers should be wellinformed. Their role is crucial since the destiny of the nation is shaped by them.

The legislators, policyformulators and citizens must strive hard to achieve development goals within the democratic polity. The democratic space should be used in a prudent manner to achieve sustainable development.

Through the new research journal it is expected to meet the background information requirements of lawmakers, policyframers, bureaucrats and other

interested personnel involved in Sri Lanka’s governance.

Many distinguished academicians and researchers contributed papers on various relevant issues to the first issue. It is hoped that the “Parliament Research Journal” will serve as a useful service.

The journal is also available at the Parliament Souvenir Sales Counter for others interested in Parliament. The price of the journal is U.S.$5.00 and the potage is U.S.$4.00. The journal can be ordered by email sent to journal@parliament.lk. Currently it is not available online.

CPA centennial book ad:Different Ads.qxd 12/01/2012 15:27 Page 331

A CPA publication ‘The Evolution of Commonwealth Parliamentary Democracy: The CPA at 100’, is a special publication from the CPA which celebrates a hundred years of the Association.

This commemorative work features articles from prominent Members, former Parliamentarians and experts in Parliament from across the Commonwealth on topics relating to the advancement of Parliamentary Democracy and Good Governance.

Contributors include former Chairs of the Executive Committee, Hon. Dato Seri Mohd. Shafie Apdal, MP, writing on “Growing up with democracy” and Dame Billie Miller on “Expanding public involvement in Parliament and politics”.

Also included are testimonials on the value of Commonwealth inter-parliamentary co-operation and a full reference directory of all 185 CPA Branch details.

“The CPA, through its conferences and delegations throughout the Commonwealth, creates a better understanding of different countries and cultures.” Hon. Graham Gunn, Member of the House of Assembly, South Australia, 1970 to 2010.

To purchase a copy of this book or for more information on the contents please contact CPA Secretariat, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, U.K. Tel.: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 E-mail: hq.sec@cpahq.org

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:34 Page 332

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

COMMONWEALTH YOUTH PARLIAMENT, LONDON 2011 Three participants in the Commonwealth Youth Parliament took place in London in September 2011 provide an account of their individual experiences from the event.

Mr Graeme Osborn.

The programme of events was spread over four days, with the first consisting of an evening welcome talk and networking event, giving us the chance to get to know the other delegates. We also found out which our party allocations (Young Democratic Party, Progressive Youth Alliance and independent).

The following day was the first of three full days, which commenced with a tour of the Houses of Parliament. The Palace of Westminster and Houses of Parliament are very impressive, with Charles Barry’s architecture providing an imposing setting. Both chambers of parliament leave an indelible mark on the memory, but for different reasons. The Commons chamber, which is larger and less decadent, but still ornately decorated, has an air of excitement, as the venue for some of the greatest and most important moments in our post-war political history (the original chamber was destroyed during the Blitz and was rebuilt after the war, with donations

332 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Mr Osborn debating in the House of Lords (right).

from around the Commonwealth).

It was the House of Lords, however, with its exquisitely ornate decoration and smaller, more intimate feel, which made a greater impression (due in no small part to the fact that we were well aware that we would be speaking there two days later).

After the tour, we returned to Portcullis House for briefings on oral questions in both houses. We then watched Prime Minister’s Questions via video link (the public gallery was not large enough to accommodate us). This was followed by lunch, after which we split back into our party groups to elect minsters and shadow ministers. I was elected Prime Minister, with Australian Commonwealth Youth Parliamentarian Alistair Campbell being elected my Deputy Prime Minister and Matthew Crow from the United Kingdom elected Leader of the Opposition. The rest of this part of the afternoon was spent electing our cabinet, and

Mr Graeme Osborn

drawing up amendments to the climate change bill and the opposition motion, both of which we would be debating the following day.

We then listened to the Secretary General of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija deliver the Throne Speech as President of Commonwealthland. The speech was the subject of a debate the following day, and as the government we had to support the policies announced in it, despite having no input to either the

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:35 Page 333

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

speech or those policies. This speech was followed by a talk, and question and answer session with John Bercow MP, Speaker of the House of Commons. The talk itself was very informative, and the question and answer session gave us a chance to learn more about the peculiarities of the role of Speaker. I asked him how the adversarial nature of Prime Minister’s Questions and layout of the House of Commons chamber affected the nature of British politics. Mr Bercow’s response was that he felt it had very little influence, and that the adversarial style of national politics in Britain had more to do with political tradition and the party system.

In the evening we had a reception at Marlborough House with the Commonwealth Dignitaries. We had a lengthy question and answer session about the Commonwealth and its future, and then a buffet reception, with music provided by a chamber ensemble from the Commonwealth Youth Orchestra.

The Thursday was essentially a full day of parliamentary sessions of various descriptions, which we were all eager to get into, after having spent the previous day preparing. The first session was a debate on the Throne Speech, held in the Grand Committee Room of the Palace of West Minster. The debate was of a very high standard, and quickly assumed the party political jibes of Prime Minister’s Questions. Some of the policies announced in the speech, such as compulsory registration of the media and not increasing social security payments drew fire from the opposition and independents, but overall, I think that as the government we held our own, and gained the upper hand towards the end of the session.

This was followed by the debate on the Climate Change Bill for which we had drawn up amendments the previous day. This turned out to be another successful session for the

governments, with the opposition only winning two out of the numerous votes during the debate.

The opposition had notably more success in the afternoon sessions. The first was a question time, with 20 questions asked by backbench members, with nearly all of the ministerial team answering questions about their remits. This was a lively session, with detailed and pointed

“The chance to stand at the dispatch box in the House of Lords was an incredible experience that will remain with me for the rest of my life.”

questioning from the opposition, but on the whole the ministers held their own, in what could probably be best described as a draw.

The following session was a debate on the opposition motion, which provided free compulsory education up to the age of 16, with the option of free education or vocational training for 16-18. The government submitted an amendment, which was designed to stir debate, adding in the option of vocational training from 14 to 16, and making it a requirement of the optional free education/training from 16-18 that students must stay in Commonwealthland for two years upon completion. Many of the opposition argued that the government was trying to force young people into ‘slavery’ or ‘bondage’ (ignoring that we had not removed the choice element), and the debate was very heated. It was slightly disappointing to see that a number of members of the

government party refused to speak, and as each member could only speak once on the motion, it meant that the opposition and independents could have several speakers in a row, all attacking to amendment. Towards the end of the debate the opposition, led by their party leader used increasingly personal attacks on individual ministers (especially myself as Prime Minister), and became rather disruptive, asking members to give way when speaking, despite them making clear at the first request that they were not going to. This came to a head during the closing speeches. The Minister for Education spoke first, but was virtually unable to make her speech, as members of the opposition were constantly asking her to give way throughout the roughly four minutes of her closing argument. After this display of childish (if procedurally acceptable) behaviour (the speaker refused a request to tell the opposition to be quiet so that we could hear the Minister), as Prime Minister I made sure that the government side of the house was silent through the closing speech by the Leader of the Opposition.

I was determined not to let the government exhibit such disrespect in a parliamentary session. The vote was a close one, falling exactly along party lines (with the independents all siding with the opposition). The opposition won by two votes, which had seemed mathematically impossible, but it later emerged that at least two government members (who had only arrived that day) were outside the room during the vote sleeping off the effects of travelling from central Africa.

With the day’s parliamentary sessions over, we were invited to a reception at Speaker’s House, hosted by Linday Hoyle MP, Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons. The house is exquisite, and it was a great chance to meet with and talk to some of the

members of the House of Lords and the CPA who attended.

The programme for Friday opened with a chance for the ministerial teams to take a wellearned break, as backbenchers and independents made up two parliamentary select committees, on sport and youth unemployment.

Each committee interviewed three independent experts, with thorough and direct questioning from all members. This was followed by a short opportunity to meet the Commonwealth Diaspora Parliamentarians, youth representatives of Commonwealth communities in the U.K. who were joining us for the afternoon session in the House of Lords. This was followed by a full three-course lunch in the members’ dining room.

The afternoon session was the one we’d all been waiting for – a once in a lifetime opportunity to debate in the House of Lords Chamber. The topic was climate change, and as Prime Minister I was tasked with introducing an ambitious motion to reduce Commonwealthland’s carbon emissions by 100 per cent by 2050. The chance to stand at the dispatch box in the House of Lords was an incredible experience that will remain with me for the rest of my life.

Rather than opposing the motion outright, the opposition, as the centre-left party, argued that the cuts should be made by 2040.

It was a non-whipped debate, with delegates able to speak freely either for or against the motion.

Whilst both front bench teams certainly engaged in political jibes and point scoring, they both argued broadly in favour, leaving it primarily to backbenchers and independents to speak against.

This created a lively and wellinformed debate, with good use of evidence and a very high standard of debate on all sides. In the vote, the motion passed and the government won, helped in part by the opposition front bench voting in favour.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 333

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:37 Page 334

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

LEAVING A LEGACY OF PROGRESS Ms Alisha Ally.

Being an ambassador is one of the greatest honors that can be bestowed on any individual. For me, it was an undeniable privilege to be selected to attend the fourth Commonwealth Youth Parliament in London this past September.

Credit must be given to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association for trying to encompass a holistic program however, as with all things, improvements can be made. It was interesting to interact with delegates from Commonwealth member states. Hearing their tales opened my eyes to the stark political reality facing nations around the globe. To my dismay, in some member states youth parliaments had either not been establish or are taken for granted.

In speaking to the CPA Secretary General Dr William Shija, he made it a point to commend the St Lucia Youth Parliament for its progress and foresight and conveyed his hopes for its betterment. I had not given enough credence to the organizers of my domestic youth parliament for the extensive training and mentoring in parliamentary decorum and public speaking preceding our annual chamber debates. As such, it was my goal upon my return to St Lucia to publicly acknowledge their efforts through a newspaper article.

In my naivety I had expected all the member countries to be on equal footing but sadly I was disappointed. Some of my

334 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

colleagues had no grasp of parliamentary procedures nor were some equipped to speak publicly far less debate in a parliamentary setting. Additionally, it was quite disconcerting to witness in the midst of a quick paced debate that some delegates had to resort to writing out their responses and reading it as if we were in a school exercise. Had those delegates been disadvantage by having English as their second language then I would not have been so taken aback. Surprisingly, it was English-speaking delegates who were guilty of such. Though we were all given strict instructions before our arrival in London that CYP was “not a reading exercise,” it appeared that organizers who were present did nothing to ensure this criteria was met.

On the brighter side, the exercises leading up to the House of Lords debate served as an icebreaker and ignited a fruitful debate on policy, bills and motions.

The guest speakers and moderators gave a unique insight and shared their vast knowledge with us. As the week came to a close, our fictional country, Commonwealthland, had a functional parliament, economic policies and environmental objectives.

CYPs were thrown for a loop when, on Friday at the House of Lords debate, Commonwealth Diaspora Youth Parliamentarians were introduced in the mix. They were oblivious to the progress

Ms Aisha Ally

CYPs had made in the days preceding the debate and raised justifiable concerns during their presentations which were, unfortunately, already addressed by the CYPs in previous sessions and to a degree, it defeated the purpose of the House of Lords debate. The Diaspora parliamentarians were under the impression the debate had to do with Commonwealth member states as opposed to an imaginary country. The ultimate conclusion of the debate on the motion “To eradicate carbon emissions [in Commonwealthland] by 100% by 2050” was that the opposition, government and independent CYPs voted in favor of the proposal because it was the least extreme, sorry to say, of the arguments presented. The opposition proposed reducing carbon emissions by 100% by 2040 while an independent delegate completely opposed the motion because “the larger countries caused greenhouse gas emissions

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:38 Page 335

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

Ms Ally speaking during a debate at the Youth Parliament.

and they should be the ones paying for it.” The independent posited that industrialized countries had over one hundred years to pollute the atmosphere so they should be the ones to clean it up and allow smaller countries to revolutionize without sacrifices. A Diaspora parliamentarian passionately disagreed with the motion because climate change is a myth and well, let’s just say the arguments went off on a tangent from there. Needless to say, we were not all on the same proverbial page.

Though there were some challenges for CYP, it is a fantastic developmental tool which will enable our young people to be empowered through education.

The commitment of staff and organizers to this event should not waiver because of bumps in the road to success. Rather, they should take heart and know that without mistakes, there will be no success.

Having been elected as the

Minister for Development in this forum, I was quite pleased that my colleagues supported my selection to represent them at the Commonwealth Youth Forum in Australia.

I, along with the shadow Minister for Development, Francis Anyaegbu from Nigeria, arrived in Perth for the eighth Commonwealth Youth Forum. The theoretical purpose of such a forum is to be envied and commended for few have an audience with the Commonwealth Heads of Government.

Though CYF serves as a platform for young people, I am in doubt as to whether the young people of the Commonwealth are capable and ready to handle such an opportunity or wield such power.

The execution of CYF does need some revision and the planning committee did as best as they could, dropping the ball in some instances.

The one thing that stood out to me was the bold admittance made

by the Commonwealth Secretariat that some of its structures are not functioning as it was intended, primarily the Regional Youth Caucuses. While we were revising the structure in our groups, we were troubling ourselves with reinventing the wheel as opposed to critically examining the process.

The level of contribution to communiqué was astounding because of the various backgrounds and fields of the contributors. The consensus process was the most grueling of all and it once again highlighted the need for parliamentary education for young people in member states because it was disturbing for me, with my background, that a meeting which claimed to invoke parliamentary proceedings could not be conducted in a manner close to what it was purporting to be. Case in point, many found it difficult to distinguish between a Point of Order and a Point of Clarification.

The shortcomings of CYF were

overridden by the gravity of what we were present to accomplish.

We were helping to plot the future for over 1.2 billion young people from all walks of life. These young people, knowingly or not, were relying on us to look after their best interest and to make rational decisions applicable to their individual situation. To be part of something this important is unimaginable.

Always, I have believed that we were put on this earth to make a difference, in whatever way that we can, and affect at least one person’s life for the better. The Commonwealth has afforded me this opportunity and more. It is my hope that through the Commonwealth Youth Parliament and the Commonwealth Youth Forum that we, as vibrant young men and women of this organization, can make a viable contribution to our future and the generations to follow. I further hope that those who come behind us, find that we were faithful.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 335

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:39 Page 336

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

COMING TOGETHER FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS

Mr Kevin Kadirgamar.

The Fourth Commonwealth Youth Parliament was in many ways a surreal experience. When I received an email from my university asking if I’d like to nominate for an event similar to the Model UN conferences that I organise on campus, little did I know that I was going in for an experience of a lifetime. As I came to know that it was the Commonwealth Youth Parliament that I was being nominated for, I did not quite know what to expect. As our departure from Australia drew nearer, I became more aware of the significance of the event that I was soon to participate in, together with my fellow delegate, Amy Robinson.

We shared an overwhelming sense that this was an opportunity not to be taken lightly. It was a unique privilege to represent the Northern Territory of Australia on the world stage, and we were keen to learn and prepare as much as possible before taking onto the House of Lords. In a simulation bringing together young people from all over the Commonwealth, this was going to be the ultimate hands-on experience at parliamentary democracy and debate on the most pressing issues for our generation.

The Fourth Commonwealth Youth Parliament turned out to be

336 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

much more than a mere simulation.

It was a most invaluable opportunity to interact with some remarkable young leaders of the Commonwealth, and be in the heart of the origins of the renowned Westminster parliamentary system. We were able to learn more about the Commonwealth itself and most importantly, be part of strengthening the common bond that is shared across the member nations.

The vibrant atmosphere that we were going to be part of over the week was evident from day one.

The welcome reception with a room full of passionate, intelligent Young Parliamentarians from far and wide gave off a special vibe.

We were soon bunched up in circles, sharing insights into matters concerning our nations, and the successes and failures of the different political systems. It was truly the world in union, with a helpful ignorance of the different colours of our lanyards which were soon to separate us into rival political groups.

It was not long before the realities of the political system kicked in. The very next day, we met in our party groups to elect cabinet positions and got fully immersed in putting forward ideas on issues like provision of free

Mr Kevin Kadirgamar

education, youth unemployment, and of course climate change which was going to be our main topic. Days and nights merged together as we began strategising ways to make our political ideologies come into fruition.

The CYP was structured in such a way that we were able to gain a full rounded practical experience of parliament in action. Starting with preliminary debate on the Throne Speech from our ‘Head of State’ to the intricate discussions in the Committee of the Whole, to the vibrant question time, I could see I was on a steep learning curve without even realising it.

All that I gained from the CYP was not limited to the parliamentary simulations alone. In fact, I now resonate with what we were told repeatedly by guest speakers: the most important and

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:40 Page 337

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

The Secretary-General of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija (left), handing Mr Kadirgamar (right) his certificate from the event.

memorable aspect of such an event is always the opportunity to network and build relationships with a range of remarkable people.

In meeting and getting to know my fellow delegates, I realised that although we came from diverse backgrounds, there was an inherent commonality in the level of interest we shared for the future of our respective nations. As I listened to the stories and insights of my colleagues, it was clear that there were so many common threads in the issues facing the different corners of the world – whether it be climate change, education, or political corruption. It retrenched my belief that the best and only way to find effective and lasting solutions is to work together in partnership. I came to realise the importance of the strong network that the Commonwealth creates in this regard.

The opportunity that we were given to meet outstanding figures such as the Deputy Secretary General, the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Lord Speaker certainly added on to our experience. I certainly gained some invaluable insights into the work of the Commonwealth and the limitations within which the work must be done.

There was also something special about being in and around the heart of democracy at the Palace of Westminster. The culmination of the CYP together with the Commonwealth Diaspora Parliamentarians at the breathtaking surroundings of the House of Lords was without question one of the most memorable experiences. The honour of being amongst a group of young people who were the fifth in history to be allowed to sit in the honourable House is one that

none of us would take lightly, and one that we would cherish for a very long time.

Although it has been a good two months since we departed London, I still hold vivid memories of our time at the CYP. At the conclusion of the proceedings, when we had fully adapted to our roles as ‘Parliamentarians’ over the week, it was time to face the real world. There was a sudden realisation that the amendments, Bills and Resolutions we formulated and passed would stop here.

The fictitious nature of “Commonwealthland’ towards which we had developed a certain level of patriotism began to dawn on us. However, these were only the means through which we gained an invaluable experience to carry with us forever. We all returned to the real world, fully equipped with knowledge, skills

and renewed enthusiasm to pass on to our peers at home. In those jam-packed few days, the CYP not only gave me an in-depth understanding of the procedural parliamentary system, but also of the intricacies involved in creating positive change at the legislative level.

This would benefit greatly in the youth-led community and advocacy projects and workshops I am involved with, and will definitely help me in my own career progression. But as with all great conferences, I have to say it is the networks and friendships that we forged that remain the most valuable. Our parliamentary colleagues from CYP do not simply boost our facebook network numbers. They will always remain valuable connections, ensuring that the solidarity amongst Commonwealth nations is well maintained in our generation.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 337

Book ad - Parliamentary African Reform:Different Ads.qxd 12/01/2012 15:29 Page 338

Available to Members and Officials of the CPA for purchase from the CPA•Secretariat, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, U.K. Tel.: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 E-mail: hq.sec@cpahq.org Also available to members of the public from booksellers.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:41 Page 339

Parliamentary Report NEWS AND LEGISLATION FROM COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTS INDIA: The Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Violation) Bill, 2010 Page 343

AUSTRALIA: Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Amendment Act 2011 Page 349

AUSTRALIA: Customs Amendment (Antidumping Improvements) Act 2011 Page 350

NEW ZEALAND: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill Page 354

REMEMBERING A PARTY LEADER Page 345

MEMBERS PROTEST AGAINST PRICE RISE Page 340

RESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

TWO RECALLS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS Page 356

Page 347

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 339

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:50 Page 340

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

INDIA

MEMBERS PROTEST AGAINST PRICE RISE The Eighth Session of the Lok Sabha began on 1 August 2011 and concluded on 8 September. The Session experienced heated moments on issues like price rise, corruption and Lokpal (Ombudsman). The House faced disruptions as the opposition parties insisted on discussing the price rise issue under a rule that entails voting.

Later, it was decided to adopt a motion urging the government to take immediate and effective measures to curb inflation to give relief to the common man.

The Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Smt. Meira Kumar, MP, admitted a motion under rule 189 as under: “That despite repeated discussions on price rise in the House, the burden of price rise on the common man is continuing. Expressing deep concern over price rise, this House calls upon the government to take immediate effective steps to check inflation that will give relief to the common man.”

On 3 August, the senior BJP member and former Finance Minister, Shri Yashwant Sinha moved the motion followed by Shri Gurudas Dasgupta (CPI) who moved an amendment to the motion. Initiating the debate, Shri Sinha alleged that the government took no concrete steps to prepare a comprehensive food pricing and management policy despite the recommendations 340 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Smt. Meira Kumar, MP

made by the Standing Committee in 2009. When the government godowns were full of food grains, the government should have used this stock to keep the prices under control but it was not done due to the fear that it might increase the fiscal deficit. He was against any such growth that would lead to price rise and asked the government to promote investment in order to produce goods and services and stop forward trading if it was responsible for price rises. Shri Sinha alleged that the government which was reelected had allowed the profiteers and hoarders to make money from common man. Refuting the charges, the Minister of Law and Justice and Minister of Minority Affairs, Shri Salman Khurshid (INC), said that high inflation was a global phenomenon and referred to several government schemes like the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, the National Rural Health

Mission, Health Insurance Scheme, Indira Awas Yojana, Right to Education Act, etc. He informed that the government had provided five million tonnes of food grains to people living above the poverty line, five million tonnes to those living below the poverty line, and a further five million tonnes in reserve. The government did not believe in the theory of growth at any rate but the fact remained that the country could not march forward without growth, asserted Shri Khurshid.

The senior JD-U member, Shri Sharad Yadav advised the government to focus more on inclusive growth than on achieving high GDP. Referring to the various schemes launched by the government for the benefit of poor he said all these schemes had failed to make any major difference in the lives of the poor. He asked the government to concentrate on providing irrigation facilities to farmers. Shri Shailendra Kumar (SP) said the government still had not framed any clear cut policy to combat inflation. Demanding that the levies imposed by the centre and the state governments on the petroleum products be brought down, he voiced Shri Yadav’s opinion that the government provide irrigation facilities to the farmers for gratis, strengthen the public distribution system (PDS) and bring to an end the

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:50 Page 341

INDIA

role of middlemen and black money. Shri T.K.S. Elangovan (DMK) proposed that the government should adopt the universal PDS system as in vogue in the state of Tamil Nadu for providing food grains to the people at a reasonable rate and initiate firm steps against the middlemen. Shri P. Karunakaran (CPI-M) attributed the price rise to the

Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, MP failure of the government, the international trade in food items and the speculative future trading in agricultural commodities. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab (BJD) said inflation had eroded the purchasing power of money while the government was facing problem of mismanagement and lack of governance in controlling the runaway prices. He stressed that reform and de-regulation across the board were needed to solve the supply side crisis that was fuelling India’s inflation. Shri Anant Gangaram Geete (Shiv Sena) said millions of people, especially the poor were bearing the brunt of price rises and the government should give them relief.

Shri Dasgupta said inflation had pushed five per cent of people below the poverty line.

Dissatisfied with the resolution to be adopted by the House that did not include the failure of the government, he said a message must go that the

Parliament was really concerned and stated that the government lacked political will to curb price rises. Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh (RJD) said the decrease in the prices of luxury items and increase in the prices of the essential goods showed that the policies of the government were anti-poor. He suggested for bringing in a law under which the prices of the foodgrains would not be allowed to be increased or decreased more than 20 per cent in a year. Dr K.S. Rao (INC) asked for banning future trading in food grains and allowing export of surplus rice to give a better price to the farmers.

Shri Manohar Tirkey (RSP) was worried as the people were losing faith in Parliament and government due to the ever increasing price rise. He wanted the government to take action against the middle men who were making profits at the cost of the producers and the consumers. Shri A. Sampath (CPI-M) demanded for banning the forward trading in food articles as it had led to hoarding and black marketing, while Shri M.B. Rajesh (CPI-M) blamed the future trading, lack of purchasing power, mindless hikes in the petroleum prices and the neglect of agriculture for continued price rises. Shri Gorakhnath Pandey (BSP) requested the government to get a proper survey of the genuine below poverty families so as to help them financially.

Shri Prasanta Kumar Majumdar (RSP) asked the government to change its economic and fiscal policies to control inflation and price rise while Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey (BJP) requested the government to take effective steps to save the country from a situation of economic emergency.

Replying to the debate on 4 August 2011, the Leader of the Lok Sabha and the Finance Minister, Shri Pranab Mukherjee attributed price rises to external factors. He said that the government was working to moderate food inflation without sacrificing growth. Giving details of various steps taken by the government to rein in on inflation, he dismissed the opposition's charge that inflation was due to high growth rates. Stating that food inflation was the result of the mismatch between supply and demand, he said the country needed to create more investment opportunities and generate more employment.

He however said that the recent hike in the prices of diesel and cooking gas was marginal keeping in view the global crude oil prices on which the government had no control.

Stating that the prices of food items had increased due to the substantial increase in the minimum support price of food grains, the Finance Minister assured that the government had enough food stocks to cater to the needs of the vulnerable sections.

Shri Yashwant Sinha who initiated the debate was disappointed that the Finance Ministers did not announce any measures to curb the rising prices. The House, after a discussion of over seven hours rejected the amendment moved by Shri Dasgupta and adopted the resolution expressing concern over the price rise and its burden on the common man. The resolution called upon the government to take immediate effective steps to check inflation for giving relief to the Indian people.

Demand for a strong Ombudsman Another issue that dominated

the Monsoon Session was the demand made by the civil society groups led by the social activist, Shri Anna Hazare, for the enactment of a strong and effective Lokpal Bill. Following an agitation launched by Shri Hazare in April 2011, the government had constituted a Joint Drafting Committee (JDC) consisting of the representatives of Shri Hazare and the union government to prepare a draft of the Lokpal Bill. Even after several meetings of the JDC, there remained many areas of differences. In the meanwhile, the government introduced the Lokpal Bill, 2011 in the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2011 providing for the establishment of the institution of Lokpal (Ombudsman) to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Bill was referred to the Departmentally Related Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law & Justice for examination and report. Not satisfied with the government’s Lokpal Bill, Shri Hazare declared to go on fast from 16 August if their version of the Bill called “Jan Lokpal Bill” was not passed by Parliament by 15 August.

When the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office, Shri V. Narayanasamy, moved the motion for leave to introduce the Lokpal Bill on 4 August, the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, Smt. Sushma Swaraj (BJP) opposed the motion for introduction of the Bill. She wanted to know why the Prime Minister was being kept out of the purview of the Lokpal Bill.

Shri Narayanasamy said the Bill

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 341

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:50 Page 342

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

would go to the Standing Committee and when the House would take it up for discussion, it could decide the issue. Shri Mukherjee said the then NDA government failed to pass the Lokpal Bill even though the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home had presented its report on the Bill.

Smt. Kumar had received notices of adjournment motion from two members regarding the reported agitation by Shri Hazare on 16 August. The Speaker disallowed the notices of adjournment motion observing that the matter, though important enough, did not warrant interruption of business of the House for the day. The Speaker had also received notices of suspension of Question Hour from some Members regarding the fast by Shri Hazare and corruption in the country. She disallowed the demand as there was no provision in the Rules of Procedure under which members could make a demand for suspension of the Question Hour. The Speaker, however, allowed the members who had given notices to very briefly touch upon the subject.

The House was, however, adjourned due to interruptions.

On 17 August, the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh made a statement regarding setting up of Lokpal and certain events including the arrest of Shri Hazare that took place on 16 August in New Delhi. He said notwithstanding the introduction of the Bill, Shri Hazare and his supporters had persisted with their demand that the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted

by Shri Hazare should be introduced in Parliament and passed it.

While agreeing that a Lokpal Bill must be passed as early as possible, the Prime Minister said it was for the Executive to

INDIA

draft a Bill and place it before Parliament. It was the Parliament that was to debate and adopt the Bill with amendments, if necessary. In the process of adoption of the Lokpal Bill, there would be opportunities for Shri Hazare and others to present their views to the Standing Committee to which this Bill had been referred by the Speaker. The Prime Minister said he was not aware of any constitutional philosophy or principle that allowed any one to question the sole prerogative of Parliament to make a law. In making a law on Lokpal, the government had faithfully adhered to the well-settled principles and Shri Hazare was questioning these principles and claimed a right to impose his Jan Lokpal Bill upon Parliament. The path chosen by Shri Hazare to impose his draft of a Bill upon Parliament was totally misconceived and fraught with grave consequences for the parliamentary democracy. He assured the House that the government was determined to provide a government that was transparent, accountable and

Dr Manmohan Singh, MP

responsive at all times and determined to fight corruption.

The elected representatives of the people in Parliament must be allowed to do the job that they were elected for. He

342 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

appealed to all sections of the House to ensure that the government and its processes,

Smt. Sushma Swaraj

and the Parliament and its processes functioned smoothly and effectively.

As soon as the Speaker asked the Leader of the Opposition to initiate the discussion, the Leader of the Opposition requested the presence of Dr Singh as it was he who had made the statement. The discussion started when the Lok Sabha reassembled at 12 noon.

Many opposition members criticized the government for arresting Shri Hazare and shifting the responsibility to the Delhi Police. Raising a discussion on the Prime Minister’s statement, Smt. Swaraj said the government was trying to muzzle the voice of the opposition both outside and inside the House. The country would never forgive the government for the treatment of Shri Hazare.

When the Chair called the Minister of Home Affairs to reply to the discussion, Shri Dasgupta (CPI) raised a point of order. He said since the statement was made by the Prime Minister, as per convention, he should reply to the discussion.

Replying to the debate, the Minister of Home Affairs, Shri P. Chidambaram said there

was a general appreciation that Shri Hazare had taken up a cause that has been neglected

by Parliament for very long. The government genuinely felt that it must engage civil society on this subject. The government invited some members of the civil society and discussed the drafting of the Bill with them. It was done with the genuine and sincere intention of arriving at a Bill that would have the widest consensus. The Minister said that Shri Hazare had an undoubted right to protest at an appropriate place which was agreed to by the Police having regard to the situation. If there was an apprehension that there would be a breach of peace, and if there was an apprehension that there would be disturbance to tranquility, the police could take action and the Police had acted in their best judgment. Parliament alone could make law and if civil society wished to have a role in the making of the law, the government would try to find a way in which civil society could have a role in making the law. Accepting the argument of Shri Hazare that a strong and effective Lokpal bill must be passed, the Minister rejected the argument that only the Jan Lokpal Bill must be passed.

An All Party Meeting held on 24 August to discuss the matter, a resolution was passed unanimously appealing Shri Hazare to end his fast. The resolution called for giving due consideration to the Jan Lokpal Bill so that the final draft of the Bill provided for a strong and effective Lokpal, supported by broad national consensus.

Several opposition parties urged the government to withdraw the Bill already introduced and bring an effective one. Replying to a debate on corruption in the Lok Sabha on 25 August, the Prime Minister announced that the

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:51 Page 343

INDIA

Jan Lokpal Bill along with other documents on the subject prepared by different groups could be debated in the House and at the end of that debate, the whole record could be sent for consideration of the Standing Committee of the Parliament. He believed this would meet the point Shri Hazare and his colleagues had been making that Parliament must have a chance to give its views on their Bill before sending it to the Standing Committee. Dr Singh submitted that this was one via media which would respect the parliamentary supremacy and, at the same time, enable Parliament to take on board ideas contained in the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted by Shri Hazare and his colleagues.

On 27 August Shri Mukherjee made identical statements in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, on

Shri Pranab Mukherjee, MP

the issues relating to setting up of a Lokpal. He called for special focus on the issues of citizen’s charter, setting up of Lokayukatas at state levels and bringing lower bureaucracy under the ambit of the Lokpal, apart from taking up other issues to have an effective and strong Lokpal Bill. The Minister proposed to adopt a resolution by consensus at the end of the debate which might satisfy Shri Hazare, brightening the

prospects of breaking his fast, which had entered its 12th day.

Initiating the discussion on Shri Mukherjee’s statement,

Smt. Swaraj argued for bringing the Prime Minister under the

THIRD READING: INDIA The Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Violation) Bill, 2010 The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 was enacted, inter alia, to provide for the establishment of a Board to protect the interests of investors in securities and to promote the development of, and to regulate, the securities market and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

The Insurance Act, 1938, inter alia, contains the law relating to the business of Insurance and the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 was enacted, inter alia, to provide for the establishment of an authority to protect the interests of holders of insurance policies, to regulate,, promote and ensure orderly growth of the insurance industry and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

In order to clear uncertainties on the differences of opinion relating to jurisdiction of the securities market regulator, i.e., the SEBI and the insurance regulator, i.e., the IRDA it had become necessary to clarify that the “life insurance business” also include any unit linked insurance policy and accordingly to amend the Insurance Act, 1938, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 and the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 for the purpose.

In order to address the differences of opinion among certain statutory regulators which might arise in future, it was felt necessary to set up a joint mechanism, consisting of the Union Finance Minister as its Chairperson, and Governor, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Finance Secretary, Secretary (Financial Services) and chairpersons of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) as its members, for resolving future differences of opinion as to whether any hybrid or composite instrument, having a component of insurance or any other investment or securities market instrument or a component of money market falls within the jurisdiction of the IRDA or SEBI or RBI or PFRDA. As both Houses of Parliament were not in session and immediate action was required to be

taken, the President in terms of provisions under article 123 of the Constitution promulgated the Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2010 in June, 2010 to achieve the above objectives.

The Government of India brought forward the Ordinance replacing the Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Validation). Provisions of the Ordinance replacing Amending Bill included: •

•

•

The amending Bill inserted a new chapter III E in the Reserve Bank of India, Act 1934 with the following new provisions relating to joint mechanism: Notwithstanding anything contained in the RBI Act, or the SEBI or any other law, in the event of emerging of any difference of opinion as to whether (i) any instrument being derivative , money market instrument, repo, or reverse repo; (ii) any instrument being policy of Life Insurance Act, 1938-is hybrid or composite instrument, having component money market investment or securities market instrument and falls with in the jurisdiction of RBI or any other financial or stock related legislations, such difference of opinion has to be referred to a joint Committee for resolution.

Such joint committee would comprise of the Union Finance Minister as ex-officer Chairperson, in the Governor, RBI, Secretaries Department of Economic Affairs and Department of Financial Services; Chairperson, Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, The Chairman, SEBI; and the chairperson, Pension Fund.

The Bill was passed by Lok Sabha on 2 August 2010 and by Rajya Sabha on 9 August 2010. The Bill as passed by both the Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 20 August 2010.

Consequently the Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance 2010 stood repeated.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 343

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:51 Page 344

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

purview of the Lokpal with two exceptions – the national security and public order.

Instead of bringing the Judiciary under the Lokpal, she suggested for setting up a national judicial commission with power to formulate the modalities of appointment and retirement of judges. The anti corruption wing of the Central

Smt. Sushma Swaraj, MP

Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should be brought under the Lokpal. Smt. Swaraj said that the selection body for appointment of Lokpal should not be dominated by the government and proposed to include more members from outside.

She believed both the Lokpal and Lokayukta could be constituted through a single act. Smt. Swaraj registered the consent of her party on all the three points raised by the Leader of the House.

Shri Sandeep Dikshit (INC) said the opinion of the House, constitutional experts and public at large should also be taken into account in order to constitute a strong Lokpal. Shri Dara Singh Chauhan (BSP) said whatever form the Lokpal Bill might take, it would not be able to deliver justice unless it took care of the poor, dalits, backward and the minorities.

Participating in the debate, Shri Elangovan supported the demand for including the Prime

INDIA

Minister within the purview of the Lokpal. On the issue of Lokayukta, he urged the House not to do anything that would militate against the autonomy of the states. Shri Basudeb Acharia (CPI-M) believed the agitation for a strong Lokpal was a reflection of the anger of the people against corruption.

He said the policies formulated and pursued by successive governments and the lack of an institutional mechanism to investigate and prosecute were responsible for the alarming rise in corruption. Shri Acharia wanted a provision in the Lokpal Bill for taking action against companies and business houses that indulged in corrupt practices in their dealings with public servants.

Shri Jose K. Mani (KC-M) believed that inclusion of the Prime Minister in the ambit of Lokpal Bill could lead to constitutional crises. Regarding Lokayukta, the centre should only draft a model legislation which could then be enacted and implemented by each state. For effective and transparent governance, it was necessary to include the lower level employees under the Bill, he asserted.

Sk. Saidul Haque (CPI-M) asked the government to withdraw the Lokpal Bill and introduce a new bill

Shri Anand Sharma, MP

incorporating the suggestions from the Jan Lokpal Bill and

344 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

others. He said the Prime Minister must be included in its ambit with adequate safeguards.

While Dr Kirit Premjibhai Solanki (BJP) asked for enacting a strong and effective Lokpal Bill based on Hazare’s Jan Lokpal Bill, Shri S.S. Ramasubbu (INC) was against bringing the Prime Minister under the purview of Lokpal.

Dr K.L. Meena (Independent) while supporting the demand for an effective Lokpal, suggested for giving due consideration to the accountability aspect and its compatibility with the federal character of the Indian polity.

Shri Anto Antony (INC) was concerned that the Jan Lokpal Bill might create a body which was not responsible to anyone in this country. He said democracy should not be sacrificed in the pretext of eliminating corruption. Shri Hansraj G. Ahir (BJP) urged the House to pass a unanimous resolution for creating an independent and strong mechanism to eliminate corruption.

Shri Dasgupta said Parliament should send a message that it was not oblivious of its responsibilities and the enactment of the Lokpal was the beginning and not the last step in fighting corruption. He promoted respecting rights of the states in the Indian federal structure.

Shri Lalu Prasad (RJD) said all the members of Parliament were united against corruption and they would do everything to protect the supremacy of Parliament as well as Constitution of India. Shri H.D. Devegowda (JD-S) said after the economic reforms of 1991 corruption had increased simultaneously with the GDP growth. The corporate houses were one of the breeding centers for corruption.

The Minister of Commerce

and Industry and the Minister of Textiles, Shri Anand Sharma and Shri Maheshwar Hazari (JD-U) said the functions and activities of judiciary, the executive, any organization in the country, NGOs, large corporate houses, media and all professions bodies should be strictly monitored. Smt. Seema Upadhyay (BSP) wanted proper representation for the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes and minority communities in the composition of the Lokpal.

Dr Mirza Mehboob Beg (J&K NC) said nothing should be done to diminish the existing vibrant parliamentary system while putting in place an effective legislation to fight corruption.

Replying to the debate, Shri Mukherjee said the Bill would be subjected to the scrutiny of the Standing Committee and the House.

If the House would decide to include the Prime Minister or delete any provision or bring an amendment to strengthen it, it was free to do so. As the Monsoon Session was starting from 1 August, it was difficult for the government to have the Lokpal Bill passed by 15 August as demanded by Hazare’s team, said the Minister.

The Leader of the House requested the Speaker to transmit the proceedings to the Departmentally Related Standing Committee for its perusal while formulating its recommendations for a Lokpal Bill. In the absence of any rules with regard to sending the proceedings of a sitting of the House to a Departmentally Related Standing Committee, this was the first such instance wherein the proceedings were sent to a Committee for its consideration. Following this, Shri Hazare ended his fast on 28 August 2011.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:52 Page 345

CANADA

REMEMBERING A PARTY LEADER

Hon. Jack Layton

On 25 July 2011, Hon. Jack Layton, Leader of the New Democratic Party and Leader of the Official Opposition, stepped down temporarily from his position for health reasons. Mr Layton had been treated for prostate cancer earlier in the year and had also undergone hip surgery shortly before the 2 May 2011 general election. At the time, it had been announced that Mr Layton’s absence from politics would be for a short period and that he would be at the helm of his party when the House of Commons resumed its work following the 2011 summer recess. Mr Layton, however, died on 22 August.

Born in Montreal, in the province of Québec, and son of Robert Layton, a cabinet Minister during the Conservative government of Rt Hon. Brian Mulroney, Jack Layton began his political career as a city councillor for the City of Toronto, Ontario, where he was an outspoken

advocate for social causes. In 1991, he unsuccessfully ran for mayor of Toronto. In 2003, he was elected as the Leader of the New Democratic Party on the first ballot. Under his charismatic leadership, an unprecedented number of candidates of the New Democratic Party were elected to the House of Commons. The party went from 13 seats in 2001 to 103 seats in 2011, with 59 of them elected in the province of Québec, a province where the New Democrats had traditionally been unsuccessful in the past. The 103 elected Members of the House of Commons made the New Democratic Party the Official Opposition and a possible government-in-waiting for Canada.

Shortly after Mr Layton’s passing, it was announced that the Canadian government had offered a state funeral to his family, an honour not usually devoted to Leaders of the

Rt Hon. Brian Mulroney

Opposition. On his death bed, Mr Layton wrote a letter to

Mr Brian Topp

Canadians that concluded: “My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear.

Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.”

New Democratic Party leadership race Before stepping down “temporarily” as Leader of the New Democratic Party, Mr Layton had recommended that Ms Nycole Turmel, MP, step in as interim Leader, a choice later endorsed unanimously by the NDP caucus. Ms Turmel, a retired career trade unionist and President of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (the largest union in the Canadian public sector) from 2000 to 2006, was first elected to the House of Commons in 2011.

Ms Turmel will lead the inexperienced New Democrats

(more than half of their Members were first elected in May 2011) until the leadership convention scheduled for 24 March 2012.

Shortly after Mr Layton’s death, Mr Brian Topp, President of the New Democrats and former senior political advisor and campaign director for Jack Layton, announced that he would be a candidate in the leadership race.

Mr Topp, who has never been elected to public office, has nonetheless received endorsement from the establishment of the party, notably from former Leader Hon. Ed Broadbent. The other major contender in this race is Mr Thomas Mulcair. A former Québec cabinet Minister and former Member of the Quebec National Assembly, Mr Mulcair was first elected to the House of Commons in a by-election in 2007. Mr Mulcair Achilles’ heel in this race is that the New Democratic Party was almost non-existent in Québec, his home province, before the general elections held in May 2011.

Despite their electoral success in that election (the party won 59 of 75 available seats in the province), the political party has few active supporters with membership cards in that province in comparison with other parts of the country. Québec is also the only province where the New Democratic Party is not present

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 345

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:52 Page 346

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

at the provincial level. Other candidates for the NDP leadership race are: Ms Niki Ashton, MP; Mr Robert Chisholm, MP; Mr Nathan Cullen, MP; Mr Paul Dewar, MP; Ms Peggy Nash, MP; Mr Romeo Saganash, MP, and Mr Martin Singh.

Legislation revived Over the past five years, the Conservative minority government of Rt Hon. Stephen Harper had been unsuccessful in having some of

Rt Hon. Stephen Harper

its legislative reforms adopted as it did not have the support of the opposition.

Now, with a majority of seats in the House of Commons, the Harper government has reintroduced most of these legislative proposals knowing that they will be adopted by Parliament.

Bill C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act, is among the most contested government proposals. This omnibus Bill groups together nine former Bills that had been introduced by the government in the previous Parliament and proposes numerous amendments to the criminal justice system.

It would, among other things, increase the accountability of federal offenders and tighten the rules governing conditional release,

CANADA

while promoting the interests and the role of victims in the correctional process. It would also amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act in a number of ways, namely by emphasizing the importance of protecting society and facilitating the detention of young persons who reoffend or who pose a threat to public safety. During the 2011 election campaign, the Conservative Party had pledged, if re-elected with a majority government, to have this Bill adopted within the first 100 sitting days of the new session.

Another controversial proposal is Bill C-19, the Ending the Long-Gun Registry Act. The Long-Gun Registry has been increasingly unpopular in Western and rural Canada, and previous attempts made by the Conservative government to eliminate it had failed.

Bill C-19 would remove the requirement to register firearms that are not prohibited or restricted. It would, in addition, call for the destruction of all existing data on these types of firearms currently included in the registry.

On the democratic reform front, the government introduced Bill C-21, the Political Loans Accountability Act, for the fourth time. This Bill would establish more stringent rules on loans to political

Hon. Gerry Ritz, MP

346 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

entities and would put in place new reporting requirements.

Another proposal reintroduced by the government is Bill C-20, the Fair Representation Act. On 27 October 2007, the day Bill C20 was first introduced, Hon. Tim Uppal, MP, Minister of State (Democratic Reform) declared in the House of Commons: “The Bill would deliver a principled and reasonable update to our seat allocation formula, providing fair representation for Canadians living in Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta. It delivers on our commitment to maintain the seat counts of smaller provinces and ensure that Québec is proportionately represented.

Canadians rightly expect fair and principled representation in their democratic institutions. The Fair Representation Act would deliver on this expectation.”

The Bill would give additional seats to fastgrowing provinces Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia while ensuring that Québec maintains its proportional representation in the House.

Other legislative proposals reintroduced from previous sessions include the Copyright Modernization Act, and the Safeguarding Canadians' Personal Information Act. Previous attempts made by the Harper government to end the monopoly of the Canadian Wheat Board (a government agency) on the marketing of wheat and barley have failed in the past.

In 2008, the Federal Court of Appeal ruled that the monopoly could not be ended through regulations as the government had then intended to do, but stated that an Act of Parliament was instead required. In the

autumn of 2008, a Bill respecting the Canadian Wheat Board died on the Oder Paper with the dissolution of

Hon. Tim Uppal, MP

Parliament. On 18 October 2011, Hon. Gerry Ritz, MP, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board, reintroduced Bill C-18, the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act. On that day, he said: "The Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act will give Western Canadian grain farmers the right to choose how they sell their wheat and barley. Our government is delivering on our long-standing promise to give Western Canadian grain farmers marketing freedom, just as they have when selling their canola or pulses."

While the Opposition cannot block the adoption of these Bills given its minority status, it has on occasion used all of its available debate time in the House as well as other parliamentary tactics to delay their passage.

The Conservative government has, however, become proactive in using what is referred to in Canadian parliamentary politics as “a motion to allocate time” whereby the House is imposed a limited time to debate a legislative proposal at any given stage.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:53 Page 347

AUSTRALIA

RESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES On 24 November the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Harry Jenkins, MP, in a surprise announcement, resigned as Speaker. Mr Jenkins, the Labor member for Scullin was first elected in 1986. He was elected

Hon. Harry Jenkins, MP

as Speaker following the 2007 Federal Election. In announcing his resignation, he commented that “I have at all times tried to uphold the fine traditions of Speaker, and to the best of my ability have attempted to carry out my duties in the most independent and non-partisan manner possible”. In explaining his reasons for stepping down, Mr Jenkins stated “as members are aware in this the 43rd Parliament, to further avoid controversial party political matters I have divorced myself from involvement with the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party. In this era of minority government I have progressively become frustrated at this stricture. My

desire is to be able to participate in policy and parliamentary debate, and this would be incompatible with continuing in the role of Speaker”.

The Prime Minister, Hon. Julia Gillard, MP, stated that “on all occasions Harry Jenkins, as Speaker of this House, has carried out his duty with honour, with dignity, with a strict non-partisan approach which brought him credit from all sides of the Parliament”. The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Tony Abbott, MP, stated that Mr Jenkins “has been in my judgment one of the very best Speakers to grace the chair of this Parliament. Certainly he is the equal of the best of the Speakers that I have served under in my 18 years in this chamber. As the Prime Minister said just a few moments ago, he was a really outstanding Speaker with a really strong love of the Parliament, which begs the question: why has Speaker Jenkins left the chair?

Just why has this great man with a great love of this chamber and a great love of its traditions, left the chair?” Mr Abbott further commented that “what has happened today is that an honourable man, the member for Scullin, has been sacrificed to protect the political life of a failing Prime Minister. That is what has happened today. He has been made to walk the plank”.

The election for the new

Hon. Peter Slipper, MP

Speaker was conducted a few hours after Mr Jenkins’ resignation. Hon. Mr Peter Slipper, MP, Liberal Member for Fisher, and the current Deputy Speaker, was elected unopposed. His election, however, was not without controversy. Prior to the election of Speaker, Mr Abbott, warned that any coalition member who stood for election of Speaker would need to resign from the coalition. Mr Slipper ignored this advice and tendered his resignation of the Liberal Party. Mr Slipper’s decision has helped strengthen the minority government of the Prime Minister by effectively increasing labor’s vote on the floor of the House of Representatives from the current 75 to 74 votes to 76 to 73 votes. The Speaker of the House of Representatives does not have a deliberative vote but only a casting vote in the event that votes are tied. The government needs only to rely on three crossbench members

instead of the previous four.

The Opposition, in an attempt to avoid a coalition member taking the position of Speaker, nominated various Labor members for the position but all refused the nomination.

The Leader of Opposition Business in the House, Hon. Chris Pyne, MP, stated “that it is utterly unprecedented for the government not to follow the Westminster tradition of nominating one of their own members to be Speaker of the Parliament”. In relation to Mr Jenkins resignation, Mr Pyne stated that “it grieves me that the former Speaker, Mr Jenkins, has retired today as Speaker of this Parliament. I have had a topsy-turvy relationship with the member for Scullin over the period that I have been Manager of Opposition Business, but I think he has always been fair and reasonable. I have sometimes been known to say to him that, if I were him, I would have thrown me out more often than he did!’”

The new Speaker of the House of Representatives placed on record his tribute to Mr Jenkins. Mr Slipper stated “I strongly believe that the Speaker ought to be independent. In this Parliament the Speaker has not attended party room meetings and the Deputy Speaker followed a similar practice. I think we have moved a long way towards an independent Speaker. I will, in

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 347

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:53 Page 348

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

fact, be an independent Speaker in the Westminster tradition. I noticed that on four occasions in September 2010 the Leader of the Opposition said that that was his preference as far as a model for the Speakership is concerned.

Consequently, after 17 years membership of the National Party, 19 years membership of the Liberal Party and three years membership of the Liberal National Party, I will be relinquishing my party membership.”

Address by President Obama to the Australian Parliament On 17 November 2011 the President of the United States, Rt Hon. Barack Obama, addressed a joint meeting of the Australian Parliament.

Previous Presidents who have addressed the Australian Parliament include President George Bush in 1992, President Clinton in 1996 and President George W Bush in 2003.

The joint meeting conducted in the House of Representatives chamber included Senators and Members. Mr Obama began by noting the “honour of standing in this great chamber to reaffirm the bonds between the United States and the Commonwealth of Australia, two of the world's oldest democracies and two of the world's oldest friends”. The President noted the enduring friendship and similarities between the two countries focusing on the successes and challenges that each country has experienced. Mr Obama commented that “this solidarity has sustained us through a difficult decade. We will never forget the attacks of 9-11 that took the lives of not only Americans but people from many nations, including Australia. In the United States,

AUSTRALIA

we will never forget how Australia invoked the ANZUS Treaty for the first time ever, showing that our two nations stood as one; and none of us will ever forget those we have lost to al-Qaeda's terror in the years since, including innocent Australians”.

Mr Obama used the address to outline his foreign policy agenda for the Asia-Pacific region. The President stated that “so here is what this region must know. As we end today's wars, I have directed my national security team to make our presence and mission in

President Barack Obama

the Asia-Pacific a top priority.

As a result, reductions in US defence spending will not—I repeat, will not—come at the expense of the Asia-Pacific. My guidance is clear. As we plan and budget for the future, we will allocate the resources necessary to maintain our strong military presence in this region; we will preserve our unique ability to project power and deter threats to peace; we will keep our commitments, including our treaty obligations to allies like Australia; and we will constantly strengthen our capabilities to meet the needs of the 21st century. Our enduring interests in the region demand our enduring presence in the region. The United States is a Pacific power and we are here to stay”.

348 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

At the same time, Mr Obama noted the role of China in the Asia-Pacific. Mr Obama stated that “the United States will continue our effort to build a cooperative relationship with China. Australia and the United States—all of our nations— have a profound interest in the rise of a peaceful and prosperous China. That is why the United States welcomes it.

We have seen that China can be a partner, from reducing tensions on the Korean peninsula to preventing proliferation. And we will seek more opportunities for cooperation with Beijing, including greater communication between our militaries to promote understanding and avoid miscalculation”.

Australia introduces a carbon pricing scheme On 8 November 2011 the Senate passed the Clean Energy Bill 2011 and related bills. The legislation will place a price on each tonne of greenhouse gases emitted by a business. It is a cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme which will commence on 1 July 2012. For the first three years, the carbon price will be fixed at $23 per tonne, and from 1 July 2015, the price will be determined by the market.

The debate over the government’s decision to introduce a carbon pricing mechanism has been heavily criticised by the opposition which claims the government has no mandate for its introduction. During the Senate debate, Liberal Senator Mathias Cormann commented that “today is the day when Labor senators will lock in their betrayal of the Australian people. Today is the day when each single Labor senator will vote in breach of their solemn promise to the Australian

people before the last election that there would be no carbon tax under the government led

by Julia Gillard. The vote today will haunt every single Labor member and senator all the way to the next election. History will judge Labor members and senators harshly and, before then, the Australian people will judge Labor members and senators harshly at the next election”. Senator Cormann concluded that “people across Australia understand that this is a tax which will push up the cost of everything, which will make Australia less competitive internationally, which will cost jobs, which will result in lower real wages and which will see emissions in Australia continue to go up”.

The Leader of the Nationals in the Senate, Senator Barnaby Joyce stated that “this legislation is the height of foolishness for this nation, which as we speak is a mere $32 billion away from our next debt ceiling. When our nation's credit card is presented, the attendant will say, 'transaction declined; please go see your bank.' It is a very sad day when we start progressing down a path of reorganising our nation and our economy on account of a colourless, odourless gas. It is the height of foolishness”.

The Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Christine Milne stated that “this Parliament is delivering profound environmental, economic and social reform, and I can understand why the coalition, who oppose that environmental, social and economic reform, are behaving as they are. This provides a platform for a higher level of ambition on climate change because, as I was saying, with a planet with seven billion people and accelerated global warning we need to make sure that the platform we are delivering

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:54 Page 349

AUSTRALIA

today has the capacity for upward flexibility so that we can do more”. The Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Bob Brown commented that “it is a great day for Australia. It is a great day for the Barrier Reef, for the Murray-Darling Basin, for Ningaloo, for Kakadu and for this nation's future, and it is a great day for this planet Earth, upon which we all depend and which gives us inspiration, which gives us joy, which gives us happiness and which today we are acknowledging we must return something to”.

The Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Sen. the Hon Penny Wong, MP stated that “today marks the beginning of Australia's clean energy future and in a few moments we will commence voting on a package that delivers for future generations of Australians. This is a historic moment. This is a historic reform, a reform long overdue, a reform which represents a clear divide in politics in this country between those who look to the future and those who are mired in the fear campaigns of today, those who speak to hope and optimism and those who want to drum up fear, those who want action on climate change and those who simply want to deny and oppose. We on this side accept the science. We accept the need to act. We also, like John Howard and Mr Turnbull, accept the advice of economists and accept that putting a price on carbon is the most efficient mechanism to reduce emissions”.

Senate Budget Estimates The Senate Budget Estimates conducted between 17-20 October provided another opportunity for Senators to scrutinize executive government over its performance. The Senate Economics committee, for

example, scrutinized treasury officials over the dangers to the Australian economy posed by the European debt crisis.

Senator Cormann sought advice about the risks to the budget of the debt crisis. The treasury noted that the crisis which originated in Greece has spread to other countries including Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain. Treasury noted that

in recent days, “both France and Belgium have also seen their funding costs increase from much lower bases, of course”. In relation to the risks to the Australian budget, treasury commented that “there is no question that, were the sovereign debt crisis in Europe to play out and were these problems not dealt with comprehensively by Europe,

that would have serious implications for the global economy and the Australian economy”.

Senator Cormann, however, sought detailed information on how the Australian budget will be impacted on in 2011-12 and 2012-13. At this point, Senator Wong commented that “if you are asking the officials to update the budget figures, that

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Amendment Act 2011 The legislation updates and modernises the operation of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986. The Special Minister of State, Hon. Gary Gray, MP, advised that the act “was originally drafted in response to the Royal Commission on Intelligence and Security conducted by the Honourable Justice Robert Hope in 1983, which raised, amongst various issues, concerns about the capacity of ministers to control effectively some Australian Intelligence Community (AIC) agencies”.

Currently, the act allows the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) to undertake preliminary inquiries, but only where a complaint is made to the office.’ The amending legislation will widen the scope to allow the IGIS to undertake preliminary inquiries. The Special Minister of State commented that “the ability to undertake a preliminary inquiry in response to a complaint provides the IGIS with an efficient and cost-effective mechanism to ask an agency for information about a matter, without having to allocate resources to conduct a full investigation”.

The legislation addresses a further anomaly in that currently, the IGIS on his or her own motion can conduct inquiries into the effectiveness and appropriateness of the procedures of an agency relating to illegality or propriety of the agency. This power only applies to the Office of National Assessments, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, and the Defence Intelligence Organisation. The legislation will ensure that the IGIS can apply the same approach to the other three intelligence agencies including the Defence Imagery

and Geospatial Organisation, the Defence Signals Directorate, and the Australian Secret Intelligence Service.

The legislation does not currently provide for the IGIS to delegate his or her functions. Therefore, the IGIS must personally exercise the powers of the office which can limit the number of inquiries that can be conducted at any one time. The legislation “allows for the engagement of a suitable person to conduct a major inquiry with access to the full range of powers under the act”.

In addition to these measures, the legislation also “provides the IGIS with the capacity to assist royal commissions at the discretion of the government of the day, while ensuring the effective operation of limitations on any unauthorised release of sensitive intelligence material by current or former IGIS officers to a court, coronial inquiry or royal commission”.

The legislation was referred to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee.

The committee recommended that the “IGIS Act be amended to include a provision stating that an annual report prepared under subsection 35(1) of the Act must include comments on any matters arising during that year relating to the employment of and delegation of powers to individuals under proposed sections 32 and 32AA of the Act”. This recommendation was agreed to by the Senate.

The Shadow Attorney-General, Sen. the Hon. George Brandis, noted that “the act was drafted with the view to ensuring the powers of the IGIS to get highly sensitive information would continue to be very closely held”. Senator Brandis concluded that “the coalition is satisfied that the appropriate safeguards have been preserved, and for that reason we support the bill”.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 349

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:54 Page 350

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

AUSTRALIA

will be done in the normal way in the mid-year review. In relation to the 2010-11 impact, you will see—and I am sure others at this table have far more expertise than I have on this—that there remains a $40 billion write-down, or less revenue, in that year than was forecast by treasury over the forward estimates period, dating from the precrisis forecast. We are still seeing revenues being hit as a result of what has occurred in the global economy over the last years, as

evidenced in the final budget outcome”.

On the domestic front, a great deal of attention was directed to the evidence of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Mr Allan Asher. At the May 2011 Budget Estimates, Mr Asher provided suggested questions to Australian Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young for her to ask Mr Asher. At the start of his evidence during the October Senate Budget Estimates, Mr Asher apologised for this conduct. Mr Asher stated that

“this was an error of judgement and it was a mistake. I wish to, firstly, apologise to the committee for that. I wish to explain my actions in the context of, firstly, my concerns about the financial state of the Office of the Ombudsman and, secondly, the absence of any specialist parliamentary committee through which the Ombudsman's performance can be assessed or concerns heard”.

Sen. the Hon. John Faulkner questioned Mr Asher

about the potential harm his actions may have brought to the independence of the office of the Ombudsman. Mr Asher responded “no, I do not believe it affects the independence in any way. The information provided, and the questions, were clearly of an administrative character, about the funding and our continued capacity to undertake the work.

In that way, I think that the questions were, in an independent sense, quite neutral”. Senator Faulkner commented that “do you

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Act 2011 The Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Act implements the government’s objective to improve anti-dumping laws. The Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Justice, Hon. Brendan O’Connor, MP, commented that the measures “are the most important changes to Australia's antidumping regime in more than a decade”. The Minister stated that ‘these changes overall will improve the antidumping system's effectiveness and they are vital because, even though our economy is strong, some local industries are vulnerable to dumping”. The legislation introduces four key themes. First, will be the introduction of a time limit on ministerial decision making.

The Minister will make a decision within 30 days of receiving a report or recommendation on which to make a decision. Second, the Minister’s decision making will be improved “by clarifying that all appropriate and relevant factors which may indicate material injury to an Australian industry are specifically listed as factors to which the minister may have regard”.

The third objective of the legislation is to ensure “greater comparability of Australia's anti-dumping system with those of other jurisdictions, and further implement the relevant World Trade Organisation agreements which provide the basis for internationally agreed antidumping rules”. Fourth, the legislation ‘will clarify that parties with a clear interest in antidumping matters are expressly given

350 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

an opportunity to participate in antidumping investigations”.

The Minister concluded that “the government's package of improvements, of which this bill is the first tranche, will provide more certainty for local manufacturers and primary producers resulting in more confidence to invest in the future”.

The Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science, Ms Sophie Mirabella, MP, noted that “this is a day that Australian industry and the coalition has been waiting for a long time—around three years, in fact”. Ms Mirabella noted that the coalition supported the legislation. She was critical, however, of the government’s performance commenting that “we are glad that, dragged kicking and screaming though they may have been, the government have eventually reacted to the combined pressure of the coalition, Senator Xenophon, industry groups, individual businesses and trade unions to make changes such as imposing a time limit of 30 days on ministerial decision making, widening the range of factors available for consideration in the determination of material damage and expanding the list of subsidies against which Australian industries can apply for countervailing duties”.

Ms Mirabella concluded that Labor's changes do represent an improvement, “but you could also be forgiven for being worried that the pursuit of this so-called package of improvements will, at the end of the day, just be another chapter in the long tale of Labor inaction and impotence when it comes to anti-dumping”.

Sen. the Hon. John Faulkner

consider approaching one senator from one political party as opposed to all the membership of a parliamentary committee as something that might raise questions about, firstly, your impartiality and, secondly, the need for you to act in a manner that is unquestionably apolitical?” Mr Asher responded that he was apolitical.

Senator Faulkner noted that an integrity agency such as the Ombudsman should be setting an example for wider public service. Mr Asher, in responding, to the question of whether he has met the high standards required responded that 2I think this was clearly an error in judgment. It was clearly a mistake”. On 20 October 2011 Mr Asher resigned as Ombudsman 14 months into his five year contract.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:55 Page 351

NEW ZEALAND

NEW ZEALAND GENERAL ELECTION 2011 In New Zealand’s general election for the Fiftieth Parliament, on 26 November,

Hon. Phil Goff, MP

with special votes still to be counted the National government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Rt Hon. John Key, was returned on the night with 60 seats, increasing its share from the last Parliament by two. The Labour Party, led by Hon. Phil Goff, MP, registered a loss, going from the 43 seats it held in the last Parliament, to 34. Mr Goff subsequently announced his retirement as leader. This overall result was not a surprise, since all the previous polls had been predicting a similar outcome. Voter turnout, at around 70 percent, was low for a New Zealand election.

The final proportion of seats between the two major parties was likely to change slightly from election night, once special votes were counted. In particular, in the Christchurch

Central electorate, National’s Nicky Wagner and Labour’s Brendan Burns finished on the night tied with 10,493 votes each. The final count for the election was expected to take a further two weeks, with the Electoral Commission aiming to release the official results on 10 December.

Minor parties that emerged with increased strength were the Greens, with 13 seats on the night, up from seven, with the possibility of achieving 14 with the addition of special votes; and Rt Hon. Winston Peters’ MP, New Zealand First Party, which, with 6.8 per cent of the vote, comes back into the House, after three years absence, with eight MPs. The Maori Party lost one Member, returning to

Hon. Peter Dunne, MP

Parliament with three.

Returning to Parliament with one Member each are Hone Harawira’s Mana Party, Hon. Peter Dunne’s United Future, and Hon. John Banks for ACT.

It is in the nature of New Zealand’s MMP (mixedMember proportional) system that one party would very rarely be able to govern without support from others, and even

keeping MMP, and changing to another electoral system-including the possibility of reverting to first past the post.

The preliminary results indicate clear support for MMP’s retention. An independent review by the Electoral Commission will now be held in 2012, to recommend any changes in the way the current system works.

Criminal Procedure Legislation

Hon. Simon Power, MP

with its large share of seats National needs—and looked to be sure of obtaining—sufficient firm support from other parties in order to achieve stable government. Hon. John Key, MP, began negotiations with some of the small parties in the days immediately following the election, in order to finalise the nature of the support for National, in time for Parliament to sit in the week before Christmas. Included on the table for negotiation were possible ministerial posts, and possible compromise agreements on policy matters.

At the same time as the general election, a referendum on the electoral system was held, in which voters were asked to choose between

On 4 October 2011 the Minister of Justice, Hon. Simon Power, MP, moved the third readings of 15 Bills divided from the Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill— legislation that he described as “well overdue”. He explained: “The laws governing criminal procedure are now over 50 years old and well out of date.

Criminal procedure is currently characterized by avoidable delay, excessive complexity, unnecessary cost, and a high reliance on paper-based systems that do not make sense in a modern era increasingly dominated by technology. It is simply unacceptable that it takes an average of 16 months for a High Court case to proceed through the system. This legislation will reduce and streamline victims’ and witnesses’ exposure to the criminal justice system. There will be fewer repeat or

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 351

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:55 Page 352

NEW ZEALAND

unnecessary events, and the use of staff time and courthouse capacity will be optimized to ensure that money is spent more effectively.”

Mr Power also made the point that “efficiency is important, but so is the right to a fair trial. The legislation achieves a careful balance between moving criminal cases through the court system more quickly and protecting the fundamental rights and safeguards that underpin our justice system. Changes made to the legislation by the Justice and Electoral Committee and during the Committee of the whole House stage have clarified beyond doubt that this legislation maintains, and even enhances, fair trial rights and fundamental justice principles”.

The Minister gave as examples of changes the setting of the threshold for trial by jury at offences carrying a term of two years’ imprisonment and

Mr Charles Chauvel

above—instead of three years as originally proposed—and amending “the clause giving the courts the ability to proceed in the absence of a defendant, so that the court’s discretion is limited to proceeding and procedural hearings where no determination of guilt or innocence will be made”.

Mr Charles Chauvel (Labour) agreed that “criminal proceedings need to be sped up. To that extent, it is

appropriate to welcome the legislation”. He also agreed that the legislation was better for the amendments that had been made to it. For instance, Labour had “insisted on recording our objection to the proposal to severely curtail the right to silence. We also objected greatly to the proposal in the Bill that would have made it easier to try people in absentia”.

Mr Chauvel accused the Minister of having a “closed mind on criminal law reform”, having vetoed other suggested changes, and said that the Minister agreed to the changes that were made only because of “raw politics” when other parties decided that Labour’s objections were right, and refused to give the Minister the numbers to pass the legislation without the changes. Mr Chauvel objected that the government had not dealt with the drivers of crime, such as alcohol, and that the substantive law needed to be overhauled, saying that only when this had been done “might one turn to the issues of evidence and procedure that this legislation tinkers with. We will be back in this House in the next term trying to deal with the inefficiencies in the criminal justice system because of the failure of the Minister to follow the Law Society’s advice and to start at the beginning with root and branch reform, rather than in the middle by looking at procedure”.

Dr Kennedy Graham (Green) “paid tribute to Mr Power for his achievement with this legislation…[its] impending adoption…is generally recognized as a seminal moment in New Zealand’s judicial legislation, the kind that occurs every half-century or so”. Dr Graham explained that the Green Party reluctantly had to oppose the legislation because of the defeat of its key

352 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

proposed amendment for the retention of the three month threshold for the right to trial by jury.

The legislation passed by 110 votes to 10, with the Green Party and Mana Party voting against.

Review of Standing Orders On 5 October Hon. Judith Collins, MP, Minister of Police, on behalf of the Acting Leader

Hon. Judith Collins, MP

of the House, Mr Power, moved that the amendments to the Standing Orders in the Report of the Standing Orders Committee should be adopted “from the day after the dissolution or expiration of the present Parliament.” Ms Collins explained that in 2011, because of the election and the Rugby World Cup, there had been only 23 sitting weeks scheduled, compared with 29 and 31 in 2009 and 2010 respectively.

“Although they were entirely appropriate responses, the early adjournments that followed the Pike River [coalmine] disaster and the February [Christchurch] earthquake also resulted in 26 fewer hours of House time— the equivalent of two sitting weeks. So from that perspective, the Acting Leader of the House is very supportive of the committee’s recommendations to allow the government to obtain extra

hours of House time by moving that sitting be extended to a Wednesday or Thursday morning, or by agreement of the Business Committee to a Thursday evening and Friday morning. Although this would not remove the need for urgency from time to time, it would provide a pressure valve for an Order Paper groaning under the weight of a busy government’s agenda. The Acting Leader of the House is also pleased to see the Standing Orders Committee give a more formal recognition to [the taking together of] cognate bills...concerning the Standing Orders Committee recommendation to reinstate the requirement to record and publish Members’ attendance at parliamentary business…Members have an obligation to Parliament and the public to at least attend the House or other parliamentary business, if not actively participate, and the public have a right to know how their elected Members perform in meeting this most basic requirement.”

Hon. Trevor Mallard, MP, (Labour) considered that “…this report...very slightly tips the running of Parliament in favour of the government, but provides some safeguards to that”.

Dr Kennedy Graham

For Dr Graham The recommendations … are good

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:02 Page 353

NEW ZEALAND

enough, as far as they go. That said, we are also of the view that an opportunity has been lost for reforming the institution more thoroughly than the recommendations in this report allow…perhaps the most important [issue] concerns the [adoption of a] code of conduct for Members. The New Zealand Parliament is rated poorly by the public, yet we as Parliamentarians are in denial.”

Valedictory Speeches Towards the end of the 49th Parliament the House heard the valedictory speeches of 15 Members. On 28 September Mr Keith Locke, one of the original Green MPs, said in his speech: “Initially, [the Greens] were dismissed as either utopian dreamers or dangerous extremists. It is much easier now, because public opinion has moved much closer to the Green way of looking at things.” He considered himself “lucky to have been here during the MMP [mixed-Member proportional representation] era, in a much more representative Parliament.

Mr Jim Anderton

Politically, the thing that has most saddened me has been the ease with which legislation giving the police or SIS [Security Intelligence Service] more powers or legislation extending sentences for crimes

passes through this Parliament.

On several issues I have looked more to Scandinavia than the Anglo nations like America, Britain, and Australia. For the last 12 years I have been a Green battler for New Zealand to be more independent in foreign affairs and defence, building on what we have achieved in leaving ANZUS [Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty] and becoming nuclear-free. There is an independent, pioneering spirit within most New Zealanders that grates against subordination to American dictates”.

Mr Jim Anderton (Leader— Progressive), in his speech on 4 October, mentioned his distaste for the old first-pastthe-post electoral system: “It gave me no satisfaction at all to see the [Labour] government we had all worked so hard to elect in 1984 sheet inequality into New Zealand in a way that I could never have envisaged.

That is why I left the Labour Party in 1989 to form the New Labour Party. The promises broken by successive governments…led to the dramatic changes that have taken place in Parliament under MMP. It was no wonder that people rebelled against an electoral system that delivered such outcomes.” Furthermore, “between 1853 and 1984, when I first came to the House, 1,102 MPs had been elected to the New Zealand House of Representatives. Of [that number], 25 were women.

Currently there are 38 women in this Parliament—more than were elected in a total of 131 years under first past the post. I have no doubt that I…made the right decision in joining with others to form New Labour when I did, then taking it into the Alliance with other parties, and, later, when the Alliance was set to become a threat to

an enlightened government rather than a supporter of it, forming the Progressives as a coalition partner for Labour. As I have often said, one bad day in

Hon. Bill English, MP

government is better than a thousand good days in Opposition”.

According to the retiring Minister of Justice, Mr Power, in his valedictory speech on 5 October: “Politicians must have a plan; a plan that is in place early, and one that they are prepared to lead. I believe that politics is 90 per cent preparation and 10 per cent execution. Ideas also matter. In politics ideas matter more than the political players themselves because all of us will come and go, but the ideas will endure…taking a position and selling it, persuading and debating, is what politics is all about. It sounds idealistic and maybe it is, but I always told myself I would leave politics before the idealism left me. I realized that…working with other political parties to reach consensus, where possible, was a legitimate way to advance legislation and to progress an agenda. Not everyone agrees with me on this approach, but I know I am right. It is our job to tackle the tough issues, the issues the public pays us to front up to and come to a view on. There are many, many debates that Parliament does not want to have, for fear of

losing votes or not staying on message: abortion, adoption law, children’s rights, and sexual violence issues. I do not share this timid view. The truth is if we do not have those debates here, where will we have them?”

Adjournment debate The adjournment debate on 6 October 2011 was the final debate of the forty-ninth Parliament. The Deputy Prime Minister, Hon. Bill English, MP, acknowledged the Speaker, Dr The Rt Hon. Lockwood Smith, MP, for his “valiant attempt to make this a place of facts, with more facts and less politics”.

He acknowledged also “the resilience of the people of Christchurch. They have had to put up with the most dreadful of circumstances. On any given day, of course, what is going on in Christchurch now is not

Rt Hon. Lockwood Smith, MP

spectacular, except the days where there are large shakes, but day after day after day they have to put up with the grinding discomforts and uncertainties of a city whose way of life has been fundamentally affected by the earthquake”. The election…will be between a National government that is looking ahead to a better New Zealand, a brighter future driven by the aspiration that New Zealanders have shown, and a Labour Party still looking back with nostalgia to its time

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 353

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:02 Page 354

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

NEW ZEALAND

in government.”

Hon. Annette King, MP,

(Deputy Leader—Labour) gave the National government

a “score card on how it has done over the last three years.

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill The Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill had its first reading on 27 September 2011. The background to the legislation went back several years. In October 2007 a series of armed police raids were carried out in response to the discovery of an alleged paramilitary training camp in the Urewera mountain range, near the town of Ruatoki in the Eastern Bay of Plenty. Guns and ammunition were seized, and 17 people arrested, all but one charged with firearms offences, and all granted bail within a month. According to the police the raids were the culmination of more than a year of surveillance. Search warrants were issued under the Summary Proceedings Act to search for evidence relating to potential breaches of the Terrorism Suppression Act and the Arms Act. On 8 November 2007 the Solicitor-General declined to press charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act, because of the inadequacies of the legislation, describing it as “complex and incoherent”, and “almost impossible to apply to domestic circumstances”.

In September 2011 the Crown dropped the charges for 13 of the 17 defendants after the Supreme Court ruled certain evidence inadmissible.

The remaining four still faced charges of participating in a criminal gang and unlawful possession of a firearm. A 3-2 verdict of the court overturned previous rulings by the High Court and Court of Appeal that cameras installed by the police to record the defendants engaging in military-style training were lawful. However, it found that offending by the remaining defendants was so serious that the evidence collected by the cameras could be used.

The Attorney-General, Hon. Chris Finlayson, MP, speaking on the first reading of the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill, explained that “for the last 17 years the police have used covert video surveillance cameras…to help investigate serious crimes. Contrary to some public comment, the police were…justified in their belief that the use of this surveillance in connection with a search warrant was not unlawful. Last month the

354 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Supreme Court retrospectively altered the law. It ruled that in the absence of specific statutory authorization the use of covert video surveillance amounting to a search, and conducted in tandem with a Summary Proceedings Act search warrant, was unlawful. The decision of the court affects approximately 40 criminal cases now before the courts and at least the same number of current police criminal investigations. The Bill…[preserves] the legal position as it was before 2 September 2011”.

Mr Chauvel complained about the way the legislation was being rushed through, although a “truncated” select committee process would allow some scrutiny of the Bill: “It is a small mercy, but at least it is happening.”

The Bill passed through its remaining stages under urgency on 6 October. In its second reading Mr Chauvel said “the least-worst outcome will be achieved by this legislation. As a result of the select committee process that the government was required to undergo, police will get only the limited powers that they formerly held, for six months only, and Parliament will be prevented from doing something constitutionally repugnant—that is, legislating retrospectively. Labour stood firm and achieved that outcome”.

In the Committee of the whole House stage, Mr Keith Locke (Green) called the Bill “legislation that has been looking for a problem”, and concluded: “there is no reason at all why we could not have gone for another six months under the present system.”

In the third reading Mr Finlayson called the Bill “the result of political parties working together to find a solution to a problem. The Bill we debate today is, to all intents and purposes, the Bill sent to the select committee. The difference is that certain elements of retrospectivity have been removed”.

Hon. Rodney Hide, MP, (ACT Party) said: “We have a patch, we have a fix-up, it is there for six months, and in six months this Parliament will have to come back and fix it. I think that is a great result.”

The Bill passed by 105 votes to 14, with the Green Party, the Maori Party, and Mana voting against it.

I have measured it by three main measures: are we better off; are there more jobs; and does it have a plan to manage the economy”? Ms King concluded: “This government has borrowed 437 billion for no growth. We have 56,000 more unemployed, and National is too timid to tackle the real policies that this country needs.”

Dr Norman described “the recent double downgrade by Standard and Poor’s and Fitch Ratings” as “a vote of no confidence in the government’s management of the economy”. He continued: “We believe that the government has not delivered a plan that seizes the economic opportunities of tomorrow, particularly in the space of the smart Green economy.

“For a decade now the Greens have shown that we can make a change as an independent party in Parliament. The next Parliament, we hope, will be an opportunity for more Green change.

“Our vision is for a New Zealand that is richer in things that matter: strong communities, a beautiful environment, and a clean, green economy that works for everyone. I believe that New Zealand can be this country, and that we can lead the change to a better world.”

The Speaker described the forty-ninth Parliament as “a busy one. You have sat for 1,650 hours, approximately, which is 150 hours more than the forty-eighth Parliament. I must say, though, that a quarter of those hours were under urgency, and I hope that the proposals to our Standing Orders adopted by this House will facilitate less reliance on urgency to advance the legislative programme in the future”.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:03 Page 355

SRI LANKA

ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF MONEY LAUNDERING The Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Bill was presented to Parliament by the Leader of the House and Minister of Irrigation, Hon. Nimal Sripala de Silva, MP, on 8 September 2011. The second reading of the bill was debated and passed with amendments on 21 September 2011 and was certified by the Speaker.

Commencing the Second reading debate, the Minister of Education, Hon. Bandula Gunawardana, MP, stated that money laundering was legalizing black money, and under the directions of the President, a Finance Intelligence Unit was established in the Central Bank.

These amendments would enable the law to take action against terrorist organizations that were collecting funds overseas. These measures would also secure the security of the nation, the national economy and the public.

Dr Harsha de Silva, MP, (UNP) said “a number of fraudulent activities have been reported with regard to the financial businesses in the recent past. It is no use passing these laws in Parliament, if they are not properly implemented by the government. We have experienced that several financial institutions have collapsed in the recent past.

Therefore it is necessary to regulate these institutions by supervising them properly.

There is no point in passing laws if they are not implemented. The government has to expose errant companies to the public. They

should be brought before the law”.

Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekera, MP, (UNP) commented “I appreciate the government for moving timely and important legislation. I am sure that it would be applicable if measures could be taken against the persons involved in the Pramuka Bank racket. The victims of the Pramuka Bank racket and Golden Key racket have not so far been provided with any relief. The share market too has faced a crisis in recent past”.

“Money laundering operates across the borders of sovereign countries. The task of combating it is extremely difficult and requires in-depth research, monitoring and investigation and exchange of financial intelligence information,” stated the Senior Minister for Human Resources DEW Gunasekara in his speech. He further stated that: “the prevention of money laundering brings in amendments to the Act of 2005. These amendments cover persons who commit money laundering while in Sri Lanka and recovery of corresponding value of the properties relating to money laundering and other unlawful activities relating to money laundering.

I must recall here, with deep respect to late Lakshman Kadiragamar the fact that the convention of the Suppression of Terrorist Financing Bill was introduced by him to this House on 7 July 2005. It became an Act, thereafter.

Strangely or ironically, it was the last piece of legislation moved by him.

What is this money laundering? It may be new to us but not so to the developed world. It does take place in our country as well, perhaps most of our people are not aware of it yet. It is a process that disguises illegal income and profits without compromising the criminals who benefit from the proceeds. This process has taken a critical and dangerous dimension under neoliberalism. This represents the ‘Speculative Capital’ which President Fidel Castro has repeatedly warned of as a cause of global financial instability.

The illegally earned funds are moved away from their associations with the crime, i.e. the origin of the funds by channeling them into the financial system. Through the entry into the financial system, the process disguises the trail in order to foil tracing of the origin of the funds. At the final stage of this process, the illegal funds return to the criminals fully assimilated into the legal economy invested in real estates, luxury assets, or business ventures. In brief, this is how the black money or dirty money in the economy operates in an advanced way. It has its own methodology and technology.

Who are these criminals engaged in money laundering?

They are those who are engaged in illegal arm sales, smuggling, organized crimes, drug trafficking, prostitution

rings, embezzlement, insider trading, bribery, corruptions and fraud schemes etc. These monies can be transferred electronically very fast from country to country through legal structures in varying forms. The possible social and political costs of money laundering are serious and alarming. They will weaken the social fabric, ethical standards, and democratic institutions. It may be why terrorists cannot easily be brought into the democratic process.”

Salient features of the amendments include: •

•

•

Applicability of the law has been expanded to cover any person who has committed a money laundering offence while in Sri Lanka; At present offences punishable exceeding seven years imprisonment under any other law has been considered as an offence for money laundering. The threshold of seven years has now been reduced to five years covering more offences punishable under money laundering offence; and Foreign predicate offences are also included as unlawful activities.

The Bill was passed subject to few Committee stage amendments, on 21 September 2011, unanimously since there was an agreement in both the Government and the Opposition with the regard to the amendments therein.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 355

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:04 Page 356

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

UNITED KINGDOM

TWO RECALLS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS Historically, recalls of Parliament during the summer recess have been relatively rare but 2011 saw two such recalls of the House of Commons. The recall of Parliament is initiated by the government and has to be agreed by the Speaker. The first, on 20 July, was to hear a statement from the Prime Minister and debate the issue of phone hacking. The second, on 11 August, was in response to a series of public disturbances that had started in Tottenham, north London, and

Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP

spread across the city and to other English cities. The disturbances had begun following a series of peaceful protests resulting from the shooting by police officers, of a 29-year-old man named Mark Duggan, in Tottenham on 3 August. As the Prime Minister, Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP, (Con) described events to the Commons: “Initially, there were some peaceful demonstrations 356 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

following Mark Duggan’s death and understandably and quite appropriately the police were cautious about how they dealt with them. However, this was then used as an excuse by opportunist thugs in gangs, first in Tottenham itself, then across London and in other cities. It is completely wrong to say there is any justifiable causal link. It is simply preposterous for anyone to suggest that people looting in Tottenham at the weekend, still less three days later in Salford, were in any way doing so because of the death of Mark Duggan. Young people stealing flat-screen televisions and burning shops—that was not about politics or protest, it was about theft.”

Making his statement, the Prime Minister set out a series of actions designed to restore order, repair and restore businesses that had been damaged by the violence and deal with what many Members of the House saw as a deeper issue – the involvement of gangs of young people. The Prime Minister described such gangs as “territorial, hierarchical and incredibly violent” and tasked the Home Secretary with bringing forward “a cross-government programme of action to deal with this gang culture and to report to Parliament in October.”

Responding to the statement, the Leader of the Opposition, Rt Hon. Edward Miliband, MP, (Lab) told the House:

“Whatever we disagree on week by week, month by month, today as a House of Commons we stand shoulder to shoulder, united against the vandalism and violence we have seen on our streets. The victims are the innocent people

Rt Hon. Edward Milliband, MP

who live in many of our cities, who have seen their homes and businesses destroyed, their communities damaged and their confidence about their own safety undermined.

There can be no excuses, no justification. This behaviour has disgusted us all. It cannot be allowed to stand; we will not allow it to stand.”

He went on to say that politicians had to understand what had caused the disturbances, in order to ensure that they were not repeated, telling the House that “These issues cannot be laid at the door of a single cause or a single government. The causes are complex. Simplistic

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:04 Page 357

UNITED KINGDOM

the government was putting in place: “One of the things we are trying to do is to look at the involvement of gangs; it is possible that that is not as high as people at first thought, but that does not mean that the Government should not be doing work on gangs.”

The Home Secretary was also pressed by the Chair of the Committee, Rt Hon. Keith Vaz, MP, (Lab) on issues such as the use of the army and of water cannon. She defended the decision not to use either of those measures, but also the

The aftermath of the London riots in Clapham Junction, August 2011.

solutions will not provide the answer.”

Following the statement, 160 Members of the House rose to ask questions. The MP for Tottenham, Rt Hon. David Lammy, MP, (Lab) told the Prime Minister: “In Tottenham, 45 people have lost their homes, which were burnt to the ground. They were running out of their homes carrying their children in their arms, and their cry is, “Where were the police?””. The point was also made by Sir Malcolm Rifkind (Con), who asked whether police had been instructed to stand back whilst looting was happening.

The role of the police was a key theme in the debate that followed. The Prime Minister stressed that the police’s response to the disturbances had initially been deliberately restrained, in order to avoid inflaming existing tensions over Mark Duggan’s death. However, he conceded that “but as I have said, and I think police chiefs

have been very frank about this, the balance between what is right for public order and what

Rt Hon. David Lammy, MP

is right for stopping criminality—looting and thieving—was not got right to start with”.

Parliament’s interest in what became known as the August riots did not end when the House rose on 11 August.

When Parliament returned in the autumn, firstly for the September sitting and then the autumn sitting in October, there

was interest from across the House in the further measures that had been taken at the time and were being taken to combat the possibility of future violence.

For example, giving evidence to the cross-party Home Affairs Select Committee, the Home Secretary, Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP, (Con) said that the riots were more complex phenomena that people initially thought: “A lot of people thought initially this was something that was very much about gangs and young people. It is obvious that gangs were involved.

Young people were involved but of those who have been arrested so far, the figures show that only about a quarter– only about 25 per cent or so, around that sort of figure-were juveniles.”

Following questioning from Rt Hon. Alun Michael, MP, (Lab) she elaborated on the role of gangs and the measures

Rt Hon. Keith Vaz, MP

government’s view that water cannon should be examined as a possible option – had the introduction of extra police not quietened the disturbances.

The Committees work on this continues, with evidence from the Mayor of London, police commissioners and local people and MPs. Eurozone crisis The issue of Europe and its future was also a key one during the autumn sittings. The continuing debt crisis on the Eurozone, with Greece in particular looking likely to default on some of its debts and facing political instability, was the backdrop to a debate held on 24 October on whether the U.K. should hold a threeoption referendum on its

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 357

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:05 Page 358

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

continued membership of the European Union (the options being to remain in the EU, leave, or renegotiate the terms of memberships).

The debate had been initiated by the Conservative Member, Mr David Nuttall, MP, with the support of some 70 other Members from the Conservative, Labour and Democratic Unionist parties.

The debate was granted by the Backbench Business Committee, chaired by Ms Natasha Engel, MP, (Lab) which allocates a number of days a session to debates initiated by backbench MPs. Opening the debate, Mr Nuttall referred to the last referendum on European Union membership, held in 1975. He said: “A staggering 84 per cent of

Rt Hon. Douglas Alexander, MP the current voting age population have never voted in favour of Britain’s continued membership of the EEC, never mind the European Union.

Furthermore, if I were a betting man, I would wager that some of those who voted yes back in 1975 may well have since changed their minds. The Common Market has fundamentally changed in size and powers as it has been transformed into the European Union, and without the British people ever being consulted, of course.”

UNITED KINGDOM

He received support from, among others, the former Parliamentary Private Secretary at the Foreign Office, Mr Adam Holloway, MP, (Con), who said: “For me, the bottom line is really quite straightforward. For seven years I have been wandering around telling the good people of Gravesham that we should have a referendum, and that we should renegotiate our position. Let me end by saying this: “If you have done the same, you must support the motion.””

In his speech, the Foreign Secretary, Rt Hon. William Hague, MP, (Con), gave six reasons why he was urging his colleagues to oppose the motion. First among these was: “The eurozone is clearly in crisis, and to pile on that uncertainty the further uncertainty of a referendum on leaving the European Union, when half the foreign direct investment into Britain comes from the rest of the European Union, and half our exports go out to the rest of the European Union, would not be a responsible action for Her Majesty’s Government to take.

It would not help anyone looking for a job. It would not help any business trying to expand. It would mean that for a time, we, the leading advocates of removing barriers to trade in Europe and the rest of the world, would lack the authority to do so.”

Responding for the Opposition, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Rt Hon. Douglas Alexander, MP, (Lab), also opposed the motion, telling the House: “The way to address the present concerns is reform of Europe, not exit from Europe.

Britain’s economy is flatlining and Europe’s economy is in crisis. Putting off investment and undermining confidence at such a critical time would be

358 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

the wrong choice for this House and the country. The right course for British growth, British jobs and British interests is to reject the motion before the House.”

Support for the motion came from a variety of Members. Mr Charles Walker, MP, (Con) made a speech of four words: “If not now, when?”; Ms Kate Hoey, MP, (Lab) said

Ms Kate Hoey, MP

that the government’s efforts to repatriate powers in future years would be aided by a referendum: “if the rest of the European Union knew that the British public were sick, sore and tired of the money being spent on Europe, of the bureaucracy, of the corruption and of all that, they would be much more likely to negotiate the repatriation of them.”

Speaking for the Democratic Unionist Party, Mr Nigel Dodds, MP, dismissed the argument that a referendum would be a distraction from the Eurozone crisis: “It is nonsense to talk about a referendum being a distraction. The EU and all its works go to the heart of decision making on all aspects of policy in this House and in government. We must therefore have a chance to deliver our verdict on how the relationship between Europe and the United Kingdom should evolve.

Moreover, the crisis in the eurozone and the consequent move to create a tighter fiscal

union among its 17 members will have a direct and profound impact on the United Kingdom.”

Opposing the motion, Mr Martin Horwood, MP, (Lib Dem) was one of several members who argued that the idea of renegotiation was not practical and that the agenda of those supporting the referendum was withdrawal. He went on: “One country is a beacon for the Eurosceptics.

One country is a member of the European economic area but not of the European Union or Schengen. It is Liechtenstein.

That is the level of influence that the Eurosceptics are demanding for this country.

“They would give up our influence on the European market and our influence as a member of the EU on negotiations from climate change to world trade. They would condemn us to the sidelines of Europe and do profound damage to the interests of this country.”

Mr Robert Walter, MP, (Con) made a similar observation, suggesting that Norway – although not a Member of the EU, had to implement most EU law to ensure its access to the single market. He spoke of the EU as a political project designed to secure peace in Europe, a theme later taken up by Mr Mark Lazarowicz, MP, (Lab) and concluded: “Europe needs Britain and Britain needs Europe. My right hon. friend the Foreign Secretary struck the right note earlier. We are in Europe, our history is European and our destiny is European. As far as I am concerned, we are here to stay and I beg my colleagues to reject the motion.”

With the front benches of the three largest parties opposing the motion it was defeated by 483 votes to 111.

CPA Centennial goods advert:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:30 Page 359

CPA CENTENNIAL GIFTS

CPA Centennial Globe: £30 each plus £7.50 postage and handling. Total: £37.50

CPA Centennial Mirror: £12 each plus £7.50 postage and handling.. Total: £19.50

The CPA Centennial Post it Note Holder: £8 each plus £7.50 postage and handling: Total: £15.50

The CPA Centennial pin specially designed to mark the 100 years milestone: £5 each plus £2.50 postage and handling. Total: £7.50

The CPA Centennial globe and post-it holder in their boxes

CPA souvenirs are available for sale to Members and officials of Commonwealth Parliaments and Legislatures by contacting the CPA Secretariat by email at: hq.sec@cpahq.org or by air mail at: Suite 700, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom

The Budget Process:Different Ads.qxd 12/01/2012 15:31 Page 360

A CPA publication

Available to Members and Officials of the CPA for purchase from the CPA•Secretariat, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, U.K. Tel.: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 E-mail: hq.sec@cpahq.org Also available to members of the public from booksellers.

Inside back cover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:14 Page 37

CPA SHOP CPA pens

CPA silver-plated cardholders

Silver-plated photoframe, clock and pen in holder

CPA souvenirs are available for sale to Members and officials of Commonwealth Parliaments and Legislatures by contacting the CPA Secretariat by email at: hq.sec@cpahq.org or by air mail at: Suite 700, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom

Outside back cover:3-col feature 12/01/2012 15:25 Page 168

GOT YOUR COPY?

THE PARLIAMENTARIAN

To subscribe to The Parliamentarian, please email pirc@cpahq.org.

Members of Parliament: Please contact your Branch Secretary.

CPA Centennial medal advert:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:26 Page 281

CPA CENTENNIAL GIFTS CPA pens

This superb limited-edition medal celebrating the centennial of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association is now for sale on a ‘first come, first served’ basis.

Approximately 4.5 centimetres in diameter, the medal features a map of the world listing each of the nine Commonwealth regions on the obverse and, on the reverse, the ‘winds of change’ centennial logo.

Each medal is beautifully presented in an individual presentation box and comes complete with a numbered certificate of authenticity personally signed by the retiring Chairperson, YB Dato’ Seri Mohd. Shafie bin Hj Apdal, MP and the Secretary-General, Dr William F Shija.

Only 150 of these rare medals will ever be made and they are for sale at £40 plus £7.50 postage and handling (total £47.50). Please send your payment and delivery address to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom.

Queries regarding the medal can be emailed to hqsec@cpahq.org

contents:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:40 Page 282

CONTENTS

2011: ISSUE 4 310

314 Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth Vol. XCII 2011: Issue Four ISSN 0031-2282 Issued by the Secretariat of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SWIP 3JA, United Kingdom Tel: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 Email: hq.sec@cpahq.org www.cpahq.org Publisher: Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General Editor: Andrew Imlach Director of Communications and Research

COMMENT

MAIN ARTICLES

Inside Issues

Gender and constitutional responsibilities of Members of Parliament

The gender question – removing the stereotypes Page 284

View from the Chair Forging a stronger Commonwealth role for Parliamentarians Page 286

View from the CWP For men only Page 288

View from the Secretary-General Democracy at 50 Page 290

Assistant Editor: Lisa Leaño Front cover Women walking in the Thar Desert, Rajasthan, India Image: Shutterstock® Printed in: England by Warners Midlands, PLC; New Delhi by Jainco Art India, and Singapore by Times Printers Private Limited 282 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP Page 294

The Canadian advantage

Ms Shelley Glover, MP Page 298

Oil exploration in the Falkland Islands Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA Page 302

Women as agents of change in small societies Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC Page 306

India’s Rajya Sabha and women’s empowerment Shri S.N. Sahu Page 310

Principles and guidelines for Constituency Development Funds Page 314

The Millennium Development Goals and parliamentary scrutiny

Mr Kevin Deveaux and Mr Cédric Jurgensen Page 318

contents:Layout 1 12/01/2012 16:11 Page 283

318

322

NEWS Building a dialogue between Parliament and enterprise Mr Riki Hyde-Chambers, OBE Page 322

Strengthening Parliaments to reinforce democratic governance in South Asia Page 326

Research journal launched in Sri Lanka Mr Neil Iddawala Page 330

Parliamentary news:

New Zealand, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, India and Sri Lanka.

Page 339

Annual subscription (four issues) UK: £34 post free.

Worldwide: £36 surface post £42 airmail Price per issue UK: £12 Worldwide: £13 surface post £14 airmail Opinions and comments expressed in articles and reviews published in The Parliamentarian are those of the individual contributors and should not be attributed to the Secretariat of the Association.

Promoting sustainable forest management

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 283

Inside Issues:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:43 Page 284

INSIDE ISSUES

THE GENDER QUESTION – REMOVING THE STEREOTYPES The Editor’s note

“Gender” should not be another label for women’s issues. As gender analyses of government budgets and other studies have been discovering, programmes can unintentionally impact negatively or unfairly on men just as they can on women: Australia has taken steps to ensure parental support programmes do not discriminate against fathers who are the primary child carers, while Caribbean initiatives to promote post-secondary education have had to focus on recruiting young men because young women are flooding into universities on their own.

In terms of representation in Parliament, however, “gender” has meant more representation by women and it looks certain to continue to mean that for the foreseeable future. Many Parliaments and Legislatures now have the composition they will have going into 2015, the Commonwealth Heads of Government deadline for 30 per cent of seats being held by women, or more precisely, the second such deadline after the 2005 deadline was missed. Only a handful of Commonwealth national Parliaments have now reached the target, while most are a considerable distance from it and, in some cases, recent elections have moved them further away still.

We therefore focus on women in Parliament in this issue by looking at the goal of increasing the role of women in Parliament and by publishing articles from women Members on non-gender subjects and from men on women’s representation to help remove the stereotype that gender is only a subject for women MPs. Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP, Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament and Chairperson of the African Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, opens the issue with an assessment of the role that women should play in all Parliaments. Commonwealth Africa has two of the world’s leaders in the representation of women in Rwanda and South Africa, but also some of the world’s lowest levels of female representation. Ms Kadaga, however, argues that female representation is not just about numbers; women must also hold their fair share of important positions within Parliament if electing more women is to have real meaning, and if electing women is ever to become common enough to no longer attract special attention.

A truly representative female presence in Parliament will help ensure fair female participation in all areas of society outside Parliament, notes Ms Kadaga. Fair

284 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

treatment of all citizens is a goal of all MPs, regardless of gender, so the Ugandan Speaker urges all Parliamentarians to examine their Parliaments’ performance from this perspective rather than from a male-female adversarial point of view.

Government finance and macro-economic questions are not usually characterized as “gender” issues; so publishing an article on these subjects from a female MP helps to make the point that women should not be stereotyped either in Parliament or outside it.

Ms Shelley Glover, MP, the Parliamentary Secretary to Canada’s Minister for Finance, explains here some of the policies that have been instrumental in the success her country has had in dealing with the effects of the global financial crisis. Canada is held up as an example of an economy with the appropriate balance of government regulation and free market activity.

Considering how well its economy is performing despite being closely intertwined with the struggling United States market, Ms Glover’s account of regulation, financial management and economic stimuli provides valuable indicators to those seeking a prudent path to economic success.

Another path to economic success not normally associated

with gender can be found in the pursuit of oil and gas extraction.

Exploration is currently under way in the South Atlantic off the Falkland Islands and the Member of the Islands’ Executive Council responsible for its development, Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA, writes here on the care her British overseas territory is taking to maximize the benefits of oil exploration for Falklanders and to minimize possible adverse effects on the environment and the Islands’ people and its economy.

Moving into a new industry, especially one as highly technical and developed as the oil industry, can be daunting for any jurisdiction unfamiliar with the way it works, so the Falklands have brought in outside advice. Despite being small and isolated, the Falklands are very familiar with the problems that new industries can bring, having experienced the ups and downs of selling licences to fish its waters.

Ms Cheek reports therefore that the Falkland Islands are not rushing into oil exploration with unrealistic expectations, although Islanders are strongly asserting their right to develop their offshore resources in the face of Argentina’s continuing claims to sovereignty.

Making more women agents of parliamentary change is examined by a male Tasmanian

Inside Issues:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:44 Page 285

INSIDE ISSUES

The Parliament of Rwanda in Kigali has, along with South Africa, among the world’s highest levels of female representation.

Parliamentarian, Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC, whose jurisdiction currently meets the Commonwealth’s 30-per-cent goal. He writes here that the route into Parliament many Tasmanian women have taken historically has been through community activism, and not just women’s rights activism. Having a man write about women in Parliament serves to emphasize the points that gender is not only a female issue and that bringing more women into Parliament benefits both genders.

Another man, Shri S.N. Sahu, a Joint Secretary in the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, traces the advancement of women and women’s rights in India’s upper House. Although he notes that legislation to reserve a third of seats in the country’s lower House, the Lok Sabha, does not cover the upper House, the Rajya Sabha has been in the forefront of measures to empower Indian women.

The allocation of government funds to individual Parliamentarians to enable them to develop small but useful projects in their own constituencies is seen as a way of empowering them and of using their unparalleled local knowledge to help their communities. But this is not always the case. A group of

Commonwealth Members representing jurisdictions which have constituency development funds met earlier this year in Jamaica with academics and others interested in this process.

They produced a set of guidelines to ensure that constituency development funds are used properly in a process which is fully transparent and accountable. We publish the guidelines in this issue so all Members can consider whether constituency development funds are a blessing or a curse, a way to apply an MP’s exceptional local knowledge for the good of the community or an unfair advantage for incumbents.

The advancement of all sectors of every society is the ultimate aim of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), adopted by the United Nations and member governments as the world moved into the new millennium over a decade ago.

With the deadline for the achievement of the Goals now three years away, Mr Kevin Deveaux and Mr Cédric Jurgensen of the United Nations Development Programme’s Parliamentary Development programme examine in this issue the role that Parliaments and individual Members will need to

play if their countries are to achieve the 2015 target for all eight MDGs. One criticism that all Parliamentarians face is that they do not know how things work in “the real world” – meaning they are sequestered in Parliament and therefore do not understand how modern businesses work. For more than three decades the Industry and Parliament Trust has been working in the United Kingdom to ensure that Parliaments and the business world understand each other. That project has now expanded into Enterprise and Parliamentary Dialogue International to build links between Parliaments in other countries and their local business community. Mr Riki Hyde-Chambers, OBE, who ran the Industry and Parliament Trust and is now the Secretary General of the international organization of Dialogue Centres, describes how the process works and the principles which govern its activities around the world.

The Fifth Conference of Speakers, Parliamentarians and parliamentary officials of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation met in New Delhi in July 2011 to discuss a wide variety of subjects focusing principally on strengthening democracy in a

region which has a mix of wellestablished and developing Parliaments. We publish here a summary of the discussions contributed by a senior officer of the Lok Sabha Secretariat, Shri Jayadev Sahu.

The provision of information to Parliamentarians is a key method of support for the development of democracy. An innovative idea has emerged in Sri Lanka where a new research journal has begun publication by Parliament.

Assistant Secretary-General Mr Neil Iddawala explains this initiative, which he is leading.

Finally, young people are now the majority in the Commonwealth so involving them in Parliament will help to deepen each member country’s commitment to democracy.

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association therefore held its 4th Commonwealth Youth Parliament in September, this time meeting in the United Kingdom Parliament including a final debate in the House of Lords Chamber.

Three of the youth MPs write about the experience to conclude this issue in a gender-appropriate way: one of the three is a woman in a House where 47 per cent of the seats were held by women.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 285

View from the Chair:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:45 Page 286

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

FORGING A STRONGER COMMONWEALTH ROLE FOR PARLIAMENTARIANS universally acceptable alternative which does not In Perth in October, the Commonwealth Parliamentary undermine our financial position.

Association (CPA) was for the first time represented at Important though this is, I cannot help reflecting a Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting that our status in the eyes of Heads of Government (CHOGM) by a delegation drawn from its elected and others depends on what the CPA is seen to officers. Together with Vice-Chairperson Dr Nafisa achieve. I think we can greatly extend our reach and Shah, MNA, of Pakistan and Treasurer Hon. Marwick improve our impact. If the Commonwealth itself is Khumalo, MP, of Swaziland, I was honoured to be being challenged by the EPG to redefine its present at this important Commonwealth event. We priorities, the CPA can surely take some hints from were of course supported by our Secretary-General, Dr their report. We have, of course, our own eminent William Shija. persons in the form of a CPA Working Party This was a useful and interesting start on which we must hope to build. By the time of the next CHOGM in Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP charged with putting forward proposals for the CPA’s future development. I shall encourage all the Sri Lanka in 2013 I hope that the CPA will have a more Chairperson of the CPA members of our Executive Committee to do some recognized role.

Executive Committee and blue-sky thinking about the best strategy to carry The actual meeting of the Heads of Government is Member of the House of us forward. only a part of the proceedings. Surrounding them is a Commons, United Kingdom The central point to which we should hold firm is gathering of representation from a great many of the that we are elected Parliamentarians. Our main purpose in being organizations which exist under the Commonwealth umbrella. It is a great associated is to help each other further the principles of representative networking occasion; but next time round I would not wish to see the CPA parliamentary democracy and uphold the values which lie at the heart of in any sense lost in the crowd. We deserve a more prominent position. the Commonwealth of Nations. We cannot do everything on our own; but That said, we must earn it. Leaders recognize that the Commonwealth we can do more if we make alliances with others such as civil society itself is not prominent in the consciousness of a large percentage of its organizations and governments where we are perhaps better equipped to population. Understandably therefore, recognition of the work of the CPA deliver common objectives. is at a low level.

We are at our best when we maximize our human resource, engaging The report of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group (EPG), Members, Clerks and other officials in the provision of courses, seminars which had been mandated to examine options for reform, formed a major and conferences. But what are the most urgent needs and causes on item on the CHOGM agenda. which we should concentrate?

At the risk of being seen to harbour an inferiority complex, I was Empowering women, the special concerns of small states, keeping faith disappointed to find that the EPG report contained only one reference to with young people: all these are obvious and constitute a huge agenda in the CPA – and you had to get to page 128 to find it. Of all the 90 or so themselves. Yet we cannot afford to ignore development issues, climate bodies belonging to the Commonwealth family, an association of change and human rights. We must think through all these matters and Parliamentarians should surely attract greater attention. The CPA has the agree a strategy in which all our Regions feel happy and which they are potential to further many of the objectives proposed by the EPG. The committed. question is whether we are ready to grasp the opportunity.

If we can show that we are effective in reinforcing parliamentary One of the issues which I have inherited on becoming Chairperson of democracy and what is often termed soft diplomacy, we will boost our the Executive Committee is our Association’s status. Currently we are prestige and be noticed with enhanced respect. constituted as a registered English charity. This gives us considerable tax The CPA should settle for no less than being the pre-eminent relation in advantages. However, I recognize that some of our Branches are the Commonwealth family. uncomfortable with this status and I am committed to trying to find a 286 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from the CWP:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:48 Page 288

VIEW FROM THE CWP

FOR MEN ONLY

Parliamentarians tick may be off target. I hope that after reading this piece I My dear fellow Parliamentarians, over the past few years, I have been am able to deflect the perception of our male colleagues more in line with privileged to be permitted access to the pages of this journal of the our reality.

Commonwealth Parliamentary Association where I I view the CWP as a vehicle for which women have been able to express my thoughts, ideas and Parliamentarians are taught not only good driving skills sentiments targeting mainly my sister but how to maintain the vehicle as well. As every driver Parliamentarians as my readers. This time, however, I knows, learning road safety and courtesy is important; am hoping to reach you, our male Parliamentarians, as but it is also essential to know how to manoeuvre when I endeavour to help you to understand where we fellow drivers will not give way or when other road users women Parliamentarians have come from, our trials are being down right discourteous. To continue the and how you can work with us as we strive to be analogy, the vehicle must be serviced regularly to agents of change for a better world. maintain top condition. Workshops and seminars are the I am drawn to sharing these thoughts after an service centres of this CWP vehicle and the funds from intense conversation I had recently with a colleague. I the CPA constitute the petrol that keeps the vehicle had been telling him how I felt undone when, as the running. As every driver knows, when other motorists Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians drive badly, it puts all other drivers at risk.

Chairperson, I was interrupted at least eight times Hon. Alix Boyd Knights MHA Though women in politics have come a long, long while delivering the CWP report at the General Chairperson of the way, there is still a great distance to travel. Without doubt Assembly during the CPA's 56th Commonwealth Commonwealth Women Parliamentary Conference in July 2011. Worse yet, I Parliamentarians and Speaker our male colleagues have assisted greatly in this regard.

After all, it is hard to be one of their number who – on complained, there was not one photographer at the of the House of Assembly, hearing the knocking, knocking, knocking of aspiring conference’s CWP's Business Meeting which was Dominica women Parliamentarians – opened the door so that being held at the same time as the Clerks-at-the-Table women could get in and, once in, proved their mettle. It is meeting. I have nothing against Clerks of Parliament, now fair to say that women in leadership roles all over the world have at the Table or otherwise; but the fact that the organizers of the conference shown that we have an important contribution to make and that we are felt comfortable about deploying their lone (as I was advised) available agents of change. conference photographer to attend to the requirements of the Clerks-atSo, when we tell you that: the-Table instead of taking photographs of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Business Meeting put a lot of things in perspective for • We feel slighted over a particular issue: Please listen to our argument me. And what was more, we were not even told about it so that we could and try to see our side of the discussion. Do not belittle our point of have made our own arrangements. view.

Naturally I was aghast when my said colleague told me that I was being • We are Parliamentarians, yes; but we are also wives, mothers and silly; he did not see any reason for me to be so upset. I said to him: “How grandmothers with additional duties to yours: Please acknowledge our dare you decide what should and should not upset me? Do you realize how multi roles. hard the CWP has strived to get the recognition it has thus far?” I went on • We need funding for important projects that are not obvious voteto explain to my colleague that as the current custodian of these gains, I catchers: Do not let us down. Remember society depends on all of us have an obligation not only to build on the gains but also to ensure that they to thrive. are not whittled away.

• We stand up in Parliament in support of legislation which will relieve the Since I share the notion that man's perception is his reality, I realized women of our country of the scourges of domestic violence, rape in that my colleague's reality as it relates to what makes women 288 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from the CWP:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:49 Page 289

VIEW FROM THE CWP

marriage and genital mutilation, and introduce harsher penalties for rape, incest and other such crimes: Stand by us in the name of and on our behalf of your mothers and daughters and sisters.

• •

•

We have stumbled and fallen because we are human: Be there to pick us up and help us to regain our footing.

Our personal path through politics to Parliament has been difficult and even fraught with danger: Encourage us and make a promise to yourselves to be more supportive of women candidates in the future.

We are next in line to make our contribution to a debate and we tell you that we have been up all night caring for our sick child: Step in and accommodate.

We are not enemies. Sharing the space in this universe as we do, we are partners in development, unity, peace and progress. Ultimately we have much more in common than we may have differences. I urge you, our male Parliamentarians – and our female Parliamentarians too – to remember always: Whatever one gender can do, two genders together can do even better.

And so, as 2012 is beginning, I wish all Commonwealth Parliamentarians a peaceful, harmonious, healthy and prosperous New Year. I also extend special season's greetings and the wish for a fruitful, collaborative New Year to the CPA Chairperson and my other colleagues on the CPA Executive Committee, and to the Secretary-General and the CPA Secretariat staff.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 289

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:51 Page 290

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

DEMOCRACY AT 50 Joining other post-50 independent countries, such as India, Pakistan, In Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth countries, there are countries Ghana, Nigeria, etc., the citizens of former colonies carry that celebrate independence every year. In 2011, a very negative and painful psychological images in their number of countries celebrated 50 years of minds as life goes on. Then of course such psychological independence. In the Commonwealth, two countries, effects are more intensive in black Africans, their Sierra Leone and Tanzania, celebrated 50 years of ancestors having suffered the untold physical, mental independence, having achieved independence in and social human pain of the African slave trade for 500 1961. For a country, one might ask: What does it mean years. As a citizen of a former British colony called to turn 50?

Tanganyika, now Tanzania (since 1964 upon uniting with In most countries, the achievement of Zanzibar and after Zanzibar’s revolution), I recall as a independence means gaining full democratic youth the wonderful and tumultuous independence freedom. For countries that gained and therefore celebrations on the night of 9 December 1961. This was celebrate independence every year, it usually means after the British Parliament had considered and passed a they were colonies of other countries. It generally Bill to give independence to the then Tanganyika. means that prior to independence they were forcefully Tanganyika became independent after first being governed by other countries or societies, against their Dr William F. Shija colonized by Germany (together with Rwanda and will. Unfortunately, the Commonwealth bears the Secretary-General of the background and linkage to colonial rule for several Commonwealth Parliamentary Burundi as German East Africa) from 1897, after the Scramble for Africa in Berlin in 1884. It then became a countries, even though the majority became Association British United Nations Trusteeship (Protectorate) in 1916 independent later on, and some turning 50 years now.

The Secretary-General’s

290 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 11:52 Page 291

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

after Germany was defeated and ousted from German East Africa.

The same approach and method was done for the independence of Sierra Leone, a Bill being passed in the British Parliament for its independence in 1961. Sierra Leone, having been established by the settlement of liberated and runaway African (there were no other) slaves between 1787 and 1792, as well as by the indigenous people, was colonized by Britain in 1808.

In both Tanzania and Sierra Leone, the major test of democracy at 50 was primarily the maintenance of peace. As with many countries in Africa, societies were not homogeneous at independence, hence the need to unify the people from multiple ethnic backgrounds, estimated to be 130 in Tanzania and 18 in Sierra Leone. The challenges before the first leaders of independent countries were therefore almost insurmountable, ranging from handling an uneducated but expectant population to a lack of physical infrastructure, poor health, the containment of ethnic conflicts and the need to formulate new modes of economic production and distribution.

This could lead to the conclusion that some societies, such as Tanzania, fortunately have had a relatively peaceful 50-year independence period; but others have gone through periods of military rule, violence and conflict, such as Sierra Leone.

It is good news that Sierra Leone has recovered from conflict to enjoy the fruits of a democracy that is maturing out of its 50 years of independence. The past two elections have been conducted relatively peacefully and Parliament is now functioning as an institution of peacebuilding through dialogue and the rule of law. The maturity that is being born out of the 50 years of democracy, regardless of the bumps and hurdles, is what the citizens need to realize as the fruits of independence.

What else should the citizens of the countries with 50 years of democracy and independence look for?

First, countries at 50 years of democracy should consolidate peace and national unity. To achieve this, leaders need to focus on promoting national

unity through education and youth development. No wonder at independence, or soon thereafter, single political party systems and a national language (Kiswahili) were adopted in countries such as Tanzania under the able leadership of Julius K. Nyerere, to promote national unity at the time. Currently, work should be carried out to strengthen existing constitutions, legal institutions and Parliament.

Secondly, leaders and citizens at 50 should strive to be economically independent; that is, individuals becoming less reliant on their relatives and friends. Governments should minimize and eventually cut off the dependency on foreign aid and recurrent budget subsidies. This means that societies will have to seriously fight off corruption, ease and enforce tax compliance, and teach the population to work and save. As markets are always important in economic activities, democratic countries at 50 need to promote regional integration, common markets and the infrastructure that goes with it. The infrastructure of colonies were at the bare minimum, structured just enough to transport raw materials from the interior to the sea ports for export to foreign industries.

Thirdly, leaders in democracies at 50 need to examine the educational curricula for their populations. It is believed that education is the singular weapon to fully liberate the citizens who were colonized just 50 years ago.

A good educational curriculum is meant to liberate the mind, accelerate the scientific benefits and restore the ruptured cultural and moral pillars of society. Leaders and citizens in democracies at 50 will also realize that educational curricula have to incorporate the high need for technical skills to sustain everyday human needs.

Fourthly, leaders and citizens in democracies at 50 should accept that change is inevitable. Whereas the leadership at independence worked to appeal to a less informed population, the situation today is very different. In the 1960s, even radio waves did not reach out to many village people.

Today we find an unbelievably large percentage of the same villages receiving high telephony connectivity. Likewise, modern communications

Commonwealth gallery Left: The delegates attending the 22nd Commonwealth Parliamentary Seminar in New Delhi, India.

Right: Dr William F. Shija (left) speaking with the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, MP, (right) during CHOGM in Perth, Australia.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 291

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:05 Page 292

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

technologies today have enabled many citizens to participate in democratic activities and to remotely engage their leaders and representatives. In Parliaments of democracies at 50, Members have also caught up with computer literacy to cope with the “worldwide school” through the internet.

Leaders in democracies at 50 need not only respond to the social media that are driving contemporary political events, but they also need to equip their citizens with trade and investment skills to take advantage of the emerging global economic trends. For example, a decade ago, one writer at the World Bank compared Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand as “Asian Tigers” with some of the emerging democracies/economies at 50 in Africa, such as Tanzania, Zambia, Ghana and Kenya, which were the “African Elephants”. This largely means that

democracies at 50, having been hugely exploited as colonies, are growing steadily. These emerging economies, however, need to engage with such other structures as the South-South co-operation, non-traditional economic partners and “rare commodity” production, where possible.

Fifthly, leaders in post-50 democracies need to be aware – and to accept – that income distribution is likely to dominate the next century’s politico-socio-economic paradigm. The demands that currently emerge out of the existing purely capitalist economic system show that greater numbers of people in the world feel that they are being exploited by a few individuals. They are demanding equity in the production and distribution of global wealth. This means that democracies at 50 should carefully guide their economic growth to match the social needs and demands of the

The Secretary-General’s From left to right: The Chairperson of the CWP, Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA; Dr Nafisa Shah, MP; Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP; and Dr William F. Shija, during the CPA Executive Committee meeting in December 2011.

The SecretaryGeneral (left) presenting a gift to the High Commissioner for Sri Lanka in London, H.E. Chris Nonis (right).

Dr William F. Shija (right) greeting former Clerk of the New Zealand Parliament and current Ombudsman, Mr David McGee (left). Mr McGee has also written two books for the CPA.

292 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

View from SG:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:06 Page 293

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

population to avert violence and conflict.

Leaders of the countries that are enjoying democracy at 50 should take serious stock to sustain democracy in the next 50 years and beyond. I have suggested a few areas for consideration; but there could be more methods to be considered.

As more countries turn 50 in democracy in 2012, such as

Jamaica, Rwanda, Samoa, Trinidad and Tobago and Uganda in the Commonwealth, the lessons are clear: Whether a country was a colony or not, it is important for its leaders and citizens to respect democracy in order to bring peace and development to future generations. To do so successfully, the lessons of the past must be learned well and the choices for today and tomorrow clearly

identified and implemented.

I wish to end my end-of-theyear view on democracies at 50 by recalling my first term of five years of service as Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Truly, the past five years have been a very rewarding period for me. I have not only shared my experiences as a former Parliamentarian, but I have also learned more about the

Commonwealth and its peoples’ cultures and development. I wish to thank everyone for the support, friendship, hospitality and cooperation during my tours of duty in our Regions and Branches, the latest being Samoa. I look forward to another rich experience from all over the Commonwealth in the New Year, 2012, to be highlighted by the event of HM The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.

Commonwealth gallery

The Chief Executive Officer of the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization, Prof. Tim Unwin, (left) with Dr William F. Shija (right) following the signing of an agreement between the two organizations.

Former Member of the CPA Executive Committee, Mr Alan Ferguson, (right) signing the visitors' book with the Secretary-General (left) looking on.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 293

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:12 Page 294

GENDER ISSUES

GENDER AND CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBLILITIES OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT The gender issue is much more than electing more women to Parliament. It affects all aspects of parliamentary life and each of the responsibilities of all Members, says the Speaker of Uganda’s Parliament.

Rt Hon. Rebecca A. Kadaga, MP, in Kampala.

Ms Kadaga, a lawyer, is the Speaker of the Parliament of Uganda having served as Deputy Speaker from 2001 to 2011. She is the ViceChairperson of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Steering Committee of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and chairs the CWP’s African Region Steering Committee.

She has served in the Ugandan Parliament since 1996, holding several ministerial portfolios. This article is based on a presentation to a Zambia postelection seminar in November 2011.

Members of Parliament are elected by the population which comprises both men and women. It is the expectation of the population that their aspirations, needs and desires are reflected in the agendas both of the political parities as well as of Parliament. It is therefore also necessary that both genders be represented in Parliament. This has its roots in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 which provides in Article 2: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights, and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without discrimination of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status….”

Since then, several Human Rights Instruments have been promulgated in the United Nations, the African Union and other bodies.

294 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

In 1975, the First World Conference on Women called for the establishment of national mechanisms for the advancement of women. By 1985, 127 Member countries had established national mechanisms.

The question now is: has national machinery been set up in every country? If so is it working? If a country is party to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination (CEDAW), has it enshrined the CEDAW Convention in its constitution?

Most constitutions do not have a guaranteed quota for the representation of women, which probably explains why most Commonwealth countries have yet to achieve 30 per cent representation of women in their Parliaments as agreed by Heads of Government first for 2005 and now for 2015.

Again, if a country is party to CEDAW, does it fulfil the obligation to report on progress every four

Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP.

years? What does it report? Have we achieved equity in employment, education, in the economy, the professions, the civil service? What about in the armed forces?

Varied rates of women’s representation in Africa It is necessary for each Parliament to take stock and evaluate where it stands today. Has it created space for the 51 per cent of the population who are clearly underrepresented in the House?

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:12 Page 295

GENDER ISSUES

There is also another opportunity. In some countries, the Head of State can make special nominations to Parliament. There is in place a Southern African Development Community resolution which enjoins the Heads of State to facilitate 50/50 representation of both genders in all the SADC Parliaments by 2015.

In my other capacity as the Chairperson of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CWP) Africa Region I keep a pulse on the progress of participation of both genders in decision-making positions. To show that African countries are at different stages of compliance to the international instruments, I have reproduced a table (see Table

One) indicating the gender status of some Parliaments.

The breakdown of the 131 seats won by women in my own country in our 2011 general elections was: • • • • •

Constituency Representatives: 11 Women District Representatives: 12 Youth Representatives: 2 Representatives of disabled persons: 2 Representatives of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces: 2

Women in influential positions?

Out of women Members of

Parliament, how many are Chairpersons of standing or sessional committees? What chance do we stand for at least 30 per cent of the committees of a House being chaired by women Members of Parliament? Of the powerful committees such as Finance, Agriculture or Defence, are any of them chaired by a woman Member of Parliament? If this has not been done yet, will there be an opportunity to amend the Rules of Procedure to ensure at least 30 per cent, if not 50 per cent, of committee Chairpersons are women?

In my Parliament, I have made a proposal to the Rules Committee to consider parity in appointing the Chairpersons of the committees

Above: Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP, addressing delegates at an international conference in Kampala.

Left: The Parliament of Uganda.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 295

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:13 Page 296

GENDER ISSUES

Table One: Rates of women’s representation in Africa Country

Lower or Single House

Rwanda South Africa Uganda Mozambique Tanzania Namibia Lesotho Seychelles Malawi Mauritius Cameroon Swaziland Sierra Leone Zambia Kenya Ghana Botswana Gambia Nigeria

Elections 2008 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2010 2007 2008 2007 2011 2007 2008 2009 2007 2011

because when the Chairpersons were appointed, the male Members of Parliament took 85 per cent of the places. This was also because the Whips of the parties, who are responsible for designating the Chairpersons of Committees, were all men. There is one woman Whip of a small party. I expect to solve the problem when the Rules of Procedure of the Ugandan Parliament are amended to provide for parity when designating committee Chairpersons.

At the level of the caucuses, the public interest requires that our views merge on common issues.

Can we have an all-party Women’s Caucus? In Uganda, the Uganda Women’s Parliamentary Association (UWOPA) is an allparty caucus, currently headed by a Member of a small opposition party.

But this caucus also has male Members of Parliament who are subscribing Members. They pay annual fees, attend all the meetings and have been very useful in sponsoring important Bills such as the Bill Against Female Genital Mutilation which was sponsored in my Parliament by one

Seats 80 400 375 250 350 67 120 35 192 70 180 66 124 156 224 230 63 53 352

Upper House or Senate Women 45 173 131 98 126 18 29 8 40 13 25 9 16 17 21 19 5 4 13

Women % 56.3 43 39.93 39.2 36.0 26.9 24.2 22.86 20.8 18.84 13.9 13.6 12.90 10.90 9.38 8.3 7.9 7.5 3.69

of the male Members of Parliament who is a Member of the Women’s Parliamentary Caucus.

Constitutional roles and the gender lens The constitutional responsibilities of Members of Parliament cover our legislative, representative and oversight roles.

In legislation, Members of Parliament must always keep in mind that they represent the entire population – men, women, children, workers, miners, young and old.

Their interests must be viewed with a gender lens. One should always ask himself or herself how any proposed piece of legislation will affect both genders. For instance, just for the sake of argument, supposing there were riots relating to the economy, as has happened in many countries all over the world, and suppose Parliament was required to enact a law that imposes a curfew at 5:00 p.m. each day. One should use a gender lens to see, first, how this curfew would affect school-going children.

Would classes have to be cut short to meet the curfew? How would it impact on a poor worker who has

296 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Elections 2008 2009 ------2004 2007 --------2008 ------------2011

Seats 26 54 ------26 33 --------30 ------------109

to walk 10 miles from his or her workplace to reach home? What would be the impact of the curfew on a woman in the market, or a trader who is trying to eke out a living and who by 4:45 p.m. has not sold anything but needs money to

“On representation, Members of Parliament find time to relate with the entirety of their electorate through constituency consultations and outreach programmes.” buy food for her home? The curfew may be a good law to enforce security in a country; but it has far reaching effects on the population.

I want to give an example from the Uganda Parliament. At a time in the past we had a lot of financial

Women 10 16 ------7 10 --------12 ------------4

Women% 38.5 29.6 ------26.9 30.3 --------40.0 ------------3.7

institutions collapsing and leaving depositors with no fall-back position. The government brought a Bill to Parliament aimed at addressing the problem. The Parliament enacted a new law on financial institutions that set the minimum threshold of capital of Uganda Shillings 4,000,000,000 or at that time U.S.$4,000,000.

Later on after reflection, we realized that, at the stroke of a pen, we had by law locked out 51 per cent of the population from setting up a financial institution because there was no woman in Uganda who could raise the minimum capital. We also realized that no young person could marshal those funds. It became clear that it was probably only the foreigners who would be able to meet those conditions. We had not employed the gender and equity lens in making that law.

On oversight of Parliaments, the budget process is the key tool of parliamentary oversight over the executive. How are we distributing the budget? Take, for example, the defence budget: how much of it goes to the women and the youth of the country? The army is a

Kadaga:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:15 Page 297

GENDER ISSUES

people? Members must think back to their constituencies and see whether something is feasible. But the Minister had actually declared that the budget for 2011/2012 was dedicated to the youth!

The representation of women in the National Assembly of South Africa is among the highest in the region.

source of employment guaranteed under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; but how many women are employed in the defence sector?

Look at the health sector: Who are the major consumers of health services? These are women and children, so how much of the health budget is allocated to paediatric care? How much of it is allocated to obstetric care? Better still, is the health budget allocated according to the African Union’s Abuja Declaration which enjoins Heads of State to allocate 15 per cent of the budget to health? What about agriculture? Is the allocation in conformity with the Abuja Declaration? If it is not, what are we going to do about it as Members of Parliament?

Priorities, conditions and expectations I would like to give two recent examples from the Uganda Parliament. The Minister of Health had presented a budget in which 60 per cent of the spending was for capacity-building. We forced this money to be re-allocated to maternal health and cancelled the workshops.

The second example I would like to give was on the Youth Entrepreneurship Scheme where a sum of Uganda Shillings 44,000,000,000 was allocated to be managed by the Ministry of Finance. We forced them to relinquish the budget to the Youth Ministry. But what was even more important was the role Parliament played in alleviating the conditions

that the Minister of Finance had set for young people to access the funds: 1. That the applicant must have a minimum of an Ordinary Level Education Certificate (obviously this left out school dropouts); 2. That the business must be registered (how many people in Uganda have registered businesses?); 3. That the business must have been in existence for at least six months; 4. But the most interesting one was that the enterprise must demonstrate the capacity to employ six other young people.

How many enterprises run by adults employ at least six

If you unpack the conditions further, how many of young girls would meet all these conditions?

To cut the story short, we varied the conditions and also moved the funds to the Youth Ministry.

On representation, Members of Parliament find time to relate with the entirety of their electorate through constituency consultations and outreach programmes. It is also important that the public have access to Parliament; that they attend and participate in public hearings at meetings of committees.

Parliaments should broadcast their proceedings.

There are also civil society’s expectations. It should be possible for civil society to have an input into legislation, policy and programmes that are brought to Parliament.

It is also important that Members have adequate information in a timely manner to inform the debates. Parliament should facilitate adequate research services.

However, on the African continent, Members of Parliament are also expected to provide other services, such as roads, hospitals and schools. It is, therefore, important that the public is educated on the roles of the Members of Parliament vis-à-vis the role of the executive.

At a cultural level, Members of Parliament are expected to participate in funerals, weddings, graduation functions et cetera, and many times they are judged harshly by the electorate for failing to fulfil these cultural norms.

With sufficient and continuous education, information and explanations, I hope we that we shall graduate from this level.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 297

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:19 Page 298

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

THE CANADIAN ADVANTAGE Despite its close connections to the struggling economy of the neighbouring United States, Canada has weathered the global economic crisis better than most countries.

The Parliamentary Secretary in Canada’s finance ministry explains why a combination of careful regulation, prudent financial management and targeted stimuli including tax reductions has kept Canada in a strong economic position.

Ms Shelley Glover, MP, in Ottawa.

Ms Glover is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance. A former police officer, she has been a Conservative Member of Canada’s House of Commons since 2008.

She served previously as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and as Parliamentary Secretary for Official Languages.

Canada is a key leader in ongoing efforts to build a better financial future for citizens worldwide by helping to promote a more stable and resilient global economy. Much has been written about how our country weathered the most synchronized global downturn since the 1930s. As countries around the world confront the challenges facing the global economy, it may be useful to provide some insight into Canada’s experience and actions.

While Canada’s economy was side-swiped by the global recession, we are recovering better than most. Fortunately, we had a lot of advantages that mitigated the impact on our country.

Stable housing sector For example, we have a strong and stable housing sector that is quite different from the situation in many other countries. There are several factors, in fact, that set Canada apart.

First of all, we don’t have mortgage interest deductibility. We don’t encourage using tax policy to

298 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

increase risk in the housing market. Secondly, we have recourse mortgages in Canada.

This helps instil a sense of responsibility and discipline among homebuyers. Thirdly, we have very prudent lending standards, reflecting both solid management practices and strong supervision.

Fourthly, our originators, for the most part, hold the mortgages that they grant. And finally, we monitor the housing market constantly and very carefully.

Indeed, the government has intervened three times in the past three years to tighten the rules for our insured mortgage market. For example, earlier this year Canada reduced amortization periods, increased mandatory down payments and lowered the maximum loan-to-value ratio on refinancing. Canada’s lenders demonstrated responsibility and restraint throughout the global downturn. As a result, Canada did not suffer a single bank bailout or failure.

Equally important, and unlike the situation south of our border in

Ms Shelley Glover, MP

the United States, there was no notable change in the rate of payment delinquency among homeowners. Paying one’s mortgage is a strong Canadian character habit.

Sound financial sector For the fourth year in a row, the World Economic Forum rated Canada’s banking system as the best in the world. More recently, five Canadian financial institutions were named to Bloomberg’s list of the world’s strongest banks, more than any other country.

Canada’s financial system is

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 12:20 Page 299

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

Ms Shelly Glover, MP, (first left) and Minister of State (Finance) Hon Ted Menzies, MP, (centre, speaking) at a pension roundtable in a suburban Winnipeg store.

solid, with well-run companies based on sound risk management.

It is supported by an effective regulatory and supervisory framework.

In Canada’s case, we have an effective prudential supervisor in the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, who reports to Parliament through the Minister of Finance. The Superintendent has a clear mandate – to protect the interests of depositors and policy holders – and the tools and authorities needed to deal quickly and early when issues arise. The Superintendent supervises financial institutions on a consolidated basis, which includes all domestic and international subsidiaries of banks and insurance companies.

Secondly, there is the Governor of the Bank of Canada. The Governor is responsible for monetary policy and for oversight of systemically important payment clearing and settlement systems, and is the lender of last resort to the financial system.

Thirdly, there is the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation, which insures deposits and acts as the resolution authority for failed banks.

Fourthly, there is a separate Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, which we have had for many years now and is responsible for consumer protection.

These officials meet regularly with the Department of Finance and their job is to keep an eye on the system and watch for early warning signs.

At the same time, we are actively identifying areas in need of improvement.

Chief among them has been the absence of a national securities regulator. Our government is working with willing provinces and territories to establish a national securities regulator to offer better protection for investors, simpler processes for business and a more comprehensive framework for addressing systemic risks that arise from capital markets.

Fiscal advantage Canada also has a strong and credible fiscal track record. Our government paid down significant amounts of debt when times were good and kept our net debt-to-

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) ratio well below our G7 counterparts.

This gave us the capacity to inject $60 billion in fiscal stimulus into our economy when it was needed – our Economic Action Plan budgets of 2009 and 2010, including measures to provide liquidity.

On the world stage, the Canadian economy is coping relatively well in spite of the economic challenges we must face beyond our borders. Canada’s economic and fiscal fundamentals remain solid and sustainable.

•

We are the only G7 country that has recovered more than all of the output and all of the jobs lost during the downturn.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 299

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:44 Page 300

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

•

•

•

Both the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) forecast that our economy will be among the strongest in the G7 this year and next.

Only recently, Moody’s renewed Canada’s triple-A credit rating based on Canada’s – and I quote – “ economic resiliency, very high government financial strength, and a low susceptibility to event risk.”

More recently, that same top rating was affirmed by Fitch, with a stable outlook, citing a “culture of conservative policymaking” that allowed Canada to weather the global recession and recover faster than other countries.

In addition, international investors have also given Canada a strong vote of confidence with their own money. After a 10-year

absence, Canada returned to the global bond market in 2009-10 with two highly successful and oversubscribed offerings, one in U.S. dollars and the second in euros.

As with all foreign currency borrowing by the Government of Canada, the proceeds were used to fund Canada’s foreign currency reserves. They were not used to fund government spending.

In the same spirit of careful fiscal management, our government has designed initiatives to achieve substantial savings for taxpayers through greater efficiency and effectiveness in government.

According to the OECD, Canada’s total government net debt-to-GDP ratio stood at 30.4 per cent in 2010, compared with an average net debt of 66.2 per cent among G7 countries. Recently, the IMF Fiscal Monitor forecast that Canada will continue to have by far the lowest total government net debt-to-GDP ratio in the entire G7,

300 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

33.3 per cent in 2016 compared to the G7 average of 92.9 per cent.

Once it is fully implemented three years from now, our deficit reduction action plan will achieve at least $4 billion in annual savings, or five per cent of the $80 billion in programme spending being reviewed, and help the government to return to balanced budgets in the medium term.

Pro-growth economic agenda Among other pro-growth policies, our government introduced tax reductions, enabling employers and entrepreneurs to invest more of their revenues back into their operations. This tax advantage, that we targeted back in 2007, is now coming into full force, putting Canadian businesses at a real advantage just when they need it most – and just when Canadians workers need it most – to drive Canada’s economic recovery and future growth.

A cornerstone of this

advantage was our substantial reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate and the elimination of the federal capital tax.

We have been steadily lowering our federal corporate tax rate, from 22 per cent in 2007 to 15 per cent as of this coming Jan. 1. At the same time, we have encouraged the provincial governments in Canada to follow suit and lower their corporate tax rates to 10 per cent, establishing a combined federal-provincial tax rate of 25 per cent. This is helping to brand Canada as a highly competitive tax jurisdiction for business investment. Most of the provinces are on track to accomplish this.

As well, we introduced incentives to encourage provinces to eliminate their general capital taxes and by 2012 all such capital taxes will have disappeared.

These and other tax changes have allowed Canada to achieve an overall tax rate on new business investment that is substantially lower than that in any other G7 country.

Glover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:44 Page 301

THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

In addition, at a time when other countries were considering raising barriers to trade, Canada lowered them.

In Budgets 2009 and 2010, we eliminated 1,755 tariffs on manufacturing inputs and machinery and equipment, positioning Canada as the first country among its G7 and G20 partners to be able to boast that it is a tariff-free zone for manufacturing.

This means that Canadian manufacturers will be able to import goods for further production in Canada without the burden of tariffs and the costs of complying with certain customs rules such as rules of origin and drawback. This is giving Canadian manufacturers a competitive advantage in the global marketplace by lowering production costs, increasing competitiveness and enhancing innovation and productivity.

It is gratifying to note these efforts are being recognized.

Canada was recently named

the top global destination for business by Forbes, the U.S. business magazine. The top ranking marked a rise for Canada from fourth place in last year’s rankings, in large measure because of our reduced tax burden.

The magazine also ranked Canada in the top tier in protecting investors and in dealing with red tape – something our government has made a key priority – and highlighted that it is relatively easy to start a new business in Canada.

International leadership While Canada’s economic fundamentals remain sound, the risks to the global economy remain serious. It is crucial for governments to work together in a coordinated effort to restore growth and confidence and to create jobs. Both advanced and emerging economies have important roles to play.

At the height of the global financial crisis, the G20 showed

the international community that leaders could work together to deal with global instability. This organization must once again send a clear signal to the world that it is ready to take the strong actions necessary to maintain future growth and stability for all.

Canada has taken a leadership role in this global effort, including securing a commitment from advanced economies at the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto to fiscal plans that will at least halve deficits by 2013 and stabilize or reduce government debt-to-GDP ratios by 2016. In Toronto, the G20 agreed to four pillars of financial sector reform, including: a strong regulatory framework, effective supervision, transparent international assessment and peer review. Many countries around the world are taking their cue from the Canadian model.

Other key accomplishments stemming from Canada’s international leadership this year include being instrumental in

shaping reforms to the global financial sector through such international organizations as the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, and keeping global focus on the recapitalization of international financial institutions, allowing them to double their lending capacity and to be a central pillar of the global response to the financial and economic crisis.

Our government remains focused on what matters to Canadians – creating jobs and promoting economic growth. While Canada has the strongest job growth record in the G7 with approximately 650,000 net new jobs created since July 2009 and the IMF projecting that we will have among the strongest economic growth in the G7 over the next two years, we are not immune from global economic turbulence.

That is why we need to stay the course and remain focused on the economy.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 301

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:46 Page 302

OIL EXPLORATION

OIL EXPLORATION IN THE FALKLAND ISLANDS The exploitation of oil and gas resources can benefit the economy of any state, provided development is regulated and monitored properly. But knowing how to do that can be a major obstacle, especially for a small jurisdiction. A Member of the Falkland Islands Legislative Assembly explains how her South Atlantic territory is handling this potential windfall industry.

Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA, in Port Stanley.

Mrs Cheek, a former teacher and businesswoman, is the Member of the Falkland Islands Executive Council responsible for, among other portfolios, Mineral Resources. A Member of the Legislative Assembly since 2009, she previously served in the Assembly from 1997 to 2005.

The Falkland Islands are a United Kingdom Overseas Territory with full internal self-government and a population of 3,000. The Islands have traditionally relied on fishing, sheep farming and tourism as the main sources of income. However, their offshore geology has led to increased interest over the last 15 years and the Falkland Islands government is now hoping to exploit available hydrocarbon resources responsibly and sustainably by adopting industry and regulatory best-practice in environmental, health and safety, and socio-economic matters.

Exploration offshore Oil exploration in the waters offshore the Falkland Islands began in the mid-nineties, when seven licences were awarded to a number of consortia including big players such as: Shell, Amerada Hess and Lasmo. Six wells were drilled in 1998 and although oil

302 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Hon. Jan Cheek, MLA

shows were encountered, the low oil price at the time (around U.S.$10 a barrel) made further exploration uneconomical and the licences were wholly relinquished or taken up by smaller, independent partners.

Further licensing was carried out in the subsequent years under an “open-door” licensing system whereby operators could approach the Islands’ government and apply for licences rather than taking part

in a more traditional licensing round. Following extensive analysis of existing well results and additional seismic surveys, a rig was secured by Desire Petroleum in late 2009 to begin another round of exploration drilling.

The first well of this round was drilled in early 2010 and since then a further 14 wells have been drilled, including one in the previously undrilled South Falklands Basin.

The “Sea Lion” prospect, drilled by Rockhopper Exploration, was declared an oil discovery and additional testing and appraisal wells have produced encouraging results. However, much work remains before this prospect can be deemed commercially viable and, in the event that it is, several years of preparation would be required before production began in earnest. Another well, on Desire’s Liz prospect, was confirmed as a gas discovery.

Other wells have resulted in oil

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:47 Page 303

OIL EXPLORATION

Oil exploration in the Falkland Islands has increased since the mid-nineties.

shows and have shown there to be good quality reservoir rocks, which although not as promising, provide invaluable information for any future drilling that may take place in the area.

Effects onshore Although exploration operations so far have concentrated in the waters to the north of the Islands, 2012 will see the arrival of a dedicated harsh environment rig to drill prospects to the south and east of the Islands for a minimum of six months.

Exploration has had relatively little physical onshore impact in the Islands, and although dedicated storage and lay-down facilities have been built by the companies, the self-sufficient nature of the industry has not required any major development so far. In economic terms, however, oil exploration has had a significant impact on the Islands, with an estimated G.B.£10 million of additional turnover being injected into the local economy every year. Given that the Islands’ gross domestic product is around £104 million, this is no mean

amount! Such an influx of cash is, of course, very much welcomed by the Falkland Islands government, but it remains wary of any artificial inflation that may arise as a result.

The industry is licensed and regulated by the Falkland Islands government’s Department of Mineral Resources, which in turn reports to the Mineral Resources Committee, made up of two elected Members of the Falklands’ Legislative Assembly and senior civil servants. All approval and licensing decisions have to be sanctioned by the Mineral

Resources Committee before they are passed on to the government’s Executive Council and the Governor for ultimate approval.

Since the early nineties, the Falkland Islands government has employed the British Geological Survey as technical advisors, providing guidance on not only exploration and geological matters, but also licensing, legislation and tax regimes. Similarly, a Memorandum of Understanding with the United Kingdom’s Health and Safety Executive allows the Falklands’ government to seek

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 303

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:49 Page 304

OIL EXPLORATION

This page: Off-shore oil exploration is a high-tech industry which must be managed carefully to control the risks.

Right: Stanley Harbour in the Falkland Islands.

advice on health and safety matters and provides the manpower and expertise to carry out inspections on offshore installations. Additional advice is provided by the U.K. oil industry regulator, the Department of

Energy and Climate Change (DECC), via the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. This outsourcing of technical advice is inevitable given the limited expertise and resources available in the Falklands.

304 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

“Frontier” restraints on production and revenue While initial results have been encouraging, there are still a lot of unknowns to be determined before oil exploration can be deemed commercial in the

Falklands. The Islands’ remoteness means that the cost of logistics is considerable, as would be the cost of transporting any production away from the Islands; therefore the threshold at which a find can be deemed commercial is higher

Cheek:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:51 Page 305

OIL EXPLORATION

than it would be in, say, the North Sea. The government is mindful of this and therefore has not factored any future oil production revenues into its long-term financial planning.

Should long-term oil production be established, the applicable fiscal system comprises of variable acreage rentals, a nine-per-cent royalty on production and corporation tax of 21 per cent on profits up to £1 million and 26 per cent thereafter. This is considered to be a very favourable fiscal regime by international standards and was originally set up as such to reflect the high-risk, frontier aspect of exploration in the Falklands.

It is envisaged that any oil production would be carried out by means of floating production and storage offshore vessels (FPSO), a system which requires no oil storage or processing infrastructure to be built onshore.

Any oil produced would then be transported to refineries by shuttle tankers without even touching the Islands. In the event that a gas discovery was deemed commercial, onshore infrastructure (such as a refinery) and the necessary pipelines would need to be built. However, the sheer cost of this and the Islands’ distance from markets make the quantities of gas required for a commercial

discovery too high to make it likely.

FPSOs are the preferred model of oil production development as they have the least impact physically, socially and environmentally.

Protecting the environment – publicly The environmental impact of any exploration and production is a very important factor to oil exploration in the Falklands. The Islands boast a pristine natural environment and an abundant range of wildlife, much of it coastal or marine, which the government is committed to protecting. Before commencing any drilling activities, operators are obliged to submit a comprehensive environmental impact statement (EIS) outlining how their operations may affect the local environment and planned steps to alleviate any impacts.

All EIS documents are made public and distributed to local environmental non-governmental organizations, interested government departments and other stakeholders, who are given 42 days to comment. Further to this, the government’s Environmental Planning Department can (and often does) engage an independent, external body to review the document and provide an impartial evaluation of

its contents. Although the Environmental Planning Department makes a recommendation to the Mineral Resources Committee on whether to approve an EIS, this recommendation is made entirely independently of the Mineral Resources Department, which in this instance simply acts as a conduit to aid the public consultation process.

Further to Environmental Impact Statements, operators submit oil spill contingency plans and waste management plans, which are again distributed among stakeholders. Again, the limited resources in the Islands are a factor when considering a response to an oil spill, and therefore as part of their oil spill response plans, all operators retain the services of specialist pollution prevention companies to airlift containment and dispersal equipment into the Islands in the event of an oil spill. With regards to waste management plans, there is a big emphasis on “zero-impact”, that is to say the onus is on the operators to ensure that as much of the waste generated by their activities as possible is not left on the Islands or in their waters but rather shipped back to where they can be disposed of safely and responsibly.

Special environmental guidelines have also been set up to mitigate the effects of seismic surveys on cetaceans. Additionally, independent observers have been placed on support vessels during well tests to observe bird interactions during periods of flaring.

An Offshore Hydrocarbons Environmental Forum encompassing government bodies, non-governmental organizations, oil industry representatives and local fishing companies has been created in order to identify and resolve any environmental issue that may arise. In addition, an Oil and Gas Development Forum has been formed to bring together local companies and the oil industry to discuss opportunities and maximize local participation in supporting hydrocarbons development.

The Falklands’ right to develop Exploration in the Falklands has received much media attention due to political tensions with Argentina over its sovereignty claim; it should be highlighted that much of this is down to media sensationalism.

However, although Argentina has introduced measures designed to hamper exploration in the Islands, such as a blockade contravening international maritime law, exploration has continued unhindered. Sadly, while it hasn’t affected oil exploration, the blockade has affected everyday life in the Islands. The disruption of alltoo-vital shipping links with the South American continent has driven up the cost of living due to the increased cost of importing goods, especially fresh fruit and vegetables.

Nonetheless, the Falkland Islands and U.K. governments have no doubt that exploration in the Islands fully complies with international law and it is the legitimate right of the Islanders to explore and exploit our natural resources.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 305

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:07 Page 306

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

WOMEN AS AGENTS OF CHANGE IN SMALL SOCIETIES Tasmanian women have a long history of becoming involved in elected politics through involvement in community organizations, says a Member of the Australian island state’s upper House.

Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC, in Hobart.

Mr Finch, a former radio broadcaster, has been an independent Member of the Tasmanian Legislative Council since 2002. He is the Third Deputy Chair of Committees.

Today Tasmania has women represented across all sectors of society. In many areas it is no longer newsworthy that a woman has reached a senior role in society.

The current Tasmanian Premier is a woman, Hon. Lara Giddings, MP, two of the six Supreme Court judges are women, with the first only appointed in 2005, and there are many prominent businesswomen and community leaders.

This situation has not been the norm over the more than 200 years since European settlement in Tasmania. It was not until 1948 that the first woman, Margaret E. McIntyre, was elected to Parliament. It was 1953 before two women were elected to the House of government, the House of Assembly.

How has Tasmania changed in

306 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

these 50 years that has led to the current situation?

Making history A major factor that affected the role of women in Tasmania has been greater access to education.

Enrolments at the University of Tasmania are now dominated by women with 14,233 of the 24,454 or 58 per cent of students enrolled during 2009 being female. This would suggest that the next generation of community and business leaders may be dominated by women as they will be the majority of the highly trained sector of the population.

History has also had an impact on the roles occupied by women in Tasmania with early European settlement, dominated by male convicts and their soldier guards, a predominately male society.

Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC

Although there were female convicts and a few free female settlers in the early decades of the nineteenth century, women were very much in the minority. This gave them a level of influence which grew as the European population increased.

Prior to European settlement women played a pivotal role in

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:54 Page 307

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

Tasmania’s first ladies: Dame Enid Lyons (left) was the first woman elected to the Commonwealth of Australia Parliament and later the first female cabinet Minister while Hon. Laura Giddings, MP, (right) is the first woman t Premier of Tasmania .

Aboriginal society as illustrated by this quote from Milestones for Tasmanian Women.

is shown by the continuity of their culture and we pay tribute to the women of Trowunna.”

“Aboriginal people inhabited Trowunna (Tasmania) for up to 40,000 years before white settlement and practiced a hunter and gatherer economy. Aboriginal women were recorded by the first French and British explorers as being outstanding hunters, harvesting a variety of seafood, birds, eggs and small land animals.

The Tasmanian Aborigines had a rich cultural and social tradition, made unique by their isolation from mainland tribes. Colonization by the English changed the landscape of Tasmania and almost destroyed the original inhabitants of Tasmania.

The resilience of Aboriginal women

There were notable women of influence including Lady Jane Franklin, wife of Governor and Arctic explorer Sir John Franklin, who not only influenced her husband’s policies but also influenced the middle and upper middle class European society at the time.

These early historical influences had a strong effect in a tiny and isolated society, and probably laid the foundations for a modern society where women and their opinions are a powerful influence. Women have always been agents of change in Tasmania throughout history and

across all aspects of Tasmanian life.

Securing the vote The women’s suffrage movement in Tasmania grew out of other organizations with interests in sanitation and temperance. The Women's Sanitary Association (1891) tried to bring about sanitary reform and the Woman's Christian Temperance Union (1892) tried to have liquor banned, but both were reportedly more successful in achieving the vote for women.

Feminism in Tasmania, along with its counterpart movements in other states, was largely a product of the twentieth century and can be dated from the late stages of the nineteenth century, fuelled largely by the demand for female

suffrage. The Woman's Christian Temperance Union took up the campaign for female suffrage in earnest by 1893. In 1896 members Jessie Rooke and Georgiana Kermode travelled the state organizing a series of public meetings that were addressed by Members of Parliament and other prominent citizens supporting a resolution “That the franchise be extended to the women of Tasmania as an act of common Justice”. A further tour undertaken

by Rooke in 1898 gathered thousands of signatures in favour of female suffrage. Petitions were presented to Parliament in 1895, 1896 and 1898 before the House of Assembly passed women's suffrage only to have it defeated in the Legislative Council.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 307

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:56 Page 308

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

Hon. Kerry Finch, MLC, (left) pictured with the President of the Legislative Council in Tasmania, Hon. Sue Smith, MLC, (right).

The Tasmanian Women's Suffrage Association was formed in1903 by Jessie Rooke. It changed its name to the Tasmanian Women's Political Association as the upper House had assented to vote for women.

Tasmanian women gained the vote finally in 1903 after women had won the vote federally.

In 1904 all Tasmanian women became eligible to vote in House of Assembly elections after 1903 Constitution Act changed the eligibility term from "man" to "person". The franchise for the Legislative Council for owners of freehold of 10 pounds annual value or leasehold of 30 pounds was extended to women. South Australia was the first in Australia to give women the vote (1896), followed by Western Australia in 1900 and New South Wales in 1902. In the Australasian region, New Zealand was the leader by providing votes for women in 1893.

All of these jurisdictions were small communities and this may have been a factor in achieving this outcome.

A model for social change A good way to understand the level

of influence and effort that was required to achieve major social change is by examining the role of one of the main figures at this time, Jessie Rooke In 1896 she set out on a votesfor-women tour of Tasmania with the suffrage superintendent for the colony, Georgina Kermode. Not even the onslaught of severe winter weather could deter them from the 200-mile journey by draughty train and rickety coach.

They addressed large public gatherings, collected campaign funds and distributed leaflets, gaining thousands of signatures for their petition which was presented to Parliament at the end of 1896. The House of Assembly agreed but the Legislative Council frustrated the reform.

Jessie undertook a second tour in 1898 and collected more signatures. She became the Tasmanian president of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union in 1898 and was the most prominent Tasmanian suffragette.

In 1903 she formed the Tasmanian Women's Suffrage Association to mobilize women to vote in the coming federal election as the Commonwealth of Australia

308 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Franchise Act had been enacted in 1902. Apparently to avoid anomalies, the Tasmanian Legislative Council suddenly agreed the vote for white women in state elections. However, women did not become eligible to stand for election to either Tasmanian House until 1921.

Jessie Rooke became Australasian president of the WCTU until her death in 1906 and so was one of the first Tasmanian women to gain prominence outside the state. Ironically, she died before she could exercise her state voting rights.

belonged to several organizations which campaigned to influence government health, welfare and justice policies for women and children.

In 1937 she convened a statewide conference to co-ordinate efforts directed towards women and children which led to the formation of the Tasmanian Council for Mother and Child. She stood unsuccessfully for the Tasmanian Parliament in 1922, 1925 and 1943. Her achievements were recognized in 1935 when an Order of the British Empire was awarded to her.

The community welfare link As would be expected in the late 1800s and early 1900s the majority of the women prominent in Tasmania were particularly interested in matters of children and welfare. Many of the women who were active in politics also had community activities as their primary focus including Edith Waterworth, OBE. Her case study illustrates the interlinked strands of community and politics.

Edith Waterworth is best known for working to improve the welfare of women and children. She

Women enter Tasmania’s Parliament Although women were given the vote in 1904 and were able to stand for the state Parliament from 1921, it took a considerable time and the bravery and perseverance of many women in Tasmania to achieve election to office. In 1921, Alicia O'Shea-Petersen and Edith Waterworth stood for election and Annette Youl also stood in 1922, all unsuccessfully.

After this time there was considerable political engagement by women. A number of women

Finch:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:57 Page 309

CASE STUDY: WOMEN IN TASMANIA

ran as candidates and in 1948 Margaret McIntyre was elected to the Legislative Council almost entirely by male voters due to the restricted franchise for the Council.

Margaret McIntyre was a very influential citizen. In her speech to the League of Remembrance in Launceston 1948, she said: “As the world has been run by men for so long, and they do not appear to have made a very good job of it, isn’t it time we women tried to use more influence in national affairs? It is no use just sitting back and bewailing the state of the world and thinking how helpless each of us is to alter it. Everyone can do some little thing to help – mothers and teachers especially.”

Born in a tent in Maitland, New South Wales, where her geologist father was surveying coalfields, Margaret McIntyre’s aspirations were fostered by her mother, Caroline David, who was the first woman principal of Hurlstone Teachers Training College.

Margaret graduated from Sydney University with a Bachelor of Arts in 1907. She married in 1908 and had two sons and two daughters.

After the First World War the family settled in Launceston.

Margaret became involved in many community activities and her interests included baby care, health, youth, education and women’s issues. She was involved in dramatic productions and believed drama would help to foster team spirit in young people.

Margaret was active in many community groups, including lobbying for the establishment of community schools, and in 1947, she was awarded an Order of the British Empire for community services.

The next year, she stood as an independent for a seat in the Legislative Council and defeated the sitting Member with a clear majority. At that stage, voting for the Legislative Council was not universal but was subject to

property qualifications. The only women who were entitled to vote were returned servicewomen and nurses who had served in the First World War. She was elected at a tumultuous time in Tasmanian politics and during her first weeks of sitting was one of three Legislative Councillors who voted against an attempt to block supply.

Unfortunately, Margaret died in a plane crash less than six months after her election.

The case of Dame Enid Lyons indicates how women in a small community can often lead the larger nation in establishing rights and equality. She was the first women elected to the Commonwealth of Australia Parliament and then rose to become the first female cabinet Minister.

She said in her Maiden Speech in the House of Representatives in 1943: “This is the first occasion upon which a woman has addressed this House. For that reason, it is an occasion which, for every woman in the Commonwealth, marks in some degree a turning point in history. I am well aware that as I acquit myself in the work that I have undertaken for the next three years, so shall I either prejudice or enhance the prospects of those women who may wish to follow me in public service in the years to come.”

Born in a timber camp in northwest Tasmania, by 1915 she was working as a teacher at the age of 17 before she married Joe Lyons, then State Treasurer and Minister for Education and Railways. She gave her first political speech in 1920 to encourage women to be interested in politics.

Joe Lyons was Premier of Tasmania from 1923 until 1928.

Both Enid, by then the mother of seven children, and her mother stood for the Australian Labor

Party in the 1925 state election. In 1929, Joe entered the federal Parliament and became Prime Minister in 1932 at the head of his new United Australia Party. Enid, by then the mother of twelve, took on the role of the Prime Minister’s wife with her family spread across three states. In 1937, Enid was made a Dame Grand Cross of the Order of the British Empire. Joe Lyons died in office in April 1939.

In 1943, Enid was elected to the federal House and focused on family, welfare and women’s rights.

“Tasmania is a very different place in many ways now; but the important role of women in driving much of this change must be acknowledged.”

She became Australia’s first female cabinet Minister in 1949 when she became Vice-President of the Executive Council in the Menzies government. She retired from politics in 1951 but she continued to be active in public life working as a newspaper columnist, serving on various boards and commissions and publishing two autobiographies.

Modern politics In the last 30 years there have been a number of firsts for women in Tasmanian politics that mirrors a rise of influence of women in the broader Tasmanian community.

Tasmania is a very different place in many ways now; but the important role of women in driving much of this change must be acknowledged.

It is difficult to isolate the

importance of the smaller community in allowing this situation to develop; but it is hard to ignore the grassroots origins of many of these women. The small community often imposes an imperative for women to step up to more influential positions.

Since Gillian James became Tasmania's first female Minister in 1980 after serving as Deputy Speaker, other women have been appointed as Ministers and as party Leaders, including the first female Premier, Hon. Lara Giddings MP. The current makeup of Tasmanian politics shows a considerable influence of women and suggests that this will continue to increase into the future.

In the Legislative Council, six of the 15 Members are women, including the President, Hon. Sue Smith MLC. In the House of Assembly, six of the 25 Members are women, including the Premier, Hon. Lara Giddings. Hon. Michelle O’Byrne is Leader of the House in the House of Assembly. In cabinet, two of the eight current Ministers are women.

Women are also active in local government with representation increasing over recent years and programmes are being put in place to encourage further participation.

The percentage of women councillors rose to 27.4 per cent in the 2009 election from 23.8 per cent in 2007. A WomenCan campaign facilitated a range of events and activities designed to encourage and support women in running for local government.

In small communities like Tasmania the starting point for many political careers and community activists is in local government.

An effort to increase female involvement at this level is likely to provide a pathway to a fuller participation in civil society in Tasmania. The benefits of this activity take time to materialize but will certainly benefit the entire Tasmania community over time.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 309

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:58 Page 310

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

INDIA’S RAJYA SABHA AND WOMEN’S EMPOWERMENT When an issue such as advancing the political and other rights of women becomes bogged down in India’s popularly elected Chamber, governments turn to the upper House, ironically the Chamber that was designed to slow down not speed up legislation.

Shri S.N. Sahu in New Delhi.

Shri Sahu was a senior official and Press Secretary to the late President of India, Shri K.R. Narayanan, and served as Director in the Prime Minister’s Office.

He is currently Joint Secretary in the Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The views expressed by the author are his personal views.

In 1946 Mahatma Gandhi expressed regret that political parties were not doing enough to send adequate numbers of women to legislative bodies. In response to a question whether it was necessary to have large numbers of women in such bodies, he forcefully said: “I am not enamoured of equality or any other proportion in such matters….Seeing, however, that it has been the custom to decry women, the contrary custom should be to prefer women…to men, even if the preference should result in men being entirely displaced by women.…Women, and for that matter any group, should disdain patronage. They should seek justice, never favours….For men to take a lead in this much-needed reform would be

310 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

not a matter of favour but a simple act of belated justice due to women.”

The Constitution Amendment Bill in the Rajya Sabha The passage of the above Bill in the Rajya Sabha (Council of States) on 9 March 2010 to reserve for women 33 per cent of seats in the Lok Sabha (House of People) and state Assemblies represented the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi to work for justice and equality for women. As the 108th amendment to the constitution, it is a mighty step for the emancipation of Indian women and their political empowerment.

The motion moved in the Council of States to pass the Bill after so many failed attempts in the

Shri S.N. Sahu

Lok Sabha to make it a law bears significance in the context of the historic role played by the Rajya Sabha in becoming a legislative forum where some of the most farreaching socio-economic legislation originated. The day it would be enacted it would be hailed as the second most

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 13:59 Page 311

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

Women of the Rayja Sabha: The role of the former Deputy Chairman of the Rayja Sabha, Dr the Hon. Najma Heptullah, (left) was significant in guaranteeing female representation in the House; and Smt. Sonia Gandhi, MP, President of the Indian National Congress Party (right).

significant development after women got the right to vote.

Several Members of the Rajya Sabha, cutting across party lines, while participating in the debate on the Bill, referred to Dr B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of our constitution. Shri D. Raja remarked that gender equality must be the objective of the entire Parliament and nation. He fortified his argument by quoting Dr Ambedkar who in his address to thousands of women belonging to the depressed classes had said: “I measure the progress of community by the degree of progress which women have achieved.”

Dr Ambedkar, as the then Law Minister of India, drafted the Hindu Code Bill which was supposed to ensure women their legitimate rights which were denied to them for centuries. Its enactment would

have brought about an unprecedented social revolution in our country spearheaded by women.

Many organizations and conservative sections of society came to the streets and shouted “Down with the Hindu Code Bill”.

They were against equality and equal opportunities for women. Our first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was saddened by those developments. In a letter to Chief Ministers he wrote that even “as a considerable majority in Parliament at that time wanted to pass the Bill with minor modifications, they were helpless before a determined minority and therefore had to concede defeat for the moment”. Those words of Prime Minister Nehru sound so contemporary for our own time when the Constitution (One Hundred Eighth Amendment) Bill

2008 is facing stiff opposition only from a small group.

The Nehru government’s intention to make the Hindu Code Bill the law of the land was best reflected when it was incorporated in the address of the then President of India, Dr Rajendra Prasad, to both Houses of Parliament assembled together in 1952.

However, the arduous exercise of DrAmbedkar to frame the Hindu Code Bill did not go in vain. Its progressive content and reformative features commanded attention of all right-thinking people from across the nation.

Country-wide debate on those aspects moulded public opinion in its favour.

Hindu Law Reform Bills and Nehru’s observations Eventually many Bills incorporating

the basic ingredients of the Hindu Code were introduced in the Rajya Sabha. The Hindu Marriage and Divorce Bill 1952, The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Bill 1953, The Hindu Succession Bill 1954, and The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Bill 1956 became law after originating in the Council of States.

It is of extraordinary education to know that then Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was making profound remarks after the passage of each and every Bill introduced in the Rajya Sabha for protecting the rights of women.

When those Bills were passed he observed in a letter to the Chief Ministers on 15 June 1956 “there is something revolutionary about them” and “they have broken the barrier of ages and cleared the way somewhat for our womenfolk to progress”. Then he remarked: “I

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 311

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:05 Page 312

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

Mahatma Gandhi (left) expressed regret that political parties were not doing enought to send sufficent numbers of women to legislative bodies; The first Indian Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (right), championed the advancement of women in the Rayja Sabha.

have long been convinced that a nation’s progress is intimately connected with the status of its women.”

The observations of Pandit Nehru articulated in the mid-1950s brought out the significance of this legislation which the Rajya Sabha had the distinction of taking up first. In preferring the Council of States to initiate those historic Bills, the government of the day was underlining the image of the Council of States as a legislative nursery for progressive ideas and forces and for taking steps to advance women and heighten the prestige of our country at the global level.

The preferred Chamber for women’s legislation Five and half decades after the Rajya Sabha was chosen to introduce the Hindu reform Bills, it fell to it again to provide leadership for passing the Constitution (Hundred and Eighth Amendment) Bill 2008 for providing adequate space to women in the political field. While the House took

courageous and bold initiatives in securing the social and economic rights of women in the middle of the twentieth century, it took the giant leap for political empowerment of women in the first decade of the twenty-first century.

With the introduction and passage of the constitutional amendment in the Rajya Sabha to reserve 33 per cent seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state Legislatures, the nation realized that the Council of States as a permanent Chamber of our Parliament is of monumental significance in successfully taking up legislation which revolutionizes polity and society and which often is not accepted by some social and political groups.

When a legislative proposal is introduced in the Rajya Sabha it does not lapse as, unlike the Lok Sabha, the upper House is not subject to dissolution. Its continuation as a permanent Chamber of our Parliament is its unique and enduring feature and any legislation originating there

312 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

remains alive. While piloting the Report of the Union Constitution Committee in the Constituent Assembly, Shri N. Gopalaswamy Ayyangar had stated that the role of the second Chamber was not to be a clog to either legislation or administration.

The idea of a second Chamber is rooted in the fundamental notion that it would prevent hasty legislation. The Rajya Sabha has certainly prevented numerous hasty laws. However there are vested interests inside and outside Parliament which often prevent introduction of legislation envisaging bold social, economic and political reforms. In the particular instance of the legislation concerning the reservation of seats for women, the Lower House of our Parliament witnessed violent resistance when it was introduced in the 11th, 12th and 13th Lok Sabhas. It is in such situations that the Rajya Sabha, created to prevent hasty legislation, is preferred by the government to introduce Bills of far-reaching social and economic significance

to hasten the process of making these into laws for the benefit of society and nation. The role of Rajya Sabha assumes critical significance for expanding the scope of democracy and making it more inclusive and broad-based.

The Speaker of the lower House, Hon. Somnath Chatterjee, in his valedictory remarks at the end of the last session of the 14th Lok Sabha on 26 February 2009 stated: “Personally it is a matter of great regret to me that we have not been able, during my tenure, to pass the Women’s Reservation Bill which to my mind would have gone a long way towards genuine and effective empowerment of 50 per cent of our population. The Women’s Reservation Bill has now been introduced in the Rajya Sabha during the 2008 Budget Session to ensure that the Bill does not lapse with the dissolution of the 14th Lok Sabha.”

With the introduction of such legislation in the Rajya Sabha, it is

Sahu:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:05 Page 313

WOMEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA

kept alive and public opinion is created and moulded around it.

The Rajya Sabha acts as the mood manager of the nation for many legislative proposals framed by governments in the larger interests of the nation to take our country forward by extending justice to those who have suffered for centuries.

That happened to the Hindu Code Bill. The Code itself could not be made a law. But the laborious process of its drafting and the final shape in which it was presented to the nation reflected the intention of the then government to establish a liberal legal regime for women for addressing their concerns in relation to marriage, divorce, right to property, et cetera.

In successfully taking up the Hindu Code legislation for guaranteeing social and economic rights of women, the Rajya Sabha thus made a start in creating conditions for making women equal partners in the political sphere.

It has been well said that “women’s empowerment is not only a political issue but also a socio-economic issue”. In successfully clearing legislation for the social and economic rights of women, the Rajya Sabha was thus fulfilling the key aspects of women’s empowerment in the middle of the twentieth century.

The then Minister of Legal Affairs, Shri H.V. Pataskar, while moving the motion in the Rajya Sabha on 1 October 1955 for the Hindu Succession Bill, stated that for many years Indian women had not been treated on an equal footing. Then he noted with satisfaction that the speeches of Members of the Rajya Sabha almost expressed unanimity to grant equality to women so that all hindrances in regard to succession for women would be removed.

For example, Shrimati Lakshmi Menon, a Member of the Rajya Sabha and then Parliamentary Secretary to External Affairs Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru,

said that those opposing the Bill would realize that they could not hold back the change that was inevitably coming in favour of women.

In 1977 when the Rajya Sabha completed 25 years, a volume was published entitled “The Second Chamber: Its Role in Modern Legislatures” edited by Shri S.S. Bhalerao, the Chamber’s then Secretary-General.

Many of its women Members contributed articles to it, including Shrimati Leela Damodar Menon who catalogued its significant achievements and wrote: “What the Rajya Sabha needed the most was more women Members in its fold”. Her robust vision for the Rajya Sabha in terms of greater representation of women was as true for the House as it was for all legislative bodies of our country including the Lok Sabha.

Representation of women on parliamentary committees and in local government Members of the Rajya Sabha have always remained vigilant in taking up the cause of women’s representation on the committees of Parliament.

It was best exemplified in their actions on 29 August 1985 when the constitution of the Joint Committee of both Houses on the Bill to provide for the appointment of the Lokpal to enquire into allegations of corruption against Ministers was being discussed in the Rajya Sabha.

Several Members wanted representation of a woman Member of the House on that committee. The Law Minister admitted that when the matter was discussed no one thought of appointing a woman Member.

The Minister of Parliamentary Affairs was very candid in acknowledging that it was his mistake that he did not propose the name of a woman Member when he prepared the list. The then Deputy Chairman, Hon. Najma

Heptullah, noted that the whole House was conscious of the fact that a woman should have been included. She ruled that the particular rule permitted for the resignation of the Member from the proposed committee and the vacancy caused thereby could be filled by a woman.

To end the controversy, the Deputy Chairman ruled: “According to rule 72, a person will resign and the vacancy so created will be filled by a lady Member.” Eventually a woman Member occupied the seat vacated by a male Member after he resigned from the membership of that committee.

That instance of 1985 proved beyond doubt that Members of the House including its Presiding Officers did underline the issue of representation of women Members in a wide variety of activities of the House which includes the work done by committees.

The Rajya Sabha passed the Constitution (73rd and 74th Amendment) Bill 1991 which eventually became an act of Parliament constitutionally guaranteeing 33 per cent of seats for women in representative bodies across the nation at the local level. As a result, one million women are now elected to such bodies every five years.

Besides, the Rajya Sabha has passed many resolutions which asked for adequate representation of women in legislative bodies. The passage of the Constitution (108th Amendment) Bill to reserve 33 per cent of seats in the lower House of the Indian Parliament and the state Assemblies is a step in that direction.

Correcting the “lopsided” male view In India, seats are reserved for territorial constituencies. The Rajya Sabha as the federal Chamber represents not territorial constituencies but the states and union territories of our country so it is not possible to reserve Rajya

Sabha seats for women. In spite of such limitations, it is important to analyze the role of the Rajya Sabha to further the cause of women’s empowerment.

While doing so, it is pertinent to bear in mind that more women Members in both the Houses of Parliament would go a long way in achieving gender equality and justice in our country.

Our first Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, wrote in early 1950s: “I have been meeting our new Members of Parliament. There are over 700 of them as between the two Houses. I have noticed with great regret how few women have been elected. I suppose this is so in the state Assemblies and Councils also. I think we are very much to be blamed. It is not a matter of showing favour to any one or even of injustice, but rather of doing something which is not conducive to the future growth of our country. I am quite sure that our real and basic growth will only come when women have a full chance to play their part in public life. Wherever they have had this chance, they have, as a whole, done well – better, if I may say so, than the average man. Our laws are manmade, our society dominated by man, and so most of us naturally take a very lopsided view of the matter. We cannot be objective, because we have grown up in certain grooves of thought and action. But the future of India will probably depend ultimately more upon the women than the men.”

The passage of the Constitution Amendment Bill in the Rajya Sabha to reserve 33 per cent of seats for women is thus a step towards fulfilling the vision of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. It is certainly a great and bold beginning for women’s empowerment which will contribute to build a better India firmly based on the values of inclusion, justice and equality.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 313

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:08 Page 314

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS The allocation of government money to Parliamentarians to support projects for the advancement of their constituencies can be a controversial process unless it is run properly. A group of Parliamentarians and academics recommends how to operate them in an effective yet transparent and accountable way.

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) in collaboration with the State University of New York organized in June 2011 workshop to investigate the operations of Constituency Development Funds (CDFs) in various jurisdictions throughout the Commonwealth. The Workshop explored the operations of these funds by asking about: the efficiency of service delivery in constituencies, the extent to which such policymaking contributes to effective administration, and the best ways to enhance the accountability and transparency of policy making on such funds.

The Workshop, hosted by the Jamaica Branch of the CPA, brought together 11 Parliamentarians from the CPA’s Asian, Indian and Caribbean Regions. It followed on a similar workshop held during the CPA’s 56th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in Nairobi, Kenya, in September 2010. The latter meeting identified the growth of CDFs in

Commonwealth regions and highlighted the need for there to be a common set of guidelines for these funds.

The Parliamentarians attending the Jamaica workshop, together with civil servants and academics, compared the delivery of CDFs in their own jurisdictions as well as case studies from other regions.

The discussion revealed that, though there was great diversity in how the funds were administered and allocated, there was an overall consensus on the need for effective governance. The workshop therefore identified the following key principles and guidelines for CDFs. Introduction Parliamentary involvement in grassroots community development has grown considerably across Commonwealth countries. One important tool in this effort has been the Constituency Development Fund, which appropriates national funding for

314 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

MP-influenced, locally determined, constituency-level development.

CDFs become legitimate mechanisms of development through their creation in legislation.

They also facilitate the legitimate connection between Members of Parliament and their constituencies. A central hope behind CDFs is that local input promotes better targeting of projects to the needs of constituents, more attention to implementation and a way of holding government officials responsible for results by giving the capacity for development to MPs whose electoral fate will be locally determined.

CPA Members recognize that CDFs should include steps to eliminate opportunities for corruption and be part of comprehensive development efforts. Below are principles and guidelines for the operation of CDFs that are consistent with international norms and values about legislative performance and socio-economic development.

These principles highlight the importance of transparent project selection and implementation in a manner that enables citizens to work together for the development of their constituency, demand accountability and maintain regular oversight. Further, the administration and management of CDFs can empower provincial and district governments and professional experts to apply their own contextual knowledge to solve local development problems. CDFs also should foster public learning through monitoring and evaluation about what types of development projects are most successful in meeting the needs of citizens and promoting community development.

It is clear that the successful operation of any CDF is contingent upon strong MP involvement and leadership. As representatives of a constituency’s citizens, MPs play an essential role in facilitating citizen participation to make claims upon government services. In this role, MPs can ensure that CDF

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:08 Page 315

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

Providing clean sources of food and water is one of the recommended areas where funding could be allocated.

Principles and Guidelines for CDFs The following are general principles of good governance that should apply to all CDFs across cases.

technocratic experts. CDF initiatives should respond to local developmental needs. On this basis, CDFs require channels of input for local citizens and civil society at all steps in decisionmaking on CDFs. CDFs shall improve the wellbeing and livelihoods of constituents. The primary purpose of a CDF is to redirect additional resources to constituencies to solve socio-economic and humanitarian problems identified by citizens and elected representatives.

I. Responsiveness CDFs are a distributive policy tool designed to meet the development needs of citizens. Their success is contingent upon an inclusive process of consultation which fosters co-operation among constituents, MPs, and

• Civic participation in government and MP-constituent relations shall be improved through the operation of CDFs. • CDFs shall respond to constituents’ needs regardless of political party affiliation or their relationships to MPs and CDF

resources are used efficiently and honestly, with the intent to meet the public interests of their constituencies. Thus, the potential offered by CDFs hinges on the initiative of MPs and their dedication to empowering citizens to participate in their own development.

committees and/or implementers.

CDFs shall not be used vindictively to retaliate against any public official’s electoral opponents.

• Project selection and implementation shall be based on the needs of the people, who will be provided opportunities to communicate their diverse development needs to MPs and CDF committees and/or implementers for the duration of the project.

• Responsiveness can be achieved through a variety of means, including public forums and discussions about a community’s development needs. A responsive CDF process shall also solicit input from all legitimate stakeholders by regularly including them in project selection and implementation.

II. Transparency Transparency, as in the case of

CDFs, is the fundamental cornerstone of an open government that promotes citizen engagement. Transparency refers to the administration of government services in an open and publicly observable manner that creates opportunities for public participation. MPs, CDF committees and/or implementers shall open decision-making processes to the public.

• The process of CDF project selection and implementation shall be transparent. MPs and CDF committees and/or implementers shall consult constituents about local development problems and all possible solutions.

• All deliberative decisions made

by MPs, CDF committees and/or implementers and other bodies shall be open to the public. The flows of all CDF funds shall be transparent and traceable to

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 315

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:10 Page 316

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

Constituency development funds are often devoted to areas such as poverty reduction, and education as well as specific needs of individual constituencies. specific decision-making processes.

• All financial information regarding the use of CDF funds on projects shall be publicly available and documented according to standard and auditable accounting principles. Documentation of CDF funding shall be made publicly available in a timely manner.

• CDF programmes shall ensure ease of access for all citizens, who shall be allowed to make claims of redress and appeal regarding the CDF process according to government regulations.

III. Administration and Management CDFs shall be administered and managed in an efficient, effective and transparent manner.

In this regard, MPs and committees and/or implementers shall facilitate the process by mobilizing citizen participation, streamlining implementing mechanisms and proactively complying with them. Such actions ensure that CDF administration and management will be performed in a timely fashion and remain faithful to the intent of CDFs. • CDF funds shall be allocated to individual constituencies in a fair and equitable manner, regardless of MPs’ partisanship, gender, religion, race or ethnicity.

316 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

• CDF funds shall be released in a timely manner and CDF projects shall be completed in a timely manner. The release of funds shall not be employed as part of a legislative election campaign.

• CDF funds shall be channeled to a separate account of a public agency. Access to the funds shall be limited to officially authorized administrators. Funds shall be managed according to the best practices of public financial management.

• The structure of CDF administration shall be clearly defined. Each administering body at corresponding levels shall function with unambiguous legitimate authority, explicit responsibility and substantive commitments. The structure of authority will be clearly stated to

the public to ensure that citizens are knowledgeable about the decision-making process of CDF management.

• A set of policies and procedures shall be made public to guide the implementation of the fund and the projects.

• Funding shall be devoted to development in constituencies.

Funded areas may include poverty reduction, infrastructure, water, education, health care, sanitation and disaster mitigation, and shall address specific needs of individual constituencies.

• CDFs shall utilize all available technical expertise relevant to a particular project.

Governments should make available to CDF implementing agencies relevant technical expertise. For example, public

Constituency Development Funds:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:11 Page 317

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

health professionals should be consulted about any CDF project that seeks to improve the health care of constituents. Such expertise is essential to ensure that development projects are carried out in effective and efficient ways that improve livelihoods.

• CDF committees and/or implementers shall coordinate their projects with similar initiatives of local governments and agencies of the central government in order to avoid waste, utilize resources efficiently and strive for sustainability of local development.

IV. Accountability and Oversight Accountability and oversight play essential roles in promoting project quality, improving decision-making, and preventing

corruption and abuse of CDF funds. Proper oversight of CDF financing ensures fiscal probity and promotes accountability to the public among MPs and CDF committees and/or implementers.

• Within government regulations, MPs, CDF committees and implementers shall be held accountable for their respective roles, conduct and decisions in the process of CDF implementation.

• Procedures and/or legal regulations shall be put in place to hold CDF actors accountable.

• Appropriate entities with adequate monitoring and oversight capability shall be assigned responsibility for overseeing CDF implementation.

• Any findings and/or results of

investigations shall be released to the public in a timely manner.

V. Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and evaluation of CDF projects are essential tasks to help ensure learning about what actions are most effective in fostering constituency development.

Monitoring ensures that CDF projects are progressing toward their goal, while evaluation assesses the efficiency, effectiveness, impact and results of a CDF project. MPs, among other stakeholders, shall engage proactively in facilitating this process.

• Monitoring shall be performed throughout a CDF project to ensure that it is progressing towards its publicly stated goal.

Constituents and legitimate stakeholders shall be afforded opportunities to participate in the monitoring process.

• If a monitoring entity determines that a project is deviating from its stated goal; under government regulations, it shall make recommendations about adjusting implementation.

• Evaluation shall be conducted upon completion of projects by appropriate government agencies.

Evaluations shall be made publicly available to ensure that CDF committees and/or implementers are aware of the effectiveness of previous CDF projects.

• In addition to monitoring and evaluation, CDF projects will be subject to regular audits by appropriately designated entities for the duration of the project.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 317

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:13 Page 318

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY The Millennium Development Goals cannot be achieved in just over three years without strong, effective and sometimes innovative involvement by Parliaments, say senior officials in the field of parliamentary strengthening at the United Nations Development Programme.

Mr Kevin Deveaux and Mr Cédric Jurgensen in New York.

Mr Deveaux, a former Member of the Legislative Assembly of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia, is the Parliamentary Development Policy Adviser in the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Mr Jurgensen is a UNDP Parliamentary Development Adviser.

This article reflects the views of its authors and not necessarily those of the UNDP, its Executive Board or United Nations member states.

In September 2000, 189 world leaders pledged together, through the United Nations Millennium Declaration, to take appropriate measures by 2015 to reduce poverty and inequalities, fight diseases and illiteracy, and to protect the environment. They officially committed themselves to “making the right to development a reality for everyone and to freeing the entire human race from want”.

Beyond this general commitment, they agreed on a precise agenda: the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) comprising 8 Goals, 21 numerical targets and 60 quantifiable indicators to help governments develop appropriate strategies and allow civil society and international organizations to follow-up progress made on reducing poverty and hunger, improving the situation of disadvantaged populations and fighting climate change.

The universal approach of the MDGs was both innovative and fully in accordance with the role of the United Nations (UN) in the field of development. Thanks to

318 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Mr Kevin Deveaux

this global consensus on priorities for development, since 2000 serious progress has been made worldwide on poverty reduction, access to primary education and to safe water – even if in many developing countries child mortality and maternal health remain especially challenging.1 For instance, a woman dies every minute from complications related to pregnancy or during the six weeks following delivery; 99 per cent of these 500,000 deaths occur each year in developing countries.

Concrete results vary

Mr Cédric Jurgensen

significantly from one country to another, depending on economic and social constraints but also on the strength of political mobilization. For example, in many cases gaps appeared between the formulation of policies intended to achieve MDGs and their concrete implementation that require appropriate resource allocations on the ground. Such situations happen more often when civic and political engagement is not encouraged and when civil society is not able to effectively hold governments to account on budget and law-making. In India for

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:13 Page 319

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

the poorest and marginalized persons or groups, such as women or disadvantaged tribes.

The National Assembly of Nigeria (top) and the Parliament of Kenya (below) provide good examples for parliamentary mobilization on the MDGs.

instance, citizens’ mobilization has not been encouraged and the budget-making process suffered

from a lack of transparency, making it difficult to ensure that funds are spent in the interest of

Innovative parliamentary involvement In such contexts, there is evidence that, as for other political issues, Parliaments can play a strategic role to guide and scrutinize the policies conducted by governments, and then make the policy and budget formulation a more inclusive process in the interest of all citizens. Indeed, international agreements such as the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness in 2005 and the Accra Agenda for Action in 2008 have officially acknowledge that Parliaments, through their lawmaking, budgeting and oversight functions, have a central role to play in this process of monitoring actions undertaken by governments to achieve the MDGs. Nevertheless, Parliamentarians themselves are not always aware of their crucial responsibility in this process,2 and may not have the required resources and information to analyze the results and assess the relevance of a government’s programmes and activities in this field. Parliamentarians need to connect with civil society organizations in order to get the pertinent information and technical advice, and then pass Bills that address the remaining issues, amend inappropriate legislation or budget, and more broadly press their government through oversight activities.

The African continent, one of the most strategic for development, already provides many examples of interesting initiatives taken by Parliaments in order to improve their performance in monitoring MDG progress.

Several of these Parliaments have thus made important progress to engage more effectively with governments and dialogue with citizens on the MDGs, and this positive trend is especially strong

Millennium Development Goals 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, 2. Achieve universal primary education, 3. Promote gender equality and empower women, 4. Reduce child mortality, 5. Improve maternal health, 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, 7. Ensure environmental sustainability and 8. Develop a global partnership for development (http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/)

among Commonwealth Parliaments.

In West Africa, Nigeria is a leader and one of the most convincing examples for parliamentary mobilization on the MDGs. Indeed, the Nigerian House of Representatives has recently created a Committee on Donor Funds and an MDG Standing committee, enjoying the same political legitimacy, resources and powers as any other standing committee within the House, while the Nigerian Senate chose to establish an ad-hoc MDG Committee, which has less power and resources than a standing committee. These new committees have successfully engaged the government in a permanent dialogue, thanks to the existence of an executive structure specifically dedicated to the MDGs, as well as a separate budget allocated to the MDGs.3 In Eastern Africa, the most interesting case is probably the one of the Kenyan Parliament, which has created a strong MDG caucus that produces reports with statistics and useful information on a regular basis.

In southern Africa, full standing committees have not been created yet within Parliaments; but an MDG caucus has been established in Zimbabwe, while the

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 319

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:14 Page 320

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

The Millennium Development Goals were devised io help governments develop strategies to provide access to improved living conditions such as safe water, primary school education and maternal health care.

Parliament of Mozambique has undertaken numerous field visits that have increased awareness of MDGs among Parliamentarians – even if in the case of Mozambique there is no reporting system from the executive to Parliament, which also faces resource constraints. In South Africa, parliamentary capacity on MDGs has been strengthened in the case of gender equality thanks to a women’s caucus, but also more broadly thanks to an innovative report produced by Parliament and dedicated to MDGs. The function of the report is not only to collect and analyze relevant data on MDG progress, but also to be used by development stakeholders as an advocacy tool for development concerns.4 Many other innovative practices can be found on other continents.

For instance, in Europe, the

Serbian Parliament has created a Poverty Reduction Standing Committee, the chair of which participates in an MDG working group formed by the government.

In the Southeast Asia, the Lower House of the Philippines’ Parliament has established a Special Committee on MDGs that checks budget allocations on MDG areas and facilitates the passage of laws related to MDGs. In the Pacific, Marshall Islands’ Parliamentarians had the opportunity to participate in 2009 in an induction programme including a specific focus on MDG achievements and how Parliament can engage more effectively with the MDGs.

monitoring MDG progress need to be gathered, compared and

Engaging with citizens Lessons learned from all those national experiences conducted to enhance the role of Parliaments in

analyzed in order to identify best practices and recommendations that could be pertinent for most Parliaments.

320 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

“Parliamentarians need to connect with civil society organizations in order to get the pertinent information...and more broadly press their government through oversight activities.”

One of the most important points, in our opinion, is the need for Parliaments to connect with civil society organizations. Indeed, the implementation of national strategies to achieve MDGs clearly requires a strong mobilization of citizens, through these organizations, that can effectively raise awareness among Parliamentarians on MDG achievements and gaps. This participative and open approach is the most pertinent for democratic Parliaments to ensure all the population benefits from their work, as a truly representative institution, through parliamentary hearings or constituency visits and meetings.

Accelerating MDG implementation can be very challenging, or even impossible, in countries where Parliaments are not able, either for technical or

Deveaux:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:15 Page 321

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

political reasons, to pass pertinent legislation, for instance on children’s vaccinations, climate change or gender equality, or to effectively hold the government accountable on the way public funds have been allocated to maternal health, children’s vaccination and primary education.

The United Nations Development Programme, which in 2010 with partners including the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association created a new portal dedicated to Parliamentary Strengthening named Agora (www.agora-parl.org), is fully committed to the process of knowledge sharing for Parliaments, on MDGs as well as on other aspects of their work.

The UNDP has also, more specifically on MDGs, disseminated useful knowledge through a handbook jointly

produced with UN Millennium Campaign and published in 2010.

This handbook, entitled Parliamentary Engagement with the Millennium Development Goals,5 includes explanations about the MDGs themselves; but it also provides advice and guidance that can be easily used to ensure Parliaments are well informed about the MDGs and can explain why and how Parliaments can engage with the MDGs in the legislative process, the oversight function as well as through budget scrutiny.

The handbook also comprises numerous examples and a checklist that Parliaments can use as a tool to assess their own performance and identify the remaining weaknesses that need to be addressed.

The UNDP has a long history of working with the CPA in

support of Commonwealth Parliaments. From the Caribbean to Africa to South Asia and the Pacific, the CPA’s member Parliaments have benefitted from this partnership. With the deadline for achieving the MDGs by 2015 fast approaching, the UNDP stands ready to work with all Parliaments to ensure they are able to play their important role in meeting these important goals.

if 80 per cent of the MPs desire an increase in their Parliament’s involvement in and support of the MDGs, half of them do not believe that their colleague follow the progress or achievement of these goals (MPs speak out: A glimpse into Parliamentarians’ perceptions of the Millennium Development Goals, IPU, 2010).

3. “Analytical study of Parliamentary Mechanisms for MDGs”, report from the IPU in collaboration with the United Nations Millennium Campaign (UNMC), 2010.

4. South Africa, Millennium Development

Footnotes

Goals, Country Report for 2010, Concept

1. For instance, India not only harbours 301

Paper

million citizens living below the poverty line,

(http://www.statssa.gov.za/nss/documents/

but also 2.1 million of the 9.7 million children

Concept%20Paper%20for%20MDG%202

dying each year before they reach the age of

010%20Final%20Draft_2_3__aposteriori.p

five, as well as around 35 per cent of the

df).

undernourished children (“Local MDG

5. Parliamentary Engagement with the

Monitoring in India”, UN Millennium

Millennium Development Goals – A manual

Campaign/PRIA resource book, 2011).

for Use in Parliaments, 2010, UNDP/UN

2. According to a face-to-face survey

Millennium Campaign

conducted with a worldwide sample of MPs

(http://www.endpoverty2015.org/files/MC_

by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), even

web_version_HighRes.pdf).

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 321

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:17 Page 322

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

BUILDING A DIALOGUE BETWEEN PARLIAMENT AND ENTERPRISE Parliamentarians are often accused of not understanding the business world. Enterprise and Parliamentary Dialogue International, which started as an idea for the British Parliament, now works globally to ensure that MPs and business people really do understand each other, says its Secretary General.

Mr Riki HydeChambers, OBE, in London..

Mr Hyde-Chambers has worked with Parliaments for over 30 years. He developed the first business and Parliament Dialogue Centre in the Westminster Parliament, the Industry and Parliament Trust, as a resource for Members and senior officials in both Westminster’s Houses. In 1997 he became the founding Secretary General of the international organization of Dialogue Centres. He also directed the development of the first learning and development service for Westminster MPs and their constituency staff.

The international business world is acutely aware of the enormous changes that are taking place in the dynamics of the global economy: the growing interdependence between national economies; the changing geopolitical world where there are no longer two dominating super powers, a world where the only certainty is change.

While Parliaments see the impact of the changes in the policy issues and legislation they are called on to formulate, they do not have the same professional support mechanisms as the business world. Parliamentarians are by definition generalists, but they often have to operate as specialist professionals, while having little of the continuous professional development support that exists in other professions and the business world.

The Dialogue Centre concept was first thought of 33 years ago by a group of senior United Kingdom Parliamentarians and industrialists who, even then, were aware of the trends that are so strikingly evident today: highly

322 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

complex issues in policy and legislation relating to an everchanging world economy. They wanted to create a practical bridge of understanding between those who create the wealth of the country and those who set the operating framework. The result was the first Dialogue Centre, the Industry and Parliament Trust (www.ipt.org.uk) which I ran for most of its existence. Since then my colleagues and I have helped adapt the Dialogue Centre concept to a range of different cultures and economies ranging from Sweden, Finland, Belgium (both Wallonia and Flanders) to Spain and New Zealand. In Spain it was used to consolidate democracy following the attempted coup and in Northern Ireland to strengthen the Assembly during the peace process. Because the economy has no political baggage and they recognized the need to understand it, politicians of all nine parties participated in the Northern Ireland Assembly and Business Trust when they would not be seen publicly together.

Dr the Rt Hon. Lockwood

Mr Riki Hyde-Chambers

Smith, MP, Speaker of the New Zealand Parliament, has expressed the purpose of all Dialogue Centres when describing that of the New Zealand Business and Parliament Trust: “To improve understanding between the political and business arenas for the benefit of better government and greater prosperity of the economy. It is supported from the most senior levels of Parliament and business. Its aim is to inform, not indoctrinate and it is nonpartisan, therefore it is neutral. If it were not so, I would not have accepted the role of President.” (http://www.nzbpt.org.nz)

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:17 Page 323

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

Mr Hyde-Chambers during a visit to Mongolia.

Hands-on business experience for Parliamentarians Dialogue Centres are inclusive of all economic sectors, of every size of business from micro to multinational, of employees as well as employers. In countries in transition they will often include civil society in activities: all stakeholders in the economy.

Dialogue Centres have no agendas so do not advocate. All Centres work to facilitate a deeper understanding of issues, with the aim of contributing better informed decision-making in legislation and regulation for the public benefit and not special interests.

The understanding is created by programmes and activities of practical engagement and involvement between business and

Parliamentary practitioners. The approach is based on the well tested adage “Tell me and I forget, show me and I remember, involve me and I understand.” All business and parliamentary participants undertake to abide by the Enterprise and Parliamentary Dialogue International (EPDI) Code of Principles (see below) which underpins all activities.

The learning experiences work because they are bespoke and tailored to Members of Parliament or committee needs and level of knowledge.

A Member can have considerable experience of business, but may want to build on this knowledge or look at a completely different business sector. The process is managed to ensure a balanced learning

experience, reflecting parliamentary research departments. Like them our credibility relies on the quality and authenticity of outputs. Both Dialogue Centres and research departments need to produce robust, reliable, balanced and userfriendly information for Members.

Coping with change The Inter-Parliamentary Union in a recent report pointed out the paradox that democracy, both as an ideal and as a set of political institutions and practices, has either triumphed in most countries or is the aspiration of many of their citizens; but at the same time there has been widespread disillusionment with the results of democracy in practice that is shared by citizens of the “old”

democracies as much as by those of the emerging ones. Today this can be acute when democracies are called on to grapple with forces that often seem beyond their control, affecting their security, their economies and the livelihoods and well-being of their citizens.

Parliaments today have a key role in addressing this paradox, carrying all the expectations that democracy will be truly responsive to people’s needs.

For an individual Member in an established Parliament, this is challenging. It is exceptionally difficult for Members of Parliaments in countries in transition, where not only economies but also society and institutions themselves are undergoing change. Frequently in these countries there are not the

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 323

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:18 Page 324

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

Dialogue centres in places like Tusheti in northeastern Georgia help build up a network to link Members with local business people.

consultation mechanisms or support systems to enable Parliaments, let alone individual Members, to fulfil their role.

From our experience of the past 33 years it is apparent that the Dialogue Centre model first formulated for Westminster can be really useful both for established Parliaments and those in transition.

The range of ways in which this is achieved is illustrated by the work of the Business and Economic Centre (www.bec.ge) of the Georgian Parliament.

In established democracies, Dialogue Centres are funded from Parliaments and often through help in kind – Parliament providing a meeting room and office for ease of access. In addition there are strictly regulated and transparent

contributions from businesses.

Countries in transition usually require at least start-up donor funding as invariably Parliaments do not have adequate budgets.

Dialogue Centres are cost effective as they do not pay for contributors to programmes. The experience of practitioners learning from one another should be mutually and appropriately beneficial. This also means there are built-in quality controls. Neither Parliamentarians nor businesses people will give time if they feel there is no benefit.

On being invited to a country we carry out an assessment of the needs, particularly of the Parliament, and meet with representatives of all political factions or parties, the business

324 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

community and the Speaker to see if a Dialogue Centre could in fact help answer these needs and how it would need to be shaped. If we are invited to establish a Dialogue Centre it operates like a franchise.

The service is delivered by nationals chosen by EPDI and programmes developed according to the direction of a national advisory board.

The methodology, expertise, development and guarantee of integrity of the process are supplied by EPDI. The Board of the EPDI firmly believes that Dialogue Centres could be of real of use in a number of Commonwealth countries, both established and in transition, and has made the strategic decision to focus its immediate development

on the countries of the Commonwealth.

Georgia: Effective parliamentary practice helps the rural economy All Dialogue Centres in countries in transition have as a measure of their success the impact of their work on the rural economy.

Georgia is a good example.

The Chairman of the Agriculture Committee asked for assistance in raising the profile of the rural economy on the political agenda, the government being focused on encouraging inward investment. The Committee had never been out of Parliament let alone to Tusheti, in the northeastern Greater Caucasus Mountains of Georgia bordering

Hyde-Chambers:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:18 Page 325

BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS

Chechnya and Dagestan. In general, all Dialogue Centres build up the good will of a network of people who can provide pro bono assistance. In this case, we persuaded the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe to provide a flight in a helicopter they used to patrol the border of the conflict area, and the British embassy to pay for the fuel.

As a result the journey took 45 minutes instead of nine hours by road and we secured a full complement of committee Members for the visit.

Next we had to gain the confidence of the Governor of Tusheti who was deeply apprehensive and suspicious of interacting with Parliamentarians and wanted to divert everyone to a

fishing trip. It is critical to Dialogue Centres that no one feels threatened or that they are going to lose face. As a participant in the process, the Governor of Tusheti came to understand that engaging with the Dialogue Centre was beneficial to all parties involved, and could be a useful process for him.

Tushetians, like most mountain people, are self-sufficient and know exactly what would help them overcome their problems. It was therefore not difficult to find individuals willing to speak who would not be intimidated by the circumstances and could involve the committee Members in the realities of the situation in Tusheti.

The approach we used in Georgia was like a select committee of inquiry. In general, we use parliamentary procedures in programmes whenever we can, as often it helps to strengthen the procedure of a Parliament in transition. In this case, the issues raised in the Georgian Dialogue Centre were all economically based, ranging from restrictive procurement regulations requiring the large army base to buy all its foodstuffs from the capital instead of locally, to the local administration allegedly pocketing the money provided by the government to keep the roads passable in the winter.

In the final analysis, it is the Parliamentarians and entrepreneurs or civil society representatives using the Dialogue Centre who will achieve the outcomes. In Georgia, they showed a review of issues through a Dialogue Centre can achieve practical benefit: 1) Regulatory changes were made in Parliament enabling the purchase of food by the army locally.

2) A transparent tender process for the annual road renovation and clearance was established resulting in the road being open for much longer,

benefiting family’s incomes.

3) For the first time, the Tusheti villages were provided with first aid medical kits.

4) For the first time the region was provided with an ambulance.

5) The Governor’s office provided U.S.$5,000 to fund a pipeline construction for a micro hydro power station to generate power to the region.

6) A bridge is being constructed over the River Shenko by the Ministry of Defence and the Governor’s office.

7) New staff appointments have been made to the national park personnel, more in tune with the problems of Tusheti.

8) A non-governmental organization, the Union of the Development of High Mountainous Regions, has been created.

9) As a result of their observer status, the French embassy has funded a local nursery; and 10) Proposed legislation changing the historic boundaries, a sensitive issue, will be reviewed.

State in the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office responsible for Africa, the United Nations, Overseas Territories and Conflict Issues Dialogue Centres in established or new democracies adhere to the Code of Principles developed by the first six Dialogue Centres from the U.K., Belgium, Holland, New Zealand, Sweden, Finland and Spain.

Participating businesses and Parliamentarians give an undertaking to their respective Parliamentary Boards to adhere to it. It has been recognized by the EU and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly as a benchmark in transparent, noncorrupt relationships between enterprise and politicians.

• • •

• Driven by principles As a number of Parliamentarians have recognized, the process was as important as the outcome. For the first time, MPs experienced how they could be effective economic champions for a region and could see very practical outcomes to their work.

“I am delighted that the European Union supports the development of the Business and Parliament Scheme of Georgia as a transferable model for other emerging democracies,” said HE Mrs Nino Burjanadze, then Chair of the Georgian Parliament.

“Economic and democratic development should go hand in hand. I support the work that Dialogue International has been doing to build the capacity of Parliaments around the world,” said Mr Henry Bellingham, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of

•

•

•

•

•

•

The programmes are independent and non-partisan.

The programmes are mutually educational and informative.

The participants must receive no fee nor be liable for any expenses related to the programme.

The participants undertake to honour the time commitment required by the study programme.

The participants undertake not to promote partisan views while on a programme.

The Dialogue Centres support those outside the Parliament in being actively engaged in the democratic process in a legitimate, non-corrupt and transparent way.

Enterprises undertake not to use their participation for lobbying.

The programmes ensure that enterprises undertake to be as open and frank as possible.

Participants undertake to keep in confidence anything of a sensitive nature; and It is the responsibility of each national organization to monitor its programmes and to ensure their quality.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 325

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:20 Page 326

SAARC CONFERENCE

STRENGTHENING PARLIAMENTS TO RE-INFORCE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE IN SOUTH ASIA South Asian Speakers and MPs discuss the great challenges facing democracy in a region that now stretches from Afghanistan east to Bangladesh.

The Chair and the Table in the Lok Sabha.

The Fifth Conference of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Speakers and Parliamentarians was held in New Delhi from 9 to 12 July 2011, and was inaugurated by the Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, at a solemn function held in the Central Hall of Parliament House. The Speaker of Lok Sabha, Smt. Meira Kumar, MP, welcomed the distinguished gathering while the Speaker of the Parliament of Sri Lanka, Mr Chamal Rajapaksa, proposed the Vote of Thanks. The Speakers, Parliamentarians, Secretaries-General and Secretaries of SAARC Parliaments attended the conference.

The Speakers of the six other member countries that addressed the gathering were Mr Abdul Raouf Ibrahimi, President of the Wolesi Jirga, National Assembly of Afghanistan; Md. Abdul Hamid Advocate, Speaker, National Assembly of Bangladesh; Mr Lyonpo Jigme Tshultim, Speaker, National Assembly of Bhutan; Mr Abdulla Shahid, Speaker, People’s Majlis of the Maldives; Mr Subas

326 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Chandra Nembang, Chairman of the Constituent Assembly of Nepal; and Dr Fehmida Mirza, Speaker, National Assembly of Pakistan.

In his inaugural address, Dr Singh said the winds of democracy have swept across the length and breadth of South Asia but the picture was a mixed one. What was however common was the optimism about the future and the abiding faith of the people in universal adult franchise and free and fair elections. Dr Singh observed that the countries of South Asia faced common challenges of mass poverty, unemployment, lack of adequate healthcare, illiteracy and environmental degradation. Each of them had rich and varied experiences in tackling these challenges and they should learn from each other’s experiences, and reinforce each other’s efforts to deal with them. The SAARC countries had to learn to speak with one voice on the common challenges that faced them. These countries had to not only keep

pace with technology, but also harness its benefits to bring down the psychological barriers that separated them. Dr Singh said that South Asia was home to perhaps the most youthful population in the world and the region could reap a rich demographic dividend if it could equip its youth with the right skills, make them employable and channel their energies to productive ends.

The Prime Minister felt that perhaps no region was more vulnerable to the effects of climate change and other challenges to sustainable development than the South Asia region. Since regional cooperation was vital for improving the quality of governance in managing the natural resources, in preventing land and water degradation and in strengthening food, water and energy security, it should be done at all levels – bilaterally, sub-regionally and as a region as a whole. He pointed out that South Asia could not realize its full potential until and unless the differences were resolved peacefully and there developed the

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:20 Page 327

SAARC CONFERENCE

Left: The Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Smt. Meira Kumar, MP, delivering the welcome address; This page: Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, MP, delivering his inaugural address in the Central Hall of the Parliament of India.

culture of solving their problems themselves. The scourge of terrorism had taken a huge toll on the societies of the region and if not checked, would consume all of them. The Parliamentarians were uniquely placed to help inculcate the sense of a common South Asian destiny in their respective countries. Stating that India remained firmly committed to principles and ideals of SAARC, the Prime Minister asserted that India would go the extra mile to make SAARC an effective organization that benefitted all citizens of South Asia.

Smt. Kumar said that while SAARC was a dialogue between governments, it was important to recognize the role that Parliaments

and Parliamentarians played in giving another vital dimension to bilateral and multilateral partnerships. Since its inception, the Association of SAARC Speakers and Parliamentarians had powerfully resonated the spirit of solidarity that was the cornerstone of SAARC. The Indian Speaker said that in a region that comprised some of the most densely populated countries in the world and characterized by an overwhelming diversity of religions, languages and cultural identities, democracy alone could lay the foundation of harmonious coexistence. The use of technology, especially IT, to connect with people and obtain their feedback, was essential for effective dialogue

between Parliaments and the people. She emphasized that SAARC member states must remember that it was only through sustainable development that they could achieve inclusive growth and ensure stability in the region.

In the first session of the conference Smt. Kumar specially welcomed the President of National Assembly of Afghanistan as the new member of the Association. Dr Mirza became the Vice-President of the conference as Pakistan proposed to host the next event in 2012. Smt Kumar then informed the gathering about the decision taken at the meeting of the Speakers Council held on 9 July 2011 regarding amendment in the rules of the Association

providing for one-fifth representation of women MPs in the delegation from each member country. She also encouraged the Speakers Council’s decision that the women delegates attending the conference might form a group of women Parliamentarians who would work for the promotion of women’s causes and hold a meeting of women Parliamentarians of SAARC countries under the overall umbrella of the association.

The discussions The first three sessions of the conference were devoted to the subject Consolidating Democracy: Strengthening Trust between Parliament and the People.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 327

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:21 Page 328

SAARC CONFERENCE

Participating in the discussion Dr Mirza and one of the lead speakers pointed out that democracy could be consolidated if it was able to ensure free and fair elections, an independent Judiciary, a responsible and responsive Executive, a vibrant civil society, a free media and above all a strong Parliament. She further pointed out that transparency and financial accountability remained at the centre-stage of public trust and one such hallmark of the parliamentary system in Pakistan was the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition as the chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee, which enhanced people’s confidence in the Parliament. The presence of 22 per cent of women legislators in the National Assembly was a driving force behind social legislation in Pakistan. She envisioned a forum which would infuse a new life into SAARC in the same manner as the European Parliament. The second speaker, Mr Ibrahimi, informed that the transition to democracy had been a long road for Afghanistan and in its efforts towards consolidating democracy. Afghanistan enjoyed a free media, democratic elections and women and youth organizations, which played a vital role in the socio-economic and political life of the country. Shri K. Rahman Khan, the Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, India said when the members of Parliament performed their duties honestly and upheld the pledge made to the people Parliament would earn their trust and respect.

Mr Shahid said if democratic institutions were to remain relevant and win the confidence and faith of the people they needed to be transparent, result-oriented, timebound and people-centered. Mr Sheikh Fazlul Karim Salim, MP, Bangladesh, said Parliaments should contribute to the development of an inclusive society and facilitate progress. Shri Yashwant Sinha, MP, India, while

applauding the functioning democracy in all the member countries of SAARC, cautioned against the forces of instability threatening the democracy in South Asia and said that the lack of trust of the people in the democratic system of governance might prove catastrophic. Mr Sunil Handunnetti, MP, Sri Lanka, noted that trust between Parliament and the people could be built only if the basic needs of the citizens were fulfilled. Mr Laxman Prasad Ghimire, Chief Whip, Nepali Congress, highlighted the significance of an inclusive Parliament and elaborated on the initiatives being taken by the Constituent Assembly to make the Parliament of Nepal inclusive. Smt

“The SAARC countries had to learn to speak with one voice on the common challenges that faced them.” Dr

Manmohan Singh, MP Maya Singh, MP, India pointed out that Parliaments must evolve with changing times and some system should be put in place to take account of the quantitative and qualitative performance of the Parliaments. Mr Anisul Islam Mahmud, MP, Bangladesh, referring to the lack of trust in the democratic system, called upon Parliamentarians to ensure that people’s trust in the democratic process should at least be retained, if not strengthened. Ms Nasima Neyazi, MP, Afghanistan, said democracy could be consolidated in Afghanistan with the active participation of women and youth.

She informed that there were 69 women members in the 249member Wolesi Jirga which exceeded the percentage of quota

328 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

reserved for women. Shri E.T. Mohammed Basheer, MP, India, elaborated on the various prerequisites for strengthening parliamentary democracy which, inter alia, included decentralization, transparency, freedom of press, inclusiveness, accountability, education, etc. Mr Mangala Samaraweera, MP, Sri Lanka, emphasized that sound democratic practices such as separation of powers, accountability and transparency, independent Election Commission, free media, right to information, etc., were vital to strengthening democracy. He also endorsed the proposal for the establishment of a South Asian Parliament made by the Speaker of the National Assembly of Pakistan. Ms Shahnaz Wazir Ali, MP, Pakistan, stressed on the commonalities of the SAARC countries, including their concern for sustainable development and proposed a committee of SAARC on development issues. Prof. P.J. Kurien, MP, India, stressed four points – poverty alleviation, decentralization of power, education and credibility of leadership – for strengthening democracy. He expressed the view that the proposal for a South Asian Parliament was worthy of consideration. Ms Kashmala Tariq, MP, Pakistan, said internal democracy within political parties was essential for strengthening democracy. Highlighting the threat of terrorism in the region, she asked for harnessing the potential of the youth.

Participating in the discussion, Dr Mahesh Joshi, MP, India, said that in order to strengthen democracy, the three organs of the state should deliver on their responsibilities and not interfere in each other’s domain. Shri Arjun Meghwal, MP, India, observed that strengthening trust between Parliament and the people required a strong Election Commission; Parliament’s power to constitutional amendment; compulsory voting, prescribing

educational qualifications for legislators and a model code of conduct for parliamentarians. Shri Nadendla Manohar, Speaker, Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, India advocated for the introduction of e-petition system as a measure to strengthen trust between Parliament and the people. He called upon the SAARC countries to give more attention to the MDGs and to focus on issues like environmental protection and wild life.

Summing up the discussions, Mr Tshultim highlighted the need to bring about transparency in governance in order to enhance faith and trust of the people in the parliamentary system. He reiterated that Parliament was the supreme institution of democracy and Parliamentarians had a very crucial role to play in strengthening democratic institutions.

Sustainable development In its fourth session, on 10 July, the conference commenced discussion on the second theme Sustainable Development in SAARC Countries: The Way Forward with Mr Subas Chandra Nembang, Speaker of the Parliament of Nepal in the Chair. In his introductory remarks, he said the governments of SAARC countries had to work for development while ensuring sustainability. Dr Sonam Kinga, Deputy Chairman, National Council of Bhutan, observed that development had to be sustainable and the benefits of sustainable development should not merely trickle down but spread out equitably. Referring to the experiences in his own country, Dr Kinga referred to Bhutan’s approach to sustainable development which was guided by an alternative model for development. The idea of Gross National Happiness (GNH), as advanced by the King of Bhutan, emphasized that human beings had a wide range of needs and material needs was only one

SAARC Conference:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:23 Page 329

SAARC CONFERENCE

The SAARC Speakers at the conference.

among them, the others being emotional, psychological and spiritual wellbeing.

Md. Abdul Hamid Advocate said that in an increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity in South Asia would be best achieved by fostering mutual understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation amongst the countries in the region.

To achieve sustainable development in the SAARC countries, it was necessary to address climate change and its negative impact as well as poverty.

Participating in the discussion, Nimal Siripala de Silva, MP, and Minister of Irrigation and Water Resources Management, Sri Lanka, expressed the view that any effort towards sustainable development had to be ecologically, socio-culturally and economically sustainable.

Availability of funds; political will; equitable growth; and wiping out terrorism in the region were imperatives for the achievement of sustainable development, he also stressed.

With Dr Mirza, Speaker of the National Assembly of Pakistan, in the Chair, the fifth Session continued the discussion on the theme. Initiating the discussion, Ms Ali emphasized the need for

common plans and strategies for the SAARC countries to tackle the challenges of chronic poverty, iniquitous distribution of wealth, unemployment, environmental degradation, management of biodiversity, urbanization, etc. She suggested that the South, including the SAARC countries, had to take a common stand in global forums on the issue of environmental protection and climate change. Shri Chongshen Mongkosungkum Chang, MP, India, said that a SAARC Commission on the lines of the European Commission, if put in place, would help to strengthen cooperation among SAARC countries.

Mr Al Haj M. Iqbal Safi , MP, Afghanistan, stressed that the SAARC Charter could be realized fully only when there was cooperation among the member countries in all respects. Ms Mabel Rebello, MP, India, made references to some of the best practices in the areas of health and child care in Indian states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu and pointed out that the SAARC countries could similarly evolve suitable models to bring about solutions to the challenges faced by the region, whether in meeting the MDGs, climate change or sustainable development. Mr Bhim Prasad Acharya, MP, Nepal, said that the main challenge before South Asia

was how to accelerate the pace of economic development without jeopardizing the environment for the future generations. Md. Motahar Hossain, MP, and State Minister for Primary and Mass Education, Bangladesh highlighted the various measures taken in Bangladesh towards sustainable development and elaborated the successes achieved in the MDGs such as primary education, reduction of child mortality and women’s empowerment.

Mr Shahid said that Maldives was most vulnerable to climate change and sea rise. He noted that climate change was a rights issue for Maldives and the Right to Life needed to be ensured to the people which could only be attained, taking recourse to a sustainable pattern of development. Shri E.T.Mohammed Basheer, MP, India, said that there was a close connection between economic development and environmental and cultural sustainability and these should go hand in hand.

He stressed the need to include environment related awareness programmes in the school curriculum. Mr Anisul Islam Mahmud, MP, Bangladesh, asserted that poverty alleviation was the most daunting challenge on the path of attaining sustainable development.

He noted that the South Asian countries were not able to respond to the emergent problems of illiteracy, unemployment, etc. and appealed to all concerned to create a South Asian Development Bank to facilitate the attainment of the goals of sustainable development.

Shri Nadendla Manohar, Speaker, Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, India drew the attention of the delegates to the problem of hygiene and sanitation in rural areas.

Ms Tariq called for enhanced co-operation among SAARC countries and noted that cooperation was about building bridges and sharing and caring.

She appreciated the initiatives

taken by India towards sustainable development and called upon India to take the lead in this direction.

In his concluding remarks, Md. Hamid said that there was unanimity amongst all the participants that the need for ensuring sustainable development was one of the prime challenges before all the SAARC countries. In this context, chronic poverty, climate change and its adverse impact on bio-diversity, unemployment, industrial pollution, lack of basic drinking water facilities, etc. were perceived as some of the immediate challenges.

It was unanimously felt that the propagation of democratic values, taking recourse to appropriate technology, addressing environmental concerns, proactive approach to bring about institutional changes, et cetera. could help in ensuring sustainable development, he added.

The conference concluded on 11 July when, in her concluding remarks, Smt Kumar said it was an educative experience for all Speakers and Parliamentarians to come together and exchange views on two very important subjects having a crucial bearing on the furtherance of democracy and development in South Asia.

She pointed out that it was the onerous responsibility of the Parliaments and Parliamentarians to strengthen the roots of democracy in the region. She also emphasized the need to learn from one another’s experiences in protecting individual rights and promoting democratic values, rule of law and justice to meet people’s aspirations.

Earlier the Secretaries-General of SAARC Parliaments and Principal Secretaries/ Secretaries of the Indian State Legislatures deliberated on two subjects: (i) Towards a paperless office: harnessing information and communication technologies in SAARC Parliaments; and (ii) meeting the information needs of the SAARC Parliaments.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 329

Iddawala:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:24 Page 330

RESEARCH JOURNAL

RESEARCH JOURNAL LAUNCHED IN SRI LANKA A new publication to expand the sources of authoritative information available to Sri Lankan MPs is published by senior parliamentary staff.

Mr Neil Iddawala in Colombo.

Mr Iddawala is the Assistant SecretaryGeneral of the Parliament of Sri Lanka.

Mr Neil Iddawala.

The first issue of a new research publication for Sri Lankan Members of Parliament was launched on 20 October 2011 in a ceremony in the Parliament Complex in Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte attended by Hon. Chamal Rajapaksa, MP, Speaker of Parliament.

The Research Division of Parliament commenced publishing the Parliamentary Research Journal to boost the legislative process and policy formulation. The theme is “Sri Lanka: Policy issues in the post-conflict era”.

The national Parliament is the forum where views reflecting all shades of political opinion are 330 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

expressed. Effective legislation is based on rational views. Therefore, lawmakers should be wellinformed. Their role is crucial since the destiny of the nation is shaped by them.

The legislators, policyformulators and citizens must strive hard to achieve development goals within the democratic polity. The democratic space should be used in a prudent manner to achieve sustainable development.

Through the new research journal it is expected to meet the background information requirements of lawmakers, policyframers, bureaucrats and other

interested personnel involved in Sri Lanka’s governance.

Many distinguished academicians and researchers contributed papers on various relevant issues to the first issue. It is hoped that the “Parliament Research Journal” will serve as a useful service.

The journal is also available at the Parliament Souvenir Sales Counter for others interested in Parliament. The price of the journal is U.S.$5.00 and the potage is U.S.$4.00. The journal can be ordered by email sent to journal@parliament.lk. Currently it is not available online.

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:34 Page 332

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

COMMONWEALTH YOUTH PARLIAMENT, LONDON 2011 Three participants in the Commonwealth Youth Parliament took place in London in September 2011 provide an account of their individual experiences from the event.

Mr Graeme Osborn.

The programme of events was spread over four days, with the first consisting of an evening welcome talk and networking event, giving us the chance to get to know the other delegates. We also found out which our party allocations (Young Democratic Party, Progressive Youth Alliance and independent).

The following day was the first of three full days, which commenced with a tour of the Houses of Parliament. The Palace of Westminster and Houses of Parliament are very impressive, with Charles Barry’s architecture providing an imposing setting. Both chambers of parliament leave an indelible mark on the memory, but for different reasons. The Commons chamber, which is larger and less decadent, but still ornately decorated, has an air of excitement, as the venue for some of the greatest and most important moments in our post-war political history (the original chamber was destroyed during the Blitz and was rebuilt after the war, with donations

332 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Mr Osborn debating in the House of Lords (right).

from around the Commonwealth).

It was the House of Lords, however, with its exquisitely ornate decoration and smaller, more intimate feel, which made a greater impression (due in no small part to the fact that we were well aware that we would be speaking there two days later).

After the tour, we returned to Portcullis House for briefings on oral questions in both houses. We then watched Prime Minister’s Questions via video link (the public gallery was not large enough to accommodate us). This was followed by lunch, after which we split back into our party groups to elect minsters and shadow ministers. I was elected Prime Minister, with Australian Commonwealth Youth Parliamentarian Alistair Campbell being elected my Deputy Prime Minister and Matthew Crow from the United Kingdom elected Leader of the Opposition. The rest of this part of the afternoon was spent electing our cabinet, and

Mr Graeme Osborn

drawing up amendments to the climate change bill and the opposition motion, both of which we would be debating the following day.

We then listened to the Secretary General of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija deliver the Throne Speech as President of Commonwealthland. The speech was the subject of a debate the following day, and as the government we had to support the policies announced in it, despite having no input to either the

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:35 Page 333

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

speech or those policies. This speech was followed by a talk, and question and answer session with John Bercow MP, Speaker of the House of Commons. The talk itself was very informative, and the question and answer session gave us a chance to learn more about the peculiarities of the role of Speaker. I asked him how the adversarial nature of Prime Minister’s Questions and layout of the House of Commons chamber affected the nature of British politics. Mr Bercow’s response was that he felt it had very little influence, and that the adversarial style of national politics in Britain had more to do with political tradition and the party system.

In the evening we had a reception at Marlborough House with the Commonwealth Dignitaries. We had a lengthy question and answer session about the Commonwealth and its future, and then a buffet reception, with music provided by a chamber ensemble from the Commonwealth Youth Orchestra.

The Thursday was essentially a full day of parliamentary sessions of various descriptions, which we were all eager to get into, after having spent the previous day preparing. The first session was a debate on the Throne Speech, held in the Grand Committee Room of the Palace of West Minster. The debate was of a very high standard, and quickly assumed the party political jibes of Prime Minister’s Questions. Some of the policies announced in the speech, such as compulsory registration of the media and not increasing social security payments drew fire from the opposition and independents, but overall, I think that as the government we held our own, and gained the upper hand towards the end of the session.

This was followed by the debate on the Climate Change Bill for which we had drawn up amendments the previous day. This turned out to be another successful session for the

governments, with the opposition only winning two out of the numerous votes during the debate.

The opposition had notably more success in the afternoon sessions. The first was a question time, with 20 questions asked by backbench members, with nearly all of the ministerial team answering questions about their remits. This was a lively session, with detailed and pointed

“The chance to stand at the dispatch box in the House of Lords was an incredible experience that will remain with me for the rest of my life.”

questioning from the opposition, but on the whole the ministers held their own, in what could probably be best described as a draw.

The following session was a debate on the opposition motion, which provided free compulsory education up to the age of 16, with the option of free education or vocational training for 16-18. The government submitted an amendment, which was designed to stir debate, adding in the option of vocational training from 14 to 16, and making it a requirement of the optional free education/training from 16-18 that students must stay in Commonwealthland for two years upon completion. Many of the opposition argued that the government was trying to force young people into ‘slavery’ or ‘bondage’ (ignoring that we had not removed the choice element), and the debate was very heated. It was slightly disappointing to see that a number of members of the

government party refused to speak, and as each member could only speak once on the motion, it meant that the opposition and independents could have several speakers in a row, all attacking to amendment. Towards the end of the debate the opposition, led by their party leader used increasingly personal attacks on individual ministers (especially myself as Prime Minister), and became rather disruptive, asking members to give way when speaking, despite them making clear at the first request that they were not going to. This came to a head during the closing speeches. The Minister for Education spoke first, but was virtually unable to make her speech, as members of the opposition were constantly asking her to give way throughout the roughly four minutes of her closing argument. After this display of childish (if procedurally acceptable) behaviour (the speaker refused a request to tell the opposition to be quiet so that we could hear the Minister), as Prime Minister I made sure that the government side of the house was silent through the closing speech by the Leader of the Opposition.

I was determined not to let the government exhibit such disrespect in a parliamentary session. The vote was a close one, falling exactly along party lines (with the independents all siding with the opposition). The opposition won by two votes, which had seemed mathematically impossible, but it later emerged that at least two government members (who had only arrived that day) were outside the room during the vote sleeping off the effects of travelling from central Africa.

With the day’s parliamentary sessions over, we were invited to a reception at Speaker’s House, hosted by Linday Hoyle MP, Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons. The house is exquisite, and it was a great chance to meet with and talk to some of the

members of the House of Lords and the CPA who attended.

The programme for Friday opened with a chance for the ministerial teams to take a wellearned break, as backbenchers and independents made up two parliamentary select committees, on sport and youth unemployment.

Each committee interviewed three independent experts, with thorough and direct questioning from all members. This was followed by a short opportunity to meet the Commonwealth Diaspora Parliamentarians, youth representatives of Commonwealth communities in the U.K. who were joining us for the afternoon session in the House of Lords. This was followed by a full three-course lunch in the members’ dining room.

The afternoon session was the one we’d all been waiting for – a once in a lifetime opportunity to debate in the House of Lords Chamber. The topic was climate change, and as Prime Minister I was tasked with introducing an ambitious motion to reduce Commonwealthland’s carbon emissions by 100 per cent by 2050. The chance to stand at the dispatch box in the House of Lords was an incredible experience that will remain with me for the rest of my life.

Rather than opposing the motion outright, the opposition, as the centre-left party, argued that the cuts should be made by 2040.

It was a non-whipped debate, with delegates able to speak freely either for or against the motion.

Whilst both front bench teams certainly engaged in political jibes and point scoring, they both argued broadly in favour, leaving it primarily to backbenchers and independents to speak against.

This created a lively and wellinformed debate, with good use of evidence and a very high standard of debate on all sides. In the vote, the motion passed and the government won, helped in part by the opposition front bench voting in favour.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 333

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:37 Page 334

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

LEAVING A LEGACY OF PROGRESS Ms Alisha Ally.

Being an ambassador is one of the greatest honors that can be bestowed on any individual. For me, it was an undeniable privilege to be selected to attend the fourth Commonwealth Youth Parliament in London this past September.

Credit must be given to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association for trying to encompass a holistic program however, as with all things, improvements can be made. It was interesting to interact with delegates from Commonwealth member states. Hearing their tales opened my eyes to the stark political reality facing nations around the globe. To my dismay, in some member states youth parliaments had either not been establish or are taken for granted.

In speaking to the CPA Secretary General Dr William Shija, he made it a point to commend the St Lucia Youth Parliament for its progress and foresight and conveyed his hopes for its betterment. I had not given enough credence to the organizers of my domestic youth parliament for the extensive training and mentoring in parliamentary decorum and public speaking preceding our annual chamber debates. As such, it was my goal upon my return to St Lucia to publicly acknowledge their efforts through a newspaper article.

In my naivety I had expected all the member countries to be on equal footing but sadly I was disappointed. Some of my

334 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

colleagues had no grasp of parliamentary procedures nor were some equipped to speak publicly far less debate in a parliamentary setting. Additionally, it was quite disconcerting to witness in the midst of a quick paced debate that some delegates had to resort to writing out their responses and reading it as if we were in a school exercise. Had those delegates been disadvantage by having English as their second language then I would not have been so taken aback. Surprisingly, it was English-speaking delegates who were guilty of such. Though we were all given strict instructions before our arrival in London that CYP was “not a reading exercise,” it appeared that organizers who were present did nothing to ensure this criteria was met.

On the brighter side, the exercises leading up to the House of Lords debate served as an icebreaker and ignited a fruitful debate on policy, bills and motions.

The guest speakers and moderators gave a unique insight and shared their vast knowledge with us. As the week came to a close, our fictional country, Commonwealthland, had a functional parliament, economic policies and environmental objectives.

CYPs were thrown for a loop when, on Friday at the House of Lords debate, Commonwealth Diaspora Youth Parliamentarians were introduced in the mix. They were oblivious to the progress

Ms Aisha Ally

CYPs had made in the days preceding the debate and raised justifiable concerns during their presentations which were, unfortunately, already addressed by the CYPs in previous sessions and to a degree, it defeated the purpose of the House of Lords debate. The Diaspora parliamentarians were under the impression the debate had to do with Commonwealth member states as opposed to an imaginary country. The ultimate conclusion of the debate on the motion “To eradicate carbon emissions [in Commonwealthland] by 100% by 2050” was that the opposition, government and independent CYPs voted in favor of the proposal because it was the least extreme, sorry to say, of the arguments presented. The opposition proposed reducing carbon emissions by 100% by 2040 while an independent delegate completely opposed the motion because “the larger countries caused greenhouse gas emissions

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:38 Page 335

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

Ms Ally speaking during a debate at the Youth Parliament.

and they should be the ones paying for it.” The independent posited that industrialized countries had over one hundred years to pollute the atmosphere so they should be the ones to clean it up and allow smaller countries to revolutionize without sacrifices. A Diaspora parliamentarian passionately disagreed with the motion because climate change is a myth and well, let’s just say the arguments went off on a tangent from there. Needless to say, we were not all on the same proverbial page.

Though there were some challenges for CYP, it is a fantastic developmental tool which will enable our young people to be empowered through education.

The commitment of staff and organizers to this event should not waiver because of bumps in the road to success. Rather, they should take heart and know that without mistakes, there will be no success.

Having been elected as the

Minister for Development in this forum, I was quite pleased that my colleagues supported my selection to represent them at the Commonwealth Youth Forum in Australia.

I, along with the shadow Minister for Development, Francis Anyaegbu from Nigeria, arrived in Perth for the eighth Commonwealth Youth Forum. The theoretical purpose of such a forum is to be envied and commended for few have an audience with the Commonwealth Heads of Government.

Though CYF serves as a platform for young people, I am in doubt as to whether the young people of the Commonwealth are capable and ready to handle such an opportunity or wield such power.

The execution of CYF does need some revision and the planning committee did as best as they could, dropping the ball in some instances.

The one thing that stood out to me was the bold admittance made

by the Commonwealth Secretariat that some of its structures are not functioning as it was intended, primarily the Regional Youth Caucuses. While we were revising the structure in our groups, we were troubling ourselves with reinventing the wheel as opposed to critically examining the process.

The level of contribution to communiqué was astounding because of the various backgrounds and fields of the contributors. The consensus process was the most grueling of all and it once again highlighted the need for parliamentary education for young people in member states because it was disturbing for me, with my background, that a meeting which claimed to invoke parliamentary proceedings could not be conducted in a manner close to what it was purporting to be. Case in point, many found it difficult to distinguish between a Point of Order and a Point of Clarification.

The shortcomings of CYF were

overridden by the gravity of what we were present to accomplish.

We were helping to plot the future for over 1.2 billion young people from all walks of life. These young people, knowingly or not, were relying on us to look after their best interest and to make rational decisions applicable to their individual situation. To be part of something this important is unimaginable.

Always, I have believed that we were put on this earth to make a difference, in whatever way that we can, and affect at least one person’s life for the better. The Commonwealth has afforded me this opportunity and more. It is my hope that through the Commonwealth Youth Parliament and the Commonwealth Youth Forum that we, as vibrant young men and women of this organization, can make a viable contribution to our future and the generations to follow. I further hope that those who come behind us, find that we were faithful.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 335

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:39 Page 336

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

COMING TOGETHER FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS

Mr Kevin Kadirgamar.

The Fourth Commonwealth Youth Parliament was in many ways a surreal experience. When I received an email from my university asking if I’d like to nominate for an event similar to the Model UN conferences that I organise on campus, little did I know that I was going in for an experience of a lifetime. As I came to know that it was the Commonwealth Youth Parliament that I was being nominated for, I did not quite know what to expect. As our departure from Australia drew nearer, I became more aware of the significance of the event that I was soon to participate in, together with my fellow delegate, Amy Robinson.

We shared an overwhelming sense that this was an opportunity not to be taken lightly. It was a unique privilege to represent the Northern Territory of Australia on the world stage, and we were keen to learn and prepare as much as possible before taking onto the House of Lords. In a simulation bringing together young people from all over the Commonwealth, this was going to be the ultimate hands-on experience at parliamentary democracy and debate on the most pressing issues for our generation.

The Fourth Commonwealth Youth Parliament turned out to be

336 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

much more than a mere simulation.

It was a most invaluable opportunity to interact with some remarkable young leaders of the Commonwealth, and be in the heart of the origins of the renowned Westminster parliamentary system. We were able to learn more about the Commonwealth itself and most importantly, be part of strengthening the common bond that is shared across the member nations.

The vibrant atmosphere that we were going to be part of over the week was evident from day one.

The welcome reception with a room full of passionate, intelligent Young Parliamentarians from far and wide gave off a special vibe.

We were soon bunched up in circles, sharing insights into matters concerning our nations, and the successes and failures of the different political systems. It was truly the world in union, with a helpful ignorance of the different colours of our lanyards which were soon to separate us into rival political groups.

It was not long before the realities of the political system kicked in. The very next day, we met in our party groups to elect cabinet positions and got fully immersed in putting forward ideas on issues like provision of free

Mr Kevin Kadirgamar

education, youth unemployment, and of course climate change which was going to be our main topic. Days and nights merged together as we began strategising ways to make our political ideologies come into fruition.

The CYP was structured in such a way that we were able to gain a full rounded practical experience of parliament in action. Starting with preliminary debate on the Throne Speech from our ‘Head of State’ to the intricate discussions in the Committee of the Whole, to the vibrant question time, I could see I was on a steep learning curve without even realising it.

All that I gained from the CYP was not limited to the parliamentary simulations alone. In fact, I now resonate with what we were told repeatedly by guest speakers: the most important and

Youth Parliament:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:40 Page 337

YOUTH PARLIAMENT

The Secretary-General of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija (left), handing Mr Kadirgamar (right) his certificate from the event.

memorable aspect of such an event is always the opportunity to network and build relationships with a range of remarkable people.

In meeting and getting to know my fellow delegates, I realised that although we came from diverse backgrounds, there was an inherent commonality in the level of interest we shared for the future of our respective nations. As I listened to the stories and insights of my colleagues, it was clear that there were so many common threads in the issues facing the different corners of the world – whether it be climate change, education, or political corruption. It retrenched my belief that the best and only way to find effective and lasting solutions is to work together in partnership. I came to realise the importance of the strong network that the Commonwealth creates in this regard.

The opportunity that we were given to meet outstanding figures such as the Deputy Secretary General, the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Lord Speaker certainly added on to our experience. I certainly gained some invaluable insights into the work of the Commonwealth and the limitations within which the work must be done.

There was also something special about being in and around the heart of democracy at the Palace of Westminster. The culmination of the CYP together with the Commonwealth Diaspora Parliamentarians at the breathtaking surroundings of the House of Lords was without question one of the most memorable experiences. The honour of being amongst a group of young people who were the fifth in history to be allowed to sit in the honourable House is one that

none of us would take lightly, and one that we would cherish for a very long time.

Although it has been a good two months since we departed London, I still hold vivid memories of our time at the CYP. At the conclusion of the proceedings, when we had fully adapted to our roles as ‘Parliamentarians’ over the week, it was time to face the real world. There was a sudden realisation that the amendments, Bills and Resolutions we formulated and passed would stop here.

The fictitious nature of “Commonwealthland’ towards which we had developed a certain level of patriotism began to dawn on us. However, these were only the means through which we gained an invaluable experience to carry with us forever. We all returned to the real world, fully equipped with knowledge, skills

and renewed enthusiasm to pass on to our peers at home. In those jam-packed few days, the CYP not only gave me an in-depth understanding of the procedural parliamentary system, but also of the intricacies involved in creating positive change at the legislative level.

This would benefit greatly in the youth-led community and advocacy projects and workshops I am involved with, and will definitely help me in my own career progression. But as with all great conferences, I have to say it is the networks and friendships that we forged that remain the most valuable. Our parliamentary colleagues from CYP do not simply boost our facebook network numbers. They will always remain valuable connections, ensuring that the solidarity amongst Commonwealth nations is well maintained in our generation.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 337

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:50 Page 340

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

INDIA

MEMBERS PROTEST AGAINST PRICE RISE The Eighth Session of the Lok Sabha began on 1 August 2011 and concluded on 8 September. The Session experienced heated moments on issues like price rise, corruption and Lokpal (Ombudsman). The House faced disruptions as the opposition parties insisted on discussing the price rise issue under a rule that entails voting.

Later, it was decided to adopt a motion urging the government to take immediate and effective measures to curb inflation to give relief to the common man.

The Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Smt. Meira Kumar, MP, admitted a motion under rule 189 as under: “That despite repeated discussions on price rise in the House, the burden of price rise on the common man is continuing. Expressing deep concern over price rise, this House calls upon the government to take immediate effective steps to check inflation that will give relief to the common man.”

On 3 August, the senior BJP member and former Finance Minister, Shri Yashwant Sinha moved the motion followed by Shri Gurudas Dasgupta (CPI) who moved an amendment to the motion. Initiating the debate, Shri Sinha alleged that the government took no concrete steps to prepare a comprehensive food pricing and management policy despite the recommendations 340 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Smt. Meira Kumar, MP

made by the Standing Committee in 2009. When the government godowns were full of food grains, the government should have used this stock to keep the prices under control but it was not done due to the fear that it might increase the fiscal deficit. He was against any such growth that would lead to price rise and asked the government to promote investment in order to produce goods and services and stop forward trading if it was responsible for price rises. Shri Sinha alleged that the government which was reelected had allowed the profiteers and hoarders to make money from common man. Refuting the charges, the Minister of Law and Justice and Minister of Minority Affairs, Shri Salman Khurshid (INC), said that high inflation was a global phenomenon and referred to several government schemes like the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, the National Rural Health

Mission, Health Insurance Scheme, Indira Awas Yojana, Right to Education Act, etc. He informed that the government had provided five million tonnes of food grains to people living above the poverty line, five million tonnes to those living below the poverty line, and a further five million tonnes in reserve. The government did not believe in the theory of growth at any rate but the fact remained that the country could not march forward without growth, asserted Shri Khurshid.

The senior JD-U member, Shri Sharad Yadav advised the government to focus more on inclusive growth than on achieving high GDP. Referring to the various schemes launched by the government for the benefit of poor he said all these schemes had failed to make any major difference in the lives of the poor. He asked the government to concentrate on providing irrigation facilities to farmers. Shri Shailendra Kumar (SP) said the government still had not framed any clear cut policy to combat inflation. Demanding that the levies imposed by the centre and the state governments on the petroleum products be brought down, he voiced Shri Yadav’s opinion that the government provide irrigation facilities to the farmers for gratis, strengthen the public distribution system (PDS) and bring to an end the

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:50 Page 341

INDIA

role of middlemen and black money. Shri T.K.S. Elangovan (DMK) proposed that the government should adopt the universal PDS system as in vogue in the state of Tamil Nadu for providing food grains to the people at a reasonable rate and initiate firm steps against the middlemen. Shri P. Karunakaran (CPI-M) attributed the price rise to the

Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, MP failure of the government, the international trade in food items and the speculative future trading in agricultural commodities. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab (BJD) said inflation had eroded the purchasing power of money while the government was facing problem of mismanagement and lack of governance in controlling the runaway prices. He stressed that reform and de-regulation across the board were needed to solve the supply side crisis that was fuelling India’s inflation. Shri Anant Gangaram Geete (Shiv Sena) said millions of people, especially the poor were bearing the brunt of price rises and the government should give them relief.

Shri Dasgupta said inflation had pushed five per cent of people below the poverty line.

Dissatisfied with the resolution to be adopted by the House that did not include the failure of the government, he said a message must go that the

Parliament was really concerned and stated that the government lacked political will to curb price rises. Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh (RJD) said the decrease in the prices of luxury items and increase in the prices of the essential goods showed that the policies of the government were anti-poor. He suggested for bringing in a law under which the prices of the foodgrains would not be allowed to be increased or decreased more than 20 per cent in a year. Dr K.S. Rao (INC) asked for banning future trading in food grains and allowing export of surplus rice to give a better price to the farmers.

Shri Manohar Tirkey (RSP) was worried as the people were losing faith in Parliament and government due to the ever increasing price rise. He wanted the government to take action against the middle men who were making profits at the cost of the producers and the consumers. Shri A. Sampath (CPI-M) demanded for banning the forward trading in food articles as it had led to hoarding and black marketing, while Shri M.B. Rajesh (CPI-M) blamed the future trading, lack of purchasing power, mindless hikes in the petroleum prices and the neglect of agriculture for continued price rises. Shri Gorakhnath Pandey (BSP) requested the government to get a proper survey of the genuine below poverty families so as to help them financially.

Shri Prasanta Kumar Majumdar (RSP) asked the government to change its economic and fiscal policies to control inflation and price rise while Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey (BJP) requested the government to take effective steps to save the country from a situation of economic emergency.

Replying to the debate on 4 August 2011, the Leader of the Lok Sabha and the Finance Minister, Shri Pranab Mukherjee attributed price rises to external factors. He said that the government was working to moderate food inflation without sacrificing growth. Giving details of various steps taken by the government to rein in on inflation, he dismissed the opposition's charge that inflation was due to high growth rates. Stating that food inflation was the result of the mismatch between supply and demand, he said the country needed to create more investment opportunities and generate more employment.

He however said that the recent hike in the prices of diesel and cooking gas was marginal keeping in view the global crude oil prices on which the government had no control.

Stating that the prices of food items had increased due to the substantial increase in the minimum support price of food grains, the Finance Minister assured that the government had enough food stocks to cater to the needs of the vulnerable sections.

Shri Yashwant Sinha who initiated the debate was disappointed that the Finance Ministers did not announce any measures to curb the rising prices. The House, after a discussion of over seven hours rejected the amendment moved by Shri Dasgupta and adopted the resolution expressing concern over the price rise and its burden on the common man. The resolution called upon the government to take immediate effective steps to check inflation for giving relief to the Indian people.

Demand for a strong Ombudsman Another issue that dominated

the Monsoon Session was the demand made by the civil society groups led by the social activist, Shri Anna Hazare, for the enactment of a strong and effective Lokpal Bill. Following an agitation launched by Shri Hazare in April 2011, the government had constituted a Joint Drafting Committee (JDC) consisting of the representatives of Shri Hazare and the union government to prepare a draft of the Lokpal Bill. Even after several meetings of the JDC, there remained many areas of differences. In the meanwhile, the government introduced the Lokpal Bill, 2011 in the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2011 providing for the establishment of the institution of Lokpal (Ombudsman) to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Bill was referred to the Departmentally Related Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law & Justice for examination and report. Not satisfied with the government’s Lokpal Bill, Shri Hazare declared to go on fast from 16 August if their version of the Bill called “Jan Lokpal Bill” was not passed by Parliament by 15 August.

When the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office, Shri V. Narayanasamy, moved the motion for leave to introduce the Lokpal Bill on 4 August, the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, Smt. Sushma Swaraj (BJP) opposed the motion for introduction of the Bill. She wanted to know why the Prime Minister was being kept out of the purview of the Lokpal Bill.

Shri Narayanasamy said the Bill

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 341

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:50 Page 342

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

would go to the Standing Committee and when the House would take it up for discussion, it could decide the issue. Shri Mukherjee said the then NDA government failed to pass the Lokpal Bill even though the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home had presented its report on the Bill.

Smt. Kumar had received notices of adjournment motion from two members regarding the reported agitation by Shri Hazare on 16 August. The Speaker disallowed the notices of adjournment motion observing that the matter, though important enough, did not warrant interruption of business of the House for the day. The Speaker had also received notices of suspension of Question Hour from some Members regarding the fast by Shri Hazare and corruption in the country. She disallowed the demand as there was no provision in the Rules of Procedure under which members could make a demand for suspension of the Question Hour. The Speaker, however, allowed the members who had given notices to very briefly touch upon the subject.

The House was, however, adjourned due to interruptions.

On 17 August, the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh made a statement regarding setting up of Lokpal and certain events including the arrest of Shri Hazare that took place on 16 August in New Delhi. He said notwithstanding the introduction of the Bill, Shri Hazare and his supporters had persisted with their demand that the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted

by Shri Hazare should be introduced in Parliament and passed it.

While agreeing that a Lokpal Bill must be passed as early as possible, the Prime Minister said it was for the Executive to

INDIA

draft a Bill and place it before Parliament. It was the Parliament that was to debate and adopt the Bill with amendments, if necessary. In the process of adoption of the Lokpal Bill, there would be opportunities for Shri Hazare and others to present their views to the Standing Committee to which this Bill had been referred by the Speaker. The Prime Minister said he was not aware of any constitutional philosophy or principle that allowed any one to question the sole prerogative of Parliament to make a law. In making a law on Lokpal, the government had faithfully adhered to the well-settled principles and Shri Hazare was questioning these principles and claimed a right to impose his Jan Lokpal Bill upon Parliament. The path chosen by Shri Hazare to impose his draft of a Bill upon Parliament was totally misconceived and fraught with grave consequences for the parliamentary democracy. He assured the House that the government was determined to provide a government that was transparent, accountable and

Dr Manmohan Singh, MP

responsive at all times and determined to fight corruption.

The elected representatives of the people in Parliament must be allowed to do the job that they were elected for. He

342 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

appealed to all sections of the House to ensure that the government and its processes,

Smt. Sushma Swaraj

and the Parliament and its processes functioned smoothly and effectively.

As soon as the Speaker asked the Leader of the Opposition to initiate the discussion, the Leader of the Opposition requested the presence of Dr Singh as it was he who had made the statement. The discussion started when the Lok Sabha reassembled at 12 noon.

Many opposition members criticized the government for arresting Shri Hazare and shifting the responsibility to the Delhi Police. Raising a discussion on the Prime Minister’s statement, Smt. Swaraj said the government was trying to muzzle the voice of the opposition both outside and inside the House. The country would never forgive the government for the treatment of Shri Hazare.

When the Chair called the Minister of Home Affairs to reply to the discussion, Shri Dasgupta (CPI) raised a point of order. He said since the statement was made by the Prime Minister, as per convention, he should reply to the discussion.

Replying to the debate, the Minister of Home Affairs, Shri P. Chidambaram said there

was a general appreciation that Shri Hazare had taken up a cause that has been neglected

by Parliament for very long. The government genuinely felt that it must engage civil society on this subject. The government invited some members of the civil society and discussed the drafting of the Bill with them. It was done with the genuine and sincere intention of arriving at a Bill that would have the widest consensus. The Minister said that Shri Hazare had an undoubted right to protest at an appropriate place which was agreed to by the Police having regard to the situation. If there was an apprehension that there would be a breach of peace, and if there was an apprehension that there would be disturbance to tranquility, the police could take action and the Police had acted in their best judgment. Parliament alone could make law and if civil society wished to have a role in the making of the law, the government would try to find a way in which civil society could have a role in making the law. Accepting the argument of Shri Hazare that a strong and effective Lokpal bill must be passed, the Minister rejected the argument that only the Jan Lokpal Bill must be passed.

An All Party Meeting held on 24 August to discuss the matter, a resolution was passed unanimously appealing Shri Hazare to end his fast. The resolution called for giving due consideration to the Jan Lokpal Bill so that the final draft of the Bill provided for a strong and effective Lokpal, supported by broad national consensus.

Several opposition parties urged the government to withdraw the Bill already introduced and bring an effective one. Replying to a debate on corruption in the Lok Sabha on 25 August, the Prime Minister announced that the

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:51 Page 343

INDIA

Jan Lokpal Bill along with other documents on the subject prepared by different groups could be debated in the House and at the end of that debate, the whole record could be sent for consideration of the Standing Committee of the Parliament. He believed this would meet the point Shri Hazare and his colleagues had been making that Parliament must have a chance to give its views on their Bill before sending it to the Standing Committee. Dr Singh submitted that this was one via media which would respect the parliamentary supremacy and, at the same time, enable Parliament to take on board ideas contained in the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted by Shri Hazare and his colleagues.

On 27 August Shri Mukherjee made identical statements in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, on

Shri Pranab Mukherjee, MP

the issues relating to setting up of a Lokpal. He called for special focus on the issues of citizen’s charter, setting up of Lokayukatas at state levels and bringing lower bureaucracy under the ambit of the Lokpal, apart from taking up other issues to have an effective and strong Lokpal Bill. The Minister proposed to adopt a resolution by consensus at the end of the debate which might satisfy Shri Hazare, brightening the

prospects of breaking his fast, which had entered its 12th day.

Initiating the discussion on Shri Mukherjee’s statement,

Smt. Swaraj argued for bringing the Prime Minister under the

THIRD READING: INDIA The Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Violation) Bill, 2010 The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 was enacted, inter alia, to provide for the establishment of a Board to protect the interests of investors in securities and to promote the development of, and to regulate, the securities market and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

The Insurance Act, 1938, inter alia, contains the law relating to the business of Insurance and the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 was enacted, inter alia, to provide for the establishment of an authority to protect the interests of holders of insurance policies, to regulate,, promote and ensure orderly growth of the insurance industry and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

In order to clear uncertainties on the differences of opinion relating to jurisdiction of the securities market regulator, i.e., the SEBI and the insurance regulator, i.e., the IRDA it had become necessary to clarify that the “life insurance business” also include any unit linked insurance policy and accordingly to amend the Insurance Act, 1938, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 and the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 for the purpose.

In order to address the differences of opinion among certain statutory regulators which might arise in future, it was felt necessary to set up a joint mechanism, consisting of the Union Finance Minister as its Chairperson, and Governor, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Finance Secretary, Secretary (Financial Services) and chairpersons of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) as its members, for resolving future differences of opinion as to whether any hybrid or composite instrument, having a component of insurance or any other investment or securities market instrument or a component of money market falls within the jurisdiction of the IRDA or SEBI or RBI or PFRDA. As both Houses of Parliament were not in session and immediate action was required to be

taken, the President in terms of provisions under article 123 of the Constitution promulgated the Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2010 in June, 2010 to achieve the above objectives.

The Government of India brought forward the Ordinance replacing the Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Validation). Provisions of the Ordinance replacing Amending Bill included: •

•

•

The amending Bill inserted a new chapter III E in the Reserve Bank of India, Act 1934 with the following new provisions relating to joint mechanism: Notwithstanding anything contained in the RBI Act, or the SEBI or any other law, in the event of emerging of any difference of opinion as to whether (i) any instrument being derivative , money market instrument, repo, or reverse repo; (ii) any instrument being policy of Life Insurance Act, 1938-is hybrid or composite instrument, having component money market investment or securities market instrument and falls with in the jurisdiction of RBI or any other financial or stock related legislations, such difference of opinion has to be referred to a joint Committee for resolution.

Such joint committee would comprise of the Union Finance Minister as ex-officer Chairperson, in the Governor, RBI, Secretaries Department of Economic Affairs and Department of Financial Services; Chairperson, Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, The Chairman, SEBI; and the chairperson, Pension Fund.

The Bill was passed by Lok Sabha on 2 August 2010 and by Rajya Sabha on 9 August 2010. The Bill as passed by both the Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 20 August 2010.

Consequently the Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance 2010 stood repeated.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 343

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:51 Page 344

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

purview of the Lokpal with two exceptions – the national security and public order.

Instead of bringing the Judiciary under the Lokpal, she suggested for setting up a national judicial commission with power to formulate the modalities of appointment and retirement of judges. The anti corruption wing of the Central

Smt. Sushma Swaraj, MP

Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should be brought under the Lokpal. Smt. Swaraj said that the selection body for appointment of Lokpal should not be dominated by the government and proposed to include more members from outside.

She believed both the Lokpal and Lokayukta could be constituted through a single act. Smt. Swaraj registered the consent of her party on all the three points raised by the Leader of the House.

Shri Sandeep Dikshit (INC) said the opinion of the House, constitutional experts and public at large should also be taken into account in order to constitute a strong Lokpal. Shri Dara Singh Chauhan (BSP) said whatever form the Lokpal Bill might take, it would not be able to deliver justice unless it took care of the poor, dalits, backward and the minorities.

Participating in the debate, Shri Elangovan supported the demand for including the Prime

INDIA

Minister within the purview of the Lokpal. On the issue of Lokayukta, he urged the House not to do anything that would militate against the autonomy of the states. Shri Basudeb Acharia (CPI-M) believed the agitation for a strong Lokpal was a reflection of the anger of the people against corruption.

He said the policies formulated and pursued by successive governments and the lack of an institutional mechanism to investigate and prosecute were responsible for the alarming rise in corruption. Shri Acharia wanted a provision in the Lokpal Bill for taking action against companies and business houses that indulged in corrupt practices in their dealings with public servants.

Shri Jose K. Mani (KC-M) believed that inclusion of the Prime Minister in the ambit of Lokpal Bill could lead to constitutional crises. Regarding Lokayukta, the centre should only draft a model legislation which could then be enacted and implemented by each state. For effective and transparent governance, it was necessary to include the lower level employees under the Bill, he asserted.

Sk. Saidul Haque (CPI-M) asked the government to withdraw the Lokpal Bill and introduce a new bill

Shri Anand Sharma, MP

incorporating the suggestions from the Jan Lokpal Bill and

344 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

others. He said the Prime Minister must be included in its ambit with adequate safeguards.

While Dr Kirit Premjibhai Solanki (BJP) asked for enacting a strong and effective Lokpal Bill based on Hazare’s Jan Lokpal Bill, Shri S.S. Ramasubbu (INC) was against bringing the Prime Minister under the purview of Lokpal.

Dr K.L. Meena (Independent) while supporting the demand for an effective Lokpal, suggested for giving due consideration to the accountability aspect and its compatibility with the federal character of the Indian polity.

Shri Anto Antony (INC) was concerned that the Jan Lokpal Bill might create a body which was not responsible to anyone in this country. He said democracy should not be sacrificed in the pretext of eliminating corruption. Shri Hansraj G. Ahir (BJP) urged the House to pass a unanimous resolution for creating an independent and strong mechanism to eliminate corruption.

Shri Dasgupta said Parliament should send a message that it was not oblivious of its responsibilities and the enactment of the Lokpal was the beginning and not the last step in fighting corruption. He promoted respecting rights of the states in the Indian federal structure.

Shri Lalu Prasad (RJD) said all the members of Parliament were united against corruption and they would do everything to protect the supremacy of Parliament as well as Constitution of India. Shri H.D. Devegowda (JD-S) said after the economic reforms of 1991 corruption had increased simultaneously with the GDP growth. The corporate houses were one of the breeding centers for corruption.

The Minister of Commerce

and Industry and the Minister of Textiles, Shri Anand Sharma and Shri Maheshwar Hazari (JD-U) said the functions and activities of judiciary, the executive, any organization in the country, NGOs, large corporate houses, media and all professions bodies should be strictly monitored. Smt. Seema Upadhyay (BSP) wanted proper representation for the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes and minority communities in the composition of the Lokpal.

Dr Mirza Mehboob Beg (J&K NC) said nothing should be done to diminish the existing vibrant parliamentary system while putting in place an effective legislation to fight corruption.

Replying to the debate, Shri Mukherjee said the Bill would be subjected to the scrutiny of the Standing Committee and the House.

If the House would decide to include the Prime Minister or delete any provision or bring an amendment to strengthen it, it was free to do so. As the Monsoon Session was starting from 1 August, it was difficult for the government to have the Lokpal Bill passed by 15 August as demanded by Hazare’s team, said the Minister.

The Leader of the House requested the Speaker to transmit the proceedings to the Departmentally Related Standing Committee for its perusal while formulating its recommendations for a Lokpal Bill. In the absence of any rules with regard to sending the proceedings of a sitting of the House to a Departmentally Related Standing Committee, this was the first such instance wherein the proceedings were sent to a Committee for its consideration. Following this, Shri Hazare ended his fast on 28 August 2011.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:52 Page 345

CANADA

REMEMBERING A PARTY LEADER

Hon. Jack Layton

On 25 July 2011, Hon. Jack Layton, Leader of the New Democratic Party and Leader of the Official Opposition, stepped down temporarily from his position for health reasons. Mr Layton had been treated for prostate cancer earlier in the year and had also undergone hip surgery shortly before the 2 May 2011 general election. At the time, it had been announced that Mr Layton’s absence from politics would be for a short period and that he would be at the helm of his party when the House of Commons resumed its work following the 2011 summer recess. Mr Layton, however, died on 22 August.

Born in Montreal, in the province of Québec, and son of Robert Layton, a cabinet Minister during the Conservative government of Rt Hon. Brian Mulroney, Jack Layton began his political career as a city councillor for the City of Toronto, Ontario, where he was an outspoken

advocate for social causes. In 1991, he unsuccessfully ran for mayor of Toronto. In 2003, he was elected as the Leader of the New Democratic Party on the first ballot. Under his charismatic leadership, an unprecedented number of candidates of the New Democratic Party were elected to the House of Commons. The party went from 13 seats in 2001 to 103 seats in 2011, with 59 of them elected in the province of Québec, a province where the New Democrats had traditionally been unsuccessful in the past. The 103 elected Members of the House of Commons made the New Democratic Party the Official Opposition and a possible government-in-waiting for Canada.

Shortly after Mr Layton’s passing, it was announced that the Canadian government had offered a state funeral to his family, an honour not usually devoted to Leaders of the

Rt Hon. Brian Mulroney

Opposition. On his death bed, Mr Layton wrote a letter to

Mr Brian Topp

Canadians that concluded: “My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear.

Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.”

New Democratic Party leadership race Before stepping down “temporarily” as Leader of the New Democratic Party, Mr Layton had recommended that Ms Nycole Turmel, MP, step in as interim Leader, a choice later endorsed unanimously by the NDP caucus. Ms Turmel, a retired career trade unionist and President of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (the largest union in the Canadian public sector) from 2000 to 2006, was first elected to the House of Commons in 2011.

Ms Turmel will lead the inexperienced New Democrats

(more than half of their Members were first elected in May 2011) until the leadership convention scheduled for 24 March 2012.

Shortly after Mr Layton’s death, Mr Brian Topp, President of the New Democrats and former senior political advisor and campaign director for Jack Layton, announced that he would be a candidate in the leadership race.

Mr Topp, who has never been elected to public office, has nonetheless received endorsement from the establishment of the party, notably from former Leader Hon. Ed Broadbent. The other major contender in this race is Mr Thomas Mulcair. A former Québec cabinet Minister and former Member of the Quebec National Assembly, Mr Mulcair was first elected to the House of Commons in a by-election in 2007. Mr Mulcair Achilles’ heel in this race is that the New Democratic Party was almost non-existent in Québec, his home province, before the general elections held in May 2011.

Despite their electoral success in that election (the party won 59 of 75 available seats in the province), the political party has few active supporters with membership cards in that province in comparison with other parts of the country. Québec is also the only province where the New Democratic Party is not present

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 345

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:52 Page 346

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

at the provincial level. Other candidates for the NDP leadership race are: Ms Niki Ashton, MP; Mr Robert Chisholm, MP; Mr Nathan Cullen, MP; Mr Paul Dewar, MP; Ms Peggy Nash, MP; Mr Romeo Saganash, MP, and Mr Martin Singh.

Legislation revived Over the past five years, the Conservative minority government of Rt Hon. Stephen Harper had been unsuccessful in having some of

Rt Hon. Stephen Harper

its legislative reforms adopted as it did not have the support of the opposition.

Now, with a majority of seats in the House of Commons, the Harper government has reintroduced most of these legislative proposals knowing that they will be adopted by Parliament.

Bill C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act, is among the most contested government proposals. This omnibus Bill groups together nine former Bills that had been introduced by the government in the previous Parliament and proposes numerous amendments to the criminal justice system.

It would, among other things, increase the accountability of federal offenders and tighten the rules governing conditional release,

CANADA

while promoting the interests and the role of victims in the correctional process. It would also amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act in a number of ways, namely by emphasizing the importance of protecting society and facilitating the detention of young persons who reoffend or who pose a threat to public safety. During the 2011 election campaign, the Conservative Party had pledged, if re-elected with a majority government, to have this Bill adopted within the first 100 sitting days of the new session.

Another controversial proposal is Bill C-19, the Ending the Long-Gun Registry Act. The Long-Gun Registry has been increasingly unpopular in Western and rural Canada, and previous attempts made by the Conservative government to eliminate it had failed.

Bill C-19 would remove the requirement to register firearms that are not prohibited or restricted. It would, in addition, call for the destruction of all existing data on these types of firearms currently included in the registry.

On the democratic reform front, the government introduced Bill C-21, the Political Loans Accountability Act, for the fourth time. This Bill would establish more stringent rules on loans to political

Hon. Gerry Ritz, MP

346 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

entities and would put in place new reporting requirements.

Another proposal reintroduced by the government is Bill C-20, the Fair Representation Act. On 27 October 2007, the day Bill C20 was first introduced, Hon. Tim Uppal, MP, Minister of State (Democratic Reform) declared in the House of Commons: “The Bill would deliver a principled and reasonable update to our seat allocation formula, providing fair representation for Canadians living in Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta. It delivers on our commitment to maintain the seat counts of smaller provinces and ensure that Québec is proportionately represented.

Canadians rightly expect fair and principled representation in their democratic institutions. The Fair Representation Act would deliver on this expectation.”

The Bill would give additional seats to fastgrowing provinces Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia while ensuring that Québec maintains its proportional representation in the House.

Other legislative proposals reintroduced from previous sessions include the Copyright Modernization Act, and the Safeguarding Canadians' Personal Information Act. Previous attempts made by the Harper government to end the monopoly of the Canadian Wheat Board (a government agency) on the marketing of wheat and barley have failed in the past.

In 2008, the Federal Court of Appeal ruled that the monopoly could not be ended through regulations as the government had then intended to do, but stated that an Act of Parliament was instead required. In the

autumn of 2008, a Bill respecting the Canadian Wheat Board died on the Oder Paper with the dissolution of

Hon. Tim Uppal, MP

Parliament. On 18 October 2011, Hon. Gerry Ritz, MP, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board, reintroduced Bill C-18, the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act. On that day, he said: "The Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act will give Western Canadian grain farmers the right to choose how they sell their wheat and barley. Our government is delivering on our long-standing promise to give Western Canadian grain farmers marketing freedom, just as they have when selling their canola or pulses."

While the Opposition cannot block the adoption of these Bills given its minority status, it has on occasion used all of its available debate time in the House as well as other parliamentary tactics to delay their passage.

The Conservative government has, however, become proactive in using what is referred to in Canadian parliamentary politics as “a motion to allocate time” whereby the House is imposed a limited time to debate a legislative proposal at any given stage.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:53 Page 347

AUSTRALIA

RESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES On 24 November the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Harry Jenkins, MP, in a surprise announcement, resigned as Speaker. Mr Jenkins, the Labor member for Scullin was first elected in 1986. He was elected

Hon. Harry Jenkins, MP

as Speaker following the 2007 Federal Election. In announcing his resignation, he commented that “I have at all times tried to uphold the fine traditions of Speaker, and to the best of my ability have attempted to carry out my duties in the most independent and non-partisan manner possible”. In explaining his reasons for stepping down, Mr Jenkins stated “as members are aware in this the 43rd Parliament, to further avoid controversial party political matters I have divorced myself from involvement with the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party. In this era of minority government I have progressively become frustrated at this stricture. My

desire is to be able to participate in policy and parliamentary debate, and this would be incompatible with continuing in the role of Speaker”.

The Prime Minister, Hon. Julia Gillard, MP, stated that “on all occasions Harry Jenkins, as Speaker of this House, has carried out his duty with honour, with dignity, with a strict non-partisan approach which brought him credit from all sides of the Parliament”. The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Tony Abbott, MP, stated that Mr Jenkins “has been in my judgment one of the very best Speakers to grace the chair of this Parliament. Certainly he is the equal of the best of the Speakers that I have served under in my 18 years in this chamber. As the Prime Minister said just a few moments ago, he was a really outstanding Speaker with a really strong love of the Parliament, which begs the question: why has Speaker Jenkins left the chair?

Just why has this great man with a great love of this chamber and a great love of its traditions, left the chair?” Mr Abbott further commented that “what has happened today is that an honourable man, the member for Scullin, has been sacrificed to protect the political life of a failing Prime Minister. That is what has happened today. He has been made to walk the plank”.

The election for the new

Hon. Peter Slipper, MP

Speaker was conducted a few hours after Mr Jenkins’ resignation. Hon. Mr Peter Slipper, MP, Liberal Member for Fisher, and the current Deputy Speaker, was elected unopposed. His election, however, was not without controversy. Prior to the election of Speaker, Mr Abbott, warned that any coalition member who stood for election of Speaker would need to resign from the coalition. Mr Slipper ignored this advice and tendered his resignation of the Liberal Party. Mr Slipper’s decision has helped strengthen the minority government of the Prime Minister by effectively increasing labor’s vote on the floor of the House of Representatives from the current 75 to 74 votes to 76 to 73 votes. The Speaker of the House of Representatives does not have a deliberative vote but only a casting vote in the event that votes are tied. The government needs only to rely on three crossbench members

instead of the previous four.

The Opposition, in an attempt to avoid a coalition member taking the position of Speaker, nominated various Labor members for the position but all refused the nomination.

The Leader of Opposition Business in the House, Hon. Chris Pyne, MP, stated “that it is utterly unprecedented for the government not to follow the Westminster tradition of nominating one of their own members to be Speaker of the Parliament”. In relation to Mr Jenkins resignation, Mr Pyne stated that “it grieves me that the former Speaker, Mr Jenkins, has retired today as Speaker of this Parliament. I have had a topsy-turvy relationship with the member for Scullin over the period that I have been Manager of Opposition Business, but I think he has always been fair and reasonable. I have sometimes been known to say to him that, if I were him, I would have thrown me out more often than he did!’”

The new Speaker of the House of Representatives placed on record his tribute to Mr Jenkins. Mr Slipper stated “I strongly believe that the Speaker ought to be independent. In this Parliament the Speaker has not attended party room meetings and the Deputy Speaker followed a similar practice. I think we have moved a long way towards an independent Speaker. I will, in

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 347

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:53 Page 348

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

fact, be an independent Speaker in the Westminster tradition. I noticed that on four occasions in September 2010 the Leader of the Opposition said that that was his preference as far as a model for the Speakership is concerned.

Consequently, after 17 years membership of the National Party, 19 years membership of the Liberal Party and three years membership of the Liberal National Party, I will be relinquishing my party membership.”

Address by President Obama to the Australian Parliament On 17 November 2011 the President of the United States, Rt Hon. Barack Obama, addressed a joint meeting of the Australian Parliament.

Previous Presidents who have addressed the Australian Parliament include President George Bush in 1992, President Clinton in 1996 and President George W Bush in 2003.

The joint meeting conducted in the House of Representatives chamber included Senators and Members. Mr Obama began by noting the “honour of standing in this great chamber to reaffirm the bonds between the United States and the Commonwealth of Australia, two of the world's oldest democracies and two of the world's oldest friends”. The President noted the enduring friendship and similarities between the two countries focusing on the successes and challenges that each country has experienced. Mr Obama commented that “this solidarity has sustained us through a difficult decade. We will never forget the attacks of 9-11 that took the lives of not only Americans but people from many nations, including Australia. In the United States,

AUSTRALIA

we will never forget how Australia invoked the ANZUS Treaty for the first time ever, showing that our two nations stood as one; and none of us will ever forget those we have lost to al-Qaeda's terror in the years since, including innocent Australians”.

Mr Obama used the address to outline his foreign policy agenda for the Asia-Pacific region. The President stated that “so here is what this region must know. As we end today's wars, I have directed my national security team to make our presence and mission in

President Barack Obama

the Asia-Pacific a top priority.

As a result, reductions in US defence spending will not—I repeat, will not—come at the expense of the Asia-Pacific. My guidance is clear. As we plan and budget for the future, we will allocate the resources necessary to maintain our strong military presence in this region; we will preserve our unique ability to project power and deter threats to peace; we will keep our commitments, including our treaty obligations to allies like Australia; and we will constantly strengthen our capabilities to meet the needs of the 21st century. Our enduring interests in the region demand our enduring presence in the region. The United States is a Pacific power and we are here to stay”.

348 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

At the same time, Mr Obama noted the role of China in the Asia-Pacific. Mr Obama stated that “the United States will continue our effort to build a cooperative relationship with China. Australia and the United States—all of our nations— have a profound interest in the rise of a peaceful and prosperous China. That is why the United States welcomes it.

We have seen that China can be a partner, from reducing tensions on the Korean peninsula to preventing proliferation. And we will seek more opportunities for cooperation with Beijing, including greater communication between our militaries to promote understanding and avoid miscalculation”.

Australia introduces a carbon pricing scheme On 8 November 2011 the Senate passed the Clean Energy Bill 2011 and related bills. The legislation will place a price on each tonne of greenhouse gases emitted by a business. It is a cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme which will commence on 1 July 2012. For the first three years, the carbon price will be fixed at $23 per tonne, and from 1 July 2015, the price will be determined by the market.

The debate over the government’s decision to introduce a carbon pricing mechanism has been heavily criticised by the opposition which claims the government has no mandate for its introduction. During the Senate debate, Liberal Senator Mathias Cormann commented that “today is the day when Labor senators will lock in their betrayal of the Australian people. Today is the day when each single Labor senator will vote in breach of their solemn promise to the Australian

people before the last election that there would be no carbon tax under the government led

by Julia Gillard. The vote today will haunt every single Labor member and senator all the way to the next election. History will judge Labor members and senators harshly and, before then, the Australian people will judge Labor members and senators harshly at the next election”. Senator Cormann concluded that “people across Australia understand that this is a tax which will push up the cost of everything, which will make Australia less competitive internationally, which will cost jobs, which will result in lower real wages and which will see emissions in Australia continue to go up”.

The Leader of the Nationals in the Senate, Senator Barnaby Joyce stated that “this legislation is the height of foolishness for this nation, which as we speak is a mere $32 billion away from our next debt ceiling. When our nation's credit card is presented, the attendant will say, 'transaction declined; please go see your bank.' It is a very sad day when we start progressing down a path of reorganising our nation and our economy on account of a colourless, odourless gas. It is the height of foolishness”.

The Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Christine Milne stated that “this Parliament is delivering profound environmental, economic and social reform, and I can understand why the coalition, who oppose that environmental, social and economic reform, are behaving as they are. This provides a platform for a higher level of ambition on climate change because, as I was saying, with a planet with seven billion people and accelerated global warning we need to make sure that the platform we are delivering

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:54 Page 349

AUSTRALIA

today has the capacity for upward flexibility so that we can do more”. The Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Bob Brown commented that “it is a great day for Australia. It is a great day for the Barrier Reef, for the Murray-Darling Basin, for Ningaloo, for Kakadu and for this nation's future, and it is a great day for this planet Earth, upon which we all depend and which gives us inspiration, which gives us joy, which gives us happiness and which today we are acknowledging we must return something to”.

The Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Sen. the Hon Penny Wong, MP stated that “today marks the beginning of Australia's clean energy future and in a few moments we will commence voting on a package that delivers for future generations of Australians. This is a historic moment. This is a historic reform, a reform long overdue, a reform which represents a clear divide in politics in this country between those who look to the future and those who are mired in the fear campaigns of today, those who speak to hope and optimism and those who want to drum up fear, those who want action on climate change and those who simply want to deny and oppose. We on this side accept the science. We accept the need to act. We also, like John Howard and Mr Turnbull, accept the advice of economists and accept that putting a price on carbon is the most efficient mechanism to reduce emissions”.

Senate Budget Estimates The Senate Budget Estimates conducted between 17-20 October provided another opportunity for Senators to scrutinize executive government over its performance. The Senate Economics committee, for

example, scrutinized treasury officials over the dangers to the Australian economy posed by the European debt crisis.

Senator Cormann sought advice about the risks to the budget of the debt crisis. The treasury noted that the crisis which originated in Greece has spread to other countries including Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain. Treasury noted that

in recent days, “both France and Belgium have also seen their funding costs increase from much lower bases, of course”. In relation to the risks to the Australian budget, treasury commented that “there is no question that, were the sovereign debt crisis in Europe to play out and were these problems not dealt with comprehensively by Europe,

that would have serious implications for the global economy and the Australian economy”.

Senator Cormann, however, sought detailed information on how the Australian budget will be impacted on in 2011-12 and 2012-13. At this point, Senator Wong commented that “if you are asking the officials to update the budget figures, that

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Amendment Act 2011 The legislation updates and modernises the operation of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986. The Special Minister of State, Hon. Gary Gray, MP, advised that the act “was originally drafted in response to the Royal Commission on Intelligence and Security conducted by the Honourable Justice Robert Hope in 1983, which raised, amongst various issues, concerns about the capacity of ministers to control effectively some Australian Intelligence Community (AIC) agencies”.

Currently, the act allows the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) to undertake preliminary inquiries, but only where a complaint is made to the office.’ The amending legislation will widen the scope to allow the IGIS to undertake preliminary inquiries. The Special Minister of State commented that “the ability to undertake a preliminary inquiry in response to a complaint provides the IGIS with an efficient and cost-effective mechanism to ask an agency for information about a matter, without having to allocate resources to conduct a full investigation”.

The legislation addresses a further anomaly in that currently, the IGIS on his or her own motion can conduct inquiries into the effectiveness and appropriateness of the procedures of an agency relating to illegality or propriety of the agency. This power only applies to the Office of National Assessments, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, and the Defence Intelligence Organisation. The legislation will ensure that the IGIS can apply the same approach to the other three intelligence agencies including the Defence Imagery

and Geospatial Organisation, the Defence Signals Directorate, and the Australian Secret Intelligence Service.

The legislation does not currently provide for the IGIS to delegate his or her functions. Therefore, the IGIS must personally exercise the powers of the office which can limit the number of inquiries that can be conducted at any one time. The legislation “allows for the engagement of a suitable person to conduct a major inquiry with access to the full range of powers under the act”.

In addition to these measures, the legislation also “provides the IGIS with the capacity to assist royal commissions at the discretion of the government of the day, while ensuring the effective operation of limitations on any unauthorised release of sensitive intelligence material by current or former IGIS officers to a court, coronial inquiry or royal commission”.

The legislation was referred to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee.

The committee recommended that the “IGIS Act be amended to include a provision stating that an annual report prepared under subsection 35(1) of the Act must include comments on any matters arising during that year relating to the employment of and delegation of powers to individuals under proposed sections 32 and 32AA of the Act”. This recommendation was agreed to by the Senate.

The Shadow Attorney-General, Sen. the Hon. George Brandis, noted that “the act was drafted with the view to ensuring the powers of the IGIS to get highly sensitive information would continue to be very closely held”. Senator Brandis concluded that “the coalition is satisfied that the appropriate safeguards have been preserved, and for that reason we support the bill”.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 349

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:54 Page 350

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

AUSTRALIA

will be done in the normal way in the mid-year review. In relation to the 2010-11 impact, you will see—and I am sure others at this table have far more expertise than I have on this—that there remains a $40 billion write-down, or less revenue, in that year than was forecast by treasury over the forward estimates period, dating from the precrisis forecast. We are still seeing revenues being hit as a result of what has occurred in the global economy over the last years, as

evidenced in the final budget outcome”.

On the domestic front, a great deal of attention was directed to the evidence of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Mr Allan Asher. At the May 2011 Budget Estimates, Mr Asher provided suggested questions to Australian Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young for her to ask Mr Asher. At the start of his evidence during the October Senate Budget Estimates, Mr Asher apologised for this conduct. Mr Asher stated that

“this was an error of judgement and it was a mistake. I wish to, firstly, apologise to the committee for that. I wish to explain my actions in the context of, firstly, my concerns about the financial state of the Office of the Ombudsman and, secondly, the absence of any specialist parliamentary committee through which the Ombudsman's performance can be assessed or concerns heard”.

Sen. the Hon. John Faulkner questioned Mr Asher

about the potential harm his actions may have brought to the independence of the office of the Ombudsman. Mr Asher responded “no, I do not believe it affects the independence in any way. The information provided, and the questions, were clearly of an administrative character, about the funding and our continued capacity to undertake the work.

In that way, I think that the questions were, in an independent sense, quite neutral”. Senator Faulkner commented that “do you

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Act 2011 The Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Act implements the government’s objective to improve anti-dumping laws. The Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Justice, Hon. Brendan O’Connor, MP, commented that the measures “are the most important changes to Australia's antidumping regime in more than a decade”. The Minister stated that ‘these changes overall will improve the antidumping system's effectiveness and they are vital because, even though our economy is strong, some local industries are vulnerable to dumping”. The legislation introduces four key themes. First, will be the introduction of a time limit on ministerial decision making.

The Minister will make a decision within 30 days of receiving a report or recommendation on which to make a decision. Second, the Minister’s decision making will be improved “by clarifying that all appropriate and relevant factors which may indicate material injury to an Australian industry are specifically listed as factors to which the minister may have regard”.

The third objective of the legislation is to ensure “greater comparability of Australia's anti-dumping system with those of other jurisdictions, and further implement the relevant World Trade Organisation agreements which provide the basis for internationally agreed antidumping rules”. Fourth, the legislation ‘will clarify that parties with a clear interest in antidumping matters are expressly given

350 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

an opportunity to participate in antidumping investigations”.

The Minister concluded that “the government's package of improvements, of which this bill is the first tranche, will provide more certainty for local manufacturers and primary producers resulting in more confidence to invest in the future”.

The Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science, Ms Sophie Mirabella, MP, noted that “this is a day that Australian industry and the coalition has been waiting for a long time—around three years, in fact”. Ms Mirabella noted that the coalition supported the legislation. She was critical, however, of the government’s performance commenting that “we are glad that, dragged kicking and screaming though they may have been, the government have eventually reacted to the combined pressure of the coalition, Senator Xenophon, industry groups, individual businesses and trade unions to make changes such as imposing a time limit of 30 days on ministerial decision making, widening the range of factors available for consideration in the determination of material damage and expanding the list of subsidies against which Australian industries can apply for countervailing duties”.

Ms Mirabella concluded that Labor's changes do represent an improvement, “but you could also be forgiven for being worried that the pursuit of this so-called package of improvements will, at the end of the day, just be another chapter in the long tale of Labor inaction and impotence when it comes to anti-dumping”.

Sen. the Hon. John Faulkner

consider approaching one senator from one political party as opposed to all the membership of a parliamentary committee as something that might raise questions about, firstly, your impartiality and, secondly, the need for you to act in a manner that is unquestionably apolitical?” Mr Asher responded that he was apolitical.

Senator Faulkner noted that an integrity agency such as the Ombudsman should be setting an example for wider public service. Mr Asher, in responding, to the question of whether he has met the high standards required responded that 2I think this was clearly an error in judgment. It was clearly a mistake”. On 20 October 2011 Mr Asher resigned as Ombudsman 14 months into his five year contract.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:55 Page 351

NEW ZEALAND

NEW ZEALAND GENERAL ELECTION 2011 In New Zealand’s general election for the Fiftieth Parliament, on 26 November,

Hon. Phil Goff, MP

with special votes still to be counted the National government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Rt Hon. John Key, was returned on the night with 60 seats, increasing its share from the last Parliament by two. The Labour Party, led by Hon. Phil Goff, MP, registered a loss, going from the 43 seats it held in the last Parliament, to 34. Mr Goff subsequently announced his retirement as leader. This overall result was not a surprise, since all the previous polls had been predicting a similar outcome. Voter turnout, at around 70 percent, was low for a New Zealand election.

The final proportion of seats between the two major parties was likely to change slightly from election night, once special votes were counted. In particular, in the Christchurch

Central electorate, National’s Nicky Wagner and Labour’s Brendan Burns finished on the night tied with 10,493 votes each. The final count for the election was expected to take a further two weeks, with the Electoral Commission aiming to release the official results on 10 December.

Minor parties that emerged with increased strength were the Greens, with 13 seats on the night, up from seven, with the possibility of achieving 14 with the addition of special votes; and Rt Hon. Winston Peters’ MP, New Zealand First Party, which, with 6.8 per cent of the vote, comes back into the House, after three years absence, with eight MPs. The Maori Party lost one Member, returning to

Hon. Peter Dunne, MP

Parliament with three.

Returning to Parliament with one Member each are Hone Harawira’s Mana Party, Hon. Peter Dunne’s United Future, and Hon. John Banks for ACT.

It is in the nature of New Zealand’s MMP (mixedMember proportional) system that one party would very rarely be able to govern without support from others, and even

keeping MMP, and changing to another electoral system-including the possibility of reverting to first past the post.

The preliminary results indicate clear support for MMP’s retention. An independent review by the Electoral Commission will now be held in 2012, to recommend any changes in the way the current system works.

Criminal Procedure Legislation

Hon. Simon Power, MP

with its large share of seats National needs—and looked to be sure of obtaining—sufficient firm support from other parties in order to achieve stable government. Hon. John Key, MP, began negotiations with some of the small parties in the days immediately following the election, in order to finalise the nature of the support for National, in time for Parliament to sit in the week before Christmas. Included on the table for negotiation were possible ministerial posts, and possible compromise agreements on policy matters.

At the same time as the general election, a referendum on the electoral system was held, in which voters were asked to choose between

On 4 October 2011 the Minister of Justice, Hon. Simon Power, MP, moved the third readings of 15 Bills divided from the Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill— legislation that he described as “well overdue”. He explained: “The laws governing criminal procedure are now over 50 years old and well out of date.

Criminal procedure is currently characterized by avoidable delay, excessive complexity, unnecessary cost, and a high reliance on paper-based systems that do not make sense in a modern era increasingly dominated by technology. It is simply unacceptable that it takes an average of 16 months for a High Court case to proceed through the system. This legislation will reduce and streamline victims’ and witnesses’ exposure to the criminal justice system. There will be fewer repeat or

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 351

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 14:55 Page 352

NEW ZEALAND

unnecessary events, and the use of staff time and courthouse capacity will be optimized to ensure that money is spent more effectively.”

Mr Power also made the point that “efficiency is important, but so is the right to a fair trial. The legislation achieves a careful balance between moving criminal cases through the court system more quickly and protecting the fundamental rights and safeguards that underpin our justice system. Changes made to the legislation by the Justice and Electoral Committee and during the Committee of the whole House stage have clarified beyond doubt that this legislation maintains, and even enhances, fair trial rights and fundamental justice principles”.

The Minister gave as examples of changes the setting of the threshold for trial by jury at offences carrying a term of two years’ imprisonment and

Mr Charles Chauvel

above—instead of three years as originally proposed—and amending “the clause giving the courts the ability to proceed in the absence of a defendant, so that the court’s discretion is limited to proceeding and procedural hearings where no determination of guilt or innocence will be made”.

Mr Charles Chauvel (Labour) agreed that “criminal proceedings need to be sped up. To that extent, it is

appropriate to welcome the legislation”. He also agreed that the legislation was better for the amendments that had been made to it. For instance, Labour had “insisted on recording our objection to the proposal to severely curtail the right to silence. We also objected greatly to the proposal in the Bill that would have made it easier to try people in absentia”.

Mr Chauvel accused the Minister of having a “closed mind on criminal law reform”, having vetoed other suggested changes, and said that the Minister agreed to the changes that were made only because of “raw politics” when other parties decided that Labour’s objections were right, and refused to give the Minister the numbers to pass the legislation without the changes. Mr Chauvel objected that the government had not dealt with the drivers of crime, such as alcohol, and that the substantive law needed to be overhauled, saying that only when this had been done “might one turn to the issues of evidence and procedure that this legislation tinkers with. We will be back in this House in the next term trying to deal with the inefficiencies in the criminal justice system because of the failure of the Minister to follow the Law Society’s advice and to start at the beginning with root and branch reform, rather than in the middle by looking at procedure”.

Dr Kennedy Graham (Green) “paid tribute to Mr Power for his achievement with this legislation…[its] impending adoption…is generally recognized as a seminal moment in New Zealand’s judicial legislation, the kind that occurs every half-century or so”. Dr Graham explained that the Green Party reluctantly had to oppose the legislation because of the defeat of its key

352 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

proposed amendment for the retention of the three month threshold for the right to trial by jury.

The legislation passed by 110 votes to 10, with the Green Party and Mana Party voting against.

Review of Standing Orders On 5 October Hon. Judith Collins, MP, Minister of Police, on behalf of the Acting Leader

Hon. Judith Collins, MP

of the House, Mr Power, moved that the amendments to the Standing Orders in the Report of the Standing Orders Committee should be adopted “from the day after the dissolution or expiration of the present Parliament.” Ms Collins explained that in 2011, because of the election and the Rugby World Cup, there had been only 23 sitting weeks scheduled, compared with 29 and 31 in 2009 and 2010 respectively.

“Although they were entirely appropriate responses, the early adjournments that followed the Pike River [coalmine] disaster and the February [Christchurch] earthquake also resulted in 26 fewer hours of House time— the equivalent of two sitting weeks. So from that perspective, the Acting Leader of the House is very supportive of the committee’s recommendations to allow the government to obtain extra

hours of House time by moving that sitting be extended to a Wednesday or Thursday morning, or by agreement of the Business Committee to a Thursday evening and Friday morning. Although this would not remove the need for urgency from time to time, it would provide a pressure valve for an Order Paper groaning under the weight of a busy government’s agenda. The Acting Leader of the House is also pleased to see the Standing Orders Committee give a more formal recognition to [the taking together of] cognate bills...concerning the Standing Orders Committee recommendation to reinstate the requirement to record and publish Members’ attendance at parliamentary business…Members have an obligation to Parliament and the public to at least attend the House or other parliamentary business, if not actively participate, and the public have a right to know how their elected Members perform in meeting this most basic requirement.”

Hon. Trevor Mallard, MP, (Labour) considered that “…this report...very slightly tips the running of Parliament in favour of the government, but provides some safeguards to that”.

Dr Kennedy Graham

For Dr Graham The recommendations … are good

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:02 Page 353

NEW ZEALAND

enough, as far as they go. That said, we are also of the view that an opportunity has been lost for reforming the institution more thoroughly than the recommendations in this report allow…perhaps the most important [issue] concerns the [adoption of a] code of conduct for Members. The New Zealand Parliament is rated poorly by the public, yet we as Parliamentarians are in denial.”

Valedictory Speeches Towards the end of the 49th Parliament the House heard the valedictory speeches of 15 Members. On 28 September Mr Keith Locke, one of the original Green MPs, said in his speech: “Initially, [the Greens] were dismissed as either utopian dreamers or dangerous extremists. It is much easier now, because public opinion has moved much closer to the Green way of looking at things.” He considered himself “lucky to have been here during the MMP [mixed-Member proportional representation] era, in a much more representative Parliament.

Mr Jim Anderton

Politically, the thing that has most saddened me has been the ease with which legislation giving the police or SIS [Security Intelligence Service] more powers or legislation extending sentences for crimes

passes through this Parliament.

On several issues I have looked more to Scandinavia than the Anglo nations like America, Britain, and Australia. For the last 12 years I have been a Green battler for New Zealand to be more independent in foreign affairs and defence, building on what we have achieved in leaving ANZUS [Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty] and becoming nuclear-free. There is an independent, pioneering spirit within most New Zealanders that grates against subordination to American dictates”.

Mr Jim Anderton (Leader— Progressive), in his speech on 4 October, mentioned his distaste for the old first-pastthe-post electoral system: “It gave me no satisfaction at all to see the [Labour] government we had all worked so hard to elect in 1984 sheet inequality into New Zealand in a way that I could never have envisaged.

That is why I left the Labour Party in 1989 to form the New Labour Party. The promises broken by successive governments…led to the dramatic changes that have taken place in Parliament under MMP. It was no wonder that people rebelled against an electoral system that delivered such outcomes.” Furthermore, “between 1853 and 1984, when I first came to the House, 1,102 MPs had been elected to the New Zealand House of Representatives. Of [that number], 25 were women.

Currently there are 38 women in this Parliament—more than were elected in a total of 131 years under first past the post. I have no doubt that I…made the right decision in joining with others to form New Labour when I did, then taking it into the Alliance with other parties, and, later, when the Alliance was set to become a threat to

an enlightened government rather than a supporter of it, forming the Progressives as a coalition partner for Labour. As I have often said, one bad day in

Hon. Bill English, MP

government is better than a thousand good days in Opposition”.

According to the retiring Minister of Justice, Mr Power, in his valedictory speech on 5 October: “Politicians must have a plan; a plan that is in place early, and one that they are prepared to lead. I believe that politics is 90 per cent preparation and 10 per cent execution. Ideas also matter. In politics ideas matter more than the political players themselves because all of us will come and go, but the ideas will endure…taking a position and selling it, persuading and debating, is what politics is all about. It sounds idealistic and maybe it is, but I always told myself I would leave politics before the idealism left me. I realized that…working with other political parties to reach consensus, where possible, was a legitimate way to advance legislation and to progress an agenda. Not everyone agrees with me on this approach, but I know I am right. It is our job to tackle the tough issues, the issues the public pays us to front up to and come to a view on. There are many, many debates that Parliament does not want to have, for fear of

losing votes or not staying on message: abortion, adoption law, children’s rights, and sexual violence issues. I do not share this timid view. The truth is if we do not have those debates here, where will we have them?”

Adjournment debate The adjournment debate on 6 October 2011 was the final debate of the forty-ninth Parliament. The Deputy Prime Minister, Hon. Bill English, MP, acknowledged the Speaker, Dr The Rt Hon. Lockwood Smith, MP, for his “valiant attempt to make this a place of facts, with more facts and less politics”.

He acknowledged also “the resilience of the people of Christchurch. They have had to put up with the most dreadful of circumstances. On any given day, of course, what is going on in Christchurch now is not

Rt Hon. Lockwood Smith, MP

spectacular, except the days where there are large shakes, but day after day after day they have to put up with the grinding discomforts and uncertainties of a city whose way of life has been fundamentally affected by the earthquake”. The election…will be between a National government that is looking ahead to a better New Zealand, a brighter future driven by the aspiration that New Zealanders have shown, and a Labour Party still looking back with nostalgia to its time

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 353

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:02 Page 354

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

NEW ZEALAND

in government.”

Hon. Annette King, MP,

(Deputy Leader—Labour) gave the National government

a “score card on how it has done over the last three years.

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill The Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill had its first reading on 27 September 2011. The background to the legislation went back several years. In October 2007 a series of armed police raids were carried out in response to the discovery of an alleged paramilitary training camp in the Urewera mountain range, near the town of Ruatoki in the Eastern Bay of Plenty. Guns and ammunition were seized, and 17 people arrested, all but one charged with firearms offences, and all granted bail within a month. According to the police the raids were the culmination of more than a year of surveillance. Search warrants were issued under the Summary Proceedings Act to search for evidence relating to potential breaches of the Terrorism Suppression Act and the Arms Act. On 8 November 2007 the Solicitor-General declined to press charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act, because of the inadequacies of the legislation, describing it as “complex and incoherent”, and “almost impossible to apply to domestic circumstances”.

In September 2011 the Crown dropped the charges for 13 of the 17 defendants after the Supreme Court ruled certain evidence inadmissible.

The remaining four still faced charges of participating in a criminal gang and unlawful possession of a firearm. A 3-2 verdict of the court overturned previous rulings by the High Court and Court of Appeal that cameras installed by the police to record the defendants engaging in military-style training were lawful. However, it found that offending by the remaining defendants was so serious that the evidence collected by the cameras could be used.

The Attorney-General, Hon. Chris Finlayson, MP, speaking on the first reading of the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill, explained that “for the last 17 years the police have used covert video surveillance cameras…to help investigate serious crimes. Contrary to some public comment, the police were…justified in their belief that the use of this surveillance in connection with a search warrant was not unlawful. Last month the

354 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

Supreme Court retrospectively altered the law. It ruled that in the absence of specific statutory authorization the use of covert video surveillance amounting to a search, and conducted in tandem with a Summary Proceedings Act search warrant, was unlawful. The decision of the court affects approximately 40 criminal cases now before the courts and at least the same number of current police criminal investigations. The Bill…[preserves] the legal position as it was before 2 September 2011”.

Mr Chauvel complained about the way the legislation was being rushed through, although a “truncated” select committee process would allow some scrutiny of the Bill: “It is a small mercy, but at least it is happening.”

The Bill passed through its remaining stages under urgency on 6 October. In its second reading Mr Chauvel said “the least-worst outcome will be achieved by this legislation. As a result of the select committee process that the government was required to undergo, police will get only the limited powers that they formerly held, for six months only, and Parliament will be prevented from doing something constitutionally repugnant—that is, legislating retrospectively. Labour stood firm and achieved that outcome”.

In the Committee of the whole House stage, Mr Keith Locke (Green) called the Bill “legislation that has been looking for a problem”, and concluded: “there is no reason at all why we could not have gone for another six months under the present system.”

In the third reading Mr Finlayson called the Bill “the result of political parties working together to find a solution to a problem. The Bill we debate today is, to all intents and purposes, the Bill sent to the select committee. The difference is that certain elements of retrospectivity have been removed”.

Hon. Rodney Hide, MP, (ACT Party) said: “We have a patch, we have a fix-up, it is there for six months, and in six months this Parliament will have to come back and fix it. I think that is a great result.”

The Bill passed by 105 votes to 14, with the Green Party, the Maori Party, and Mana voting against it.

I have measured it by three main measures: are we better off; are there more jobs; and does it have a plan to manage the economy”? Ms King concluded: “This government has borrowed 437 billion for no growth. We have 56,000 more unemployed, and National is too timid to tackle the real policies that this country needs.”

Dr Norman described “the recent double downgrade by Standard and Poor’s and Fitch Ratings” as “a vote of no confidence in the government’s management of the economy”. He continued: “We believe that the government has not delivered a plan that seizes the economic opportunities of tomorrow, particularly in the space of the smart Green economy.

“For a decade now the Greens have shown that we can make a change as an independent party in Parliament. The next Parliament, we hope, will be an opportunity for more Green change.

“Our vision is for a New Zealand that is richer in things that matter: strong communities, a beautiful environment, and a clean, green economy that works for everyone. I believe that New Zealand can be this country, and that we can lead the change to a better world.”

The Speaker described the forty-ninth Parliament as “a busy one. You have sat for 1,650 hours, approximately, which is 150 hours more than the forty-eighth Parliament. I must say, though, that a quarter of those hours were under urgency, and I hope that the proposals to our Standing Orders adopted by this House will facilitate less reliance on urgency to advance the legislative programme in the future”.

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:03 Page 355

SRI LANKA

ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF MONEY LAUNDERING The Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Bill was presented to Parliament by the Leader of the House and Minister of Irrigation, Hon. Nimal Sripala de Silva, MP, on 8 September 2011. The second reading of the bill was debated and passed with amendments on 21 September 2011 and was certified by the Speaker.

Commencing the Second reading debate, the Minister of Education, Hon. Bandula Gunawardana, MP, stated that money laundering was legalizing black money, and under the directions of the President, a Finance Intelligence Unit was established in the Central Bank.

These amendments would enable the law to take action against terrorist organizations that were collecting funds overseas. These measures would also secure the security of the nation, the national economy and the public.

Dr Harsha de Silva, MP, (UNP) said “a number of fraudulent activities have been reported with regard to the financial businesses in the recent past. It is no use passing these laws in Parliament, if they are not properly implemented by the government. We have experienced that several financial institutions have collapsed in the recent past.

Therefore it is necessary to regulate these institutions by supervising them properly.

There is no point in passing laws if they are not implemented. The government has to expose errant companies to the public. They

should be brought before the law”.

Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekera, MP, (UNP) commented “I appreciate the government for moving timely and important legislation. I am sure that it would be applicable if measures could be taken against the persons involved in the Pramuka Bank racket. The victims of the Pramuka Bank racket and Golden Key racket have not so far been provided with any relief. The share market too has faced a crisis in recent past”.

“Money laundering operates across the borders of sovereign countries. The task of combating it is extremely difficult and requires in-depth research, monitoring and investigation and exchange of financial intelligence information,” stated the Senior Minister for Human Resources DEW Gunasekara in his speech. He further stated that: “the prevention of money laundering brings in amendments to the Act of 2005. These amendments cover persons who commit money laundering while in Sri Lanka and recovery of corresponding value of the properties relating to money laundering and other unlawful activities relating to money laundering.

I must recall here, with deep respect to late Lakshman Kadiragamar the fact that the convention of the Suppression of Terrorist Financing Bill was introduced by him to this House on 7 July 2005. It became an Act, thereafter.

Strangely or ironically, it was the last piece of legislation moved by him.

What is this money laundering? It may be new to us but not so to the developed world. It does take place in our country as well, perhaps most of our people are not aware of it yet. It is a process that disguises illegal income and profits without compromising the criminals who benefit from the proceeds. This process has taken a critical and dangerous dimension under neoliberalism. This represents the ‘Speculative Capital’ which President Fidel Castro has repeatedly warned of as a cause of global financial instability.

The illegally earned funds are moved away from their associations with the crime, i.e. the origin of the funds by channeling them into the financial system. Through the entry into the financial system, the process disguises the trail in order to foil tracing of the origin of the funds. At the final stage of this process, the illegal funds return to the criminals fully assimilated into the legal economy invested in real estates, luxury assets, or business ventures. In brief, this is how the black money or dirty money in the economy operates in an advanced way. It has its own methodology and technology.

Who are these criminals engaged in money laundering?

They are those who are engaged in illegal arm sales, smuggling, organized crimes, drug trafficking, prostitution

rings, embezzlement, insider trading, bribery, corruptions and fraud schemes etc. These monies can be transferred electronically very fast from country to country through legal structures in varying forms. The possible social and political costs of money laundering are serious and alarming. They will weaken the social fabric, ethical standards, and democratic institutions. It may be why terrorists cannot easily be brought into the democratic process.”

Salient features of the amendments include: •

•

•

Applicability of the law has been expanded to cover any person who has committed a money laundering offence while in Sri Lanka; At present offences punishable exceeding seven years imprisonment under any other law has been considered as an offence for money laundering. The threshold of seven years has now been reduced to five years covering more offences punishable under money laundering offence; and Foreign predicate offences are also included as unlawful activities.

The Bill was passed subject to few Committee stage amendments, on 21 September 2011, unanimously since there was an agreement in both the Government and the Opposition with the regard to the amendments therein.

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 355

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:04 Page 356

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

UNITED KINGDOM

TWO RECALLS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS Historically, recalls of Parliament during the summer recess have been relatively rare but 2011 saw two such recalls of the House of Commons. The recall of Parliament is initiated by the government and has to be agreed by the Speaker. The first, on 20 July, was to hear a statement from the Prime Minister and debate the issue of phone hacking. The second, on 11 August, was in response to a series of public disturbances that had started in Tottenham, north London, and

Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP

spread across the city and to other English cities. The disturbances had begun following a series of peaceful protests resulting from the shooting by police officers, of a 29-year-old man named Mark Duggan, in Tottenham on 3 August. As the Prime Minister, Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP, (Con) described events to the Commons: “Initially, there were some peaceful demonstrations 356 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

following Mark Duggan’s death and understandably and quite appropriately the police were cautious about how they dealt with them. However, this was then used as an excuse by opportunist thugs in gangs, first in Tottenham itself, then across London and in other cities. It is completely wrong to say there is any justifiable causal link. It is simply preposterous for anyone to suggest that people looting in Tottenham at the weekend, still less three days later in Salford, were in any way doing so because of the death of Mark Duggan. Young people stealing flat-screen televisions and burning shops—that was not about politics or protest, it was about theft.”

Making his statement, the Prime Minister set out a series of actions designed to restore order, repair and restore businesses that had been damaged by the violence and deal with what many Members of the House saw as a deeper issue – the involvement of gangs of young people. The Prime Minister described such gangs as “territorial, hierarchical and incredibly violent” and tasked the Home Secretary with bringing forward “a cross-government programme of action to deal with this gang culture and to report to Parliament in October.”

Responding to the statement, the Leader of the Opposition, Rt Hon. Edward Miliband, MP, (Lab) told the House:

“Whatever we disagree on week by week, month by month, today as a House of Commons we stand shoulder to shoulder, united against the vandalism and violence we have seen on our streets. The victims are the innocent people

Rt Hon. Edward Milliband, MP

who live in many of our cities, who have seen their homes and businesses destroyed, their communities damaged and their confidence about their own safety undermined.

There can be no excuses, no justification. This behaviour has disgusted us all. It cannot be allowed to stand; we will not allow it to stand.”

He went on to say that politicians had to understand what had caused the disturbances, in order to ensure that they were not repeated, telling the House that “These issues cannot be laid at the door of a single cause or a single government. The causes are complex. Simplistic

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:04 Page 357

UNITED KINGDOM

the government was putting in place: “One of the things we are trying to do is to look at the involvement of gangs; it is possible that that is not as high as people at first thought, but that does not mean that the Government should not be doing work on gangs.”

The Home Secretary was also pressed by the Chair of the Committee, Rt Hon. Keith Vaz, MP, (Lab) on issues such as the use of the army and of water cannon. She defended the decision not to use either of those measures, but also the

The aftermath of the London riots in Clapham Junction, August 2011.

solutions will not provide the answer.”

Following the statement, 160 Members of the House rose to ask questions. The MP for Tottenham, Rt Hon. David Lammy, MP, (Lab) told the Prime Minister: “In Tottenham, 45 people have lost their homes, which were burnt to the ground. They were running out of their homes carrying their children in their arms, and their cry is, “Where were the police?””. The point was also made by Sir Malcolm Rifkind (Con), who asked whether police had been instructed to stand back whilst looting was happening.

The role of the police was a key theme in the debate that followed. The Prime Minister stressed that the police’s response to the disturbances had initially been deliberately restrained, in order to avoid inflaming existing tensions over Mark Duggan’s death. However, he conceded that “but as I have said, and I think police chiefs

have been very frank about this, the balance between what is right for public order and what

Rt Hon. David Lammy, MP

is right for stopping criminality—looting and thieving—was not got right to start with”.

Parliament’s interest in what became known as the August riots did not end when the House rose on 11 August.

When Parliament returned in the autumn, firstly for the September sitting and then the autumn sitting in October, there

was interest from across the House in the further measures that had been taken at the time and were being taken to combat the possibility of future violence.

For example, giving evidence to the cross-party Home Affairs Select Committee, the Home Secretary, Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP, (Con) said that the riots were more complex phenomena that people initially thought: “A lot of people thought initially this was something that was very much about gangs and young people. It is obvious that gangs were involved.

Young people were involved but of those who have been arrested so far, the figures show that only about a quarter– only about 25 per cent or so, around that sort of figure-were juveniles.”

Following questioning from Rt Hon. Alun Michael, MP, (Lab) she elaborated on the role of gangs and the measures

Rt Hon. Keith Vaz, MP

government’s view that water cannon should be examined as a possible option – had the introduction of extra police not quietened the disturbances.

The Committees work on this continues, with evidence from the Mayor of London, police commissioners and local people and MPs. Eurozone crisis The issue of Europe and its future was also a key one during the autumn sittings. The continuing debt crisis on the Eurozone, with Greece in particular looking likely to default on some of its debts and facing political instability, was the backdrop to a debate held on 24 October on whether the U.K. should hold a threeoption referendum on its

The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 357

Parliamentary news pages:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:05 Page 358

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

continued membership of the European Union (the options being to remain in the EU, leave, or renegotiate the terms of memberships).

The debate had been initiated by the Conservative Member, Mr David Nuttall, MP, with the support of some 70 other Members from the Conservative, Labour and Democratic Unionist parties.

The debate was granted by the Backbench Business Committee, chaired by Ms Natasha Engel, MP, (Lab) which allocates a number of days a session to debates initiated by backbench MPs. Opening the debate, Mr Nuttall referred to the last referendum on European Union membership, held in 1975. He said: “A staggering 84 per cent of

Rt Hon. Douglas Alexander, MP the current voting age population have never voted in favour of Britain’s continued membership of the EEC, never mind the European Union.

Furthermore, if I were a betting man, I would wager that some of those who voted yes back in 1975 may well have since changed their minds. The Common Market has fundamentally changed in size and powers as it has been transformed into the European Union, and without the British people ever being consulted, of course.”

UNITED KINGDOM

He received support from, among others, the former Parliamentary Private Secretary at the Foreign Office, Mr Adam Holloway, MP, (Con), who said: “For me, the bottom line is really quite straightforward. For seven years I have been wandering around telling the good people of Gravesham that we should have a referendum, and that we should renegotiate our position. Let me end by saying this: “If you have done the same, you must support the motion.””

In his speech, the Foreign Secretary, Rt Hon. William Hague, MP, (Con), gave six reasons why he was urging his colleagues to oppose the motion. First among these was: “The eurozone is clearly in crisis, and to pile on that uncertainty the further uncertainty of a referendum on leaving the European Union, when half the foreign direct investment into Britain comes from the rest of the European Union, and half our exports go out to the rest of the European Union, would not be a responsible action for Her Majesty’s Government to take.

It would not help anyone looking for a job. It would not help any business trying to expand. It would mean that for a time, we, the leading advocates of removing barriers to trade in Europe and the rest of the world, would lack the authority to do so.”

Responding for the Opposition, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Rt Hon. Douglas Alexander, MP, (Lab), also opposed the motion, telling the House: “The way to address the present concerns is reform of Europe, not exit from Europe.

Britain’s economy is flatlining and Europe’s economy is in crisis. Putting off investment and undermining confidence at such a critical time would be

358 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four

the wrong choice for this House and the country. The right course for British growth, British jobs and British interests is to reject the motion before the House.”

Support for the motion came from a variety of Members. Mr Charles Walker, MP, (Con) made a speech of four words: “If not now, when?”; Ms Kate Hoey, MP, (Lab) said

Ms Kate Hoey, MP

that the government’s efforts to repatriate powers in future years would be aided by a referendum: “if the rest of the European Union knew that the British public were sick, sore and tired of the money being spent on Europe, of the bureaucracy, of the corruption and of all that, they would be much more likely to negotiate the repatriation of them.”

Speaking for the Democratic Unionist Party, Mr Nigel Dodds, MP, dismissed the argument that a referendum would be a distraction from the Eurozone crisis: “It is nonsense to talk about a referendum being a distraction. The EU and all its works go to the heart of decision making on all aspects of policy in this House and in government. We must therefore have a chance to deliver our verdict on how the relationship between Europe and the United Kingdom should evolve.

Moreover, the crisis in the eurozone and the consequent move to create a tighter fiscal

union among its 17 members will have a direct and profound impact on the United Kingdom.”

Opposing the motion, Mr Martin Horwood, MP, (Lib Dem) was one of several members who argued that the idea of renegotiation was not practical and that the agenda of those supporting the referendum was withdrawal. He went on: “One country is a beacon for the Eurosceptics.

One country is a member of the European economic area but not of the European Union or Schengen. It is Liechtenstein.

That is the level of influence that the Eurosceptics are demanding for this country.

“They would give up our influence on the European market and our influence as a member of the EU on negotiations from climate change to world trade. They would condemn us to the sidelines of Europe and do profound damage to the interests of this country.”

Mr Robert Walter, MP, (Con) made a similar observation, suggesting that Norway – although not a Member of the EU, had to implement most EU law to ensure its access to the single market. He spoke of the EU as a political project designed to secure peace in Europe, a theme later taken up by Mr Mark Lazarowicz, MP, (Lab) and concluded: “Europe needs Britain and Britain needs Europe. My right hon. friend the Foreign Secretary struck the right note earlier. We are in Europe, our history is European and our destiny is European. As far as I am concerned, we are here to stay and I beg my colleagues to reject the motion.”

With the front benches of the three largest parties opposing the motion it was defeated by 483 votes to 111.

CPA Centennial goods advert:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:30 Page 359

CPA CENTENNIAL GIFTS

CPA Centennial Globe: £30 each plus £7.50 postage and handling. Total: £37.50

CPA Centennial Mirror: £12 each plus £7.50 postage and handling.. Total: £19.50

The CPA Centennial Post it Note Holder: £8 each plus £7.50 postage and handling: Total: £15.50

The CPA Centennial pin specially designed to mark the 100 years milestone: £5 each plus £2.50 postage and handling. Total: £7.50

The CPA Centennial globe and post-it holder in their boxes

CPA souvenirs are available for sale to Members and officials of Commonwealth Parliaments and Legislatures by contacting the CPA Secretariat by email at: hq.sec@cpahq.org or by air mail at: Suite 700, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom

Inside back cover:Layout 1 12/01/2012 15:14 Page 37

CPA SHOP CPA pens

CPA silver-plated cardholders

Silver-plated photoframe, clock and pen in holder

CPA souvenirs are available for sale to Members and officials of Commonwealth Parliaments and Legislatures by contacting the CPA Secretariat by email at: hq.sec@cpahq.org or by air mail at: Suite 700, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom