The Parliamentarian 2010: Issue One - Provincial Houses: Canadian democracy in architectural form by The Parliamentarian

Cover:Layout 1 24/03/2010 15:49 Page 1

TheParliamentarian Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth

2010 | Issue One XCI | Price £12

PROVINCIAL HOUSES: Canadian democracy in archictectural form PAGE 58

PLUS Westminster Speaker’s Conference and electoral reform PAGE 14

Suspending democracy in the Turks and Caicos: For and against PAGES 18 AND 22

Benchmarking Parliaments PAGES 26 AND 30

Super-injunctions, Parliament and freedom of the press PAGE 42

Inside front cover:Layout 1 19/03/2010 13:05 Page 37

Calendar of Events 2010

May TBC: Post-Election Seminar for Mozambique 5-10: Climate Change Study Group for the Africa Region and National Workshop for the National Assembly of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria. 8-13: Mid-Year Executive Committee Meeting, Swaziland.

June TBC: CPA Workshop at the 10th Commonwealth Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Affairs Ministers Meeting (WAMM), Barbados,

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.

The Overseers:Different Ads.qxd 16/12/2009 09:39 Page 388

A CPA publication

Available to Members and Officials of the CPA for purchase from the CPAâ&#x20AC;˘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.

Contents:Layout 1 30/03/2010 18:12 Page 2

CONTENTS

2010: ISSUE 1 36

Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth Vol. XCI 2010: Issue One ISSN 0031-2282 Issued by the Secretariat of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SWIP 3JA, United Kingdom Tel: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 Email: hq.sec@cpahq.org www.cpahq.org Publisher: Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General Editor: Andrew Imlach Director of Communications and Research

COMMENT

MAIN ARTICLES

Inside Issues

The Speaker’s Conference: Seeking a more just, credible and effective Legislature

A step for women toward the political mainstream. Page 4

View from the Chair

Feeding democracies: Creating a conducive climate for large and small. Page 6

View from the CWP

Equal rights, equal opportunities: A dream for women? Page 8

View from the Secretary-General The abhorrence of human trafficking. Page 10

Assistant Editor: Lisa Leaño Front cover The staircase in the New Brunswick Legislative Assembly building Printed in England by Warners Midlands, PLC, The Maltings, Manor Lane, Bourne, Lincs PE10 9PH 2 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Miss Anne Begg, MP. Page 14

Suspending selfgovernment in the Turks and Caicos Islands Mr Chris Bryant, MP. Page 18

The suspension of theTurks and Caicos Islands’ constitution Mr Norman B Saunders Sr. Page 22

The CPA Benchmarks and the Parliament of Canada – A selfassessment CPA Canada Branch. Page 26

A quality framework to assess Parliaments: Improving efficiency and effectiveness Dr. V.K. Agnihotri. Page 30

Sustainable development, climate change and renewable energy sources in Quebec

Madame Fatima Houda-Pepin, MNA. Page 36

Super-injunctions – The threat to parliamentary privilege and press freedom Mr Paul Farrelly, MP. Page 42

The Parliamentarian as the people’s educator Dr Jayalath Jayawardana, MP. Page 46

Using web technologies to engage young people in government decision-making in New South Wales Hon. Graham West, MP. Page 48

Contents:Layout 1 30/03/2010 18:13 Page 3

NEWS New initiatives in the Senate – Strategic planning and an administrative ethics officer Mr Gary O’Brien. Page 50

Reviewing executive spending in Kiribati and the role of the Public Accounts Committee Mrs Terengaiti Awerika. Page 54

Parliamentary news: Australia, Sri Lanka, Canada, United Kingdom, India, Quebec, New Zealand and British Columbia Page 63

BOOK EXCERPT

The Legislative Process: A handbook for public officials Mr Bilika H. Simamba. Page 82

Annual subscription (four issues) UK: £36 post free. Worldwide: £38 surface post £44 airmail Price per issue UK: £12 Worldwide: £13 surface post £14 airmail Opinions and comments expressed in articles and reviews published in The Parliamentarian are those of the individual contributors and should not be attributed to the Secretariat of the Association.

Democracy in architectural form: Province Houses in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick Mr James W. Macnutt, QC. Page 58

CPA Organization Page 85

Promoting sustainable forest management

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 3

Inside Issues:Layout 1 01/04/2010 12:26 Page 4

INSIDE ISSUES

ASTEP FOR WOMEN TOWARD THE POLITICAL MAINSTREAM The Editor’s Note

Progress in the representation of women in Commonwealth Parliaments has come slower than hoped so far in the new millennium; but with this issue of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association’s journal of Parliaments and Legislatures, we can record an admittedly small but nonetheless significant advance. The original Commonwealth goal agreed by Heads of Government – to have women occupy 30 per cent of parliamentary seats by 2005 – was missed. Parliaments are now half way to the extended goal of reaching the same target by 2015 with most still having a considerable way to go. The recent passage through India’s upper House, the Rajya Sabha, of legislation to reserve for women 30 per cent of seats in the country’s Parliament and each of its state Legislatures will certainly help. But it will take much more than enforced representation in one country to enable the Commonwealth to hit its gender target. Another gender target, however, is much closer. We have long sought to publish in The Parliamentarian articles from women not just on gender and “women’s issues” but on a variety of parliamentary matters so that having women write on all aspects of governance becomes the norm.

Mainstreaming women in this way will contribute to the mainstreaming of women in Parliaments themselves. In this issue, we publish three major articles by women, none of whom write about gender. We open with an account by Ms Ann Begg, MP, of the United Kingdom House of Commons on that House’s current use of a parliamentary process employed only five times previously to examine the most fundamental issues in the electoral system: the Speaker’s Conference. Ms Begg, who has chaired many of the Conference’s meetings on behalf of the Speaker, currently Rt Hon. John Bercow, MP, writes here on the electoral subjects being considered by this group of specially appointed senior Backbenchers and on the process itself. The Conference has received testimony from and put questions to a wide range of British citizens, including the Prime Minister, the Opposition Leader and the Leader of Parliament’s third party – all of it open to the public via the news media. The Speaker’s Conference is a special process which augments Parliament’s day-to-day procedures for representation, doing so in a fully accountable and transparent way. Other Parliaments throughout the

4 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Commonwealth may see this as a useful process to enhance their own performance in key areas. Our second article by a woman comes from Quebec as Mde Fatima Houda-Pepin, MNA, First Vice-President of the Quebec National Assembly, writes on new initiatives to develop environmentally friendly energy sources, something for which her province is noted. Quebec’s vast sources of hydro-electric power have long kept much of northeastern North America alight. Mde Houda-Pepin describes a new policy initiative to expand the development of clean power sources which will help to reduce carbon emissions without reducing energy consumption. This article will be particularly helpful to Members of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association’s new Climate Change Task Force. This issue’s third major article from a woman comes from the Pacific island nation of Kiribati which has been working diligently to strengthen its parliamentary performance despite the threat to its existence posed by climate change. Ms Terengaiti Awerika, an officer in the Parliament’s Clerk’s Department, writes on the activities and methods of operation used by its Public Accounts Committee to ensure propriety and effectiveness

in public spending. The country, with a small population scattered over the vast central Pacific Ocean, must conserve all its limited government revenues; so the work of its Public Accounts Committee is especially vital for the future of both the nation and its democratic institutions. Financial propriety and the future of democratic institutions in another small group of islands are also in question, but for different reasons. In August 2009, the Turks and Caicos Islands in the northern Caribbean lost their internal self-government and their House of Assembly as the British government took control of its overseas territory’s affairs. Mr Chris Bryant, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office, explains the significant failings in governance that were reported by a special commission of inquiry, and the actions that Whitehall took to try to change the ways of the small territory adjacent to The Bahamas, a territory with a long history of troubled politics. From the perspective of Turks and Caicos Islands political leaders, there were other avenues open to the British government short of abandoning democratic governance. A former Member of the House of Assembly and a one-

Inside Issues:Layout 1 01/04/2010 12:26 Page 5

INSIDE ISSUES

time Chief Minister, Mr Norman B. Saunders, writes in this issue that the territory needs good governance not by Britain but by new leaders who are devoted to giving it a successful future, so the Turks and Caicos government and Legislature should not have been suspended in the first place and there should be no delay in returning it to democracy in mid2011 as promised. The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association has developed a set of standards to assist Parliaments to determine whether they have the latest procedures to ensure good governance. Many Parliaments have begun using these standards, the CPA Benchmarks for Democratic Legislatures, to assessment themselves to identify ways to upgrade their performance. The Parliament of Canada is one of those Branches, so we publish here an account submitted by the CPA Canada Branch of how they assessed themselves and how well they did. The Canadian experience provides an example to other Parliaments interested in assessing themselves with the CPA Benchmarks. Having considered the CPA Benchmarks and other similar assessment systems, the Secretary-

General of India’s upper House, the Rajya Sabha, proposes applying a far more complex method of grading based on several used to assure businesses and consumers of the quality of service provided by companies in the corporate world. Dr V.K. Agnihotri describes here how quality assessment systems could be adapted to the parliamentary world. The historic right of Parliamentarians to speak in Parliament and to be protected against court action for anything said in Parliament and the media’s right to report what is said under the protection of qualified privilege are threatened in today’s complex legal environment. A challenge to these rights occurred in the United Kingdom last year while a House of Commons committee was looking into British libel laws and media standards. Mr Paul Farrelly, MP, a Member of the committee and a former journalist, writes in this issue on the challenge, which involved him directly, and on how the House and the committee responded to an attempt to muzzle Parliament and the media’s coverage of it. Combining professions is extremely difficult, especially when one of them requires as much time and attention as politics. Dr

Jayalath Jayawardana, MP, has in fact managed to combine politics and his first profession, medicine, with a third profession: broadcasting. The Sri Lankan Parliamentarian writes here about how he uses all three professions to reach out to the people in an innovative way. Communicating with young people has never been easy for Parliaments or governments. In New South Wales, Hon. Graham West, MP, describes a promising high-tech approach started when he was Minister for Youth. Instead of lamenting that young people spend too much time online, his government started an online campaign using some of the websites young people use. He writes in this issue on the campaign. When Canadians talk of Senate reform, it usually refers to attempts to convert this appointed Chamber into an elected Chamber amid arguments that an appointed House is out of tune with modern society. However, an aspect of the Senate that is very much in tune with today is its willingness to use the latest management techniques in its administration. Mr Gary O’Brien, who was appointed as its Clerk in late 2009 after a long career in the Senate, explains in this issue how new administrative

ways of working are being used in an institution which, in both Canadian and other Commonwealth terms, is too often dismissed as anything but modern. Partly because of Parliament’s largely unwarranted reputation as an old-fashioned institution, public interest in many Commonwealth democracies is waning. Canada’s three small Maritime provinces have grouped together in a campaign to revive interest and respect for parliamentary government, including a programme to remind their voters that the venerable buildings where their politics is played out are actually highly attractive architectural assets. Mr James Macnutt, QC, has been commissioned by their Speakers to write a book celebrating the three Legislative Assembly buildings. He writes here about the project. Finally, legislative drafting is a specialty which requires proper training. Mr Bilika H. Simamba, the Senior Legislative Counsel in the Cayman Islands Legislative Drafting Department, has published a new book on the subject so we in turn publish excerpts from it here to assist those Parliaments and governments which need help in training and retaining their drafters.

Women Parliamentarians are now attending Commonwealth Parliamentary Conferences, like this 2009 meeting in Tanzania, and other CPA events than they used to..

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 5

View from the Chair:Layout 1 24/03/2010 16:32 Page 6

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

FEEDING DEMOCRACIES: CREATING A CONDUCIVE CLIMATE FOR LARGE AND SMALL

almost certain that progressive global warming will adversely affect those nations with agricultural-based economies particularly harshly. This will only serve to exacerbate an already dire situation for it is generally the case that it is these nations with the highest incidence of endemic poverty. When we were in Arusha last September, the President of Tanzania gave a stirring opening address to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference about global warming, spelling out some of the consequences and urging developed nations to do more. This need was further endorsed when I noticed that a local paper “Heads of Government reaffirmed the challenges reported that Tanzania stands to lose up to 60 per cent of facing small states as set out in the 2005 Gozo its agricultural output by 2030 as a result of global Statement on Vulnerable Small States. They noted warming. I have no means of knowing how accurate that with concern that the global financial and statistic is, but if it is anywhere near accurate then the economic crisis is having significant negative fate of a country that only two years ago experienced a effects on small states in trade, aid, tourism and Hon. Dato’ Seri Mohd. Shafie devastating drought is surely a wakeup call for the world. remittances and that the crisis has exacerbated the Apdal, MP According to the United Nations there is a direct challenges already faced by these countries by Chairperson of the CPA relationship between agricultural productivity, hunger and deepening unemployment and creating budgetary Executive Committee and pressure in crucial social sectors.” Minister of Rural and Regional poverty. Three-quarters of the world's poor live in rural areas and derive their living from agriculture. Most of the Development, Malaysia farming in these areas is subsistence level farming with The communiqué went on to note the low productivity levels. Generally there is a lack of inward disproportionate impact of the economic crisis on agricultural investment and this leads to low levels of mechanization and small states and if we add to this the fact that many small states will be poor crop disease prevention technologies. amongst those most severely affected by climate change then we have a Former U.S. President Bill Clinton told a United Nations meeting in potentially very serious situation. This situation is even further exacerbated 2008 that the global food crisis shows "we all blew it, including me," by if we take into account the growing debt burden of many of these states. treating food crops "like colour TVs" instead of as a vital commodity for the These issues are not easily solved and, tempting though it may be, world's poor. He criticized decades of policymaking by the World Bank, the throwing money at the problem is unlikely to bring the long-term systemic International Monetary Fund and others, encouraged by the U.S., that changes required. I am of the view that there are at least two changes pressured Africans in particular into dropping government subsidies for needed if this problem is to be managed effectively. The first of these is the fertilizer, improved seed and other farm inputs as a requirement to get aid. urgent requirement to complete the Doha Round and ensure fairer trade Africa's food self-sufficiency declined and food imports rose. practices. This will do much to ensure a more equitable trading system and However, whatever the cause or whoever is responsible is not germane improved economic prospects for less developed countries. Secondly, we as food security is a worldwide issue with around 850 million people need to continue the pursuit of ways and means of enhancing micro perpetually hungry to the point of starvation mostly due to endemic poverty. economic activity especially in impoverished communities. If this wasn’t serious enough it is estimated that up to 2 billion people face My second issue is closely related to the first. The combination of the food insecurity due to intermittent supply or seasonal fluctuations in food world economic situation and global warming surely spells out a dire production and, again, endemic poverty. Add to this the horrifying fact that warning regarding poverty and most especially food security. It now seems At the meeting of the Commonwealth Heads of Government (CHOGM) held in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago from 27 to 29 November 2009, much of the attention was on the big issues of the world economy and climate change. However there were two interconnected issues that attracted my attention and which I think demand closer scrutiny. The first of these issues are the challenges facing our smaller member states. The CHOGM communiqué states:

6 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

View from the Chair:Layout 1 24/03/2010 16:32 Page 7

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

17,000 children die every day from hunger and malnutrition and we have a problem of global dimensions even before we start to talk of global warming. When we add the effects of global warming to the food security equation the problems expand exponentially. For example, the risk of food insecurity to urban populations even in developed countries will rise substantially. With this increased risk it is likely that there will be: a higher and more frequent incidence of food rioting and civil disturbance, an increase in homelessness and mass migration and in all probability an even higher loss of life. It is sad and disturbing to note that in Haiti following the devastating earthquake there were food riots even though the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s emergency resources were focused on the country. Without wishing to be the purveyor of gloom we have to face up to and stop denying the realistic prospect of wholesale civil disruption in many parts of the world and probably an uncontrollable refugee problem. The really critical implications of this are the consequences for democratic governments particularly those already grappling with poverty and food insecurity. What then is the role of the CPA in this matter? I think we have three important functions. First, as democratically elected Members of Parliaments, we need to recognize what Amartya Sen, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, states that "there is no such thing as an apolitical food problem." While drought and other naturally occurring events may trigger famine conditions, it is often the actions of government that determine the severity of its impact

and often even whether or not a famine will occur. Secondly, we must use our parliamentary right to advise governments and comment on government action. It is going to be very tempting for some governments to take an insular and protectionist stance. Each of us will be under pressure from our constituents and others to protect our own. But we must point out and go on pointing out that by doing so we run the risk of sowing the seeds of our own demise. Thus one of our tasks as Parliamentarians is to educate our people and ensure that they understand that food security and global warming are worldwide phenomena requiring a world response and that each of us has a part to play. Furthermore, we must show that it is in all our interests to take a positive good-neighbour attitude. Thirdly, we must pay more than lip service to the particular needs of our smaller member states. Some, especially those in the South Pacific, could cease to exist, according to some forecasts. It was sad to see that their concerns though bravely aired at the Copenhagen Conference were swept aside by the loud and hectoring voices of some far less vulnerable nations. Therefore, I would like to commit us to consider as a matter of urgency not only the development of climate change alleviation strategies and the ways in which we can support our smaller member states but also our parliamentary roles in facing a crisis in the making. Finally, and hopefully on a happier note, may I wish all our Members a peaceful and more prosperous 2010.

UN studies say a lack of inward agricultural investment leads to low levels of mechanization and poor crop disease prevention technologies.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 7

View from the CWP:Layout 1 29/03/2010 11:49 Page 8

VIEW FROM THE CWP

EQUAL RIGHTS, EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES: A DREAM FOR WOMEN?

equally, to be heard on this platform and to get even a quarter of rights for Ever since I grew up, I have been dreaming of a society where women can women (leave aside equal rights), I have to struggle and fight very hard to be treated as equals with men. The right to equality is the right of all human convince my colleagues from diverse backgrounds. I feel beings to be equal in dignity, to be treated with respect discriminated against and frustrated many a time. and consideration and to participate on an equal basis In the CPA hierarchy, the CWP must be with others in any area of economic, social, political, acknowledged by always being represented as a right on cultural or civil life. Most of the religions, including the stage at the annual conference. I have had to push Islam, have been endorsing this concept. through to make the CPA realize that women, who In Pakistan, the constitution emphasizes the comprise 50 per cent of the world’s population, should be equality of men and women. However, we lack: given an equal opportunity to be honoured. I wondered implementation in laws; effective legal protection what democracy was? against discrimination, harassment and unequal The CWP Chairperson is elected by all the women opportunities, and the legal means to promote equality. Parliamentarians at a conference and yet the CPA does This year’s International Women’s Day under the not acknowledge her as an Officer of the Association, theme, “Equal rights, equal opportunities: Progress for whereas others such as the President, the Viceall”, underlines the need for governments, Parliaments, President and the Treasurer – who constitutionally do not civil society, women’s organizations, the private sector, Ms Kashmala Tariq, MNA come through the same electoral process – are so the media and individual women and men to join Chairperson of the honoured. The CWP Chairperson is recognized forces in making important changes to policies, Commonwealth Women constitutionally as a Member of the Association’s programmes, attitudes and behaviour to ensure that Parliamentarians Executive Committee but not as an Officer even though women fully participate in economic and social life. she has such a significant mandate. To my The right to equality before the law and the disappointment, these practices are clearly promotion of equal opportunities are fundamental discriminatory towards women and in conflict of the norms in international human rights law; however, the principles of the Commonwealth. It also shows how insecure our recognition and enjoyment of equal rights still remain beyond the reach of hierarchies are. I still wonder when we will practice what we preach and large sections of humanity. Even in countries where such provisions are in where this long journey and the struggle of women will end. force, much remains to be done to ensure the realization of the right to There are studies showing that the higher percentage of women in equality. decision making positions, the more successful and efficient institutions are. In times of economic stress, there is no business argument that can Unparliamentary inequalities counter the value-added of investing in women. Similarly, development We do not have to go far to find examples: unfortunately, in my view our studies over and over show that investing in women has a high return in own organization practices such inequalities. Despite making tall claims by improving livelihoods, improving access to education for children and asking countries to give women 30 per cent of representation in health for all, and reducing poverty in general terms. This makes an impact Parliaments, my own experience as the Chairperson of the on overall national economic and social development. Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians (CWP) is that even in 2010 – I feel that there is a need for sensitization, a change in attitudes and my third year in this position – women do not occupy 30 per cent of the mindsets at all level. Too often, obstacles in the form of negative Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Executive Committee and all stereotypes about women’s leadership potential continue to limit their other decision-making fora. Furthermore, I believe women success, limit change and limit progress. Specific measures to encourage Parliamentarians should be given an adequate budget and resources for and support women’s participation and enable them to gain senior their activities according to their representation. In order to be treated 8 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

View from the CWP:Layout 1 01/04/2010 13:42 Page 9

VIEW FROM THE CWP

leadership positions should be enhanced, including management and leadership training, formalized mentorship programmes and sustainable financial support. Transforming commitments into reality International Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Day is a reminder that most countries still have a long way to go before equality of rights and opportunities is translated into reality. There is no denying the fact that the status of women in most countries has improved considerably; but given the very low baseline from which women started, we cannot afford to be complacent. At a time when goals of gender equality have been set universally, it is a pity that most countries like Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bangladesh and African countries are lagging behind in reaching the Millennium Development Goals that are to a great extent directed at closing the existing gender gap in societies. The positive aspect is that women are now themselves struggling to rise. But without an enabling environment it is not possible for the

marginalized amongst them to realise their full potential. It is time to eliminate injustice and inequalities and to promote full and effective equality. On 8 March 2010, International Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Day, we called on Commonwealth members and all the CPA Branches to resolve to review and reinforce their commitments, policies and programmes to make gender equality a reality and initiate positive action, which includes a range of legislative, administrative and policy measures to overcome past disadvantage and to accelerate progress towards equality â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to convert lipservice into reality. I urge our Commonwealth family to be leaders in assuring progress for all by taking important steps to ensure dignity, respect and equality for women and give access to participation and leadership. Let us begin by asking all our Members to ensure that from this year onward their delegations to CPA conferences are truly gender-balanced and we see women attending our conferences as delegates, not observers.

In some Commonwealth countries, women waiting to vote in elections queue separately from men.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 9

View from theSG:Layout 1 24/03/2010 16:34 Page 10

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

THE ABHORRENCE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING One of the most abhorred activities in contemporary society is human trafficking. In recent years, there have been numerous media reports regarding the existence of unduly influenced or forced movements of human beings by organized groups. By definition, human trafficking is an activity organized to move and resettle human beings from one geographical area to another for the purpose of exploitation. Media reports have shown that organized individuals or groups of people carry out deceitful activities that lead to the trapping of women, children and men of various races for economic and social benefits. This enslaving activity has been going on for decades, even centuries, within countries, between countries and internationally. During the period of slavery, human beings,

Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association

particularly Africans, were bought and sold like commodities. They were then relocated and forced into labour by their masters, an activity that left untold stories of inhuman treatment and cruelty that the world has ever witnessed. There are similar stories of bondage and ill-treatment in the continents of America, Europe and Australia. However, quiet as the world might seem to be now, there are still untold stories of human bondage, trafficking and “modern” slavery in many parts of the world. For example, there are groups which continue to organize the trafficking of women, particularly from poor and underdeveloped societies, to work as prostitutes or house servants in Europe, Arabia and other areas of the world. The victims are usually lured by organized groups who promise to give them employment and better life in Europe and elsewhere.

The Secretary-General’s The Secretary-General of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija (far right) shaking hands with Shri Dilip Baerjee (far left) at the book launch of Election Recorder - an analytical reference at the West Bengal Legislative Assembly in Kolkata, India.

10 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

View from theSG:Layout 1 24/03/2010 16:35 Page 11

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

Some of the victims, particularly those who are under age, are forcefully snatched by criminal gangs who thereafter exploit them through forced labour or illicit trade, including paedophile activities. Other media reports have shown that male victims of various ages are sometimes castrated by their “employers” to render them completely docile in social and economic life. The United Nations has a covenant on human rights. It sets out the right of all human beings to move and associate free of undue influence and coercion. What the world is currently witnessing is the existence of the organized crime of human trafficking. It is one of the challenges of society to combat human trafficking. I believe Parliamentarians would know of inhuman activities in their countries similar to human trafficking. Typical examples of this vice within countries is the employment of women and children in domestic duties who, in the process, are overworked, underpaid and The incidence of human restricted in their movements. trafficking has increased in Such servants usually have their recent years. travel and personal documents kept away, rendering them

unable to leave. Similar treatments are usually meted on individuals who are lured from other countries. This treatment is tantamount to enslavement. In recent weeks, there have been examples of individuals and groups who raised suspicion as to whether they were not practising human trafficking or intending to do it. One example was revealed by media reports between Tanzania and Britain. The reports state that a Londonbased Tanzanian of undisclosed ethnic descent was questioned by British police over mistreatment of her 45-year maid, also from Tanzania. Having fallen ill, apparently because of severe inhuman and appalling treatment and working conditions, the maid revealed to the police that she was forced to work every day, without break or leave, and she slept on the kitchen floor. Her boss paid her £10 per month, having taken away her passport for fear she would escape. The relief in this case is that immigration rules in Britain do not give an employer the right to own a domestic worker, but most immigrant domestic workers do not know the rules. This modern-day slavery is at least constantly pursued by the British police and immigration authorities, who often arrest the culprits. Other social

Commonwealth gallery Left (top): Hon. Meira Kumar, MP, Speaker of India’s Lok Sabha, inaugurates the 20th Commonwealth Speakers and Presiding Officers Conference in New Delhi as Prime Minister Hon. Manmohan Singh looks on.

Left (bottom): Dr Shija (centre) seated to the left of the Speaker of Parliament in Sri Lanka, Hon. W.J.M. Lokubandara.

The Secretary-General (second from left) with attendees at the 20th Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers in Delhi.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 11

View from theSG:Layout 1 24/03/2010 16:35 Page 12

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

organizations, such as Kalayaan and the Tanzania Women Association (TAWA), have done commendable work to pursue the cases of bondaged domestic workers in Britain, Tanzania and other countries. I am sure there are several other similar incidences of human trafficking in Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth societies that call for the urgent attention of Parliamentarians and governments. It is my opinion that Parliamentarians in the Commonwealth have an urgent duty to arrest this system of modern-day slavery done through human trafficking. It is important to treat the activity of human trafficking in the same way drug trafficking and terrorism are treated. In fact, because of the existence of human trafficking, the normal social activity of adoption

has become problematic. It appears that ordinary law-abiding world citizens have been eager to adopt children from particularly under-privileged societies. However, there is now rising suspicion that attempts to adopt children by individuals is being taken as a disguise for trafficking human beings at their tender age. The recent adoption fracas in earthquake-hit Haiti is a case in point. With the government seriously disempowered by the effects of the earthquake, a group of “missionaries” went on the rampage to transport children from Haiti to the United States, even where some of the children’s relatives were present in the country. It may not be known if the intentions of the “missionaries” were genuine or they were individuals bent on stealing the children to resettle them without proper adoption procedures, hence engaging in one aspect of human trafficking.

The Secretary-General’s

Dr Shija (left) with the Deputy Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Mrs Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba (right).

Participants in the Yukon Legislative Assembly during the 27th Canadian Speakers Conference.

Yukon Speaker Hon. Ted Staffen hosting the 27th Canadian Speakers Conference.

12 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

View from theSG:Layout 1 24/03/2010 16:36 Page 13

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

The controversies surrounding the adoption of children have often surfaced because of the belief that people in developing countries adore the life in Western societies. The case of Madonna and the adoption case in Malawi is an example of refusal by some of the citizens of Malawi to automatically accept the removal of a child from his/her

natural and cultural environments for the sake of adoption and a “better life”. In fact, in recent years, there are many individuals who have chosen to “return home” from Europe and America, not because of racism alone, but to return to their natural and cultural environments. There have been several other controversial cases of adoption

because of the suspicion of human trafficking, among other things. In the circumstances, because of increased criminal tendencies, it is important for Parliamentarians to revise the laws, enacting new ones where necessary, to address the movement of human beings, with the sole aim of combating human trafficking. Human trafficking is not only a criminal offence; its practice

defeats the very essence and purpose of democracy, human rights and equality among human beings. I feel that the Commonwealth family has the opportunity and duty to lead the way in the fight against human trafficking, as we have done in the cases of poverty alleviation, terrorism, climate change and general human rights violations.

Commonwealth gallery Prof. Maurice Iwu (second left), Chair of Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission, and colleagues, with CPA Directors Mr David Broom (left) and Mr Andrew Imlach (right).

MPs from the Parliament of Cyprus greeting Mr Andrew Imlach (right) during a visit to the CPA Secretariat.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 13

Begg:Layout 1 19/03/2010 13:36 Page 14

DIVERSITY IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

THE SPEAKER’S CONFERENCE: SEEKING A MORE JUST, CREDIBLE AND EFFECTIVE PARLIAMENT The Vice-Chair of the current Speaker's Conference outlines recommendations about how the U.K. House of Commons can increase the representation of women, ethnic minorities and disabled people.

Ms Anne Begg, MP, in London. Ms Begg, a teacher, was first elected as a Labour Member of the United Kingdom House of Commons in 1997. She became Vice-Chair of the Speaker's Conference in 2008. Ms Begg is also a Member of the Chairmen’s Panel where she deputizes for the Speaker in Westminster Hall debates and on Public Bill committees.

The Speaker’s Conference (on parliamentary representation) was set up by the House of Commons in November 2008. We were asked to inquire into the under-representation of women, disabled people and people from black and ethnic minority communities in the House. Currently the composition of the House of Commons does not reflect U.K. society: women constitute 52 per cent of the U.K.’s population but only 20 per cent of the Commons’ membership. Approximately one in 13 people in U.K. society come from a black and minority ethnic (BME) community, but only one in 43

14 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Ms Anne Begg, MP.

MPs have a BME background. One in five people in Great Britain acknowledge some form of impairment, but only a handful of MPs identify themselves as disabled. We were asked to find

ways in which this underrepresentation could be addressed and to find ways in which people from these groups could be encouraged and supported to stand for Parliament. Some people questioned why it was necessary to carry out this work. After all, they said, the principle that an MP represents all his or her constituents regardless of their background, their circumstances or their political allegiance is strongly adhered to by MPs. Does the individual MP’s own background, therefore, matter? Our view is that while, at the individual level, it does not

Begg:Layout 1 19/03/2010 13:52 Page 15

DIVERSITY IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

matter, justice requires that there should be a place within the House for individuals from all sections of society. We also identified further advantages from a more representative House. A socially diverse House would be able to draw upon a wider range of experiences and insights when scrutinising legislation, and government

backgrounds have an understanding of what can be achieved through politics, they will not use the opportunities to stand for Parliament which may be available.

policy; and, in a House where individuals from many different groups are able to be seen and heard, the decisions made would be likely to benefit from enhanced legitimacy. Our main task, therefore, was to consider how to create a “level playing field” for anyone who knows that they wish to represent their community as an MP: how to ensure that equal opportunities are available to all whatever their gender, family background or personal circumstances. As an extension to this task we recognized that we should also take a step back to ask how people become politically engaged in the first place – for unless people of all

visits outside Westminster. These would enable us to talk directly to people who either do not have easy access to ”the Westminster village”, or who are unaware of how to become involved. Between March and June 2009 we visited East London, Manchester (in North West England), Cheltenham (South West England), Cardiff and Leeds (in Yorkshire). Representatives of the Scottish Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly joined our discussions at the National Assembly for Wales. In Manchester, Cheltenham and Leeds we also conducted open meetings. These were opportunities for anyone with an interest to come

Engaging the public It was with the issue of engagement in mind that we decided upon a programme of

along and ask questions, or tell us their ideas and recommendations for improving diversity within the House of Commons. We established an online forum where individuals could discuss the issues. We broke new ground by filming a short video, which can be seen on YouTube at www.youtube.com/UKParliame

Left: The Houses of Parliament in London; Above: The clock tower which houses Big Ben.

nt#p/a/u/2/LN8tung8jo4. We also took substantial formal and informal evidence from disabled people’s organizations, campaigning groups, from political party officials and prospective parliamentary candidates. Conduct of meetings The vast majority of MPs are Members of registered political parties and it is therefore reasonable to describe the parties as the gatekeepers to

the House. Inevitably, we had to engage substantially with the different cultures and procedures of the various parties represented at Westminster. Much of this discussion was sensitive, with the certain prospect of a general election looming. We had also to bear in mind the absolute requirement that the office of the Speaker be kept “above the fray” of party politics. In pursuit of this goal both Speaker Martin and Speaker Bercow issued statements confirming the protocol that, when chairing conference evidence sessions, they would act “in the manner of a wholly neutral Chairman of a public bill committee, exercising control and ensuring discipline, rather than as a conventional select committee Chairman who puts questions to witnesses”. As Vice-Chairman it was my particular role to chair meetings and visits which the Speaker could not attend owing to his responsibilities in the Chamber, and also to act as the Conference’s rapporteur. A normal select committee inquiry at Westminster will spend several weeks gathering the opinions of interested individuals and groups before concluding with questions to the relevant government minister. It was apparent to us very early in our work that, in this case, while there would be actions for government arising from our inquiry our most significant recommendations would be directed to the political parties. We therefore chose to conclude our evidence-gathering by inviting the leaders of the three main political parties at Westminster – the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown, MP, the leader of the Opposition, Rt. Hon. David Cameron, MP, and the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Rt. Hon. Nick Clegg, MP, to appear before us. We

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 15

Begg:Layout 1 19/03/2010 13:55 Page 16

DIVERSITY IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

were delighted when they each agreed to attend. Evidence from the Prime Minister and other major party leaders Our session with the party leaders took place on 20 October 2009 and was televised live. After some intensive discussions it was agreed that each of the leaders would come to the table separately, to answer questions on the individual position and views of their party relating to diversity in the House of Commons. With barely 20 minutes with each of the leaders, it required us to be extremely disciplined and efficient in our conduct of the meeting. The witnesses were escorted into the room through the Members’ door, and exited by the public door; while some commentators interpreted this as a means to avoid potentially awkward encounters between the leaders of the different parties the simple reality is that this practice shaved precious seconds off the ”changeover” time between witnesses, which could then be devoted to discussion. The evidence given to us by the party leaders, while brief, made an immensely valuable contribution to our inquiry. Each of the leaders took the opportunity to stress a personal commitment to increasing the diversity of representation in Parliament. All of them equally, were willing to explore the difficulties which lie in changing long-established party cultures and procedures so that the barriers of discrimination against certain groups can be removed. Monitoring candidate selections We were particularly pleased to secure consensus on the subject of monitoring. We had been told that monitoring of the parties’ candidate selections by candidates’ sex, ethnicity, and personal identifications of disability

would provide hard evidence as to the relative success of different strategies to promote diversity. Monitoring could also help to increase the speed of change. We had already secured some preliminary reports from the parties about their candidate selections so we were pleased that each of the party leaders agreed to continue reporting to us in the run up to the 2010 general election.

“Our view is that while, at the individual level, it does not matter, justice requires that there should be a place within the House for individuals from all sections of society.” At the same time we were aware that our ability to act as monitors would be limited: our conference will cease to exist at the dissolution of the 2005 Parliament. Therefore, when we realized that the Equality Bill which was going through the House presented an opportunity to propose a statutory monitoring provision, we were anxious to use it. Attempt to amend the Equality Bill Accordingly, in early December 2009 we tabled a new clause and new schedule for the consideration stage of the Equality Bill. Recognizing that the political parties already monitor the diversity of their candidate selections for their own purposes, our proposal simply required the parties to put such information into

16 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

the public domain, and created a formal mechanism for them to do so, in a common format and on specified days, so that the record of the parties on equality could be compared. Our amendments were accompanied by an interim report. This explained to the House the role monitoring could play in securing diversity of representation, and set out the support expressed by the party leaders in their evidence to us. We argued that publishing this information would enable everyone

to see what numbers of candidates were coming forward from different groups for selection. It would also allow analysts to work out how successful potential candidates from different groups were, in being selected for winnable seats; and whether there were particular points in the process at which different groups tended to fall out of the competition. Our amendments were selected for debate (the Chairman of Ways and Means, rather than the Speaker,

Begg:Layout 1 19/03/2010 13:56 Page 17

DIVERSITY IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

presiding over the relevant selection conference) but unfortunately were not reached before the debate ran out of time. Nonetheless we secured a government commitment to take the matter forward, and we are currently watching the progress of the Bill in the House of Lords. The historic tradition of the Speaker’s Conference Historically the Speaker’s Conference is, in limited degree, a joint enterprise of Parliament

and Government: it takes place at the request of the Prime Minister of the day, and the role of supporting the conference has been shared between Parliament and Government. This co-operation has been manifested throughout our work as demonstrated by the willingness of government to respond to our suggestion for amendment of the Equality Bill. If parliamentary business allows, we look forward to a government-sponsored debate on our report to mark

Above: Women in the U.K. constitute 52 per cent of the population but only 20 per cent of the Common’s membership. International Women’s Day in March. There have only been six Speaker’s Conferences in the history of our Parliament. The Conference was designed to provide a politically neutral forum in which the political parties might discuss pressing constitutional issues on which a

consensus was required. The most prominent of these conferences was the first, which was chaired by Speaker Lowther in 1916-17, and which concluded that the right to vote should be extended to women. Throughout our deliberations in this sixth conference – the first of the 21st century, and the first for 30 years – we have been aware of the expectations which are fostered by this record but also of the unique authority which the status of a Speaker’s Conference accords to our work. Our final report, published on 11 January 2010, sets out the reasons why diversity of representation is important. It also asserts the importance of healthy local political parties which have the vitality and the resources to connect with local communities and to identify and nurture potential MPs from a wide variety of backgrounds. We have expanded further on the importance of monitoring, target setting and continued parliamentary scrutiny, and we have raised the possibility that in the future all parties may need to adopt some form of prescriptive quota to promote women’s representation, and may wish similarly to use some form of quota also for black and minority ethnic representation. We have made a series of very practical recommendations which are designed to improve disabled people’s access to politics, and to Parliament itself. The public response in the last couple of days has been positive, if low-key: one national paper, The Guardian, has pleasingly described our report as “a clear programme of action…that should transform the appearance of politics over the next 20 years” if our recommendations are implemented. It may take that many years or even longer to determine whether this Conference has lived up to the reputation of its predecessors.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 17

Bryant:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:25 Page 18

FOR SUSPENSION

SUSPENDING SELFGOVERNMENT IN THE TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS Armed with a commission in inquiry report pointing to serious improprieties in the internal self-government of its overseas territory in the northern Caribbean, the British government took over the government of the Turks and Caicos Islands. The Foreign and Commonwealth Ofﬁce Minister who took the action explains why.

Mr Chris Bryant, MP, in London. Mr Bryant is the Parliamentary UnderSecretary of State in the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Ofﬁce. A Labour Member since 2001, his ministerial duties include responsibility for, among other matters, U.K. overseas territories and the Caribbean.

On 14 August 2009 I announced that I had instructed the Governor of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) to bring into force an Order in Council suspending ministerial government and the House of Assembly in TCI for a period of up to two years. This was a serious constitutional step which the U.K. Government did not take lightly. However these measures were essential in order to restore the principles of good governance and sound financial management. It remains the U.K.’s intention that elections should be held by July 2011, if not sooner. This is not the first time that the U.K. has needed to intervene in the running of the territory. There have been concerns about poor governance in TCI for many years. The Blom-Cooper Inquiry in 1986 into allegations of arson and corruption found three Ministers guilty of unconstitutional behaviour and of ministerial malpractices.

18 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Mr Chris Bryant, MP

Blom-Cooper also noted persistent unconstitutional behaviour and contraventions of the fundamental freedom of the individual from discrimination on grounds of political opinions and maladministration at every level of government. This led to the suspension of the Executive Council (now known as the Cabinet) in TCI for about two years in order to change the administrative structure to prevent

ministerial abuses. Following the 2003 election of the TCI Government led by Hon. Michael Misick, there were regular allegations of corruption involving the Premier and some Cabinet Ministers and officials. Successive Governors made it clear to individuals who raised concerns that they should provide any evidence they had, in order to permit full investigations of any allegations. Unfortunately, people were unwilling to do that. In July 2007 the U.K. Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) announced their inquiry into the U.K.’s Overseas Territories. They reported that they received over 200 submissions from individuals. The largest single group of these related to TCI, many alleging corruption, especially in regard to the sale of Crown Land, the distribution of contracts and development agreements, the granting of Belongerships* and the

Bryant:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:26 Page 19

FOR SUSPENSION

misuse of public funds. Many apparently also expressed concern about freedom of speech on the islands. Their insistence on the confidentiality of their submissions was of real concern to the FAC. Three members of the FAC visited TCI in March 2008. They

reported that they had encountered extraordinary circumstances in which large numbers of people made allegations of corruption, but wished to see the visiting party in secret locations or under conditions of anonymity because they feared reprisals. On 6 July 2008, the FAC published its report on the Overseas Territories which recommended that the Government should announce a Commission of Inquiry to investigate allegations made by TC Islanders. On 10 July 2008, the Governor of TCI announced the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry into the possibility of corruption or other serious dishonesty in relation to past and present Members of the Legislature of TCI. The Commissioner was Sir Robin Auld, a retired English Court of Appeal judge.

The Commission convened formal public hearings in TCI during January and February 2009 to hear evidence from members of the House of Assembly and others. Sir Robin submitted his Final Report to the Governor on 31 May 2009 directed, as required by his terms of reference, to the formulation of preliminary findings and recommendations concerning:

Opposite page: Turks and Caicos Legislative Council Building; Above: An aerial view of Grand Turk; Left: A cruise ship docking into the islands.

(a) Instigating criminal investigations by the police or otherwise; (b) Any indications of systemic weaknesses in legislation, regulation and administration; and (c) Any other matters relating thereto. Sir Robin made over 60 recommendations. On systemic weaknesses he recommended: partial suspension of the Constitution and interim direct rule; The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 19

Bryant:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:27 Page 20

FOR SUSPENSION

criminal sanctions and civil recovery; integrity in public life; Crown Land allocation, sale and management and a new constitution. Some recommendations focussed on deterring or preventing corruption and other serious dishonesty, while other looked at the broader constitutional and statutory framework of governance. The Commission of Inquiry’s Interim Report also described the dire condition of the territory: “[The] government of the Territory is at a near stand-still. The Cabinet is divided and unstable. The House of Assembly stands prorogued until 1st April 2009. The Territory’s finances are in dire straits and poorly controlled. There is a settled pattern of recourse to disposals of Crown land to fund recurrent public expenditure, for want of governmental revenue from other more fiscally conventional sources. … [T]he financial position is so bad that the Government cannot pay many of its bills as they fall due. Governmental and other audit recommendations lie ignored and unattended. In short, there are wide-spread fears on the part of the people of the Territory that they are leaderless and that their heritage is at risk of continuing to drain away.” I shared the Commissioners concerns for the territory, and was particularly troubled by the following: Unstable political situation A revolt by members of the governing party (Progressive National Party) almost resulted in a successful vote of no confidence in the Premier, Michael Misick, in the House of Assembly. The Premier announced on 20 February 2009 that he would vacate his office on 31 March 2009. He was replaced by Galmo Williams. Despite the appointment of a new Premier, our assessment was that public confidence in TCIG had not been restored. In addition,

the composition of the House of Assembly remained unchanged. The findings of the Commission’s report were so serious, and the corruption so systemic, that the U.K. had no choice but to take decisive action. Contingent liabilities/economy The U.K. was increasingly concerned about the mounting U.K. Government contingent liabilities in TCI. Financial mismanagement by the former TCIG TCI’s finances were in a dire state. The previous government’s policy of unrestricted spending and substantial tax concessions was unsustainable. It had run up significant debt. By August 2009, when the parts of the Constitution were suspended, TCIG’s debt was $135million for a population of less than 40,000. If the country’s expenditure had continued unchecked, bankruptcy would have resulted. Despite a decade of high growth (20 per cent in one year), reserves were zero (under applicable U.K. Government guidelines they should be $20million). The main borrowing constraints set by the U.K. Government (the ratio between borrowing and reserves and the overdraft limit) had been breached significantly. Failure to control the management of cash was compounded by poor or nonexistent departmental expenditure controls, the absence of internal audit controls, delays in auditing TCIG accounts and poor revenue collection. The Tourist Board entered into contracts and incurred commitments for millions of dollars without the knowledge of the Ministry of Finance. Hurricane Ike: September 2008 The severe damage caused by the hurricane exposed TCIG’s dire lack of planning and provision for a disaster. This was despite regular advice and support from the Governor and the U.K.

20 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Government. It also demonstrated the inability of the then Government to fund the recovery programme. The need to ensure ring fencing (through the establishment of a hurricane recovery fund managed by a U.K. adviser) of the U.K.’s contribution of £5m assistance to TCI, was driven in large part by lack of confidence in the ability of the TCIG to spend the money as intended. Crown land TCIG had accelerated the disposal of Crown Land, both to large developers and to individuals and became increasingly reliant on such sales to balance its budget. Land was sold for a fraction of its value, costing TCI millions of dollars in lost revenue. Audit recommendations ignored Few of the recommendations in the Chief Auditor’s reports were implemented. Although these reports went to the Public Accounts Committee, the Committee met rarely and failed to produce a report in the last three to four years. Electoral reform Both sets of independent observers (Electoral Reform International Services (ERIS) and Caribbean Community (CARICOM)) at the general elections in February 2007 made a large number of recommendations for improvements in the process. The observers were critical of the lack of legislation covering party campaign finance, party use of state resources for campaigning, and qualifications on the right to vote that restricted the universality of the right to vote, leading to suffrage limited to less than half of the resident adult population. TCIG did not act upon these recommendations. Having considered the preliminary findings and recommendations of the Commission, and based on an accumulation of factors, I

instructed the Governor to bring into force an Order in Council suspending ministerial government and the House of Assembly for a period of up to two years. The Order also suspended the constitutional right to trial by jury in TCI, which provides the possibility in future of having trials by judge alone in the TCI Supreme Court in appropriate cases. Whilst the Government is now headed by the Governor, the public service continues to consist of Belongers. All permanent secretaries are Belongers, the Advisory Council and Consultative Forum consist of Belongers. I must make it clear that none of the work currently underway to restore the principles of good governance, sustainable development and sound financial management could be undertaken nor would succeed without the active involvement and support of TC Islanders. An enormous amount of work has been undertaken since August. The main focus has been to restore sound financial management and improve the public sector. This is a critical first step to prepare for economic recovery and restore the country’s reputation as a good place to live, visit and do business. The U.K. is better placed to restore confidence in TCI than the previous administration who were tainted by the corruption and poor management that had become prevalent in TCI. Our goals have been to reduce expenditure, increase revenue, contain the debt and secure the best debt repayment terms available. The Governor and his team have taken a number of significant steps: -

An Advisory Council, chaired by the Governor, and a Consultative Forum, have been appointed by the Governor. Both bodies meet regularly. They ensure that the voice and views of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands

Bryant:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:28 Page 21

FOR SUSPENSION

continue to be heard. Concerns and questions are discussed on a wide range of issues (e.g. the economy, new healthcare scheme, airport expansion, crime levels and police performance). Press releases are issued after the Advisory Council so that the public is aware of what has been discussed and approved. A full review of the TCI Government’s finances was undertaken and, in discussion with the Advisory Council and following debate in the Consultative Forum, further measures were put in place to limit public expenditure, increase revenue and bring debt under control. The Governor published a new budget at the end of September. U.K. Government funded advisers offer support and guidance not only to the Governor, but also to the public service. They are working in the priority areas outlined here. Their appointment is part of the U.K.’s commitment to assist the TCI. A Special Prosecutor, Helen Garlick, and her team were appointed. They visit TCI on a regular basis and are following up several lines of inquiry. The Governor undertook a series of Town Hall meetings and visited all the main inhabited islands: Salt Cay, South Caicos, Middle Caicos, North Caicos and Providenciales, as well as Grand Turk. This enabled him to explain to the public what the interim Government means for them, to answer their questions, and to hear their concerns. He will revisit the islands early in the new year. A full review of TCIG financial management practices was completed and a Stabilisation Plan implemented to deal with fundamental weaknesses. The Governor and his financial

A worker polishing conch shells in Turks and Caicos.

advisers have secured a consolidated loan facility to reduce the immediate burden of unpaid bills and short term debt, to assist the Government to manage its repayments over a longer period and maintain public services. The Governor is giving a high priority to monitoring and strict enforcement of the payment of dues and taxes. TCI needs all the money it can generate to meet its debts and pay for vital public services. TCI has signed Tax Information Exchange Agreements with 12 countries – putting them on the OECD’s white list which will help to renew confidence in the territory as a financial services centre. The existing revenue system was reviewed and options identified for a fair and affordable revenue strategy to enable TCI to remain competitive, build an adequate level of reserves and ensure the delivery of appropriate public services. To help strengthen TCI’s revenue base, improvements were made to the efficiency and capability of the Customs Department. The department is responsible for the collection of over 40 per cent of all TCI revenue.

The administration of the TCI’s most valuable asset – its land – has also been a priority. To address the significant losses from the unsustainable sale of large tracts of land by the former Government, the Interim Government has begun to restore order to the Crown Land Unit where systems had virtually collapsed. They have put in place procedures to recover unpaid arrears of over $3million. They are also dealing with the backlog of cases in the Land Registry, speeding up access to information and service delivery and ensuring a more accurate assessment of stamp duty. A profitable and sustainable tourism industry is of central importance to TCI’s economy. A working group has made recommendations on the promotion of tourism. We are determined to ensure that TCI is supported by a stronger public service, staffed by TC Islanders. Ministries and Departments were badly coordinated and either poorly resourced or over-manned. The public service has been restructured to improve efficiency and value for money. The Chief Executive aims to reduce public sector

employment costs by 2.5 per cent before the end of March 2010. A programme to review Ministry and departmental staffing and skill requirements and to identify critical establishment positions that need to be filled urgently is underway, and two new Ministries of Border Control, and Tourism, Trade and Economic Development have been created. New permanent secretaries (all TC Islanders) have also been appointed. The new Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Communications will improve the focus on national economic drivers, such as business and trade.

The actions we have taken to date are starting to attract renewed confidence in TCI and work is under way to facilitate this interest. Over the years many reports have been compiled and lists of recommendations drawn up to rectify weaknesses in TCI’s systems. I hope that when we pass the reins of government back to TCI in 2011, the principles of good governance, sustainable development and sound financial management will be firmly embedded in daily life and that the territory will build a fresh start on these solid foundations.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 21

Saunders:Layout 1 22/03/2010 18:05 Page 22

SUSPENSION OF THE HOUSE

THE SUSPENSION OF THE TURKS & CAICOS ISLANDS’ CONSTITUTION A former senior Member of the Turks and Caicos Islands House of Assembly argues that the British government had other available options short of suspending elected government when it was faced with a damning report on corruption its is Caribbean overseas territory.

Mr Norman B. Saunders, Sr. in Cockburn Town. Mr Saunders is a former Member of the House of Assembly and a former Chief Minister and Backbencher in the ruling Progressive National Party prior to the suspension of the House.

On 14 August 2009 the British Government suspended the Turks & Caicos Islands Constitution and introduced direct rule from London, the Governor being solely in charge of the country. This action was taken as a result of recommendations made from Sir Robin Auld, the sole Commissioner, in his report (“the Report”) following his Commission of Inquiry. In the report Sir Robin concluded that: “there is a high probability of systemic corruption in Government and the Legislature and among public officers in the Turks & Caicos Islands in recent years.” To give a semblance of decency to the decision the Governor set up two advisory bodies comprised of Belongers’ of repute. The Advisory Council meets every two weeks and advises the Governor on matters of policy, while the Consultative Forum meets less frequently and advises on legislation. The Governor, with advice from these bodies, is referred to as the Interim Government.

22 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

The matter of alleged corruption by former Ministers of

Mr Norman Saunders Sr.

government is the subject of an ongoing investigation and might be the subject of court proceedings, and as such, I consider it inappropriate to discuss that subject at this time. It is important, however, to point out that the legal and legislative processes to deal with those matters were in place, and in the case of the legislative process, prior to the suspension of the constitution there was a change in cabinet of the ruling

government that excluded all of the former Ministers whose behaviour the Commissioner concluded warranted further investigation. There were other options too for reconstituting a government of duly elected Members who had not been cited by the Commissioner. It is my opinion, and the opinion of many in this country and abroad, that the suspension of the TCI Constitution fell far short of the best solution to the crisis. The decision to suspend the constitution was a high-handed act of an imperial power exerting its power over a small territory. The decision was taken without any real interest in a democratic solution and without regard to any consequences, good or bad, that may follow in the Turks & Caicos Islands. The recommendation to suspend the TCI Constitution was supported by arguments in the Report that emphasized the British government’s obligation to “root out systemic corruption,” to introduce new legislation and a new constitution,” and to make

Saunders:Layout 1 22/03/2010 18:06 Page 23

SUSPENSION OF THE HOUSE

Left: The Turks and Caicos House of Assembly’s building; Below: The Crest tof the Turks and Caicos Islands.

administrative changes, all designed to prevent any possibility of corruption in the future. There was never any argument from the cabinet led by Hon. Galmo Williams about the objectives set by the British government to deal with the problems raised by the Report, including the most urgent problem of bringing the finances of the country under control. The cabinet that was set up following the

resignation of the then Premier had communicated and demonstrated a desire to work with the Governor and the British government to achieve the objectives listed in the report. The Williams led government had, in fact, made substantial progress on a number of the Auld recommendations, including recommendations about the country’s finances and the introduction of some of the

recommended legislation. With the British government providing specialist assistance where necessary a democratically elected government could have realized all the recommendations under a democratic system. In fact, a number of the recommendations in the Auld report had already been implemented by the Williams Administration, prior to the suspension of those parts of the TCI’s Constitution providing for The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 23

Saunders:Layout 1 22/03/2010 18:06 Page 24

SUSPENSION OF THE HOUSE

representative government and a right to trial by jury, and no stone was left unturned in an effort to dissuade the British government from going ahead with the suspension of representative government. Despite all efforts, on 14 August 2009 the provisions in the TCI Constitution providing for elected government was suspended by passage in the U.K. Parliament of the Turks and Caicos Islands Constitution (Interim Amendment)(Amendment) Order 2009, with the promise of returning the country to democratic rule, with a new constitution in July 2011, although this date can be

brought forward or extended as the British government sees fit. It is my view that the decision to suspend those parts of the constitution providing for representative government was a bad decision as no constitution is perfect, and no political system, in any part of the world, can for all time solve all problems. Constitutions should be evolving instruments and they should be in a never-ending process of improvement as countries make the necessary changes in the light of new revelations of weaknesses in their constitutions. In Issue One/2009 of The Parliamentarian,

24 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

there are two articles that I believe touch on themes and issues similar to ours in the Turks and Caicos Islands. The first is “The Commonwealth at 60 – Relevant then, Relevant now.” I quote: “Democracy is an unending journey, and its path has been as winding and incremental in the longest established democracies as in the newer ones. Most Commonwealth Members – states for less than half a century – have had to move uncommonly fast in creating the laws, institutions and underlying democratic culture that are the bedrock of a system which has been observed to be only the

best of several imperfect options. Democracy resolves around the painstaking process of nurturing democratic culture and building good governance in the institutions of democracy – Legislature, executive, judiciary, ombudsmen, human rights institutions, electoral commissions, and more.” (H. E. Mr. Kamalesh Sharma, SecretaryGeneral of the Commonwealth) The Secretary-General of the CPA, Dr William F. Shija, also made a very pertinent point in the same issue in his article, “The Plight of Developing Countries in the Global Economic and Financial Crisis.” As he stated: “To this, Ivan Breinhold

Saunders:Layout 1 22/03/2010 18:07 Page 25

SUSPENSION OF THE HOUSE

Above: The Speaker’s Chair in the Assembly Chamber.

Leth, a European business advisor in the Kingdom of Lesotho, is known to have said: ‘Europe has fought its own wars, exploited its own people, overthrown its own dictators, and through this cursed process of human suffering, Europe has created its own present political and economic system. Africa can, and must, do it on its own.’” Likewise, the Turks and Caicos should be allowed to do the same.

We have come to accept the need for intervention in exceptional cases but this is not one of them. Five months after the suspension of the constitution the financial and economic situation continues to deteriorate and investors on whom the economic engine depends for survival continue to leave the country, for many and varied reasons. This, coupled with the global economic situation, has seriously eroded government revenues making it challenging for government to pay civil servants on time, let alone other bills. The main thrust of the Interim Government has been to bring the financial situation under control, largely by cutting expenditure and raising taxes, in the hope of bridging the gap between revenue and expenditure. Those actions have not helped the economy as each month government revenues decline even further. What is needed is an injection of capital that would enable civil servants to be paid on time, government creditors to be paid – and equally important for stimulating the economy – to make necessary and worthwhile expenditure on capital projects, all designed to encourage business and strengthen government’s medium and long term revenue earning ability. It is unfortunate that the British government did not seen fit until very recently to assist in this vital area, when just about every country in the world, rich and poor alike, including the United Kingdom itself, was doing the same thing. We have the ability to repay and should repay the debts created by responsible borrowing when our economy recovers. We do not expect nor are we suggesting that we should be the recipient of any handouts from the British government. The British government very kindly made a substantial donation to us following the devastation to our country by hurricane Ike, following the

devastation in September 2008. Understandably the British government retained control of how and when the money was spent. Unfortunately – and many

“The best that can be done now is to speed up the process of putting in place the recommended or necessary changes, so that democracy can be restored by July 2011.” believe deliberately – those funds are only now being spent, 15 months after hurricane Ike, which has caused much suffering and inconvenience by school children who missed classes because of the destruction of the roofs of the school buildings. The concern of leading Turks & Caicos Islanders is whether the British government is going to live up to its commitment to restore democracy to this country in July 2011. The Interim Government seems to have settled into a regular routine. There appears to be no rush, apart from efforts to increase revenue and reduce expenditure, and I agree that those efforts are important to deal with the many other matters considered important in the report. While there has been a realignment of administrative staff, considered to help in the workflow and to streamline administrative procedures, there is no apparent action to reveal or root out what the Commissioner has concluded is systemic corruption. Unless that is done

the belief will persist that that conclusion was drawn only to strengthen the argument for suspension of representative government. In addition, the Commissioner recommended that sweeping changes be made in the Legislature, in the administration, and for the operation of political parties, along with the need for a new constitution. There is no evidence that any of those matters are being dealt with and they are at the heart of what the report recommends must be dealt with prior to the restoration of democracy. I admit it is a challenge to implement all of those recommendations within the allotted time; but five months into the Interim Government and no sign of any of them being dealt with is cause for concern. The fear is that if the other matters are not addressed within two years the date for the return to democratic rule will be pushed backward, further aggravating the situation here. To conclude, I remain convinced that suspension of the provisions in the TCI Constitution providing for government elected by the people was totally unnecessary, and a contradiction coming from a power that espouses the virtues of a free and democratic society. That no effort was made or concern given to achieving the recommended changes by democratic means is not just disappointing but undermines the U.K.’s claim to democratic ideals. Many alternatives were available for implementing all of the recommendations by a democratic process, but they were ignored. The best that can be done now is to speed up the process of putting in place the recommended or necessary changes, so that democracy can be restored by July 2011. Any delay is to delay the rebuilding of our country, which is paramount to the advancement of our people and the restoration of their pride and dignity.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 25

CPA Canada Branch:Layout 1 01/04/2010 10:44 Page 26

CPA BENCHMARKS

THE CPA BENCHMARKS AND THE PARLIAMENT OF CANADA – A SELF-ASSESSMENT Members and Clerks of Canada’s federal Parliament assess their venerable institution against the CPA Benchmarks in the tense parliamentary atmosphere of a minority government.

CPA Canada Branch, in Ottawa.

The Parliament of Canada, and by extension, the Canada Branch of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, has long had a strong interest in the development and achievement of benchmarks for Parliaments and Legislatures. The request for the membership of the Branch to undertake a selfevaluation of how well the Canadian Parliament meets the Recommended Benchmarks for Democratic Legislatures was a welcome opportunity to undertake this examination. The participation of Sen. the Hon. Jane Cordy in the October 2006 CPA Workshop on Benchmarks for Democratic Legislatures held in Bermuda provided the catalyst for the Canadian Branch to consider the possibility that such a selfexamination would arise in the future. The process The Canadian Parliament is bicameral in nature and a review of the Benchmarks indicated that any responses to them should be prepared in a single joint document

26 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

marrying both Senate and House of Commons practices. To ensure accuracy in the preparation of the responses, the Executive Committee of the Canadian Branch of the CPA agreed to have the Clerk of the Senate and Clerk of the Parliament, then Mr Paul Bélisle, and the Clerk of the House of Commons, Ms Audrey O’Brien, take responsibility for the initial assessment of how well the Parliament of Canada was or was not meeting the Benchmarks. Their assessment was then forwarded to the Members of the Executive Committee for consideration, agreement and finalization of the document prior to it being forwarded to the CPA Secretariat. For each of the Benchmarks, we assessed the degree to which our practices and procedures met the Benchmarks, using a 1 to 5 scale, with the following definitions: 5 4 3

Fully meets the Benchmark Partially meets the Benchmark Currently developing

processes to implement the Benchmark Reviewing potential application of the Benchmark No current plan to meet the Benchmark

Where the rating was lower than 5, an explanation was provided, as it was in other cases where it was felt that additional explanation might be beneficial for a better understanding of the rating applied to the various Benchmarks. Looking at the legislative framework The exercise undertaken by senior parliamentary staff included a review of all of the relevant legislation pertaining to the maintenance and improvement of the democratic Benchmarks within the Canadian electoral system. The Legislation reviewed included: the Parliament of Canada Act, the Canada Elections Act and the Federal Accountability Act. Over the past 10 years, the Canada

CPA Canada Branch:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:40 Page 27

CPA BENCHMARKS

Left: The Peace Tower at the Canadian Parliament in Ottawa; Below: Wroght iron pedestrian gate at the entrance to the Houses of Parliament.

Elections Act has benefited from several amendments to update it in light of changes in technology and as a means to encourage all eligible voters to be able to cast their ballots in a free and open manner.

Few changes have been made to the Parliament of Canada Act since its adoption in 1985, with the notable exception of the creation of the Office of the Ethics Commissioner in 2004 with the coming into force of the Conflict of

Interest Act. This particular Act also included legislation dealing with the Lobbyistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Registration Act governing the registration of all persons purporting to have access to current and past Members of cabinet and or the political power The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 27

CPA Canada Branch:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:40 Page 28

CPA BENCHMARKS

bases within Parliament. Its implementation is a concrete attempt to ensure that lobbyists are registered and identified in the public domain and that Parliamentarians are aware of individuals’ status as lobbyists and the parties they represent on various issues before Parliament. These Acts were further bolstered by the adoption of the Federal Accountability Act in 2006 which codifies many of the principles contained in other legislation and acts as a legislative watchdog on the behaviour of both sitting and retired Parliamentarians and senior bureaucrats within the federal government. Involving Members and Clerks Following this review of the appropriate legislation, the senior Table staff from both the Senate and House of Commons met to evaluate how Canada measured itself against the Benchmarks as sent by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Once the initial assessment had been achieved, the results were then forwarded to both Mr Bélisle and Ms O’Brien for a detailed review. During the initial process, there were a number of Benchmarks where the staff felt there was sufficient ambiguity that the Parliamentarians needed to be consulted for their assessment of how well Canada was meeting the established Benchmarks. These points were raised with both Clerks and both agreed that Parliamentarians themselves would need to evaluate the Benchmarks. It should be noted that unlike many other branches of the CPA throughout the Commonwealth, membership in the Canadian Branch is dependent on an expressed wish on the part of each individual Parliamentarian to join the Association. Membership is based on an annual payment of a membership fee which permits the Parliamentarian (Senator or

Above: A statue of Queen Victoria on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. She chose Ottawa as Canada’s capital. Member of the House of Commons) to be actively involved

28 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

in all the CPA activities of the Branch and to have the opportunity to apply for any regional or international CPA events. As membership can exceed 180 in any year, consultations on a topic as important as a self-assessment

on how well the country is meeting the Benchmarks for a parliamentary democracy can be problematic. Canada is currently experiencing its third minority government in four years, so

CPA Canada Branch:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:41 Page 29

CPA BENCHMARKS

Parliamentarians were not available to sit down as a group and discuss each individual Benchmark. Instead, the responsibility for reviewing the assessment was taken up by the 16-Member elected Executive Committee in May and early June 2009. The draft assessment was translated into French and sent to all Members of the Executive Committee with a request that they review the ratings and, if they disagreed with the assessment, to report their comments to the Executive Secretary in writing by a pre-determined deadline which had been established to permit sufficient time for Members in both Chambers to conduct an in-depth review during their busy parliamentary schedules. Members only The Executive Secretary was instructed to prepare a table of the Benchmarks indicating where there was unanimous support and where there appeared to be disagreements in the ratings. The following are the items where the Parliamentarians were requested to provide input and their own self-assessment of how well the Canadian Parliament is meeting the objectives: 1.2.2 Special measures to encourage the political participation of marginalized groups shall be narrowly drawn to accomplish precisely defined, and time-limited, objectives. On this Benchmark directly related to elections, the Members felt that this particular matter is better dealt with in Canada by the individual political parties rather than being legislated by Parliament or regulated by Elections Canada. 4.1.2 Any restrictions on the legality of political parties shall be narrowly drawn in law and shall be consistent with the International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Benchmark 4.1.2 related to political parties and to party groups and cross-party groups. It resulted in a final rating of 5 where the Parliamentarians felt that Canada has established an atmosphere in which the individual political parties take responsibility for ensuring that both civil and political rights are respected. 7.1.1 The Legislature shall have mechanisms to obtain information from the executive branch sufficient to exercise its oversight function in a meaningful way. 7.1.2 The oversight authority of the Legislature shall include meaningful oversight of the military security and intelligence services. 7.1.3 The oversight authority of the Legislature shall include meaningful oversight of state owned enterprises. 7.2.2 Oversight committees shall provide meaningful opportunities for minority or opposition parties to engage in effective oversight of government expenditures. Typically, the Public Accounts Committee will be chaired by a Member of the opposition party. 7.2.3 Oversight committees shall have access to records of executive branch accounts and related documentation sufficient to be able to meaningfully review the accuracy of executive branch reporting on its revenues and expenditures. These Benchmarks all fall under the “Oversight Function” of Parliaments or Legislatures and this area engendered the most discussion among the Parliamentarians during the consultative process. In large part, this may have been a direct result of the pressures of working in a

minority government situation and some political and philosophical disagreements between the government and opposition parties in relation to how well the Canadian Parliament is doing in this area. 8.2.1 The Legislature shall have the right to receive development assistance to strengthen the institution of Parliament. Benchmark 8.2.1 falls under the section on Representational Function and was one of the few areas where Members of the Executive Committee reviewing the ratings were unprepared to provide the top rating. It may be a simple case that most Canadian Parliamentarians do not see a need for their Parliament to be receiving development assistance – but are not prepared to enact legislation to directly prohibit or encourage such assistance. Preparing a rating Once all of the comments had been received, a bilingual table of the results was prepared and a final discussion of the results – in particular those ratings where no consensus was apparent – was added to the agenda for the next Executive Committee meeting. Unfortunately, it was not possible to convene this meeting within the timeframe for the study, so the Members of the Executive were again consulted electronically and asked to provide their comments in writing on those ratings where no consensus existed. Once all of the comments had been included and tabulated, those points where there had been a difference in the ratings were adjusted to reflect the majority opinion of the responses and a final rating was applied. The final version of the table in both English and French was then re-circulated to all Members of the Executive Committee with a draft motion to adopt both the accompanying letter and the chart

of the ratings for submission to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association as requested by the CPA Secretary-General. All Members of the Executive Committee agreed with the final version and subsequently, the document was forwarded to the CPA Secretariat. It should be noted that none of the Members who had previously disagreed with the initial ratings were in disagreement with the final ratings resulting from the averaging of the responses received. A tool for professional development The CPA Canadian Branch, with the support of the CPA Secretariat, has offered the CPA Canadian Parliamentary Seminar on an annual basis as a form of professional development for newly elected Parliamentarians throughout the Commonwealth. This Seminar not only provides the delegates with the opportunity to meet and exchange best practices in the development of parliamentary democracy, but also presents the Canadian participants with the opportunity to learn from their Commonwealth colleagues. The Benchmarks are a natural extension to this activity. As the Benchmarks were developed as a self-assessment exercise, the Canadian Branch did not feel it appropriate to consult with the Legislatures of the 10 provinces and three territories which make up the Canadian Confederation. In future, it might be a useful exercise to include all of them in such a self-assessment. In conclusion, the Canadian Branch wishes to thank the CPA for its initiative in pushing forward on this front. At times, we become complacent about how well we are doing in adapting to change and moving forward on the development of new democratic principles and practices. Undertaking this kind of selfassessment becomes a useful tool in measuring our progress.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 29

Agnihotri:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:58 Page 30

ASSESSMENT OF PARLIAMENTS

A QUALITY FRAMEWORK TO ASSESS PARLIAMENTS: IMPROVING EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS Is it possible to develop a framework for the assessment of Parliament using Total Quality Management procedures used to assess the quality of companies? A senior Indian parliamentary administrator suggests it is.

Dr V.K. Agnihotri in New Delhi Dr Agnihotri is the Secretary-General of the Rajya Sabha, the upper House of the Parliament of India.

The Parliament The emergence of Parliament in its modern form, as the most prominent institution of democratic societies, dates back to the middle of the 13th century. Over the next centuries, Parliament became the chief instrument of democracy. The essence of this instrument was discussion and as such, by its very definition, Parliament established itself as an “instrument or device for government by discussion”.1 According to Leo Amery “the main task of Parliament is still what it was when first summoned, not to legislate or govern, but to secure full discussion and ventilation of all matters”.2 The right to talk and reason with government, before compulsion is brought to bear, is the foundation on which the whole of parliamentary government is

30 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Dr V.K. Agnihotri. built. It provides unparalleled opportunities for airing diverse views and at the same time educates public opinion. Parliament obtains results by democratic means. On the political plane, Parliament epitomizes the fusion of principle of representation with

consent for taxation – “no taxation without representation”. This fusion was amply reflected in the famous principle: “what touches all should be approved by all”.3 On the legal plane, Parliament symbolizes the fusion of state authority with individual freedom. As such, Parliament is an eminently practical and institutional answer to the problem of authority and freedom.4 From this perspective, any true parliamentary system is concerned with governance as much as it is with the liberties of the people. The essence of parliamentary democracy is reconcilement of strong, stable and efficient government with personal freedom; in particular, the freedom of the elector to help choose and change those directing the nation’s affairs.5

Agnihotri:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:58 Page 31

ASSESSMENT OF PARLIAMENTS

Table one: NDI Survey No.

Question

14a

Formal Power Legally, only the Legislature may determine and approve the budget of the Legislature.

14b

Practice In practice, only the Legislature determines and approves its own budget.

In the context of parliamentary form of government, Parliament, elected by adult population of the country, controls public finance and appointments, holds the government accountable, and legislates.6 In sum, the main functions of Parliament today are legislation, oversight of the executive, and providing a forum for ventilating public grievances and expectations. Concerns have been expressed about the efficacy and efficiency of the parliamentary system, in general, and the functioning of modern Parliaments, in particular. The dwindling number of sittings of the House, disruption of its proceedings, especially Question Hour, absence of a large number of Members from the House and/or their non-participation in the proceedings even when present, delays in submission of reports of Committees as well as unethical practices, such as manipulation of Committee proceedings, cash-for-query, misutilisation of funds and entitlements etc. have invited adverse comments from various sections of the society. Current assessment scenario As Parliaments have come under greater scrutiny of citizens and civil society organizations, a need for greater transparency in the

Strongly

Agree

functioning of Parliaments and their subsidiary institutions has been felt over time. This has, in turn, led to evolution of what can be termed as a system of selfassessment. Parliaments routinely publish data regarding number of sittings held, actual hours of sitting, time lost, number of questions listed and actually answered orally, number of Bills introduced and/or passed, number of Reports laid on the Table, number and topics of discussions held etc. This data lends itself to evaluation of performance of Parliaments by civil society organizations. Against this backdrop, a conscious effort has been made by certain institutions to develop models of self-assessment of Parliament. Important among these are: (i) The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) Model; (ii) Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) Model; (iii) National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI) Survey; and (iv) Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie (APF) Evaluation Method.7 IPU self-assessment tool kit The IPU self-assessment tool kit has been developed to assist Parliaments in a systematic analysis of their performance,

Disagree

Strongly disagree

leading to the identification of strengths and weaknesses, and the formulation of recommendations for reform and development. Although the Tool Kit is organized as a series of questions, it is not intended as a questionnaire to create rankings or “league tables” of Parliaments through external evaluation by international experts. The tool kit provides a framework for discussion among Members of Parliament and other stakeholders in order to develop agreement on priorities for change and improvement. It has the potential to be an immensely powerful tool for change. The IPU Self-assessment framework comprises six sections, namely: (i) The representativeness of Parliament; (ii) Parliamentary oversight over the Executive; (iii) Parliament’s legislative capacity; (iv) The transparency and accessibility of Parliament; (v) The accountability of Parliament; and (vi) Parliament’s involvement in international policy. Each section has a set of questions to elicit value judgments on a five-point scale ranging from “very high/good” to “very

Opposite page: The Indian Parliament building in New Delhi.

low/poor”. There is also provision for incorporating additional questions. There are three other questions seeking judgmental responses. Main participants in most self-assessments will be Parliamentarians, preferably in the form of a committee. The IPU Tool Kit has been used in the Parliaments of Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Algeria, South Africa, Ireland and Andorra.8 CPA benchmarks This comprises a list of primarily prescriptive statements organized under the following broad sections:(i) General; (ii) Organization of the Legislature; (iii) Functions of the Legislature; and (iv) Values of the Legislature. It is designed to assist Parliaments and Legislatures to undertake their own selfassessment based on a Commonwealth standard developed by Members and parliamentary officials. The

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 31

Agnihotri:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:59 Page 32

ASSESSMENT OF PARLIAMENTS

Diagram 1:

EFQM Excellence Model

benchmarks reflect the current state of good Commonwealth parliamentary practices and comprise 87 standards. The assessment panel may comprise Members of Parliament as well as officials and other civil society representatives. This selfassessment is expected to lead to discussion and debate, both inside and outside of Parliaments, and can thus provide a basis for measuring parliamentary effectiveness and to help leverage reforms. The CPA, however, recognizes that no single Parliament is a source of “best practice” in all areas. Furthermore, the Parliamentary system is a dynamic one and, therefore, “best practice” today will be surpassed tomorrow. The benchmark assessment has been conducted by Australia, Canada, Naura, New Zealand, and Vanuatu among others.9 NDI Survey As the title suggests, this pertains to a survey conducted by NDI in Colombia, Guatemala, Peru and

Serbia and is not an evaluation per se. It sought to generate a perspective on parliamentary powers and their use in practice across different aspects of Parliamentary work, such as representation, law making, oversight, budget review and institutional capacity. A sample of the survey form is shown in table one: The gap between the power and practice is the starting point of discussion and debate as well as for drawing up of the charter for future action. The survey has been used as a diagnostic tool. Its data has been useful in advocacy as well as in providing a basis for dialogue between Members of Parliament and civil society organizations. APF evaluation method APF brings together 77 Parliaments and parliamentary organizations. With a view to develop and strengthen democracy, in collaboration with UNDP and based on a comparative study of the Standing

32 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Orders of several Parliaments in the Francophone world, APF has developed criteria for evaluating the democratic reality of Parliaments. The evaluation method is divided into four parts, namely: (i) Election and the status of the Parliamentarians; (ii) Rights and duties of Parliament; (iii) Organizations of Parliaments; and (iv) Parliament and communications. The criteria so developed provide benchmarks which all Parliaments should aspire to achieve. Some of the other methodologies of assessment of Parliament, at different stages of implementation, are South African Development Community Parliamentary Forum (SADC-PF), Democracy Assessment Methodology of International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA),

Parliamentary Powers Index (PPI), Congressional Capabilities Index (IDB) et al. An evaluation of current assessment methodologies The highlights of the assessment methodologies mention above could be summarized as follows:(i) Of the four main methodologies, the IPU model is perhaps the most advanced, precise as well as comprehensive, while the NDI model is a survey tool and the APF method is a work in progress. (ii) Even though assessment is to be primarily undertaken by the Members of Parliament, participation by officials and representatives of civil society is possible and, in some cases, even encouraged. (iii) All the models, explicitly or implicitly, proclaim to be selfassessment tools and perhaps rightly so in view of the legitimate concern for the autonomy of Parliaments and

Agnihotri:Layout 1 23/03/2010 16:59 Page 33

ASSESSMENT OF PARLIAMENTS

Legislatures. However, the need for an external facilitator has been by and large recognized in order to develop a shared understanding of the issues involved, particularly in situations where there is a high degree of political polarisation. (iv) The spectrum of evaluation criteria is not confined to evaluating only the business of Parliament. It pans out to evaluate the quality of democratic system and institutions in the country. Thus, while, on the one hand, the electoral process and the representativeness of the Parliament is sought to be assessed, at the other end of the spectrum lie ethical governance and international policy. (v) Responses to the questionnaire, benchmarks etc. have been typically sought in qualitative terms ranging from “very high” to “very low” or “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree” etc. However, there is scope for “yes” and “no” responses as far as CPA benchmarks are concerned. Furthermore, in the IPU Tool Kit numeric values have been implicitly assigned, in the range of five to one, in respect of the responses “very high” to “very low”. The argument There is an aphorism in the assessors’ community: “What cannot be measured cannot be improved”. The legitimate concerns for the autonomy of Parliament and the apprehensions relating to creation of “league tables” notwithstanding, it cannot be anybody’s case that Parliaments need no improvement. As already noted, in the qualitative and descriptive evaluation of Parliaments advocated by the IPU and CPA models, quantitative reasoning is implicit. The qualitative responses, namely “very high” “high” etc., on

the one hand, and “strongly agree”, “disagree” etc. on the other could easily be converted into numerical data following standard quantitative techniques. Binary responses in the nature of “yes” and “no”, to the extent solicited by the CPA model, also lend themselves to quantification. Even though third party evaluation may not be acceptable in the context of the fiercely advocated autonomy of Parliament, still the IPU model perceives a role for an external

“The CPA, however, recognizes that no single Parliament is a source of “best practice” in all areas. facilitator, who could be provided by IPU or other organizations. Similarly, even though creation of “league tables”’ is not desirable, it would do a Parliament no harm if, through an assessment procedure, it is made to realize where it stands on an appropriately calibrated scale. As a matter of fact, in the rightto-information regime if a Parliament makes public as much data as possible about its responsibilities, functions, targets and achievements, civil society organizations could easily prepare a report card on its performance. PRS Legislative Research brings out statistical analysis of each Session of Indian Parliament based on the end-of-the-Session press releases issued by the two Houses of Parliament. It has a section dealing with “Plan vs. Performance” and another one entitled “Vital Stats” providing quantitative analysis of the sessional performance of Parliament.10 Another Non-

Governmental Organization has done an evaluation of parliamentary Committees.11 However, a Parliament on its own could do this job much better with professional assistance. It is again to be noted that in the IPU and CPA models various questions and benchmarks cover a wide gamut of issues. These could easily be categorized into “facilitative” and “output” factors. The facilitative factors are, for example, representativeness of Parliament, election law, transparency, ethical concerns, infrastructure etc. The output factors undoubtedly pertain to oversight and legislative functions. Total Quality Management (TQM) framework In the face of cut-throat competition in the manufacturing sector, quality assurance came to occupy pride of place at an early stage. In the initial phase, it took the form of a “selection or rejection” routine. In due course, as quality certification procedures were developed, quality standards and benchmarks came to be delineated for different types of manufacturing activities. As service industry made rapid progress, quality standards to meet its

Above: The President’s residence in New Delhi.

specific requirements also came to be established. Evolution of quality concepts took a quantum leap with the arrival of Total Quality Management (TQM) as a holistic approach to quality management and assessment. Over the years, TQM principles have been fine-tuned and refined to assess quality not only of manufacturing and service industries but also of public and not-for-profit institutions. The broad features of the TQM system can be deduced from a brief description of the following widely adopted models:(1) European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) Excellence Model; (2) Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award; (3) Deming Prize; and (4) Florida Governor’s Sterling Award. EFQM Excellence Model12 The EFQM Excellence Model is a structure for the organization’s management system. It can be used as a part of a self-

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 33

Agnihotri:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:00 Page 34

ASSESSMENT OF PARLIAMENTS

assessment as well as a framework for comparison with other organizations. It also helps in identifying areas for improvement. It is a non-prescriptive framework based on nine criteria. Five of these are “enablers” and four are “results”. The enablers criteria cover what an organization does and how it does it. The result criteria cover what an organization achieves. Results are caused by enablers and enablers are improved using feedback from results. The model is more appropriately depicted in the form of the following diagram: Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award13 Instituted in the wake of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Improvement Act, 1987, this annual award recognizes U.S. organizations in business, health care, education and non-profit sectors for performance excellence in a manner somewhat similar to the EFQM Excellence model. The Malcolm Baldrige Award prescribes the following seven categories of the Criteria for Performance Excellence:(i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

Leadership; Strategic Planning; Customer Focus; Measurement, Analysis and Knowledge Management; (v) Workforce Focus; (vi) Process Management; and (vii) Results. The main uses of the Baldrige Criteria are education and organizational self-assessment and self-improvement. They provide organizations with an integrated approach to management of organizational performance to achieve improvement in the delivery of value to customers and stakeholders, overall organizational effectiveness and capabilities and organizational and personal learning.

Diagram 2:

Sterling Management System

Deming Prize14 The Deming Prize, instituted by the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE), is one of the highest awards on TQM in the world. It defines TQM as a set of systematic activities carried out by the entire organization to effectively and efficiently achieve company objectives so as to provide products and services with a level of quality that satisfies customers, at the appropriate time and price. The Deming Prize Committee does not specify what issues the applicants must address rather applicants themselves are responsible for identifying and addressing such issues. The examination process is an opportunity for “mutual development”, rather than “examination”. Thus, organization’s self-development comes from the examination process itself. Florida Governor’s Sterling Award15 The Florida Governor’s Sterling Award is based on the National Malcolm Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence. It seeks to assist organizations in utilizing

34 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

proven standards of excellence as a guide to making improvements that generate better options, customer value and overall results. The Sterling Management System is represented through the following diagram:An Evaluation of Quality Assessment Models The salient features of the quality assessment models discussed above may be summarised as follows: (i) These are mature models, with rigorous assessment procedures, and have been in vogue for considerable period of time. (ii) They are focused on ensuring delivery of value to customers and other stakeholders through a set of specific criteria for organizational effectiveness. (iii) They tend to promote selfassessment and development/improvement through that process itself. Thus the primary objective of self-assessment is continuous improvement.

(iv) Facilitation is an important concomitant of the evaluation procedure. There are many similarities in the conceptualisation of parliamentary self-assessment models in vogue and the quality assessment models discussed above. In both, primary emphasis is on improvement through selfassessment. TQM Model for Assessment of Parliament Assessing quality of Parliament against TQM parameters is indeed a daunting task. Prima facie, Parliament is not in the business of manufacturing. It also does not ostensibly deliver any specific services as understood in common parlance. How then do we superimpose the TQM framework on the business of Parliament? From the assessment models discussed earlier, however, a few things are obvious. Primarily, there are concerns for efficiency and effectiveness of Parliament. Moreover, the assessment of Parliament is obviously based on some criteria. Putting these two

Agnihotri:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:00 Page 35

ASSESSMENT OF PARLIAMENTS

facts together there is considerable scope for attempting a TQM approach to assessing Parliament. The following assessment criteria emerge from the parliamentary assessment models aforementioned: (i) Representativeness; (ii) Oversight of the Executive; (iii) Legislation; (iv) Transparency; (v) Accessibility; (vi) Accountability; (vii) Institutional Capacity; (viii)Infrastructure; (ix) Integrity; and (x) Involvement in International Policy. One approach to developing Quality Assessment Model for Parliament would be to categorise these criteria into “facilitative” and “output” factors. The output of Parliament would largely be in terms of legislation, oversight of the Executive, accountability and involvement in international policy. Most of the other factors could be regarded as facilitative, in so far as their presence makes Parliament a truly democratic institution. A more focused approach would be to categorise the criteria into those contributing to efficiency and to effectiveness of Parliament. The efficiency parameters would encompass legislation, oversight of the Executive, institutional capacity, infrastructure and involvement in international policy. The other criteria largely pertain to ensuring effectiveness of Parliament. A totally different approach to Quality Assessment could be described as Human Development Index (HDI) strategy. It would require identifying some critical yet simple indices (such as legislation, oversight of the Executive and deliberation) to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the parliamentary system of a country. From yet another point of view, the impact of the output of Parliament on the quality of life of the people

could also provide a framework for assessment. Assessment process and procedures Self-assessment primarily by Parliamentarians is, no doubt, currently the most acceptable process. However, the procedures and practice evolved in various Parliaments of the world, which have adopted different assessment models discussed earlier, would suggest greater involvement of the civil society organizations in the process of assessment. As suggested earlier, publication of data pertaining to the functioning of Parliament as well as providing access to its proceedings, in plenary as well as committee sittings, would greatly facilitate its assessment by civil service organizations. Furthermore, an evaluation exercise based on quality parameters or an indexation model is primarily a voluntary one and in a self-assessment mode. Submission to third party assessment and creation of socalled “league tables” are often mandated by donor agencies. Even in case the Parliament decides to do the self-assessment entirely on its own initiative and only with the involvement of the Members of Parliament, either in an ad hoc manner or through a permanent committee system, the need for a competent facilitator, at least in the initial stages, cannot be over-emphasised. For an assessment to be objective, an impartial assessor is absolutely essential. In any case, working out the details of the assessment procedure on the lines either of the TQM or ISO specifications16 would necessitate involvement of experts as direct participants or as witnesses. In due course, of course, facilitation capabilities could be developed among serving and/or retired Members of Parliament. The road ahead Quality Assessment of an

organization is only a discreet event in its continuous journey on the road to improvement. As a matter of fact, in discussing the Quality Assessment Model, we are, in effect, holding the stick at the wrong end. First and foremost, a decision at an appropriate level would need to be taken whether the Parliament wishes to take specific and concrete steps for improvement in the quality of its inputs and outputs in order to make its functioning more effective and efficient. It could be broad-based or confined, at least initially, to more measurable activities, including administrative functions and procedures. The quality initiative has to be demand driven. First among the drivers of quality is leadership, without which any quality initiative is a non-starter. The implementation of TQM in Parliament has to begin by first identifying reasons, if any, for bringing about change. This would need to be followed by drawing up a road map, preferably through the instrumentality of a “Visioning Workshop”, of the journey to improve the quality of the functions of Parliament. A Quality Improvement Committee would need to be set up for this purpose as well as for monitoring the inputs, outputs and outcomes. Documentation and standardization, along with benchmarking exercises, would thus be of the essence. Assessment or evaluation would be the culmination of the entire process.17 In order to kick-start this process, a project initiative by the IPU, CPA or any other organization authorised by them would be in order. A consensus among the member states would need to be evolved in order to take up pilot projects to develop and formalize the TQM Model for Parliament. It is indeed an idea which has long been overdue.

Endnotes 1

Hogg, Q (1946) The Purpose of Parliament, Blandford Press, London, p.2-3.

Amery, L. (1947) Thoughts on the Constitution. Oxford University Press, London, p.12.

Strathearn, G (1964) Our Parliament. Cassell for the Hansard Society, London, p.xi.

Menhennet, D and Palmer, J (1967) Parliament in Perspective: A background book. The Bodley Head, London, p.10.

Menhennet, D and Palmer, J op. cit., p.47.

Hogg, Q, op. cit., p.2.

ASGP: “Evaluating Parliament tObjectives, methods, results and impact.” Geneva, Switzerland, 22 October 2009.

Inter-Parliamentary Union (2008) “Evaluating Parliament – a selfassessment toolkit for Parliaments.” SRO-Kundig, Geneva, Switzerland.

CPA/World Bank Institute (2006) Recommend Benchmarks for Democratic Legislatures. A Study Group Report Published by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

10 PRS Legislative Research (2009) Parliament Session Wrap - Winter Session (November 19 to 22 December 2009). Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi. 11

Jha, R.K. (2009) Evaluating Parliamentary Committees and Committee System : Changing Contours of Governance and Policy. Social Watch India, New Delhi.

12 www1.efqm.org/en/Home 13 www.baldrige.nist.gov/Business_Criteria.htm (Criteria for Performance Excellence) 14 http://deming.org (Deming Prize – Prize Information) 15 www.floridasterling.com 16 Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (2005) Quality Management Systems - Requirements for Service Quality by Public Service Organisations (ICS 03.120.10). BIS, New Delhi. 17 Agnihotri, V.K. (2003) Quality Management in Government – Theory and Practice. Allied Publishers Private Ltd., New Delhi.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 35

Houda-Pepin:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:19 Page 36

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, CLIMATE CHANGE AND RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES IN QUÉBEC The Canadian province of Quebec has a long history of providing North America with clean, renewable hydro-electric power. But the province is not content to rest on its carbon emission laurels. The first Vice-President of the Quebec National Assembly reports that the province is expanding its renewable energy sources in the fight against climate change and for development.

Madame Fatima Houda-Pepin, MNA, in Quebec City. Ms Houda-Pepin is the first Vice-President of the National Assembly of Quebec. A former consultant and university lecturer, she has been a Member of the Assembly for the Québec Liberal Party since 1994.

Introduction Québec covers a vast geographical territory rich in natural resources. It is hardly surprising, then, that its elected representatives have long been preoccupied by environmental issues. With its low population density, Québec has ample space for future development; yet this very fact entails a serious ecological responsibility, and implies that development is important from a number of perspectives. Natural-resource development is the driving force behind a large portion of Québec’s economy. Countless jobs—the livelihood of entire regions—depend on such activities. Consequently, Québec’s Parliamentarians, who represent all regions of the province, make every effort to ensure that natural resources are developed in a sustainable manner that will meet the needs of future no less than present generations. Moreover, sustainable development, climate change and energy cannot be dealt with in isolation from each other. Energy production and use,

36 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

based largely on hydrocarbons almost everywhere in the world,

Madame Fatima HoudaPepin, MNA. generate large amounts of greenhouse gases (GHGs). While not exempt from this problem, Québec does possess the capability of producing energy from renewable resources such as hydroelectricity and wind. In addition, Québec has large forest and fresh-water reserves; its biodiversity, unique but fragile, must be preserved for future generations—the more so because natural sites are an

important asset for outdoor tourism. Sustainable development The concept of sustainable development first came to widespread notice with the publication of the report of the Brundtland Commission (World Commission on Environment and Development) in 1987. In Québec, Parliamentarians and civil society were generally quick to take an interest in a concept that was grounded in a long-term vision of development and a deep concern for intergenerational equity. This interest culminated in Québec’s Sustainable Development Plan, published in 2004 by the Department of the Environment,1 and in the framing of a draft bill. In the following year a parliamentary committee carried out a broad public consultation on the draft bill. Department officials toured the province, outlining its proposed approach in 21 towns and cities throughout Québec; but the main goal was to determine the issues that Quebecers held most dear,

Houda-Pepin:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:19 Page 37

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Clock tower of the Québec Parliament building in Québec City.

and to canvass their opinions on the general tendency of the plan. On 19 April 2006, the Sustainable Development Act was passed. The Act did a number of important things: it created an official management framework within the public administration setting forth the principles that would guide all government action in Québec; it affirmed the right of everyone to live in a healthy environment whose biodiversity was strictly preserved (this right has since been incorporated into Québec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms); and it required the government to adopt a strategy expressly stating the approach, issues, directions and objectives the administration had to pursue to foster sustainable development. Adopted in December 2007, the strategy was to be implemented by all government departments, agencies and enterprises on 1 January 2008. As required by the Act, it not only defined the roles and responsibilities of administration officials, but also provided for monitoring mechanisms. The strategy considers sustainable development in its environmental, social and economic dimensions, all of which are fundamental to the quality of life. Implementation of the strategy Under the Act, the Minister of Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks is responsible for co-ordinating the definition, renewal and revision of the different components of the strategy. Moreover, all government departments and agencies must not only participate in the development, implementation, monitoring and revision of the strategy, but must also include in their annual reports, under a separate heading, the specific objectives they have set for contributing to sustainable The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 37

Houda-Pepin:Layout 1 01/04/2010 10:51 Page 38

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

development and to the progressive implementation of the strategy. Each report must describe the activities and interventions carried out to achieve the objectives, and the extent to which target results were achieved. Actions and interventions that were planned but not carried out must also be described. Sustainable development indicators The Act also puts the Minister in charge of the drawing up, in collaboration with the other Ministers, a list of sustainable development indicators; taken together, these are used to form a dynamic portrait of Québec’s environmental, social and economic situation, and to gauge the province’s progress in sustainable development. The first list of indicators was published as a consultation document.2 As required by the Act, a public consultation on the subject was held by the Parliamentary Committee on Transportation and the Environment; this took place in late summer 2009. Evaluation of results Québec has adopted a strict accountability and resultsevaluation mechanism which requires departments and agencies to report on the actions they have undertaken to achieve strategy objectives. The mechanism also provides for the intervention of a Sustainable Development Commissioner, who answers to the Auditor General and is appointed by the latter with the approval of the Office of the National Assembly. A number of tasks are required of the Commissioner: verifying and evaluating the progress of the Administration in achieving its sustainable development objectives; examining the strategy and indicators for follow-up purposes; and tabling reports in the National Assembly on the activities carried out by the Administration to implement the strategy. As part of

The tallest of a series of waterfalls in Riviere-du-Loup which powers a hydroelectric station.

his or her investigatory powers, the Commissioner may also require departments, agencies and other entities to file reports or to further clarify their activities.3 To summarize, then, the Sustainable Development Act requires that the administration adopt a stringent management framework emphasizing, as a central concern, development that respects the environment and the rights of future generations.

38 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Québec’s Parliamentarians now have at their disposal the information they need to exercise tight and constant control over the actions of the administration, and thus to assume fully their responsibility of defending the present and future interests of Québec society. Climate change The policies and strategies of each government department must be in keeping with the government’s overall sustainable development programme. The 2006-2012 Action Plan on climate change well illustrates the seriousness of Québec’s approach to sustainable

development, an approach which must meet present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to do the same. It will be remembered that in December 2002 Canada became the 99th country to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Québec declared itself in favour of the Protocol, having already manifested its support in a variety of ways since 1997. For instance on 24 October 2002, the National Assembly passed a motion on the implementation of the Protocol in Québec. The federal government was subsequently asked to begin negotiations with Québec on a bilateral agreement for the funding

Houda-Pepin:Layout 1 01/04/2010 10:52 Page 39

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

and implementation of a GHG reduction strategy.4 In proportion to its population, Québec emits fewer greenhouse gases (GHGs) than any other province in Canada. This enviable record is due largely to our investments in hydroelectricty, a form of energy that is nearly emission-free. In addition to having the lowest per capita GHG emissions in Canada, Québec was able to limit emission increases to 1.6 per cent between 1990 and 2006, compared to the Canadian average of more than 21.8 per cent.5 In fact from 2003 to 2006 Québec actually succeeded in

reducing its GHG emissions by 5.5 per cent. Three factors explain our efficiency in this regard. First, investments in new manufacturing-sector technologies have made industrial processes more energy-efficient. Consequently, that sector experienced a 7.1 per cent reduction in GHG emissions between 1990 and 2006. Secondly, Québec’s automobile population is one of the most energy-efficient in Canada. Lastly and as previously mentioned, Québec has made substantial investments in the clean and renewable energy that is hydroelectricity. This form of

energy emits 67 times fewer GHGs than the other major sources of energy, and was responsible for only 0.5 per cent of Québec’s emissions in 2006. With an installed hydroelectric capacity6 of 37,729 MW in 2008, Québec is a world leader in hydroelectric production and meets all but a small fraction of its own consumption needs.7 Québec is committed to applying in its jurisdiction the strategies and policies required to counter climate change. In spring 1995, it formulated its first action plan to implement the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In fall 2000, a

second action plan was adopted (the 2001-2002 action plan on climate change). Its 37 measures were aimed at reducing GHG emissions and facilitating Québec’s adaptation to climate change. A number of important initiatives were eventually to emerge from the plan: the creation of the Ouranos Consortium (a multi-disciplinary research group in regional climatology); renewed emphasis on hydroelectric development; the signing of the “Paix des Braves” agreement with the Grand Council of the Crees and of an agreement with the Inuit of Nunavik; the development of wind-power; the implementation of biogas regulations; the development of hydrogen technologies; the signing of industrial agreements, particularly in the aluminium industry; and investments in transportation. A third action plan on climate change, for the years 2006 to 2012, was announced in June 2006. It contains measures aimed at reducing or avoiding GHG emissions, and at enabling key sectors, such as energy, transportation, industry, residual materials, agriculture, health, the environment, natural resources and land use planning, to adapt to climate change. In 2007, the federal government made a significant financial contribution8 — $350 million—out of Canada’s trust fund for clean air and climate change. This brought total funding for the Plan’s implementation to $1.55 billion over six years. In that time, Québec intends to reduce GHG emissions by 14.6 metric tons—to six per cent below their 1990 levels—thus satisfying the objectives of the Kyoto Protocol. Renewable energies In its quest to achieve sustainable development and reduce GHG emissions, it seems clear that Québec will have to turn increasingly to the potential represented by renewable energies. It must continue to

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 39

Houda-Pepin:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:21 Page 40

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

This page: Québec’s Parliament building at night; Opposite page: Wind turbines generating clean energy.

innovate and search for renewable sources of energy that will help it improve its carbon balance. The energy sector unquestionably plays a major role in Québec’s economy. In 2006, energy in all its forms (electricity, hydrocarbons and biomass energy) accounted for 10.9 per cent of gross domestic expenditure. Renewable energies account for a high proportion of Québec’s total energy consumption, a fact which makes it virtually unique in North America. This position is due to its hydroelectric resources, certainly, but also in some measure to its biomass energy and, increasingly, to the possibilities associated with wind power. Québec’s energy situation may be summarized as follows: oil and gas are imported, while electricity and biomass energy, almost in their entirety, are

produced domestically in the form of renewable energy. Electricity is the most widely used form of energy in Québec, accounting for 40 per cent of total consumption, followed closely by petroleum (37 per cent), natural gas (13 per cent) and biomass (10 per cent). It is important to note the specific nature of the energy portrait that emerges from these figures. There are few regions of the world where electricity tops the list in energy consumption as it does in Québec, where it is used largely for space heating and water heating. The severity of our winters makes adequate heating essential—a question, in fact, of survival. In the past decade, Québec’s major new undertaking in tapping the potential of renewable energies has been its development of wind energy. From a technical

40 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

and economic point of view, the amount of wind energy that can be integrated into Hydro-Québec’s power grid has been evaluated at

“...Québec is resolutely committed to protecting the environment and participating in global efforts to fight climate change.” approximately 4,000 MW. Wind power is by definition intermittent, since it depends on the presence and speed of the wind. However,

Québec is fortunate in being able to use wind energy in conjunction with the storage capacity of hydroelectric dams. When the wind is strong but energy demand is low, hydroelectric production can be decreased and water allowed to accumulate behind the dams; conversely, when the wind is weak, hydroelectric production can be adjusted to meet the demand. Wind power is not seen as a substitute for, but rather as a complement to, hydroelectricity. Once the necessary installations have been completed, wind energy will account for up to 10 per cent of Québec’s total electricity production. On 1 August 2008, Québec had 339 wind turbines on its territory, for a total installed capacity of 422.25 MW. This wind energy is integrated into Hydro-Québec’s power grid. Renewable energies make up

Houda-Pepin:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:21 Page 41

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

an increasingly large part of Québec’s energy production, and Québec is resolutely committed to their further rapid development. For instance, apart from hydroelectric energy and wind power, significant efforts are being made to produce ethanol fuel from forest and agriculture residues and urban waste. Geothermal energy and solar energy are also in the Government’s promotional and support plans, for, despite a common misconception, Québec receives ample sunshine and possesses an abundance of solar energy. Quebecers have not been slow to appreciate the importance of energy issues. Already, in the policy directions of the 1996 energy policy, renewable energies were being emphasized as a way of diversifying the sources of electricity production. This trend toward diversification was reaffirmed in the 2006-2015 Energy Strategy, which was preceded by a public consultation, in November 2004, held by the National Assembly’s Committee on Labour and the Economy. Public interest was nothing if not impressive. The Committee received 169 briefs on all manner of energyrelated themes, and the Internet consultation period alone attracted several thousand visitors and resulted in almost 2,000 commentaries and opinions from both individuals and organizations. Whether from experts, ordinary citizens or organizations, the message to the Committee was clear: accelerate the development of renewable energies in Québec, particularly wind power, in conjunction with hydroelectricity. It was in the wake of this consultation that the Government, in May 2006, published its energy strategy. Apart from their role in preparing the energy strategy, Parliamentarians have the

opportunity, every two years, of examining Hydro-Québec’s development plan. The Committee on Labour and the Economy is thus in a position to judge how well that state-owned enterprise has met its responsibilities with regard to power generation and distribution, and to examine its financial results.9 Conclusion Québec is particularly well placed to become a leader in the field of sustainable development and to address issues under the Kyoto Protocol. Almost the whole of Québec’s power production comes from hydroelectricity, a renewable energy source that emits only small amounts of GHGs. The combination of wind energy and hydroelectricity has made Québec one of the lowest GHG emitters in the industrialized world. Hydroelectricity is the motor of our sustainable development; complemented by wind power, it will give certain local and regional communities, as well as Native peoples, the opportunity to play an active role in achieving sustainable development. All the measures put forward, whether in the sustainable development strategy, the action plan on climate change or the energy strategy, show that Québec is resolutely committed to protecting the environment and participating in global efforts to fight climate change. Quebecers have had the great good luck to inhabit a land rich in energy potential. We must now begin to tap this potential, seizing upon new opportunities to develop forms of energy that are clean, safe and renewable.

capacity of all the production equipment

www.mddep.gouv.qc.ca/developpement/indi

of a power station.

cateurs/Indicateurs_DD_Doc%20consultati 7

on_12%20juin%202009.pdf . 3

Québec’s total installed capacity,

To access the actions plans (French

including its nuclear power plant, the

only) of various departments, agencies

thermal power plants, wind power,

and public enterprises, click on the

biomass energy and cogeneration, was

following link:

40,798 MW in 2008; if we add the

www.mddep.gouv.qc.ca/developpement/list

5,428 MW produced at Churchill Falls,

e.htm.

Labrador, Québec’s total installed

To access the text (French only) of the

capacity is 46,226 MW. To access a

motion in the Journal des débats click on

summary document (French only)

the following link:

prepared by the Department of Natural

www.assnat.qc.ca/indexweb/Recherche.asp

Resources and Wildlife and filed with

x?cat=ex&Session=jd36l2se&Section=suj

the Office of Public Hearings on the Environment, click on the following link:

ets&Requete=73236&Hier=Protocole%20de%20Kyoto_Positi

www.bape.gouv.qc.ca/sections/mandats/Riv

on%20gouvernementale_Motion%20sans

iere_franquelin/documents/DB25.pdf .

%20préavis_7323-6

To access the revised version of the 2006-2012 Action Plan, click on the

The data on Québec’s GHG emissions

Endnotes

are from the Inventaire québécois des

Which became, on 17 March 2005, the

émissions de gaz à effet de serre en

www.mddep.gouv.qc.ca/changements/plan_

Department of Sustainable

2006 et leur évolution depuis 1990,

action/2006-2012_en.pdf .

Development, Environment and Parks.

published in 2008.

following link:

The Régie de l’énergie (energy board) is

To access this document (French only),

www.mddep.gouv.qc.ca/changements/ges/

responsible for setting the rates and

which was published in January 2009

2006/inventaire2006.pdf

conditions for the transmission of

and revised in June of the same year,

Hydro-Québec defines installed

electricity by the carrier and for its

capacity as the maximum generating

distribution by the distributor..

click on the following link:

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 41

Farrelly:Layout 1 01/04/2010 10:42 Page 42

SUPER-INJUNCTIONS

SUPER-INJUNCTIONS – THE THREAT TO PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE AND PRESS FREEDOM The right of Parliament to debate public issues without judicial intervention and the right of the media to report those debates were threatened in the United Kingdom in 2009 when, coincidently, a House of Commons committee was considering libel laws and media standards. A Member of that committee recounts the threat, its ramiﬁcations for three centuries of parliamentary privilege and for freedom of the press, and the committee’s recommendations to deal with that threat.

Mr Paul Farrelly, MP, at Westminster. Mr Farrelly has been a Labour Member of the United Kingdom House of Commons since 2001. He is a Member of the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee and a former journalist with Reuters and with The Independent on Sunday and The Observer newspapers.

It was the whisper among international media lawyers gathered in late 2009 in London – or “Sue City”, as the capital has become known – to grumble about the United Kingdom’s restrictive libel laws. Trafigura, an international commodities trader, had secured a High Court gagging order preventing the mainstream media from publishing the contents of a damning internal report over the company’s role in a toxic wastedumping scandal in the Ivory Coast. Furthermore, adding insult to injury, the press was barred as well from reporting the injunction’s existence. Never mind that Trafigura’s “secret” report was already in the public domain overseas. Never mind that it was by now all over the internet, too. The latest so-called “super-injunction” from the courts meant the British newspaperreading, BBC-watching public had no right to know. Anyone, indeed, becoming aware of the order’s

42 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Mr Paul Farrelly, MP.

existence was bound by its draconian terms. Libel laws and media standards By then, on the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, for nearly a year we had been grappling with the thorny issue of Britain’s libel and nascent privacy laws and the tricky matter of press standards. The report, just published, was

originally prompted by the British tabloids’ appalling treatment of the McCann family, following the tragic disappearance of their daughter Madeleine in Portugal. In any other industry, as in banking now, after such a collective breakdown in standards, the press would have been clamouring for an enquiry. Yet the voluntary regulator, the Press Complaints Commission, showed no inclination at all. Around the same time, the former head of international motor racing, Mr Max Mosley, also won a controversial privacy battle in the courts following revelations about his unorthodox activities behind closed doors. British supermarket giant Tesco had pursued the most aggressive libel suit against The Guardian newspaper and in Washington, Congress was mulling legislation to stop U.K. libel judgments being enforced in the United States. New York state had already passed its “Libel Terrorism Protection Act”, too, to defend U.S.

Farrelly:Layout 1 24/03/2010 10:26 Page 43

SUPER INJUNCTIONS

Historically, Members have been protected by privilege for what they say in Parliament, and the media have been protected by qualified privilege for reporting it. But in today’s complex legal world, are they still?

free speech from “libel tourists” availing themselves of London’s courts. Each time, indeed, that we came to complete our report, major events occurred which warranted

serious examination: In the middle of 2009, it was the re-opening of an old controversy involving the News of the World, the U.K.’s biggest-selling tabloid, whose royal editor – and a private investigator

on the newspaper’s books – had been jailed for hacking into the phones of staff at Buckingham Palace. Then along came Trafigura, an issue of my own making. The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 43

Farrelly:Layout 1 24/03/2010 10:26 Page 44

SUPER INJUNCTIONS

Parliamentary questions and sub judice? Just before the end of the 2009 summer recess, I tabled a series of parliamentary questions to “tie up loose ends” regarding our enquiry. One two-part question related to injunctions, and included a reference to the suppressed waste-dumping report. Under our unwritten constitution, the parliamentary authorities are, rightly, wary of clashes with the courts. Questions relating to legal actions are subject to strict sub judice checks with the courts to ensure they do not touch on “active proceedings”. In this instance, the first part of my question related to a case already decided. Checks in Parliament by the House of Commons Table Office on Trafigura yielded nothing, however. The company’s lawyers, libel specialists Carter Ruck, had persuaded the judge to grant a third level of secrecy – which

ironically proved their undoing. The identities of its client and a subsidiary had been removed from the face of the injunction and replaced with random sets of initials: RJW and SJW. My question had not named the immediate defendant, The Guardian; there was, therefore, no means of tracing the action and the question was accepted for tabling, attracting privilege. And then the real storm raged. The Guardian took the precaution of notifying Trafigura’s lawyers of its intention to publish. Carter Ruck told them this would be a breach of the injunction and a contempt of court. Parliamentary free speech challenged The uproar was immediate and entirely understandable. This was a stance which offended everyone’s understanding of the 1689 Bill of Rights – “That the freedom of speech and debates or

44 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached in any court or place out of Parliament” – and the 1840 Parliamentary Papers Act, which explicitly protects reporting of Westminster. Had not Lord Denning, perhaps the most famous judge of my lifetime, put it not 40 years ago: “Whatever comments are made in Parliament, they can be repeated in the newspapers without any fear of an action for libel or proceedings for contempt of court.” (Attorney General v Times Newspapers, 1973). Succinct or not, Denning’s Court of Appeal decision in the Times case was overruled by the House of Lords. And the Trafigura case was by no means the first time that the issue has reared its head since. In 1977, legal action was started for contempt of court against newspapers which revealed the identity of an expert Ministry of Defence witness,

“Super-injunctions” infringe on freedom of the press.

“Colonel B”, during the prosecution of two journalists under the Official Secrets Act. Before the case was heard, however, four outraged MPs mentioned the Colonel’s real name during question time in the House. The government advised silence from the media, the press cried privilege and went ahead anyway. Like Trafigura, the furore that followed hardly settled the issue. Back in 1977, the cat was already out of the bag, as Parliament was being broadcast live. In 2009, The Guardian played new and old media adeptly. A one-line release on Twitter, the social networking site, accompanied a teasing front page story about the threat to ageold rights and the affair led the

Farrelly:Layout 1 24/03/2010 10:27 Page 45

SUPER INJUNCTIONS

news in print, on the airwaves and in the “blogosphere”. Standing up for parliamentary rights MPs, under assault all year over their expenses, jumped to the barricades to assert age-old rights. Carter Ruck, nothing if not undaunted, overplayed a weakening hand, arguing that a Westminster debate should be scrapped as it would break Parliament’s own sub judice rules. The new Speaker, Rt Hon. John Bercow, had the ultimate say and – in an easy early test of his resolve – ruled out stifling the House. By the time of the debate, however, such was the rumpus that Trafigura had agreed to lift the injunction. Determined assertion of historic freedoms, good old fashioned journalism and the new power of the internet had made utterly counter-productive the most determined of efforts to preserve secrecy. While the issue of contempt – and a potential clash between Parliament and the courts – had gone away, once again it certainly had not been resolved. In the Colonel B case, too, common sense had carried the day and the Director of Public Prosecutions had backed away from any further action in the courts. During our enquiry, we took our own soundings. Advice from parliamentary counsel, however, is given strictly in private and the inhouse experts are loathe to be quoted. One concern about going on the record is the potential vulnerability of the procedures and privileges at Westminster to a challenge in the European Court of Human Rights – not a factor most other Commonwealth countries need weigh, of course. The U.K.’s Human Rights Act was only passed in 1998; but the issue had already surfaced in the “Colonel B” affair too as we have long been a signatory to the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.

New legislated protection for Parliament A second worry is that laying bare the fragility of cherished “rights” in black and white might just encourage an aggrieved party to test them. This is certainly not hypothetical. It has happened before, in the case of A v the U.K. in 2002. Then the European Court supported freedom of speech in Parliament; but it did raise issues about the protection of individuals’ rights when MPs used privilege to

“The free and fair reporting of proceedings in Parliament is a cornerstone of democracy...in our report we urge that the 160-yearold Parliamentary Papers Act should finally be replaced with a “clear and comprehensible modern statute”.” name them. Suffice it to say, however, that after Trafigura the interpretation of its lawyers, Carter Ruck, was the one preferred. The Bill of Rights and the Parliamentary Papers Act do not give the press an unfettered right to report parliamentary proceedings, immune to any court challenge. Lord Denning may have been sound in practice, but his comments were not accurately the law. The 1981 Contempt of Court Act might bite Parliament, too. There are other loose ends left abundant. What actually constitutes “malice” if a newspaper relies on qualified privilege (to report parliamentary proceedings),

knowing it is bound by an injunction? What is the meaning of “active proceedings” in the courts for Parliament’s sub judice rules? Had I tabled a parliamentary question with precise details of the Trafigura injunction, could the court service even have responded to checks at all without – in true Catch 22 fashion – breaking the terms of the injunction? The free and fair reporting of proceedings in Parliament is a cornerstone of democracy. To dispel the confusion over this issue, in our report we urge that the 160year-old Parliamentary Papers Act should finally be replaced with a “clear and comprehensible modern statute”. The appeal has been made before – the last time 11 years ago by the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege – and it is imperative the government now acts. Focusing on “superinjunctions” Importantly, the Trafigura affair also shone the brightest of lights on the ease with which so-called “super-injunctions” have been issued by the courts in London, in privacy and confidence actions, often with little or no notice to the media and little opportunity to contest whether publication is, indeed, in the “public interest”. There are signs that this freeze on press freedom is starting to thaw. After the Trafigura rumpus, the country’s most senior judge, Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, took the almost unprecedented step of issuing a press release saying in part: “I simply cannot envisage that it would be constitutionally possible, or proper, for a court to make an order which might prevent or hinder or limit discussion of any topic in Parliament.” In the recent case of England football captain Mr John Terry, which occurred just as we finalized our report, the High Court lifted a “super-injunction” preventing reporting of an extra-marital affair

with the former girlfriend of an international team-mate. Two days earlier, too, in its first case Britain’s new Supreme Court – which assumed the judicial functions of the House of Lords last October – lifted a gagging order on the naming of five suspected terrorists, ruling that there was a "powerful, general public interest" in identification. Echoing Lord Judge, it also criticized the so-called “efflorescence of anonymity orders” over recent years which had become an “ingrained habit” in the courts, often without “the slightest justification”. Restoring the balance Our committee report – “Press Standards, Privacy and Libel” – also calls for stricter limits on the use of “super-injunctions”, as well as considering a myriad of other issues, such as “libel tourism”, the exorbitant costs of justice in England and Wales compared with other countries and measures to make self-regulation of the British press far more effective. It was, we concluded, “the product of the longest, most complex and wide-ranging inquiry” we had ever undertaken. Our aim was to “arrive at recommendations that, if implemented, would help restore the delicate balances associated with freedom of the press”. We hope they will be pursued with vigor: by the government, the U.K. Press Complaints Commission and the courts.

A copy of the Select Committee report on “Press Standards, Privacy and Libel” can be viewed at www.paulfarrelly.com or www.publications.parliament.uk /pa/cm/cmcumeds.htm.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 45

Jayawardana:Layout 1 24/03/2010 12:29 Page 46

ROLE OF THE PARLIAMENTARIAN

THE PARLIAMENTARIAN AS THE PEOPLE’S EDUCATOR A Sri Lankan MP links his medical, broadcasting and parliamentary backgrounds to improve the well-being of his constituents and his viewers.

Dr Jayalath Jayawardana, MP, in Colombo. Dr Jayawardana was first elected to the Parliament of Sri Lanka in 1994 for the United National Party. He was the Minister of Rehabilitation, Resettlement and Refugees from 2002 to 2004 under the previous government. In addition to his parliamentary duties, he hosts a weekly television programme on health matters.

Parliamentarians across the world are elected by constituents of their respective countries with the purpose of improving people’s lives. In the modern world, Parliamentarians are not only expected to look into the basic needs of the people, but also to make sure that their needs are being catered to, and that society is being given the correct guidance and advice. In the past, the primary duty of the Parliamentarian was to look into the welfare of the people and his/her constituency. As times have changed, so too have the needs of the people where the challenges have become more complicated. Parliamentarians also act as legislators. They make the laws of their country for the benefit and protection of the citizens. A successful Parliamentarian today has to be a good communicator. With technological advances in the media, it has become easier to access people

46 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Dr Jayalath Jayawardana, MP

through electronic and print forms. Meetings can now even be conducted through the media, such as by webconferencing. Television has changed the role of the Parliamentarian whereby it is now possible for people to watch parliamentary debates and see election candidates on the screen. Above all, today’s Parliamentarian has to be an educator, whose prime responsibility is to educate a society in whichever way they can.

Using technology to educate the people Sri Lanka is a socialist democratic republic in Asia with a population of 20 million, and has become one of the fastest developing countries in the South Asian region. Both electronic and print media have developed and advanced in Sri Lanka. The state and the private independent media play a very important and vital role in the country, where most presidential campaigns, parliamentary elections as well as local government elections are now conducted through electronic and print media. I started the first weekly television medical programme on one of the popular TV channels in Sri Lanka in 1996, where – along with guest consultants and practitioners – we would discuss the various aspects of new developments of modern medicine, diagnostic methods of various diseases and the signs and symptoms of various diseases to

Jayawardana:Layout 1 24/03/2010 12:30 Page 47

ROLE OF THE PARLIAMENTARIAN

educate the general public as well as to dispel medical myths. The programme – which has been running for over 12 years – grew to become one of the most popular shows in Sri Lanka, with viewing figures reaching over 1 million, and more than 300 medical experts participating in the programme. The programme set an example of how you could get closer to the people using a different approach. With so many preventable diseases in the country, it is very important to detect illnesses such as breast and womb cancer at its early stages. With new diseases emerging in our society, the public should at least have a general knowledge about them. Malnutrition and anemia are common among the people of developing countries, while diabetes and hypertension have become national health problems. Double role I deviated from the traditional services rendered by a

Parliamentarian by becoming a medical educator. Medical doctors who have become Heads of State in various parts of the world have been recognized by an organization called the International Medical Parliamentarians Organization affiliated to the World Health Organization. Medical Parliamentarians should get together to discuss ways and means to control fatal diseases such as AIDS, as well as make use of their expert knowledge to eradicate malnutrition and other deficiency disorders. I have submitted articles to The Parliamentarian along with medical articles published in the weekly national newspaper for the last 10 years, which I have chosen to publish in two books. There are only three medical Parliamentarians in Sri Lanka out of 225 Parliamentarians. I have been an active Member of the Health Consultative Committee in the Parliament of Sri

Lanka, and was awarded the membership of the International Parliamentarians Association affiliated to the World Health Organization in 1997. I received my MBBS degree from the University of Colombo and obtained the Fellowship of the International College of Surgeons, U.S.A. Today, it has become very important for educated people to become Parliamentarians, especially in the developing world. They can contribute to the development of the society and the country in a more professional and intellectual way. I have been a very active, human rights and child rights defender, and was responsible for establishing the parliamentary lobby for child rights in Sri Lanka. Talking about health The health policy of a country is one of the most important matters which directly deals with the lives of the people. Several factors such as

Opposite page: Dr Jayawardana (right) on his television programme; Above: Sigiriya - Lion's rock in Sri Lanka, ancient fortress and buddhist monastery.

agriculture, the economy, infrastructure development, social security, environment and education directly and indirectly influence human life in the global village today. You need a healthy society to make a happy world. I have taken it upon myself as a Parliamentarian to educate my own people who elected me to Parliament in Sri Lanka, as well as set an example that an opposition Parliamentarian can play an important and vital role for the benefit of the people without state power and a ministerial portfolio. It proves that in today’s society, a good Parliamentarian can be a good educator as well as a good communicator.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 47

West:Layout 1 24/03/2010 16:11 Page 48

ENGAGING YOUNG PEOPLE

USING WEB TECHNOLOGIES TO ENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT DECISIONMAKING IN NEW SOUTH WALES A.

Hon. Graham West, MP, in Sydney. Mr West has been an Australian Labor Party Member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly since 2001. He was Minister for Youth at the time of writing this article. He was appointed as Minister of Juvenile Justice in December 2009.

A recent study by the University of Western Sydneyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Whitlam institute highlighted how acute the difficulty of engaging young people in decision making was in an Australian context, and why governments had to find new ways of reaching young people. Its survey found that very few young people expected to get involved in the formal political process. While this was disturbing for decision-makers, it was tempered by the fact that the majority of young people were interested in making a positive difference in the world. What was perhaps most startling about the gap between the politically active and the majority, is that most young people did not see participating in government as relevant to achieving these goals. This not only denied decision-

48 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Hon. Graham West, MP.

makers of a new set of solutions to community problems but also presented challenges in encouraging social change, in terms of undesirable behaviour (e.g. drugs, binge drinking and unsafe sex). In an era of increased interconnectivity among young people through technology, many believe that they can bring more influence to bear through

non-governmental organizations and actions online, and many will seek advice on behaviour from other groups online including friends, relying on the perceived anonymity of the net to seek out advice, but not necessarily from government. This presents a real policy challenge to governments but also offers opportunities to reach out to young people and get their valuable input into decision-making in ways previously impossible by using these same technologies. The idea of using web-based technologies is not new, but these efforts often fail because traditional consultation websites are usually not much more than an online glossy brochure with a feedback form replacing a reply paid envelope. They rely on direct marketing techniques to reach their audience. We should not be surprised

West:Layout 1 24/03/2010 14:35 Page 49

ENGAGING YOUNG PEOPLE

then that young people are not overjoyed by this type of site, nor do they race out to participate in them. For many they are simply unsolicited advertising, junk mail that as best get flicked through but almost certainly rejected. Using online technologies should not been seen as an extension of direct marketing but a new way of direct engagement

Facebook, Bebo and Myspace were all utilized as part of the campaign as this was where young people were already having discussions with each other. This freeform discussion that takes place is the key to closing the gap between government and young people and the idea was to see if it could work to help with a real problem and then connect this

conducted in both electronic and physical spaces. It started with an examination of social networking sites and online presence in the targeted regions. In both regions it was found that young people had a presence online but few of the local websites, blogs or forums appeared to be used by them. However examination of social media sites such as YouTube indicated a strong youth presence for the region with user-generated content easily found. MySpace and Facebook both had active regionally focused groups and pages. These findings helped the development of a strategy for reaching young people both faceto-face and online and for attracting them to a consultation site where they were invited to express their preferences. The field study then emerged through the following stages: •

Opposite page: The sun setting over Sydney Harbour at Manly Cove; Above: A poster promoting the YourSpin project. and spreading messages by word of mouth. It should be viewed more in the vein of an online tutorial group or public meeting. The exchange of ideas is to be encouraged, views are to be teased out and assumptions challenged. This is where the web 2.0 technologies provide us with new opportunities to talk with and listen to young people. To this end the New South Wales (NSW) government in conjunction with the University of NSW embarked on the YourSpin project. The idea was to use social networking sites and other web 2.0 technologies to involve young people in spending $200,000 in two regional communities.

discussion to a decision making process. • The project Objectives 1. To explore how online social networking technologies could be used to engage young people aged 9-18 to better inform government decision making; 2. To develop, apply and assess various strategies of attracting and involving young people in the pilot project focusing the Central Coast and Northern NSW regions; and 3. To see if and how young people would engage in making decisions about expenditure in their local areas.

•

The field study in the targeted regions took place from mid January to mid April 2009 and was

•

Stage One: Face-to-face interviews with young people to gain insight into potential areas in which the grant money could be used and also learn about their online behaviour patterns. Stage Two: Analysis and classification of proposals and development of a short list of proposals on which to spend the grant money. Stage Three: The development of an interactive online game designed to encourage young people to vote and express preferences for the proposals on which to spend the money. Stage Four: Design of a webbased survey to collect demographic data and information about young people’s views of their consultation by the government. Stage Five: The development of a “viral” campaign to attract people to the online game and to voting. Stage Six: Analysis of voting results in the two regions and assessment of results.

Outcomes The pilot project was undertaken during the first quarter of 2009, and the online campaign ran from 15 February 2009 to 17 April 2009 – a period just short of nine weeks. During that period 8,200 young people joined the online community created by the research team, and 2,026 “voted” on suggested ways and means of spending funds in their local area. The total cost of the pilot project was AUD$60,000 – which meant that each “friend” who joined the community cost approximately AUD9. The 2,026 young people who voted provide a clear pattern of choices within the regions and demonstrated a different set of funding priorities between the regions. The micro communities created for the pilot project remain in place and can form the basis of future campaigns and engagement. There were valuable lessons learned from every step in the online campaign and during the pilot project. These lessons can provide accelerated learning for future campaigns. Most importantly the project highlighted that young people were interested in being involved in their communities and engaging in decision making. It also highlighted that geography was equally an important factor, with differences observed between the two regions and funding adjusted accordingly. This confirmed that all politics was local, even in the global age. The project in reaching over 8,000 young people in nine weeks also makes it almost unprecedented as a participation tool and highlights the potential of this new set of communication tools. The University of NSW have now applied to the Federal Government to take this research further, and if successful, can only see government decision making enhanced with the spirit of youth. I would also like to thank Professor Daryll Hull from the UNSW for his assistance in this project.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 49

O'Brien:Layout 1 24/03/2010 14:39 Page 50

STRATEGIC PLANNING IN THE SENATE

NEW INITIATIVES IN THE SENATE – STRATEGIC PLANNING AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE ETHICS OFFICER Modern management methods can seem incompatible with the parliamentary culture; but the new Clerk of Canada’s Senate ﬁnds his venerable institution is embracing new administrative tools to help improve its performance.

Mr Gary O’Brien in Ottawa. Mr O’Brien was appointed as the Clerk of the Senate of Canada in September 2009. He joined the Senate in 1980 where he served as Chief of English Journals and Director of Committees until assuming the role of Deputy Clerk in 1999, a position he held until 2006.

Parliaments and Legislatures are often seen as being predisposed against change. This is partly explained by their function of being stewards of the centuries-old and much respected parliamentary tradition. William Blackstone, in his famous Commentaries on the Laws of England, used the metaphor of the parliamentary form of government being “an old Gothic castle” which one generation after another is fortunate enough to inherit. This castle, Blackstone maintained, was “erected in the days of chivalry…the moated ramparts, the embattled towers, and the trophied walls, are magnificent and venerable, but useless.... The inferior apartments, now converted into rooms of convenience, are cheerful and commodious, though

50 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Mr Gary O’Brien.

their approaches are winding and difficult”.1 If too many changes are made to the castle, it could come crashing down. In many ways, Blackstone’s metaphor is still relevant. Legislatures protect and very much enjoy their long-standing and cherished traditions, their medieval

pageantry and their many unwritten customs and practices. While they are not totally immune, in Blackstone’s words, to fitting the old Gothic castle “up for a modern inhabitant”, Legislatures at times tend to frown upon new ways of doing business. They enjoy their constitutional independence and relish the doctrine of “the sovereignty of Parliament” however mythical and unrealistic that doctrine has become. There is a mind-set to disregard any new practices not associated with what they regard to be their basic role – to make laws. In the case of the Parliament of Canada, that primary function was bestowed upon them by the Constitution Act, 1867, specifically in section 91 which states that Parliament is to “make laws for the peace, order and good

O'Brien:Layout 1 24/03/2010 14:39 Page 51

STRATEGIC PLANNING IN THE SENATE

government of Canada in relation to all matters not coming within the classes of subjects by this act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the provinces”. The reform of Parliament has

never been easy. Despite enormous pressure at times for change, Legislatures have shown themselves remarkably picky about which items on the reform menu they wish to embrace. Many ideas have been rejected as being too radical or not in keeping with the customs of Parliament. Parliamentarians and their staff often become set in their work ways. Political scientists refer to the manner in which Legislatures actually function as the “folkways” of a Legislature, which are defined as “the unwritten rules of the game, the norms of conduct, its approved manner of behaviour”.2 As we know, folkways describe a Legislature’s traditions and character. They are a source of parliamentary procedure; they can affect power relations by determining who has influence and who has not; and more importantly, they can set limits on the extent to

which change can be brought to a Legislature.3 Yet as Professor Philip Norton, now Baron Norton of Louth and a distinguished member of the British House of Lords has written: “A Legislature cannot be analysed independently of the political system of which it forms a part.”4 We know that Legislatures perform many functions within a political system in addition to law-making, for example: representing the electorate, holding the government accountable for its actions, being a forum for debate and the expression of grievances, monitoring the expenditure of public funds, legitimizing governmental decisions, recruiting political actors, communicating political knowledge, and performing a safety-valve or tension-release function generated by the political process. Legislatures and their committees,

Opposite page: A Senate Finance Committee meeting; Above: The Senate in session; Left: The main door to the Senate Chamber.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 51

O'Brien:Layout 1 24/03/2010 14:40 Page 52

STRATEGIC PLANNING IN THE SENATE as well as royal commissions and think-tanks, are constantly reviewing how such functions can better be performed. We also know that parliamentary bodies operate in a media-surrounded “fish bowl” and however much they may wish to remain “independent” from social, legal or administrative forces, they know it is exceedingly difficult to do so. They are constantly being scrutinized and much more thoroughly than government departments. In such an environment where public perception is always the first order of the day, small problems can quickly balloon into major crises. While procedural change may be more difficult to come by, administrative change is often “in the air.” As historical experience has shown, it is very difficult to keep inappropriate behaviour or unethical conduct under wraps for very long and when it is exposed, reform can come rather quickly. Quite simply, Legislatures are expected to “walk the talk”. For example, if a Legislature or one of its committees cannot keep its own expenditures under control, they cannot really expect a government department to do the same. If their system for governing Members’ pay and allowances is out of line, as we have recently seen by the expenses scandal in the U.K., all the good work a Legislature does will suffer enormously. As the new Speaker of the British House of Commons told the Hansard Society in his remarks before them on 30 November 2009: “I cannot think of a single year in the recent history of Parliament when more damage has been done to it than this year, with the possible exception of when Nazi bombs fell on the Chamber in 1941.” It is not surprising then that in spite of a seeming predisposition to be against change, many Parliaments and Legislatures are experimenting with modern

management practices and modern management philosophies. Many are doing so not just out of fear or in response to scandal but with a view that such changes will provide efficiencies and pay-backs, as well as provide improved accountability and transparency. What surprised me most as someone who had retired from the Senate in 2006 as Deputy Clerk and then returned in 2009 as Clerk was not that modern management philosophies were being embraced but how committed the Senate was in implementing new administrative policies. This paper examines two such initiatives: the creation of a strategic planning unit, and the designation of a corporate officer for values and ethics. It will describe each of these programmes, how they came about, and what benefits, as well as what risks, they may hold. Strategic planning Strategic planning, or better strategic management, came into prominence in 1980 with the publication by Harvard Business School Professor Michael E. Porter’s book entitled Competitive Strategy (New York: Free Press, 1980). Although primarily developed as a market economy management practice, it has been widely adopted as an important tool of public administration. Its purpose is to support the continuous improvement of management practices. Simply put, strategic planning is about setting the organization’s future direction and identifying the short and longterm outcomes that you want to achieve. It means making sure that you align all your resources, activities, products and services to get the results you want. Traditionally, strategic planning focuses on establishing an integrated planning cycle, an environmental scan, MAF (Management Accountability Framework) self-assessments by senior managers, and the setting of

52 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

strategic priorities and initiatives as well as work plans and progress reports. However, the Senate is attempting to go far beyond these components by developing a results-based management framework. This framework is based on the mission and vision of the Senate Administration and is comprised of a performance measurement system that links all the activities of the Administration to the outcomes they support. The core of this framework is the

“To engage effectively in performance measurement, you need to define what you are trying to achieve before identifying measures that support them...” question: if you are not managing by results, how are you managing? To manage by results, a performance measurement system is required. If you don’t have the statistics and reliable data to inform your assessments, you cannot manage by results. Performance measurement becomes particularly useful when maintained consistently over time and trends can be reviewed. Furthermore, managing by results not only ensures more informed decision-making, but the sharing of those results with the Internal Economy Committee, thus enhancing accountability. The impetus for implementing a Performance Framework within the Senate came from the federal government’s 2003 policy called the Management, Resources and

Results Structure Policy which prescribed that government departments must define and measure the strategic outcomes which reflect the organization’s mandate and vision. While Parliament is not subject to the Management, Resources and Results Structure Policy, the Senate Administration began developing a results framework for performance measurement three years ago with the objective of ensuring that we spend on the right priorities and that we build systems to support effective operations in the service of senators. This year it produced a 2008-2009 Performance Report which, although still a prototype, is much improved over earlier reports. There is still much work to be done. To engage effectively in performance measurement, you need to define what you are trying to achieve before identifying measures that support them; in other words, performance measurement and reporting should be results-driven and not data-driven or it becomes measurement for measurement’s sake. Gaps still need to be closed in performance reporting and more directors need to become engaged. There is little measurement of cost-efficiency or productivity. The yearly strategic initiatives set by senior management still need to be costed and prioritized to ensure success. A results-based budgeting system in theory requires that financial data be coupled with performance data which in turn needs to be linked to strategic outcomes. We are not there yet but by all appearances we are on our way. The major impediment for implementing an initiative like strategic planning within a parliamentary environment is that with so much day to day uncertainty it is hard to plan anything. As the saying goes, “a week is a long time in politics”. Our manager of Strategic Planning, Ms

O'Brien:Layout 1 24/03/2010 14:40 Page 53

STRATEGIC PLANNING IN THE SENATE Jill Anne Joseph, in an article cowritten with the former Clerk entitled Results-Based Management in the Parliamentary Environment anticipates this problem. She writes: “In the interparliamentary community, we have heard fellow clerks say that managing strategically is impossible when working with Parliamentarians. Busy managers often believe that, with operations demanding their full attention, there is no time for planning. Still others will argue that planning is something that capable managers do instinctively, without the need to discuss and document every step of the process. Planners would argue the opposite: volatile, busy, resource-challenged environments need performancebased planning most of all – to do the right things well the first time…. Planning, like anything else, is an exercise that an institution must undertake with reasonable expectations regarding the benefits and outcomes. While performance measurement is likely to add value to the way institutions manage, it is not a panacea for all of the challenges they face…. Results-based Management – truly an exercise in sustained incrementalism – should thus be developed to a level suitable to the size of the institution and to the value it adds, while affording sufficient resources to support the processes and activities that may ultimately result in precisely the added value sought.”5 The Senate is still finding its way with respect to this initiative. It has created a small but very engaged Strategic Planning Unit attached to the Office of the Clerk. I believe we can only expect a much better administered institution as a result of their work. Appointment of a Corporate Officer The other initiative I wish to comment upon is the appointment of a Corporate Officer for Values and Ethics. The models provided by

the federal government for promoting values and ethics within public administration were instrumental in the development of this position. The 1996 Tait Report entitled “A Strong Foundation” promoted an extensive dialogue with public servants on values and ethics. The Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act of November 2005 committed the government to establishing a charter of values to guide public servants in their work and professional conduct. The Management Accountability Framework (MAF) was created with the aim of establishing an integrated management framework. It identified ten elements to guide organizations in their management of programmes and policies. Public service values constituted one of the ten (10) MAF elements. Finally, the Federal Accountability Act of 2006 implemented measures to strengthen accountability and to increase transparency and oversight in government operations. The Senate also took a number of steps to promote ethics in the conduct of its business. The Senate Administrative Rules adopted in 2004 included a number of rules that relate to ethical conduct. In 2005 a Conflict of Interest Code for Senators was adopted and revised in 2008 and provided for the appointment of an Ethics Officer for senators. In February 2007, the Senate Administration adopted and brought into force a Statement of Values and Ethics. Although the Senate is a separate and autonomous institution, the Statement underlined that values and ethics know no borders. As such, the Senate Administration made known that it shares common values and ethics with the Public Service of Canada which include: democratic values, professional values, ethical values and people values. The Statement of Values and

Ethics of the Senate Administration reinforced that managers are responsible for respecting and promoting these values within the Senate workplace and that staff members are expected to be guided by these values in carrying out their functions. Other measures have also been taken. Letters of offer to new employees now include a statement on values and ethics. A policy against harassment in the workplace was adopted. Last year workshops promoting ethics were conducted in which over 70 per cent of the Senate administrative staff attended. The objectives of these workshops were to reflect on the meaning of personal and organizational values and ethics, and to identify ethical dilemmas in view of developing scenarios and having a dialogue. Also in 2009, the Senate’s Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel participated in and graduated from Carleton University’s Certificate on Organizational Ethics Programme. He has now been appointed the Senate’s Corporate Officer for Values and Ethics. The primary duties of this position will be to draft and finalize a Code of Conduct of the Senate Administration and to be available to all employees of the Senate Administration who may wish to discuss an ethical issue outside of their regular reporting environment. He also chairs a Senior Management Subcommittee on Ethics whose main role is to provide an ethical infrastructure for staff of the Senate Administration, including training, promotional materials and activities. Research reveals that a workplace that is silent on ethics is an ethically negative work environment. To be alive, ethics must be visible, on the agenda and discussed. It is expected that the forthcoming Code of Conduct of the Senate Administration will provide rules of conduct under the following headings: ethical

business climate, respectful work environment, exemplary service, loyalty, protection of Senate assets and other resources, and the integrity of books and records. However, it is still an open question whether the Code will formally declare that it be the duty of staff members to report misconduct or perceived misconduct. “Whistleblowing” within a government department is one thing; within a parliamentary setting where there is so much media scrutiny is another. There is not much appetite for the Senate to be a lone-ranger in this field and it would seem more prudent to see how other Legislatures plan to deal with the issue of the disclosure of misconduct within the institution before acting. All these initiatives I believe will make the Senate a stronger and better administered parliamentary body.

Endnotes 1 Storing, H.J. “William Blackstone”, in Strauss, L and Cropsey, J, History of Political Philosophy, Second Edition (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1981). 2 Matthews, D.R. U.S. Senators and Their World (Chapel Hill: The University of Carolina Press, 1960), p. 92. 3 O’Brien, G. “Legislative Folkways: The Example of the Canadian Parliament”, Communication to the Havana Session of the InterParliamentary Union, Association of the Secretaries General of Parliaments, April 2001. 4 Norton, P (ed.), Legislatures (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 271. 5 Joseph, J.A and Belisle, P “Results-Based Management in the Parliamentary Environment”, The Table, 2009: 77:30

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 53

Awerika:Layout 1 01/04/2010 12:15 Page 54

ACCOUNTING FOR SPENDING IN KIRIBATI

REVIEWING EXECUTIVE SPENDING IN KIRIBATI AND THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE In a small country with few resources, its Parliament, Public Accounts Committee and Auditor General must be especially vigilant in scrutinizing all spending.

Mrs Terengaiti Awerika in Tarawa. Mrs Awerika is the Secretary to the Kiribati Public Accounts Committee. This paper is based on a presentation to a CPA-supported workshop on public spending scrutiny run by Australiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s La Trobe University.

Development of the budget Prior to the preparation of the budget, the cabinet of Kiribati decides on a budget ceiling based on advice from the Secretary of Finance. The objective of the budget ceiling is to have Ministries prioritize their activities within a budget that does not exceed revenues. With this information on hand, the various output managers draft their budget for their various departments, divisions, sections and units according to the activities that they are required to carry for the coming year. The drafts are then discussed within the ministry with the final drafts usually discussed and agreed to by the respective Ministers. In the preparation phase, the various output managers draft their budget for their various departments, divisions, sections

54 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

and units according to the activities that they are required to carry for the year. The drafts are then discussed within the Ministry with the final drafts usually discussed and agreed to by the respective Ministers. Ministries drafted their budgets according to the ceiling already set by the cabinet and coordinated by the Planning Unit at the Ministry of Finance. The cabinet then reviews the draft budgets usually after these drafts have been reviewed by a mini cabinet chaired by the President with the Minister of Finance as a Member. The mini cabinet then recommends to the cabinet that the final draft of the budget is taken to Parliament for approval. The cabinet usually just formalizes the recommendation, given the membership of the mini cabinet.

Budget approval The executiveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s final draft is then tabled in Parliament for approval. It is important to note that the governing party normally has the majority of Members so the budget when taken to Parliament will most likely be adopted. In the process, however, the opposition will use the opportunity to highlight its concerns over the budget and at times vote against its passing depending on the presentation of the budget. Parliament considers the budget brought to it by the executive after it has been prepared by the Secretaries and endorsed by the cabinet. The government budget presented to Parliament is based on a four-year Medium Term Expenditure Framework. A new development in Kiribati earmarked for implementation in

Awerika:Layout 1 01/04/2010 12:16 Page 55

ACCOUNTING FOR SPENDING IN KIRIBATI

the near future is for Parliament to be involved in the formulation of the governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s budget. This would hopefully get Members of Parliament more involved in the formulation phase and consequently have their views reflected in this phase that would then improve accountability.

Managing the budget Once the budget is passed, the Accountant General will then release accounting warrants to respective Ministries enabling them to access funds using a government payment system. When done properly, the transaction begins with a need identified that cannot be supplied within the Ministry. This may involve the need for a service or a product. Quotations are sought from at least three suppliers and brought up to the Secretary for consideration. The submissionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s objective is to ensure that the Secretary as Senior Responsible Officer is well informed to make a decision on any expenditure of the Ministry. Should the submission be above $5,000.00 then the Ministry is required under the Procurement Act to have the transaction considered by the Procurement Committee which is chaired by the Ministry of Finance. Other accounts personnel at the middle

and senior level are also involved in this procurement exercise by delegation by their respective Ministries. Minutes of the meeting are attached to the local purchase order along with the debit note from the vender and the payment voucher and are sent to the Accountant Generalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office to have the funds released. The order and the voucher are signed by different officials to address transparency issues. The reality is that the Secretary is not always around to make these decisions and therefore delegates this responsibility to other senior staff in his/her Ministry. Depending on how well the Secretary and those to whom he/she has entrusted with this scrutiny role will determine how well or how poorly government funds are spent in each particular Ministry. Regular meetings are often held between the Secretary and the head of the accounting section to update the Secretary on how the Ministry is performing financially. Monthly

Opposite page: The Kiribati flag; Above: Women performing a traditional dance; Left: Kiribati President H.E. Anote Tong. reports are also circulated to different sections within the Ministry to show how far they have gone with their budgets. At this stage the scrutiny part is over as it is just a matter of making sure that the Ministry is operating within the allocated budget with all measures taken to ensure that a Ministry does not spend more than its approved operational budget. An automated system is in place that allows the accounting section of any Ministry to know its balance as recorded at the office of the Accountant General. An internal accounting system also exists that allows the ministerial staff to maintain an internal record of all transactions that take place before it is sent to the central processing centre at the Ministry of

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 55

Awerika:Layout 1 24/03/2010 13:55 Page 56

ACCOUNTING FOR SPENDING IN KIRIBATI finance. It is important to clarify at this stage that all transactions begin at the Ministry and are processed internally with the final payment made from the office of the Accountant General, through the payment section. Auditor General’s scrutiny The examination of the Auditor General’s reports is an important part of the system of checks and balances in the Westminster style of government and has hence been adopted in the Kiribati context. The Auditor General reports in accordance with the constitution, a report which he/she submits to the Minister for Finance and the Speaker to Parliament. The reports of the Auditor General are reviewed by the Parliament through its only scrutinizing mechanism, the Public Accounts Committee. Public Accounts Committee scrutiny role in the process Like other Public Accounts Committees (PACs), the PAC is the spending scrutiny mechanism of Parliament and holds government to account for its use of public funds and resources by examining the audited accounts. Its functions are stipulated in the National Constitution section 114 (4) as follows; i.

To consider the accounts of the government in conjunction with the report of the Auditor General;

ii.

To report to the Maneaba, in the case of any excess or unauthorized expenditure of funds, the reasons for such expenditure;

iii. To propose any measures it considers necessary to ensure that the funds of the government are properly and economically spent and where a report on the examination and audit of the accounts of any corporation, statutory

board, body or commission is required by law to be laid before the Maneaba, to consider such report; and iv. To make recommendations to the Maneaba ni Maungatabu in respect of such accounts. The scrutiny process starts immediately following the tabling of reports of the Auditor General to the tabling and debating of the PAC reports in Parliament. After the reports of the Auditor General are tabled in Parliament, the PAC schedules its inquiries with government Ministries. The Secretary (under the advice of the Chairman) writes to the relevant Ministries of their dates to appear before the PAC. If necessary the Committee may call for officers through issuance of summons to give formal evidence before Members in the inquiry. This power is hardly used as softer measures are taken to prevent unwanted friction between the PAC and the executive. Before inquiries commence, briefing sessions for PAC Members are often held one day before each inquiry. The main advisors to the PAC provide this allimportant briefing. These are the Auditor General and the Accountant General who provide advice on technical aspects of the reports. At inquiries, PAC reviews the Audit Report and spend much of its time examining departmental annual accounts over the unauthorized expenditures and the under collections of government revenue. Inquiries are recorded by the Secretariat and its minutes of proceedings are published but not tabled in Parliament. Such records and documents relating to an inquiry are stored at the office of the Secretary for future references or disposed of when no longer useful. These inquiries are held behind closed doors and not open to the public or the media. This has been the practice from the early

56 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

days in 1974 when the Kiribati PAC was first founded and it continues to the present day. Follow-up inquiries are often distributed to Ministries on issues that require further clarifications from the PAC i.e. breakdown of the over-expended figures, etc... Such documents all form part and parcel of the PAC report to Parliament. Upon the completion of each inquiry, relevant reports are drafted by the Secretariat in close consultation with the Chairman and the Members who then review the drafts and after reaching a consensus a final report is produced with very strong recommendations for corrective actions. The report is tabled and debated in Parliament. The PAC reports are always approved by resolution of the House but unfortunately recommendations have yet to be acted upon. It is not the committee’s role to compel the government to implement its recommendations, although it is important to ensure that recommendations are given serious consideration. The committee understands that the government will not always agree with its findings and recommendations and after further examination by the government there may at times be practical or political reasons why its recommendations cannot or should not be implemented. Even though the PAC plays a major role to scrutinize use of public funds by the executive, this role is confined only to its functions as provided for in the Constitution. As such, the PAC only examines the public accounts. Relationship between the PAC and the Auditor General’s Office The office of the Audit is an independent entity and the PAC‘s role is derived from the Auditor General’s reports being tabled in Parliament. However, both the PAC and the Auditor General are independent in their own spheres. The Auditor General is

appointed by the President and reports to the Speaker of Parliament through reports tabled in Parliament. The PAC Members are nominated by Members of Parliament. The PAC itself has a very close working relationship with the Auditor General. The Auditor General briefs the PAC in private. At inquiries, the Auditor General sits with the Members and participates in the hearings by questioning witnesses with the Chair’s permission. The Auditor General also advises the PAC during the review of their draft reports. The PAC works in close consultation with the Office of the Auditor General through formulating and planning for its work programme. The Auditor General is the PAC’s principal adviser. Committee Secretariat Currently there are two members of staff serving the PAC including other committees, the Secretary and the transcriber. The numbers have remained small for a number of years. Lack of secretariat capacity was one of the longstanding issues to address PAC queries that arose from accounting issues. This was in addition to the technical advices provided by the Auditor General’s and the Accountant General’s offices. The PAC schedule has evolved to a full-time basis and inclusion of a full-time technical advisor will improve the understanding and outcome of the PAC work. A review to be underway from the UNDP will also accommodate this staffing need for the Secretariat. The PAC works programme is heavily dependent on the number of audited reports tabled in Parliament. Upon the adoption of the Auditor General's reports, the Secretariat drafts a programme for the PAC taking into consideration the associated costs. Associated costs include among other things the cost of

Awerika:Layout 1 01/04/2010 12:16 Page 57

ACCOUNTING FOR SPENDING IN KIRIBATI stay for the Members in Tarawa, where PAC Members are not from Tarawa, to ensure that their stay is fully utilized in PAC work. Effort is made to see that PAC Members' time is fully utilized in their oversight duties and upon completion of their duties, travel is booked to return to their respective constituencies. The effectiveness of the PAC is heavily dependent on its membership as not all MPs who are selected to this body have strong financial backgrounds. The majority of Members of Parliament have weak financial backgrounds and also have limited knowledge of transparency and good governance principles. The Secretariat initiated a capacity-building exercise by conducting a PAC workshop to provide PAC Members, Members of Parliament and representatives of other key stakeholders including the Auditor General, the Accountant General and the Executive with a better understanding and appreciation of the role of the PAC in pursuing accountability and good governance across the public sector. The workshop aimed at identifying key accountability issues for the PAC and mechanisms to better improve the effectiveness of PACs. This workshop was conducted in May 2008 by Mr Peter Loney of La Trobe University and funded by the United Nations Development Programme. The workshop instilled awareness in participants of the important role of the PAC in Kiribati as the only oversight mechanism of Parliament. Issues It is important to note that although there are numerous types of transactions, there are those that have been areas of concern in addition to accountability issues in certain steps of the transaction process. Among many issues, the issues of over-expenditures and under-

collections of the government revenues are major concerns in the reports of the Auditor General published and tabled in Parliament. Other issues that raise accountability concerns include the imprests issued to officials for overseas travel, procurement of services contracts and payment of overtime hours, to name but a few. Retirement of imprests Retirement of imprests is an ongoing dilemma as funds provided to civil servants prior to their overseas duty travel can amount to over AU$5,000 per office per trip excluding payment of airfares. These funds are given to the officers with an understanding that 14 days after the officerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s return from official travel she/he is required to retire the funds by providing an explanation on how the money was spent at which point the government can determine whether or not the office should return funds or reimburse the official for expenses that go over the funds received prior to travel. Backlog of retirements that remain outstanding make it difficult for the Accountant General to ascertain the level of funds that need to be returned to government which is usually the case in most travels undertaken by officials. The added difficulty is most of the officers who do not retire their imprests are very senior in rank. Procurement of service contracts The procurement of services or goods is another area that raises concerns from the PAC. The Procurement Act stipulates the need to have at least three bids for any transaction that would amount to more than $5,000.00. The idea behind this act is to make sure that the best price is negotiated on behalf of government for the best use of public funds. In the process, connections get the best of these procurements. It is commonly see that contracts go to friends, family and other people

who have connections with those conducting the procurement. The procurements are usually justified with reasons which are easily fabricated. An added concern is last minute transactions which are driven by senior officials and which usually involve huge amounts of funds. Those sitting on the Procurement Committees are junior staff who can be easily manipulated by their seniors. Payment of overtime hours Overtime hours for the most part are difficult to administer. There are usually no measures in place that enable a supervisor to know precisely how much work is done in a given hour for those who work overtime. Those who normally take advantage of this overtime facility are the support staff and in particular those from the accounting cadre, drivers and cleaners. There is a need to relook at the current arrangements in order to come up with a method to control the unnecessary use of overtime which is fast becoming a way to supplement income for the support staff on work that may be easily done during normal working hours yet left to be done later when the returns are much higher. Backlog of reports from State Owned Enterprises In 2008, steps were taken by government to bring the State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) reports up to date. Government accounts were brought up to date; but SOE reports remain slightly behind. There is a sense of urgency to get these reports in as in years past, SOEs have continuously requested subsidy from government at an alarming rate. It is becoming a norm for SOEs to have guaranteed overdraft facilities with the only bank in Kiribati. They run in hundreds of thousands of dollars. In the absence of these reports, it will be difficult to ascertain the amount of damage these subsidies have

done to the overall budget of the nation. Parliament Scrutiny of PAC Report Another issue that Parliamentarians have always seen as one weakness in the oversight role of the PAC is the insufficient time that Parliamentarians have to review the report prior to its tabling. In the past, given the lack of capacity to properly support the PAC, the submission of PAC reports have been compromised as they are being tabled in Parliament only days after their release to the MPs for their review. The limited time translates to the limited input the MPs can make when discussing or debating the PAC report. An unforeseen positive development was from the Honourable Speaker who on the first sitting of Parliament announced over the local radio the list of SOEs outdated accounts and urged the Managers or Chief Executive Officers and members of the Board of Directors to urgently submit more timely reports to the Auditor Generalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office. Conclusion Scrutiny of the executiveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s use of public funds and the role of the PAC in this process have been vital contributors to transparency, accountability and good practices. The PAC being the only Parliament financial oversight mechanism has played a very important role in the process through a careful scrutiny of the Audit reports through inquiries held. From the outset, the PAC , though limited and confined to its functions as provided for in the constitution, is a very powerful scrutinizing body for Parliament and for the people of Kiribati that needs to be empowered even further if it is to meet the objectives of its establishment.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 57

Macnutt:Layout 1 22/03/2010 17:21 Page 58

PROVINCIAL HOUSES

DEMOCRACY IN ARCHITECTURAL FORM: PROVINCE HOUSES IN NOVA SCOTIA, PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND AND NEW BRUNSWICK Canadaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s three Maritime provinces generate public interest in parlaimentary politics in part by focusing attention on the historic and stately buildings which house their venerable democracies.

Mr James W. Macnutt, QC, in Charlottetown. Mr Macnutt, a lawyer and former Legislative Counsel for the Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly, was commissioned to write an architectural history of their buildings by the Legislatures of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.

Democracy as a form of government is not guaranteed permanence in those jurisdictions within the sphere of the British Parliamentary tradition. It must be promoted, explained and justified on a continuing basis. The history of European politics in the 20th century demonstrates how vulnerable democracy can be, particularly in times of crisis. Voter turnout and volunteer participation in the political process appear to be on a steady decline. An increasing number of citizens have little knowledge of or interest in the functioning of democratic government. The public is certainly aware of Parliaments in action and have an unflattering image consisting of members engaging in the futile and childish acrimony and posturing, hollow rhetoric, insincerity, rabid partisanship, and

58 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Mr James W. Macnutt, QC.

endless mendacity. This is the case irrespective of which party is in power and which jurisdiction is involved. If these general statements are correct, and I suggest they are, it is a primary duty of Parliaments, in a nonpartisan manner, to promote the principles of democracy. To paraphrase Sir Winston

Churchill, democracy is not perfect, but it is the best system of government yet devised. To counteract apathy, ignorance and the negative image of a working Parliament in session, those espousing the parliamentary model of democracy must engage the electorate in a better understanding of why it is the best system yet devised. The Speakers of the Legislatures of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, the smallest of the Canadian provinces, have recognized that knowledge of parliamentary government is declining. That is a remarkable fact in three provinces in which democracy has been functioning for over 250 years and in which the electorate has traditionally been as engaged in politics as it has in

Macnutt:Layout 1 22/03/2010 17:23 Page 59

PROVINCIAL HOUSES

religious observance; political affiliation and adherence have historically often engendered greater fervour than has religion. To attempt to counteract the prevalence of ignorance and disengagement among the electorate, the Speakers have embarked on projects intended to explain the role and function of the parliamentary system in their

presentation of the buildings speak to the dignity, traditions and importance of our form of government in the British parliamentary tradition. Our understanding and appreciation of the buildings in which democracy is practiced must lead to a better understanding of the principles and objectives of democracy.

continuum of democratic government in all three provinces, and provides the linkage for the three buildings being grouped for the purpose of the book. The buildings in Halifax and Charlottetown conform to a floor plan developed in pre-revolutionary America. That plan was adopted with adaptations for local needs in Nassau and a few other

provinces. One of those initiatives is to document and photographically illustrate their legislative assembly buildings. I have been sponsored by all three Speakers to write an architectural history of each of their Legislative Assembly buildings. The book shall explain both the form and the function of the buildings. It shall do so by describing the origin of the form or layout of the buildings and how the form was guided by the functions performed in them. There is no more graphic evidence and representation of our parliamentary democracy than the buildings in which it is performed. A visit to the Palace of Westminster reveals more to the non-academic observer about the day to day functioning of parliamentary democracy than is available theoretically in textbooks. Furthermore, the architectural features and decorative

Stepping back in time The history of democratic government in the three Maritime provinces is among the oldest in the British parliamentary tradition. In 2008 Nova Scotia celebrated the 250th anniversary of the establishment of its Legislature. In 1758 Nova Scotia geographically included much of what is now the separate province of New Brunswick. With the defeat of France in the region at Louisburg in 1757, Prince Edward Island, then known as Isle St. Jean, was annexed to the colony of Nova Scotia. As part of the British colonial administration of the southern half of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, both New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island attained separate colonial status from Nova Scotia within decades of the Treaty of Paris in 1763. The democratic governance of Nova Scotia, therefore, provides part of the

Opposite page: The exterior of the Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly; Above: The Assemblyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Chamber. Legislatures within the British Parliamentary system. The plan reflected the tripartite nature of the 18th century colonial Legislature: the Governor, the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly. Each had prescribed functions which required a certain presence and priority for each of those parties within the building. With the passage of time and an increasing egalitarianism in the colonies during the late 19th century the form changed as did the spatial requirements, particularly after the abolition of the Legislative Councils. The floor plan of the Legislature building in New Brunswick is an interesting contrast with its counterparts in Charlottetown and Halifax as it

was built in the 1880s when the pre-eminence of the Legislative Council had been greatly reduced and architectural styles had changed giving greater flexibility in the allocation of space. The relevance of all three Legislature buildings being analysed and described in the same book lies not only in their common roots in the colony of Nova Scotia, it also arises in providing a contrast in the differing development of democratic practices in the three provinces. Great care was taken by the Legislatures of the three provinces in choosing the architectural style and decoration of the buildings. While the floor plans of the building in Halifax (1819) and Charlottetown (1849) are virtually identical, the architectural styles in which they were built differ. The Nova Scotia Province House was built in the Adamesque style following closely the stylistic details employed by Robert Adam. Province House in Charlottetown was built in the Greek revival style. The New Brunswick building, built much later in the 19th century was built in the Second Empire style. The book shall contrast the design and layout of the three Province Houses with the Palace of Westminster. While the mother of Parliaments is different in architectural style and decoration from any of the Legislature buildings in Maritime Canada, its basic floor plan is similar to that of the Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island buildings. Which came first to that plan is a surprising element in the comparison. The architectural history of various Legislature buildings has been recorded periodically, but almost always in isolation from other buildings within that parliamentary tradition. Very little has been written analyzing the origin of the floor plan as a reflection of the practical functioning of a legislature in the British Parliamentary system. A comparison of various styles and

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 59

Macnutt:Layout 1 22/03/2010 17:24 Page 60

PROVINCIAL HOUSES

forms of Legislature buildings is almost non-existent as is a comparison of colonial Legislatures with the Palace of Westminster. The forms of each of the three Legislature buildings mirror the development of democratic government and protocol in the provinces. The book shall focus on the allocation of spaces to functions that are performed in the buildings. Those functions have their origin in the constitutional rights and duties of the current principals, the Lieutenant Governors and the Legislative Assemblies. The layout of the buildings also reflects the protocol and practice of a monarchical government. The functioning of a Legislature in the British parliamentary system in which Queen Elizabeth II is head of state, overtly recognizes the monarchical role. In addition to the rights and privileges conferred by the Constitution Act of Canada, the Royal Prerogative confers on both Her Majesty and on the Lieutenant Governors additional powers and unwritten privileges, all of which are reflected in the design of the buildings and in the ceremonial procedures performed within them. An effective and graphic way of explaining democratic government within the provinces, therefore, is to describe the history of the buildings as architectural compositions. The book shall be almost evenly divided between explanatory text and illustrations. All illustrations shall be contemporary photographs illustrating the interiors as well as the exteriors of the buildings as they are today. All three buildings have recently received major and sensitive restoration, so the time is appropriate to celebrate the results. The restoration work demonstrates the commitment of all three Legislatures to the place in which their democracies operate. It is, however, true that 60 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Macnutt:Layout 1 22/03/2010 17:24 Page 61

PROVINCIAL HOUSES

appropriate conservation of the legislative buildings is only part of the responsibility of the three Legislatures. They must also make

the buildings known and relevant to the values of the general public. The book commissioned by the three Speakers is intended to

provide an architectural and photographic explanation of the three Legislative Assembly buildings, their relationship to each other, and their connection with other British parliamentary Legislature buildings. The book shall be printed in both English and French with a separate printing for each. The scheduled date for publication and release is October 2010. It is to be hoped that the book on the Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island Legislature buildings will stimulate further research and documentation in book form on the built tradition of British parliamentary democracy. To commemorate Her Majesty’s coronation, a book was

Opposite page: The exterior (top) and the Chamber (bottom) of New Brunswick’s Legislative Assembly; Above: The Chamber of the Nova Scotia legislative building; Left: The exterior of the Nova Scotia building. published illustrating, without text, the exterior front elevation of each of the Legislature buildings then in the Commonwealth. As we approach the 60th Anniversary of Queen Elizabeth II’s coronation, it would be a fitting commemoration of the event if another book was prepared on the Commonwealth’s Legislatures, but this time with both descriptive text and photographic exploration of the interiors and exteriors.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 61

The Budget Process:Different Ads.qxd 07/08/2009 10:35 Page 143

A CPA publication

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:46 Page 63

Parliamentary Report NEWS AND LEGISLATION FROM COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTS AUSTRALIA: National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009

Page 65

INDIA: The Competition (Amendment) Bill, 2009

Page 69

NEW ZEALAND: Biosecurity Amendment Bill

Page 75

QUEBEC: Regulation of the financial sector

Page 77

BRITISH COLUMBIA: Housing and Social Development Statutes Amendment Act, 2009

Page 78

NEW OPPOSITION LEADER ELECTED IN PARTY VOTING Page 64

ELECTORAL REFORMS TOP THE AGENDA IN INDIA Page 68

REWRITTEN IMMIGRATION BILL RECEIVES ITS THIRD READING IN NEW ZEALAND

REFORMS AGREED BY THE U.K. HOUSE OF COMMONS Page 79

Page 73

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 63

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:47 Page 64

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

AUSTRALIA

TURNBULL STEPS DOWN AS LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

Hon. Tony Abbott, MP.

Hon. Tony Abbott, MP, was elected as the new Leader of the Opposition on 1 December 2009. In a three cornered contest, he defeated the previous leader, Hon. Malcolm Turnbull, MP, and the shadow treasurer Hon. Joe Hockey, MP. In the first party room ballot, Mr Abbott received 35 votes to 26 for Mr Turnbull and 23 for Mr Hockey. In the second round, Mr Abbott defeated Mr Turnbull 42 votes to 41. Mr Abbott’s leadership challenge came after an intense party debate about the coalition’s policy to address climate change. When it was in government the coalition embraced an emissions trading scheme as the approach to reduce carbon emissions. The Labor Government introduced legislation in 2009 proposing the establishment of an ETS. The then Leader of the Opposition, Mr Turnbull, was charged with negotiating with the government over the fine 64 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

detail of the scheme. Hon. Ian Macfarlane, MP, on behalf of the coalition negotiated a series of amendments to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Legislation. As part of these amendments, the coalition succeeded in gaining increased support for key Australian export industries, including coal mining, food processing and natural gas. Mr Turnbull stated that “the package will protect farmers by permanently excluding agriculture from the scheme, whilst providing them with significant financial and land management opportunities including agricultural offsets from 2010”. In addition, assistance to electricity generators would be more than doubled. However, there was increasing criticism and dissent from within the coalition for an ETS. In particular, Sen. the Hon. Nick Minchin questioned whether humans were contributing to global warming.

Hon. Joe Hockey, MP.

Members of the National Party were opposed to the introduction of any ETS. This growing resistance within the coalition to an ETS and criticisms about Mr Turnbull’s consultation and hardline

Hon. Malcolm Turnbull, MP.

position started to fuel leadership issues, and led to a number of opposition shadow ministers resigning their positions. Mr Turnbull stated: “Now I know, and I just repeat this, this is a difficult issue for many Liberals, many Australians. But I repeat most people who doubt the science also know that it makes sense to take out insurance, to manage the risk, to give the planet the benefit of the doubt. Now at the moment, as you know, some of my colleagues have found it necessary to resign from ministerial positions so they can cross the floor on the issue. That is their right and I respect it. But I believe we must maintain this

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:47 Page 65

AUSTRALIA

course of action. It is the responsible thing to do. It is the honourable thing to do.” Mr Abbott was elected as Leader of the Opposition with the policy of rejecting the ETS. In December the CPRS legislation was defeated for a second time in the Senate providing the government with a double dissolution election trigger if it decided that this was the preferred path. Mr Abbott’s key plank in criticising the ETS is that represents a $120 billion tax on the Australian public. Mr Abbott advised that the opposition would have a climate change policy but it would not be based around an ETS. Mr Abbott stated that “I don’t see why there is this insane rush to give ourselves this great big new tax before other people have done it, because it will harm our economy and it won’t help the environment”. On 2 February 2010 Mr Abbott announced details of the coalition’s policy to address climate change. Mr Abbott stated that “our policy will be simpler, cheaper and more effective than the government’s because it relies on incentives not penalties. Now, at the heart of our policy is an Emissions Reduction Fund which will slowly ramp up and it will be at the level of $1 billion in the fourth year. From this fund we will purchase improvements in the environment that will also reduce emissions. The kinds of things that we might purchase will perhaps be increased soil carbon which will improve soil productivity, we could purchase cleaner power stations, perhaps using innovative technology such as algal synthesis. There’ll be the potential for a great deal of extra tree planting on suitable land”. In response to criticisms

that the scheme is not market based, Mr Abbott stated “I want to make it very clear that this

policy is not about using regulation rather than the market. This is a market-driven

policy only it will be driven by rewards, not penalties”. Other features of the

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 The National Consumer Credit Protection legislation provides for a single standard and uniform regime for consumer credit regulation and oversight. The Australian Government will take over responsibility for the regulation of consumer credit. The Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law, Hon. Chris Bowen, MP, stated that the legislation would replace the state-based Uniform Consumer Credit Code which operates inconsistently across the states and territories. The legislation will establish, for the first time, a comprehensive national licensing regime for people engaging in credit activities. Mr Bowen advised that “lenders and providers of consumer credit broking services must be registered with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), then obtain an Australian credit licence”. To qualify for an Australian credit licence, lenders and brokers must meet minimum training requirements and have adequate financial and human resources to meet their obligations. Mr Bowen noted that “licensees must also meet enhanced standards of conduct, including the requirement to act honestly, efficiently and fairly”. In relation to dispute resolution, Mr Bowen stated that “consumers will be able to resolve consumer credit disputes outside the court system at no cost to them, as licensees must be members of an external dispute resolution scheme”. ASIC will be given the power to cancel or suspend a licence, or to ban people from engaging in credit activities, where this is necessary to protect consumers from the risk of financial harm and to maintain the integrity of the credit industry. The National Consumer Credit Protection legislation introduces responsible lending conduct requirements. When offering consumer credit, lenders must assess that the loan is not unsuitable for the consumer. In addition, consumers must assess that the consumer has the capacity to repay the loan. Mr Bowen stated that “as part of the responsible lending requirements, licensees will also have to let

consumers know, upfront, what fees and charges they will need to pay before the loan is suggested or entered into”. Brokers will also need to disclose any commissions if the suggested loan is secured. The regulatory framework is supported by a range of sanctions and remedies. There will be criminal penalties for licensee misconduct, including possible imprisonment for up to two years for those who lend contrary to the responsible lending requirements. Civil penalties for licensee misconduct enables ASIC to seek fines of up to $220,000 for an individual and $1.1 million for a corporation. The legislation introduces a three-tier dispute resolution system for consumer credit issues. This system will give consumers access to the licensee’s internal dispute resolution process; the licensee’s ASIC-approved external dispute resolution scheme; and access to judicial review. The new National Credit Code will also provide a consumer protection framework for consumer credit and related transactions. Mr Bowen advised that the framework largely replicates the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, enacted in the Consumer Credit (Queensland) Act 1994 and in force in the states and territories since 1996. The then Shadow Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law, Hon. Chris Pearce, MP, was supportive of the legislation and commented that it made sense “to have all forms of credit and financial services federally regulated”. Mr Pearce focused on the area of responsible lending and noted the two tests under the legislation that lenders are required to meet. First, the suitability of the loan must be individually determined by the provider and, secondly, consumers’ capacity to repay the loan must be adequately assessed. Mr Pearce commented that “most objective analysis of Australia’s banking system would concur that, for the most part, our financial institutions have been lending responsibly”. He noted that “despite this, further consumer protection and transparency is indeed always welcome”.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 65

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:48 Page 66

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

AUSTRALIA

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Appropriation (Water Entitlements and Home Insulation) Act 20092010 The legislation appropriates revenue for funding to cover rebate payments made under the home insulation programme and departmental costs associated with the acceleration of the water buybacks within the Murray-Darling Basin system. The Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Hon. Lindsay Tanner, MP, stated that the “measures provided for in this bill allow administered funding of $695.8 million for the home insulation programme to be brought forward (from 2010-11) and departmental funds of $4.9 million to be brought forward ($4.4 million from 2013-14 and $0.5 million from 2014-15) from the Water for the Future – Restoring the Balance in the Murray-Darling Basin programme”. Mr Tanner noted that “the home insulation programme has seen unprecedented demand from householders, with over half a million homes being insulated to date”. He indicated that based on the current take-up rate under the home insulation programme, the 2009-10 appropriation would be exhausted by late December 2009. Mr Tanner advised the House that “the current uptake rate for the programme is another positive confirmation of the success of one of the government’s stimulus package measures in supporting jobs in not only the manufacturing industry but also installer job creation and associated logistics”.

Hon. Julie Bishop, MP.

coalition’s climate change policy include extra incentives for uptake of solar power. Mr Abbott advised that the coalition will provide a $1,000 rebate for either solar panels or solar hot water systems capped at 100 000 rebates per year, with the goal of achieving

one million additional solar energy homes by 2020. In addition, Mr Abbott noted that the coalition commits to the planting of an additional 20 million trees by 2020 to reestablish urban forests and green corridors. On 8 December 2009 Mr Abbott announced details of his new front bench. The Deputy Leader of the Liberals, Hon. Julie Bishop, MP, retained her position as deputy leader and Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Leader of the Nationals, Hon. Warren Truss, MP, also retained his position as Shadow Minister for Trade, Regional Development and Local Government, while Senator Minchin was moved to

66 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

The Shadow Minister for Small Business, Deregulation, Competition Policy and Sustainable Cities, Hon. Bruce Billson, MP, while noting that the opposition would support the bills commented that the legislation has “been hurriedly rushed into the Parliament to take account of the Rudd government’s mismanagement and inability to implement its policy undertakings”. In relation to the home insulation programme, Mr Billson noted that the market had become frenzied by people seeking to take up the $1,600 rebate, and new providers entering the insulation business. Mr Billson stated that “quotes for homes in my own electorate that were of $600-$700 prior to the announcement of this programme have all of a sudden rocketed up to the maximum amount that can be claimed”. The rush by people to enter the insulation business has brought attention to the need for adequate occupational safety and training. Mr Billson noted that a young worker involved in the programme lost his life in a work accident. Mr Billson stated that “there are calls from unions to say this programme has been so poorly implemented and administered that the adequate training that installers should have has not been available in all cases to try to guard against tragedies like the one we have seen reported today and earlier events”.

the position of Shadow Minister for Resources and Energy. In other key positions, the Mr Hockey retained the position of Shadow Treasurer. In particular, Mr Hockey and the coalition have been

Hon. Warren Truss, MP.

successful in highlighting Labor’s Budget waste and mismanagement. Senator Barnaby Joyce was promoted to the front bench as the Shadow Minister for Finance and Debt Reduction, while Hon. Greg Hunt, MP, “will take on the responsibility for the coalition’s Climate Action Plan to cut carbon emissions while protecting jobs and the Australian economy. Some of the senior members of the Coalition returning to the front bench include Hon. Kevin Andrews, MP, as Shadow Minister for Families, Housing and Human Services, and Hon. Bronwyn Bishop, MP, as the Shadow Minister for Seniors.

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:48 Page 67

SRI LANKA

PROPOSED ELECTRICITY BILL TO MEET DEMANDS OF THE PEOPLE AND BOOST THE ECONOMY Power and Energy Minister Hon W.D.J. Seneviratne informed Parliament that the Government expected to meet the demand for electricity adequately and affordably to fulfill the basic requirements of the people while providing opportunities for the productive economic activities through the new Sri Lanka Electricity Bill. Tabling the Bill before House, the Minister said it would provide provisions for generation, transmission and distribution of electricity, was formulated to suit the new technological developments and international optimum strategies. The Minister further said the statement on “National Energy Policy and Strategies of Sri Lanka” approved by Parliament last year identified the problems and the technical requirements of the electricity sector while suggesting the remedies for such problems. The policy statement also recommended provisions to create a new legal environment as there was no suitable legal environment in the previous Act to implement these principles. Thus, under the new Bill, authority was granted to the Public Utilities Commission to follow a suitable pricing policy to ensure consumer security and equality. “This will increase the quality of the energy services while protecting harmful environmental impacts caused by the energy facilities,” said Mr Seneviratne. He said the Ministry implemented the

action plan with a huge investment for the implementation of the basic energy requirements included in the policy statement. Steps have been taken to achieve the national targets of “meeting the basic energy requirements” against the increasing demand by projects such as the Upper Kotmale Hydro Power Project (150 Mw), the Norochcholai coal power project (900 Mw), two coal power plants (2000 Mw) to be constructed in Muttur, the Uma Oya Hydro Power Project (120 Mw) and the project to convert the generation of electricity by natural gas instead of diesel in the Kelanitissa Power Plant. The transmission line between India and Sri Lanka will help generate excessive electricity to be exchanged between the two countries, which “would pave the way to diversify energy sources enhancing the quality of the energy services”, said the Minister. He also added that “we have taken action to transmit the electricity generated by all the power houses to all villages in the country efficiently”. The new Act has prohibited the involvement in generating electricity by any developer without a licence received from the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka. This would prevent high cost generation and transmission systems which are not compatible with the economy

of Sri Lanka. The Bill has also emphasized the insurance of consumer protection and the equality. The provisions that enable to probe whether the transmission process of the Ceylon Electricity Board and the technical procedure of all the electricity suppliers are being conducted according to the consumer’s needs and technical standards have been

imposed by the Commission. Further, this Act has granted a special power to the subject Minister to prevent the Commission from actions harmful to the public or service providing licences when amending or changing the conditions in the licence. The Sri Lanka Electricity Bill (Second Reading) was passed with a majority of 69 votes in Parliament.

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND The Corrections (Contract Management of Prisons) Amendment Bill The Bill received its third reading on 24 November. Hon. Judith Collins, Minister of Corrections, described its purpose as putting in place the government’s policy to allow competitive tendering for contract managing of prisons on a case by case basis: “The government wants New Zealand to have a world-class corrections system. We believe that allowing for contract management of prisons will create much-needed opportunities for the entire system to benefit from outsidesector initiative and expertise.” However, Hon. Lianne Dalziel (Labour) disagreed: “it is quite clear that there is an ideological divide across the House. Our view is that the deprivation of

liberty is one of those core State functions that should not be contracted out. It is a question of whether the profit motive is the driver we want in a service that benefits from keeping its business full of people. Private prisons need to keep seeing [prisoners] return, because that is where the profit lies. We know that the private prison experiment that we had in this country once before was more costly than the public sector alternative. Overseas, the costs have been higher, the rates of suicide have been higher, the rates of escape have been higher, and the damage done to prison guards has been higher. ” The Bill was passed by 68 votes to 53, with Labour, Progressive, and the Green Party voting against.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 67

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:48 Page 68

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

INDIA

ELECTORAL REFORMS TOP THE AGENDA IN INDIA Electoral reforms During the 2009 Winter Session, the Parliament of India passed an important bill providing for electoral reforms. On 2 December 2009, the Lok Sabha took up the Representation of the People (Amendment) Bill, 2009 for consideration. The Bill had been introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 24 October 2008 to address certain loopholes noticed in the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The two Acts contain details regarding election procedures, rules for candidate selection and conduct, and the allocation of seats for constituencies, etc. The Bill was earlier passed by the Rajya Sabha on 25 November 2009. In July 2004, the Election Commission of India had forwarded a set of 22 proposals on electoral reforms to the government for consideration. While considering the proposals of the Election Commission, it was considered appropriate to examine certain proposals in respect of the electoral reforms. Five proposals were examined and approved by the government requiring amendments to the aforesaid Acts of 1950 and 1951. Several amendments included: the appointment of the appellate authority within the district against the orders of the electoral registration officers, and the simplification 68 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

of procedure for disqualification of a person found guilty of corrupt practices.

Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh

Moving the motion for consideration of the Bill in the Lok Sabha on 2 December, the Minister of Law and Justice, Shri M. Veerappa Moily said in any parliamentary democracy, the process of elections had to be free, fair and equitable. The Representation of People Acts, 1950 and 1951 provide for free, fair and equitable elections, which the amendment Bill has been brought to correct some flaws that have entered into the fabric of the body politics. Shri Shailendra Kumar (SP) said that those who did not vote should be deprived of all the government facilities, and suggested making voting compulsory and not allowing corrupt people to contest elections. Shri Kalyan Banerjee (AITC) asked for providing adequate infrastructure to the Election

Commission for conducting elections and for ensuring that each and every voter is enrolled, and was in favour of banning both the exit and opinion polls as press freedom was being abused and misused. The result of the election should be declared only after the entire election was over in the country. Shri A. Sampath (CPI-M) called for giving voting rights to all NonResident Indians. Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh (RJD) said it was necessary to bring a comprehensive Bill as the present one covered only a few minor issues. He pointed out that poor people, particularly in rural areas, faced a lot of difficulties in getting their names included in the votersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; lists or in obtaining voter identity cards. Shri S.D. Shariq (J&K NC) wanted voting to be compulsory as candidates winning with less than 50 per cent of votes could not claim to represent the entire population. Replying to the debate, Shri Moily said the 22 recommendations forwarded by the Election Commission were forwarded to the departmentally-related Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice. The Standing Committee recommended in respect of five components only, and 17 recommendations were still pending with the Standing Committee since 2004. He assured that a

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:49 Page 69

INDIA

comprehensive legislation would be brought for amending the Representation of the People Act. The Minister was not in favour of the system of negative voting. The issue of banning election advertisements, particularly beginning from a few months earlier to the elections needed greater deliberation. He said unless all political parties united, it was not possible to have simultaneous elections to all the State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha. The Minister said he had an open mind on the question of compulsory voting subject to practical considerations and the ground reality, and that the issue of state funding of elections was pending consideration of the government. The response of the state governments in this regard was lukewarm and they were not willing to bear the cost of elections. On the issue of rigging, the Minister said instead of leaving it to the discretion of the observer or the returning officer, it was being considered to lay down the objective parameters so that there could be some sort of process of auto-piloting while ordering the re-polling. He said that undue, extraneous influence had to be halted, and further discussion was necessary to address other deficiencies through a comprehensive bill. Impact of climate change On 3 December 2009, the Lok Sabha discussed the impact of climate change ahead of the climate conference at Copenhagen. Initiating the discussion, the senior BJP member Dr Murli Manohar Joshi blamed the developed countries for the rise in global temperature and the volatile changes taking place in the environment. He alleged that the western countries first

caused pollution and then offered technology to control it at a heavy price. As developed countries were responsible for the present situation, Dr Joshi wanted the government to forcefully put across Indiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s voice in Copenhagen and not succumb or bow before the developed countries. He suggested sustainable consumption in place of sustainable development and a different development model for providing every person an opportunity to lead a dignified life. He asked the government to assert its stand forcefully at Copenhagen and tell the world that the present development model had caused a great damage to the world, resulting in increased poverty, unemployment and damage to the environment. Shri Sandeep Dikshit (INC) said the U.S. and European countries had to admit that because of their mistakes, the whole world was facing the adverse effects of climate change. Stating that the country had to remain alert to protect its interests and not succumb to pressure from the west, Shri Dikshit was sure that the government stood committed to the interest of the country. Shri M.B. Rajesh (CPI-M) wanted to know the basic nonnegotiable minimum that India wanted to protect at the Copenhagen summit. He wanted developed countries to drastically cut their greenhouse gas emissions on the basis of the Kyoto Protocol that underlined the common but differentiated responsibilities. He asked the government not to take any unilateral action and give away our carbon space. Prof. Sk. Saidul Haque (CPIM) said the poor, especially in developing countries, would be worst affected by climate change and India was likely to be among the worst affected

droughts, changes in crop patterns including sharp drop in of food grains production and

regions with erratic and unseasonal rainfall, melting of Himalayan glaciers, floods and

THIRD READING: INDIA The Competition (Amendment) Bill, 2009 The Competition Act, 2002 was enacted in 2002. Bearing in mind the economic developments that resulted in opening up of the Indian economy, removal of controls and consequent economic liberalization which required that the Indian economy be enabled to allow competition in the market from within the country and outside, the Act was subsequently amended in 2007. The Competition Act, 2002, inter alia, provided for: 1. The establishment of the Competition Commission of India and 2. The establishment of the Competition Appellate Tribunal. Section 66 of the Act was brought in force on 1 September, 2009. The post of Chairperson of the MRTPC was vacant on the said date and there were only two Members in the said Commission out of five. Both Members demitted their office on 14 September 2009 and 1 October 2009 respectively on completion of their tenure. Efforts were made to fill up the posts but were of no avail. The MRTPC became non-functional and a gap was created for the disposal of the cases pending with the Commission. As both Houses of Parliament were not in session and the President was satisfied that the circumstances existed which rendered it necessary for her to take immediate action, the

Competition (Amendment) Ordinance, 2009 was promulgated on 14th October 2009 so as to transfer immediately the cases pending with the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission to the Competition Appellate Tribunal and National Commission from the date of issue of the ordinance. Subsequently the government brought forward the Ordinance replacing the Competition (Amendment) Bill, 2009. Some suggestions which were made during the discussion on the Bill included: â&#x20AC;˘ Cases regarding unfair trade practices also need to be taken up by the Competition Commission and â&#x20AC;˘ Measures need to be taken to control monopoly and ensure atmosphere of fair competition. The Minister assured the House that the Competition Commission would perform to its optimum and it would send out a message that India not only meant business but a business in a manner which was respectable. The bill was passed by Lok Sabha on 14 December 2009 and by Rajya Sabha on 16 December 2009. The Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 22 December, 2009. Consequently, the Competition (Amendment) Ordinance 2009 was replaced by the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2009.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 69

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:49 Page 70

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

inundation of coastal areas due to rise in sea levels. He blamed developed countries for undermining the UNFCCC framework of “common but differentiated responsibility of developed and developing countries” wherein the former were required to undertake binding emission cuts, while the latter were assisted through funds and technology transfers to take adaptation measures. Smt. Maneka Gandhi (BJP) said time had come for both developed and developing worlds to recognize that reducing methane was the quickest way to stop global warming. Since the world’s top destroyer of the atmosphere were carnivorous humans, the quickest way to stop the climate change was to become vegetarian. Shri P. K. Majumdar (RSP) asked for the government to inform western countries to take the responsibility of cleaning the environment, while Dr Arjun Roy (JD-U) highlighted the need of minimizing the use of petrol, diesel, electricity and other toxic gases. Replying to the debate, the Minister of State of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Shri Jairam Ramesh said that the future of the country depended on how India responded to the challenge of climate change. He said the government had launched the Indian National Network on Comprehensive Climate Change Assessment on 14 October 2009, bringing together 97 research institutions and 250 scientists, which would conduct and make public every year an assessment of what was happening on account of climate change. The Minister told that the government would go to Copenhagen in a positive frame of mind and work overtime with like-minded

INDIA

countries to ensure that there was a comprehensive and equitable arrangement. He assured that India would not accept a legally binding emission reduction cut. India was prepared to subject all its mitigation actions, which were supported by international

Smt. Sushma Swaraj

finance and technology, to international review. The Minister reiterated to be “flexible” without compromising the basic national interest. He said India

70 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

could have a 20 to 25 per cent reduction in emission intensity between 2005 and 2020 for which a series of policy measures were being taken. These would include legislation on mandatory fuel efficiency standards for vehicles and a model energy conservation building code. The government was going to Copenhagen to get the best agreement for India and the best agreement for India internationally. New Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition The Deputy Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and senior BJP member, Smt. Sushma Swaraj, became the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha on 21 December 2009 in place of Shri Lal Krishna Advani. Smt. Swaraj was a member of the Haryana Legislative Assembly from 1977-82 and then from 1987-90. She was previously State Cabinet Minister of Labour and

Employment from 1977-1979 and Cabinet Minister of Education, Food and Civil Supplies from 1987-1990. In 1996, she was elected to the 11th Lok Sabha and was appointed Union Cabinet Minister of Information and Broadcasting. She was reelected to 12th Lok Sabha in 1998 to the position of Minister of Information and Broadcasting with additional charge of the Ministry of Telecommunications. 20th CSPOC in Delhi The 20th Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers of the Commonwealth (CSPOC) was inaugurated by the Prime Minister of India, Hon. Dr Manmohan Singh, on 5 January 2010 in New Delhi. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha and Chairperson of the CSPOC, Hon. Meira Kumar, delivered the welcome address. To mark the occasion, the Prime Minister released a

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:49 Page 71

INDIA

commemorative stamp brought out by the Department of Posts of the Government of India. The Prime Minister said the role of presiding officers had come into sharp focus as the task of running Parliament smoothly and giving due representation and voice to all sections had become more complex and challenging. In the end, democracy had to respond to these everyday concerns of the common man and Parliament should be the forum to articulate and address them. He emphasized on meeting the expectations of young people and giving women a more meaningful voice in the political and development processes. Smt. Kumar said that the institution of the Commonwealth had played a crucial role in promoting mutual

Hon. Meira Kumar

cooperation and consultation among the member countries, and events like CSPOC further strengthened interparliamentary cooperation in the Commonwealth emerging as a unique platform for Speakers and Presiding Officers to share and gain from each other’s experiences. She said democracy was a unifying and empowering force in India due to the abiding faith and astonishing resilience of the people. The Deputy Speaker of the

THIRD READING: INDIA The Central Universities (Amendment) Bill, 2009 The Central Universities Act, 2009 was enacted by Parliament to establish and incorporate universities for teaching and research in the various states and to provide for matters connected. The Act provided, inter alia, for establishment of a central university in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. As a number of preparatory steps were required for the next academic session, and as Parliament was not in session, the central government considered it necessary to amend the Central Universities Act, 2009. Accordingly, in terms of provisions of Article 123 of the constitution, the Central Universities (Amendment) Ordinance, 2009 (Ord. 8 of 2009) was, promulgated by the President on the 20 October, 2009. Subsequently the government brought forward the ordinance replacing Central Universities (Amendment) Bill, 2009. The Amending Bill inserted a new section in the principal Act which included special provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir: • The central university of Jammu and Kashmir shall be known as the Central University of Kashmir and its territorial jurisdiction shall be limited to the Kashmir Division of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. • There shall be an established university which shall be a body corporate, known as the central university of Jammu having its territorial jurisdiction to the Jammu division of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. During discussion of the Bill, the Minister in charge observed that the government had been emphasizing not just on the expansion of higher education but also improving the quality of higher education and removing the regional imbalances, a measure that was welcomed by the Members. The Bill was passed by Lok Sabha on 1 December 2009 and by Rajya Sabha on 7 December 2009. The Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was agreed by the President on 22 December 2009. The Representation of People (Amendment) Bill, 2009 It was deemed necessary to take some need-based measures to remove certain loopholes noticed in the Representation of the People Act 1950 and the Representation of the People Act 1951, the two primary electoral laws of the country. In July, 2004, the Election Commission of India forwarded a set of 22 proposals on electoral reforms to the government for consideration.

Several proposals examined by the government relating to amendments of the aforesaid Acts of 1950 and 1951 included: (a) The Representation of the People Act, 1950:Appointment of the appellate authority within the district against the orders of the electoral registration officers (amendments of section 24) The government accordingly brought forward the Representation of the People (Second Amendment) Bill, 2008 which sought to achieve the above objective. Features of the Amending legislation include: Amendment to RP Act, 1950 • For the words “Chief Electoral ‘officer’ the words in Section 24 of the Principal Act pertaining to general duty of Returning Officer, “ District Magistrate of Executive Magistrate or District Collector or an Officer of equivalent rank” have been substituted. Amendments to RP Act, 1951 For Section 8A of the Principal Act which contains provision regarding “corrupt practices” for the words “ as soon as may be after such order Effect”, the words “as soon as may be within a period of three months from the date such order takes effect” be substituted. During discussion on the Bill in both Houses of Parliament, Members extended their support to the measure. Issues raised by Members during the structured debate on the bill were: • The need for a ban on election advertisements particularly beginning from a few months earlier to elections; • Holding of elections on a single day throughout the country; • The need for a biometric system for voting; and • Setting up of Electoral Tribunals for speedy disposal of election related cases. The Minister-in-charge of the bill informed the House that the government would be bringing forward a comprehensive amendment to the Representation of People Act regarding ban on advertisements and surrogate advertisements, and felt that greater deliberation was needed. The Minister finally stated that various facets of electoral reforms would be sought to be covered in the Comprehensive Amendment Bill. The Bill was passed by Rajya Sabha on 25November 2009 and by Lok Sabha on 9 December 2009. The Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was agreed by the President on 22 December 2009.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 71

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:50 Page 72

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

INDIA

House of Commons, United Kingdom, Hon. Sylvia Lloyd Heal, said that the CSPOC provided an opportunity to share ideas, which was followed by a vote of thanks from the Speaker of the House of Commons in Canada, Hon. Peter Milliken. Hon. Hari Ramkarran, Speaker of the National Assembly of Guyana, chaired the first workshop on “the Speaker’s Role as a Mediator.” Hon. Dr Lockwood Smith, Speaker of the House of Representatives, New Zealand, spoke about its Business Committee that represented every party. Recognizing the importance of interaction between the Legislature and the Executive and the resultant need of the efficient use of Question time, he stated he had effectively curbed the tendency of Ministers to make long speeches, evading the much sought-after answers. He also referred to the problems of member’s raising “spurious” points of order which he effectively resolved by letting Members only intervene when they were specific and clear about the intervention, thereby ensuring order in the House. The Speaker’s role was even more critical for the survival of nascent democracies where the parliamentary institutions were still in the formative phase. The presentations were followed by wide participation. The important points that emerged included: • The parliamentary device of asking questions on the floor of the House was a very potent and effective mechanism available with the elected representatives of the people for eliciting responses from the government; and • The time allotted for taking

up questions was of immense significance which had to be gainfully and effectively.utilized. The Speaker of the Parliament of Singapore Workshop, Hon. Abdullah Tarmugi, chaired the second workshop on the “Use of Technology in the Parliamentary Context.” The lead speaker, Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, Hon. K. Rahman Khan, highlighted the inescapability of the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in furthering and deepening democracy. In this regard, he pointed out that information flow within the government, between citizens and government, and among citizens and civil society was crucial for building a successful democratic society. The main points that came out of the workshop included: • ICTs which emerged were required to be used by public representatives in the best possible manner so as to remain in constant touch with the people; and • The sanctity of the debating chambers must be maintained at all costs, while making the best use of ICTs. Several delegates affirmed that Parliaments and Parliamentarians should learn to make use of technological advances, especially in the ICT sector to connect with their constituents and to facilitate a more efficient discharge of their duties. The common refrain was that though technological tools and devices may be allowed to assist members in their efficient discharge of their duties, the sanctity of Parliament as the highest debating forum should not be compromised.

72 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Samoa, Hon. Falemoe Leiatana Tolofuaivalelei, chaired the third workshop

Hon. Rahman Khan.

on the “Role of Speaker in the Administration of Parliament.” The lead speaker, Smt. Kumar, said the administration of Parliament connoted the orderly conduct of the proceedings of the House and the measures to facilitate that process so as to make it a cost-effective Legislature and efficient administrative machinery. She referred to several measures taken in the Indian Parliament to keep a close and constant monitoring of the expenditure involved in parliamentary activities. The main points that emerged from the workshop included: • The most important factor when looking at the role of the Speaker in the administration of Parliament was trust, which should be gained in all respects while performing various functions — whether they pertained to financial or administrative matters or matters pertaining to the conduct of the House; and • The respect given by the Speaker to the Members of the House was very important in facilitating the

smooth conduct of the business of the House. Participating in the discussion session, the Speaker of the National Assembly of Kenya, Hon. Kenneth Marende, observed that the role of the Speaker went beyond regulating the debate and the Speaker was answerable to the Parliament and the nation. Hon. Elizabeth F.Y. Renner, Speaker of the National Assembly of The Gambia, said that Parliament was responsible in her country for scrutinizing the overall estimates of the government. Summing up, Smt. Kumar observed that the role of the Speaker in the administration of the Parliament was connected to the supremacy of the Parliament, whereby the constitution enjoined the Speaker certain administrative and financial autonomy. With regards to the budget, she said that the Secretariat of the Lok Sabha was primarily responsible for the preparation of the budget estimates of the House, which were placed before the committee appointed by the Speaker. Once the Speaker awarded approval, these were forwarded to the Ministry of Finance for incorporation in the Union Budget. In her concluding remarks at the closing ceremony, Smt. Kumar said that there had been meaningful discussions which would have a bearing on the efficient functioning of Commonwealth Parliaments, and complimented the CSPOC for nurturing and cherishing the values and ideals of parliamentary democracy in the Commonwealth over the last 40 years.

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:50 Page 73

NEW ZEALAND

REWRITTEN IMMIGRATION BILL RECEIVES ITS THIRD READING IN NEW ZEALAND The Immigration Bill, representing the biggest rewrite of New Zealand immigration law for over 20 years, and replacing the Immigration Act 1987, received its third reading on 29 October. Speaking on behalf of the Minister of Immigration, the Minister of Internal Affairs Hon. Nathan Guy said “it is vital that we have legislation that allows us to protect the security of New Zealand’s border and the integrity of our immigration system. We must also manage immigration in a fair and balanced way. This Bill allows us to do all of those things. One of the reasons that the government’s aim to create a world-class immigration system is so important is the essential contribution that immigration makes to New Zealand. The Bill contains robust safeguards for the collection, storage, and use of biometrics. For those who seek to abuse the system, we know that paper-based identity documents are inadequate to manage risk. “The Bill removes the distinctions between the categories of visa, permit, and exemption, and uses the single term “visa”. [It] creates a streamlined deportation process that balances efficiency with fairness. It essentially maintains the existing rights to appeal, but creates a more streamlined appeals process.” Hon. Pete Hodgson

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill The Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill, was read a third time on 24 November, and passed by 63 votes to 58. It amended the Climate Change Response Act 2002 and included modification of the New Zealand emissions trading scheme. Hon. Dr Nick Smith (Minister for Climate Change Issues) said the Bill was about implementing a workable and affordable scheme that will provide an incentive to reduce emissions and to encourage afforestation. “It strikes that right balance that we need to find between protecting our environment and ensuring New Zealanders have jobs. It ensures that we do our fair share on climate change without the pretence the previous government ran of New Zealand being carbon neutral.” Mr Charles Chauvel (Labour) called the Bill “fundamentally flawed”, saying “it is economically irrational, socially inequitable, environmentally counter-productive, and fiscally unsustainable. Its hallmark has been one of poor procedure and hasty consideration”. Mr Russell Norman (Co-Leader—Green) said the previous [Labour] government’s record in reducing greenhouse emissions was “terrible”. “We cannot say that today we are not going to address our greenhouse emissions because we can deal with them later. Actually, we cannot. The emissions that go out today will add to the stock in the atmosphere and increase the problem for everybody on planet Earth for the next couple of thousand years.” Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill The Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill,

supported by all parties in the House, was read a second and a third time on 10 December. The purpose of the Bill was to enable New Zealand to meet its obligations under the Convention on Cluster Munitions by prohibiting the use of cluster munitions, and activities including the acquisition, possession, retention, stockpiling, and transfer of cluster munitions. Hon. Georgina Te Heuheu (Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control) said the convention was a significant development in international humanitarian measures: “Cluster munitions pose a particular threat to civilians. They have a wide area effect and they very often leave behind a large number of unexploded devices. Decades after their use, the tragedy of lost lives and horrific injuries are still apparent.” The Minister noted that New Zealand’s Defense Force had helped clear unexploded cluster munitions around the world, most recently in southern Lebanon, and that New Zealand had played a leading role in the process toward the Convention on Cluster Munitions: “We were a member of the small core group of States that drove the convention, and in the process we hosted a crucial meeting in Wellington last year [2008].” Mr Phil Twyford (Labour) clarified that the convention did not explicitly prohibit investment in cluster munitions, but emphasized: “I am very glad to say that members of the committee, from all parties, accepted the argument that our legislation should explicitly prohibit investment in cluster munitions. To date, only three countries—Belgium, Ireland, and Luxembourg— have legislated to explicitly outlaw investment.”

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 73

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:50 Page 74

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

(Labour) said that “as a nation, we need to keep our borders open and safe, so immediately there is tension because an open border will be less safe than a closed one. But there is no way that this country can operate without having very, very open borders. Indeed, there is another tension in immigration. On the one hand, the Immigration Service sets out to be a gatekeeper, and, on the other hand, it sets out to be a recruitment agency. Those two issues are directly in conflict, but it must do both. Ms Catherine Delahunty (Green) said that the Green Party would be voting against the Bill because “it contains too many restrictions on people’s rights. One of the major problems in this Bill is the increasing secrecy in decision making on refugee claims, residence applications, and visa matters. Fourteen agencies can now determine immigration information to be ‘classified’. To be able to rely on [classified] information is dangerous and contrary to international best practice. In addition, there is an extreme arbitrary power given to the executive…the Minister of Immigration can deport anyone he or she deems ‘constitutes a threat or risk to security’”. The Bill passed by 108 votes to 12, with the Green Party and the Maori Party opposed. Illegal street racing Introducing the third reading of the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill on 20 October 2009, Hon. Steven Joyce, Minister of Transport, pointed out that “current legislation…does not go far enough in providing police with appropriate powers that reflect the wider issues associated with illegal street racing. This Bill will tighten up that

NEW ZEALAND

legislation, and tackle other offending that goes hand in hand with illegal street racing. The select committee received many submissions from residents, who said that the peace of their homes was compromized by the selfish and often intimidating behaviour of antisocial drivers. Business owners told of loss of revenue and damage to premises. People told of incessant noise. The Bill aims to reduce this nuisance and disturbance by giving roadcontrolling authorities such as councils the powers to create by-laws to prevent cruising. Cruising is carefully defined in the Bill as the repeated circling of the same sections of the road in a manner that draws attention to the power or noise of the vehicle, or that forms a convoy that impedes the flow of traffic”. Hon. Clayton Cosgrove (Labour) supported the legislation, with some reservations: “This legislation will be only as good as the resources that the agencies— the police, primarily, in this case—are given to implement it. Cutting the police budget by 21 million bucks and taking out ten per cent of the vehicle fleet is not the way to do it. Sadly, we have less confidence tonight than we did before this debate that the definition of ‘cruising’ is robust enough to withstand a court challenge and a case precedent that may water it down, robust enough to not catch innocent people, unintended though that may be, and robust enough to ensure that boy racers cannot get around it.” Mr Cosgrove also objected that the problem of noise had not been dealt with. The Bill passed unopposed. A companion Bill, the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill, was divided into the Sentencing (Vehicle

74 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Confiscation Amendment) Bill, the Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill, and the Privacy Amendment Bill, which received their third readings on 21 October. Speaking about the third readings, Hon. Judith Collins, Minister of Police, said: “We will strengthen the powers of the courts to order the confiscation of motor vehicles, empower the courts to order the destruction of motor vehicles used by recidivist illegal street racers, and toughen the provisions to seize motor vehicles to enforce the collection of unpaid fines. This legislation has been labelled

Hon. Simon Power the crushing legislation because it introduces a new penalty for illegal street racing: vehicle destruction. We have learnt from past legislation that fines do not work. ” Mr Cosgrove said that although Labour believed that the legislation, contained “some very good provisions”, the difficulty was that when the Minister “was asked how many cars she thought would be crushed?” She said that she expected 10 a year. “In Christchurch, we know that 1,000 cars maraud around the show each Friday night. How will ten cars a year incentivize a change in behaviour?” Mr Keith Locke said that the Green Party opposed the legislation because “we think

this legislation, along with some other Bills the government is introducing, goes in the wrong direction of thinking that the answer to criminal behaviour is just to extend the penalties and get tougher and tougher and tougher. That response is only filling up our jails—overfilling our jails….” Mr Locke also opposed the crushing of cars: “There may be cases for forced confiscation and the like, but surely the vehicle itself should remain to be of use to somebody, if not the offender.” The Bills passed by 113 votes to 9, with only the Greens voting against. Justice legislation Moving the second reading of the Crimes (Provocation Repeal) Amendment Bill on 17 November, the Minister of Justice, Hon. Simon Power, explained that it “repealed sections of the Crimes Act 1961 that provide a partial defence for murder if the offence was provoked. The partial defence of provocation is overwhelmingly used in cases where the accused has lashed out in anger. The law does not consider anger to be an excuse for resorting to violence in other legal contexts where the consequences are less extreme, such as assaults or domestic disputes. For that reason alone, it is inappropriate to allow anger to be a justification for murder. It is also a particular concern that the partial defence has been disproportionately successful in so-called homosexual panic cases. The sexual orientation of the victim should not be a relevant factor. “Historically, murder was punishable only by the death penalty, and more recently by a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment. The partial defence was therefore

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:51 Page 75

NEW ZEALAND

considered necessary to ensure that some discretion was available to juries to acknowledge exceptional circumstances. The Sentencing Act 2002 abolished the mandatory sentence for murder in favour of a presumption of life imprisonment, which may be departed from where such a sentence would be manifestly unjust. Battered individuals and

Ms Jeanette Fitzsimons individuals with mental impairments or a diminished capacity should not be disadvantaged by the abolition of the partial defence provocation. The threshold to displace the presumption of a sentence of life imprisonment for murder is a high one, likely to be met only in exceptional cases”. Hon. Lianne Dalziel, in supporting the Bill on behalf of Labour, mentioned that she had withdrawn a Member’s Bill in her name, in order to enable the government Bill to proceed. “I know there are different views amongst different parts of the legal profession about the nature of the provocation defence, but I am very much of the view that it is an anachronistic relic of New Zealand’s legal past, and that it must be repealed.” The Bill passed by 116 votes to 5, with only the Act Party opposing it. Green valedictories On Wednesday, 10 February

2010, Ms Jeanette Fitzsimons, former co-leader of the Green Party, gave her valedictory speech after 13 years in Parliament: “In 1996 many throughout the world were talking about climate change, sustainable energy policies, toxic chemicals, human rights, genetic engineering, and the failure of our current ways of measuring economic success. But this Parliament, mostly, was not. Those are the issues that I and my colleagues have brought here and that are becoming mainstream. Yet I have to say, with great sadness, that that the big picture has not changed all that much. This place, on which we pin such hopes as the pinnacle of democracy, has proved itself incapable of responding to the crises that threaten to overwhelm us. As an institution it is asleep, often in denial, and often preoccupied with trivia. Probably my greatest achievement has been to persuade two successive governments, Labour and National, that it is worthwhile investing in home insulation on a large scale, combining benefits to health, family well-being, employment, energy demand, and carbon emissions.” Another Green Member, Ms Sue Bradford, retired from Parliament, and gave her valedictory speech on 28 October 2009. She cited as “the most significant thing that I have been able to accomplish here” her “Member’s Bill amending section 59 of the Crimes Act and removing the defence of reasonable force for the purpose of correction. I am deeply grateful that, with huge support from nongovernmental organizations outside Parliament and from 113 MPs inside, we were able in 2007, to pass a law that now means children are entitled to the same legal protection that we adults enjoy”.

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND Biosecurity Amendment Bill Hon. Nathan Guy (Minister of Internal Affairs), on behalf of the Minister for Biosecurity, moved the third reading of the Biosecurity Amendment Bill on 19 November: “The Bill will allow the instant fine for incorrect biosecurity declarations to be increased from $200 to $400. The maximum penalty for conviction in court for the same offence is more than doubled, from $400 to $1,000.” Mr Guy spent some time putting the legislation in context: “New Zealand is unique among many developed countries in that it relies heavily on primary production for its export earnings. We have been fortunate to remain free of many pests and diseases that affect agricultural productivity and export markets in other countries. “Another very important source of export earnings for New Zealand is tourism. The improvements to the biosecurity system proposed in the Bill are a key part of the joint agreement between the New Zealand and Australian governments to make it easier for their citizens to travel across the Tasman Sea. Streamlining border processes will allow passengers who comply with biosecurity requirements to pass through with minimal intervention.” Hon. Damien O’Connor (Labour) commented that “[the Minister] and his government cut $2 million from biosecurity in the Budget. They also removed over 50 experienced front-line border protection people, who check that we do not have unwanted organisms and pests coming in. If this government was genuinely concerned about biosecurity and

if it really did care, it would have increased the number of people on the ground ”. Mr Kevin Hague (Green) said that “at several points in the debates on the Bill the government has said that this is just the first of its biosecurity measures, that it is starting off with increased fines, and that there will be plenty more where those came from. I indicate to the House that the Greens are waiting and waiting, and we are looking forward to seeing what those additional biosecurity measures are”.The Bill was passed unopposed. The Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill The Bill received its third reading on 27 October. Hon. Nathan Guy, Associate Minister of Justice, explained that the Bill “amends the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 to expand police powers to collect DNA profiles. [It] implements the government’s post-election action plan to require DNA testing for every person arrested for an imprisonable offence.” Mr Chauvel (Labour) said that “at all times, the House has known that in legislating in his way, we are breaching our own human rights standard, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. We have an Attorney-General’s report, which is a certificate that tells us this. The Bill is much worse than it could be or should be…it will inevitably result in uncertainty and litigation against New Zealand at an international level ”. The Bill passed by 108 votes to 14, with the Green Party and the Maori Party voting against.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 75

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:51 Page 76

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

CANADA

ADDRESSING ONLINE CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IN CANADA One good thing about minority governments in Canada is that citizens learn more about how their system of government works. Canadians are now well acquainted with such terms as “vote of confidence,” “ways and means motion,” “dissolution,” and “prorogation.” The most recent events on the Canadian political landscape, and in particular, the controversial 30 December 2009 prorogation of Parliament, have created many opportunities for Canadians to learn more about their political system. These events, however, often eclipsed the government’s legislative proposals. Legislation Very few new legislative proposals were introduced before Parliament late in 2009. Some of these new initiatives reflected the Conservative government’s commitment to tackle crime. Bill C-58, the Child Protection Act (Online Sexual

Hon. Helena Guergis

76 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Exploitation), which was introduced in the House of Commons on 24 November 2009, would impose an obligation on Internet providers to report any website that they are aware of that commits a child pornography offence. Hon. Helena Guergis, Minister of State for the Status of Women, said during second reading debate that: “The creation of the internet, particularly the creation of the World Wide Web, has provided new means for offenders to distribute and consume child pornography, resulting in significant increases in the availability and volume of child pornography. While Canada has one of the most comprehensive frameworks in the world to combat child pornography, we can and must do better in protecting children from sexual exploitation. This proposed new federal statute before us today would enhance Canada's capacity to better protect children from sexual exploitation by requiring suppliers of Internet services to report Internet child pornography. Bill C-58 would strengthen Canada's ability to detect potential child pornography offences; help reduce the availability of online child sexual abuse; facilitate the identification, apprehension and prosecution of offenders; and, most importantly, help

identify the victims so they may be rescued from sadistic paedophiles.” Another legislative proposal recently introduced in the House of Commons is Bill C62, the Provincial Choice Tax Framework Act. At second reading debate, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, Mr Ted Menzies, stated that: “[T]he

Mr Ted Menzies

provincial choice tax framework act is a very straightforward piece of legislation that simply confirms a fundamentally basic principle: provincial taxation is a provincial responsibility. As such, each province must have the independence to decide whatever form of taxation they deem best for their own jurisdiction's economy. The provincial choice tax framework act enshrines federal Parliament's belief that provincial taxation is indeed a matter of provincial autonomy. It facilitates maximum

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:51 Page 77

CANADA

provincial choice on matters of provincial taxation, including the decision of a province to transition to harmonized valueadded tax. Bill C-62 permits the implementation of the new fully harmonized value-added tax framework in Ontario and British Columbia and also establishes a new framework to accommodate any province’s decision to implement the provincial component of the harmonized value-added tax. Bill C-62 was quickly adopted by both Houses of Parliament and received Royal Assent on 15 December 2009. Bills C-51 and C-56 also received Royal Assent on that day. Bill C-51, the Economic Recovery Act (stimulus), would implement parts of the economic rescue package announced in the House of Commons in January 2009. It includes, among other things, the popular home renovation tax credit. Bill C-56, the Fairness for the SelfEmployed Act, grants employment insurance benefits to self-employed persons. This bill had been introduced earlier in the fall when the government of the Prime Minister, Rt Hon. Stephen Harper, sought the support of the New Democratic Party to ensure its survival in the House of Commons. Prorogation On 30 December 2009, the Governor General, Rt Hon. Michaëlle Jean, prorogued Parliament, and summoned it to return 3 March 2010. In Canada, the governor general prorogues Parliament on the advice of the prime minister. Until the 40th Parliament, the exercise of the prorogation prerogative had been the focus of little attention. The first session of the 40th Parliament had, however, been prorogued on Prime Minister Harper’s

recommendation, in order to avoid a vote on a nonconfidence motion that was expected to defeat his

Rt Hon. Stephen Harper

government and permit it to be replaced by a coalition government formed by the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party. The second prorogation of Parliament, ending the second session of the 40th Parliament, delayed the commencement of the 2010 sitting from 25 January to 3 March. Various reasons have been put forward by Prime Minister Harper for seeking prorogation, including a need for time to take stock and recalibrate the economic rescue package. Prime Minister Harper also argued that minority Parliaments were not good for the economy: “As soon as Parliament comes back, we're in a minority Parliament situation and the first thing that happens is a vote of confidence and there will be votes of confidence and election speculation for every single week after that for the rest of the year. That's the kind of instability I think that markets are actually worried about. But you know the government will be well-prepared and I think Canadians want to see us focus on the economy. So that's what we're going to be doing.” The decision to prorogue Parliament was widely

THIRD READING: QUEBEC Fiscal Balance The Act to amend the Balanced Budget Act and various legislative provisions concerning the implementation of the accounting reform (Bill 40) passed on 18 September 2009, temporarily suspends the effect of certain provisions of the Balanced Budget Act and enables the Minister to present objectives for decreasing budgetary deficits until 20132014. Construction Industry The Act to provide for measures to fight crime in the construction industry (Bill 73), passed on 4 December 2009, amends various legislative provisions concerning the conditions that apply to the issue of building contractor and owner-builder licences and the restriction that may be attached to the licences and that prevents the obtention of a public contract. It also amends various penal provisions relating to the construction industry. Regulation of the financial sector The Act to amend various legislative provisions principally to tighten the regulation of the financial sector (Bill 74), passed on 3 December 2009, amend several Acts that regulate financial institutions and other players in the financial markets in order to reinforce investor confidence in Québec. For instance, the Code of Penal Procedure is amended in order to provide expressly that a judge may impose consecutive prison terms. Consumer protection The Act to amend the Consumer

Protection Act and other legislative provisions (Bill 60), passed on 2 December 2009, include special provisions applicable to contracts involving sequential performance for a service provided at a distance. It introduces rules on the sale of prepaid cards and disclosure rules applicable prior to the sale of additional warranties. The scope of injunctions against prohibited stipulations and practices is extended and consumer advocacy bodies are allowed to apply for such injunctions. Non-Violence The Act to proclaim the International Day of NonViolence (Bill 199), passed on 2 December 2009, proclaims 2 October of each year the International Day of NonViolence. Caregivers The Act to establish a caregiver support fund (Bill 6), passed on 8 October 2009, includes measures to offer support and respite to caregivers who provide regular, unpaid assistance to seniors with a significant or persistent disability that may compromise their ability to continue living at home. Early childhood The Act to establish an early childhood development fund and to amend the Act to establish the Fund for the promotion of a healthy lifestyle (Bill 7), passed on 24 September 2009, establishes a fund whose purpose is to support the overall development of children five years of age and under living in poverty.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 77

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:52 Page 78

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

CANADA

criticized, even in Alberta, the Prime Minister’s home province. Many rallies were organized to protest against the prorogation, and a letter signed by hundreds of scholars supported the protesters in their criticism. The prorogation was denounced as a purely political move designed to advance partisan aims. As prorogation terminates all parliamentary business, it ended, among other things, the work of the Special Committee on Afghanistan. Toward the end of 2009, House of Commons debates, and especially

Question Period, had been dominated by the possible abuse of Afghan prisoners surrendered by the Canadian Forces to Afghan authorities. The government, led by Minister of Defence, Hon. Peter Mackay, had first denied any allegations of wrongdoings by the Canadian Forces, and even challenged the credibility of a former ambassador to Afghanistan who had reported possible abuses. The Special Committee, with a majority made up of opposition members, intended to hold meetings during the Christmas

Hon. Peter Mackay. and January recess on this

THIRD READING: BRITISH COLUMBIA Health Statutes (Residents’ Bill of Rights) Amendment Act, 2009 The amending legislation had a smooth passage through the House, receiving Royal Assent on 26 November 26, 2009. It is intended to promote the rights of adult persons in care, such as the elderly and those with physical or mental disabilities. Care facilities are required to post a Residents’ Bill of Rights and make the contents known to persons in care, their families and representatives. The residents’ rights include: the right to health, safety and dignity; the right to participation and freedom of expression; and the right to transparency and accountability. These rights are subject to what is reasonably practical given the physical, mental and emotional circumstances of the person in care, as well as the need to protect the health and safety of that person or others. Assistance to Shelter Act Passing Third Reading on division, this new legislation establishes a scheme for issuing and cancelling extreme weather alerts and enables police officers to transport homeless people to emergency shelters. The Assistance to Shelter Act applies to adults age 19 and older when an extreme weather alert has been issued for a community. The Act, though, does not require shelters to hold people against their will. Once at the shelter the person can make the choice to stay or go. Outreach workers at

78 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

the shelter are available to help individuals access medical, financial and long-term housing supports. The Assistance to Shelter Act was not supported by the Official Opposition, who highlighted the need for further housing assistance. The Opposition also noted that instead of enhancing police powers, additional community outreach workers would be more effective in providing street level assistance to the homeless. Housing and Social Development Statutes Amendment Act, 2009 This amending legislation also passed Third Reading on division. Its purpose is to prohibit adults from receiving provincial income assistance until outstanding warrants for arrest on serious, indictable offences from other jurisdictions are resolved. Exemptions are made for individuals who are highly vulnerable, such as those who are pregnant or in the final stages of life. The amending Act was opposed in the House on the basis that the language of the bill could deny income assistance to those charged with less serious offences, such as shoplifting or property damage. In addition, the Opposition questioned the intent of the legislation, as a means to reduce income assistance eligibility and subjecting income assistance recipients to unfair penalties by prohibiting access to funds for food and shelter.

subject. With prorogation, the government, many critics argued, was hoping this embarrassing file would vanish from the public debate. Detractors have also claimed to see through the government’s political manoeuvres, arguing that the governing party hopes to benefit from an increase in its popularity in the aftermath of the Olympic Games, being held in Vancouver, British Columbia, and even to seek defeat in the House of Commons on the Speech from the Throne, 3 March 2010 or the Budget Speech, 4 March 2010, which would lead to an election, and allow the party to finally form a majority government. A new session would also give the government an opportunity to reorganize and secure control over Senate committees. These committees reflect the composition of the Senate, which until recently, included a majority of members from the Liberal Party. With five new Senators appointed on 29 January 2010, however, the Conservative Party will now have more Senators than the Liberal Party. However, as Senate committees’ membership is established only at the beginning of a new session, the Liberal Party would have still controlled Senate committees. Prorogation will ensure that there will be more Conservative committee members than Liberals. The Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party have pledged to present before Parliament measures that would circumscribe the Prime Minister’s prerogative to seek prorogation in the future. The Third Session of the 40th Parliament commences 3 March 2010.

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:52 Page 79

UNITED KINGDOM

REFORMS TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS FOLLOW THE STATE OPENING State opening and the Queen’s speech 2009 The Queen's speech marked the start of Parliament on 18 November 2009. The Queen outlined the government’s priorities for the coming Parliamentary year in the Queen’s Speech following the official state opening of Parliament. She told Parliament that the Government would put financial stability and economic recovery at the heart of its plans in the run-up to the next general election. Legislation such as the Financial Services Bill will transform the way the financial sector is policed and empower consumers of financial services, while other Bills would seek to reduce Government debt and promote growth and jobs in key sectors such as digital communications outlined the government's plans. The Queen said: “My Government’s overriding priority is to ensure sustained growth to deliver a fair and prosperous economy for families and businesses, as the British economy recovers from the global economic downturn. Through active employment and training programmes, restructuring the financial sector, strengthening the national infrastructure and providing responsible investment, my Government will foster growth and employment. The Queen delivered the

speech during the traditional ceremony from the House of Lords. The event is known as the state opening of Parliament and is one of the most important - and colourful events in the parliamentary calendar. While it is called the Queen's Speech, it is written by the government and approved by the Cabinet. The Queen reads the speech in the same tone throughout to indicate Her Majesty's neutrality. Other key measures outlined in the speech included a legal obligation to halve the budget deficit within four years and a promise to clamp down

on bankers who take too many financial risks. In all, the speech outlined 13 bills and two draft bills which were expected to be brought forward in the remaining 70 to 80 days of parliamentary business before Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. Gordon Brown was expected to call a general election. Reform of the House of Commons The Select Committee on Reform of the House of Commons was appointed on 20 July. It had 18 members and was chaired by the chairman of the Select Committee on

Reform of the House, Mr Tony Wright. The Committee

Rt Hon. Gordon Brown.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 79

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:52 Page 80

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

published its report, Rebuilding the House, on 24 November 2009. The Committee reports’ explained that it had been “set up at a time when the House of Commons is going through a crisis of confidence not experienced in our lifetimes”. Such a crisis was “largely, but not exclusively, because of the revelations about Members' expenses, bringing with it a storm of public disapproval and contempt”. The report’s main recommendations included: • Chairs of departmental and similar committees should be directly elected by secret ballot of the House. Members of select committees would be elected within party groups. • Backbench business should be organized by a Backbench Business Committee, responsible for all business which was not strictly ministerial. That committee would then join with the representatives of the government and opposition in a House Business Committee which would be obliged to come up with a draft agenda for the week ahead. This agenda would then be put to the House for its agreement. The committee deferred matters relating to the election of the Deputy Speakers to the Procedure Committee. The committee made a total of 50 conclusions and recommendations, and published a draft resolution which they suggested should be put to the House. The committee concluded that although they expected a government reply to some of the points raised, it was “essentially a matter for the judgement and will of the House”. The government motions

UNITED KINGDOM

based on the Reform Committee’s report were published in the Remaining Orders and Notices section of the Order Paper on 8 February 2010. A written ministerial statement was published on 9 February which set out to explain the government’s arguments for not tabling certain recommendations from the Wright Committee – most notably no motion was tabled by the government in support of the committee’s proposal for a House Business Committee. The written ministerial statement stated that “the

Rt Hon. Harriet Harman

government fully supports 21 of the recommendations and conclusions in the report and has tabled 16 motions which are required to give effect to these recommendations. Some of the report’s other recommendations do not require motions to be brought before the House at present”. The statement then explained that the government had also tabled a number of other motions to approve some of the other recommendations from the Reform Committee’s report. The government debate was to be held as a general debate on the report of the Reform Committee. At the moment of interruption, the motions would be put without debate. Motions tabled in this

80 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

way fall if there are any objections. Although it would be possible to table amendments to the motions, it would not be possible to vote on them. The government’s decision to table the motions in such a way was subject to some criticism by external commentators, as was their decision not to table the Committee’s own resolution. It was also the subject of questions from the Liaison Committee to the Prime Minister at his regular evidence session. In addition the Reform Committee held an evidence session with Rt Hon. Harriet Harman and her Conservative and Liberal Democrat shadows, both on the procedure for the decisions to be made, and the content of the government motions. Amendments to two of the government’s 16 motions were tabled by members of the Reform Committee and these were accepted by the government and incorporated into their motions before the debate on 22 February. One of these was to specify that the election of select committee members should take place within political parties through a secret ballot using “whichever transparent and democratic method they choose”, rather than it being left entirely to political parties to determine their own method. The other was to specify a time when the House would consider the establishment of the Backbench Business Committee, rather than simply passing it over to the Procedure Committee for further consideration. A further amendment was tabled by over 100 Members, including the Conservative and Liberal Democrat front benches, in support of a House

Sir George Young

Business Committee. On 22 February the House held a debate on the motion: “That this House has considered the matter of the report from the House of Commons Reform Committee on rebuilding the House.”Opening the debate, Ms Harman stated that it was “an important day in the history of reform of this House. If, as I hope, we take forward the reforms which we are debating today, this will be the most farreaching package of reforms that has ever been agreed. We will debate the reforms today, and then we will return to these issues next week, on 4 March, to vote”. She argued that the House needed reform to “give more power to Backbenches and to give the House more power over the government. And the House needs reform to help restore its reputation, which has been battered by the expenses revelations”. She told the House that the votes which would take place on 4 March would not be whipped. In response to questions, Ms Harman stated that although the government had not itself tabled a motion on the establishment of a House Business Committee, she would herself vote for the amendment that a House Business Committee be established in the next Parliament.

Parliamentary News:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:52 Page 81

UNITED KINGDOM

Sir George Young, Shadow Leader of the House, questioned the process of bringing the reforms forward in two stages. He said that thought the government should have tabled all the resolutions of the Wright Committee “...and let the House come to a judgement on them rather than picking, choosing and tabling only those that they prefer. That would be in the spirit of the establishment of the Wright committee and the respectful way to proceed with the report”. Mr Wright set out the arguments for the major areas of the committee’s report. He concluded his speech commenting that “there was no parliamentary golden age. When there was supposed to be one, in the middle of the 19th century, Gladstone was already writing about the "declining efficiency of Parliament". Neither was there a golden age in which politicians were loved. It was in the 1960s that Henry Fairlie wrote: "Today, more than ever, the politician appears to be held in contempt". Members of Parliament work harder now; they are more professional and we are much better supported in our work. When all that is properly said, however, we know that the House stands at

Mr Parmjit Dhanda, MP

a critical moment in its history. Something has gone wrong-

beyond the expenses issueand we have an obligation to put it right. Our constituencies are cultivated as never before, but the vitality of the House is diminished as never before. More is expected of us than just cheering or jeering. Members of this House have a number of roles, but the fundamental task of Parliament is to hold power to account. Our proposals are designed to strengthen Parliament in that fundamental role. We call our report Rebuilding the House because that is what is required and because this is the moment to do it.” The Liberal Democrat Spokesman, Mr David Heath, MP, was also supportive of the

Mr David Heath, MP

committee’s report, saying that he acknowledged the limits of the remit and had some doubts about the way in which the report had been translated into the motions before the House. He did, however, express his view although he would support the committee’s proposal for two business committees, he would prefer there to be just one committee. Members made a number of references to the large number of Parliamentarians standing down and the forthcoming election. Mr Parmjit Dhanda asked if the reforms would give the country new confidence in Parliament. He said that he

believed it would not: “it will make a difference here, but... if we are to make Parliament stronger, we need to shift the pendulum of power away from this place into local communities.” Ms Jo Swinson, MP described the committee’s proposals as “somewhat timid” although she agreed that they were “a step in the right direction... Given the difficulty we have had even in getting to this stage of the debate it has been like trying to take a baby step through treacle”. Mr Mark Fisher argued that the House of Commons was “on the brink of reform, and we now need to step over the brink. This is just a start, and we must not forget why we are here and how we got to this point. What is sad is that we need to make the step to reform quickly and decisively now, because – as others have said –come the general election we will have a great many new Members and, tragically, some of the most important voices in the reform debate over the last few years will be lost…” After a full day's debate on Monday 22 February, the House was invited to give unanimous consent to 16 Motions. Eleven of them were so agreed, including a reduction in the size of standard select committees, encouragement for work on increasing public engagement with legislation, agreement to an early decision in the next Parliament on sittings of the House in September 2010, and various steps to enhance procedure on public petitions. Following the Speaker's statement of 23 February, petitions were for the first time formally noted on the Order Paper for 1 March. The five motions objected to on 22 February were re-tabled

for decision on 4 March. In the course of the next week a number of amendments were

Miss Jo Swinson, MP

tabled to these Motions. In the votes on 4 March, seven amendments were made, mostly without a vote. They included: • A mechanism was introduced permitting the Speaker to invite the Committee of Selection to discharge and replace a select committee member whose attendance had fallen below a given threshold over a session. The concrete outcome of the 4 March votes was that the chairs of many select committees will in the new Parliament be elected by the whole House in a secret ballot using the Alternative Vote; that members of select committees should be elected within parties using a secret ballot; and that, in line with the proposals of the Procedure Committee, the Deputy Speakers will at the outset of the new Parliament be elected in a secret ballot using the Single Transferable Vote. The Committee on the Reform of the House reported on 10 March 2010 that these steps taken together with the 11 motions agreed on 22 February, were “significant and welcome”.

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 81

Simamba:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:36 Page 62

BOOK EXCERPT

THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS: A HANDBOOK FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS

Mr Bilika H. Simamba. Mr Simamba is Senior Legislative Counsel at the Legislative Drafting Department of the Cayman Islands Government. He previously taught at the University of Zambia Law School and later served as a Senior Lawyer for the Southern and Eastern African regional integration body, COMESA.

There has never really been a serious problem of availability of formal courses for lawyers to train as drafters. The problem has been one of retaining budding drafters once they are trained, as well as failure to make the most of the drafting expertise that is available. That is why there is need for a fresh and multidimensional approach to the issue. One obvious area that also needs to be addressed has to do with the quality of instructions. Public officials often do not appreciate the amount of background information they must provide and the degree of conceptualization that must take place before a drafter is called upon to draft a law. Without proper training, their proposals tend to be scanty, on the assumption that the drafter will to do the rest. When the drafter is confronted with this deficiency, he is forced to research not only legal issues, which is his job, but also the substantive issues of the legislation, all because of the urgency of the matter or the

82 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

drafterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s desire not to be misunderstood. This additional work considerably slows down his progress and leaves him little time to actually

draft the legislation. In order for the official to help the drafter in this regard, the official has to understand the role of the drafter and how the official is supposed to facilitate that role. Without a cadre of officials in ministries and departments who understand and

can play this role effectively, it is difficult for good quality, timely legislation to be delivered. Unfortunately, there are few materials directed specifically at equipping the public official with the knowledge necessary to participate effectively and intelligently in the legislative process. This book is intended to meet that need in a unique way. There are many standard published works on legislative drafting, the legislative process and procedures in Parliament. These works contain a lot of information that would be useful to the public official. However, many are meant for lawyers who draft laws or are training to draft, or people who work specifically for or in Parliament. As a result, they contain a lot of information that is not of much use to the public official or which, even if useful, is presented with too much detail or jargon, at least from the officialâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s vantage point. Consequently, they are unattractive to him, as he has to rummage through a mass of information

Simamba:Layout 1 23/03/2010 17:37 Page 63

BOOK EXCERPT

before he finds what he actually needs. The public official wants to know in direct and simple terms the mechanics of requesting Legislative Counsel to draft legislation and interacting with him in refining policy. He wants to know what to expect of counsel and what counsel, in turn, will expect of him. In this respect a preliminary question that is often asked is: “How do I know which ministry is responsible for a particular subject matter?” In many instances this is not a problem, but grey areas are fairly common, especially after a restructuring of ministerial and departmental responsibilities. And in all this, he needs to know how to find laws that have previously been promulgated in relation to the matter before him, because what he can intelligently propose depends on what already exists. The official also wants to know in an efficient and direct way how the legislative process works and what his role is in it. This raises a number of other questions quite apart from his liaison with Legislative Counsel. What is the procedure within the executive branch of government for proposing legislation? After approval of a proposal by the authority concerned, what procedures govern its processing into law? How many law-making authorities are there? If there is more than one authority, which one takes precedence? After laws are made, do they take effect immediately, and just how does that whole process work? Answers to these questions may be found in circulars, manuals, pamphlets, brochures and similar materials. Unfortunately, such materials, like published works, often deal with a narrow or specific subject matter or are addressed to a particular group of public officials in a particular government. There may be a circular from the chief executive officer of the government containing the format of a Cabinet Memorandum, and it

may or may not contain the whole procedure for making proposals. There may be a circular providing some information about what to put before Legislative Counsel once a proposal has been approved by the Cabinet, but it may or may not explain whether or not a particular kind of proposal needs to go to the Legislature, or whether an instrument signed by the minister, without the approval of the Legislature, is enough. In the context of the Legislature, there will generally be a handbook for Members. This, as may be expected, will be tailored to the Members’ special needs. A public official on the executive side of the government will not need to know all the details of the internal workings of the House, although, admittedly, he will need to know some, as it will be relevant to his dealings with the Legislature. Examples of materials aimed at a particular and narrowly defined audience abound. Suffice to say that many of these materials do not present, in a convenient single volume, information that the official really needs. Indeed, even where such publications or internal government documents exist, the official may not know about them. Developed jurisdictions have comparatively more resources to prepare appropriate material, arrange workshops and seminars, and take other initiatives aimed at familiarizing officials with the legislative process, but even there, criticisms exist. A former Legislative Counsel in Alberta, Canada – a country noted for its advances in the drafting of laws – said some years ago that although Legislative Counsel often complain that instructions they receive are inadequate, “few Canadian offices have taken concrete steps to improve the quality of instructions they receive”. (Admittedly, since then there has been some movement.) The problem is far worse in developing jurisdictions. It is worth noting the words of the Legislation Advisory Committee of

New Zealand: “Enacting statute law is the most important activity Parliament undertakes. Making subordinate legislation is one of the most important activities the Executive undertakes. They both depend on the quality of the work of departmental officials and drafters.” As I have observed, in most developing jurisdictions, emphasis has been placed on training drafters but not on building capacity in knowledgeable and competent departmental officials. It is hoped that this book will go some way to remedy this deficiency, as well as to stimulate an interest in developing relevant materials. To that end, I make certain generalizations about what is likely to exist in many jurisdictions within the British Commonwealth. In this regard, it should be observed that the Commonwealth has for decades customarily offered drafting courses which trained young drafters not from the perspective of any particular jurisdiction but rather on the practices in different parts of the Commonwealth, thereby helping them gain a good general understanding of legislative practices in various countries. Armed with this general knowledge, participants returned home knowing what to look for in their own jurisdictions. The same approach is taken in this book. If the official can gain a good general knowledge of what obtains in some Commonwealth

jurisdictions in relation to legislation, he will be better able to ask intelligent questions aimed at finding out what the position is in his particular jurisdiction. In order to achieve this, the book contains examples from both the older and newer Commonwealth countries. Indeed, the official is likely to find that, even if his jurisdiction is not specifically referred to, many practices in other countries are similar or even identical to those in his own, for all Commonwealth countries received the legacy of a common British legal and legislative heritage. Further, this approach follows that of leading works on legislative drafting, which do not deal with a particular jurisdiction. They approach the subject from a comparative perspective, giving examples from various jurisdictions. By way of further evidence of the utility of this approach, one need only consider that Legislative Counsel adapt to different jurisdictions in the British Commonwealth, moving freely from one to another, without needing a detailed exposition of practices in the new jurisdiction. This mobility is facilitated by the fact that many governments have laws that allow the engagement of drafters who are qualified legal practitioners from any Commonwealth jurisdiction to work without requiring them to be qualified to practise in the particular jurisdiction.

Book Details The Legislative Process: A Handbook for Public Officials Bilika H. Simamba AuthorHouse 1663 Liberty Drive Bloomington Indiana 47403 USA www.authorhouse.com Phone: 1-800-839-8640 Email for orders: bkorders@authorhouse.com First published by AuthorHouse 20 November, 2009 Library of Congress Control Number 2009906713

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 83

Democracy, Parliament:Different Ads.qxd 16/12/2009 10:05 Page 412

A CPA publication

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:03 Page 85

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

CPA ORGANIZATION Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Executive Committee and Secretariat, Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Steering Committee and Branches of Association CPA Executive Committee PATRON: H.M. Queen Elizabeth II (Head of the Commonwealth) VICE-PATRON: H.E. Hon. Mwai Kibaki (President of Kenya)

Officers President: Hon. Kenneth Marende, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly, Kenya) Vice-President: Rt Hon. John Bercow, MP (Speaker of the House of Commons, United Kingdom) Chairperson of the Executive Committee: Hon. Mohd Shafie Apdal, MP (Minister of Rural and Regional Development, Malaysia) Vice-Chairperson of the Executive Committee: Hon. Kathleen Casey, MLA (See Canada Region) Treasurer: Hon. Hashim Abdul Halim, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, West Begal

Hon. Job Yustino Ndugai, MP (Tanzania)

BRITISH ISLANDS AND MEDITERRANEAN

Hon. Muyali Boya Mary epse Meboka, MP (Cameroon)

Mr Alun Cairns, AM (Wales) Hon. Ernest M. Britto, MP (Minister for the Environment and Tourism, Gibraltar)

Hon. Sada Soli Jibia, MP (Nigeria)

Mr Lindsay Hoyle, MP (United Kingdom) ASIA Hon. W.J.M. Lokubandara, MP (Speaker of Parliament, Sri Lanka)

CANADA Hon. Kathleen Casey, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Prince Edward Island)

Hon. Kiramatullah Khan, MP (Speaker of the Provincial Assembly, Northwest Frontier Province)

Hon. George Hickes, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Manitoba)

Hon. Abdul Hamid, MP (Speaker of Parliament, Bangladesh)

Mr Joe Preston, MP (Canada)

AUSTRALIA

Regional Representatives AFRICA Hon. Mninwa Johannes Mahlangu, MP (Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, South Africa) TBA (Mozambique)

Hon. John Pandazopoulos, MP (Victoria)

CARIBBEAN, AMERICAS AND ATLANTIC Hon. Keith Flax, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly, British Virgin Islands)

Hon. Michael Polley, MP (Speaker of the House of Assembly, Tasmania) Sen. the Hon. John Hogg (President of the Senate, Australia)

Hon. Hari. N. Ramkarran, SCC, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly, Guyana) Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA (Speaker of the House of Assembly, Dominica)

Hon. Marwick Khumalo, MP (Swaziland) The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 85

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:04 Page 86

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

INDIA

SOUTH-EAST ASIA

ASIA

PACIFIC

Hon. Uday Narain Choudhary, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Bihar)

Hon. Datuk Frankie Chong Yu Chee, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Sabah)

Mr Dhammika Dasanayake (Parliament of Sri Lanka)

Mr Rafael Gonzalez-Montero (Parliament of New Zealand)

AUSTRALIA

Dr Mohamad Maliki Osman, MP (Singapore)

Mr Andres Lomp (Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia)

SOUTH-EAST ASIA Mrs Roosme Hamzah (Parliament of Malaysia)

Hon. Tanka Bahadur Rai, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Assam)

Hon. Datuk Ronald Kiandee, MP (Malaysia)

Hon. Meira Kumar, MP (Speaker of the Lok Sabha, India)

CWP PACIFIC Hon. Snyder Rini, MP (Minister of Finance and Treasury, Solomon Islands) Hon. Dr Tetau Taitai, MP Kiribati Hon. Bill Vakaafi Motufoou, MP (Niue)

Ms Kashmala Tariq, MNA (Chairperson)

BRITISH ISLES & MEDITERRANEAN Mr Andrew Tuggey (Parliament of the United Kingdom) CANADA Mr Blair Armitage (Parliament of Canada)

CPA Regional Secretaries

CARIBBEAN, AMERICAS & ATLANTIC

AFRICA

Ms Jacqui Sampson (Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago)

Dr Thomas Kashililah (Parliament of Tanzania)

INDIA

Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Secretariat Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom Tel: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 Email: hq.sec@cpahq.org Secretary-General: Dr William F. Shija Director of Communications and Research: Mr Andrew Imlach Director of Administration and Finance: Mr David Broom

Shri P. D.T. Achary (Parliament of India)

Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians: Steering Committee

PRESIDENT

AFRICA

CANADA

INDIA

TBC (Kenya)

Hon. Moggie Mbaakanyi, MP (Botswana)

Hon. Maria Minna, PC, MP (Canada)

CHAIRPERSON

ASIA

CARIBBEAN, AMERICAS AND ATLANTIC

Hon. Km. Selja, MP (Minister of State in the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, India)

Ms Kashmala Tariq, MNA (Pakistan)

Hon. Ferial Ashraff, MP (Sri Lanka)

DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON and Australia

BRITISH ISLANDS AND MEDITERRANEAN

Ms Angela D’Amore, MP (New South Wales)

Hon. Justyne Caruana, MP (Malta)

PACIFIC Hon. Dancia Penn, OBE, QC, MHA (Deputy Premier of the British Virgin Islands )

Hon. Va’aiga Tukuitoga, MP (Niue) SOUTH-EAST ASIA

86 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Ms Irene Ng, MP (Singapore)

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:04 Page 87

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures ALDERNEY (www.alderney.gov.gg) President: Sir Norman Browse (President of the States) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Sarah Kelly (Clerk of the States) The Court of Alderney, Queen Elizabeth II Street, Alderney GY9 3TB Tel: (+44) 1481-822-817 Fax: (+44) 1481-823-709 Email: alderneycourt@cwgsy.net

ANGUILLA (www.anguilla.gov.ai) President: Hon. David Anthony Carty, MLA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-President: Ms Keesha C. Webster, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Adella Richardson (Clerk to the House of Assembly) The Valley, Anguilla Tel: (+1-264) 497-5081; 497-3748 Fax: (+1-264) 498-2210 Email: carmen.richardson@gov.ai

ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA (www.ab.gov.ag) (President) Sen. the Hon. Hazelyn MasonFrancis, MBE (President of the Senate) Secretary and Offices: Miss Thelma Thomas (Clerk to Parliament) Antigua and Barbuda Department of Legislature, Queen Elizabeth Highway, St Johns, Antigua and Barbuda Tel: (+1-268) 462-4822 Fax: (+1-268) 462-6724 Email: parliament@antigua.gov.ag; thelma.thomas@antigua.gov.ag.

AUSTRALIA (www.aph.gov.au) Joint Presidents: Sen. the Hon. John Hogg (President of the Senate) Hon. Harry Jenkins, MP (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Kevin Rudd, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Malcolm Turnbull, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Bernard Wright (Clerk of the House) c/o Parliamentary Relations Office Parliament House, Canberra, A.C.T. 2600 Tel: (+61-2) 6277 4340 Fax: (+61-2) 6277 2000 Email: PRO@aph.gov.au STATE AND TERRITORIAL PARLIAMENTS OF AUSTRALIA

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY (www.parliament.act.gov.au) President: Mr Shane Rattenbury, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Mr Jon Stanhope, MLA (Chief Minister) Mr Bill Stefaniak, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Tom Duncan (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) A.C.T. Legislative Assembly, Civic Square, London Circuit, Canberra A.C.T. 2600, Australia. Tel: (+612) 6205-0191 Fax: (+612) 6205-3109 Email: tom.duncan@parliament.act.gov.au

NEW SOUTH WALES (Australia) (www.parliament.nsw.gov.au) Joint Presidents: Hon. Amanda Fazio, MLC

(President of the Legislative Council) Hon. Richard Torbay, MP (President of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Kristina Keneally, MP (Premier) Mr Barry Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Farrell, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Russell D. Grove, PSM (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Parliament House, Sydney, 2000, New South Wales, Australia Tel: (61-2) 9230 2222 Fax: (61-2) 9230 2333 Email: russell.grove@parliament.nsw.gov.au

NORFOLK ISLAND (Australia) (www.norfolk.gov.nf) President: Hon. Lisle Denis Snell, MLA (Speaker) Vice-President: Mr Timothy John Sheridan, MLA (Deputy Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Ms Robin Eleanor Adams, JP (Clerk to the Legislative Assembly) Old Military Barracks, Kingston, Norfolk Island 2899, via Australia, South Pacific Tel: (+672-3) 22003 Fax: (+672-3) 22624 Email: clerk@assembly.gov.nf

NORTHERN TERRITORY (Australia) (www.nt.gov.au/lant) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Paul Henderson, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Terry Mills, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ian McNeill (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) G.P.O. Box 3721, Darwin NT 0801, Australia Tel: (+61-8) 8946-1450

Fax: (+61-8) 8941-2567 Email: ian.mcneill@nt.gov.au

QUEENSLAND (Australia) (www.parliament.qld.gov.au) President: Hon. Mike Reynolds, MP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Anna Bligh, MP (Premier) Mr Jean-Paul Langbroek, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Neil Laurie (Clerk of the Parliament) Ms Leanne Clare (Assistant Honorary Secretary) Parliament House, Brisbane 4000, Queensland, Australia Tel: (+61-7) 340 67185 Fax: (+61-7) 322 17475 Email: neil.laurie@parliament.qld.gov.au

SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Australia) (www.parliament.sa.gov.au) Joint Presidents: Hon. Jack Snelling, MP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Hon. Bob Sneath, MLC (President of the Legislative Council) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Mike Rann, MP (Premier) Hon. Martin Hamilton-Smith, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Jan Davis, AM (Clerk of the Legislative Council) Parliament House, Adelaide 5000, Australia. Tel.: (+61-8) 8237-9301 Fax: (+61-8) 8211 7658 Email: jan.davis@parliament.sa.gov.au

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 87

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:04 Page 88

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures TASMANIA (Australia) (www.parliament.tas.gov.au) President: Hon. Lin Thorp MLC Senior Vice-President: Hon. Sue Napier, MHA (Minister for Infrastructure) Junior Vice-President: Hon. Greg Hall, MLC Secretary and Offices: Mr Peter Bennison (Deputy Clerk of the House of Assembly) Parliament House, Hobart, Tasmania 7000, Australia. Tel: (+61-3) 6233 2211 Fax: (+61-3) 6233 6266 Email: peter.bennison@parliament.tas.gov.au

VICTORIA (Australia) (www.parliament.wa.gov.au) Joint Presidents: Hon. Grant Woodhams, MLA (President of the Legislative Council) Hon. Jenny M. Lindell, MP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. John Brumby, MP (Premier) Mr Ted Baillieu, MP (Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly) Mr John Lenders, MLC (Leader of the Government in the Legislative Council) Joint Secretaries and Offices: Mr Ray W. Purdey (Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Mr Wayne R. Tunnecliffe (Clerk of the Legislative Council) Parliament House, Melbourne,Victoria 3002, Australia. Tel: (+61-3) 9651 8911, 9651 8550 Fax: (+61-3) 9650 4279 Email: cpabranch@parliament.vic.gov.au

WESTERN AUSTRALIA (www.parliament.wa.gov.au) Joint Presidents: Hon. Barry House, MLC (President of the Legislative Council) Hon. Grant Woodhams, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Colin Barnett, MLA (Premier) Hon. Eric Ripper, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Hon. Sue Ellery, MLC (Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council) Mr Peter McHugh (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Parliament House, Harvest Terrace, Perth 6000, Western Australia, Australia Tel.: (+61-8) 9222-7215 Fax: (+61-8) 9222-7818 Email: cpawa@parliament.wa.gov.au

THE BAHAMAS (www.bahamas.gov.bs) Joint Presidents: Sen. the Hon. Lynn Holowesko (President of the Senate) Hon. Alvin Smith, MP (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Rt Hon. Hubert Alexander Ingraham, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Perry G Christie, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr MauriceTynes (Clerk to the Legislature) House of Assembly, P.O. Box N3003, Nassau, The Bahamas. Tel: (+1-242-32) 22041 Fax: (+1-242-32) 21118 Email: houseofassembly@bahamas.gov.bs

88 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

BANGLADESH (www.parliamentofbangladesh.org) President: Hon. Abdul Hamid (Speaker of Parliament) Vice-President: Hon. Shawkat Ali, MP (Deputy Speaker of Parliament) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ashfaq Hamid (Branch Secretary) Bangladesh Parliament, Parliament House, Sher-e-Bangla, Nagar, Dhaka 1207, Bangladesh. Tel: (+880-2) 811-1600, 811-14 Fax: (+880-2) 811-2267, 912-22 Email: sangshod@citechco.net

BARBADOS (www.barbadosparliament.com) Joint Presidents: Sen. the Hon. Branford Taitt (President of the Senate) Hon. Michael Carrington, MP (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. David J.H. Thompson, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Mia Mottley, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Joint Secretaries and Offices: Mr Pedro E. Eastmond (Acting Clerk of Parliament) Mr Nigel R. Jones (Deputy Clerk of Parliament) Parliament Buildings, Bridgetown, Barbados. Tel: (+1-246) 4263717, 4263712 Fax: (+1-246) 4364143 Email: parliamentbarbados@caribsurf. com

BELIZE (www.governmentofbelize.gov.bz) Joint Presidents: Hon. Andrea Gill (President of the Senate) Hon. Emil Arguelles, MHR (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-President:

Hon. John BriceĂąo (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Herbert C. Panton (Clerk of the National Assembly) PO Box 139, Belmopan, Cayo District, Belize, Central America. Tel.: (+501-8) 222141, 222142, 222144 Fax: (+501-8) 223889 Email: clerkna@bna.gov.bz

BERMUDA (www.gov.bm) Joint Presidents: Sen. Mrs Carol A.M. Bassett, JP (President of the Senate) Hon. Stanley Lowe, OBE, JP, MP (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Ewart Brown, JP, MP (Premier) Mr H. Kim E. Swan, JP, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Ms Shernette Wolffe (Clerk to the House of Assembly) Sessions House, 21 Parliament Street, Hamilton HM12, Bermuda. Tel.: (+1-441-2) 927408 Fax: (+1-441-2) 922006 Email: smwolffe@gov.bm

BOTSWANA (www.gov.bw) President: Hon. Patrick Balopi, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Vice-Presidents: H.E. Dr Festus G. Mogae, MP (President of the Republic) Hon. Otsweletse Moupo, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ernest Sipho Mpofu (Clerk of the National Assembly) P.O. Box 240,Gaborone, Botswana Tel.: (+267) 361-6800 Fax: (+267) 391-3103, 391-4376 Email: parliament@gov.bw

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:05 Page 89

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS (www.dpu.gov.vg) President: Hon. Roy Harrigan, MHA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Ralph T. O'Neal, OBE, MHA (Branch Vice-President) Dr the Hon. D. Orlando Smith OBE, MHA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Ms Phyllis Evans (Clerk of the House of Assembly) Office of the Clerk, Richard G. Stoutt Building, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands Tel.: (+1-284) 494-4757/8 Fax: (+1-284) 494-4544 E-mail: pevans@gov.vg

CAMEROON (www.assemblee-nationale.cm) President: Hon. Djibril Cavaye Yeguie, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Vice-president: Hon. Joseph Mbah-Ndam, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr John Teboh Ndum (Branch Secretary) National Assembly, Yaounde, Cameroon. Tel: (+237) 7771-0077, 77777247/ 7788-0967 Fax: (+237) 2222-3869, 22220979 Email: ndumjt@yahoo.com

PARLIAMENT OF CANADA (www.parl.gc.ca) Joint Presidents: Sen. the Hon. Noel Kinsella (Speaker of the Senate) Hon. Peter Milliken, MP (Speaker of the House of Commons) Vice-Presidents: Rt Hon. Stephen Harper, PC, MP

(Prime Minister) Mr Michael Ignatieff, MP (Leader of the Official Opposition) Chair: Mr Russ Hiebert, MP Executive Secretary and Offices: Ms Stephanie Bond 5th Floor, 131 Queen Street, Houses of Parliament, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0A6 Tel.: (+1-613) 993-0330 Fax: (+1-613) 995-0212 Email: cpa@parl.gc.ca

PROVINCIAL AND TERRITORIAL PARLIAMENTS OF CANADA

ALBERTA (Canada) (www.assembly.ab.ca) President: Hon. Ken Kowalski, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Ed Stelmach, MLA (Premier) Dr David Swann, MLA (Leader of the Official Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Dr W.J. David McNeil (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) 801 Legislature Annex, 9718-107 Street, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5K 1E4. Tel: (+1-780) 427-2478 Fax: (+1-780) 427-5688 (Clerk’s Office) or (+1-780) 422-9553 (Speaker’s Office) Email: david.mcneil@assembly.ab.ca

BRITISH COLUMBIA (Canada) (www.leg.bc.ca) President: Hon. Bill Barisoff, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Gordon Campbell, MLA (Premier) Ms Carole James, MLA (Leader of the Opposition)

Honorary Secretary and Offices: Mr E. George MacMinn, QC (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Room 221, Parliament Buildings,Victoria, British Columbia, Canada V8V lX4. Tel: (+ 1-250) 387 3785 Fax: (+1-250) 387 0942 Email: clerkhouse@leg.bc.ca

MANITOBA (Canada) (www.gov.mb.ca/legislature) President: Hon. George Hickes, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Gary Doer, MLA (Premier) Mr Hugh McFadyen, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Ms Patricia Chaychuk (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) 237 Legislative Building, 450 Broadway, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 0V8. Tel: (+1 204) 945 3636 Fax: (+1 204) 948 2507 Email: patricia.chaychuk@leg.gov.mb.ca

NEW BRUNSWICK (Canada) (www.gov.nb.ca/legis/) President: Hon. Roy Boudreau, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Shawn Graham, MLA (Premier) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Loredana Catalli Sonier (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Parliament Buildings, P.O. Box 6000, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada E3B 5H1. Tel: (+1-506) 453 2506 Fax: (+1-506) 453 7154 Email: l.catalli.sonier@gnb.ca

NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR (Canada) (www.gov.nl.ca) President: Hon. Roger Fitzgerald, MHA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Danny Willams, QC, MHA (Premier) Ms Yvonne Jones, MHA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr William MacKenzie (Clerk of the House of Assembly) House of Assembly, Confederation Building, P.O. Box 8700, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada A1B 4J6. Tel.: (+1-709) 729-3405 / 7292579 Fax: (+1-709) 729-4820 Email: williammackenzie@gov.nl.ca

NORTHWEST TERRITORIES (Canada) (www.assembly.gov.nt.ca) President: Hon. Paul Delorey, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr Tim Mercer (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Legislative Assembly of the NWT, P.O. Box 1320,Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, Canada X1A 2L9. Tel: (+1-867) 669 2299 Fax: (+1-867) 873 0432 Email: tim_mercer@gov.nt.ca

NOVA SCOTIA (Canada) (www.gov.ns.ca) President: Hon. Charlie Parker, MLA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Darrell Dexter, MLA (Premier) Secretary and Offices: Mr Roderick K. MacArthur (Clerk of the House of Assembly)

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 89

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:05 Page 90

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures P.O. Box 1617, Province House, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 2Y3. Tel: (+1-902) 424 5978 Fax: (+1-902) 424 0632 Email: macartrk@gov.ns.ca

NUNAVUT (Canada) (www.assembly.nu.ca) President: Hon. James Arreak, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr John Quirke (Clerk of the Assembly) PO Box 1200, Iqaluit, Nunavut, X0A 0H0, Canada. Tel.: (+1-867) 975-5100 Fax: (+1-867) 975-5191 Email: jquirke@assembly.nu.ca

ONTARIO (Canada) (www.ontla.on.ca) President: Hon. Steve Peters, MPP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Dalton McGuinty, MPP (Premier) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Deborah Deller (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Room 104, Main Legislative Building, Queen’s Park, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M7A 1A2. Tel.: (+1-416) 325-7341 Fax: (+1-416) 325-7344 Email: clerks_office@ontla.ola.org

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND (Canada) (www.assembly.pe.ca) President: Hon. Kathleen Casey, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Robert Ghiz, MLA (Premier) Hon. Olive Crane, MLA (Leader of the Opposition)

Secretary and Offices: Mr Charles H. MacKay (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) P.O. Box 2000, Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada C1A 7N8. Tel: (+1-902) 368 5970 Fax: (+1-902) 368 5175 Email: chmackay@gov.pe.ca

QUEBEC (Canada) (www.assnat.qc.ca) Joint Presidents: Hon. Yvon Vallières, MNA (President of the National Assembly) Ms Fatima Houda-Pepin, MNA (Vice-President of the National Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr Richard Daignault Assemblée nationale du Québec, Direction des relations interparlementaires et internationales, Edifice JeanAntoine-Panet, 1020 rue des Parlementaires, 6e étage, Bureau 6.65, Québec G1A 1A3, Canada Tel: (+1-418) 643 7391 Fax: (+1-418) 643 1865 Email: rdaignault@assnat.qc.ca

SASKATCHEWAN (Canada) (www.legassembly.sk.ca) President: Hon. Don Toth, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Mr Greg Brkich, MLA (Deputy Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Mr Gregory Putz (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) 239 Legislative Building, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada S4S OB3. Tel: (+1-306) 787-2335 Fax: (+1-306) 787 0408 Email: cpa@legassembly.sk.ca

YUKON (Canada) (www.legassembly.gov.yk.ca) Joint Presidents: Hon. Ted Staffen, MLA

90 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

(Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Dennis Fentie, MLA (Premier) Vice-President: Mr Arthur Mitchell, MLA (Leader of the Official Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Dr Floyd McCormick (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Yukon Legislative Assembly, Box 2703, Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada Y1A 2C6. Tel: (+1-867) 667 5498 Fax: (+1-867) 393 6280 Email: clerk@gov.yk.ca

CAYMAN ISLANDS (www.gov.ky) Joint Presidents: Hon. Mary Lawrence, JP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Hon. W. McKeeva Bush, OBE, JP, MLA (Leader of the Government) Vice-President: Ms Zena Merren-Chin (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Ms Wendy Lauer (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) P.O. Box 890 GT, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands. Tel: (+1-345) 949-4236/8 Fax: (+1-345) 949-9514 Email: wendy.lauer@gov.ky

COOK ISLANDS (www.cook-islands.gov.ck) President: Hon. Mapu Taia, OBE (Speaker of Parliament) Vice-President: Hon. Jim Marurai, MP (Prime Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Nga Valoa (Clerk of Parliament) Office of the Legislative Service, Parliament of the Cook Islands, P.O. Box 13, Rarotonga, Cook Islands.

Tel: (+682) 26500, 26507 Fax: (+682) 21260 Email: nvaloa@oyster.net.ck nvaloa@parliament.gov.ck

CYPRUS (www.parliament.cy) President: H.E. Mr Marios Karoyian, MP (President of the House of Representatives) Vice-Presidents: Mr Aristophanis Georgiou, MP Mr Christos Pourgourides, MP Mr Sofocles Fittis, MP Dr Eleni Theocharous, MP Secretary and Offices: Mr Socrates Socratous (Secretary-General of the House of Representatives) House of Representatives, Homer Ave., 1402 Nicosia, Cyprus. Tel.: (+357-22) 407-304, 407-310 Fax: (+357-22) 668-611 Email: international-relations@ parliament.cy

DOMINICA (www.dominica.gov.dm) President: Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Roosevelt Skerrit, MHA (Prime Minister) Hon. Ron Green (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Ms Maria Rolle (Acting Clerk of the House of Assembly) House of Assembly, Victoria Street, Roseau, Dominica, West Indies. Tel: (+1-767-44) 82401 Ext. 3102, 3291 Fax: (+1-767-44) 98353 Email: houseofassembly@cwdom.dm

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:05 Page 91

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures FALKLAND ISLANDS (www.falklands.gov.fk/legco) President: Hon. Keith Biles JP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Ms Claudette Anderson-Prior, MBE (Clerk of Councils) Gilbert House, Stanley, Falkland Islands. Tel: (+500) 27451 Fax: (+500) 27456 Email: cprior@sec.gov.fk

GIBRALTAR (www.gibraltar.gov.gi) President: Hon. Haresh K. Budhrani, QC, MP (Speaker of Parliament) Vice-President: Hon. Peter Caruana, QC, MP (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Melvyn L. Farrell, RD (Clerk to Parliament) Parliament, 156 Main St, Gibraltar. Tel.: (+350) 200-78420, 20074186 Fax: (+350) 200-42849 Email: parliament@gibtelecom.net

FIJI ISLANDS Branch in abeyance

GAMBIA (www.gambia.gm) President: Hon. Elizabeth Yamie Frances Renner (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Secretary and Offices: Mr Momodou Sise (Acting Clerk of the House of Representatives) Legislative Department, Parliament Buildings, Independence Drive, Banjul, The Gambia. Tel.: (+220) 422-7241, 422-6643, 422-2352 Fax: (+220) 422-5123 Email: assembly.clerk@yahoo.co.uk GHANA (www.parliament.gh) President: Rt Hon. Ebenezer Begyina Sekyi Hughes, MP (Speaker of Parliament) Secretary and Offices: Mr Emmanuel Anyimadu (Branch Secretary) Parliament House, Victoriaborg, Accra, Ghana. Tel.: (+233) 21-664-042, 21-665957 Fax: (+233) 21-662-084 Email: clerk@parliament.gh

GRENADA (www.gov.gd) Joint Presidents: Sen. the Hon. Joan Purcell (President of the Senate) Hon. George McGuire, MP (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-Presidents: Dr the Hon. Keith Mitchell, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Hon. Tillman Thomas, MP (Prime Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Adrian C. A. Hayes (Clerk of Parliament) Houses of Parliament, P.O. Box 315, Church Street, St George's, Grenada, West Indies. Tel.: (+1-473) 440-2090, 4403456 Fax: (+l-473) 440-4138 Email: adrian.hayes@gov.gd

GUERNSEY (www.gov.gg) President: Sir Geoffrey R. Rowland (Bailiff of Guernsey and President of the States) Vice-Presidents: Mr Richard J. Collas (Deputy Bailiff of Guernsey and Deputy President of the States) Dep. Bernard Flouquet

Room 103, Parliament House Annexe, New Delhi 110 001, India. Tel.: (+91-11) 2301-6987, 23034141 Fax: (+91-11) 2301-7465, 23015518 Email: cpaindia@sansad.nic.in

(Deputy Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Kenneth H. Tough (H.M. Greffier) Greffe, Royal Court House, Guernsey, Channel Islands, GYI 2PB. Tel: (+44-1481) 725277 Fax: (+44-1481) 715097 Email: simon.ross@gov.gg

STATE LEGISLATURES OF INDIA

GUYANA (www.parliament.gov.gy) President: Hon. Hari N. Ramkarran, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Samuel A. A. Hinds, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Robert Corbin, MP (Acting Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Sherlock Isaacs (Clerk of the National Assembly) Parliament of Guyana, Parliament Office, Public Buildings, Brickdam, Georgetown, Guyana. Tel: (+592) 226-1465, 226-8456 Fax: (+592) 225 1357 (Parliament Office) Email: parlib@guyana.net.gy

INDIA (www.parliamentofindia.nic.in) President: Hon. Meira Kumar, MP (Speaker of the Lok Sabha) Vice-Presidents: Hon. K. Rahman Khan, MP (Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha) Shri Charnjit Singh Atwal, MP (Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha) Secretary and Offices: Shri P.D.T Achary (Secretary-General of the Lok Sabha) Room 18, Parliament House, New Delhi 110 001, India. Tel.: (+91-11) 2301-7465, 23034255, 2303-4567

ANDHRA PRADESH (India) (www.nic.in/aplegis) Joint Presidents: Hon. Kethireddy Suresh Reddy, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Hon. Dr A Chakrapani, MLC (Chairman of the Legislative Council) Vice-President: Hon. Rajasekhara Reddy, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Sri K. Tuljanand Singh (Secretary to the Legislature) Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, Public Gardens, Hyderabad 500 004, Andhra Pradesh, India. Tel: (+91-40) 2323-2072 Fax: (+91-40) 2321-0408 Email: seclegis@ap.nic.in

ARUNACHAL PRADESH (India) (www.arunachalpradesh.nic.in) President: Shri Wanglin Lowangdong (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Shri Tapang Taloh (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Naharlagun-791110, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Tel: (+91-360) 244-346 Fax: (+91-360) 244-305

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 91

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:06 Page 92

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures ASSAM (India) (www.assamassembly.nic.in) President: Hon. Tanka Bahadur Rai, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Tarun Gogoi, MLA (Chief Minister and Leader of the House) Secretary and Offices: Shri Gauranga Prasad Das (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Dispur, Guwahati, 781006, Assam, India. Tel.: (+91-361) 261-1113, 2261766 Fax: (+91-361) 226-2225 Email: assamlegislative@sify.com

BIHAR (India) (www.bihar.nic.in) President: Hon. Uday Narayan Choudhary, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Prof. Arun Kumar, MLC (Chairman of the Legislative Council) Hon. Nitish Kumar, MLC (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Shri Surendra Prasad Sharma (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Bihar Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Patna 800015, Bihar, India. Tel.: (+91-612) 222-3840 Fax: (+91-612) 223-2212

CHHATTISGARH (India) (www.cgvidhansabha.gov.in) President: Hon. Shri Dharam Lal Kaushik (Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Shri Devendra Verma (Clerk to Parliament) Chhattisgarh Legislative Assembly, Baloda Bazar Road, Raipur 492

005, India Tel.: (+91-771) 228-3615, 2283616 Fax: (+91-771) 228-3615, 2283788 Email: secycgvs@rediffmail.com

DELHI (India) (www.delhigovt.nic.in) President: Hon. Ch. Prem Singh MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Smt. Kiran Choudhary (Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Shri Siddarath Rao (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Delhi Legislative Assembly, Old Secretariat, Delhi-110054, India. Tel.: (+91-11) 2389-0007, 23890109 Fax: (+91-11) 2389-0128

GOA (India) (www.goagovt.nic.in) President: Hon. Pratapsingh Rane, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Shri Mauvin Godinho, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Shri T.N. Dhruva Kumar (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Goa Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa 403521, India. Tel.: (+91-832) 241-0915, 2410917 Fax: (+91-832) 241-1054, 2411024, 241-1066 Email: goaassembly@dataone.in

92 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

GUJARAT (India) (www.gujaratindia.com) President: Hon. Ashok Bhatt, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Narendra D. Modi, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Shaktisinhji H. Gohil, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Shri D.M. Patel (Secretary of the Legislature Secretariat) Legislature Secretariat, Vitthalbhai Patel Bhavan, Gandhinagar 382 010, Gujarat, India. Tel.: (+91-79) 2322-0998; 23253076 Fax: (+91-79) 2322-0902 Email: assembly@gujarat.gov.in

HARYANA (India) (http://haryana.gov.in) President: Shri Sardar Harmohinder Singh Chatha (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Shri Sumit Kumar (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Haryana Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Sector 1, Haryana 16 0001, Chandigarh, India. Tel.: (+91-172) 2740-785, 2740030 Fax: (+91-172) 2740-430, 2747075

HIMACHAL PRADESH (India) (www.hpvidhansabha.nic.in) President: Hon. Gangu Ram Mussafir, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Virbhadra Singh, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Prem Kumar Dhumal, MLA (Leader of the Opposition)

Secretary and Offices: Shri Goverdhan Singh (Secretary of the Legislature) Himachal Pradesh Vidhan Sabha Secretariat, Council Chamber, Shimla 171004, Himachal Pradesh, India. Tel.: (+91-177) 280-3086, 2658164, 265-6424 Fax: (+91-177) 281-1151, 2652949 Email: visabha@hp.nic.in

JAMMU AND KASHMIR (India) (www.jammuandkashmirstate legislature.org) President: Hon. Tara Chand, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Abdul Rashid Dar, MLC (Chairman of the Legislative Council) Secretary and Offices: Mr M. Iqbal Ganai (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir State, India. Tel.: (+91-194) 247-9969 (Srinagar); (+91-191) 254-2031 (Jammu) Fax: (+91-194) 247-7738 / 2479666 (Srinagar); (+91-191) 2570344 (Jammu) Email: a.r.salmani@rediffmail.com/ ardar@rediffmail.com JHARKHAND (India) President: Hon. Inder Singh Namdhari (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Arjun Munda, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Rajendra Singh, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Sri Amar Nath Jha (Secretary-in-charge, Legislative Assembly)

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:06 Page 93

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures Jharkhand Legislative Assembly, Dhurwa, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India. Tel.: (+91-651) 244-0200 Fax: (+91-651) 244-0025

KARNATAKA (India) (www.kar.nic.in/kla) Joint Presidents: Hon. Jagadish Shettar, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Hon. Veeranna Mattikatti, MLC (Chairman of the Legislative Council) Vice-Presidents: Hon. B.S Yediyurappa, MLA (Leader of the House, Legislative Assembly) Hon. Dr V.S Acharya, MLC (Leader of the House, Legislative Council Hon. Mallikarjun M. Kharge, MLA (Leader of the Opposition, Legislative Assembly) Hon. V.S Ugrappa, MLC (Leader of the Opposition, Legislative Council Secretary and Offices: Shri S.B Patil (Principal Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Karnataka Legislative Assembly Secretariat, PB No 5074, Room 228, 2nd Floor,Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore 560 332, Karnataka, India. Tel.: (+91-80) 2225-0702, 22033471 Fax: (+91-80) 2225-8301, 22258171 Email: speaker-kla-kar@nic.in

KERALA (India) (www.niyamasabha.org) President: Hon. K. Radhakrishnan, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. V.S. Achuthanandan, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Oommen Chandy, MLA

(Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Shri P.D. Rajan (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Kerala Legislative Assembly, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala 695 033, India. Tel.: (+91-471) 2512-002, 2513006, 2305-834; Speaker 2513007, 2308-890, 2305-830 Fax: (+91-471) 2305-891; Speaker 2512-131 Email: secretary@niyamasabha.org

MADHYA PRADESH (India) (www.mp.nic.in) President: Hon. Ishwaras Rohani, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Shivraj Singh Chouhan, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and offices: Dr A.K. Payasi (Principal Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly, Bhopal 462 004, Madhya Pradesh, India. Tel.: (+91-755) 244-0206 Fax: (+91-755) 244-0238 Email: vidhansabha@mp.nic.in

MAHARASHTRA (India) (www.maharashtra.gov.in) Joint Presidents: Hon. Shivajirao Deshmukh, MLC (Chairman of the Legislative Council) Hon. Dilip Walse-Patil, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Ashokrao Chavan, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Eknathrao Khadse, MLA (Leader of the Opposition, Legislative Assembly) Hon. Pandurang Fundkar, MLC

(Leader of the Opposition, Legislative Council) Hon. Harshawardhan Patil, MLA (Minister of Parliamentary Affairs) Secretary and Offices: Shri A.N. Kalse (Principal Secretary of the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council) Room 802, 8th Floor, Maharashtra Legislature Secretariat, Vidhan Bhavan, Mumbai 400 032, Maharashtra, India. Tel.: (+91-22) 2282-0820, 22027399 Fax: (+91-22) 2202-4524, 22820820 Email: mls_mumbai@rediffmail.com

MANIPUR (India) (www.manipurassembly.gov.in) President: Hon. Dr Sapam Budhichandra Singh, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Okram Ibobi Singh, MLA (Chief Minister and Leader of the House) Treasurer: Secretary and Offices: Shri Th. Megha Raj Singh Manipur Branch Secretariat, Imphal 79500I, Manipur, India. Tel.: (+91-385) 245-0239 Fax: (+91-385) 245-1193, 2450253 Email: man-assembly@man.nic.in MEGHALAYA (India) (www.meghalaya.nic.in) President: Mr Charles Pyngrope, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Shri Sanbor Shullai (Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Smt. W.M. Rymbai (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly)

Meghalaya Legislative Assembly, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Shillong 793001, Meghalaya, India. Tel.: (+91-364) 222-3878, 2224267 Fax: (+91-364) 221-0157

MIZORAM (India) (www.mizoram.nic.in) President: Hon. R Romawia, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Lal Thanhawla, MLA (Leader of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ngurthanzuala (Secretary) Mizoram Legislative Assembly Secretariat, P.O. Aizawl, Mizoram, India. Tel.: (+91-389) 232-2250, 2325733, 232-3608 Fax: (+91-389) 232-3207 Email: secymzmla@alpha.nic.in

NAGALAND (India) (www.nagaland.nic.in) President: Hon. Kiyanilie Peseyie, MLA (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Neiphiu Rio, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Tokheho Yepthomi, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr A. E. Lotha (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Nagaland Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Kohima 799001, Nagaland, India. Tel.: (+91-370) 227 507, 2291029 Fax: (+91-370) 227 1509 Email: assembly@yahoo.com

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 93

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:06 Page 94

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures ORISSA (India) President: Hon. Maheswar Mohanty, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Prahlad Dora, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Shri Balakrishna Sahoo (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Legislative Assembly, Bhubaneswar, 751001 Orissa, India. Tel.: (+91-674) 253-6872, 2536852 Fax: (+91-674) 240-6144, 2418678 Email: ola@ori.nic.in

PUDUCHERRY (PONDICHERRY) (India) (www.pon.nic.in) President: Hon. R. Radhakrishnan, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Shri V. Vaithilingam (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Shri M. Sivaprakasam (Secretary to the Legislative Assembly) Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Puducherry â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 605 001, India. Tel: (+91-413) 334-462, 335-525 Fax: (+91-413) 335-525, 332-397 Email: secretary@satyam.net.in

PUNJAB (India) (www.punjabgovt.nic.in/governme nt/govt741.htm) President: Hon. Sardar Nirmal Singh Kahlon, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Rajinder Kaur Bhattal, MLA Hon. Sardar Parkash Singh

Badal, MLA Secretary and Offices: Shri Ved Parkash (Secretary to the Legislature) Punjab Vidhan Sabha Secretariat, Vidhan Bhawan, Chandigarh, India. Tel.: (+91-172) 274-0786 Fax: (+91-172) 274-0472

RAJASTHAN (India) (www.rajassembly.nic.in) President: Mr Deependra Singh Shekhawat (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Mr. Ashok Gehlot, MLA (Chief Minister) Mrs Vasundhara Raje, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Shri H.R Kuri (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Vidhan Sabha Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur 302 005, Rajasthan, India. Tel.: (+91-141) 274-4326; Speaker's Office 274-4321 Fax: (+91-141) 274-4333/4 Email: rajassembly@nic.in SIKKIM (India) (www.sikkim.gov.in) President: Hon. D.N. Takarpa, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Mingma Tshering Sherpa, MLA (Deputy Speaker) Hon. Pawan Kumar Chamling, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Shri Dorjee Rinchen (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Sikkim Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Nam Nang, Gangtok 737101, Sikkim, India. Tel.: (+91-3592) 203-654 Fax: (+91-3592) 202-181 Email: secretaryslas@gmail.com

94 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

TAMIL NADU (India) (www.tn.gov.in) President: Hon. R. Avudaiappan, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. M. Karunanidhi, MLA (Chief Minister) Hon. Prof. K. Anbazhagan, MLA (Leader of the House) Hon. Selvi J. Jayalalithaa, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Thiru M. Selvaraj (Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Chennai 600 009, Tamil Nadu, India. Tel.: (+91-44) 2567-2611, 25670271 (x105) Fax: (+91-44) 2567-8956 Email: tnasmbly@tn.nic.in

TRIPURA (India) (http://tripura.nic.in) President: Hon. Ramendra Chandra Debnath, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Shri Subal Rudra, MLA (Deputy Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Shri D.K. Daschaudhuri (Secretary to the Legislative Assembly) Tripura Legislative Assembly, Agartala, Tripura, 799 001 India. Tel.: (+91-381) 222-4067, 2224968 Fax: (+91-381) 222-4095

UTTARAKHAND (formerly UTTARANCHAL) (India) (www.uttaranchal.assembly.org) President: Hon. Harbans Kapoor, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Maj-Gen (Rtd) Bhuvan

Chandra Khanduri, MLA (Leader of the House) Hon. Dr Harak Singh Rawat, MLA (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Shri Mahesh Chanddra (Secretary to the Legislative Assembly) Vidhan Sabha Bhawan, Dehradun, Uttaranchal, India. Tel.: (+91-135) 266-6444 Fax: (+91-135) 266-6788, 2666680

UTTAR PRADESH (India) (www.uplegassembly.nic.in) Joint Presidents: Hon. Shri Sukhadeo Rajbhar, MLA (Leader of the Opposition, Legislative Assembly) Hon. Shri Sukhram Singh Yadav, MLC (Chairman of the Legislative Council) Joint Vice Presidents: Hon. Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav, MLA (Leader of the Opposition, Legislative Assembly) Hon. Shri Ahmed Hasan, MLC (Leader of the Opposition, Legislative Council) Secretaries and Offices: Shri Pradeep Kumar Dubey (Special Secretary) Legislative Assembly, Uttar Pradesh, Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow 226 001, India. Tel.: (+91-522) 223-8098, 2238168 Fax: (+91-522) 223-8208, 2238174 Email: upvs@up.nic.in

WEST BENGAL (India) (www.kolkata.wb.nic.in/bidhansabha) President: Hon. Hashim Abdul Halim, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Shri Bhakti Pada Ghosh, MLA

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:07 Page 95

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures (Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Shri Jadablal Chakraborty (Principal Secretary of the Legislative Assembly) Assembly House, Kolkata-700 001, West Bengal, India. Tel: (+91-33) 2248-6221, 22480896/6098 Fax: (+91-33) 2248-4248, 22130402 Email: root@bidhan.wn.nic.in

ISLE OF MAN (www.tynwald.org.im) Joint Presidents: Hon. Noel Quayle Cringle, MLC (President of Tynwald and President of the Legislative Council) Hon. Stephen Rodan, MHK (Speaker of the House of Keys) Vice-President: Hon. Tony Brown, MHK (Chief Minister) Chairman of the Executive Committee: Mrs Clare Christian, MLC Secretary and Offices: Mr Roger Philips (Clerk of Tynwald) Legislative Buildings, Douglas, IM1 3PW, Isle of Man. Tel: (+44-1624) 685500 Fax: (+44-1624) 685504 Email: enquiries@tynwald.org.im

JAMAICA (www.jis.gov.jm) Joint Presidents: Dr the Hon. Sen. Oswald Harding, OJ, CD, QC (President of the Senate) Hon. Delroy Chuck, MP (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-President: Hon. Bruce Golding (Prime Minister) Secretary and Offices: Ms Heather Cooke (Clerk to the Houses of Parliament)

Houses of Parliament, Gordon House, 81 Duke Street, P.O. Box 636, Kingston, Jamaica. Tel: (+1-876) 922-0200/7 Fax: (+1-876) 967-1708, 967-0064 Email: heather.cooke@japarliament.gov.j m/clerk@japarliament.gov.jm

JERSEY (www.statesassembly.gov.je) President: Mr Michael C. St. J. Birt (Bailiff of Jersey and President of the States) Chairman of Executive Committee Connétable Len Norman Secretary and Offices: Mr Michael N. de la Haye (Greffier of the States) States Greffe, Morier House, Halkett Place, St Helier, Jersey, Channel Islands, JE1 1DD. Tel: (+44-1534) 441013 Fax: (+44-1534) 441098 Email: m.delahaye@gov.je

KENYA (www.parliament.go.ke) President: Hon. Kenneth Marende, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Hon. Farah Maalim, MP (Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr Patrick G Gichohi (Clerk of the National Assembly) P.O. Box 41842-00100, Nairobi, Kenya. Tel.: (+254-20) 2284-8000/2221291 Fax: (+254-20) 243-694/315-950 Email: cna@parliament.co.ke

KIRIBATI (www.tskl.net.ki/parliament/index. html) President: Hon. Taomati Iuta, MP (Speaker of Parliament)

Vice-President: H.E. Hon. Anote Tong, MP (President of the Republic) Secretary and Offices: Eni Tekanene (Acting Clerk of Parliament) House of Assembly, P.O. Box 52, Bairiki, Tarawa, Kiribati. Tel: (+686) 21880 / 22080 Fax: (+686) 21278 Email: eni@parliament.gov.ki

LESOTHO (www.lesotho.gov.ls) Joint Presidents: Hon. J.S. Lejaha (President of the Senate) Hon. Ntlhoi A. Motsamai, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Prof. the Hon. P.B. Mosisili, MP (Prime Minister) Sen. the Hon. R.M. Masemene Secretary and Offices: Miss Lebohang Ramohlanka (Clerk to the National Assembly) Linare Road, Parliament Buildings, P.O. Box 190, Maseru100, Lesotho. Tel.: (+266) 22-323-035, 22-317056 Fax: (+266) 2231-7056 Email: parliam@ilesotho.com/ senate@ilesotho.com

MALAWI (www.malawi.gov.mw) Chairman: Hon. Louis Joseph Chimango, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Matilda Marcia Katopola (Clerk of the Parliament) National Assembly, Parliament Offices, Chief M'Mbelwa House, Private Bag B362, Capital City, Lilongwe 3, Malawi. Tel.: (+265-1) 773-008, 773-090, 773-882 Fax: (+265-1) 774-196, 771-340 Email: parliament@malawi.net/

MALAYSIA (www.parlimen.gov.my/ www.cpamalaysia.org) Joint Presidents: Hon. Tan Sri Dato' Abdul Hamid Pawanteh (President of the Senate) Hon. Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Haji Mulia (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Najib Tun Abdul Razak, MP (Prime Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Roosme Hamzah (Clerk of the House of Representatives) Parliament House, 50680 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: (+603) 2072-1955, 20797391, 2079-3161 Fax: (+603) 2070-0986, 20317361 Email: cpamalay@parlimen.gov.my

STATE PARLIAMENTS OF MALAYSIA

JOHORE (Malaysia) (www.johoredt.gov.my) President: Hon. Dato’ Haji Zainal Abidin bin Mohamed Zin, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Dato’ Haji Abdul Ghani bin Othman, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Tuan Haji Mohamad bin Haji Karim (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) State Secretariat, Dewan Undangan Negeri Johore Bangunan Johore, Bukit Timbalan, Johore Bahru, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-7) 223-9780 Fax: (+60-7) 224-6359

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 95

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:07 Page 96

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures KEDAH DARULAMAN (Malaysia) (www.kedah.gov.my) President: Hon. Dato' Haji Badruddin bin Amiruddin, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Dato' Seri Haji Syed Razak bin Haji Syed Zain Barakbah, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Encik Kharudin bin Zain (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Aras 1 Blok A, Wisma Darul Aman, Jalan Tunku Bendahara, 05503 Alor Setar, Kedah, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-4) 730-1957 Fax: (+60-4) 733-3494 Email: kharuddin@mmk.kedah.gov.my

KELANTAN (Malaysia) (www.kelantan.gov.my) President: Hon. Hj Mohd Nassuruddin B Hj Daud (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Dato’ Hj Nik Abdul Aziz B Nik Mat (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Muhammed Imran B. Mansoor (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan Kelantan, Blok 1, Kota Darulnaim, 15503 Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-9) 748-4123 Fax: (+60-9) 743-6649 Email: sudn@kelantan.gov.my

MELAKA (MALACCA) (Malaysia) (www.melaka.gov.my) President: Hon. Datuk Othman Bin Muhamad, MLA (Speaker of the State Assembly)

Vice-President: Rt Hon. Datuk Haji Mohd. Ali bin Mohd. Rustam, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Mariam Binti Ilias (Clerk of the State Assembly) Jabatan Ketua Menteri Melaka, Blok Laksamana, Aras 2, Seri Negeri, 75450 Ayer Keroh, Melaka Tel: (+60-6) 230-7452 Fax: (+60-6) 231-1304 Email: mohdzin@melaka.gov.my

NEGERI SEMBILAN (Malaysia) (www.nsic.gov.my) President: Hon. Dato' Haji Lilah bin Haji Yassin, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Dato' Haji Mohamad bin Hj. Hassan MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Yaakop bin Rantau Unit Dewan & Protokol, Tingkat 5, Blok B, Wisma Negeri, Jalan Dato' Abdul Malek, 70503 Seremban, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-6) 765-9924, 762-3721 Fax: (+60-6) 764-7473 Email: kpsupro@sukns.gov.my PAHANG (Malaysia) (www.pahang.gov.my) President: Hon. Dato’ Haji Wan Mohd. Razali bin Wan Mahussin, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Dato’ Sri Haji Adnan bin Haji Yaakob, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Nasruddin Md. Salim (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan Pahang, Wisma Sri Pahang, 25503 Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-9) 552-1600 Fax: (+60-9) 516-3495

96 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

PENANG (Malaysia) (www.penang.gov.my) President: Hon Dato’ Haji Abdul Halim bin Hussain, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Mr Lim Guan Eng, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Baharuddin bin Ahmad Suri (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan, Tingkat 25, Menara Komtar, 10503 Pulau Pinang, Malaysia. Tel.: (+60-4) 650-5155/2611836 Fax: (+60-4) 263-3642 Email: baharuddin@penang.gov.my

PERAK (Malaysia) (www.perak.gov.my) President: Rt Hon. Dato' Seri Di Raja Mohamad Tajol Rosli bin Mohd. Ghazali, MLA (Chief Minister) Vice-President: Hon. Dato' Haji Mat Isa bin Ismail, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr Hasim bin Hasan (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) 2nd Floor, Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan, Peti Surat 1004, Jalan Panglima Bukit Gantang Wahab, 03000 Ipoh, Perak, Malaysia. Tel.: (+60-5) 522-5212/4 Fax: (+60-5) 241-0451 Email: hasim@perak.gov.my

PERLIS (Malaysia) (www.perlis.gov.my) President: Hon. Abdul Azib bin Haji Saad, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Dato’ Seri Shahidan bin Kassim, MLA

(Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ahmad bin Zakaria (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan, Ibu Pejabat Kerajaan Negeri, 01990 Kangar, Perlis, Malaysia Tel: (+60-4) 976-5481 Fax: (+60-4) 976- 3555

SABAH (Malaysia) (www.sabah.gov.my) President: Hon. Datuk Hj. Juhar Hj. Mahiruddin, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Datuk Hj. Musa Hj. Aman, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Bernard J. Dalinting (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) P.O. Box 11247, 88813 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-88) 427-533 Fax: (+60-88) 427-333 Email: bernard.dalinting@sabah.gov.my

SARAWAK (Malaysia) (www.sarawak.gov.my) President: Hon. Dato Sri Mohd Asfia Awang Nassar, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice President: Rt Hon. Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Dr Haji Abdul Taib Mahmud, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Abang Othman Abang Fata (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Dewan Undangan Negeri, Sarawak, Petra Jaya, 93502 Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-82) 440-796, 440-628, 441-955 Fax: (+60-82) 440-790, 440-628 Email: abangof@sarawaknet.gov.my

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:07 Page 97

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures SELANGOR (Malaysia) (www.selangor.gov.my) President: Hon. Tan Sri Datoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Seri Haji Onn bin Haji Ismail, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Datoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Seri Dr Mohamad Khir bin Toyo, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr. Shamsul Azri bin Abu Bakar (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly/ Protocol) State Legislative Assembly of Selangor, Tingkat 1, Bangunan Annex Dewan Undangan Negeri Selangor, 40680 Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia. Tel: (+60-3) 5544-7613 Fax: (+60-3) 5510-4055 Email: faizah@selangor.gov.my

TERENGGANU (Malaysia) (www.terengganu.gov.my) President: Hon. Dato' Haji Che Mat bin Jusoh, MLA (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Dato' Idris bin Jusoh, MLA (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr A Rahim Bin Jusoh (Branch Secretary) Pejabat Dewan Undangan Negeri Terengganu, Tingkat U2, Blok Podium, Wisma Darul Iman, 20503 Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia. Tel.: (+60-9) 623-1957 Fax: (+60-9) 623-6957 Email: sudewan@terengganu.gov.my

MALDIVES (www.majlis.gov.mv/pm/english) President: Hon. Abdulla Shahid, MP (Speaker of the People's Majlis)

Vice-President: Hon. Ahmed Nazim, MP (Deputy Speaker of the People's Majlis) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ahmed Mohamed (Secretary-General) People's Majlis Secretariat, Medhuziyaaraiy Magu, Male, 20080, Republic of Maldives Phone: (+960) 331-3214, 3313216 Fax: (+960) 334-1856, 3324104 Email: cpa@majlis.gov.mv

MALTA (www.parliament.gov.mt) President: Hon. Dr Louis Galea, MP (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Carmelo Abela, MP (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Ms Pauline Abela (Clerk of the House) House of Representatives, The Palace, Valletta CMR 02, Malta. Tel.: (+356) 2559-6300 Fax: (+356) 2559-6400 Email: parliament@gov.mt

MAURITIUS (www.gov.mu) President: Hon. Rajkeswar Purryag, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ram Ranjit Dowlutta (Clerk of the National Assembly) National Assembly, Port Louis, Mauritius. Tel: (+230) 208-0691, 201-1414 Fax: (+230) 212-8364 Email: themace@intnet.mu

MONTSERRAT (www.gov.ms) President: Hon. Joseph H. Meade, MLC (Speaker of the Legislative

13323, Windhoek, Namibia. Tel: (+264-61) 288-9111 Fax: (+264-61) 247-772 Mrs Panduleni Shimutwikeni (Secretary to the National Council) National Council, Private Bag 13371, Windhoek, Namibia Tel.: (+264-61) 237-561, 2028000 Fax: (+264-61) 226-121 Email: parliament@parliament.gov.na

Council) Vice-President: Hon. Reuben Meade, MLC (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Miss Judith Jeffers (Acting Clerk of Councils) Government Headquarters, Brades, Montserrat. Tel: (+1-664) 491-2195 Fax: (+1-664) 491-6885 Email: legis@gov.ms/ jeffersj@gov.ms

MOZAMBIQUE (www.govnet.gov.mz) President: Dr Eduardo Jaquim Mulembwe, MP (Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Dr Baptista Ismael Machaieie (Branch Secretary) Assembleia da Republica, 24 de Julho Avenue. nr. 3773, Caixa Postal 1515, Maputo, Mozambique Tel: (+ 258) 21-40-08-26/29; 21-22-51-00 Fax: (+ 258) 21-40-07-11/2122-51-79 E-Mail: chinhabotao@gmail.com

NAMIBIA (www.parliament.gov.na) Joint Presidents: Hon. Dr Theo-Ben Gurirab (Speaker of the National Assembly) Hon. Asser Kapere (Speaker of the National Council) Joint Vice-Presidents: Hon. Doreen Sioka, MP (Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly) Hon. Margaret MensahWilliams (Deputy Chairperson of the National Council) Secretary and Offices: Mr Jakes Jacobs (Secretary of the National Assembly) National Assembly, Private Bag

NAURU (www.naurugov.nr) President: Hon. Riddell Akua, MP (Speaker of Parliament) Secretary and Offices: Mr Frederick Cain (Clerk of Parliament) Parliament House, Nauru Island, Central Pacific. Tel.: (+674) 444-3145 Fax: (+674) 444-3187 Email: farcain@cenpac.net.nr

NEW ZEALAND (www.parliament.govt.nz) President: Hon. Lockwood Smith, MP (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-Presidents: Rt Hon. John Key, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Phil Goff, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary, Treasurer and Offices: Ms Mary Harris (Clerk of the House of Representatives) Parliament House, Wellington 6001, New Zealand Tel: (+64-4) 471-9999 Fax: (+64-4) 439-6422 Email: cpa@parliament.govt.nz

NIGERIA (www.nassnig.org/ www.nigeria.gov.ng) President: Hon. Oladimeji Bankole, MHR

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 97

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:07 Page 98

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-President: Hon. Austin Opara, MHR (Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives) Secretary and Offices: Mr Oluyemi Ogunyomi (Clerk to the National Assembly) National Assembly, Three Arms Zone, PMB 141, Central Area, Abuja, Nigeria Tel: (+234) 9-234-2269; 9-2340630 Fax: (+234) 9-234-2157; 9-2342159 Email: rabi1982003@yahoo.com

STATE LEGISLATURES OF NIGERIA ABIA (Nigeria) (www.abiastate-ng.com) President: Rt Hon. Agwu U. Agwu (Speaker of the State House of Assembly) Offices: Abia State House of Assembly, P.M.B. 7242, Umuahia, Abia, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-80) 357 48776/231 49393 Email: nagwu@yahoo.com

ADAMAWA (Nigeria) President: Hon. Abubakar Abdullahi, MLA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Offices: Adamawa State House of Assembly, Army Barracks Road, Yola, Adamawa Nigeria

AKWA-IBOM (Nigeria) (www.akwaibomstategov.com) President: Hon. Bassey Essien, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Aniefiok Thomson, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices:

Dr Okon A. Ekanem (Office of the Clerk of the House) Akwa-Ibom State House of Assembly, Wellington Bassey Way End, PB 636, Uyo, Akwa-Ibom State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-85) 200-040/85202-259

ANAMBRA (Nigeria) (www.anambrastateng.org) President: Hon. Anayo Nnebe, MLA (Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Walter N. Adogu (Clerk of the House) Anambra State House of Assembly, Legislative Buildings, P.M.B. 5053, Awka, Anambra State, Nigeria. Tel.: (+234 48) 551-379, 551-377 Email: houseofassembly_ana@yahoo.com

BAUCHI (Nigeria) President: Tanko Ibrahim Jalam (Speaker of the House) Bauchi State House of Assembly P.M.B. 0262, Bauchi Nigeria Tel: (+234) 77-543-218/542-8 Fax: (+234) 77-543-218

BAYELSA (Nigeria) (www.bayelsa.gov.ng) President: Hon. Boyehayefa Debekeme, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Secretary and Offices: Mr P.K. George, Esq. (Clerk of the House) Bayelsa State House of Assembly, Amarata, Yenagoa, PMB 37, Bayelsa State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-84) 490-374/490375/490-382 /490-230 Email: byha_yen@yahoo.com

98 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

BENUE (Nigeria) (www.benuestate.gov.ng) President: Hon. Tseer Tsumba William Edo, MLA Secretary and Offices: Mr Emmanuel Ukaba (Clerk of the House) Benue State House of Assembly, Legislative Buildings, PMB 102356, Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-44) 531-610

BORNO (Nigeria) (www.bornonigeria.com) President: Hon. Goni Ali Modu, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Bello Ayuba, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Alh. Musa A. Gwoma (Clerk of the House) Aji Yusuf Ngamdu (Deputy Clerk of the House) Borno State House of Assembly, P.M.B. 1180, Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria. Tel.: (+234) 802-8411328 Fax: (+234) 805-7243812 Email: mgwoma@yahoo.com/ bornoparliament@yahoo.com

CROSS RIVER (Nigeria) (www.crossriverstate.gov.ng) President: Rt Hon. Francis Busam Adah, MLA (Speaker of the House) Rt Hon. (Chief) Dominic Aqua Edem, MLA (Branch Vice President) Secretary and Offices: Ntufam (Elder) John A. Okon (Clerk of the House) Cross River House of Assembly, House of Assembly Buildings, P.M.B. 1372, Calabar, Cross River, Nigeria Tel.: (+234) 87-220-010/87-233-706 Fax: (+234) 87-233-706

DELTA (Nigeria) (www.deltastate.gov.ng) President: Hon. Y. D. Igbrude (Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Mr O. J. Iyamu (Branch Secretary) Delta State House of Assembly, P.M.B. 5028 Asaba, Delta State, Nigeria Fax: (+234) 56-280-661

EBONYI (Nigeria) President: Rt Hon. Omo Christopher Isu, MLA (Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Hon. Chief G.O. Ogbaga (Clerk of the House) Ebonyi State House of Assembly, Nkaliki Road, Abakaliki, Ebonyi State, Nigeria

EDO (Nigeria) (www.edostate.gov.ng) President: Rt Hon. Zakawanu Garuba, MLA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Levis Osaretin Aigbogun, (Majority Leader) Secretary and Offices: Mr Egbe Evbuomwan (Clerk of the House) Edo State House of Assembly, P.M.B. 1726, King's Square, Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234) 803 4045 926/805 3144 623 Email: edocpasec@yahoo.com EKITI (Nigeria) (http://ekitinigeria.net) President: Rt. Hon. Bamisile Richard Oluwafemi, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Taiwo Olatunbosun, MLA (Deputy Speaker)

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:08 Page 99

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures Secretary and Offices: Pastor Fasiku Ademiloye (Clerk of the House) Ekiti State House of Assembly, P.M.B. 5843, Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria Tel: (+234) 30-251-149/30240-235 Fax: (+234) 30-251149 Email: ekitihouseofassembly@yahoo.uk

ENUGU (Nigeria) President: Hon. Abel Chukwu, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Charles Ogbo Asogwa, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Herbert Emeka Udeh, MLA (Clerk of the House) Enugu State House of Assembly, Legislative Building, Independence Layout, P.M.B. 1686, Enugu State, Nigeria Tel: (+234-42) 451-761/451768/451-864/500-139

GOMBE (Nigeria) (http://gombestatenigeria.com) President: Hon. Manga Musa Bojude, TBC (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Inuwa Garba, (TBC) (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Muhammad Garba Wala (Clerk of the House) Gombe State House of Assembly, Administrative Secretariat, P.M.B. 075, Gombe State, Nigeria Tel: (+234) 72-220-047

IMO (Nigeria) (www.imostate.gov.ng) Secretary and Offices: Dr Emmanuel Ngozi Ibekwe, MLA (Clerk of the House)

Imo House of Assembly, Private Mail Bag 1559, Imo State, Nigeria

JIGAWA (Nigeria) President: Hon. Mujitafa M. Malam (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Ibrahim Yusha'u Kanya (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Sabo Wada Ringim (Branch Secretary) Jigawa State House of Assembly P.M.B. 7007 Dutse, Jigawa State, Nigeria. Tel.: (+234-64) 721-362/00 Fax: (+234-64) 721-362.

KADUNA (Nigeria) (www.kadunastate.gov.ng) President: Hon. Abbas S. Pada, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Emmanuel Audu Maisango, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Barr Umma Aliyu Hikima (Clerk to the Legislature) Offices of the Legislative Complex, Kaduna State House of Assembly, Lugard Hall, P.M.B. 2125, Kaduna State, Nigeria. Tel.: (+234-62) 247-580 Fax: (+234-62) 243-580

KANO (Nigeria) (www.kanostate.net) President: Rt Hon. Abdul Azeez Garba Gafasa, MLA (Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Mahmoud S. Bello (Clerk of the House) State House of Assembly, PMB 3104, Kano, Kano State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-64)665-894

KATSINA (Nigeria) (www.katsinastate-lgac.com) President: Rt Hon. Yau Umar Gofo-Gofo, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Bilyanu Moh. Rimi, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ahmed Moh. Katsina (Clerk of the House) Katsina State House of Assembly, P.M.B 2148, Katsina, Katsina State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234) 65-432-989 (President) /65-432-997 (Secretary) /65-432-992 / 65432-998 Fax: (+234) 65-432-992

KEBBI (Nigeria) President: Mohammadu D. Dantani (Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Abubakar Dan Malam (Clerk of the House) Tel: (+234-68) 332059

LAGOS (Nigeria) (www.lagosstate.gov.ng) President: Hon. Jokotola Pelumi, MLA (Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr R.O Jaiyesimi (Clerk of the House) Lagos State House of Assembly, Assembly Complex, Alausa Ikeja, Lagos, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-1) 496-1686/4978937/493-4753/775-4143 Fax: (234+1) 496-1686 Email: lagoshousespeaker@yahoo.com

NASARAWA (Nigeria) (www.nasarawastate.org) Secretary and Offices: Mr Moses Ondaki (Clerk of the House) Shendam Road, Lafia, Nasarawa State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-47) 221-435 Fax: (234-47) 221-563 Email: onawom@yahoo.com

NIGER (Nigeria) Branch suspended KOGI (Nigeria) Branch suspended

KWARA (Nigeria) (www.kwarastate.gov.ng) President: Hon. Babatunde Mohammed, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Babatunde Mohammed, MLA (Deputy-Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Mahie Abdulkadir (Clerk of the House) Kwara State House of Assembly, Legislative Buildings, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-31) 220-001/220994

OGUN (Nigeria) (www.ogunstate.gov.ng) President: Rt Hon. Titi Oseni, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Olu, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Alhaji K.A. Lawal (Clerk of the House) Ogun House of Assembly, P.M.B 2054, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria. Tel.: (+234-39) 241-774/243989

ONDO (Nigeria) Branch suspended

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 99

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:08 Page 100

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures OSUN (Nigeria) (www.osunstate.gov.ng) President: Rt Hon. Raifu Adejare Bello, MLA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-President Hon. Yekeen Taiwo Sunmonu, MLA (Deputy Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Mr Segun Akinwusi (Clerk of the House) Mr Tunde Kolawole (Secretary) Osun State House of Assembly, Gbongan Road, Abere, P.M.B. 4432, Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-35) 243-033/360608/08037-186-539 Email: speaker@house.osunstate.org

080/463-246/465-888 Fax: (+234-73) 460-153, 464081 Email: plateauhouseofassembly@yahoo.com

OYO (Nigeria) (www.oyostate.gov.ng) President: Hon. Moroof Olawale Atilola, MLA (Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Okesipe Okesola (Clerk of the House) Parliament Buildings, P.M.B. 5018, Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-02) 810-5676/810-4941

SOKOTO (Nigeria) (www.sokotostate.gov.ng) Joint Presidents: Hon. Abdullahi Balarabe Salame, MLA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Hon. Bello Muhammad Dange, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Hon. Mohammad Mainasara Ahmad (Clerk to the House) Sokoto State House of Assembly, Kaduna Rd, PMB 02202, Sokoto, Nigeria Tel.: (+234) 60-230-156, 236192 E-mail: harandemahe@yahoo.com

PLATEAU (Nigeria) (www.plateaustategov.org) President: Rt Hon. Simon B. Lalong, MLA (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Usman Zumunta Musa, MLA (Deputy Speaker of the House) Secretary and Offices: Mr Cornelius D. Shiolbial (Clerk of the House) Plateau State House of Assembly complex, 21 Old Bukuru Rd, PMB 2142, Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria. Tel.: (+234-73) 460-153/464-

RIVERS STATE (Nigeria) (www.riversstatenigeria.net) President: Rt Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, MLA (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr A.E. Nwala (Clerk of the House) Rivers State House of Assembly, Assembly Complex, P.M.B. 6166, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria Tel: (+234) 84 234-632 (Speaker)/84-330-338 Fax: (+234) 84 234-630

TARABA (Nigeria) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ismailu T. Ukwen Taraba State House of Assembly, Legislative Buildings, P.M.B 1069, Jalingo, Taraba State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234) 35-243-033/35240-657/79-22571/79-23302

100 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

YOBE (Nigeria) Secretary and Offices: Mr Alh Mohammed Nur Alkali (Clerk of the House) Yobe State House of Assembly, Maiduguri Road, Damaturu, Yobe State, Nigeria Tel.: (+234-76) 522-995/522-862

ZAMFARA (Nigeria) Branch suspended

NlUE (www.gov.nu) President: Hon. Atapana Siakimotu, MP (President of the Legislative Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Krypton Okesene, MP Secretary and Offices: Mrs Moka Tano-Puleosi (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Ms Tina Tavita (Assistant Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) Assembly Chambers, Fale Fono, P.O. Box 40, Alofi, Niue, South Pacific. Tel.: (+683) 4200 Ext 87 Fax: (+683) 4344 Email: legislative.premier@mail.gov.nu

PAKISTAN (www.na.gov.pk/www.senate.gov.pk ) Joint Presidents: Hon. Fahmida Mirza, MNA (Speaker of the National Assembly) Hon. Farooq Hamid Naek (Chairman of the Senate) Secretary: Mr Karamat Hussain Niazi (Secretary of the National Assembly) Mr Raja Muhammad Amin (Secretary of the Senate) Parliament House, Constitution Avenue, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan Tel.: (+92-51) 920-3734/9221082

Fax: (+92-51) 920-5205/9203359 Email: iprsenate@yahoo.com

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES OF PAKISTAN

BALOCHISTAN (Pakistan) (www.balochistan.gov.pk) Secretary and Offices: Mr Muhammad Khan Mengal (Secretary of the Provincial Assembly) Provincial Assembly of Balochistan, Quetta, Pakistan Tel.: (+92-81) 920-1950 Fax: (+92-81) 920 2575/3057

NORTHWEST FRONTIER (Pakistan) (http://nwfp.gov.pk) President: Hon. Kiramatullah Khan, MLA (Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Mr Amanullah (Branch Secretary) Northwest Frontier Provincial Assembly, Peshawar, Pakistan Tel.: (+92-91) 921-0161 Fax: (+92-91) 921-0241 Email: aman_assembly@yahoo.com

PUNJAB (Pakistan) (www.pap.gov.pk) President: Hon. Rana Muhammad Iqbal Khan, MPA (Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Mr Maqsood Ahmad Malik (Secretary) Provincial Assembly of Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan Tel.: (+92-42) 920-0317/8 Fax: (+92-42) 920-0330 Email: info@pap.gov.pk

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:08 Page 101

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

Directory of Parliaments and Legislatures SINDH (Pakistan) (www.sindh.gov.pk) President: Hon. Nisar Ahmed Khuhro (Speaker of the Provincial Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr Hadi Bux Buriro (Secretary of the Provincial Assembly) Provincial Assembly of Sindh, Karachi 74400, Pakistan Tel.: (+92-21) 921-2021/9212024 Fax: (+92-21) 921-2033 Email: info@pas.gov.pk

PAPUA NEW GUINEA (www.parliament.gov.pg) President: Hon. Jeffrey Nape, MP (Speaker of the National Parliament) Deputy President: Rt Hon. Sir Thomas Koraea, MP (Deputy Speaker of the National Parliament) Secretary and Offices: Mr Don Pandan (Clerk of the National Parliament) Parliament House, Waigani, National Capital District, Papua New Guinea. Tel.: (+675) 327-7400 Fax: (+675) 327-7481 Email: parlib@datec.net.pg

BOUGAINVILLE (Papua New Guinea) Branch suspended

ST CHRISTOPHER & NEVIS (www.gov.kn) President: Hon. Marcella Liburd, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Mr José Lloyd (Clerk of the National Assembly) Government Headquarters, P.O. Box 164, Basseterre, St Kitts. Tel.: (+1-869) 465-2521, 467-

1335 Fax: (+1-869) 469-5629

NEVIS President: Hon. Marjorie Morton (President of the Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Joseph W. Parry (Premier) Hon. Vance Amory (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Dwight Morton (Clerk of the Nevis Island Assembly) Administration Building, Charlestown, Nevis Island, West Indies. Tel.: (+1869) 469-5521 Fax: (+1869) 469-1806 Email: dwimo@hotmail.com

ST HELENA (www.sainthelena.gov.sh) President: Mrs M A Cathy Hopkins, MBE (Speaker of the Legislative Council) Secretary and Offices: Ms Gillian Francis (Clerk of the Councils/Secretary) The Castle, Jamestown, STH 1ZZ, St Helena. Tel.: (+290) 2470 Fax: (+290) 2598 Email: gillianf@sainthelena.gov.sh

SAINT LUCIA (www.stlucia.gov.lc/agencies/ legislature) President: Senator Dr the Hon. Rosemary Husband-Mathurin (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Stephenson King, MP (Prime Minister) Dr Kenny Davis Anthony, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Kurt Thomas

(Clerk of Parliament) Old Government Buildings, Laborie Street, Castries, Saint Lucia WI. Tel: (+1-758) 453-6650/4683919/452-3856 Fax: (+1-758) 452-5451 Email: parliamentslu@yahoo.co.uk

ST VINCENT & THE GRENADINES (www.gov.vc) President: Hon. Hendrick Alexander, MP (Speaker of the House of Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Dr the Hon. Ralph Gonsalves, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Arnhim Eustace, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Ms Nicole Herbert (Clerk of the House of Assembly) House of Assembly, Court House, Kingstown, St Vincent. Tel.: (+1-784) 457-1872 Fax: (+1-784) 457-1825 Email: svgparliament@vincysurf.com

Hon. Marie-Louise Potter, MP (Leader of Government Business) Secretary and Offices: Ms Veronique Bresson (Branch Secretary/Clerk to the National Assembly) National Assembly of Seychelles, P.O Box 734, Victoria, Mahé Tel: (+248) 321-333/321-603 Fax: (+248) 321-1401 Email: lgb5@seychelles.net

SIERRA LEONE (http://parliamentsl.org) President: Hon. Abel Stronge (Speaker of Parliament) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ahmed Abu Kemokay (Clerk of Parliament) Parliament Building, OAU Drive, Tower Hill, Freetown, Sierra Leone Tel.: (+232-22) 223-140 Fax: (+232-22) 222-483

SAMOA (www.parliament.gov.ws/general.cfm) President: Hon. Tolofuaivalelei Falemoe Leiataua, MP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Mr Fepuleai A Ropati (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly) P.O. Box 1866, Apia, Samoa. Tel: (+685) 21 816 Fax: (+685) 21 817 Email: legislative@ipasifika.net

SINGAPORE (www.parliament.gov.sg) President: Hon. Abdullah Tarmugi, MP (Speaker of Parliament) Vice-President: Hon. Lee Hsien Loong, MP (Prime Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Siow Peng Han (Principal Assistant Clerk) Parliament House, 1 Parliament Place, Singapore 178880 Tel.: (+65-6) 332-6668 Fax: (+65-6) 332-5526 Email: parl@parl.gov.sg

THE SEYCHELLES (www.egov.sc) Joint Presidents: Dr Patrick Herminie, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Rev. Wavel Ramkalawan, MP (Leader of the Opposition)

SOLOMON ISLANDS (www.parliament.gov.sb) President: Hon. Derek Sikua, PM (Prime Minister) Vice-President: Mr Manasseh Sogavare (Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Taeasi Sanga

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 101

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:08 Page 102

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

(Clerk to the National Parliament) Office of the National Parliament, P.O. Box G19, Honiara, Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands. Tel.: (+677) 22732 Fax: (+677) 24272

SOUTH AFRICA (www.parliament.gov.za/) Joint Presidents: Hon. Max Vuyisile Sisulu, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Hon. Mninwa Johannes Mahlangu, MP (Chairperson, National Council of Provinces) Secretary and Offices: Mr Zingile Dingani (Branch Secretary) Parliament, P.O. Box 15, Cape Town 8000, South Africa. Tel:(+27-21) 403 2911 Fax: (+27-21) 403 2604 Email: zdingani@parliament.gov.za

(Minister of Public Works) Branch Representative: Hon. Mike Alolo, MPL (Deputy Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Ms Elzabe Rockman (Secretary to the Legislature) Free State ProvincialLegislature, Private Bag X20561, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa. Tel.: (+27 51) 407-1239/407-1111 Fax: (+27 51) 407-1137

GAUTENG (South Africa) (www.gautengleg.gov.za) President: Hon. Richard Mzameni Mdakane, MPL (Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Mr Peter Skosana (Secretary of the Legislature) Gauteng Provincial Legislature, Private Bag X52, Johannesburg 2000, South Africa. Tel.: (+27-11) 498-5968/9 Fax: (+27-11) 498-5720

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES OF SOUTH AFRICA

EASTERN CAPE (South Africa) (www.ecprov.gov.za) President: Mr Fikile Devilliers Xasa (Speaker of the Legislature) Vice-President: Ms Noxolo Abraham-Ntantiso, (Branch Chairperson) Secretary and Offices: Mr Mzukisi Harold Mpahlwa (Secretary to the Legislature) Legislature of the Province of Eastern Cape, Private Bag X005I, Bisho 5605, South Africa. Tel.: (+27-40) 608-0207 Fax: (+27-40) 639-1481 Email: jdesousa@ecleg.gov.za

FREE STATE (South Africa) (www.fs.gov.za) President: Hon. M.A. Dukwana, MPL (Speaker of the Legislature) Chairperson: Hon. S. T. Malebo, MEC, MPL

KWAZULU-NATAL (South Africa) (www.kznparliament.za) President: Hon. Willies Mchunu, MPL (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. Sbu Ndebele, MPL (Premier) Secretary and Offices: Ms Nerusha Naidoo (Secretary of the House) KwaZulu-NataI Provincial Legislature, Private Bag x9112, Pietermaritzburg 3200, South Africa. Tel.: (+27 33) 355-7600/3557509/8 Fax: (+27 33) 355-7699/3557544 Email: naidoon@kznlegislature.gov.za

LIMPOPO (South Africa) (www.limpopo.gov.za) President: Dr the Hon. Tshenuwani Simon Farisani, MPL

102 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

(Speaker of the Provincial Legislature) Vice-President: Hon. Manana Catherine Mabuza, MPL (Deputy Speaker of the Provincial Legislature) Secretary and Offices: Adv. Mr E.N. Lambani (SecretarytotheProvincialLegislature) Provincial Legislature of Limpopo, Lebowakgomo Government Complex, Private Bag X9309, Polokwane 0700, South Africa. Tel: (+27-15) 633-5071/633-8008 Fax: (+27-15) 633-8185 Email: npglegs@mweb.co.za

MPUMALANGA (South Africa) (www.mpuleg.gov.za) President: Hon. Yvonne N. Phosa, MPL (Speaker) Vice-President: Hon. B.J. Nobunga, MPL (Deputy Speaker) Secretary and Offices: Mr Rolson Mathabathe Moropa (Secretary to the Legislature) Mpumalanga Legislature, Private Bag XII289, Nelspruit 1200, South Africa. Tel.: (+27-13) 766-1166/8/9 Fax: (+27-13) 766-1459

NORTH-WEST (South Africa) (www.nwpl.gov.za) Chairman: Hon. Raymond Motsepe, MPL President: Hon. Thandi Modise MPL (Speaker of the House) Vice-President: Hon. B.E.E. Molewa, MPL (Premier) Secretary and Offices: Dr Baba Schalk (Secretary for the North-West Legislature) 2nd Floor, Legislature Building, Private Bag X2018, Mmabatho 2735, South Africa Tel: (+27-183) 874-233/4 Fax: (+27-183) 873-908 Email: nathi@nwpl.org.za

NORTHERN CAPE (South Africa) (www.northern-cape.gov.za/ legislature/index.html) President: Hon. Calvin A.T. Smith, MPL (Speaker) 1st Vice-President: Hon. E.M. Dipico, MPL (Premier) Secretary and Offices: Mr M.Z. Mawasha (Acting Secretary to the Provincial Legislature) Northern Cape Provincial Legislature, Private Bag X5066, Nobengula Extension, Kimberley 8301, South Africa. Tel.: (+27-53) 830-9007/8, 8398069 Fax: (+27-53) 839-8094 Email: mmashope@leg.ncape.gov.za

WESTERN CAPE (South Africa) (www.wcpp.gov.za) President: Hon. S. Esau, MPP (Speaker of the Legislature) Vice-President: Hon. T.R. Majola, MPP (Deputy Speaker of Legislature) Secretary and Offices: Mr Peter Williams (Secretary to the Provincial Parliament) Legislature Building, P.O. Box 648, Cape Town 8000, South Africa. Tel: (+27-21) 487-1621 (President: 487-1602; VicePresident: 487-1611) Fax: (+27-21) 487-1618 (President: 487-1604; VicePresident: 487-1613) Email: peter.williams@wcpp.gov.za

SRI LANKA (www.parliament.lk) President: Hon. W.J.M. Lokubandara, MP (Speaker of the Parliament) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Ratnasiri Wickramanayaka, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Ranil Wickremasinghe, MP

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:09 Page 103

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

(Leader of the Opposition) Secretary and Offices: Mr Dhammika Kitulgoda (Acting Secretary-General of Parliament) CPA Office, 4th Floor, Parliament of Sri Lanka, Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte, Sri Lanka. Tel.: (+94-11) 277-7223 (Speaker), (+94-11) 277-7288 (Secretary-General of Parliament), (+94-11) 277-7277/8 (Office) Fax: (+94-11) 277-7275/7227 Email: cpa@parliament.lk

SWAZILAND Joints Presidents: Sen. Gelane Zwane (President of the Senate) Prince Guduza Dlamini, MP (Presiding Officer) Vice-Presidents: Sen. Chief Gelane Zwane (Deputy President of the Senate) Hon. Trusty Gina, MP (Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Ms Sanele M. Nxumalo (Clerk to Parliament) Houses of Parliament, P.O. Box 37, Lobamba #107, Swaziland. Tel.: (+268) 416-2407/11, 4163440 Fax: (+268) 416-1603 Email: clerk@parliament.gov.sz/ adminparl@swazi.net

TANZANIA (www.parliament.go.tz) President: Hon. Samuel John Sitta, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) Vice-President: Hon. Mizengo Kayanza Peter Pinda, MP (Prime Minister) Mr Hamad Rashid Mohammed, MP (Leader of the opposition) Secretary and Offices: Dr Thomas Kashililah (Clerk) The National Assembly, Box 9133,

Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Tel.: (Dar es Salaam): (+255-22) 211-8591/2 Fax: (Dar es Salaam): (+255-22) 211-2538 The National Assembly, P.O. Box 941, Dodoma, Tanzania. Tel.: (Dodoma): (+255-26) 2322696/232-4604 Fax: (Dodoma): (+255-26) 2324218 Email: dmgalami@parliament.go.tz

ZANZIBAR (Tanzania) President: Hon. Pandu Ameir Kificho, MHR (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-President: Hon. Shamsi Vuai Nahodha, MHR (Chief Minister) Secretary and Offices: Mr Ibrahim Mzee Ibrahim (Clerk of the House of Representatives) House of Representatives, P.O. Box 902, Zanzibar, Tanzania. Tel: (+255-24) 223 0234/5 Fax: (+255-24) 223 0215 Email: zahore@zanlink.com

TONGA (www.parliament.gov.to) President: Hon. Tuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ilakepa, MP (Speaker of the Legislative Assembly) Secretary and Offices: Dr Viliami Uasike Latu (Clerk of the House) Tonga Legislative Assembly, P.O. Box 901, Nukuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;alofa, Tonga. Tel: (+676) 23565/24455 Fax: (+676) 24626 Email: sione_tekiteki@parliament.gov.to

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO (www.ttparliament.org) Joint Presidents: Sen. the Hon. Danny Montano (President of the Senate) Hon. Barendra Sinanan, MP

(Speaker of the House of Representatives) Vice-Presidents: Hon. Patrick Manning, MP (Prime Minister) Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Joint secretaries and Offices: Ms Jacqui Sampson (Clerk of the House of Representatives, Honorary CPA Branch Secretary) Mr Neil Jaggassar (Clerk of the Senate) Parliament, Red House, P.O. Box 878, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and Tobago. Tel: (+1 868) 6232565, 6238366 Fax: (+1 868) 6254672 Email: jsampson@ttparliament.org

TURKS & CAICOS ISLANDS Branch in abeyance

TUVALU President: Sir Kamuta Latasi (Speaker of the Parliament) Vice-President: Rt Hon. Apisai Ielemia, MP (Prime Minister) Secretary and Offices: Ms Lily Faavae (Acting Clerk of the Parliament) Office of the Speaker, Private Mail Bag, Funafuti, Tuvalu. Tel.: (+688) 20250 Fax: (+688) 20253, 20843 Email: parliament@tuvalu.tv

UGANDA (www.parliament.go.ug) President: Hon. Edward Ssekandi, MP (Speaker of Parliament) Treasurer: Hon. Rosemary Nansubuga Seninde, MP Secretary and Offices: Mr A.M.Tandekwire (Clerk to Parliament) Parliament House, P.O. Box 7178, Kampala, Uganda.

Tel: (+256-414) 256-190/234340/6/235-023/347-438/40 Fax: (+256-414) 231-296/346826/250-459 Email: clerk@parliament.go.ug

UNITED KINGDOM (www.parliament.uk) Joint Presidents: Rt Hon. Baroness Hayman (Lord Speaker) Rt Hon. Michael Martin, MP (Speaker of the House of Commons) Chairman: Rt Hon. Gordon Brown, MP (Prime Minister) Vice-President: Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP (Leader of the Opposition) Joint Honorary Treasurer: Sir Nicholas Winterton, MP Secretary and Offices: Mr Andrew Tuggey Westminster Hall, Houses of Parliament, London SW1A 0AA, United Kingdom. Tel: (+44-20) 7219 5373 Fax: (+44-20) 7233 1202 Email: cpa@parliament.uk

NORTHERN IRELAND (United Kingdom) (www.niassembly.gov.uk) President: Hon. William Hay, MLA (Speaker of the Assembly) Vice-Presidents: Rt Hon. Peter Robinson, MP, MLA (First Minister) Secretary and Offices: MrTrevor Reaney (Branch Secretary) Room 23, Parliament Buildings, Belfast BT4 3XX Tel.: (+44-28) 9052-1130 Fax: (+44-28) 9052-1959 Email: Peter.Gregg@niassembly.gov.uk / speaker@niassembly.gov.uk

The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One | 103

CPA Organization:Layout 1 19/03/2010 12:09 Page 104

THE CPA ORGANIZATION

SCOTLAND (United Kingdom) (www.scottish.parliament.uk) President: Mr Alex Ferguson, MSP (Presiding Officer) Vice-Presidents: Rt Hon. Alex Salmond, MP, MSP (First Minister) Mr Ian Gray, MSP (Leader of the party not represented in the Scottish Executive with the greatest number of Members in the Parliament) Secretary and Offices: Mrs Margaret Neal The Scottish Parliament,

Edinburgh EH99 1SP, United Kingdom Tel: (+44 131) 348 5318 Fax: (+44 131) 348 6925 Email: margaret.neal@scottish. parliament.uk

WALES (United Kingdom) (www.assemblywales.org) President: Rt Hon. Lord Dafydd ElisThomas, PC, AM (Presiding Officer) Vice-President: Hon. Rosemary Butler, AM (Deputy Presiding Officer)

Secretary and Offices: Ms Natalie Drury-Styles (Branch Secretary) National Assembly for Wales, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff CF99 1NA, United Kingdom. Tel.: (+44-29) 2089 8705 Fax: (+44-29) 2089-8686 Email: natalie.drurystyles@wales.gsi.gov.uk

VANUATU Branch suspended

ZAMBIA (www.parliament.gov.zm) President: Hon. Amusaa K. Mwanamwambwa, MP (Speaker of the National Assembly) VicePresidents: Hon. Michael Mabenga, MP Hon. Request Muntanga, MP Secretary and Offices: Mrs Doris Katai Mwinga (Clerk of the National Assembly) Parliament Buildings, P.O. Box 31299, Lusaka 10101, Zambia. Tel.: (+260-1) 292-425/36 Fax: (+260-1) 292-252 Email: clerk@parliament.gov.zm

Are these Branch listings correct? Details of CPA Branches contained in these pages are correct as of going to press. If Branch details are incorrect, please notify: pirc@cpahq.org For current details, please consult our website at www.cpahq.org

The CPA Centennial 2011... The CPA is planning a publication to commemorate the CPA Centennial in 2011. To ensure that we have the most up-to-date parliamentary information, we would ask for all Branch secretaries to check the details of the Branch in the directory as well as on the website.

104 | The Parliamentarian | 2010: Issue One

Inside back cover:Layout 1 16/12/2009 10:07 Page 37

CPA SHOP CPA pens

CPA silver-plated cardholders

Silver-plated photoframe, clock and pen in holder

CPA souvenirs are available for sale to Members and officials of Commonwealth Parliaments and Legislatures by contacting the CPA Secretariat by email at: hq.sec@cpahq.org or by air mail at: Suite 700, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom

Outside back cover:3-col feature 16/12/2009 10:08 Page 168

GOT YOUR COPY?...

THE PARLIAMENTARIAN

To subscribe for a copy of The Parliamentarian, please email pirc@cpahq.org. Members of Parliament should contact their Branch Secretary.