TheParliamentarian Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth
2013 | Issue Two XCIV | Price £13
CHILD LABOUR: Tackling the issue in India
PAGE 118
PLUS Charter of the Commonwealth PAGE 102
Cover.indd 1
We the people PAGE 104
Women’s leadership for sustainable democracy and development
The Falklands referendum: Exercising the right to self-determination
PAGE 114
PAGE 122
16/08/2013 11:29:33
Calendar of Events 2013 August 28-6 September
59th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference, Johannesburg, South Africa
September 15-19
Post-Election Seminar, Lesotho
20
C25: Seminar marking 25 years of the Committee system in the New South Wales Legislative Council
October 20-26
6th Youth Parliament, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India
27-31
16th Biennial Conference of Presiding Officers and Clerks of the Caribbean, Americas and Atlantic Region, Guyana
29-31
CPA, WBI, IMF, UNDP, Revenue Watch Institute: Global Conference on the Role of Parliaments and Extractive Industries, Vienna, Austria
November 15-17
Commonwealth Heads Of Government Meeting (CHOGM), Colombo, Sri Lanka
25-29
CPA/Commonwealth Secretariat Africa Region Human Rights Seminar, Seychelles
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.indd 37
16/08/2013 17:17:26
In the next issue of The Parliamentarian... 59 COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY CONFERENCE Johannesburg, South Africa 28 August - 6 September 2013 TH
“Effective solutions to Commonwealth Developmental Challenges”
South Africa ad.indd 89
16/08/2013 17:20:48
CONTENTS
2013: ISSUE TWO 102
104 Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth Vol. XCIV 2013: Issue Two 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
COMMENT
MAIN ARTICLES
Inside Issues
Charter of the Commonwealth
Commonwealth Strengthening: A matter of confidence Page 92
View from the Chair The Commonwealth Charter - A positive first step toward renewal Page 94
View from the CWP
Publisher: Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General
Women in Parliament: Following an increasingly welltraveled path Page 96
Editor: Andrew Imlach Director of Communications and Research
View from the Secretary-General
Designer and Assistant Editor: Lisa Leaño
Agricultural development: The key to growth in Africa Page 98
Page 102
We the people
Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, SC, MP, Page 104
The Commonwealth: Standing up for what is right Rt Hon. Hugo Swire, MP Page 108
New Zealand: Rebuilding fiscal buffers after the global financial crisis
Women’s leadership for sustainable democracy and development Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA Page 114
Reducing India’s child labour force Shri Kalyan Banerjee, MP Page 118
The Falklands referendum: Exercising the right to self-determination Hon. Dick Sawle, MLA Page 122
Hon. Bill English, MP Page 112
Front cover Boy working in Delhi textile factory © Shutterstock Printed in: England by Warners Midlands, PLC; New Delhi by Jainco Art India, and Singapore by Times Printers Private Limited
90 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Contents.indd 90
16/08/2013 11:30:28
122
PROFILE: SOUTH AFRICA
Constitutional engineering and re-democratization in Fiji Dr Steven Ratuva Page 126
The “Nirbhaya” (Fearless) Ordinance: Executive lawmaking in India Dr Vivek K. Agnihotri Page 132
Grassroots development: Improving the lives of the Sri Lankan people Mr Neil Iddawala Page 136
NEWS
PROFILE
Parliamentary news:
South Africa:
Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, India, and British Columbia. Page 139
Host Parliament for the 59th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference
Annual subscription (four issues) £38 post free UK: Worldwide: £40 surface post £46 airmail Price per issue U.K.: £13 Worldwide: £14 surface post £15 airmail Online Click the link on the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association website: www.cpahq.org iPad , iPhone App On sale from the iTunes Store in “Business” or “News and Politics” 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 | 2013: Issue Two | 91
Contents.indd 91
19/08/2013 12:27:31
INSIDE ISSUES
COMMONWEALTH STRENGTHENING: A MATTER OF CONFIDENCE The Editor’s note
Does the new Commonwealth Charter strengthen the organization significantly enough to make it “stronger, more resilient and progressive…and…more relevant”? Is it in urgent need of a fresh injection of these characteristics? The drafting of a Commonwealth Charter was the first and most detailed recommendation of the Eminent Persons Group charged by Heads of Government with remaking the Commonwealth. The Group’s 2011 report entitled “A Commonwealth of the People: Time for Urgent Reform” even offered a draft of a possible charter, called for public consultation on its text and made this one of its key recommendations for saving the Commonwealth. Heads of Government agreed, the public was consulted and on Commonwealth Day 2013 Her Majesty The Queen signed the Charter as Head of the Commonwealth. We publish the Charter to open this issue. We follow it with two opinions on the document, one from Prime Minister Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, MP, of Trinidad and Tobago and the other from Rt Hon. Hugo Swire, MP, the United Kingdom Minister of State responsible for the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is sometimes dismissed as a “club” since it has no convention binding its member countries under international
law and it doesn’t appear to some to be doing anything. The new Charter does not fill that purported gap as it is not legally binding. It is essentially a compilation of principles agreed by Commonwealth Heads of Government in decades of communiqués and so, as the Eminent Persons Group put it, it is the statement of a Commonwealth “spirit” shared by its governments and people. Such an ephemeral-sounding statement is hardly a plan of action. The Charter is not immutable, as international conventions tend to be, because the door is left deliberately open for future expansion and development. Critics will argue this leaves the door open for governments to water down or remove inconvenient principles. But even its harshest critics should acknowledge that changing a Charter provision would be more difficult and publicly more damaging than agreeing a new communiqué paragraph that might not sit comfortably with a paragraph lost in the output of a meeting decades before. Leaving the Charter open also gives Parliaments and Legislatures an opportunity to strengthen their position in a document that makes much of democracy but surprisingly little about the main institution that brings democracy to life in each country. Ironically, the process of 54 governments agreeing to have a
Charter, drafting its text, consulting with organizations and citizens around the world about its contents, keeping all 54 diverse governments signed up to it and presenting it for formal signature by the Head of the Commonwealth, all within a year and a half, calls into question the urgency for Commonwealth reform in the first place. Make no mistake: getting 54 governments around the world to agree to nearly 1,800 words is not easy. But if that many governments, organizations and people were willing to move that quickly and do all that for the Commonwealth, surely its future cannot have been as bleak as the title of the Eminent Persons Group report implied. Perhaps what the Commonwealth needed – and still needs – is a public injection of confidence that it is already strong, resilient, progressive and relevant. The act of adopting a Charter certainly does that. South Africans who fought for the end of apartheid could provide such an injection. After their first non-racial election in 1994, many spoke openly of the Commonwealth’s contribution in helping them to launch a new country. This year, the national Parliament of that country hosts the 59th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference and its National Council of Provinces (NCOP) Chairperson, Hon. Mninwa Johannes Mahlangu, MP, serves as the Commonwealth Parliamentary
Association’s President. Mr Mahlangu opens the special Profile on South Africa published with this issue as he writes about the structure and role of his unusual Chamber. Hon. Max Sisulu, MP, the Speaker of the National Assembly, then writes on how his Chamber is refocusing its processes so the Assembly and its Members contribute fully to the development of South Africa. Their respective Deputy Presiding Officers, Hon. Thandi Memela, MP, and Hon. Nomaindya Mfeketo, MP, write about child rights and sectoral Parliaments, while three Ministers, Mr Trevor Manuel, MP, Dr Rob Davies, MP, and Mr Fikile Mbalula, MP, write on key aspects of their work in national planning, trade and sport respectively. Dr Mathole Motshekga, MP, the African National Congress’s Chief Whip in the Assembly, recalls the demanding process of uniting all South Africans into one fully democratic nation with a Parliament that is relevant, responsive and representative. Ms Lindiwe Mazibuko, MP, the Parliamentary Leader of the opposition Democratic Alliance, writes about what she sees as a significant problem with that Parliament, and proposes a solution which calls for electoral reform. Mr Cedric Frolick, MP, Mr R.J. Tau, MP, Mr Ben Skosana,
92 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Inside Issues.indd 92
16/08/2013 17:17:58
INSIDE ISSUES
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II signing the Commonwealth Charter.
MP, Ms Nosilivere Magadla, MP, and Ms Fatima Hajaig, MP, all House Chairpersons in the National Assembly or the NCOP, write on their particular areas of parliamentary responsibility, which range from committees to international relations. We are particularly pleased to publish in the Profile an article from a prominent South African Parliamentarian who is not from the national Parliament. Hon. Lindiwe Maseko, MPL, Speaker of the Gauteng provincial Legislature and a former Chairperson of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, writes here on the formal joint programme adopted by the national Parliament and the nine provincial Legislatures to enable all of them to work together to strengthen public involvement in parliamentary democracy and parliamentary oversight of the executive. The peaceful transformation of South Africa from an apartheid state into a non-racial democracy was a remarkable accomplishment. An extract from the memoirs of the late Prof. Kader Asmal, a key participant in that transformation who subsequently sat in the National Assembly for a decade, is reproduced here to provide an insight into those historic times. We provide Clerkly perspectives on the role and evolution of Parliament in the first two decades of the new South Africa from Secretary to Parliament Mr Michael Coetzee and the Secretaries of the National
Assembly, Mr Masibulele Xaso, and the National Council of Provinces, Advocate Modibede Phindela. The Profile concludes with: an article on the electoral system by Mr Norman du Plessis of the Electoral Commission; accounts from parliamentary officials Adv. Nonkosi Cetywayo, Mr Luzuko Jacobs and Mrs Sindiswa TyhokoloMbetshe of their roles in support of the Parliament of South Africa, and by reports on parliamentary support for constituency work, the State of the Nation address and parliamentary artworks. The fact that such an impressive, innovative and representative Parliament has come so far in just less than two decades demonstrates the confidence that the vast majority of South Africans shared in their ability to make their “rainbow” nation work, and the confidence that the Commonwealth should have in itself for helping them significantly along the way. Confidence is also an issue in financial circles these days, both for governments and for the private sector. Hon. Bill English, MP, New Zealand’s Finance Minister, explains in this issue how his government has sought to counter the effects of the global financial crisis and maintain an economy that is one of the few to escape the worst consequences of a lack of global confidence in investments. Confidence seems to be at least one of the issues surrounding the
level of representation of women in Parliaments and Legislatures. In an article here based on her presentation to a ministerial meeting earlier this year, the Chairperson of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA, Speaker of Dominica’s House of Assembly, does not suggest that women lack the confidence to hurl themselves into the political fray. In her experience, most women candidates do not lack confidence. But she does acknowledge that one of the factors militating against female representation is the high number of women voters who tend to vote for men. She writes here on what could be done to give women more confidence in women so the concept of a woman as an MP becomes “standard”. Often the women who do make it into Parliament are pushed into what are seen as “women’s issues” such as health, education, gender equality, child care and social services. We counter that typecasting, as we have done in this issue, by publishing Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar’s article on foreign policy. We also counter it by publishing an article by a man on one of the traditional female focuses – children. Shri Kalyan Banerjee, MP, a Member of the Indian Parliament, writes here on how India is trying to curtail the use of child labour and encourage children to go to school instead. He notes that in a country with a long history of
child labour, this will take more than legislation. From the world’s largest democracy we turn to one of its smallest, the Falkland Islands. Faced by renewed sabre-rattling by Argentinian political leaders pressing their claim to this British – and Commonwealth – outpost in the South Atlantic Ocean, Islanders voted in a referendum early this year on whether they wish to remain British. Hon. Dick Sawle, MLA, an elected Member of both the legislative and executive arms of the Falklands government, writes here on the overwhelming result. Also early this year, another small Commonwealth island jurisdiction, Fiji Islands, was finally on a clear path back to democracy after seven years of military rule. An internationally supported constitutional review had reported and the stage appeared to be set for a return to elected governance in 2014. Then the military government stepped in to trash the report (apparently literally), reject the recommended democratic governance structure and embark on its own constitution-making. Fijian political sociologist Dr Steven Ratuva writes in this issue about the prospect that his country may yet escape from its sixth military government in 25 years. Tragically, there was no escape for a young Delhi woman who was viciously attacked on a bus last December allegedly by five men and a boy. The government acted swiftly to increase the punishment for such barbaric incidents; but, as Parliament was not sitting, they amended the necessary legislation by executive ordinance. Dr Vivek K. Agnihotri, the former Secretary-General of the Rajya Sabha, analyses here the propensity of Indian governments to take law-making into their own hands, even if only temporarily till Parliament resumes. Finally, Mr Neil Iddawala, the Deputy Secretary-General of the Parliament of Sri Lanka, reports on a new approach to economic development based on government support for local initiatives.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 93
Inside Issues.indd 93
19/08/2013 12:28:16
VIEW FROM THE CHAIR
THE COMMONWEALTH CHARTER – A POSITIVE FIRST STEP TOWARD RENEWAL
with violations of these principles in member states more actively. In designing I recently chaired a roundtable forum at Westminster to discuss topics relating the Charter, the EPG learnt lessons from the formulation of the Millennium to the next Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Development Goals and undertook to combine existing statements from November this year. Our meeting took place exactly six months before the Singapore, Harare, Port-of-Spain and others into a single document with relevant start of CHOGM to analyse a number of aspects of the meeting, but focusing additions from the contemporary context. particularly on the content and impact of the Commonwealth Charter. I was One of the recurring themes in our forum discussion was the high delighted to have our discussion led by Sir Ronald Sanders, KCMG, a Visiting expectations placed on the Charter before its publication Fellow at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies and the various responses to it from citizens and the media at the University of London and a member of the in each Commonwealth nation. It was felt that a more Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group (EPG). Joining effective consultation with the public would have benefited him were Prof. Philip Murphy, Director of the Institute the development of the Charter and that, as it stands, the of Commonwealth Studies, and Dr Purna Sen, Deputy Charter does not adequately reflect the views of the citizens Director of the Institute of Public Affairs at the London of Commonwealth nations. However, we would have to School of Economics. I found the discussions to be question how this consultation may have played out and how extremely valuable and believe it would be helpful to a fair representation of the citizens of the Commonwealth summarize the points made for colleagues. could have been reached. Although the logistical challenge of As many of you will be aware, the Commonwealth surveying citizens was acknowledged, those assembled felt Charter was produced originally by the EPG and was this process would have added weight to the importance of signed by Her Majesty The Queen in December 2012. In the Charter and its reception in member nations. signing the Charter, the Queen stated that she hoped the Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, Many felt the Charter had not gone far enough on some Charter will “reinvigorate efforts, already begun, to make MP aspects of human rights, and the clause “We are implacably the Commonwealth fit and agile for the years ahead, so Chairperson of the CPA opposed to all forms of discrimination, whether rooted in that it can apply its global wisdom to the hopes and needs Executive Committee gender, race, colour, creed, political belief or other grounds” of this and future generations”. In the United Kingdom, the was too vague. It was agreed, however, that the Charter Charter has been enthusiastically received by the public remains an extremely useful document for the Commonwealth to celebrate and civil society groups and colleagues from other nations seem to be similarly and promote to its citizens. As the Commonwealth is a voluntary organization, passionate about its aims. creating a document like the Charter gives the exercise more clarity and scope At the forum, Sir Ronald went into detail about the initial discussions held than similar documents produced by supranational organizations. It shows our within the Eminent Persons Group which brought about the formation of the non-Commonwealth neighbours our commitment to our shared values and Charter. This was a fascinating insight into their thoughts and hopes for the our commitment to each other. The Charter, while not legally binding, exercises exercise and highlighted the desire of EPG members for the Commonwealth a moral obligation on nations to uphold principles of democracy, human rights, to succeed, flourish and grow in future years as a strong and coherent body. We international peace and security, tolerance, respect and understanding and, then heard from Prof. Murphy who analysed the long history of promoting human importantly for colleagues, good governance and others. rights and values within the Commonwealth. Dr Sen then outlined her views on Discussion later turned to the renewal of the Commonwealth and the the impact the Charter will have. Participants were then given the opportunity “glue” which holds us together. In this ever increasingly connected world with to share their personal views on these areas. As the meeting was held under numerous pressures and opportunities for governments, the Commonwealth Chatham House rules I am not at liberty to disclose these, however I can assure relies on its shared values to maintain its membership. Some members may have you all that it proved a hot topic for debate! found their interests begin to diverge in the past; but new transnational issues It is clear that the Commonwealth is now taking its responsibility for the such as climate change, micro-finance, land rights and food security mean promotion of human rights and the rule of law more seriously and engaging 94 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
View from the Chair.indd 94
19/08/2013 10:50:39
VIEW FROM THE CHAIR
Commonwealth members are beginning to renew their dialogue and friendship with other nations to understand the threats and opportunities presented by these phenomena. Commonwealth members are particularly well placed to enter these discussions with each other and work towards solutions through having shared experience and a common language. Through discussions at CHOGM on these topics, the Commonwealth seeks consensus amongst its members which we hope will then turn into a global consensus. The opportunity for small states to have equal access to large states through the Commonwealth’s institutions, particularly at CHOGM, is a key part of the Commonwealth’s unique appeal to its members. Although two members of the
G8 are Commonwealth countries, not all members of the Commonwealth have access to these types of meetings. The fact that the Commonwealth offers a forum and, crucially, a forum where nations from each of six continents are on an equal footing is indeed worth celebrating. The CPA adds a further dimension to this by affording equal status to Branches representing provincial and state Legislatures and overseas territories. Applications from countries to join the Commonwealth which do not necessarily share common history with current members is an extremely positive development and should be encouraged. Participants at the meeting agreed that enshrining these values within the Charter is a positive step for the Commonwealth.
Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP, (right) with Sir Ronald Saunders, KCMG
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 95
View from the Chair.indd 95
19/08/2013 10:50:56
VIEW FROM THE CWP
WOMEN IN PARLIAMENT: FOLLOWING AN INCREASINGLY WELL TRAVELED PATH
Dominica’s history which was very volatile and fraught with social and political My country, Dominica, enjoys the distinction of having the first female leader in upheaval. At every sitting of Parliament she was vilified by government Members, the Western Hemisphere. Dame Mary Eugenia Charles, or “Mamo” as she was all men, in every way shape and form, about her gender, even popularly known, had a distinguished career as Prime her “privileged” social standing, the lot. But she ignored these Minister of Dominica for 15 years until she stepped down unkind jibes and remained focused on her mission: to get to make way for her successor in readiness for elections into government and develop her country and its people. She which were to take place in a few months. promoted her party’s cause and campaigned tirelessly across Dame Eugenia was a lawyer, politician and occasional the country, founding party branches and getting herself journalist. She was born on 15 May 1919 in the village of known to the electorate. Pointe Michel on the southwest coast of the island. Her The constitution of Dominica provides that the position father had a great influence on her attitude to life. Her of Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee must be mother was a practical, firm but loving guide who imbued held by the Leader of Opposition. Never one to miss an her with a down-to-earth and no-nonsense approach to opportunity, she used this position to great effect for with this life. position came her authority to demand financial documents It was her father, John Baptiste Charles, whose from senior public servants to expose misspending by the footsteps she followed. He was a self-made man who built government. Her tenacity both in and out of the House was himself up from youth as a stone mason and small farmer Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA beginning to pay off. By the late 1970s Miss Charles, as she to being one of the leading plantation owners on the island. Chairperson of the then was, attracted broad respect and growing support from He was also an exporter of local produce to Great Britain Commonwealth Women a critical mass of the electorate. and the United States. He founded his own bank, the Parliamentarians When, in 1975, the then Premier declared that he was Dominica Co-operative Bank. He was also a politician who taking Dominica into independence, Eugenia Charles fought and won elections in various constituencies. went into top gear. Armed with her legal experience she Young Eugenia was educated at convent schools demanded changes to the draft constitution and advocated in Dominica and Grenada. She persuaded her father to that Dominica should go independent as a sovereign republic send her to the University of Toronto in Canada where without the British monarch as head of state. she read law. From there she went over to England where she was called to the She led the opposition delegation at the constitutional conference for Bar at the Inns of Court in London in 1949. She immediately returned home and independence held at Marlborough House in London in 1977 and was an active set up her practice and not long after began writing anonymous articles for local spokesperson in the public meetings related to the constitution in the run-up newspapers that were highly critical of the ruling party of the day, an activity which to independence in November 1978. During the political upheavals and the she kept up for the next 10 years alongside her legal work. ensuing constitutional crisis in 1979, she served as a member of the Committee By 1960 she went vocal with her criticisms and when the government, for National Salvation that brokered the creation of an interim government to in reaction to mounting criticism, passed the Seditious and Undesirable administer Dominica until general elections could be organized. Publications Act in July 1968, she was in the vanguard of those who lead the Eugenia Charles became the first female Prime Minister in the Caribbean demonstrations against what they dubbed “the shut-your-mouth” Bill. With her and in the Western Hemisphere when her Dominica Freedom Party handsomely allies she founded the Dominica Freedom Party, becoming its political leader. won the general election of 1980. Her party contested the 1970 elections, but she failed to win her seat. She Her first order of business was to lead the reconstruction of Dominica which was, however, appointed as a “nominated Member” and entered the House of had been totally devastated by Hurricane David the year before. Not too long Assembly on 12 November 1970. after, she had to cope with the attempted coups to overthrow her government. She won her seat at the next elections in 1975 and became Leader of the These were just some of the major challenges with which she had to cope during Opposition. Dame Eugenia spent four years as Opposition Leader, a period of 96 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
View from the CWP.indd 96
19/08/2013 10:52:28
VIEW FROM THE CWP
© David Gadd/Sportsphoto
I would like to think that I speak on behalf of all women everywhere in this world who refused to consider that this tiny seedling of political consciousness growing in their soul was a mere weed when they permitted it to grow and flourish at great personal cost and sacrifice. As I write this, Dame Eugenia’s indomitable spirit is foremost on my mind. They are in politics today because they decided, among other reasons, that the sacrifice is worth it. My foray into politics was not dissimilar from that of my mentor, Dame Eugenia. In the late 1940s and up to the early ‘60s, my late uncle was a politician who was deemed to possess high oratory skills. People in my country walked or rode on horseback for miles and miles to come to the capital, Roseau, to listen to him whether they agreed with his politics or not. It was not lost on me that at that time there were just three women on the political scene. My impressionable mind took in only that women were part of that scene. Coupled with the Hon. Dame Eugenia Charles, MP, Prime Minister of Dominica, and Hon. Paul fact that my father and mother had instilled in me that Keating, MP, Prime Minister of Australia, attending the opening ceremony of I could do anything I wanted once I applied myself, my the 1993 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Cyprus. subconscious was already formulating my future. Dame Eugenia came after, but she cemented in me the desire to become involved. But my ambition had to wait for me: to go to the United Kingdom to study, to curtail my studies to get married and have children, to wait until they went to university, to go along with her 15-year tenure. Although she rose admirably to them all, by 1995, battlethem to complete my studies this time in law, to get back to my country by 1990 weary though still regarded as the “iron lady of the Caribbean”, she called it a day and to begin my advocacy for abused women and children. in favour of one of her all male senior party colleagues. By 2000, the Labour Party won the elections with a one-seat majority and Dame Eugenia’s legacy has not gone unnoticed in her country, in the region asked me to be their nominee for Speaker. I agreed, was voted in and then, as or even the world. Well after her retirement, she continued to receive accolades, they say, the fight started! particularly for her innovative approach to development. From the day I became Speaker, virtually every ruling I make has been subject Her brave entry into politics was at a time when women who ventured into to organized criticism. Over the airwaves, on political platforms, in internet blogs, that arena asked no quarter, expected no concessions and got neither. Several the most unsavoury things have been said about me. It was no solace to me to books have been written about her and she continues to be a role model for learn that my sister Speakers in other islands were faring no better. many an aspiring female politician, not the least myself. I fully acknowledge her I, as Speaker, have been taken to court I think a total of nine times, counting remarkable strength of character and determination as being the motivation for appeals. But I have won every case so far. There are still two or three matters me to enter politics. pending. I understand letters have been circulated to every Legislature in the But before I relate my experiences as Speaker, now in my 14th of service, Commonwealth criticizing my rulings. please permit me to repeat here what I consider to be the three most compelling At times like these, I remember Dame Eugenia and, thanks to my close-knit reasons for women to have a place in the most important decision-making family, friends and many, many supporters, I am able to remain focused and ride institution in a country. First, the Chinese have a saying: “Men hold up only half out yet another storm. the sky.” It therefore stands to reason that women must hold up their half or the Politics is clearly not for the weak and fainthearted, more so for women. But inevitable will occur. Need I point out that it seems the inevitable is occurring all I do believe that great strength can be acquired when one becomes imbued around us? with a clear sense of purpose and one surrounds oneself with family, friends Secondly, powerful world leaders, some of whom are conferring in Northern and supporters, particularly for the times when the going gets even tougher than Ireland as I write, have persuaded us for decades that democracy is the only usual. acceptable form of governance and I agree. But surely what is more democratic Since the days of Dame Eugenia and others who, cutlass in hand, hacked than the two genders that equally share the space on this planet participating in a road through the political jungle, they left a footpath for us to follow. We, in the the political and decision-making process equally too? here-and-now, can do no less for those who desire to succeed us than to turn And thirdly, of course, most persuasive of all to my mind, is that by leaving that footpath into a smooth, well-tarred road. women out of the decision-making equation, half of the world’s potential It is my hope and belief that the less the new female politicians stumble, the intellectual resources remain untapped. more likely they are to arrive at their ultimate destination: a seat in Parliament, in I would like to suggest that the seeds of political consciousness do not the shortest possible time. discriminate by gender when searching for suitable planting ground. However, it is in the nurturing of the tiny plants that have sprung from these seeds that [Author’s Note: Sections of this article were based on Women in Parliament obstacles, real and imagined, present themselves. Some may argue that many of in Dominica: Past and Present, written by Ms Boyd Knights and Dominican these obstacles are, for the most part, self-imposed. But the social, environmental, historian and anthropologist Mr Lennox Honychurch.] sexist, religious and cultural obstacles are real. The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 97
View from the CWP.indd 97
19/08/2013 10:52:41
VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: THE KEY TO GROWTH IN AFRICA Agriculture has been the mainstay of modern human survival for centuries. Through agriculture, man has produced food and cash crops. In contemporary times, the prospects of successful agriculture have been beset by human resources, access to land, rapid deforestation and environmental degradation, fertiliser over-dependency, and the emergence of modern science such as genetically modified seeds. Agricultural activities worldwide are varied. There are people who are still undertaking agriculture at peasant level, mainly to satisfy their subsistence food supply and cash earnings. There are, however, those who conduct large-scale commercial farming in what is generally termed as agribusiness. These include those whose farms produce grains to process for vehicles and other machinery. Both of these categories have their prospects and problems.
Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association
In many Commonwealth countries, agriculture is an activity undertaken by as much as 70 per cent of the total population. The population that is expected to engage in agriculture is the young generation. That is in why many countries which are 50 to 60 years old (in terms of independence), the development priority list tends to be education, agriculture, infrastructural development and energy (including water) supply. The attention on agriculture for food security and commercial purpose has gained momentum in many young governments. Several countries are working to transform the sector in order to attract the youth to it, and to reduce the youth influx to towns and cities. Reciting this potential in Africa, A. Namanga Ngongi (New African, May 2013) states that: “Africa’s land is attracting unprecedented attention not for its mineral wealth but for its agricultural potential, with 60% of the world’s unused agricultural land. A new scramble for
The Secretary-General’s
Dr William F. Shija (second right) pictu Mninwa Johannes Mahlangu, MP, (left and Tanzanian Speaker Hon. Anne Ma
The CPA Secretary-general (right) greeting the new Speaker of the Parliament of Kenya, Hon. Justin Muturi, MP (left).
98 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
View from the SG.indd 98
19/08/2013 10:48:10
VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
Africa is raging. Africa and Africans can be proud of past achievements and look forward to a bright future.” Also, reports from Nigeria, for example, show that for quite some time: “The sector has been neglected with the country’s focus on oil and gas, causing a bill of nearly $10 billion on imports of both wheat and rice.” The country, however, can grow these crops itself. The challenge of agriculture in many countries is that the educational curriculum has tended to distance young men and women from agricultural activities. The school experience in the 1950s and 1960s in a number of developing countries appears to have been different, in that the basic educational process was geared towards the necessity to Credit schemes for the agricultural sector be self-reliant. Youth at have been established in Commonwealth elementary and middle countries such as Ghana and Uganda. school levels studied academic science and other subjects, but were also trained in agricultural techniques to manage sizeable farms to produce food crops. They also kept cattle for milk or poultry for consumption at school. They would sell off the extra proceeds to raise the school funds. This was indeed practical education for self-reliance. In some Commonwealth countries, the immediate post-independence policy of “Education for Self-reliance” enabled young men and women to go through
basic education to acquire both academic and vocational skills for life. This was an immediate response to the minimal investment and slow modernisation in agriculture, which to-date has led the youth to shun agricultural activities, choosing to migrate to urban places where they encounter high unemployment. In recent years, however, again with reference to Africa, where the World Bank and International Monetary Fund marginalized agriculture in the structural adjustment programmes of the 1980s, there are several countries that have now created conditions for a modern and productive agricultural sector. Examples of positive public-private partnerships have been mooted in Kenya, Nigeria and Tanzania. It has been cited by several publications that credit schemes for the agricultural sector have been established in Ghana, Mozambique and Uganda. Similar financial ventures for agricultural growth have been utilized in Asia, particularly in India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, et cetera, in pursuit of food security. Recent reports on the state of global agriculture show that the current decade will require careful but full human and material resource utilization to ensure global food security. My view is that to attract the youth into agriculture,
Commonwealth gallery
nd right) pictured with South African National Council of Provinces Chairperson Hon. angu, MP, (left); Gauteng Legislature Speaker Hon. Lindiwe Maseko, MPL, (second left) Hon. Anne Makinda, MP, (right) at the 44th Africa Regional Conference in Namibia.
The SecretaryGeneral and the Governor-General of Antigua and Barbuda Dame Louise Lake-Tack, GCMG, DStJ .
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 99
View from the SG.indd 99
19/08/2013 10:48:26
VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
countries need to create the linkage between education, technology and finance. The youth and mature people yearn for modernity and prosperity in agriculture. Agriculture has to be improved to transform rural life. Further, to accelerate agricultural production, energy, water and communication facilities have to be made available to young people, whose tastes are now constantly changing because of international exposure. Modern agriculture requires the utilization of science and technology, through research on seeds, fertilizers and soil analysis. The long-held tradition of using extension services to boost agricultural productivity also needs to be redeemed. In the current times, effective agricultural extension services can be done through public or private agencies, provided that farmers are properly guided on how to access such facilities.
Further, modern agriculture must be based on water supply and management. In many countries, water management is still a neglected study and practice. A family, for example, could collect, manage and utilize the water received from the annual rainfall to grow vegetables around the household with enough land space. The water management approach is also applicable to large-scale farming, in which case irrigation is necessary. Agriculture has often been stunted by the lack of sufficient investment, inadequate mechanization and lack of research support. In countries where land is plentiful, there is need to accelerate the public-private partnership to maximize production. Even small farmers could be assisted to develop a system of crop-sharing with medium size investors, in which case a 60-40 shareholding between the
The Secretary-General’s Pictured with three senior Parliamentarians from the Parliament of Uganda.
Dr William F. Shija (left) presenting a gift to Dr Jai Pradash Gupta, MLA, from the Jharkhand Branch.
Pictured with the President of the Senate of Antigua and Barbuda, Sen. the Hon. Hazelyn Francis (centre) and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Jamaica, Hon. Michael Peart, MP, (right) during the 38th Caribbean, Americas and Atlantic Regional Conference.
Canadian High Com the U.K. and former B Premier H.E. Mr Gord (right) presents a Qu Jubilee Medal to Mr A of the CPA Secretari
100 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
View from the SG.indd 100
19/08/2013 10:48:46
VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
investor and individual farmer was arranged. The farmer, who owned the land, would receive 60 per cent of the end value of the crops, while the investor, who brought in machinery and other inputs, would have 40 per cent. The modernization of agriculture through the interface between land owners and investors and between public and private players assumes that government through Parliament
has to supervise and monitor the process. The supervision process would guarantee that land owners were not victimized, all taxes involved were paid, water management (including environmental protection) was properly administered and the marketing process was facilitated. This supervisory role requires not only education and vocational skills; it calls for a legislative machinery to sustain policies and regulations.
In this view, written with an eye on South Africa, I wish to call on Parliamentarians in the Commonwealth to rethink agriculture. It is befitting that the debate at the 59th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in Johannesburg, will focus on suggesting effective solutions to Commonwealth developmental challenges. In the debate package, the issues of land access and ownership, parliamentary
intervention in the informal economy and entrepreneurship, the possibility of attaining the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, transfer of technology and research for agricultural productivity and education for local employment needs in small states, all promise to enrich the debates on the parliamentary role on agriculture as a sector, and upon which millions of men and women in the Commonwealth depend.
Commonwealth gallery Presenting a gift to the President of the New South Wales Legislative Council, Hon. Don Harwin MLC, (right).
Assisting Scottish Member Ms Patricia Ferguson, MSP, (right) to record her visit in the CPA Secretariat guest book.
dian High Commissioner to K. and former British Columbia er H.E. Mr Gordon Campbell presents a Queen’s Diamond e Medal to Mr Andrew Imlach CPA Secretariat in May.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 101
View from the SG.indd 101
19/08/2013 10:49:00
COMMONWEALTH CHARTER
Charter of the Commonwealth We the people of the Commonwealth: Recognizing that in an era of changing economic circumstances and uncertainty, new trade and economic patterns, unprecedented threats to peace and security, and a surge in popular demands for democracy, human rights and broadened economic opportunities, the potential of and need for the Commonwealth – as a compelling force for good and as an effective network for co-operation and for promoting development – has never been greater, Recalling that the Commonwealth is a voluntary association of independent and equal sovereign states, each responsible for its own policies, consulting and co-operating in the common interests of our peoples and in the promotion of international understanding and world peace and influencing international society to the benefit of all through the pursuit of common principles and values, Affirming that the special strength of the Commonwealth lies in the combination of our diversity and our shared inheritance in language, culture and the rule of law; and bound together by shared history and tradition, by respect for all states and peoples, by shared values and principles and by concern for the vulnerable, Affirming that the Commonwealth way is to seek consensus through consultation and the sharing of experience, especially through practical co-operation, and further affirming that the Commonwealth is
uniquely placed to serve as a model and as a catalyst for new forms of friendship and co-operation in the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations, Affirming the role of the Commonwealth as a recognized intergovernmental champion of small states, advocating for their special needs; providing policy advice on political, economic and social development issues, and delivering technical assistance, Welcoming the valuable contribution of the network of the many intergovernmental, parliamentary, professional and civil society bodies which support the Commonwealth and which subscribe and adhere to its values and principles, Affirming the validity of and our commitment to the values and principles of the Commonwealth as defined and strengthened over the years, including: the Singapore Declaration of Commonwealth Principles, the Harare Commonwealth Declaration, the Langkawi Declaration on the Environment, the Millbrook Action Programme, the Latimer House Principles, the Aberdeen Agenda, the Trinidad and Tobago Affirmation of Commonwealth Values and Principles, the Munyonyo Statement on Respect and Understanding, the Lake Victoria Commonwealth Climate Change Action Plan, the Perth Declaration on Food Security Principles and the Commonwealth Declaration on Investing in Young People, Affirming our core Commonwealth principles of
consensus and common action, mutual respect, inclusiveness, transparency, accountability, legitimacy and responsiveness, Reaffirming the core values and principles of the Commonwealth as declared by this Charter: I. Democracy We recognize the inalienable right of individuals to participate in democratic processes, in particular through free and fair elections in shaping the society in which they live. Governments, political parties and civil society are responsible for upholding and promoting democratic culture and practices and are accountable to the public in this regard. Parliaments and representative local governments and other forms of local governance are essential elements in the exercise of democratic governance. We support the role of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group to address promptly and effectively all instances of serious or persistent violations of Commonwealth values without any fear or favour. II. Human rights We are committed to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other relevant human rights covenants and international instruments. We are committed to equality and respect for the protection and promotion of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development, for all without discrimination on any grounds as the foundations of peaceful, just and stable societies.
We note that these rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated and cannot be implemented selectively. We are implacably opposed to all forms of discrimination, whether rooted in gender, race, colour, creed, political belief or other grounds. III. International peace and security We firmly believe that international peace and security, sustainable economic growth and development and the rule of law are essential to the progress and prosperity of all. We are committed to an effective multilateral system based on inclusiveness, equity, justice and international law as the best foundation for achieving consensus and progress on major global challenges including piracy and terrorism. We support international efforts for peace and disarmament at the United Nations and other multilateral institutions. We will contribute to the promotion of international consensus on major global political, economic and social issues. We will be guided by our commitment to the security, development and prosperity of every member state. We reiterate our absolute condemnation of all acts of terrorism in whatever form or wherever they occur or by whomsoever perpetrated, with the consequent tragic loss of human life and severe damage to political, economic and social stability. We reaffirm our commitment to work together as a diverse community of nations, individually and collectively under the auspices and authority of
102 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Commonwealth Charter.indd 102
16/08/2013 11:28:52
COMMONWEALTH CHARTER
the United Nations, to take concerted and resolute action to eradicate terrorism. IV. Tolerance, respect and understanding We emphasize the need to promote tolerance, respect, understanding, moderation and religious freedom which are essential to the development of free and democratic societies, and recall that respect for the dignity of all human beings is critical to promoting peace and prosperity. We accept that diversity and understanding the richness of our multiple identities are fundamental to the Commonwealth’s principles and approach. V. Freedom of expression We are committed to peaceful, open dialogue and the free flow of information, including through a free and responsible media, and to enhancing democratic traditions and strengthening democratic processes. VI. Separation of powers We recognize the importance of maintaining the integrity of the roles of the Legislature, executive and judiciary. These are the guarantors in their respective spheres of the rule of law, the promotion and protection of fundamental human rights and adherence to good governance. VII. Rule of law We believe in the rule of law as an essential protection for the people of the Commonwealth and as an assurance of limited and accountable government. In particular we support an independent, impartial, honest and competent judiciary and recognize that an independent, effective and competent legal system is integral to upholding the rule of law, engendering public confidence and dispensing justice. VIII. Good governance We reiterate our commitment to promote good governance through the rule of law, to ensure transparency
and accountability and to root out, both at national and international levels, systemic and systematic corruption. IX. Sustainable development We recognize that sustainable development can help to eradicate poverty by pursuing inclusive growth whilst preserving and conserving natural ecosystems and promoting social equity. We stress the importance of sustainable economic and social transformation to eliminate poverty and meet the basic needs of the vast majority of the people of the world and reiterate that economic and social progress enhances the sustainability of democracy. We are committed to removing wide disparities and unequal living standards as guided by internationally agreed development goals. We are also committed to building economic resilience and promoting social equity, and we reiterate the value in technical assistance, capacity-building and practical co-operation in promoting development. We are committed to an effective, equitable, rules-based multilateral trading system, the freest possible flow of multilateral trade on terms fair and equitable to all, while taking into account the special requirements of small states and developing countries. We also recognize the importance of information and communication technologies as powerful instruments of development; delivering savings, efficiencies and growth in our economies, as well as promoting education, learning and the sharing of culture. We are committed to strengthening its use while enhancing its security, for the purpose of advancing our societies. X. Protecting the environment We recognize the importance of the protection and conservation of our natural ecosystems and affirm that sustainable management of the natural environment is the key to sustained human development. We recognize the importance of
multilateral co-operation, sustained commitment and collective action, in particular by addressing the adaptation and mitigation challenges of climate change and facilitating the development, diffusion and deployment of affordable environmentally friendly technologies and renewable energy and the prevention of illicit dumping of toxic and hazardous waste as well as the prevention and mitigation of erosion and desertification. XI. Access to health, education, food and shelter We recognize the necessity of access to affordable health care, education, clean drinking water, sanitation and housing for all citizens and emphasize the importance of promoting health and well-being in combating communicable and noncommunicable diseases. We recognize the right of everyone to have access to safe, sufficient and nutritious food, consistent with the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security. XII. Gender equality We recognize that gender equality and women’s empowerment are essential components of human development and basic human rights. The advancement of women’s rights and the education of girls are critical preconditions for effective and sustainable development. XIII. Importance of young people in the Commonwealth We recognize the positive and active role and contributions of young people in promoting development, peace, democracy and in protecting and promoting other Commonwealth values, such as tolerance and understanding, including respect for other cultures. The future success of the Commonwealth rests with the continued commitment and contributions of young people in promoting and sustaining the Commonwealth and its values and
principles, and we commit to investing in and promoting their development, particularly through the creation of opportunities for youth employment and entrepreneurship. XIV. Recognition of the needs of small states We are committed to assisting small and developing states in the Commonwealth, including the particular needs of small island developing states, in tackling their particular economic, energy, climate change and security challenges, and in building their resilience for the future. XV. Recognition of the needs of vulnerable states We are committed to collaborating to find ways to provide immediate help to the poorest and most vulnerable including least developed countries, and to develop responses to protect the people most at risk. XVI. The role of civil society We recognize the important role that civil society plays in our communities and countries as partners in promoting and supporting Commonwealth values and principles, including the freedom of association and peaceful assembly, and in achieving development goals. We are committed to ensuring that the Commonwealth is an effective association, responsive to members’ needs and capable of addressing the significant global challenges of the future. We aspire to a Commonwealth: that is a strong and respected voice in the world, speaking out on major issues; that strengthens and enlarges its networks; that has a global relevance and profile, and that is devoted to improving the lives of all peoples of the Commonwealth. Dated this 14th day of December 2012. Officially signed on Commonwealth Day, 11 March 2013, by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Head of the Commonwealth.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 103
Commonwealth Charter.indd 103
16/08/2013 11:29:01
THE CHARTER OF THE COMMONWEALTH
WE THE PEOPLE The Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago argues that the new Charter of the Commonwealth focuses and strengthens the contribution of the organization in attaining peace, democracy, human rights, development and the rule of law in member states and in the wider global community.
Hon. Kamla PersadBissessar, SC, MP, in Port-of-Spain.
Mrs Persad-Bissessar has been the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago since 2010 and was the Commonwealth Chairperson-in-Office in 2010-11. She leads the United National Congress and the People’s Partnership coalition. A lawyer, she was a Senator in 1994 before entering the House of Representatives in 1995. She has held several senior political posts, usually as the first Trinidadian woman to do so.
Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, SC, MP The Charter of the Commonwealth encompasses all the goals and aspirations of Commonwealth citizens. It embodies the cherished values and principles of Commonwealth peoples, expressed through their governments. It effectively communicates to member states and to their citizens the vision, role and function of the Commonwealth. At its core, the Charter outlines the means by which compliance with Commonwealth principles and values will impact upon and improve the lives of Commonwealth citizens everywhere.
The signature on the document of Her Majesty The Queen, in her capacity as Head of the Commonwealth and as a unifying symbol of Commonwealth authority and steadfastness, underscores the common commitment of all Commonwealth member states to work together harmoniously, as equals, towards the achievement of peace, democracy, human rights and the rule of law, as critical foundations for the attainment of sustainable development of our countries, and for the betterment of the lives of the peoples of the Commonwealth. While the Charter does not have binding legal effect on its members, it must be appreciated that the Charter is, in essence, the embodiment of longstanding Commonwealth values and principles. As such, the Charter is not a standalone document, separate and apart from the institutions and practices of the Commonwealth. Rather, it is a free expression by Commonwealth peoples of those values and principles that they hold dear and that together constitute a sort of Commonwealth view of the world. My hope is that they
will both identify and embrace it as theirs. Impact on member nations Given the diversity of the Commonwealth, it is not always possible to achieve consensus on major issues.
104 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Bissessar.indd 104
16/08/2013 11:27:25
THE CHARTER OF THE COMMONWEALTH
But in this very fact lies the inherent strength and value of the grouping as an umbrella that can, and does, accommodate varying points of view on major issues. As such, harmonization might sometimes prove elusive, though possibilities for the development of a co-ordinated
approach remain on the table. It is also the tradition of the Commonwealth to offer assistance and support to those members found, on careful objective study, to be in breach of its core values and principles as the preferred approach to managing local situations that can
threaten the creation of all-out social conflict. One of the main benefits of inscribing customary Commonwealth views and attitudes in a Charter is that such a document constitutes the institutional face of the Commonwealth as a whole.
The Prime Minister delivering remarks at the Canadian Council of the Americas Business and Diaspora Reception in April 2013.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 105
Bissessar.indd 105
16/08/2013 11:27:34
© Photographs this page Alicia L Harry
THE CHARTER OF THE COMMONWEALTH
This page: Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar and the then Prime Minister of Australia, Hon. Julia Gillard, MP, play a steel pan, a Trinidadian musical invention. Right: With the Secretary-General of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija.
In a sense, therefore, the Charter provides institutional context to a longstanding practice of the Commonwealth as an advocate in a
plethora of areas directly linked to the social and economic development of its members. I regard as significant Article
One of the Charter, which explicitly recognizes participation in democratic processes as an inalienable right of all Commonwealth citizens. Parliaments
and representative local governments are regarded as “essential elements” in the cornerstone of democracy. Adherence to democratic
106 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Bissessar.indd 106
16/08/2013 11:27:48
THE CHARTER OF THE COMMONWEALTH
“Given today’s global dynamics and its impact on our countries, the Charter should be a living document that responds to the prevailing challenges of the times in which we live.”
principles of governance manifested in all its forms, including a free press and full accountability, therefore constitute core values of the Commonwealth. Therefore the Charter represents the codification of widely accepted and entrenched political norms and values across the Commonwealth and as such, can be regarded as the glue that unites and, in some sense, shapes our organization. I am particularly gratified that the Charter specifically addresses issues related to women and girls and the importance of gender equality. Developmental evidence continues to underscore the contribution of women, not only to their families and communities but also to national development. The Commonwealth must, of necessity, ensure the protection and care of women and girls and collaboratively work to provide the full range of services and responses needed to arrest the spread of violence against women. Our youth also constitute a large and vibrant segment of the Commonwealth. The Charter, quite rightly, recognizes the positive
and active role of young people in promoting development, peace and democracy and in promoting and protecting Commonwealth values. Young people make up over 60 per cent of the world’s population. In the Commonwealth that’s over one billion people. As inheritors of our actions, I urge member nations to adhere to the Charter in its call for facilitating youth development through the creation of opportunities for youth employment and entrepreneurship. In the global context The Commonwealth has in fact established and maintained a highly credible profile and reputation as an intergovernmental body, whose influence derives from its legitimacy and structure as an association of sovereign states. Commonwealth action and its contribution to the discourse on international issues have been well recorded over the life of the organization. Its clear position on apartheid, for instance, was and remains today well known. The influence of the Commonwealth in several
areas of national and international life – education, health, economic development, disaster preparedness and management, and institutionbuilding to promote democracy and good governance – has had, and continues to have, a lasting favourable impact on lives across the membership of the 54 countries. During the World Health Assembly in 2010, an international code of practice for the recruitment of health professionals was approved as a resolution by the Assembly. That code had its genesis in the Commonwealth and was based on a fulsome discussion on a draft during the Meeting of Commonwealth Health Ministers in Geneva, preparatory to the Assembly, at which the matter was successfully brought to the floor. Here is one compelling example of the Commonwealth’s demonstrable effectiveness in its role as advocate. And there are others. On developmental issues in particular, which have been a pivotal aspect of the mission of the Commonwealth, a significant record of achievement has been established in several areas through advocacy and international co-operation such as in the following areas: • Institutional strengthening for the participation of Commonwealth developing countries in international trade negotiations including the establishment, in 2010, of the Commonwealth Small States Office in Geneva, Switzerland, to provide accommodation and technical support to member states unable to afford an independent office at that location; and • A high level of engagement on the part of the Commonwealth on
climate change issues which affect all members of our grouping, albeit disproportionately so in the case of the small island developing members in the Caribbean and Pacific regions, in particular. What the Charter does is to further elevate the profile of the Commonwealth, by publicly branding it as an intergovernmental organization of global reach and influence. From Trinidad and Tobago’s perspective, what is desirable is that the Commonwealth is impactful, both in supporting and boosting the quality of life of Commonwealth citizens in their home countries and, as well, in representing legitimate Commonwealth views and aspirations across the arena of international relations. I am satisfied it has already gone a long way in demonstrating its capacity in both areas and I have no doubt that a further improvement of that respectable performance is to come. What lies ahead Given today’s global dynamics and its impact on our countries, the Charter should be a living document that responds to the prevailing challenges of the times in which we live. I anticipate that the need will arise in the future to revisit the Charter and update it in order to maintain its relevance and appeal. Trinidad and Tobago, under my premiership will lend its full support to the Charter. We remain proud of our Commonwealth vocation and committed to working collaboratively with our partners for the success and higher levels of achievement for Commonwealth peoples everywhere.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 107
Bissessar.indd 107
16/08/2013 11:27:56
COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
THE COMMONWEALTH: STANDING UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT The new Commonwealth Charter dispels the myth that this association of sovereign states is out-dated and sets continuing goals that all can use to hold it accountable, says the British Minister of State responsible for Commonwealth affairs.
Rt Hon. Hugo Swire, MP, in London. Mr Swire is the United Kingdom Minister of State in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office responsible for, among others, the Commonwealth. A Conservative Member of the House of Commons since 2001, he has held several posts including Opposition Whip and Minister of State for Northern Ireland. He previously worked in the arts and served in the U.K. Armed Forces.
rule of law. When we want to raise standards of human rights across the world, the Commonwealth and its networks can help to get the message out there and to take the lead in improving the way things are done.
Rt Hon. Hugo Swire, MP
I am very proud to be the United Kingdom Minister responsible for our relationship with the Commonwealth, taking over from Rt Hon. the Lord Howell of Guildford who was, and remains, committed to its future. This is an organization I passionately believe in, and one that has enormous potential to do good in the world. Commonwealth membership is based on shared values of democracy, human rights and the
A modern role Over the last few years, there has been a great deal of discussion in the U.K. Parliament and the media about the need for modernization: to find a happy medium that encompasses the past and the present. We have been all too aware that if the Commonwealth cannot protect democracy and stand up for human rights, then it risks losing credibility and becoming untenable. Our government strongly supports the Commonwealth’s efforts to increase its profile, relevance and effectiveness. We actively supported the strengthening of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action
Group’s (CMAG) role so that it can take leadership on important issues. For our government, Commonwealth values underpin everything we do and that is why I am so pleased that the Commonwealth has agreed to a Charter setting out those values. The Charter was presented to Her Majesty The Queen on Commonwealth Day, 11 March 2013, and was also laid before Parliament in the form of a Command Paper on 4 March.
108 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Swire.indd 108
16/08/2013 17:21:11
COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth speaking at the Commonwealth Secretariat
The Charter marks an important milestone in the Commonwealth modernization process and the future of the organization. We want to ensure that the Commonwealth strengthens its role and relevance in today’s world. It needs to be an organization that has an impact, not just in business and politics but in making people’s lives better. What incentive could be more powerful than that? Sixteen core values are set
out in the Charter, all of which Commonwealth Leaders have committed their countries to upholding. These values cover, among others: upholding democracy and human rights, international peace and security, freedom of expression, promoting tolerance and respect, protecting the environment, providing access to health, education and food and recognizing the positive role that young people can play in promoting these and other values.
By outlining these values, the Commonwealth is ensuring that these commitments are clearly defined and accessible to everyone in the Commonwealth. If you are wondering why there is a Commonwealth, what it does and where it is going, there is now a place to see all of this laid out. It is part of our commitment to transparency; but it is also a vital part of cutting back on misconceptions and getting to the root of what matters. The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 109
Swire.indd 109
16/08/2013 17:21:25
COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
A Commonwealth important to all The Charter is an expression of member states’ commitment to the development of free and democratic societies and the promotion of peace and prosperity. Moreover, it acknowledges the important role that civil society plays in supporting the goals and values of the Commonwealth. When I attended the Commonwealth Youth Forum in Papua New Guinea in April I saw this for myself. The Commonwealth is not about leaders and followers: it is about citizenship and talking to one another. There were some truly inspirational people there with ideas about how we can combat climate change, create
sustainable development and engage people from smaller Commonwealth realms. I was struck but just how young the Commonwealth is. This is no halfdead institution, but a living breathing body with words that resonate. People may not want to listen to political figures, but the voice of the future Commonwealth is altogether more appealing. The Charter is for them. It is a document they will need to be happy with if they are to modernize as they want to. And that is important to the future of the Commonwealth, where over 1 billion people are under the age of 25. Agreement to the Charter was an important milestone in modernizing the Commonwealth: no mean feat
when you consider that it represents over two billion of the world’s people, large and small countries, rich and poor. For 64 years we went along knowing what we believed in and assuming other members felt the same way. By sitting down and agreeing a way forward we now know what matters to other countries and what we can do to make a difference. All 54 sovereign and independent member states agreed to this and they attach real importance to it. This is not least because the Commonwealth provides a consensus-based forum for Commonwealth member states to improve the common interests of their peoples, promote international
understanding and allow them to influence international society. It is not just another document. It is now the document of the Commonwealth. Clear standards for accountability The Charter has been adopted at a time in which the world is rapidly changing: new trade and economic patterns are opening up whilst there is an increased worldwide surge in popular demands for democracy and human rights. Consequently, the need and the potential for the Commonwealth as a network for effective co-operation and promoting development have never been greater. The creation of a Commonwealth Charter which sets
110 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Swire.indd 110
16/08/2013 17:21:36
COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
working together on health and peace initiative – another area where the Commonwealth can and does make a difference.
“The Commonwealth has also taken a leading role in promoting gender equality and getting women an equal voice across the world.”
The Queen signing the new Commonwealth Charter
out the clear goals and principles of the Commonwealth will ensure that the Commonwealth remains relevant and accessible to all, and provides a useful means to protect and promote core democratic values in the years to come. The values within the Charter are those which member nations consider important enough to enshrine in one single document to which all Commonwealth member nations subscribe. These commitments should be upheld, adhered to and kept under review, not just by Commonwealth member states and Parliamentarians, but by individuals and civil society organizations. This in turn will make the Commonwealth stronger and
make sure individuals can hold Commonwealth member states to account. It would be misleading to say that all Commonwealth countries already adhere, without exception, to every value identified in the Charter. However, by setting them out and agreeing to them we are on the road to ensuring that they become common currency across the Commonwealth. This is the start but it is not the end, and we will keep refining our work and defining our values as the years go on. Looking to Sri Lanka These values will of course be a central focus of this year’s Commonwealth Heads of
Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Sri Lanka. I am aware that 2013’s CHOGM is not without its controversies. Ahead of the meeting in Colombo we will look to Sri Lanka to demonstrate its commitment to upholding Commonwealth values of good governance and respect for human rights. We must all pull together with a common agenda, especially as we work towards implementing a new Strategic Plan for 2013-2016 and push forward with post-2015 educational development goals. As we have said before, we believe that change comes from within. We want to be a leading voice in the Commonwealth and to encourage Sri Lanka to make the changes being called for in order to promote peace. This is an area in which the Commonwealth has a wealth of experience. It has observed over 70 elections since 1990, and on each occasion provided a trusted, objective judgement on the credibility of the electoral process and submitted recommendations on how to improve elections in the future. The Commonwealth has also taken a leading role in promoting gender equality and getting women an equal voice across the world. The Commonwealth Secretariat developed a Plan of Action as early as 1995 and has kept this updated. We know that by sharing best practice we can encourage greater representation in politics, as well as reap the benefits of men and women
A strong relationship for trade, Games and co-operation Yes, there are changes to be made. With the collective weight of the Commonwealth, we shouldn’t be surprised that some, including the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons, think it is an organization that should do better. They are right. We all want a strong Commonwealth that makes the most of its considerable assets. But the important thing to take away from the Charter is that the Commonwealth is changing and that it has a future. Trade, for example, is booming. Research conducted by the Royal Commonwealth Society found that when two trading partners were Commonwealth members, their trade was likely to be a third to a half more than when one or both trade partners was non-Commonwealth. There is clearly the potential to build on this in 2013 and beyond. We also have Glasgow’s Commonwealth Games to look forward to in 2014. This will be the third time that Scotland has hosted the Games, and we are working closely with the Scottish government to make sure they are a success. Sport offers a chance to promote the key values of the Commonwealth, with a strong emphasis on engaging our youth. We are confident that the Glasgow Games will make a significant and positive contribution to the future success and prosperity of the Commonwealth. Above all though, in the year of the Charter, we can be confident that there is a will to develop and improve the Commonwealth. Members share principles of democracy, rule of law, good governance and similar legal systems. These provide solid foundations for strong relationships. Together we share a long and rich history, and together we can make sure that the future is richer still.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 111
Swire.indd 111
16/08/2013 17:21:47
GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS
NEW ZEALAND: REBUILDING FISCAL BUFFERS AFTER the Global Financial Crisis Prudent policies enabled New Zealand to deal with simultaneous global financial and domestic seismic shocks, says the country’s Finance Minister. He explains why it responded so well and how it is preparing to cope with future shocks.
Hon. Bill English, MP, in Wellington. Mr English is New Zealand’s Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister. He has been a Member of the House of Representatives for the National Party since 1990. A former Leader of his party from 2001 to 2003, he has held several government and opposition Front Bench positions, including being Minister of Finance and of Revenue and then Treasurer in 1999. He was Minister for Infrastructure from 2008 to December 2011 when he became Minister of Finance.
Hon. Bill English, MP
Being at the bottom of the world did not spare New Zealand or New Zealanders from the negative fallout of the global financial crisis (GFC). In the two years until the end of 2009, our economy’s output took a four-percent hit and the unemployment rate more than doubled to peak at around 7.0 per cent. After a decade of strong consumer spending, many households cut back and focused instead on paying down their debt. New Zealand exporters experienced a decline in sales volumes, although our primary industry exporters were partly sheltered by on-going resilience in the prices of New Zealandrelevant commodities which have been underpinned by the country’s expanding trade links with dynamic Asian economies. New Zealand-registered banks
had little direct exposure to the United States financial crisis; but they were reliant on global short-term wholesale markets for funding. As activity in these markets collapsed after the failure of Lehman Brothers, some banks feared the prospect of being unable to rollover their debt. And in addition to dealing with the effects of the global financial crisis, the New Zealand economy faced its own domestic shocks, most notably the severe earthquakes in Canterbury, a major exporting province, in 2010 and 2011. Strength from prudent fiscal planning New Zealanders responded well to the challenges posed by these multiple adverse shocks. Gross domestic product has been expanding at a modest but steady pace since the beginning of 2011. In the final quarter of 2012, the economy expanded by 1.5 per cent compared with the previous quarter and by 3.0 per cent compared with the same quarter of the previous year. I believe that one of the reasons why New Zealand has emerged from this difficult period relatively well is the country’s fiscal policy framework. For over two decades, governments have been required by law to maintain a transparent spending and tax framework and to maintain prudent
public sector debt levels. It means that when the country was struck by a cocktail of external and internal shocks, the government had scope to respond appropriately to support economic activity in the short term, and to lead efforts to rebuild devastated Canterbury in the longer term. The government allowed the automatic stabilizers to operate fully during the global financial crisis and after the Canterbury earthquakes. The government’s operating balance before market gains and losses (OBEGAL) shifted from a surplus of 3.0 per cent of GDP in 2007/08 to a 9.2 per cent deficit in 2011/12, as the government responded to the aftermath of the earthquakes in Canterbury and protected New Zealand families from the worst effects of the recession. Where expenditure cuts did occur, they were concentrated in areas considered to have a relatively limited negative impact on private sector spending, such as suspending the government’s payments to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund in 2009. Temporary measures and longer-term efficiencies Core government net debt rose from a low point of 5.6 per cent of GDP in the financial year to June 2008 to nearly 25
112 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
English.indd 112
16/08/2013 11:32:03
GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS
New Zealand Prime Minister Rt Hon. John Key, MP, (front centre left) and cabinet colleagues escort Mr English (front right) to the Chamber on Budget Day 2013.
per cent in the year to June 2012. The government judged that this temporary growth in the deficit and debt was appropriate to buffer the economy as households and businesses repaired their balance sheets. More importantly, the government also required public agencies to deliver better results from the spending and programmes they were undertaking already. These improved results are focused on challenging areas such as reducing crime, improving education standards and getting more New Zealanders off welfare and into work. As economic conditions stabilized and household confidence started to recover, fiscal policy moved into a consolidation phase, reducing the degree of economic stimulus. Key targets are to return the operating balance to surplus by 2014/15, and to reduce net government debt to 20 per cent of GDP by 2020. This is aimed at reducing core government expenses from around 35 per cent of GDP in 2012 to around 30 per cent of GDP by 2016/17. This slowdown in expenditure growth is being achieved through a number of policies, including reductions in the size of new spending allowances and efficiency gains across the state sector, changes to welfare policies and restraint in public sector wage growth.
To stabilize the financial sector during the height of the GFC, the government of the day introduced a temporary and optional insurance scheme called the Crown Deposit Guarantee Scheme. It provided a government guarantee on retail deposits in New Zealand banks and finance companies that paid fees to participate in the scheme. This guarantee expired in December 2011, with the government having paid out around NZ$1.8 billion to deposit holders. Facing future financial risks With this experience in mind, the government has tried to reduce the risk of future taxpayer-funded bailouts after institutional failures. To provide an alternative policy option after a bank failure, the Reserve Bank has worked on developing an Open Bank Resolution (OBR) policy to deal with the failure of a systemically important financial institution. The OBR policy aims to minimize the disruption of a bank failure on the wider financial system and reduce the cost of a bailout to taxpayers. In addition to the OBR policy, the Reserve Bank has also worked on developing a macro prudential policy strategy, which should allow it to better manage the risks to the
financial system from excessive asset price growth and the rapid build-up of debt. The Reserve Bank has identified several macro prudential policy tools which could play a role in maintaining a sound financial system. They include: counter-cyclical capital buffers, which form part of the Basel III framework; adjustments to sectoral capital risk weights and core funding ratios, and restrictions on high loan-to-value lending by banks. A Memorandum of Understanding between the Reserve Bank and the government will formalize the policy framework. Growing national savings and the economy Over the longer term, other policy challenges lie ahead. Since the mid-2000s, the largest contribution to economic growth has come from the non-tradables sector, with many tradable industries contracting. In addition, New Zealand’s external indebtedness remains high by international standards, raising concerns about our vulnerability to conditions in international capital markets. Understanding the drivers of these trends is a key policy focus. For example, a government-appointed working group explored many of the issues around New Zealand’s relatively low rate of national saving.
Work on these issues should ultimately help rebalance the economy, shifting resources back towards the tradable sector and towards greater reliance on domestic rather than foreign savings to fund investment. New Zealand’s long-run growth performance is also an important focus, as its average growth rate and its productivity performance have lagged behind many other Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development economies over several decades. This ongoing reduction in New Zealanders’ average income relative to other better-performing countries has contributed to New Zealand’s large migration outflows to other countries, particularly Australia. As a result, the government has introduced a Business Growth Agenda, an integrated programme of several hundred policies that aims to help firms develop and to ultimately lift New Zealand’s standard of living. The Agenda focuses on six main workstreams to assist growth by creating a more productive and competitive economy – growing export markets, building innovation, improving infrastructure, expanding capital markets, sustainably developing natural resources and developing a more dynamic and flexible labour market. For example, the target of lifting the ratio of exports to GDP to 40 per cent by 2025 is based on improving access to international markets, increasing earnings from tourism and growing exports of education services. New Zealand’s recovery is being helped by our stable and efficient financial system. The government’s intention to consolidate its financial position and return debt to prudent levels has been well signalled in the Fiscal Strategy Report, published in the annual budget each May. With New Zealand now in its third year of recovery, the government is working hard to build up the strength of the Crown’s financial position as a buffer against the next shock that may come our way.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 113
English.indd 113
16/08/2013 11:32:18
WOMEN LEADERS IN PARLIAMENT
WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP FOR SUSTAINABLE DEMOCRACY AND DEVELOPMENT
Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA, in Roseau.
Ms Boyd Knights is the Chairperson of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians. An attorney, she has been the Speaker of the Dominica House of Assembly since 2000. This article is based on her presentation at the Annual Consultation of National Women’s Machineries in March 2013 in New York.
• Gender, Democracy, Peace and Conflict; • Gender, Human Rights and Law; • Gender, Poverty Eradication and Economic Empowerment; and • Gender and HIV/Aids.
Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA
This subject is anchored within the context of Millennium Development Goal 3: Promoting Gender, Equality and Empowering Women. The Commonwealth’s commitment to gender equality is demonstrated by a plan of action (PoA) for gender equality to cover the period 2005 – 2015 which was adopted by member governments in 2005. In this PoA, four critical areas for Commonwealth Action have been set out. They are:
And by these points, therefore, the setting and ambit of this consultation have been defined. It has always intrigued me that great men, even from ancient times, who determined that the concept of democracy was (and is) the ideal, have had difficulty in accepting women as being part of the democratic process. And so I ask: What could be more democratic than the two genders that equally share the space on this planet, to equally share its governance as well? So why then did it take over 2,600 years for women in governance to become “standard”? And I use the word “standard”
advisedly, since we have not yet arrived where we need or desire to be. Because the impediments to women becoming involved in politics are well known, they bear repeating here and include: • Religious, Social and cultural barriers; • Preservation of the male status quo and old boys network; • The cut and thrust of political mud-slinging and smear campaigns; • Lack of finance; • Little or no family support; • Women constituents supporting men candidates over women; • Prevailing political, party structures that present obstructions; • Women being less inclined to use unethical and dubious campaigning strategies; • Requiring the ability to multitask, juggling home and work (long hours); and • Media phobia.
114 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Knights.indd 114
19/08/2013 13:30:08
© All Photographs John Oko Nyaku
The Chairperson of the CPA’s Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians argues that more and sustained action is required if Commonwealth countries are to meet the target of 30 per cent female representation in Parliament by 2015 or, for most, as soon as possible thereafter.
© All Photographs John Oko Nyaku
WOMEN LEADERS IN PARLIAMENT
Of course, this list is not exhaustive since the type of impediments varies from country to country. Let us face it: when the first women took their place in Parliament amongst their male colleagues, it was with the concurrence of some, if not all, of the men present. In perusing the biographies of these parliamentary pioneers, a school of thought seems to emerge that these women asked for no quarter, no concessions, no consideration of their gender. They were just determined to prove, and did in fact prove, that they were as good as, if not better than, their male counterparts at running their countries. Indeed women leaders such as my own country’s Dame
Mary Eugenia Charles, Mrs Sirimavo Bandaranaike of Sri Lanka, Golda Meir of Israel, Indira Gandhi of India and Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom come to mind. There is no doubt that these formidable women made their mark on the political landscape way beyond their own country so that other women all over the world who were secretly nurturing political ambitions began to feel brave enough to venture forward albeit tentatively at first. Women within political parties began claiming their right to be more than just foot soldiers. Opportunities knock In the Caribbean in the 1970s, as in many countries all over the world,
women were now being given opportunities in education, business and in politics. The liberation process was taking off in earnest. The sound of shattering glass ceilings was sweet music to the ears of the stakeholders on what was then termed the women’s liberation movement. But the groundswell did not always translate into leadership roles for women. A typical example is what we observed at the Faculty of Law at the University of the West Indies in Barbados in contrast with what was happening in judicial circles. Whereas in the 1960s , 1970s and up to the early 1980s very few women opted to study law, by the mid 1980s women were catching up and
The CWP Chairperson (second right) pictured with fellow delegates and resource persons at the meeting in New York.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 115
Knights.indd 115
19/08/2013 13:30:21
WOMEN LEADERS IN PARLIAMENT
so by the end of that decade, there were more female than male law graduates. Yet by 2000, the cream had not risen. Yes, we were seeing more and more women judges on the Bench; but at Court of Appeal level – very few. The cream just was not rising as expected.
I feel very proud now, though, to recall that although it was not until 2011, the full Court of Appeal of the OECS was comprised of women, sitting in Antigua. Today, the OECS Chief Justice is a woman who was appointed a few months ago. I know one other Caribbean jurisdiction that
has had a female Chief Justice. It is a combination of many factors, therefore, that have shown that in order for women to achieve true equality, they have to be part of the decision-making process at all levels, including of course, the highest institution in the land.
Maintaining the numbers I want to warn about complacency. Drawing again on the experiences of the Caribbean, by the late 1980s there were more female graduates than males in the faculty of Law, but this was not the only one. A new phenomenon had been taking place
116 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Knights.indd 116
19/08/2013 13:30:36
WOMEN LEADERS IN PARLIAMENT
before the eyes of Caribbean society; but very few were taking notice. Before more females could graduate from university, there had to be more girls graduating from college and high school. Girls were surpassing boys in academic achievement from primary to secondary and even tertiary
levels, and not just in the traditional disciplines either. Boys were the new underachievers. While the girls were doing better, the boys were doing something which I refer to as “self-marginalization.” Too many boys were drifting into antisocial behaviour, drugs, violence, et cetera. And even while this new trend of male marginalization was taking root, even up to now, as in the world of law, the cream was not rising in the corporate world, the public service or the world of politics. In fact, what we’ve seen in politics is that the fortunes of women candidates change from election to election with the percentage of women in Parliament going up and down. Even in Dominica we have moved from 20 per cent female representation in Parliament to a mere 12.5 per cent today. Of course, this lack of sustainability is most unsatisfactory. The lesson to be learned here is that mechanisms for maintaining and increasing whatever gains are made should be deemed to be necessary components of whatever strategies are devised. Furthermore, such mechanisms must be ongoing even after set targets have been met. I was recently (once again) complaining to one of my male parliamentary colleagues about the dearth of women in our Parliament, and in reply he asked: “What do women bring to the parliamentary table that men do not”? I replied: “You’ll never know if you don’t put women there.” That may have seemed like a cop-out response,;but I just wanted him to consider that he could not condemn what he did not know. Despite my colleague’s sentiments, there is a growing awareness of the significant contribution of women in political and other leadership positions at community, national, regional and even international levels. Striving for gender equality is therefore not just a noble goal, but a demonstration and acceptance that co-operation between the genders enhances the possibility of the advancement of society generally. At the Commonwealth Women
Parliamentarians business meeting last year, the discussion session centered around the question: Is there such a thing as a woman’s agenda (in Parliament)? In response, some women said that setting
“...what we’ve seen...is that the fortunes of women candidates change from election to election with the percentage of women in Parliament going up and down. “ forth a woman’s agenda (and I am paraphrasing here) would further marginalize women. Others expressed the view that Parliament was established by men, run by men and the decisions taken by men need not be for the benefit of women. Therefore, such decision-making ought to be filtered through gender lenses so as to maximize the benefits accruing to society overall. All participants, however, agreed that women’s participation in Parliament is crucial and that CWP Members themselves ought to take the lead in encouraging and empowering women, especially young women, to become involved in politics. Implementing the strategies There are as many strategies devised, as there have been countries effecting ways, for encouraging more women into politics and Parliaments and I am sure all of us know some if not all of them: Quotas, affirmative action, constitutionally laid out percentages, political party arrangements, et cetera. My personal choice, in the absence of affirmative action and quotas, is the 3 M’s: mentoring, motivating and mobilizing. I am particularly keen on the mentoring
idea. When I speak to women MPs most tell me there was a woman they admired who influenced their decision to enter politics. I am pleased to note, then, that the Commonwealth Secretariat’s PoA has been extended to foster greater empowerment of women and to adopt other strategies for increasing our numbers in the political arena. Such forward movement on the part of highly regarded organizations such as the Commonwealth Secretariat and the United Nations gives added credibility to the gender equality ideal. What is more, the re-socialization element and the role adjustment aspect which are so crucial to bringing about greater acceptance of and less discrimination against women as politicians have a better chance of taking place, and in turn assist in engendering sustainability. However, even as we strive to encourage more women into politics and Parliaments, let us consider Rwanda. When the Rwandan conflict was over, the country’s women took on the responsibility of rebuilding their country. Their progression into Parliament to continue that building process was inevitable. Has the Rwanda experience translated into tangible gains for the women of that country? I would imagine that it has uplifted the profile and status of women in that country generally,; but I’d like to know: what else? Is it soon enough to know how the high percentage of women in the Parliament has been able to make a difference in the lives of the average Rwandan young girl? This is a story the world needs to know. And it must be told by our Rwanda sisters themselves. It is one movie I’m patiently waiting for. And so, as 2015 approaches and our countries will be called to account, how many countries will have attained the desired goal of 30 per cent women in their Parliament? Some countries will, but most won’t. Rwanda, keep that 56 per cent flag flying. We need to reflect on it every so often so that our countries’ aspirations may be maintained.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 117
Knights.indd 117
19/08/2013 13:30:48
CHILD LABOUR
Reducing India’s Child Labour Force With the highest figure in the world for child labour, the Indian government is working on ways to tackle the problem. However, other factors are contributing to the situation, argues a Member of India’s lower House, the Lok Sabha.
Shri Kalyan Banerjee, MP, in New Delhi.
Shri Banerjee has been an All India Trinamool Congress Member of the Lok Sabha, India’s lower House, since 2009. A lawyer, he was a Member of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly from 2001 to 2006.
Shri Kalyan Banerjee, MP
“Children are living beings – more living than grown-up people who built shells of habit around themselves. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary for their mental health and development that they should not have mere school for their lessons, but the world whose guiding spirit is personal love” Rabindra Nath Tagore Every child is a blessing of God, representing the greatest assets of a nation and the future of every country. It is unfortunate therefore when a child becomes a labourer under our prevailing social system. Every nation believes that employers should not be
permitted to employ children and that parents, no matter how poor, should not be allowed to keep children out of school. It is up to the state to stand as guardian, protecting children against child labour. In India a large number of children work for free in the fields or the cottages with their parents, where plucking leaves from the tea garden is all too common. For poorer countries, children are an economic asset. India is the world’s largest democratic country, and the world’s second fastest growing major economy, but millions of children – all under 14 years of age – work as labourers. It has the world’s largest child labour force at 2.3 per cent. Poverty as well as the lack of educational facilities has contributed to the figure. A recent report produced by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions says that there were as many as 4.98 million children working in India’s agricultural, industrial and commercial sectors. India’s booming economy has taken advantage of children workers towards its growth. While child labourers can be found in urban dwellings, around 80 per cent
reside in rural areas where they are forced to work in agricultural activities, such as tanning, livestock rearing, forestry and fisheries. The practice is widely prevalent in many third world countries such as China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Brazil, but the matter is of greater concern in India given it has the largest in the world. Tackling the issue After independence, the Indian constitution adopted proactive policies in trying to handle the issue, whereby several Articles highlighted the concerns surrounding its existence. Article 24 prohibits the employment of children below the age of 14 years in any factory, mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment, while Article 39 (e) provides that the health and strength of workers - men and women - and young children are not abused or forced by economic necessity to enter avocation unsuited to their age of strength. Article 39(f) provides that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom
118 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Banerjee.indd 118
16/08/2013 11:26:23
© Pavel Svoboda Shutterstock.com
CHILD LABOUR
and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and moral and material abandonment. The founding fathers of the constitution emphasized the importance of the role of the children and the need for their development. Dr B.R. Ambedkar projected children’s rights in the Directive Principles of State Policy as their deprivation had
Child labour is more prevalent in India’s rural areas
a dangerous effect on the efficiency of democracy and the Rule of Law. The Children (Pledging of Labour) Act, 1933 prohibits the pledging of labour of children for employment and prescribes penalty for persons and guardians pledging child labour. The Factories Act, 1948 prohibits the employment of children below 14 years of age in factories and provides
that persons between 14 to 18 must obtain a certificate of fitness from a certifying surgeon. On 26 September 1994, under the chairmanship of the Union Labour Minister, the National Authority for the Elimination of Child Labour was constituted upon the directions of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha.
A new Article 21A was incorporated in the constitution which took effect in 2010, stipulating that the State provide free and compulsory education to all children aged 6 to 14. Compulsory education to children up to 14 years was passed with the enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2010.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 119
Banerjee.indd 119
16/08/2013 11:26:34
CHILD LABOUR
Table One Census Year (as reported by Census)
Child Labour
1971 10.7 million 1981 13.6 million 1991 11.3 million 2001 12.6 million 12.62 million (provisional) 2011 Source: Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India The National Child Labour Project (NCLP) The National Child Labour Project (NCLP), which started its operation in 1988, was an integral part of the National Policy on Child Labour as adopted by the Ministry of Labour and Employment Government of India in 1987. The policy was multi-dimensional and addressed the complex issues relating to child labour in a comprehensive, holistic and integrated manner. It aimed at eliminating child labour from the country in a phased manner. The action plan under this Policy consisted of: • A Legal Action Plan, which stressed upon enforcement of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 and other labour Acts like Factories Act, 1948, Mines Act, 1952, etc; • Development Programmes to benefit the families of child labourers by inducting them into the existing income generation or employment assistance schemes; and • National Child Labour Projects for areas with a high concentration of child labour. The National Child Labour Project addressed the issues through the following activities: • A survey to identify children engaged in hazardous occupations and processes; • Withdrawal of the children from hazardous employment and processes; and • Rehabilitation of children withdrawn from work through special
total of 47,200 children. It is important that there is no increase in child labour in India as shown in the 2011 Census when compared to the 2001 Census in Table One.
schools established by the project society.
Factors maintaining the child labour force In spite of the constitutional provisions and various Acts enacted by the Parliament, they have not been successful for various reasons. These include:
The NCLP operated through Project Societies formed at the district level with the District Magistrate/ District Collector as the Chairman and an officer to work as Project Director for its implementation. The Special Schools under NCLP are run by NGOs, local selfgovernment bodies, or directly by the Project Society. The Schools enroll working children from 9 to 14 and are given education for a maximum of three years or until they reach 14. Each Special School, with two educational instructors and one vocational instructor, has provision for 50 children, and are given basic education and vocational training. The teaching volunteers are mainly from the local community and are paid a consolidated wage of Rs. 4000 per month. Until August 2009, the children of NCLP Schools were provided with cooked lunchtime meals, which have now been merged with the midday meal under Sarva Siksha Mission. Every child is paid a stipend of Rs. 150 per month, whereby the amount is deposited in a savings account in the name of the child on a monthly basis, which can be withdrawn only at the time of mainstreaming. Initially, the NCLP Scheme was introduced in the industry-specific nine child labour-endemic districts, and at present 271 districts are covered under the project. In West Bengal, under the ministry of the leader Ms Mamata Banerjee, all the 19 districts are covered under the NCLP. Out of 985 sanctioned Special Schools, 963 are functioning with a
• Lack of educational facilities in rural areas. Compulsory education has not been implemented because of the failure to build infrastructure, employment of teachers, and attracting more rural children into education. • India carried over a large scale of child labour after independence. In fact, there was no account of the number of child labourers before the 1971 Census. The British regime in pre-independence India did not take any effective steps for promoting education in rural areas, and the availability of educational facilities was so marginal that only few students could take advantage. • Religious conception and the caste system among others were responsible for the lack of interest in education before independence in India. Discouraging girls from an education in rural areas helped to create a huge female child labour force. • Since poverty and destitution are the main causes behind child labour, labour inspectors are sympathetic to the families. They find themselves in a moral dilemma because parents want their working children to bring some financial relief to them. • The Schools offer no relief. They do not supply food, and little sympathy exists for poor children The government’s policy to supply one meal to poor students was not properly implemented, and children of poor and socially outcast families are treated in discriminatory manners by the teachers and the school authorities. In a nutshell, we are all responsible for not eliminating child labour from
While boys are more likely to be engaged in the agricultural and industrial sectors, girls can take on domestic service roles.
the soil of India. The International Labour Organization estimates that 215 million children engaged in child labour worldwide in 2008. An estimated 14 per cent of children in India between the ages of 5 and 14 years are involved in child labour activities. The Ministry of Women and Child Development conducted a study on child abuse, covering 13 states, 12,447 children, 2,324 young adults and 2449 stakeholders. It looked at different forms of child abuse in different evidence groups including children at work. Key findings showed: • 50.2 per cent of the children worked seven days a week;
120 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Banerjee.indd 120
16/08/2013 11:26:46
CHILD LABOUR
© Paul Prescott Shutterstock.com
• Boys and girls were being physically abused equally; • 56.38 per cent of the children were working in illegal/hazardous occupations; • 65 per cent of the children were working because of parental pressure. The largest number of child labour instances is in the Asia-Pacific region (113.6 million) followed by Sub-Saharan Africa (65.1 million) and Latin America and the Caribbean (14.1 million). In terms of population, Sub-Saharan Africa presents the most alarming picture. One in four children is a child labourer in the region – compared to roughly one in eight in Asia-Pacific and one in 10 in Latin America and Caribbean.
Child labourers are engaged in three broad groupings of economic activities: agriculture, industry and service. Most are aged between 5 to 17 years old are in agriculture (60 per cent) compared to some 26 per cent in service and seven per cent in industry sectors. While boys are more likely to undertake activities in agriculture and industry, girls outnumber boys in domestic services. While the Asia-Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean regions continue to reduce child labour, SubSaharan Africa has witnessed an increase. A brighter future In 2011, the International Labour Organization adopted new
international standards promoting decent work for domestic workers. By the Convention No. 189, the ILO asked member States to set a minimum age for domestic workers which had to be consistent with the ILO’s Child Labour Convention and no lower than the established norms for workers. Convention No. 189 and Recommendation No. 201 highlighted the need to identify hazardous elements of domestic work and to prohibit such work for children under the age of 18. Education eradicates illiteracy and provides a means to economic empowerment and opportunity to live a better life. Article 26 (1) of Universal Declaration of Human Rights assures that everyone has the right to education which shall be free, at least at the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made available and higher education shall equally be accessible to all on the basis of merit. Education enables development of human personality and strength, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The duty of the State is to provide facilities and opportunities for the children driven to child labour to develop their personality as responsible citizens. Due to poverty, children are subjected to many visible and invisible sufferings and disabilities. The Convention on the Rights of Child which was ratified by the Government of India on 11 December 1992 recognizes the right of the child for full and harmonious development of his or her personality. Article 3 of the Convention mandates that the best interest of the child is the primary consideration, while Article 27 (i) provides that State parties recognize the right of every child to an adequate standard of living for the child’s physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development. The government of India has made a declaration with regard to Article 32 of the Convention which states: “While fully subscribing to the objectives and purposes of the
Convention, realizing that certain of the rights of the child, namely those pertaining to economic, social and cultural rights, can only be progressively implemented in the developing countries, subject to the extent of available resources and within the framework of international co-operation; recognizing that the child has to be protected from exploitation of all forms including economic exploitation; noting that for several reasons children of different ages do work in India; having prescribed minimum ages for employment in hazardous occupations and in certain other areas; having made regulatory provisions regarding hours and conditions of employment; and being aware that it is not practical immediately to prescribe minimum ages for admission to each and every area of employment in India – the Government of India undertakes to take measures to progressively implement the provisions of Article 32, particularly paragraph 2(a), in accordance with its national legislation and relevant international instruments to which it is a State Party.” Article 21, 21A, 23, 24, 39 (e) and (f), 45, 46 of the Constitution of India, read with the Preamble, mandates compulsory education of children, socio-economic justice to children and their empowerment, full growth of their personality – socially, educationally and culturally – growing up as a matter of right. Various welfare laws made by Parliament and the appropriate state Legislatures will only be an illusion unless they are effectively implemented and made a reality. Pragmatic, realistic and constructive steps and actions are required to enable the children coming from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds to enjoy their childhoods and develop their personalities. Child labour must be eradicated through promoting education and well-planned poverty alleviation and developmental schemes, as well as through the imposition of trade actions on the employment of children.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 121
Banerjee.indd 121
16/08/2013 11:26:59
FALKLAND ISLANDS: SELF-DETERMINATION
Falkland Islanders were this year asked if they wanted their home to remain a British overseas territory. A senior Member of the Islands’ government reports the overwhelming response here and calls on the United Nations – and Argentina – to recognize their right to self-determination.
Hon. Dick Sawle, MLA, in Stanley.
Mr Sawle has been a Member of the Falkland Islands Legislative Assembly since 2009 and is currently one of its three elected Members who have also been elected by the Assembly as Members of the Executive Council. He is a former teacher and fishing company owner who has lived in the Falklands since 1986.
Hon. Dick Sawle, MLA
The events of 11 and 12 March 2013 put down a marker in the history of the Falkland Islands. For the first time, we held a referendum on our political status. The result was incontrovertible – the people of the Falkland Islands wish, beyond any doubt whatsoever, to remain as an Overseas Territory of Great Britain. Three people voted no. Overall, 99.8 per cent voted yes and 92 per cent of our voters turned out to vote.
© All photographs courtesy of Sharon Jaffray
THE FALKLANDS REFERENDUM: EXERCISING THE RIGHT TO SELFDETERMINATION
The right to self-determination That expression of self-determination does not preclude the right to change our political status at any time by means of another referendum. The right of a people to decide their own future is a fundamental human right that cannot have any conditions attached to it. In 2008, Argentina attempted to qualify the right to selfdetermination, but it was not accepted by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (Fourth Committee) which reiterated that the right to selfdetermination is a “universal right”. It is a right that Great Britain recognizes and wholeheartedly supports. Argentina would prefer to determine itself what is in the “best interests” of the Falkland Islanders, and evidently with no consultation with our people. Any country that is based on modern democratic principles cannot support that position and maintain a clear conscience. Argentina constantly refers to
UN Resolution 2065, and implies that Britain is somehow ignoring UN resolutions requiring sovereignty negotiations. Resolution 2065 (from 1965, 48 years ago) calls on Great Britain and Argentina to negotiate over the future of the Falkland Islands bearing in mind the “interests” of the Falkland Islanders. It does not mention sovereignty. It does not promote any solution other than a peaceful one. Great Britain did not ignore Resolution 2065. As we have seen from recently released documents and as we know from history, Great Britain and Argentina did discuss a variety of peaceful solutions following Resolution 2065, none of which would have received any support whatsoever from Falkland Islanders. Regardless, 2065 is not a binding resolution. What are binding on all parties are UN Security Council resolutions. When Argentina invaded, all previous positions were
122 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Sawle.indd 122
16/08/2013 17:19:45
FALKLAND ISLANDS: SELF-DETERMINATION
binding Security Council Resolution was to refuse to comply, and to send in more troops. The result was war and the surrender and expulsion of the Argentine forces. Argentina now conveniently ignores the invasion, which resulted in the loss of nearly a thousand lives. In 1994 Argentina placed its unconditional claim to the Falklands in its constitution, with complete disregard for UN Resolution 31/49 which calls on neither side to introduce unilateral modifications in the situation.
superseded by this act of war. UN Security Council resolution 502 (April 1982) demanded an immediate withdrawal of all Argentine forces from the Falkland Islands. This was binding. Argentina’s response to the
Argentine bullying Whilst Falkland Islanders wish for nothing more than normal relationships with all neighbouring countries, under the regime of Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner we have endured a series of intimidating and bullying actions which are all designed to try to destroy our economy and
force us into giving in to Argentina’s wishes. It is a fact that, under the Carlos Menem government and his foreign Minister Guido Di Tella, relationships post-war were of course difficult. However, in the 1990s Falkland Islanders were involved in discussions and agreements with Argentina, resulting in the 1999 agreement regarding a direct flight connection with Chile, the agreement for the Argentine families commission to build a memorial at Darwin, Argentina agreeing to look at changing place names in the Falklands to the English names, agreement that Argentina would look at the feasibility of minefield clearance and agreement also over the conservation and management of straddling fish stocks. We also agreed a special area of joint hydrocarbons exploration. Sadly, whilst the Falklands has held firm with its side of the agreement, the only part of the
Opposite page: British to the core; Above: The count begins under the watchful eyes of the Observer Mission; Left: Riders lead the rally to the finish point.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 123
Sawle.indd 123
16/08/2013 17:19:56
FALKLAND ISLANDS: SELF-DETERMINATION
This page: Flagged vehicles convoy though Stanley; Right: Observers Alisha Todd, Mission Leader Brad Smith and Deputy Juan Henao
agreement that Argentina has not reneged on under the various Kirchner regimes is the once weekly flight to Chile. Even that flight has seen a series of both overt and implicit threats made by the Argentine administration. The Kirchner regime has tried to harm us in a number of ways: • Threatening and harassing fishing companies which operate in Argentina and the Falklands with legal action under new laws; • Threatening and violence to cruise vessel operators; • Threatening legal action against any company involved in hydrocarbons exploration in the Falklands; • Attempting (illegally) to block South American ports to any vessel with the Falklands flag; • Denying the right of innocent passage to vessels transiting Argentine territorial waters through Argentine
Decree 256 which is contrary to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea; • Refusing to co-operate with our scientists regarding the conservation and management of international fish stocks; • Attempting to block our presence at international events; • Placing their claim in any international forum at which we have no presence; • Prohibiting the over-flight of charter aircraft heading to the Falklands, and • Threatening any companies that wish to do business with us. Giving Falklanders a voice These actions are not those of a friendly neighbour and of course are seldom reported in the media outside of the Falklands. It was against this background of continual aggression and harassment that we, the Falkland
Islands government, decided to hold a referendum. It was time for the people to be allowed to freely, fairly and democratically express which political system they wish to live under. We discussed the idea within our government about three years ago. Initially it is fair to say that there was not a great deal of enthusiasm for the idea. Why ask a question to which you already know the answer? Elected Members are elected to represent the people, and there was no sign whatsoever that the people wished for a change to the current status of the Falklands. But over time and under ever increasing pressure from Argentine actions, the idea grew in strength. We, the elected Members, wanted to be able to tell the world that the Falkland Islanders are in charge of their own destiny. We wanted to give our people the right to speak out on their own behalf and we wanted to be given a
clear mandate. We wanted to send the clearest of all possible messages out to the world and its leaders and we wanted it to come from the heart of our country – its people. Rewriting history This is not about what happened over 180 years ago in 1833. What happened then was simply that a military force that was in our Islands illegally was expelled by the British. They had been here for less than three months. The often-voiced comment from Argentina is that the British expelled either an Argentine population or a native population. This is untrue and the facts are out there for whoever wishes to research them. The civilians who were here (about 30 in total) were persuaded by Captain Onslow of HMS Clio to remain and all but two did exactly that. Argentina claims the Falklands form part of the province
124 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Sawle.indd 124
16/08/2013 17:20:05
FALKLAND ISLANDS: SELF-DETERMINATION
of Tierra del Fuego – an area that did not form part of Argentina until two generations of Islanders had been born and raised here. Argentina also conveniently ignores the Convention of Settlement of 1850 in which Britain and Argentina agreed to restore perfect friendship, settling all outstanding disputes. However, since 1833 Argentina has never let the truth get in the way of a good story, and the constant repetition of the myths gained traction and credence in the international arena, and gave rise to UN Resolution 2065 in 1965. The United Nations was, we contend, misled. We have been dismissed as villagers objecting to a high-speed rail link. If the village has a constitution which allows it to form a democratic government, raise taxes, manage its budget, write legislation and have full right to all natural resources, then of course it could stop a high-speed rail link. Another pro-Argentine argument is that the Falklands should belong to Argentina simply because we are 300 miles from Argentina and 8,000 miles from Great Britain. No big country has the right to take over any smaller country simply based on proximity. Can it be right that a country of over 40 million people such
as Argentina has the right to bully a territory of 3,000 into submission? These arguments are sadly reflected in current Argentine propaganda. The levels of absurdity seem to increase on an almost daily basis, culminating in the latest from Argentine Foreign Minister Hector Timerman who has said that Falkland Islanders do not exist, or that it is not the people but the territory that is in dispute. Territories do not have rights – people do. That is why they are called human rights. Who has ever asked a mountain if it would rather be British or Argentine? We asked our people and their response was clear. Diverting the attention of Argentinians But, because the history is so clear and their claim so patently ludicrous, one has to wonder why the government of Argentina wishes to pursue this course of action. The answer in our view is sadly not about logic or reason or history or belief. It is simply a populist and nationalist card which was pulled out in 1982 by a desperately unpopular military dictatorship and a card which has, for many years, been played to its full extent by the current government. Argentina is chasing a dream but living a nightmare. The dream is
based on a false version of history. The dream is taught to children in schools in Argentina – a process of indoctrination from an early stage and it is a dream that is now so closely related to national pride that it is without solution. Argentina’s domestic situation is dire. Inflation is rampant, their economy is spiralling downwards, credit cards are controlled, the media is under pressure to publish government propaganda and “pesification” has produced a flourishing black market economy in dollars. There is no credible opposition to their current elected leader who pays lip service to democratic principles and so the Falklands is raised yet again as a unifying, populist and nationalist issue. So what is the end game in this new attack on the Falklands and its people? Does Argentina actually wish to win this new war it is waging upon a peaceful community of less than 3000 people? Making the world take notice Just reflect for a moment on what it would mean if Argentina did somehow wrest sovereignty from a people that have no wish to be subjugated by Argentina. Argentina would no longer be
able to play the populist card when times were tough. Attention would necessarily focus on domestic issues. In the Falklands they would have a very big problem to deal with – 99.8 per cent of the population would not want Argentine rule. There is nothing to indicate that the three people who voted no want Argentine rule either. They could equally be seeking immediate independence from Great Britain. The United Nations would have to stand by and watch while Argentina colonized a people that have clearly expressed their wishes to remain under British sovereignty. The United Nations would have to ignore our wishes, which have now been so categorically stated. Argentina would have little option but to cleanse the Falklands of its people, who would have to stand by and watch as our home and our natural resources were plundered by a colonial power. Is that right? Does anyone seriously expect that to happen and for the UN to stand by and watch? Then British Prime Minister Rt Hon. Margaret Thatcher was a strong leader who believed in the politics of conviction rather that the politics of spin and half truths. When Argentina invaded the Falklands in 1982, she recognized the rights of Falkland Islanders to determine their own future. She will forever be remembered here in the Falklands with great affection and admiration. Academics may write copious detailed accounts over potential “solutions” based on papers, precedent and resolutions; but these lack that clarity of vision, that conviction and that moral certitude with which she led Great Britain’s response to the invasion. She stood firmly behind the rights of a few thousand against an invasion force led by a dictator. Backed by the task force, she and they gave us back our freedom, and we will not lose it again. Our people have spoken and they have rights. Those rights cannot and will not be ignored. The referendum has placed a clear, decisive and incontestable marker on the table that the world cannot ignore: 99.8 per cent
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 125
Sawle.indd 125
16/08/2013 17:20:17
© J. Whitman Shutterstock.com
CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING
CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING AND RE-DEMOCRATIZATION IN FIJI Fiji Islands has moved along a sometimes controversial and sometimes delayed path back to democratic governance. It finally now has a new constitution and a military regime that is preparing to transform itself into an elected government in 2014, says a leading Fijian political sociologist. The whole process has also bridged the country’s ethnic divide — Fijians of Melanesian and Indian backgrounds both support and oppose the new constitution and the expected electoral opponents.
Dr Steven Ratuva in Auckland.
Dr Ratuva is a political sociologist at the University of Auckland. With a PhD from the United Kingdom, he has worked at the Australian National University and University of the South Pacific where he was head of sociology. He has been a consultant and advisor for a number of international organizations and publishes widely on politics and development.
Dr Steven Ratuva
Devising legal and political mechanisms and parameters through constitutional means, a process which is often referred to as constitutional engineering, is a major political preoccupation in many modern states primarily because of the central role
constitutions play in framing and legitimizing principles and norms as basis for organizing and governing society. In many post-colonial states constitutional engineering is vital for nation-building, addressing inequality and conflict resolution. However, at the same time, constitutions can be scapegoat for political instability and poor governance and calls for constitutional reform often follow in the wake of political crisis. Fiji’s obsession with constitutional engineering reflected the need to address the complex situation of cultural diversity and ethnic tension it inherited at the time of independence in 1970. Amongst other reasons, Fiji constitutions were designed to provide political balance and ameliorate differences between
ethnic groups competing for political power. The constant constitutional reforms were largely a result of coups and associated political instability. Since independence in 1970 after 96 years of British colonial rule, a total of five constitutions were written. These consisted of three substantive and operational constitutions — the 1970, 1990 and 1997 constitutions; and two drafts. The two drafts were the latest attempts to create a new constitution after the 1997 constitution was removed in 2009. The first draft was produced by the constitutional review commission in 2012 but this was rejected by the government and replaced it with their version which was released in early 2013. This article provides an overview
126 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Ratuva.indd 126
19/08/2013 14:32:53
CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING
of the current constitutional review process in Fiji and examines some of the political dynamics and challenges. It is the most controversial constitutional review process in Fiji because of the government’s rejection of the original draft by a group of international experts and the creation of a new one by government lawyers. The new constitution will provide the electoral framework for the next election in 2014 which will be used by the military-backed regime, which came into power through extralegal means, both as its exit strategy and as its means of returning to power through legal means. Overview of Fiji’s constitutions By the time of the highly anticipated 2014 election in Fiji, the country
would have had five constitutions within the period of 44 years since independence in 1970. This translates into one constitution for every 8.8 years, an incredibly high figure by world standard. The first constitution which came into existence in 1970 was designed to provide an ethnically balanced political formula as part of the postindependence multiracial experiment. This balance was fractured by the two 1987 ethno-nationalist coups which shifted the centre of political gravity away from the multiracial “centre” to the extreme indigenous Fijian side of the political continuum. This shift was legitimized by the abrogation of the 1970 constitution and the promulgation of the ethno-nationalist 1990 constitution which provided
for institutionalized indigenous Fijian political ascendency. As a result of internal and external pressure for a multi-ethnic constitution, the constitution was reviewed and this resulted in the 1997 constitution, often glorified as one of the most enlightened constitutions in the world because of its advocacy for multiculturalism, liberal values and a comprehensive bill of rights. Following the 2000 coup, the military attempted to abrogate the constitution but a Supreme Court decision declared the abrogation null and void. However, the constitution was later removed in 2009, three years after the Fiji Supreme Court declared Commodore Frank Bainimarama’s 2006 military coup illegal. The removal of the 1997 constitution
allowed the military-backed regime total control of all the state institutions including the judiciary. The constitutional review After living under the shadow of military hegemony, the challenge for the country was how to put in a viable and credible process towards re-democratization through constitutional means. This was important in a number of ways including the need to re-democratize the country, rebuild state institutions destroyed after the 2006 coup, reassert the citizen’s sense of democratic citizenship, as well as provide the exit strategy for the coup leaders who found themselves entangled in the quagmire of opposition and uncertainty. The
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 127
Ratuva.indd 127
19/08/2013 14:33:04
CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING
appointment of the constitution commission led by Prof Yash Ghai, a leading international expert, heralded a moment of high expectation and hope. However, this optimism was thwarted by differences between Prof Ghai and Fiji’s Attorney-General, Mr Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, a former student of the professor, over the legal conditions under which the constitutional reform was to take place. The professor had demanded that any constitutional reform must be carried out in a free political climate to allow for greater participation while the Attorney-General insisted that while there should be free participation, there should also be a degree of cautious restriction to avoid potential instability. The core of the contention revolved around the human rights versus security discourses. This degenerated into public debate with Cmd Bainimarama publicly scolding Prof Ghai to “just
do his job” and even urging him to resign if he could not take the heat. The rift increasingly became wider and irreparable and the fate of the constitution commission’s draft, released in December 2012, became a foregone conclusion—needless to say, it was destined for the ashbin of
“While some aspects of the Ghai draft...were retained, a number of significant provisions were either removed or altered.” history. In its place the government put forward its alternative draft. Although some may say that it
was excessively long, the 200-page Ghai draft was comprehensive and enlightening in many respects. It had a very strong human rights focus with specific provisions to protect indigenous rights and land. For the first time ever, socioeconomic rights were accorded a constitutionally prominent status as a way of addressing the increasingly problematic scourge of poverty. An innovative aspect of the draft was its attempt to shift power away from parliamentary hegemony to direct participation by civil society and the community at large through a proposed People’s Assembly which would also elect the President. A major break with the past was the proposal for proportional representation. The 1970 and 1990 constitutions provided for the first-past-the post system while the 1997 constitution provided for preferential system and by and
large these electoral systems led to skewed distribution of seats as well as ethnic demarcation and tension. The proportional system suggested, based on parties providing their “closed’ list was meant to transform the political culture away from ethnicbased representation to greater ethnic and gender diversity. While previous constitutions were largely focused on issues of state governance, the Ghai draft covered a whole range of areas relating to people’s daily lives such as environment and heritage, land, civil society, media, local government and national security. This was indicative of the degree of inclusiveness and thoroughness with which the commission travelled the country collecting views from people of different sections of the community. The collective spirit of the country was succinctly captured in the preamble which in a reconciliatory and at the
128 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Ratuva.indd 128
19/08/2013 14:23:28
CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING
same time forward-looking vision started by stating that, “The People of Fiji declare— We are Fijian: iTaukei and all others who have come to make their home in these islands. We recognise the indigenous Fijian and Rotuman peoples who first formed a spiritual connection with these islands, establishing a strong, vibrant culture lasting for thousands of years.” It then concluded with: “In humility and hope, determined to overcome the past, and having engaged in open discussion of our visions for Fiji, we adopt this constitution for ourselves, and as a gift to our children, with the prayer that the generations who follow may live in peace and happiness.” The draft constitution was presented to the President in late December 2012 and almost immediately the government assembled a team of lawyers, led by the Attorney-General, to dissect the Ghai draft and come up with
an alternative. Meanwhile, the government started making public statements criticizing various parts of the Ghai draft and there were hints that it was not going to see the light of day.
Left: Fiji’s Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum; Above: internationally known constitutional expert Prof Yash Ghai.
The alternative draft The alternative government draft which was about half the length of the Ghai draft was released in March 2013. While some aspects of the Ghai draft such as the bill of rights were retained, a number of significant provisions were either removed or altered. The People’s Assembly to elect the President was publicly derided by the President to be a form of bastardized democracy consisting of “unelected” people with no public mandate. Interestingly, Bob Carr the Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs, a vehement critic of the Fiji government concurred with Fiji’s President. The government
draft proposed that the President should be elected by Parliament. The provision for the existence for the Great Council of Chiefs (which under the 1997 constitution appointed the President) was removed together with special aspects pertaining to indigenous rights to land and culture. The government justified this on the grounds that in its vision for a multicultural Fiji, special protection for a community undermines trans-cultural engagement. Other parts of the Ghai draft relating to environmental protection, civil society and local government were removed and perhaps most conspicuous was the change to the preamble. The
reference to indigenous Fijians as original settlers was removed and the entire section was altered. Perhaps one of the few major areas of concurrence between the two constitutional drafts was the recommendation for the proportional party list system as a way of ensuring equity in the distribution of seats and votes compared to the first past the post and alternative preferential systems. The only difference was that while the Ghai draft recommended a closed list system (where the party selects and ranks candidates), the government draft recommended an open list system where the voters decided on the candidates and their ranking. Both drafts advocated multi-ethnic listing by political parties to move away from the tense, divisive, volatile and destabilizing zero sum ethnic competition over political control of the state which characterized Fiji politics since independence in 1970. However, unfortunately none of the drafts provided for mechanisms to explicitly “induce” or “reward” political parties to be more multiethnic. Ironically, it was assumed that the old ethnic-based parties would have enough sense to field multiethnic candidates on their own accord. The Ghai draft did mention about gender inclusion but this was removed in the government draft. The Ghai draft made the argument that because of the need for more robust and diverse parliamentary representation, the number of seats needed to be relatively high and thus recommended 71 seats. The government argued otherwise and proposed that Parliament should be lean, affordable and efficient and reduced the number to 45, a reduction of about 33 per cent. Unlike the single-Member constituencies under the 1970, 1990 and 1997 constitutions, both the Ghai and government draft constitutions provided for only four multi-Member constituencies as a way of ensuring greater proportionality and minimizing logistical costs. Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the constitutional reform
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 129
Ratuva.indd 129
19/08/2013 14:23:43
CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING
Members of the Fijian Indian community: Fijian constitutions were designed to provide political balance and ameliorate differences between ethnic groups competing for political power.
was the issue of immunity. The debates revolved around two positions: on one hand is the legal purist argument that no immunity whatsoever should be granted since immunity will only encourage the coup culture; on the other hand is the political pragmatism argument that immunity is the best exit strategy from the current political quagmire. Both the Ghai and government drafts provided for immunity. The prospect of immunity has compelled Cmd Bainimarama to enthusiastically embrace election but the long term risk is that immunity has the potential to legitimize future coups. The role of the constitution in stopping or at least minimizing the possibility of future coups has been an issue of utmost interest given the fact that the country has gone through six coups — two in 1987, two in 2000, one in 2006 and one in 2009. The Ghai draft proposed a number of
preventive mechanisms. The first was the proportional representation system which would hopefully nullify the predominance of ethnicity as the major factor in political mobilization; secondly was the proposal that while the constitution was to provide for immunity for those who were involved in the coups from 1987 to 2006, there would be no more immunity in the future. The government draft provided for immunity since 1987 as provided for in the 1990 and 1997 constitutions but there was no provision for future immunity. This poses a major threat to future stability. However, the government argues that the new proposal to make the Prime Minister Commander in Chief of the military instead of the President is a way of keeping the military under direct civilian control. On one hand this reasoning does make sense; but at the same time it can lead to greater
politicization of the military by the government in power. Constitutional challenges and paradoxes One of the assumptions when the constitutional review team was appointed that the individuals selected were liberal-minded with the right expertise, experience and, some suggested, had political “sympathy” towards the regime. The three local members represented the diverse ethnic community (an indigenous Fijian former politician, an Indo-Fijian scholar and a Euro-Fijian woman activist) and the two foreign experts were both legal scholars (Prof Yash Ghai of Kenya and Prof Christine Murray of South Africa). To the consternation of the regime, the commission was rigorously independent and was perceived as a competitor and even a threat to the pre-formulated designs of the regime,
under the legal and political direction of the Attorney-General who in many respects virtually had tight control over state policies as well as the legal and ideological trajectory of the country. The tension between Prof Ghai and Mr Sayed-Khaiyum was more than simply a battle of egos as some have suggested, it was fundamentally driven by competing conceptions of the process of constitutional reform and the substance of the constitution. Neither of them was ready to compromise as they both fiercely pursued divergent paths. Prof Ghai had envisaged a more inclusive democratic system with greater civil society and community participation while Mr Sayed-Khaiyum was interested in a more regulated and leaner form of formal democracy. Mr Sayed-Khaiyum was also inspired by self-preservation by envisaging a system which would possibly return members of the regime to power in the next election as an exit strategy as well as to protect them from future treason prosecution. The lack of compromise between the two players was indicative of the bigger national atmosphere of suspicion and tension and the failure of the government to devise a framework to integrate constitutional reform and conflict resolution. Constitutional reform was carried out as a purely technical process independent of any initiative for national dialogue and reconciliation to address the underlying fractures caused by the 2006 coup. It was largely a process of state-building without the support of nation-building. The former refers to reconstructing the dilapidated state institutions while the latter refers to mending the social fractures between communities at the people-to-people level. A process which integrated the two and which would have made constitutional reform a vehicle for national dialogue and reconciliation would have made a lot of difference in terms of transforming relationships and addressing possible tension. Furthermore, while both drafts talked about inclusiveness, there was no attempt to translate the
130 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Ratuva.indd 130
19/08/2013 14:23:57
CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING
documents into Fijian and Hindi, the major vernacular languages. To assume that everyone could understand English was a major blunder which would have a profound impact on people’s knowledge as well as sense of ownership of the constitution. Furthermore, the public consultation periods for both drafts were quite short. While the Ghai consultation was more of a listening and participatory exercise to solicit and capture people’s views and concerns, the government one was basically a rushed lecture tour to explain what was in the draft constitution with the hope of mass mobilization of public support within a short time. Tactically it was a shrewd ploy by the government to opt for the constitution to be “passed” directly by the public rather than being endorsed through a vote by a People’s Assembly as suggested earlier. This way, it would be easier for the government to push the constitution through before being signed by the President. The possibility of amending the constitution later will not be easy because Chapter 11 of the government draft states that it has to be done through a referendum. This becomes a major obstacle to future attempts to address emerging issues which require constitutional amendments. Frustration emanating from failure to amend the constitution may help precipitate political grievances in the future. Constitutional engineering and implications for elections For keen observers of Fiji politics, the 2014 election will be one of Fiji’s most anticipated because of a number of overtly interesting developments. First, it is the first time that the recommendations of a constitutional review commission was rejected; secondly, it is also the first time that a restrictive political party re-registration decree has been put in place; thirdly is the notion that the election will be the only viable exit strategy for the coup leaders, and lastly is the fact that the election comes at the end
of eight years of revolution which saw fundamental transformations in the political and socio-cultural institutions of the Fijian society. At first glance, these factors have the potential to give Cmd Bainimarama’s newly conceived political party overwhelming advantage over the other parties struggling either to be re-registered or newly registered. His strategic advantage is bolstered by his total control of the key apparatus of the state including the military, civil service, law-making and development policies which he has deployed meticulously and systematically to mobilize support and hopefully enable his party (currently without a name or visible form) to win the election. However, politics in Fiji is often unpredictable and the antiBainimarama political forces may be able to make use of his shortcomings to outmanoeuvre him in what might appear to be a close encounter. His major political opposition is in the form of a coalition for democracy consisting of the Fiji Labour Party (FLP), Social Democratic Liberal Party (SOLDEP), National Federation Party (NFP) and People’s Democratic Party (PDP). The coalition, however, is plagued by internal fractures which have roots in past political and ongoing personality differences. The PDP which is unionbased is a breakaway from the FLP as a result of power struggle between Mr Mahendra Chaudhry the FLP leader and former prime minister and other unionists who have been trying to oust him from the leadership of the FLP for years. The SDL, which changed its name from the Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua, was the ruling party which was overthrown during the 2006 coup and the Leader and former Prime Minister, Laisenia Qarase, was later jailed for corruption. One of the leaders of SDL, Dr Tupeni Baba, a former academic, together with Mr Krishna Dutt, a former FLP senior politician, left the FLP as a result of differences with Mr Chaudhry and Dr Baba later formed his own New Labour Party during the 2000 election. The lines of demarcation are intertwined and the fractures are
deeply embedded and the coalition appears to be a temporary front which may begin to unravel during the election because of competition over candidate ranking as required under the proportional party list system. Mr Chaudhry is considered the most detested person amongst the coalition parties and interestingly, the anti-Chaudhry parties know that the only person with the real power to weaken Mr Chaudhry’s ambition for power is Cmd Bainimarama and thus it won’t be surprising if some parties will form a coalition with Cmd Bainimarama to outflank Mr Chaudhry. A surprising and interesting feature of Fiji politics now is the toning down of the ethnic factor, unlike in past years. This is a result of the way Cmd Bainimarama has broken the ethnic divide through his support for Indo-Fijian political rights and strong initiatives in promoting indigenous Fijian rural development. Both the support for and opposition to Cmd Bainimarama have assumed a multi-ethnic character. This multiethnic tendency maybe further reinforced through the proportional representation system which may see the emergence of minority parties and the formation of a coalition. Conclusion Constitutional engineering is not the ultimate panacea for democracy and political stability because it is merely a mechanical and institutional process. What is more important is to give the constitution the breadth and the spirit to ensure that it comes alive as a guide to people’s aspirations and vision. There is no such thing as a “good” or “bad” constitution but what matters is for citizens to make honest and efficient use of the document, no matter what the shortcomings are, to maximize benefit in the form of democratic participation, protection of human rights and promotion of national development. To inspire national progress, constitutions should not be treated with cautious and sacred restraint as a Christian would treat the holy Bible and at the
same time it should not be treated like a scrap book to be used merely as a tool to serve embedded political interests as in the past. Rather it should be a utilitarian guidebook to inspire creative and innovative thinking and sentiments to achieve greater collective good for the country. The future of Fiji’s new constitution depends on the political circumstances and leadership. The constant changes in the constitutions in Fiji are symptomatic of deep-seated ethno-political and socio-economic fractures and dynamics which need to be seriously addressed through broader citizen peace-building strategies beyond the constitutional framework. After the new constitution is promulgated, there needs to be serious consideration of a national dialogue and reconciliation process by political parties, religious groups, civil society organizations and other players. Under the proportional representation system, there is bound to be a coalition government in power after the 2014 election. This would potentially provide an appropriate political climate conducive for a national dialogue and reconciliation initiative. Every time a new constitution is created in Fiji, there was unrestrained popular optimism about a new start and a new future. Each time, there was disappointment and for some, overpowering anguish, as the dreams of a Fijian utopia was shattered by coups and associated ethnic tension. Fijians have been to bounce back from their misery through collective resilience and strong-willed adaptation to new realities. Just like the case of its predecessors, the new constitution has evoked optimism and hope for many for a new promising order. While there is also pessimism about whether the coming election will be free and fair, the potential for Fiji to achieve future stability and prosperity depends largely on the leaders’ capacity to ameliorate the emerging challenges and the people’s will to respond to these challenges with an open and inclusive spirit.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 131
Ratuva.indd 131
19/08/2013 14:24:11
EXECUTIVE LAWMAKING
THE “NIRBHAYA” (FEARLESS) ORDINANCE: EXECUTIVE LAWMAKING IN INDIA A vicious fatal attack on a young couple on a bus in Delhi in late 2012 shocked the world and prompted the Indian government to respond quickly with an executive ordinance strengthening the punishment for such an act. Although the attack was exceptional, the former Secretary-General of India’s Rajya Sabha writes that the practice of executive lawmaking in India is not as exceptional as would be expected in a vibrant and experienced parliamentary democracy.
Dr Vivek K. Agnihotri in New Delhi.
Dr Agnihotri was the Secretary-General of the Rajya Sabha, the upper House in the Parliament of India, until September 2012. He was Secretary for the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs from 2003 to 2005 and an Administrative Member of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench) of New Delhi from 2006 to 2007.
On 17 December 2012, India (and the rest of the world, a little earlier or later) woke up to a disconcerting media report of a barbaric incident. A 23-year old female physiotherapy intern was brutally assaulted and raped in Delhi, perhaps on account of her “fearless” protests, in a bus in which she was travelling late in the evening with a male companion. When the woman’s companion tried to intervene, he was reportedly beaten and knocked unconscious with an iron rod. The alleged assailants (a group of six males) then are said to have beaten the woman with the rod and raped her. The attack eventually led to her death. Medical reports later indicated that she suffered serious internal injuries during the assault, and doctors said that a blunt object (possibly the iron rod) may have been used. That rod was later described by police as being a rusty implement resembling a wheel jack handle. According to the International Business Times, a police spokesman said that a minor was the most brutal attacker and had “sexually abused his victim twice and ripped out her intestines with his bare hands”.
Dr Vivek K. Agnihotri
The horrendous event caused widespread local, national and international outrage and public protests against the concerned authorities, including the government as well as civil society, for not being able to provide adequate security to women in India. An executive response On 22 December, a judicial committee headed by Justice J.S. Verma, a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, was appointed by the government of India to submit a report within 30 days on possible amendments to criminal law
to deal sternly with sexual offences. The committee submitted its report after 29 days. Taking note of the recommendations of the committee, the President of India promulgated the Criminal Law (Amendment) ordinance on 3 February 2013 which provided for amendments to the Indian Penal Code 1860, the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 on laws related to sexual offences. The ordinance, inter alia, provided for rigorous imprisonment for at least 20 years or the death penalty in the case of a rape leading to the death or persistent vegetative state of the victim. When the Indian Parliament assembled on 21 February for its first session of the year (the Budget Session), the government, in keeping with the time-honoured convention, laid a copy of the ordinance on the Tables of the two Houses of Parliament. A Bill to replace the ordinance was placed before cabinet which referred it to a group of Ministers and, based on its recommendations, finally approved the Bill.
132 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Agnihotri.indd 132
16/08/2013 11:25:14
EXECUTIVE LAWMAKING
The shocking attack on a young woman caused a wave of mass protests across the country.
On 18 March, the government convened an all-party meeting in order to arrive at a consensus before moving the Bill in Parliament. The next day, the Home Minister introduced The Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2013 in the Lok Sabha and fast-tracked its consideration and passing. When the Bill was taken up for discussion on the same day, the Home Minister proposed certain amendments based on the consensus arrived at during the allparty meeting. An earlier Bill of the same title, introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 2012, was simultaneously withdrawn. The upper House (Rajya Sabha) approved the Bill, as amended by the Lok Sabha, on 21 March. The statutory resolutions seeking disapproval of the ordinance, moved in
both the Houses, were negatived. The Bill received President’s assent on 2 April and became the law of the land. Presidential law-making The Constitution of India, in Article 123, makes provision for legislative powers of the President. Going by the doctrine of the separation of powers, as practised in parliamentary democracies around the world and particularly in Commonwealth countries, this provision is quite unique. However, in another sense, it is not so unprecedented since it derives from an identical provision in the Government of India Act 1935, which preceded the constitution of independent India. Table 1 confirms the correspondence: The President may issue an ordinance to enforce the provisions
of a Bill introduced in and pending before a House, or to enforce the provisions of a Bill already passed by one House but pending in the other House, or an entirely new matter to be replaced subsequently by a Bill to be brought before the Houses. In the present case, The Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012, introduced in the Lok Sabha on 4 December 2012, was pending before Parliament at the time of promulgation of the ordinance. In any case, an ordinance has a definite shelf-life and lapses if a Bill replacing it, with or without modification, is not passed by both Houses of Parliament within six weeks of the re-assembly of Parliament following the issue of the ordinance. Further, the ordinance etiquette practised in the early days of the
coming into force of the Constitution of India required that an ordinance should not be issued after the issuing of a summons convening a session of Parliament, if a Bill on the subject is pending in Parliament or a Bill is ready but has not been introduced in Parliament. These niceties have been given a go-by over time. There have been occasions when one of the Houses has been prorogued to enable the issuing of an ordinance, since the constitution prescribes that an ordinance cannot be issued if both Houses are in session. On the other hand, occasionally Parliament has reaffirmed its supremacy by either not allowing the Bill to replace the ordinance to be passed within the prescribed time-frame or agreeing to refer it to the department-related
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 133
Agnihotri.indd 133
16/08/2013 11:25:24
EXECUTIVE LAWMAKING
Table One: Legislative Powers of Governor-General/President of India Government of India Act 1935
Constitution of India 1950
Chapter IV: Legislative Powers of the Governor-General Sections 42 and 43. Power of Governor-General to promulgate ordinances
Chapter III: Legislative Powers of the President
43(2) An ordinance promulgated under this section shall continue in operation for such period not exceeding six months as may be specified therein but may by a subsequent ordinance be extended for a further period not exceeding six months. 43(3) An ordinance promulgated under this section shall have the same force and effect as an act of the federal Legislature assented to by the Governor-General but every such ordinance – *** (b) May be withdrawn at any time by the Governor-General; *** 43(4) If and so far as an ordinance under this section makes any provision which the federal Legislature would not under this act be competent to enact, it shall be void. (3) If and so far as an ordinance under this article makes any provision which Parliament would not under this constitution be competent to enact, it shall be void.
parliamentary standing committee for examination and report, thus resulting in the lapsing of the ordinance.
Parliamentary review The Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the two Houses of the
Article 123. Power of the President to promulgate ordinances during a recess of Parliament (1) If at any time, except when both the Houses of Parliament are in session, the President is satisfied that circumstances exist which render it necessary for him to take immediate action, he may promulgate such ordinances as the circumstances appear to him to require. (2) An ordinance promulgated under this article shall have the same force and effect as an act of Parliament, but every such ordinance – (a) Shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament and shall cease to operate at the expiration of six weeks from the reassembly of Parliament, or, if before the expiration of that period resolutions disapproving it are passed by both Houses, upon the passing of the second of those resolutions; and (b) May be withdrawn at any time by the President. *** (3) If and so far as an ordinance under this article makes any provision which Parliament would not under this constitution be competent to enact, it shall be void.
Indian Parliament contain identical provisions requiring that whenever a Bill seeking to replace an ordinance
is introduced in a House, a statement explaining the circumstances which had necessitated legislation by
Police on duty during the protests
134 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Agnihotri.indd 134
16/08/2013 11:25:37
EXECUTIVE LAWMAKING
ordinance should be placed before the House along with the Bill. The same procedure has to be followed in case of ordinances which embody wholly or partly, or with modification, the provisions of a Bill pending before either of the Houses. After the promulgation of the ordinance, any Member of either House may give notice of a statutory resolution seeking disapproval of the ordinance and, in case such a notice is admitted, the said resolution is listed and moved before the motion for consideration of the government Bill seeking to replace that ordinance is moved by the concerned Minister. However, the statutory resolution and the motion for consideration of the Bill are generally discussed together. After the discussion, the resolution is put to a vote of the House first, and if the resolution is adopted, the Bill replacing the ordinance falls through. On the other hand, if the statutory resolution is negatived, the motion for consideration of the Bill is put to a vote and further stages for consideration and passage of the Bill are followed as usual. Generally, an ordinance replacing a Bill is not referred to a departmentrelated parliamentary standing committee for examination and report mainly because an ordinance, unless replaced by a Bill passed by both the Houses of Parliament, ceases to operate on the expiry of six weeks from the re-assembly of Parliament. The government priority, therefore, remains to get the Bill passed within the stipulated period. However, as stated above, there have been instances when Bills replacing ordinances were referred to standing committees for examination and report. Whenever a Bill pending before one of the Houses of Parliament, in respect of which an ordinance has been issued, comes up for consideration, the concerned Minister proposes an amendment to the Bill inserting a new clause, known as a Repealing and Saving clause, at the end of the Bill. Insertion of this new clause
has two effects: first, it repeals the ordinance issued on the Bill and, secondly, it validates all the acts and actions taken in pursuance of the ordinance.
Table Two: Number of Ordinances Issued in Certain Years
A not-so-exceptional occurrence Even though the power of the President to issue ordinances is, in the nature of things, exceptional in terms of the doctrine of separation of powers, since the coming into existence of the Parliament of India in 1952 until now there has been only one year (1963) when no ordinances were issued. In the first year itself, nine ordinances were issued. The number of ordinances has waxed and waned over the years. But, as Table 2 demonstrates, there have years when ordinances have had a field day, making legislative powers
1971 23
“There have been instances when ordinances have lapsed either on account of a lack of consensus on the legislative matter or because the Bill to replace the ordinance was referred to a standing committee. ” of the Parliament look somewhat redundant. The issuing of such a large number of ordinances in these years is, to say the least, a sad commentary on parliamentary oversight of the executive. It shows that in those years the Parliament, to a certain extent, relinquished its legislative authority in favour of the executive. The judiciary too, in terms of the scheme of the Constitution of India, cannot enquire into the motives of the
YEAR NUMBER OF ORDINANCES ISSUED
1975 29 1992 21 1993 34 1996 32 1997 31 1998 20
government in issuing ordinances or question the propriety of issuing them. It can intervene only if an ordinance is ultra vires the legislative powers of the Parliament or it is unconstitutional or the power has been exercised by the Executive in a mala fide or perverse manner. The provision in the Constitution of India regarding legislative powers of the President of India raises the issue of the integrity of the democratic process vis-à-vis executive expediency. It is no doubt true that in the context of the practice of the Indian Parliament, which does not continuously remain in session and is prorogued at the end of each of its three sessions (Budget, Monsoon and Winter), at times circumstances do exist which necessitate the promulgation of ordinances. However, it has been observed that very often the executive takes the ordinance route in order to bypass legitimate parliamentary procedures. This has become particularly prominent since 1993, when department-related parliamentary standing committees were constituted, inter alia, to examine and report on the Bills introduced in the Parliament. Since a Bill replacing an ordinance has to be approved by Parliament within six weeks of its re-assembly, the reference of a Bill to a standing
committee is either given a go-by or the matter is hustled through, since normally the standing committee is given three months to report and usually takes much more time. Juris prudent? The executive, whenever it is confident of mustering the requisite majority in both the Houses of Parliament and wants to exhibit its resolve to tackle a political or legislative problem, goes ahead with the promulgation of an ordinance. However, the road to legislation through the ordinance route is not always smooth. There have been instances when ordinances have lapsed either on account of a lack of consensus on the legislative matter or because the Bill to replace the ordinance was referred to a standing committee. Ultimately, it all boils down to how constitutional morality is perceived and practised by the stakeholders. Coming back to the law in question, it is a truism that an effective criminal justice system does not depend solely on strict laws. For the justice system to be not only effective but also to be seen as efficient, it should inter alia also ensure certainty and swiftness in the delivery of punishment. The quantum of punishment is thus only one of the elements of an effective criminal justice system.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 135
Agnihotri.indd 135
16/08/2013 11:25:46
IMPROVING THE STANDARD OF LIVING
Grassroots development: improving the lives of the sri lankan people A new approach to development in Sri Lanka unites three separate government authorities to facilitate small-scale family and community initiatives to grow the Sri Lankan economy from the bottom up, say Ministers.
Mr Neil Iddawala
Mr Iddawala is the Deputy Secretary General Parliament of Sri Lanka. A lawyer, he worked previously in the judicial service.
Mr Neil Iddawala
A unique development strategy, the “Divineguma Bill” (Life Upliftment), was presented to Parliament by the Minister of Economic Development, Hon. Basil Rajapaksa, MP. In accordance with Sri Lanka’s key policy document, “Mahinda Chintana – Vision for the Future” it was presented in order to establish the Department of Divineguma Development by amalgamating the Samurdhi (Prosperous) Authority, Southern Development Authority and the Udarata (upcountry) Development Authority of Sri Lanka. This Act is designed to empower 1.8 million poor families in all parts of
the country to overcome economic difficulties in the government’s attempt to realize the aim of making “Sri Lanka the miracle of Asia”, while eliminating poverty in the country. The Bill, which was previously much debated in Parliament and challenged in the Supreme Court, was finally passed in Parliament with more than a two-thirds majority on 8 January 2013. The Act aims to establish Divineguma community-based organizations with the voluntary participation of Divinegurna beneficiaries to provide for a co-ordinating network at the district and national level. Moreover, supervising, monitoring and evaluating the functions of such organizations at regional level will be carried out by the Divineguma regional organizations. Similarly, Divineguma District Committees will be established representing all regional organizations functional within a district. In addition, Divineguma community-based banking societies will be established comprising of all Divineguma banks within the area of authority of each regional organization, in order to
establish a viable micro-financial banking network at regional level. The programme is based on the concept of “People initiate; government facilitate”, thus ensuring peoples’ participation from the bottom to the top in the development process. It also enhances the active role of civil society in good governance policies. The major purpose is to create a healthy and economically empowered strong domestic unit in several phases. Other core objectives of the programme include: alleviating poverty in order to ensure social equity, promoting economic development activities focusing on individuals, groups and families, and ensuring food security for all. Thus it is apparent that the Divineguma Development Department aims to ensure that all people are beneficiaries of economic advancement aimed at achieving economic prosperity for the betterment of all citizens. Implementing Divineguma The Divineguma Programme will be implemented under several sectors including: agriculture, livestock and
136 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Iddawala.indd 136
19/08/2013 12:26:46
IMPROVING THE STANDARD OF LIVING
Core objectives of the programme include alleviating poverty and ensuring food security for all.
fisheries, industries and marketing. As per the new regulations enacted through the Divineguma Act, the accomplishments of the Divineguma Programme through the above sectors are many and varied. The agricultural sector promotes the participation of urban as well as rural people in home gardening including fruits and vegetables. Thus, the improvement of people’s nutritional intake is expected which in turn would reduce malnutrition while ensuring food security. It also saves money by preventing unnecessary household expenditure used to buy food items from the market. An additional income will also be generated by selling the surplus production thus giving rise to an economically empowered family unit. The environmentally friendly nature of the agricultural sector is reflected as it encourages the use of organic manure and crop diversification. The livestock sector, on the other hand, gives prominence to the distribution of chickens, goats and pigs and preparation of cattle sheds et cetera. A variety of fsheries projects are also in the process of being implemented by the Ministry
of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, with the financial resources allocated to projects such as breeding in fresh water ponds. The industrial sector is also engaged in providing training to selected artisans in order to improve the family economy by providing financial and technical incentives to commence village industries. It is expected that it would boost household income while upgrading quality of life. Moreover, it will create small scale entrepreneurs in the villages while developing their technical and entrepreneurial skills contributing to social capital. The promotion of the concept of selfemployment enhances particularly the contribution of women towards the country’s gross production. Features of the Act include the introduction of new regulations that draw on the three institutions: the Samurdhi Authority, Southern Development Authority and the Udarata Development Authority. The introduction of micro financial assistance as a poverty alleviation model is another prominent aspect of the Act. During the debate, Hon. Dinesh
Gunawardena, MP, Minister of Water Supply and Drainage, said that the Divineguma Bill would enter into history by raising people’s living standards while ensuring social justice. It would also strengthen the economy of Samurdhi beneficiary families, and result in the majority of people reaping the benefits of economic development. The Human Resources Development Senior Minister, Hon. D.E.W. Gunasekera, MP, said:“This Bill has been discussed widely in the country. This will join three institutions. All Provincial Councils except the Northern Provincial Council approved the Bill. The amendments are all progressive ones. This Act has focused on the grassroots level people of the country”. Hon. Ranjith Madduma Bandara, MP, (United National Party) stated that “if this Bill is brought to eliminate poverty honestly, we support it. If this is a move to exploit people to gain political benefits, it is not fair. Do you implement any special programme under the Upcountry Development Authority to eliminate poverty? You have allocated only Rs 14,000 million for 2013 to eliminate poverty. Around
20 per cent of the people enjoy 57 per cent of the GDP. The Samurdhi recipients are the poorest people in the country. Eighty billion rupees has been saved by them in a bank, what are you going to do with this money? I request you to implement this project without considering party differences to eliminate poverty.” The Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning, Hon. Dr Sarath Amunugama, MP, added that poverty would be further reduced with the implementation of the Divineguma Bill. He emphasized that a microcredit system for small-scale entrepreneurs to strengthen their businesses and start new ventures would also be implemented. The Divineguma Bill would also bring all institutions together to work towards the development of the country. Economic Development Minister Rajapaksa, in replying at the end of the debate said that “Samurdhi officers will be entitled to get their pension with the passage of this Bill. We take all measures to provide benefits for the people, though various groups go before courts not once but 100 times. This Act never grabs the power of the people; but this is the first time that the Minister’s power is given to them. “The people who attempted to prevent the power being given to the people say they are happy as they too contributed to provide power for the people. “We have never taken the power of Provincial Councils through this Bill. But going beyond the provincial councils, we have taken measures to give power to the people. I expected that the opposition would suggest positive amendments, but ‘no’. The communist parties in the government and the Muslim Congress made some suggestions. We add those possible ones. I thank all who supported this Bill”. The Leader of the House, Minister Hon. Nimal Siripala de Silva, MP, asked for a division by name. One hundred and fifty nine voted in favour, while 43 Members voted against the Bill.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 137
Iddawala.indd 137
19/08/2013 12:26:56
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.
The Budget Process.indd 138
16/08/2013 17:19:18
Parliamentary Report
NEWS AND LEGISLATION FROM COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTS AUSTRALIA: Crimes Legislation Amendment (Slavery, Slavery-like Conditions and People Trafficking) Act 2013 Page 143
BRITISH COLUMBIA: Provincial Sales Tax Transitional Page 147
INDIA: The Banking Laws (Amendment) Bill 2011 Page 151
INDIA: The Prevention of MoneyLaundering Bill Page 152
NEW ZEALAND: The Minimum Wage (Startingout Wage) Amendment Bill Page 157
NEW ZEALAND: The Student Land Scheme Amendment Bill Page 158
COMMONWEALTH DAY AND THE commonwealth charter Page 140
A NEW LEADER FOR THE CANADIAN LIBERAL PARTY
LAW STRENGTHENED FOR WOMEN’S SAFETY
ELECTION OF SPEAKER OF THE N.Z. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Page 147
Page 150
Page 156
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 139
Parliamentary News.indd 139
19/08/2013 13:23:22
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
UNITED KINGDOM
Commonwealth Day and the Commonwealth Charter
On 11 March, Commonwealth Day, the Her Majesty The Queen signed the Commonwealth Charter. In Westminster the occasion was marked by the laying of the Charter before both Houses of Parliament and a debate in each House. The Charter sets out the values of the Commonwealth and was agreed by Heads of Government on 14 December 2012. The House of Commons debate took place in Westminster Hall on 14 March. Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP, (Conservative), Chair of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association U.K. Braqnch, opened the debate stressing the importance of the
Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP
Commonwealth’s voluntary nature and of its young people: “The modern Commonwealth is not a British Commonwealth; it is the Commonwealth of nations, in which there should, indeed, be parity of esteem. It is an example of countries slowly edging together, towards wider circles of understanding and
Lord Wallace of Saltaire
co-operation, beginning to see that there are opportunities that were perhaps not recognized 10, 20 or 30 years ago. The Commonwealth embraces one third of the world’s population, and half of the population of the Commonwealth is under 25. We should be particularly concerned about that young section. The Commonwealth must have meaning for them.” The House of Lords debate took place a week earlier on 7 March. The Government Spokesman, Lord Wallace of Saltaire (Liberal Democrat), opened the debate by telling the House: “A strong Commonwealth is important to the national interests of all its member states. It can help us to promote democratic values, good governance and prosperity. This is no longer the British Commonwealth but a network of like-minded nations with shared history, values and interests within which the U.K. plays an active and leading role.” He talked of the values of the
Charter and of the importance of ensuring that they are respected by all Members. In particular he dwelt on the need for reform of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) and spoke of the value of the Commonwealth’s “unique network of networks”. These themes were further developed by the Minister for the Commonwealth, Rt Hon. Hugo Swire, MP, (Conservative), in responding to the Commons debate. He praised CMAG’s work in relation to the crisis in the Maldives and spoke of the
Rt Hon. Hugo Swire, MP
need to make its voice stronger. He spoke of the importance of the Charter: “[It is] a major milestone in the promotion of democratic values across the Commonwealth. For the first time in its 64-year history, the Commonwealth has a single statement defining the core values for which it stands.” He also spoke of the need for the Commonwealth to “evolve constantly” to keep pace with
140 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 140
19/08/2013 13:23:36
UNITED KINGDOM change in the modern world. In particular he talked about the
Rt Hon. Baroness Royall of Blaisdon need to focus on trade with the Commonwealth, building on and strengthening “our shared principles of democracy, the rule of law, good governance and our similar legal systems”. He concluded by reiterating the United Kingdom’s commitment to the Commonwealth and looked ahead to the Commonwealth Games, to be held in Glasgow in 2014. Speaking for the Opposition in the Lords, the Shadow Leader of the House of Lords, Rt Hon. Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Lab), welcomed the Charter as providing the opportunity for radical reform: “The Charter provides an opportunity for the Commonwealth to restate its role in a fast-changing world, but for that opportunity to be truly grasped, the core values and principles have to be adhered to. It is a voluntary association of independent, sovereign states
Rt Hon. Lord Howe of Aberavon
which celebrate diversity while sharing history and traditions; we share a culture but have many cultural differences. However, those differences must not be allowed to override our shared respect for human rights.” She went on to question why, in the 21st century “the Commonwealth still tolerates not only the criminalization of homosexuality in many Commonwealth countries” but also the provision of the death penalty for homosexual acts in some countries. Speaking in the Commons debate on the same theme, Ms Kerry McCarthy, MP, (Lab), welcomed statements made by Caribbean leaders against discrimination against homosexuals and the statements in the Charter about gender equality, but pressed
Rt Hon. Lord Howell of Guildford the Government on what more it would do to pursue these agendas. Both debates included contributions from former Ministers. In the House of Lords, the former Minister for the Commonwealth, Rt Hon. Lord Howell of Guildford (Con), described the Commonwealth as a “family”. He spoke of a “practical vision” of the United Kingdom’s future prosperity and destiny lying in the ready-made networks and commonalities between Commonwealth countries. The former Foreign Secretary, Rt Hon. Lord Howe of Aberavon (Con),
spoke of “the Commonwealth as a collective organization, supporting, encouraging, offering up advocacy of the right course of events, underlines to me the extent of the value of the
to human rights. Views varied as to whether the U.K. government should attend the meeting, with several Members citing the Foreign Affairs Select Committee’s view that the Prime Minister should not attend unless there were “convincing and independently-verified evidence of substantial and sustainable improvements in human and political rights in Sri Lanka”. At the time of the debates, no decision had been taken. However, the government subsequently announced that the Prime Minister would be attending CHOGM.
Ms Kerry McCarthy, MP
Commonwealth declaration today”. Mr Henry Bellingham, MP, (Con), former Minister for Africa and the Overseas Territories, told the Commons that Commonwealth GDP would overtake European Union GDP by 2015 and dwelt on the links between Commonwealth countries and the Overseas territories. Members of both Houses raised areas where they thought Commonwealth countries could do more to live up to the values of the Charter. The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Williams of Oystermouth (CrossBench), questioned whether visa requirements in relation to students and eminent people visiting the United Kingdom from Commonwealth countries were too stringent, arguing that “current situation maximises the possibilities of embarrassment and unfairness”. Whist Members such as Mr Simon Hughes MP, (Liberal Democrat), Mr Mike Gapes, MP, (Labour) and the Earl of Sandwich (Cross-bench) expressed concern that the holding of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (CHOGM) in Sri Lanka could undermine the perception of the Commonwealth’s commitment
Royal Charter on Press Regulation On 18 March the Prime Minister made an application for an emergency debate in the House of Commons under Standing Order 24. The Standing Order, usually used by backbench Members to force debates on urgent matters or to raise urgent constituency concerns, was invoked to allow the House to debate a cross-party agreement on press regulation that had been reached over the weekend.
Mr Simon Hughes, MP
Press regulation had been a source of controversy in both Houses since the publication of Lord Justice Leveson’s report on the subject in November 2012. In the months leading up to 18 March, Peers had forced the issued by inserting amendments – tabled by the Labour Peer Lord
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 141
Parliamentary News.indd 141
19/08/2013 13:23:50
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
UNITED KINGDOM
Prime Minister Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP, (left) and Deputy Prime Minister Rt Hon. Nick Clegg, MP.
Puttnam – into the Defamation Bill to provide for statutory regulation of the press. Amendments had also been inserted into the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill. On the afternoon of 18 March, amendments to the Crime and Courts Bill providing for statutory regulation were due to be debated. Opening the emergency debate, the Prime Minister, Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP, (Con), told the House: “My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and I have today reached cross-party agreement on a royal charter that will help deliver a new system of independent and robust press regulation in our country. As Lord Justice Leveson recommended, we need a system of tough, independent self-regulation that will deliver for victims and meet the principles set out in his report. This system will ensure
Rt Hon. Edward Milliband, MP
up-front apologies, million-pound fines, a self-regulatory body with independence of appointments and funding, a robust standards code, an arbitration service that is free for victims and a speedy complaint-handling mechanism.” The Prime Minister set out the terms of the agreement. He reminded the House that Lord Leveson had recommended that the press should establish a new regulatory body but that there should be a further body to oversee it. Lord Leveson had proposed that OfCom should be given powers in statute to fulfil that secondary role. The Prime Minster said that he had always had concerns about this proposal. Instead, this “recognition body” would be established by Royal Charter. Two changes would be made in legislation – first to establish “a system of exemplary costs and damages” that would only apply to newspapers that did not participate in the regulatory scheme. Secondly, the Royal Charter itself would only be able to be altered by a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament. The Prime Minister argued that this did not amount to statutory regulation of the press and that it was important that the principle of a free press was maintained. The required amendments would be made to the Crime and Courts Bill and the three parties had agreed to remove the other amendments
from the others Bills. Supporting the motion, the Leader of the Opposition, Rt. Hon Edward Milliband, MP, (Lab), said: “First…the new regulator will be independent of the press. Secondly, it is a regulator with teeth, with the powers to direct apologies and corrections of equal prominence. That matters because we know the history: a front-page story that turns someone’s life upside down, followed by an apology buried in the small print on page 36. Thirdly, this system will endure, because of the statutory underpinning being considered in another place today, which will protect the system from being tampered with
Ms Caroline Lucas, MP
by Ministers or watered down.” He told the House that the agreement which had been reached was a victory for the victims of phone hacking who had campaigned against the
abuses of some in the press and he acknowledged “the vast majority of decent, law-abiding journalists, who want to get back to doing their job”. Speaking for the Liberal Democrats, the Deputy Prime Minister, Rt Hon. Nick Clegg, MP, also welcomed the deal. Like the Leader of the Opposition he set out the three aims that he believed the Charter achieved: “First, they must deliver the model of independent selfregulation set out by Lord Justice Leveson; secondly, they must command the widest possible cross-party support, which Lord Justice Leveson also said was critical, and thirdly, they must strike the right balance between protecting the great tradition of a free press in this country and also protecting innocent people from unwarranted intimidation and bullying by powerful interests in our media. Let us not forget that the hacking scandal was caused by some of our biggest newspapers, but it was still a minority of newspapers and certainly not the local and regional press, which must not pay the price for a problem they did not create.” Some Members, like Ms Caroline Lucas, MP, (Green), expressed some concern that the proposal did not address specific issues – in her case “the endemic sexism that is sadly very present in the British press today”. Others, like Hon. Jacob Rees-Mogg, MP, (Con), saw the introduction of the Charter as introducing “the risk of increasing state power over our media, leading not immediately to direct censorship but to self-censorship, which we are already seeing with the being press reluctant to criticize the great and the good”. However, the overwhelming majority of those who spoke in the debate welcomed the agreement and the first of the amendment to the Crime and Courts Bill was later passed by 530 votes to 13.
142 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 142
19/08/2013 13:24:02
AUSTRALIA
Prime Minister survives FIRST leadership challenge
Hon. Julia Gillard, MP
On 21 March, amid plunging opinion polls for the government, the then Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government, Hon. Simon Crean, MP, challenged leadership of the Prime Minister, Hon. Julia Gillard, MP,. The Prime Minister fronted question time and indicated that Mr Crean had been sacked and that she would be holding a ballot for the position of Leader and Deputy Leader at 4.30 p.m. She then invited the Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Tony Abbott, MP, to “take his best shot”. Mr Abbott asked the Prime Minister whether she agreed with the Minister for Regional Australia “that the government is in deadlock and no longer capable of discharging its duty to the Australian people”. Ms Gillard disputed the position and elaborated on the achievements of her government. The leadership ballot resulted in the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, Hon. Wayne Swan, MP, being re-elected
unopposed. In what appeared to be confusion within the Rudd camp, Mr Rudd refused to nominate for the leadership declaring that he was available only if he was called upon unopposed. In February 2012 Mr Rudd lost a leadership contest to Ms Gillard 31 votes to 71. [A report on Mr Rudd’s successful June challenge appears in Issue Three.]
Ms Gillard said concerning her colleagues that ‘I accept their continuing support of me as Prime Minister and Labor Leader, with a sense of deep humility and a sense of resolve. I never sought office for its own sake; I have only ever sought office in the interests of the nation, and to assist our nation to prepare to meet the challenges of the future’. Following the leadership
contest, a group of senior Ministers and party Whips resigned including the Minister for Tertiary Education and the Minister for Small Business, Hon. Chris Bowen, MP, the Minister for Human Services, Sen. the Hon. Kim Carr, and the Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Hon. Richard Marles, MP. The government Whips
THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Crimes Legislation Amendment (Slavery, Slavery-like Conditions and People Trafficking) Act 2013 This Act amends the Criminal Code Act 1995 to insert offences of forced labour, forced marriage, organ trafficking and harbouring a victim, and ensures the slavery offence applies to conduct which renders a person a slave, as well as conduct involving a person who is already a slave. The then Attorney-General Hon. Nicola Roxon, MP, noted that with this legislation the “Gillard Labor government is protecting vulnerable women and children and, in some cases, men from trafficking and slavery”. Ms Roxon commented that “people traffickers recruit, transport, transfer, harbour or receive their victims through force, coercion or other means in order to exploit them. This is the modern-day face of slavery. A common factor of contemporary slavery and trafficking—from forced labour and forced marriage to organ trafficking—is the misuse and abuse of power. And such an abuse has no place here in Australia”. Ms Roxon noted that ‘fortunately, slavery and people trafficking are not common in Australia, but the effect on victims is traumatic and can have lifelong consequences”. In relation to forced marriage, Ms Roxon stated that “as Australia’s first female Attorney-General, I am proud to
be introducing legislation which makes forcing someone into a marriage illegal. It is a serious matter and should be treated as such. Marriage should be a happy event, entered into freely between consenting adults”. The Shadow Attorney-General Sen. the Hon. George Brandis SC noted that “although these offences are described as new, most amount to definitional changes to existing offences in divisions 270 and 271 of the Criminal Code. The important new offences concern the expanded definition of servitude, organ trafficking and forced marriage”. Senator Brandis commented that “organ trafficking is currently covered, though not exclusively, by the human trafficking provisions. These amendments have the support of the coalition and it is to be hoped that the cases to which they will apply will be extremely rare”. In relation to organ trafficking, Senator Brandis stated that “there appears to have been only one discontinued investigation in Australia, although it is estimated that globally up to 15,000 kidneys are bought and sold illegally each year. The trade is allegedly substantial in China, Pakistan, Egypt, Colombia and the Philippines”. In relation to forced marriage, Senator Brandis noted that “according to some estimates, there may be up to 1,000 forced marriages a year involving Australians and it appear to be a growing problem.”
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 143
Parliamentary News.indd 143
19/08/2013 13:24:13
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
including Hon. Joel Fitzgibbon, MP, Ms Jill Hall, MP, and Mr Ed Husic, MP, all resigned. The Minister for Resources and Energy, Hon. Martin Ferguson, MP, resigned stating that “I was worried about where we were heading from an electoral point of view. For those reasons I would have voted for Kevin Rudd yesterday, and Simon Crean, to try and give this party a fresh start”. Mr Ferguson commented that “I touch on today the need for the Labor Party to reclaim the mantra of the Hawke and Keating governments to govern for all Australians. The class war that started with the mining dispute of 2010 must stop.” On 25 March Ms Gillard announced her new Ministry. Some of her existing senior Ministers took on additional duties as a result of the resignations. The current Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Hon. Anthony Albanese, MP, took on Mr Ferguson’s responsibilities for Regional Development and Local Government. Similarly, the Minister for Trade and Competitiveness, Hon. Craig Emerson, MP, took on Mr Bowen’s responsibilities for Tertiary Education, Skills, Science and Research. Mr Emerson was to be supported by Sen. the Hon. Don Farrell who became Minister for Science and Research and Minister Assisting on Tourism. Sen. the Hon. Jan McLucas was appointed Minister for Human Services. Hon. Catherine King, MP, was promoted to the Outer Ministry as Minister for Regional Service and Minister for Road Safety. Hon. Gary Gray, MP, joined the Cabinet as Minister for Resources and Energy, Minister for Tourism. The House of Representatives was to be dissolved on 12 August with an election scheduled for 14 September 2013.
AUSTRALIA Australian federal dudget 2013 On 15 May 2013 the Treasurer, Hon. Wayne Swan, MP, delivered the sixth budget of the Labor government. Mr Swan noted that in a period of challenging global conditions, Australia’s taxation receipts are expected to fall by over $60
Hon. Wayne Swan, MP
billion over the four years to 2015-16. Mr Swan stated that “powerful global forces and the stubbornly high Australian dollar have savaged budget revenues”. Mr Swan advised that “this year we face the second largest revenue write down since the Great Depression”. As a result the underlying cash deficit is expected to be $18 billion in 2013-14. The deficit falls over the forward estimates, and the underlying cash balance is expected to reach balance in 2015-16 and surplus in 2016-17. Mr Swan stated that “because of our deep commitment to jobs and growth we have taken the responsible course to delay the return to surplus and due to a savage hit to tax receipts there will be a deficit of $18 billion in 2013-14, because we put jobs and growth first”. The current budget projections are in sharp contrast to the same time last year when Mr Swan reported that the Budget would return to a $1.5 billion surplus in 2012-13. At that time, Mr Swan stated that “the deficit years of the global recession are behind us.
The surplus years are here”. Notwithstanding the longer time required to reach a budget surplus, the budget papers noted that the Australian economy continues to outperform most of the developed world and prospects remain favourable, with an outlook of solid growth, low unemployment and contained inflation. Mr Swan reported that real GDP growth is forecast at 2.75 per cent in 2013-14 and three per cent in 2014-15. Over the same period the consumer price index is forecast to remain stable at about 2.25 per cent. In 201314 unemployment is forecast at 5.75 per cent. Mr Swan advised that the economy is undergoing transition with the resource investment boom shifting to a boom in production and exports. In seeking to make the economy more productive, Mr Swan commented that “we are transforming our nation’s schools by investing $9.8 billion in new school funding”. In addition, the government has committed a “new $24 billion investment in the next wave of nation building infrastructure”. In relation to social reform, Mr Swan noted that the government was proud to establish Disability Care Australia and the National Disability Insurance Scheme. On 16 May Mr Abbott gave his address in reply to the Budget speech. He emphasized that Australia was a great country where people in various areas of endeavour were competing on the world stage. He noted that “we are a great country and a great people let down by a bad government”. He stated that a “coalition government will do what’s needed to restore the hope, reward and opportunity that should be your birthright”. In relation to specific commitments, Mr Abbott stated that the carbon tax and the minerals resource rent tax would be abolished. When the Labor government introduced the carbon price
mechanism it also introduced a compensation scheme comprising tax cuts and pension increases to offset the increased prices arising from the carbon price. Mr Abbott committed to retaining “the current income tax thresholds and the current pension and benefit fortnightly rates while scrapping the carbon tax”. Mr Abbott stated that “with a change of government, your weekly and fortnightly budgets will be under less pressure as electricity prices fall and gas prices fall and the carbon tax no longer cascades through our economy”. Mr Abbott confirmed that the coalition would not continue the twice a year supplementary allowance to people on benefits “because it is supposed to be funded from the mining tax and the mining tax is not raising any revenue”. For the same reason the coalition would scrap the low income superannuation contribution. In addition, the Mr Abbott announced that the coalition would delay by two years the ramp up in the compulsory superannuation guarantee. Mr Abbott stated that “these
Hon. Catherine King, MP
measures alone will produce nearly $5 billion a year in savings which is more than enough for tax cuts without a carbon tax”. In relation to Labor’s budget and the planned budget cuts, Mr Abbott noted that due to Labor’s poor management over five years, “there is now a
144 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 144
19/08/2013 13:24:30
AUSTRALIA budget emergency”. He stated that “hence the coalition may decide not to oppose any of them; does not commit to reverse any of them; and reserves the option to implement all of them, in government, as short-term emergency measures to deal with the budget crisis Labor has created”. The Australian Greens criticized the budget, noting that it “will make Australia weaker, dumber and meaner”. Greens Leader Sen. Christine Milne said “this is demonstrated by slashing funding to universities and renewable energy, failing to support single parents and the unemployed and delaying, for the second time, our commitment to increase foreign aid to 0.5 per cent of GNI until 2017”. Sen. Milne commented that “all of this could have been avoided if Labor had the backbone to stand up to the big mining companies and abolish fossil fuel subsidies and fix the mining tax. This year the mining tax collected a shocking $200 million, down from the promised $3 billion”. Western Australia: Bills affect parliamentary privilege In the last few months of sitting in 2012, Western Australia’s Legislative Council passed two Bills that included provisions impacting upon parliamentary privilege. The Evidence and Public Interest Disclosure Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 contained provisions that established a series of mandatory steps to be taken, and specific factors to be taken into consideration, in any proceeding conducted by “a person acting judicially” where a witness who is a journalist has declined to disclose a confidential source of information. The Western Australian government indicated that it was of the view that both the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly of the state
THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 The Act establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme by setting out the objects and principles of the scheme. People with disability will be given choice and control over the care and support they receive. The Prime Minister Hon. Julia Gillard, MP, commented that the legislation “will transform the lives of people with disability, their families and carers”. She noted that “it will bring an end to the tragedy of services denied or delayed and instead offer people with disability the care and support they need over their lifetimes”. In arguing the need for reform, the Prime Minister stated that “the risk of disability is universal, so our response must be universal. The only solution is therefore a nation-wide, demand-driven system of care tailored to the needs of each individual and established on a durable, long-term basis”. The scheme is ambitious because more than 400 000 Australians are living with a disability, and “because carers are required to stretch the bonds of obligation and kinship past breaking point”. The Prime Minister, in explaining the detail, noted that “the legislation is designed to ensure that people with disability can access reasonable and necessary supports, that there is an assurance of support over a person’s lifetime, and that the scheme remains sustainable over the long term”. The legislation “sets out a broad role for the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency to provide general supports to people with disability and their families”. Chapter Three of the legislation sets out the process for how to become a participant in the scheme, and how to develop a personal, goal-based plan with the agency and receive individualized supports. A person may make an access request to the agency to become a participant, and the CEO of the agency must determine whether they meet the access criteria. The Prime Minister noted that “the legislation is designed to allow participants and their families to choose how their funding for supports under a plan is managed. It also sets out how a participant’s plan may be reviewed over time to take into account the participant’s changing circumstances”. The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Tony Abbott, MP, rose to support the legislation noting that the “coalition has consistently supported the National Disability Insurance Scheme”. Mr Abbott stated that “quite often in this chamber, I am accused of a relentless negativity. It is always unfair, but in this case it is false—because when it comes to the National Disability Insurance
Scheme, I am Dr Yes. I always have been, always will be”. Mr Abbott, however, noted that the scheme is a work in progress with many questions remaining. Mr Abbott commented that “much of the design work, indeed, is yet to be completed. We still do not know who will be eligible for the NDIS. We do not know what is covered by the NDIS. We do not know the extent of coverage by the NDIS. We do not know the precise role of the states in the operations of the NDIS, if any. Indeed, the very nature of the scheme itself is yet to be determined. Is it to be a scheme such as Medicare? Is it to be, in effect, Medicare for people with disabilities? Or is it to resemble more closely the workers compensation schemes or the state traffic accident schemes, which are genuine insurance schemes?” Mr Abbott commented that “in the end, for this scheme to successfully come to fruition for the mighty benefit of people with disabilities throughout our country, it cannot simply reflect Labor values; it cannot simply reflect Liberal values. It must reflect national values. It must reflect the values that are held deep by members on both sides of this chamber, values that are common to members of all Parliaments right around our country. It has to be a national scheme”. To ensure that the scheme succeeds, Mr Abbott called for a “bipartisan parliamentary committee, co-chaired by relevant frontbenchers—so that this scheme can indeed be shepherded from the early days to its completion through this Parliament and through the other Parliaments that need to work together if it is to succeed”. Mr Abbott asserted that it was the coalition that could best be relied on to deliver the scheme. He stated that “the party that you can best trust to deliver a national disability insurance scheme is the party that you can most trust to deliver strong economic growth. I would put it to you, Madam Deputy Speaker Rishworth, and through you to the Australian people, that such a party is the coalition”. Senator Rachel Siewert, Australian Greens, welcomed the legislation noting that it “will help ensure that people living with a disability will receive more comprehensive support in their everyday lives”. She stated that “this legislation provides a once in a lifetime opportunity to confront powerlessness and move towards transformative change by giving much greater choice and control to the individual and providing packages of support that focus on meeting the aspirations of the individual by providing the necessary supports to help them live, work and participate in their own communities”.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 145
Parliamentary News.indd 145
19/08/2013 13:24:41
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
Parliament and their committees fall within the broad definition of “a person acting judicially”. The Bill raised issues regarding both the clarity of language required to apply legislation to parliamentary proceedings and the desirability of regulating parliamentary proceedings in the same manner (and by the very same provisions) that courts and tribunals are regulated. It is significant that although the Bill was based on national model “shield” laws, its purported application to parliamentary proceedings was unique to Western Australia. The Bill was referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and Privileges and was the subject of a number of legal opinions from the State Counsel, Mr George Tannin, SC, and prominent barrister, Mr Bret Walker, SC. The government subsequently amended the Bill to clearly remove any application to parliamentary proceedings. The Legislative Council currently has before it a draft standing order that seeks to implement the broad policy aim of providing some protection to journalists who appear as witnesses in the Council’s proceedings, while preventing any impact on parliamentary privilege or exposing such proceedings to the possibility of judicial review. The Criminal Investigation (Covert Powers) Bill was the second Bill that appeared to adversely impact on parliamentary privilege. Again, it effectively sought to regulate parliamentary proceedings in the same manner as court proceedings. The Bill expressly defined “court” to include any committee or other body established by the Parliament of Western Australia. The Bill had the policy aim of ensuring that the identities of certain participants in covert investigation activities were not disclosed by their involvement
AUSTRALIA as witnesses in any “court” proceedings. The Bill had implications for parliamentary committees, particularly those investigating the misconduct of Members or matters of privilege generally. Again, although the Bill was based on a national model law, the Western Australian government had introduced unique provisions that purported to apply the Bill to parliamentary committee proceedings. Interestingly, the Bill only purported to apply to committee proceedings and not to proceedings in the House (where such disclosures would appear to be just as likely to occur). The Clerk of the Legislative Council obtained legal advice from Mr Walker which indicated that parliamentary Members and staff could find themselves subject to criminal prosecution under the enacted Bill for disclosures during or arising from committee proceedings. The Bill was subsequently heavily amended by the government so as to clearly separate those provisions relating to parliamentary committee proceedings from those applying to courts and tribunals. The criminal offence provision relating to disclosures was also amended to exempt parliamentary proceedings from its operation. First Aboriginal Chief Minister The first Aboriginal person to become a state or territory Leader in Australia became Chief Minister in the Northern Territory on 13 March. Hon. Adam Giles, MLA, who had been Transport Minister, replaced Hon. Terry Mills, MLA, following a caucus vote among the ruling Country Liberal Party Members. The leadership change occurred seven months after the Country Liberal Party came into office at the August 2012 election
by winning 16 of the 25 Legislative Assembly seats. The Australian Labor Party has eight seats and there is one independent in the Legislative Assembly. In Victoria, a leadership change also took place when Premier Hon. Ted Baillieu, MP, resigned and was replaced by Hon. Dr Denis Napthine, MP. Dr Napthine became Premier on 6 March. He was elected by the Liberal Party after Mr Baillieu resigned the leadership two and a half years after being elected Premier. Dr Napthine has been a member of the Victorian Parliament since 1988. He represented the electorate of Portland until it was abolished in the 2002 redistribution, and since 2002 he has been the Member for South-West Coast. Before being elected to office, he worked as a practicing veterinarian and in the Department of Agriculture. Dr Napthine has led the Victorian Liberal Party before, as Opposition Leader after the 1999 election, until he was succeeded as Opposition Leader by Hon. Robert Doyle, MP, and then Mr Baillieu. He has been responsible for a range of portfolios in opposition and in government. In the current Liberal-Nationals government he has been Minister for Ports, Racing, Regional Cities and Major Projects. On becoming Premier, Dr Napthine said “Ted Baillieu certainly has served the state very well. He has served the Liberal party extraordinarily well and he can be very, very proud of his achievements. I am honoured and proud to say that he is not just a colleague, he is a great friend. And I want to pay tribute to Ted, Robin and his family. “It is my task to build on the great work and the great foundation that Ted Baillieu and his team provided for this government — to build on the task where we have delivered a sound economic management, a
triple A status and it is one of the only states and territories that has triple A status and maintained that status”. Dr Napthine leads a minority government after a Liberal MP left the party to sit as an independent. The Liberals have 34 seats in the Assembly and the Nationals 10 to Labor’s 43 with one independent. In the Legislative Council, the Liberals have 18 seats, the Nationals three, Labor 15 and the Greens three. Liberal Party secures majority vote in Western Australia The state general election took place on 9 March 2013 after the Parliament had been prorogued on 14 December 2012. It was the first election to take place pursuant to amendments to the electoral legislation establishing fixed four-year terms for each Parliament. The Liberal-National alliance government was returned at the election. With an almost nine percent state-wide swing in voting towards it, the Liberal Party secured enough seats to have a majority in its own right in the Legislative Assembly (31 of the 59 seats), whereas in the previous Parliament it had been part of a minority government that was reliant on the support of both the National Party and independents. The Liberal Party, however, still requires the support of the National Party in the 36-seat Legislative Council. Prior to the election, Premier Hon. Colin Barnett, MLA, had reaffirmed the alliance between the two parties. Following the election both the National Party (five seats) and the Australian Labor Party (11 seats) have maintained their numbers in the Legislative Council. The Greens WA, however, lost two of their four seats, with one seat being picked up by the Liberal Party (17 seats) and one seat going to the recently formed Shooters and Fishers Party.
146 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 146
19/08/2013 13:24:53
CANADA
A New Leader FOR THE CANADIAN LIBERAL PARTY Liberal Leadership The Liberal Party of Canada suffered a historic electoral defeat in 2011 general election and was
relegated to third-party status for the first time in Canadian history. At that time, then-Leader Mr Michael Ignatieff stepped down,
and shortly thereafter, the Liberal caucus elected Mr Bob Rae, MP, to serve as interim leader. In October 2012, Mr Justin
Trudeau, MP, (Papineau) announced his intention to run for Leader of the Liberal Party, and officially launched his
THIRD READING: BRITISH COLUMBIA Provincial Sales Tax Transitional Provisions and Amendments Act, 2013 Following a province-wide referendum, the government of British Columbia made a commitment to implement the results of the referendum and to extinguish the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST). The first step of this commitment was the introduction and passage in May 2012 of the Provincial Sales Tax Act (PST) which reinstated the seven per cent PST, effective 1 April 2013. The government also committed to releasing the final piece of enabling legislation in advance of the move back to PST in order to help businesses and consumers prepare for the reimplementation of the tax. To fulfil this second commitment, on 9 January 2013 the government publicly released a draft proposed consolidation of the PST legislation. As the House was not scheduled to sit before 12 February, the draft legislation, which included a consolidation of the Provincial Sales Tax Act passed in May 2012 along with draft proposed amendments, was shared with Members of the Legislative Assembly prior to being publicly released. Official Opposition Finance critic Bruce Ralston criticized the government’s release of the draft legislation, stating that the government could have called the House back for a fall session and introduced the legislation in the House. With the resumption of the House, the government introduced Bill 2, Provincial Sales Tax, Transitional Provisions and Amendments Act, 2013 on 13 February 2013, completing the legislative requirements for the reintroduction of the PST. The Opposition had not supported the introduction of the HST and therefore supported its reversal in Bill 2, which passed without division and received third reading on 26 February 2013. Seniors’ Advocate Act Following public consultations conducted by the Ministry of Health in the spring and summer of 2012, and a related report by the Ombudsperson, the government introduced Bill 10, Seniors Advocate Act. This bill, introduced on February 20, 2013, provides for the appointment, responsibilities and powers of the Seniors Advocate, a public officer to be appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council. The advocate will
be responsible for monitoring the provision of services to seniors and for advocating the interests of seniors with respect to issues such as healthcare, housing and transportation. The position will also identify solutions to systemic issues facing seniors and make recommendations to government to improve the welfare of seniors. During second reading debate, Opposition Members were critical of the government’s initiative, advocating that the position should be independent of government in order to effect change, and that the appointment should be limited to a set term. Bill 10 passed on division on 14 March 2013 and British Columbia becomes the first jurisdiction in Canada to have a seniors advocate. Justice Reform and Transparency Act Introduced on 26 February 2013, Bill 15, Justice Reform and Transparency Act, had its genesis in a government-initiated review of BC’s justice system undertaken by lawyer Geoffrey Cowper. As recommended in Mr Cowper’s report, the legislation establishes a justice and public safety council to provide a focal point for justice system strategy, reform, performance-planning and reporting. The council will be responsible for examining and suggesting improvements to the functioning of the justice system, developing an annual plan with performance measures and yearly progress reports. The legislation also requires a justice summit be held at least once a year to encourage innovation and facilitate collaboration across the sector. Included in the legislation are amendments to the Provincial Court Act and Supreme Court Act to allow for more effective judicial administration of the courts in British Columbia. In addition, the legislation gives the director of police services the authority to set standards respecting the collection, disclosure and analysis of information regarding the administration and management of policing. Opposition Members voiced their skepticism regarding the timing of the Bill’s introduction during the week prior to a provincial general election and questioned how the reforms would be implemented during a time of budgetary restraint. Despite their misgivings, Bill 15 received third reading on 11 March 2013.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 147
Parliamentary News.indd 147
19/08/2013 13:25:05
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
CANADA
Former Canadian Prime Minister Rt Hon. Pierre Elliot Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, with his wife in 1979.
campaign. Over the next several months, seven other candidates announced their campaigns: David Bertschi; Martha Hall Findlay; Karen McCrimmon; Joyce Murray, MP, (Vancouver Quadra); Marc Garneau, MP, (WestmountVille-Marie); George Takach, and Martin Cauchon. On 14 April 2013, Mr Trudeau swept 80 per cent of the leadership Convention vote among the final field of six candidates and was declared leader of the Liberal Party. Mr Trudeau has served as a Member of Parliament for the riding of Papineau since 2008. He was a teacher prior to entering federal politics. His father, Rt. Hon. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, served as the 15th Prime Minister of Canada, from 1968-1979, and again from 1980-1984. In the new Leader’s speech following his election, he alluded to his father’s legacy in Canadian history, stating,
“I don’t care if you thought my father was great or arrogant. It doesn’t matter to me if you were a
Mr Justin Trudeau, MP
Chretien-Liberal, a Turner-Liberal, a Martin-Liberal or any other kind of Liberal. The era of hyphenated Liberals ends right here, tonight. From this day forward, we welcome all Liberals as Canadian Liberals. United in our dedication to serve and lead Canadians”. Since his win, publicly released
polls suggested that the Liberals made dramatic gains in national support, often surpassing support of the official opposition, the New Democratic Party, and the governing Conservative Party of Canada. Spotlight on the Senate The Senate has been in the spotlight since being plagued by allegations of misuse of travel and residential expenses. Holding its Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration announced it conducted an audit to assess “whether all senators’ declarations of primary and secondary residence are supported by sufficient documentation” in December 2012. Specifically, Senators Mike Duffy, Patrick Brazeau, and Mac Harb were under investigation regarding ineligible living
expenses while Senator Pamela Wallin was being investigated with regards to ineligible travel claims. All of their files were referred to an external auditor. On 9 May 2013, the Senate released the results of those outside audits and the Internal Economy Committee’s reports on Senators Brazeau, Duffy and Harb. In the report, the committee ordered Sen. Harb to repay $51,000 to the Senate. Sen. Harb consequently left the Liberal caucus and stated his intention to seek to overturn the committee’s findings. The report also ordered Sen. Brazeau to repay $48,000. Sen. Brazeau is currently sitting as an independent in the upper Chamber. Prior to this investigation, Sen. Brazeau had been expelled from the Conservative caucus following charges of assault and sexual assault that were laid against him
148 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 148
19/08/2013 13:25:21
CANADA by the Quebec Police in February 2013. Sen. Brazeau pleaded not guilty to both offences, and the legal proceedings are ongoing. Regarding the Senate expenses investigation, Sen. Brazeau claimed he complied with the Senate rules for housing expenses and has asked for a public hearing on his case. The report on Sen. Duffy’s expenses notes that he had already repaid $90,000 and did not owe Parliament any further payments. However, a week after the Internal Economy Committee’s report was released, a spokesman from the Prime Minsiter’s Office, Mr Andrew MacDougall, confirmed that the Prime Minister’s chief of staff, Mr Nigel Wright, had written a personal cheque for $90,172.24 to repay Sen. Duffy’s living expenses, and that the cheque was a gift. On 16 May 2013, Sen. Duffy resigned from the Conservative caucus and is currently sitting as an independent. Sen. Wallin’s audit is ongoing; however on 17 May 2013, she also recused herself from the Conservative caucus and now sits as an independent. Shortly following the intense media coverage surrounding revelations that he had written a $90,000 cheque to repay improperly claimed housing expenses for Sen. Duffy, Mr Wright resigned from his post. He issued a statement, stating that that the Prime Minister accepted his resignation and that he did not advise the Prime Minister of the means by which Senator Duffy’s expenses were repaid, either before or after the fact. The Prime Minister also informed the public that he had not been aware of his chief of staff’s activities regarding Sen. Duffy’s expenses until the media began reporting on the matter. Mr Ray Novak, Prime Minister Harper’s principal secretary, has since taken on the role as chief
of staff. On 4 June 2013, Sen. Marjory LeBreton, Leader of the Government in the Senate, announced her intention to introduce a motion in the Senate calling on Canada’s Auditor General to conduct a comprehensive audit of all Senate expenses. Legislation On 29 April 2013, the government introduced Bill C-60, Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1. The 128-page Bill makes hundreds of amendments to over 20 federal statutes. The Bill would also enact the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act, which allows for the amalgamation of the Department of Foreign Affairs
Ms Shelly Glover, MP
and International Trade Canada (DFAIT) and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). At second reading, on 1 May 2013, Conservative MP Ms Shelly Glover (Saint Boniface) stated: “Bill C-60 would implement key measures from the recent federal budget, economic action plan 2013, which is a positive and forward-looking blueprint to help grow the Canadian economy today and into tomorrow. This plan would make our economy stronger by helping our manufacturers buy new equipment with tax relief, help small businesses create more jobs with a hiring credit, help
rebuild our roads and bridges with record new support for infrastructure and much more.” Opposition MPs criticized the Bill for being too large-scale and argued that it should be broken down into a number of smaller bills. Finance Critic, MP Ms Peggy Nash (Parkdale-High Park) stated: “Bill C-60 includes a large variety of complex measures— from changes to the temporary foreign worker programme and the Investment Canada Act to the merger of DFAIT and CIDA. These are important issues that deserve thorough consideration and scrutiny, both here in Ottawa and in our communities from coast to coast to coast. Bill C-56, An Act to amend the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, (short title: Combating Counterfeit Products Act) was introduced in Parliament on 1 March 2013. The Bill amended the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act to add new civil and criminal remedies and new border measures to both Acts in order to strengthen the enforcement of copyright and trade-mark rights and to curtail commercial activity involving infringing copies and counterfeit trade-marked goods. On 31 May 2013, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, Mr Bernard Valcourt, introduced Bill C-62, an Act to give effect to the Yale First Nation Final Agreement and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. This legislation will ratify the Yale First Nation Final Agreement, made between Yale First Nation and the Province of British Columbia. “The introduction of this legislation demonstrates what can happen when parties work together toward a common objective and, more important, it brings the Yale First Nation one step closer to establishing a new
future for its community”, said Minister Valcourt. “This agreement brings economic benefits for all Canadians, and will give the Yale First Nation the tools and authority
Ms Peggy Nash, MP
to take control of its future.” Bill C-53, An Act to assent to alterations in the law touching the Succession to the Throne received Royal Assent on 27 March 2013. At the 2011 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), the 16 Realms for which Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is the Head of State agreed to change the rules governing the line of succession to the Throne. Each Realm was tasked with introducing legislation in their individual Legislatures. As a result, Bill C-53 was introduced in Canada by Justice Minister Hon. Rob Nicholson, MP, on 31 January 2013. The legislation confirms that Canada approves of ending the practice of placing male heirs ahead of their older sisters in the line of succession. The Bill also permits heirs to the throne who marry Roman Catholics to remain eligible in the line of succession Mr Nicholson stated that “these changes will ensure that the Crown evolves to reflect Canadian culture and values…. Canadians are proud of the crown and we are proud of this legislation”.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 149
Parliamentary News.indd 149
19/08/2013 13:25:33
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
INDIA
Law strengthened for Women’s Safety The 2013 Budget Session of Parliament commenced on 21 February with the Presidential Address to both Houses of Parliament assembled together
Smt. Meira Kumar
in the Central Hall of Parliament. One of the important Bills passed by Parliament related to providing stringent punishment for crimes against women. The second part of Parliament that began on 22 April, however, remained paralyzed as the opposition Members disrupted the proceedings demanding the resignation of two Ministers, one for the alleged involvement of his relative in allegedly corrupt practices relating to an appointment in his Ministry and the other for the censure made by the Supreme Court against a Minister for allegedly changing the investigation report of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on alleged irregularities in the allocation of coal blocks. With the House paralyzed, it was decided by the leaders to pass the Demands for Grants
(Railways) for 2013-14, Demands for Grants (General) for 2013-14, and the Finance Bill, 2013, without discussion in the meeting of the Speaker with the Members of the Business Advisory Committee. When the Speaker, Smt. Meira Kumar, MP, initiated the process for transacting financial business the next day, the Leader of the Opposition, Smt. Sushma Swaraj, MP, accused the government of being the most corrupt government since independence. She said that the opposition would not oppose the passing of finance related bills but would walk out of the House as it did not wish to be witness to its passing. The government had introduced the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012 on 4 December 2012 for providing stringent punishment for the offence of rape by amending the Indian Penal Code, 1860; the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The Bill was referred to the Departmentally Related Parliamentary Standing Committee (DRSC) on Home Affairs for examination and report. Following the tragic gang rape case of 16 December 2012 in Delhi, the government had set up a Committee under Justice J.S. Verma, to give recommendations on amending laws to provide justice and enhanced punishment for criminals in cases of sexual assault of an extreme nature. The Justice Verma Committee, in its report submitted on 23 January
2013, had suggested some additional provisions relating to other offences of human trafficking, sexual harassment, voyeurism, stalking, etc. The DRSC on Home Affairs also examined the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012 and tabled its report in Parliament on 1 March 2013. Keeping in view the recommendations of the DRSC on Home Affairs, the recommendations of Justice Verma Committee and the views and suggestions received from various quarters including women’s groups, the government
Smt. Sushma Swaraj, MP
brought the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013. As the Parliament was not in session and an urgent legislation was required to be made, the President of India promulgated the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2013 on 3 February 2013. As the promulgation of the Ordinance had rendered the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012 ineffective, the Minister of Home Affairs, Shri Sushilkumar
150 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 150
19/08/2013 13:25:46
INDIA Shinde, MP, moved the motion for the withdrawal of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012 and introduction of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013 to replace the Ordinance. With the leave of the House, the Minister withdrew the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012 and introduced the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013. The Criminal Law
Shri Sushilkumar Shinde, MP
(Amendment) Bill, 2103 sought to amend the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Several objectives of the Bill included: • Making specific provisions for punishment of causing grievous harm by acid attack and also for an attempt thereof; • Defining and prescribing punishment for the offences of stalking, voyeurism and sexual harassment; • Widening the definition of rape, broadening the ambit of aggravated rape and enhancing the punishment; and • Prescribing for punishment extending to the sentence of death, for an offence where in the course of commission of an offence of rape, the offender inflicts injury which causes the death of the victim or causes the victim to be in a persistent vegetative state. Three Members had given notices for disapproval of the
Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2013 as the constitution gives a right to members to give notice of statutory resolution for disapproval of an ordinance promulgated by the President. Since the resolutions of all the
three members were identical, the member whose notice was first in time was allowed to move the resolution. The Speaker observed that as per the established practice of the House, two other members would get a chance at the time of
their party’s turn. She said it had been the convention of the House to have combined discussions on items if the subject matters of items were such that the items could be conveniently discussed together. This convention had evolved in order to save time in
THIRD READING: INDIA The Banking Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2011 The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 empowers the Reserve Bank to regulate and supervise the banking sector. Banking companies are now operating in a liberalized environment and it has become necessary that they are enabled to raise capital in accordance with international best practices. Recommended proposals included: (a) Enable the nationalized banks to increase or decrease the authorized capital with approval from the Central Government and the Reserve Bank without being limited by a maximum cap of three thousand crores of rupees; and (b) Provide the nationalized banks to issue two additional instruments (“bonus shares” and “rights issue”) for accessing the capital market to raise capital required for expansion of banking business. Taking advantage of the liberalized environment, banking companies are engaging in multifarious activities through the medium of associate enterprises. It has, therefore, become necessary for the Reserve Bank, as the regulator of the banking companies, to be aware of the financial impact of the business of such enterprises on the financial position of the banking companies. The Government proposed to confer power upon the Reserve Bank to call for information and returns from the associate enterprises of banking companies also and to inspect the same, if necessary. The Banking Regulation (Amendment) Bill, 2005 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 13 May 2005 to strengthen the Reserve Bank’s supervisory and regulatory powers over the banking sector. The Bill was referred to the Standing Committee on Finance for examination. Based on the recommendations of the Standing Committee, it was decided to move official amendments to the Bill in the Lok Sabha, but the Bill could not be taken up for consideration and lapsed due to dissolution of the Lok Sabha. The Government, therefore, brought forward the Banking Laws (Amendment) Bill, incorporating certain provisions of the Banking Regulation (Amendment) Bill, 2005.
The present Amending Bill proposed to: (a) Enable the banking companies to issue preference shares subject to regulatory guidelines of the Reserve Bank; and (b) Align the restriction on commission, etc., on sale of shares to issue price rather than to the paid-up value of shares. The Banking Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2011 aims to amend the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980. This will make the regulatory powers of Reserve Bank more effective as well as increase the access of nationalized banks to capital markets to raise capital required for the expansion of banking business. Highlights of amendments made include: Amendments to the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 The key term ‘approved securities has been defined to mean securities issued by the Central Government or any State Government or such other securities as may be specified by the Reserve Bank from time to time. Amendment to the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 In section 3 of the Principal Act for sub section (2A), a new sub section has been substituted providing that the authorized capital of every corresponding new bank shall be three thousand crores of rupees divided into three hundred crores of fully paid up shares of ten rupees each. Amendment to the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1980 In Section 7 of this Act too corresponding amendments have been made. During the debate on the Bill in both Houses of Parliament, members welcomed the fiscal amendment Bill. The Bill was passed by Lok Sabha on 18 December 2012 and by Rajya Sabha on 20 December 2012. The Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 5 January 2013.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 151
Parliamentary News.indd 151
19/08/2013 13:26:00
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
the House and to avoid repetition of arguments. Moving the motion for consideration of the Bill, Shri Shinde said the nation was waiting for the outcome of the debates and it was incumbent upon the House to rise to deliberate it with all the seriousness and sensitivity it deserved. The Minister said that the present Bill was the result of the contribution of all the stakeholders who gave their views for developing an effective and urgent response to the issues
INDIA which arose in the aftermath of 16 December. The Bill provided a foundation for handing out harsher punishments: a minimum punishment of 20 years – extendable to sentence for life – for gang rape and sentence up to death for repeat offenders. The laws were made more womenfriendly by protecting the dignity of women during the recording of evidence as well as during cross examination. Provisions were also made for compensation, medical treatment and auxiliary issues pertaining to these issues. The
Minister agreed to the demands of the BJP, SP and other political parties for keeping the age of consent at 18 years and not 16 as stated in the ordinance. Parliament had to deliver quickly and effectively to ensure that the legislative framework remained relevant to the changing times and protected women, said the Home Minister. Initiating the debate, Dr Bhola Singh, MP, (BJP) said the government was forced to take these measures because of the public pressure. However, the
THIRD READING: INDIA The Prevention of Money-Laundering Bill The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 was enacted to prevent money-laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from, or involved in, money-laundering and for matters connected. The Act was amended in 2005 and 2009 to remove the difficulties that arose in the implementation of the Act. The problem of money-laundering is no longer restricted to the geo-political boundaries of any country. In light of this, India became a member of the Financial Action Task Force and Asia Pacific Group on moneylaundering, which are committed to the effective implementation and enforcement of internationally accepted standards against money-laundering and the financing of terrorism. Consequent to the submission of an action plan to bring anti money-laundering legislation of India at par with the international standards, it became necessary to amend the Prevention of MoneyLaundering Act, 2002. The government brought forward the Prevention of Money-Laundering (Amendment) Bill, 2011. It sought, among other things, to introduce the concept of ‘corresponding law’ to link the provisions of Indian law with the laws of foreign countries and introduce the concept of ‘reporting entity’ to include therein a banking company, financial institution, intermediary or a person carrying on a designated business or profession. The Standing Committee presented its 56th Report on Prevention of money Laundering (Amendment) Bill 2011 to the Lok Sabha and laid in Rajya Sabha on 9 May 2012. The Standing Committee made 18 recommendations which were all accepted by the government. Amendments included a change to sub-clause
(v), which substituted the existing definition of the expression “financial institution” to mean a financial institution as defined in clause (c) of section 45-I of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and included a chit fund company, a housing finance institution, an authorized person, a payment system operator, a nonbanking financial company and the Department of Posts in the Government of India. Members from all Sections of the House expressed concern over black/unaccounted money flow in the country and the disreputable purposes for which it was used. While some members unanimously favoured a stringent fiscal law, other members expressed reservations with regard to efficacy of certain aspects. The Minister of Finance while replying to the debate on the Bill, stressed that money laundering was not the same as the generation of black money. While some cases of black money came under money laundering, many did not. In the case of money laundering, there must be a predicate crime or a crime as defined in the Schedule to the Act. Referring to the recommendations made by the Standing Committee on Finance, the Minister stated all these have been accepted and those which required official amendments have been converted as official amendments. Minister assured the House of Government’s commitment to tackle this global menace of money laundering through effective implementation of the Amending Bill. The Bill was passed by Lok Sabha on 29 November 2012 and by Rajya Sabha on 17 December 2012. The Amending Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 3 January, 2013. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 thus stood amended.
mere enactment of the Bill was not going to stop the incidents of misconduct and sexual assault against women in society. A change in the society’s mindset and social reforms was also required. He pointed to the adverse impact of western culture on Indian society. The senior JD-U leader, Shri Sharad Yadav, MP, also stated that laws alone could not end crimes against women; what was required was a change in the mindset of society. He emphasized on proper implementation abolishing the caste system which created inhibited women’s progress. Shri Sandeep Dikshit, MP, (INC) supported the strengthening of legal provisions against rape and related incidents. He welcomed the death penalty; life imprisonment till death involving gang rape and repeat offences; mandatory victim statement recordings before a woman officer; stringent action against officers found guilty of not registering complaints; and the most stringent provision against trafficking. Smt.
152 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 152
19/08/2013 13:26:13
INDIA
The gang rape case in India in December 2012 sparked many protests in the country’s capital.
Sumitra Mahajan, MP, (BJP) said laws once made should be implemented, with children divided in to two categories, one below 12 years of age and the other above. She asked for the setting up of fast track courts, deployment of women police personnel in each police station and the sensitization of people about crimes against women. She suggested penal provisions for prosecuting those who incriminated innocent persons on false charges of rape or other sexual assaults. The legislation should not give an impression that it was gender bias against male but was only to provide justice to women. Shri Shailendra Kumar (SP) thanked the government for keeping the age of consent for sex as 18 years, and not 16 as provided in the ordinance. Emphasizing the need to encourage women to be economically independent, he also asked the government to ensure that the provisions of the legislation were not misused. Shri Kalyan Banerjee,
MP, (AITC) described rape as a heinous crime and was against showing any mercy towards the rapists. Cautioning against the misuse of the law, he also highlighted the need to educate people about its various provisions. Shri Pinaki Misra, MP, (BJD) said the government should have taken into consideration the majority of opinion of the House before bringing forward the Bill. The way the ordinance was brought in a panic after the 16 December incident showed complete chaos in the thinking of the government. He believed the Bill failed to address trafficking and police reforms. Shri Anant Gangaram Geete, MP, (Shiv Sena) supported the Bill as it would put the fear of law in the minds of the criminals. He assured the support of his party to any step that sought to ensure the safety of the women. Smt. Supriya Sule, MP, (NCP) believed gender equality was the key to providing safety and security to women. She also highlighted the importance of judicial and police
reforms and making police more sensitive to women’s needs. Shri Gurudas Dasgupta, MP, (CPI) said there were many laws but the main problem was its non-enforcement. He regretted that atrocities against women committed in places far away from the saddle of power were going unnoticed. Smt. Harsimrat Kaur Badal, MP, (SAD) said something had to be mentioned in the Bill about trafficking of adopted children and women being pushed into the trade by their husbands. There was nothing in the definition of rape which mentioned physically challenged, mentally retarded and handicapped girls and what was needed to ensure their safety. Smt. Priya Dutt, MP, (INC) said the Bill was a great step forward but women had to be encouraged to be able to go and lodge a complaint. Lamenting that equality in terms of equal opportunities and rights in political, economic and social spheres between men and women did not exist, Smt. Shatabdi Roy, MP, (AITC) said
neither any legislation nor any discussion in Parliament would be required when equality was provided to women in the real sense of the term. Referring to the ill treatment of women in society, Smt. Meena Singh (JDU) believed crime against women would be checked the moment they were treated as equal human beings. Replying to the debate, Shri Shinde said the government had taken immediate steps for enhancing punishment for the rapists. A provision had been made to punish the police officer in case he/she did not lodge a report, and he agreed that a female police officer should be appointed in each police station. The Minister assured the House to make more efforts on the issue of modernization of the police force. At the end of the debate, the resolution for disapproval of the ordinance promulgated by the President was dismissed and the Bill, as amended was passed on 21 March and received Presidential assent on 3 April 2013.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 153
Parliamentary News.indd 153
19/08/2013 13:26:26
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
SRI LANKA
Regulations under the Sri Lanka Press Council Law
Hon. Wijedasa Rajapakse, MP
Under the Sri Lanka Press Council Law, Mass Media and Information Minister, Hon. Keheliya Rambukwella, MP, approved the regulations making it mandatory for every proprietor or editor of a newspaper to pay a fee when applying for registration or a renewal. The charges were effective from 31 March, with fees of Rs. 5,000 for a daily newspaper and Rs. 3,000 for a weekly newspaper. Opening the debate Hon. Wijedasa Rajapakse, MP, (UNP) said the Council had been controversial ever since it was enacted in 1973 to target the print media in the absence of privatized electronic media. He said that Article 15 of the Act provided for the pursuance of matters in criminal court while Article 479 in the Penal Code covered criminal defamation made against the head of state by media personnel acting irresponsibly. “These laws led to a lot of issues during the latter part of the 1990s and were repealed by the UNF Government. In the current
context, most journalists today would be in Welikada Prison if that had not been done,” he quipped. Mr Rajapakse said that in January 2009, the government had provided Parliament with a report on crimes against media in response to an opposition request. He said that according to this report, during the three year period January 2006 to January 2009, nine media persons had been killed, five were kidnapped, and 27 had been assaulted. “This list doesn’t provide the numbers of those who fled the country failing to practice journalism,” he added. In response, Hon. Sajin
Hon. Sajin Vas Gunawardena, MP Vas Gunawardena, MP, (UPFA) refuted charges that the government was controlling the media on the basis that 85 per cent of the media companies were held by the private sector, included by members of the government and opposition. “How can you claim media freedom is not there? Media
freedom is curtailed by the respective owners who limit journalists from writing. It is not the government.” Mr Gunawardena argued that the Press Council Act was not strong enough. “I believe that criminal defamation has to be included again. We have no intention to control or limit the activities of the media personnel,” he said, accusing several media companies of “taking bribes and using methods of extortion” which he said he had witnessed in the recent past. Joining in the debate Tamil National Alliance Hon. M.A. Sumanthiran, MP, said the government attacked the media “through inducement, threats, physical attacks, and by killing”. He said the question was how many of these crimes against journalists and media institutions had actually been solved by law enforcement officials. “This is the litmus test to see who is behind these crimes. If the government is not able to solve a single issue, it proves that the government is behind them,” he charged. “A few years ago Sri Lanka was the second most dangerous place for journalists in the world. During the past few years the only provincial newspaper in northern Sri Lanka, Uthayan newspaper, reported 30 incidents including the killing of its two journalists within the office premises. This year a distributor was attacked and a distribution center in Kilinochchi was also attacked. You can’t have armed
154 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 154
19/08/2013 13:26:40
SRI LANKA
External Affairs Minister Hon. Prof. G.L. Peiris, MP, (second left) and Mass Media and Information Minister, Hon. Keheliya Rambukwella, MP, (third left) at the launch of the 2013 CHOGM host government website.
groups doing this in a highly militarized Kilinochchi without the knowledge of the government. Carrying out such attacks by armed thugs and not to get caught shows the involvement of the government,” he argued. Hon. Anura Kumara Dissanayake, MP, (DNA) stated that the influence of the media was vast. In addition to the state media, there were some media organizations owned by fractions of the government. The conduct of the state media could not be accepted,
but “the government was not taking any measures to correct them. No suspects involved in the attack on the ‘Siyatha’ had been arrested and a number of journalists had been abducted and some killed”. He added that “investigations had not been carried out successfully and journalists have been intimidated. Today, alternative media practices had collapsed due to threats, and it was only through websites that the alternative media had recently emerged, but the government was intent to cripple them”.
Mr Rambukwella stated that the Press Council Law had been amended to revise the registration and renewal fees. The Parliamentary Consultative Committee on Mass Media expressed that justice should be attributed to users of the media. While the media had the freedom to express itself and reveal facts, on the other hand the affected parties had to be allowed o take action if the information was misleading or malicious. State television channels amounted to six but there were 18 private
channels. He added that excessive freedom was not going to benefit the country, and there had to be a degree of control over the negative aspects of society from the media At the conclusion of the debate Chief Opposition Whip Hon. John Amaratunga (UNP) informed the House that they opposed this Bill, but did not ask for a division. Thereafter the regulations were approved and the opposition disagreement was recorded.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 155
Parliamentary News.indd 155
19/08/2013 13:26:52
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
NEW ZEALAND
Election of Speaker OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Rt Hon. David Carter, MP, (National) was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives on 31 January following the appointment of the previous Speaker, Dr the Rt Hon. Lockwood Smith, MP, (National) to the post of High Commissioner to the United Kingdom. Mr Carter entered Parliament in 1994 and has held a number of ministerial positions, most recently in agriculture, biosecurity and forestry. Mr Carter’s nomination was contested by opposition parties, which claimed they had not been consulted over the nomination. In the ensuing personal vote between Mr Carter and Hon. Trevor Mallard, MP, (Labour), Mr Carter was elected by 62 votes to 52. Mr Carter said that he did not underestimate the challenge before him as Speaker: “There will be occasions when the tension and the atmosphere within this House will fall somewhere between tinder-dry and white-hot. I see my responsibility being akin to a referee reffing the inevitable [rugby] final between the almighty [Canterbury] Crusaders and one of the others…having to make an instant decision [and] not having access to the whistle. But I will have access to the yellow and red cards, although I hope they are used infrequently.” The Prime Minister, Rt Hon. John Key, MP, (National) said that Mr Carter was “extremely fair…thoughtful, and…has a real passion for the parliamentary
Rt Hon. David Carter, MP
process”. He added that the outgoing Speaker, Dr Smith, had “brought to this Parliament... some real standards and some expectations”. The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. David Shearer, MP, (Labour) said that despite the contested election, Labour would work constructively with Mr Carter and that Labour Members had most appreciated from Dr Smith “the fact that when we asked a straight question, he insisted on Ministers giving an answer, and that is a fine place to start, Mr Speaker-Elect, as you begin your Speaker’s career”. Valedictory: Dr the Rt Hon. Lockwood Smith Dr Lockwood Smith, who was the Speaker of the New Zealand House of Representatives from December 2008 to February 2013, was first elected to Parliament in 1984. He was appointed Minister of Education in the incoming National government in 1990. Later during National’s time in office from 1990 to 1999 he also served as Minister of Agriculture,
Minister for International Trade, and Minister of Tourism. Dr Smith delivered his valedictory speech on 13 February. As well as outlining his political career, he commented that although the introduction of the mixed-Member proportional representation system had broadened representation in Parliament, it had also led to “a significant shift in the accountability of Members”. He said: “Obviously, list Members are very much accountable to their political parties, as they owe their place on the list to their party, but the pervasive power of the party vote has meant that all Members are now totally accountable to their parties. This House, in so many ways, has become a place of political parties rather than a House of Representatives”. On his time as Speaker, Dr Smith said that he would say nothing. He told Members: “You have had to endure those four years and will make your own judgments. I just want to thank you for the tremendous courtesy and goodwill you have shown me.” He also said that he respected the integrity that Mr Shearer had “brought to a fiendishly difficult job”, and praised the Prime Minister for bringing “such extraordinary skills to this place. Never once in my four years as Speaker did you ever try to influence the way I was chairing this House or any decision I ever made. Listening to other Speakers around the
156 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 156
19/08/2013 13:27:04
NEW ZEALAND Commonwealth, I am not sure many are quite so fortunate”. Pacific Issues Debate On 18 April Hon. Hekia Parata, MP, Minister for Pacific Island Affairs, asked the House to “note the Pacific Parliamentary Forum that was held this week at Parliament and that it acknowledge the needs and aspirations of all Pacific peoples, and the contribution New Zealand can make as an integral part of the Pacific region, to enhance its relationship with all Pacific people’. It was the first time in 20 years that Parliament had held a special debate on Pacific issues, and it occurred within the context of the Pacific Parliamentary and Political Leaders Forum convened by the New Zealand Parliament from 18 to 22 April. Forum participants observing the three-hour debate included Parliamentarians from American Samoa, the Cook Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Wallis and Futuna, and official representatives from Fiji, New Caledonia, and Tokelau. Many of the speeches highlighted themes of interest to the forum. “We do not know each other as well as we used to” acknowledged Mr John Hayes, MP, (National). “This meeting, I hope, will help us to get to know each other much better, because it is much easier to work with people you know and understand.” Ms Parata emphasised common ties, connections, and interests between the participants: “We are a Pacific nation. We are united by the great ocean Te Moana-nui-aKiwa which joins us, and that is central to our understanding of our history, culture, and world
view. Culturally, New Zealand owes much to other Pacific nations.” Te Ururoa Flavell, MP, (Maori Party) said: “Tangata Pasifika and tangata whenua
have always shared a common bond in our connections through our ancestry, our culture, and our customs. We both understand implicitly concepts that run to
the core of our being. Our land, our whenua, is the central link to our genealogical connections, as an enduring umbilical cord, pito, between yesteryear and
THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND The Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill This Bill aims to get more New Zealanders aged between 16 and 19 years of age into work or training by reducing starting-out wages. At its third reading the Minister of Labour, Hon. Simon Bridges, MP, (National) described the Bill as “part of the government’s focus to create job opportunities for young people who are finding it difficult to get work in the current economic climate”. Young people could be paid at a rate ‘set at no less than 80 per cent of the adult minimum wage’ and would be incentivised to stay longer with an employer because they “must complete six months of continuous work with an employer before they are entitled to be paid the adult rate by the employer”. He said the starting-out wage was about young people getting ‘a foot in the door”. “With a steady work history behind them, young people…will be seen as less risky for new employers to take on. “ Opposing the Bill, Mr Darien Fenton, MP, (Labour) warned that it would “create an underclass of young workers and consign them to economic marginalization”. She described the measure as: “classic National Party”. “In the face of its economic failures and its marginalization of thousands of unemployed and underemployed, it has resorted to its tried and failed policies of last century”. She said “it is our young people who are going to pay the price”. Ms Holly Walker, MP, (Green) criticized the way the government had determined the starting-out wage as a way to address youth unemployment: “This is not evidence-based policy. It is…policy-based evidence. Having come up with the policy, it then got its officials to come up with some evidence to support it. That is no way to make policy, and…this Bill is no way to reduce youth unemployment”. She said young people were increasingly “turning away from Parliament and politics and disengaging from our political system. It is because of bills like this that they are doing that”. Mr Simon O’Connor, MP, (National) countered: “National believes in young people. If providing a slightly lower wage allows an employer to make the choice of you, a young person, over another, then, yes, this government is prepared to back you.” The Bill passed by a majority of one vote.
The Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Bill The Bill passed its third reading by a majority of two votes on 9 April. The Bill simplifies benefit categories and introduces new obligations for beneficiaries as part of the government’s social welfare reforms. “We are introducing social obligations to ensure that children in benefit dependent homes get quality early childhood education, are enrolled with a doctor, and get their Well Child checks, and that school-aged children are in school,” said the Minister for Social Development, Hon. Paula Bennett, MP, (National) at the second reading. The legislation also includes a requirement for job seekers to be drug-free and available for work, and stops benefits for beneficiaries with outstanding arrest warrants. Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga, MP, (National) supported the Bill, saying: “The reforms we are making today are about building confidence in the welfare system… so it can regain the work focus that it was intended to have 75 years ago.” “Long-term welfare dependency is trapping way too many people in a life of limited choices, poverty, and poor health. We are delivering on welfare reforms…expecting job seekers to be drug-free, ready, and available for work; ensuring a work-focused welfare system; stopping benefits to those with an outstanding warrant; and introducing health, education, and social obligations so children in welfare-dependent families get the best possible start in life.” “Labour strongly opposes this Bill” said Su’a William Sio, MP, (Labour). “People think the inclusion of the words ‘Work Focus’ in the name of the Bill means that they will have jobs. The words are deceptive, as this Bill does not help to create jobs in the private sector and it does not create any jobs in the public sector. It does not raise wages or income levels for those most in need or in desperate situations. It does not provide affordable housing for those families living in garages or in crowded houses. It does not value motherhood and the role of raising children. It does not even address the issues that have been identified as barriers to work.” ‘This Bill tears up the idea of a social contract,” said Ms Jacinda Ardern, MP, (Labour). The Bill passed by a majority of one.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two | 157
Parliamentary News.indd 157
19/08/2013 13:27:16
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
tomorrow.” “We need to assist our brothers and sisters in the Pacific to be part of the international organizations such as the InterParliamentary Union and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association”, said Hon. Tau Henare, MP, (National). “Democracy needs a free media,” said Mr Shearer. “It needs an independent and strong
NEW ZEALAND judiciary. It needs institutions that guarantee and protect human rights. It requires openness and transparency. All of those things help to protect the rights of people. It also needs properly functioning political parties to help bring order, efficiency, and predictability to the way our political system operates.” Le’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-
Taylor, MP, (NZ First) referred to representation of women in Parliament: “Collectively, women make up 12 per cent of the parliamentary seats in the Pacific Islands, and if we exclude the French territories, that figure would fall to a mere five per cent.” “We fail to realise that women make up half of the Pacific population. Their perspective and
THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND The Student Land Scheme Amendment Bill (No. 2) The government has tightened up repayment obligations on New Zealand’s student loan scheme with the passing of the Student Land Scheme Amendment Bill (No. 2). Hon. Peter Dunne, MP, (United Future) Minister of Revenue, said the main new measure would “broaden the definition of income used to determine the loan amount a New Zealand - based borrower has to repay each year’. He hoped this would end ‘the mounting criticism…about people being able to shelter or hide income to avoid student loan repayment obligations”. The Bill also contained data-matching provisions between the Customs Service and the Inland Revenue Department to enable overseas-based borrowers to be tracked down. Mr Dunne said this would “make sure that, like their domestically based counterparts, they meet their repayment obligations”. Dr David Clark, MP, (Labour) supported the Bill, saying: “Labour expects every borrower to make an equal effort to pay back their student loan, whether they are overseas or at home.” However, Hon. David Cunliffe, MP, (Labour) cautioned: “The changes in this Bill do not even make the student loan scheme sustainable. In the face of a $2,670 million debt mountain, with over half of all overdue borrowers overseas .This Bill solves, at best, $7 million of that over five years.” Opposing the Bill, Mr Gareth Hughes, MP, (Green) said the Green Party had concerns with each of the measures but was particularly concerned about a regulation-making provision: “This government is abusing this quite considerable, powerful tool, where we are seeing less parliamentary oversight of important changes being made.” The Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill A Member’s Bill in the name of Ms Louisa Wall, MP, (Labour), passed its third reading on 17 April by 77 votes
to 44. Ms Wall noted the strong public interest in the Bill’s legislative process, saying “this Bill has seen a full gallery at the first and second readings, and again tonight”. Mr Kevin Hague, MP, (Green) said that “this Bill is about so much more than achieving equality under the law, which is a basic human right that has been denied us until this day. It is about saying these lives matter. Our society is big enough for us all. The world will be a better place for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender New Zealanders, and absolutely no one at all will be any worse off”. “After three decades and 10 Parliaments,” said ACT Leader Hon. John Banks, MP, who was in Parliament at the time of the passage of the Homosexual Law Reform Act 1986, “I have had time to reflect…on what I said and to reflect on what I did. If I knew then what I have since learnt, I would have acted differently. I see this as a debate more about human rights, predicated on the basis that we are all entitled to live our lives to the fullest extent of human happiness, while respecting the rights and beliefs of others”. In opposition to the Bill, the Leader of New Zealand First, Rt Hon. Winston Peters, MP, repeated his party’s view that a legislative change such as this should be subject to a referendum. “Some support the change; others do not. No one really knows what side the majority of the public opinion sits on.” Mr Jonathan Young, MP, (National) also opposed the Bill, saying that “in societies, traditions are important. A tradition is not to be cast off or cast away quickly or easily, because it is the touchstone of a value that perhaps younger minds may not fully understand, yet enter into because it is there”. Ms Jami-Lee Ross, MP, (National) raised the issue of children, saying: “The prevailing wisdom seems to be that every child must have a mother and a father. What is most important is that a child is raised in a loving and caring environment. If that environment just so happens to be a same-sex marriage, then that child is just as fortunate as every other loved child.”
active participation is essential for good governance and for the process of democracy.” Hon. Phil Goff, MP, (Labour) and Dr Kennedy Graham, MP, (Green) spoke about the effects of climate change on Pacific states. Mr Goff acknowledged that “the small islands of the Pacific…do little to cause the problem of global warming but, as countries, will be the first victims of that process. It is beholden on countries like New Zealand and Australia to not oppose the stand that the Pacific takes to stop the process of global warming but to get alongside the Pacific to work with and support the Pacific in those objectives”. Dr Graham described climate change as a “risk multiplier” that was nowhere more starkly portrayed than in the Pacific. “For our visitors here in this Gallery the risk is existential. The international community has, to put it simply, failed to solve climate change.” For the Leader of NZ First Rt Hon. Winston Peters, MP, “the issues facing countries in the Pacific might be similar, whether they are climate change, the retention of resources, or pollution and environmental degradation”. He said: “It is up to New Zealand to ensure that we undertake aid assistance and that development does not come at the expense of local people, customs, and culture. We must look to uphold and respect the cultural as well as the political boundaries of our neighbours.” Mr Alfred Ngaro, MP, (National) advocated greater confidence in Pasifika communities: “We have so much to contribute in our passion. We are more than just sporting people. We are more than just performers and dancers on a stage. We have intelligence. Let us call back the intelligence that comes from the navigators of the past.” The motion was unanimously agreed to.
158 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
Parliamentary News.indd 158
19/08/2013 13:27:29
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.
Book ad - Parliamentary African Reform.indd 159
16/08/2013 11:28:28
CPA MATTERS
CPA Statement of Purpose The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association mobilizes its Parliaments, Legislatures, their Members and staff to advance the consideration of good democratic governance and the institutional and professional development of its membership. It works in the Commonwealth through meetings and publications to discuss: • The democratic representation of all sections of society and both genders; • Parliamentary oversight of the executive; • Parliamentary involvement in formulating legislation and government policy; • The role of small Parliaments; • Parliamentary outreach to the people, and • The independence of Parliament from the executive government. Adopted by the CPA General Assembly, Colombo, Sri Lanka, September 2012.
160 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue Two
CPA Statement of purpose left page.indd 160
16/08/2013 11:31:09
CPA SHOP CPA pens
Silver-plated photoframe, clock and pen in holder
CPA silver-plated cardholders
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.indd 37
16/08/2013 17:17:04
GOT YOUR COPY?
THE PARLIAMENTARIAN
To subscribe to The Parliamentarian, please email pirc@cpahq.org. Members of Parliament: Please contact your Branch Secretary.
Outside back cover.indd 168
16/08/2013 17:18:44