The Parliamentarian 2014 Issue One - Promoting Women

TheParliamentarian Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth

2014 | Issue One XCV | Price £13

PROMOTING WOMEN: Transforming women into leaders

PAGE 14

PLUS Reserved seats for women: encouraging female political participation in the Pacific PAGE 18

Cover.indd 1

Overcoming the big challenges for a small Parliament: the Cook Islands PAGE 28

Understanding conduct, ethics and codes PAGE 40

Parliamentary privilege: ancient origins, modern relevance PAGE 46

21/03/2014 15:03:47

Calendar of Events 2014 March 25-7

Parliamentary Staff Development Workshop for the Pacific Region, Cook Islands

26-8

Post-Election Seminar, Bahamas

April 28 April-1 May Mid-Year Executive Committee Meeting, London, United Kingdom

May 25-31

25th Commonwealth Parliamentary Seminar, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

27-30

British Islands and Mediterranean Regional Conference, Cardiff, Wales

June 1-7

Canadian Parliamentary Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

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

Inside front cover.indd 37

21/03/2014 15:23:18

A new CPA publication

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

Following the Money ad.indd 1

21/03/2014 15:08:11

CONTENTS

2014: ISSUE ONE

14 22

Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth Vol. XCV 2014: 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: Lisa Leaño Front cover The Business Meeting of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2013

COMMENT

MAIN ARTICLES

Inside Issues

Women’s transformational leadership: working towards genuine democracy and social progress

Continuing the journey to inspire change Page 4

View from the Chair Strengthening the work of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Caucuses Page 6

View from the CWP Inspiring change Page 8

View from the Secretary-General

South Africa - beyond Nelson Mandela Page 10

Printed in: England by Warners Midlands, PLC; New Delhi by Jainco Art India, and Singapore by Times Printers Private Limited

Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, SC, MP Page 14

Reserved seats for women: encouraging female political participation in the Pacific Hon. Elizabeth Burain, MP Page 18

Promoting women’s political representation and effective participation in Parliament

Overcoming the big challenges for a small Parliament: the Cook Islands Hon. Niki Rattle Page 28

Small Parliaments big challenges

Hon. K.H. Randolph Horton, JP, MP Page 32

An ethical framework for Members of the National Assembly of Québec Hon. Jacques Chagnon, MNA Page 36

Mr Charles Chauvel Page 22

2 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Contents.indd 2

21/03/2014 11:19:18

36 28

Understanding conduct, ethics and codes Hon. Dr Ken Coghill, PhD Page 40

Parliamentary privilege: ancient origins, modern relevance Lord Brabazon of Tara Page 46

Tackling public health in Malawi

NEWS

DIRECTORY

Parliamentary news:

CPA Organization:

Québec, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom and India Page 55

Page 71

Annual subscription (four issues) UK: £40 post free Worldwide: £42 surface post £48 airmail Price per issue UK: £13 Worldwide: £14 surface post £15 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.

Lord David Chidgey Page 50

Promoting sustainable forest management

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 3

Contents.indd 3

21/03/2014 11:19:30

INSIDE ISSUES

CONTINUING THE JOURNEY TO INSPIRE CHANGE The Editor’s note

I have been fortunate to have grown up in an era that celebrates and promotes women across every arena. From entrepreneurs and humanitarians to writers and political leaders, there is no shortage when it comes to finding a female role model that inspires women to want to effect positive change.

Such then is fitting that the theme of this year’s International Women’s Day (8 March) focused around the issue of Inspiring Change. Women from all backgrounds and nationalities came together to celebrate women’s social, political and economic achievements, while still focusing their attention on areas requiring action.

While the number of females entering the political field is still lacking, the number of current highprofile female leaders is encouraging and a constant reminder of what can be achieved. Non-Commonwealth examples include the Burmese prodemocracy leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, who has campaigned tirelessly for independence, and subsequently suffered for her beliefs, and Dilma Rousseff, the first female President of Brazil. During her inauguration speech, Rousseff made a special mention to help women, stating “I would like for fathers and mothers to look into their daughters’ eyes and tell them ‘Yes, women can.’” Additionally she promised her country that nine

out of her 37 Ministers would be women, a positive record for the country.

Looking back within the Commonwealth community, and the picture is indeed a healthy one. Rwanda, the Seychelles and South Africa top the leader board given their impressive percentages of female Parliamentarians. The Commonwealth is certainly not short of inspiring female Parliamentarians – both living and deceased. Deceased female leaders include Indira Gandhi (India); Margaret Thatcher (United Kingdom); and Janet Jagan (Guyana), while living inspiring examples include former Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard; Luisa Diogo (Mozambique) and the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, SC, MP, who leads this issue with her article on encouraging more women into leadership roles.

Having been awarded the Political Consultants Democracy Award alongside Jamaican Prime Minister, Hon. Portia Simpson-Miller in 2013, the Prime Minister is going from strength to strength in her work to empowering women. From hosting regional colloquiums in the Caribbean to co-hosting a side event in the United Nations General Assembly, her efforts to increase women’s participation in representative politics

shows no sign of slowing down.

Keeping in line with the theme of inspiring change, a Member from Bougainville, Hon. Elizabeth Burain, MP, provides an overview of the struggle to encourage women into Parliament in the Pacific. With one of the lowest rates in the world, the issue of reserved seats for women has been implemented into many Parliaments to try and encourage more women into political participation. However, despite its worthwhile intentions, she argues reserved seating may in fact be having the opposite effect, leaving female Members being regarded as second class citizens.

Despite women constituting half the world’s population, they are disproportionately under-represented in governance and decision-making according to the Parliamentary Advisor to the United Nations, Mr Charles Chauvel. He writes about the various projects and forums supported by his organization to not only help strengthen Parliaments but also to help them exceed the 30 per cent global target of women’s representation.

The Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers that took place in Wellington, New Zealand in January 2014, aimed to: • Maintain, foster, and encourage

impartiality and fairness on the part of Speakers and Presiding Officers of Parliaments; • Promote knowledge and understanding of parliamentary democracy in its various forms; and • Develop parliamentary institutions.

Both articles from Hon. Niki Rattle from the Cook Islands and Hon. Randolph Horton, JP, MP, from Bermuda, are based on their speeches given at the conference, providing an overview of the challenges and obstacles faced from their respective small Parliaments.

Ethics and transparency have become a core value of political life, and an integral role in the efforts to regain the public’s trust. Subsequently, some Parliaments and Legislatures have taken to implementing Codes of Conduct to assist Members in conducting themselves appropriately.

The President of the National Assembly of Quebec, Hon. Jacques Chagnon, MNA, writes about the framework used in his Parliament, and the reasons behind its emergence.

Hon. Dr Ken Coghill from Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, tackles the issue of Codes of Conduct in Parliament from another perspective, that is, understanding the various types of codes, its effectiveness, and ultimately their importance in helping to achieve

4 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Inside Issues pages.indd 4

21/03/2014 11:21:59

INSIDE ISSUES

Gone but not forgotten: Third Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi (left), and first female British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher (right)

the best government for the interests of the people.

A scandal involving parliamentary privilege and MPs from the United Kingdom in 2009 brought a subject, though ancient in origin, back to the forefront. After the Members in question used parliamentary privilege

to protect them from prosecution, a Green Paper was published on the subject, and a Joint Committee was set up to scrutinize the findings. A Member of the House of Lords, and former Whip in Margaret Thatcher’s Government, Lord Brabazon of Tara, chaired the Committee and

relays the findings of the report in his article.

The final contribution comes from another Lord from the U.K., Lord David Chidgey, writing on the issue of public health in Malawi.

He reports how money granted from international aid and development is

helping to improve the lives of many Malawians, particularly relating to the treatment of HIV and Tuberculosis.

Lord Chidgey also stresses on the importance of maintaining and strengthening the United Kingdom’s ties with Malawi for ongoing development.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 5

Inside Issues pages.indd 5

21/03/2014 11:23:03

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

STRENGTHENING THE WORK OF THE COMMONWEALTH WOMEN PARLIAMENTARIANS CAUCUSES of the CPA’s Pacific Region, and in particular encouraged by its programmes I hope that this issue of The Parliamentarian finds you fresh from your targeting young people. I was able to experience one first-hand, when I visited Commonwealth Day celebrations, and filled with enthusiasm for this year’s Commonwealth Youth New Zealand, whom I encouraged to establish links with theme, “Team Commonwealth”. At the time of writing, the CPA Headquarters the My Commonwealth group in Canada and to network more widely with other Secretariat is embracing this idea of unity, working closely with the U.K. Branch organizations for young people across the Commonwealth. to host a joint programme for young people representing Commonwealth Finally, I have recently returned from a visit to the Parliament of Gibraltar, diaspora here in the Houses of Parliament at Westminster. This will be the first where I was warmly received by both parliamentary colleagues and its Chief time we hold such a programme in collaboration with a branch, but it builds on the Minister and Deputy Chief Minister. I am grateful to my hosts there, and in success of several collaborations in previous years on the Commonwealth Youth particular for the opportunity to discuss in greater detail my Parliament, and I greatly look forward to expanding on its plans to create a formal role for a Chairperson of the CPA’s highlights in future issues.

Small Branches caucus.

“Team Commonwealth” seems already to have been Looking ahead, I realise with some sadness that I have a theme of my activities over the past months, during now entered my last six months as Chairperson of the which I have had the opportunity to engage with a number Executive Committee. It is some consolation for leaving of other Commonwealth organizations. This began in behind a position that holds so many rewarding opportunities November at the Commonwealth Heads of Government to work with colleagues across the Commonwealth that Meeting in Sri Lanka, which I have already touched upon my final six months will allow me to attend meetings and in a previous issue. It was rewarding to work with my regional seminars in so many countries – Malta, Cameroon Executive Committee colleagues Hon. Ronald Kiandee, and Canada to name but three – and I greatly look forward to MP, and Hon. Speaker Rebecca Kadaga, MP. As part welcoming the Executive Committee to London at the end of of the delegation, I also managed to meet with Foreign April for its mid-year meeting.

Affairs Ministers from a number of Commonwealth Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, I am also greatly heartened to see an area of the CPA’s countries. This was also the second consecutive MP activity that I see as most central to its overarching aim of CHOGM at which the CPA has been represented, and Chairperson of the CPA strengthening parliamentary democracy. This is the sterling establishes a strong precedent for continued – and Executive Committee work of the various regional Commonwealth Women perhaps more formal – involvement of the CPA and Parliamentarians’ caucuses, reaching new heights this the Commonwealth’s other Associated Organisations year. The Canadian regional meeting took place in January, the British Isles (AOs) at future meetings. I have represented the CPA in discussions with AOs and Mediterranean Region’s will be held in March (both linking into the UN’s which I hope will result in a more formal mechanism for AOs to engage with the Commission on the Status of Women) and the CWP’s preeminent Africa Region CHOGM event. will hold its annual conference in July. All regions have a number of innovative 2014 for me began with an opportunity to engage with another group of new programmes in the pipeline, for instance CWP Australia’s Forum for young Commonwealth colleagues at the Commonwealth Speakers and Presiding women seeking to enter politics. I am delighted to see the increase to the CWP’s Officers’ Conference in New Zealand in January, which I attended as an observer budget having so much impact already. in order to inform Branch Presidents directly of the work of the CPA, and some Finally, I should like to take the opportunity to encourage all Small Branches of the challenges we face in achieving a universally-acceptable – and legally to submit their thoughts on my proposal to create a position for an elected viable – status as an organization. My meetings were amicable and productive, representative on the Executive Committee. I believe it would ensure that and the conference was extremely well organized; I should like to extend my small Legislatures’ concerns are foremost in the CPA’s strategy and decisioncongratulations and thanks to the New Zealand Parliament for hosting it and making, and urge you to take this opportunity to drive the initiative. I very much welcoming me. look forward to my final six months in my role, which I believe will contain many Whilst in the region, I was delighted to be able to meet Pacific Island highlights for me, and would like to thank you all for your support to date and to Members – my first opportunity to engage with Parliamentarians from across come. the region in my capacity as Chairperson. I am highly impressed by the work 6 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

View from the Chair.indd 6

21/03/2014 11:25:04

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

A cross-section of the women Parliamentarians that attended the 59th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in Johannesburg

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 7

View from the Chair.indd 7

21/03/2014 11:25:15

VIEW FROM THE CWP

INSPIRING CHANGE

of the seats compared to 43 per cent males. Its Speaker of the House is also I want to take this opportunity to thank the CPA family and the CWP for the female. From the perspective of the 9th Parliament of Uganda, with the new overwhelming support that culminated in my election as the Chairperson of constituencies created in 2010, its 9th Parliament comprises the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians on 4 of 375 members with 129 (34.4 per cent) female MPs. September 2013. This was not only humbling, but a I wish to share with you a few highlights of what we as monumental honor for me to be entrusted with the mantle women Parliamentarians in Uganda have done to inspire of coordinating efforts tackling the global plight of women. change for the women in our country.

The theme for this year’s International Women’s Day is The cross-party women’s caucus in Parliament (CWP ‘Inspiring Change’ and we as the Commonwealth Women Uganda) has established itself as one of the most influential Parliamentarians are in total agreement with the relevance caucuses in Parliament, and a major player in advancing of this theme. Inspiring change is one of the main tenets women’s issues and interests. of the CWP. We discuss this through open dialogue on All female MPs automatically qualify for membership in ways of increasing female representation in Parliament, the caucus, and it is highly active. The caucus has gradually Cabinet and senior positions, and working towards the developed its structures, become more organized, and taken mainstreaming of gender considerations in all CPA active part in shaping debates and promoting legislation activities and programmes. We have made considerable addressing women’s concerns. There is a caucus secretariat progress in making women be appreciated as equally able Rt Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP and office with a full-time co-ordinator, which has been or even better, given the opportunity to play a leadership Chairperson of the invaluable in co-ordinating initiatives and advocacy, both inside role in any sphere.

Commonwealth Women Some countries have acknowledged the potential Parliamentarians and Speaker and outside the Parliament.

The cross-party nature of the caucus and its extensive contribution of women in national Parliaments and thereby of the Parliament of Uganda membership is critical in explaining its success. Despite the enabled more space through appropriate constitutional, introduction of multi-party politics prior to the 2006 elections, legislative and structural arrangements. The Table 1 party politics has so far not created great divides in terms of displays the countries that have won acclaim for their women’s issues. Female opposition members and ruling commitment to increasing the number of women in party members alike affirm their ability to collaborate across party lines and national Parliaments. unite behind women’s issues under the auspices of the caucus. In particular, I strongly believe that increased female representation is one of the the caucus’ ability to establish a strategic plan for its work has yielded results. key channels of pushing for and realizing positive change for the women’s Roundtables, each led by a chair, are tasked with the responsibility of moving movement. Taking stock of the trend of women in leadership is vital as we look to forward in one specific legislative area, with policy advocacy and networking high inspire change among aspiring and potential women leaders all over the world. on the agenda. This organisational initiative began with the 8th Parliament and I want to share with you the progress of the East African Community as a has allowed closer monitoring and assessment of its work and improved working region in relation to female representation. In Kenya, there are 65 women in relations with male legislators, some of whom are subscribing members of the the Lower House representing 18.6 per cent of the total seats. In the Upper caucus. In some instances our male colleagues have been key in the sponsoring House or the Senate, there are 18 Women out of a total number of 68 Members of crucial Legislation e.g. the Law on Female Genital Mutilation and the Law on representing 26.5 per cent. monitoring the trafficking of women and girls. Actors in civil society as well as In Tanzania, out of 350 seats, there are 126 women in Parliament the aid community have also been important in enabling pro-women legislative representing 36 per cent. The Speaker of the National Assembly is also female. victories.

In the Parliament of Rwanda, there are 10 female senators compared to 16 The plight and participation of rural women is equally intriguing since many males, and the vice president of the Senate is also female. In the lower chamber, are not able to personally articulate their own issues. One of the hindrances to the there are currently more female deputies than men as they occupy 64 per cent 8 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

View from the CWP.indd 8

21/03/2014 11:36:42

VIEW FROM THE CWP

Table 1

Delegates attending the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Meeting in Johannesburg, South Africa

participation of rural women in political activities is the work-burden. We need to create the conditions that will liberate rural women from manual labour, such as reducing the distance in order to get water. We need to get them equipped with energy saving stoves that will facilitate faster cooking and therefore free her time to attend to political issues for which her input is required.

It is my hope that 2014 showers us with blessings for women across the world. I hope my message together with the other articles centered on the same theme in this Issue of The Parliamentarian can ‘inspire Change’ among women globally.

Aluta Continua!

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 9

View from the CWP.indd 9

21/03/2014 11:36:51

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

SOUTH AFRICA – BEYOND NELSON MANDELA The citizens of South Africa and the people of the rest of the world are now poised to reflect on the legacy of the legendary Nelson Mandela, who passed in December last year. We in the Commonwealth parliamentary community had earlier on followed the state of his health, as the country was to host our 59th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in September. Before and during the conference, I was personally worried that perhaps the conference proceedings would be cancelled, if the beloved leader were to die at the time. God, however, decided to give the delegates the best opportunity to express their love and admiration of the African icon, when he was still alive, to the wonderful success of the conference. The great African and world leader passed on in December 2013, sending tremors through the global community.

I was privileged to represent the CPA at his funeral

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

ceremonies, in what turned out to be another learning experience of the rewards of leadership through courage, patriotism, and reconciliation. As my wife and I witnessed the various events, a cross-section of feelings and expressions emerged in the South African society. From sorrow and joy, to hope and despair; above all, there was hope for unity and progress.

We joined the Speaker of the Gauteng Legislative Assembly, Hon. Lindiwe Maseko-Kasolo, MPL, and fellow Members to pay our last respects to the late ‘Madiba’ in Pretoria. Our feelings of deprivation changed however when we observed the number of ordinary South Africans, young and old, braving their way through police barriers to access the last opportunity to view his body. It was an expression of the immense popularity Mandela enjoyed as a leader who worked selflessly with his colleagues of the African National Congress (ANC) to overcome the Apartheid system in South

The Secretary-General’s The Director of Programmes, Ms Meenakshi Dhar (right) presenting a gift to the Speaker of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, Mr Asad Qaiser.

10 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

View from the SG.indd 10

21/03/2014 11:40:02

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

Africa and forge reconciliation. In his political practice, we find the true sense of tolerance, respect and understanding worth emulating.

I wish to join Commonwealth Parliamentarians in saluting the South African Government, the South African Political Parties, and the people of South Africa for uniting to put on a wonderful and fitting State funeral ceremony for a statesman and icon of African democracy.

I was touched not only by the huge gathering of world leaders who turned up to pay tribute to the beloved son of Africa, but also by the State and traditional pomp that showed the extent of Mandela’s deep roots in his culture and his people.

I was also touched by the statements made by several Heads of State. The President of Tanzania, H.E Jakaya Kikwete, MP, mentioned an event during the struggle that, while travelling, Mandela had left his boots behind at the House of a former Tanzanian Minister, Nsilo Swai, in Moshi, Tanzania. The President

accounted how Tanzania, under Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, had contributed to the liberation and anti-apartheid struggle in Southern African in the 1960s, 1970s,

Mourners leaving the viewing of Nelson Mandela’s body in December 2013. and 1980s, albeit of its state of poor economic development.

The life and death of Nelson Mandela has now left behind in South Africa and

Commonwealth gallery Parliamentary officials from Canada, India and Nigeria pictured with the CPA Secretary-General (seated centre) and members of the CPA Secretariat staff in London.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 11

View from the SG.indd 11

21/03/2014 11:40:12

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

elsewhere opportunity to reflect and implement the best values he professed.

South Africans still face challenges in breaking away from apartheid attitudes and social structures. To succeed in this process, the education system should be fully utilized. Also, political leaders should utilize the constitution to weed out the remaining social structures that discriminate and divide citizens. I would also suggest religious leaders congregating together to work against any weeding out apartheid culture among their congregations.

I feel that the leaders of the post-Mandela South Africa need to practically address what the “Father of South Africa” envisaged when he preached about a “Rainbow Nation” through reconciliation. The process needs to be established for fair economic sharing. Let South Africans address the land distribution among its citizens equally and with urgency. As in many other parts of the world, the people,

particularly the youth, are impatient and in a hurry to realize a fair economic sharing system, be it from industrial, mining, transportation or other economic activity. As I have said before in my views, democratic systems will not be sustained by unfair economic systems. Therefore, the South African body politic has currently a good opportunity to work on the best way forward beyond Nelson Mandela, properly utilizing the results of the forthcoming general elections.

I wish to emphasize, as we enter 2014 and work toward a better and relevant Commonwealth, that we should utilize the wonderful example of Nelson Mandela in working to forge a better society. If Mandela lived longer, I am sure he would have fought the remaining racial arrogance and discrimination – in sports and other social contexts. I am sure he would have been shocked by the recent revelations in the Stephen Lawrence case in the United Kingdom.

The Secretary-General’s

The Speaker of the House of Assembly of Bermuda, Hon. Randolph Horton, MP, (left) speaking with the CPA Assistant Director of Programmes, Ms Arlene Bussette (right).

The High Commissioner of Trinidad and Tobago, H.E Garvin Nicholas (left) speaking with Ms Meenakshi Dhar during Commonwealth Day.

The group of young participants that took part in the 2014 CPA Commonwealth Day programme in London.

12 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

View from the SG.indd 12

21/03/2014 11:40:25

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

I am also sure that if Mandela lived longer, he would have urged our Commonwealth citizens to go beyond just Commonwealth Day, Commonwealth Games and Commonwealth Youth Parliaments, etc. He would have gone further to demand for a true Commonwealth position towards a global economic reform, which is equitable and fair.

It is my view that the modern Commonwealth, particularly through

the Commonwealth Charter, has a lot to borrow from the practice of Nelson Mandela. To him and us, true reconciliation does not allow further practice of any sort of discrimination.

Mandela’s reconciliation philosophy leaves no chance for former colonial masters to behave arrogantly and with disregard to fellow Commonwealth citizens; it simply means building respectful partnerships between individuals and countries.

I expect that the real Commonwealth Values – the Mandela model – will be used to truly redress and repair the effects of the apartheid regime in South Africa.

This means tackling extreme poverty, hunger, education and health services, housing and basic sanitation.

The Mandela model would demand for future anti-conflict strategies, such as, where there is land, gold, oil, or other riches, for

ordinary citizens to benefit too. It is my clear conviction that this is one area where the modern Commonwealth should focus its contribution in the next decade and beyond, with a full reflection of what Nelson Mandela tirelessly worked for in his life of almost a century.

It is my greatest hope and that the future of South Africa will closely continue to rely on the ideals of its legendary former leader.

Commonwealth gallery

Mr Joe Preston, MP, (right) and Senator Raynell Andreychuk (left) from Canada, visiting CPA HQ in March.

The delegation of parliamentary staff from North-West Province, South Africa.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 13

View from the SG.indd 13

21/03/2014 11:40:38

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP

WOMEN’S TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP: WORKING TOWARDS GENUINE DEMOCRACY AND SOCIAL PROGRESS A joint winner of the Political Consultants Democracy Award 2013 alongside Prime Minister of Jamaica, Hon. Portia Simpson-Miller, MP, the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago is continuing her efforts, in achieving the objective of getting more women into leadership roles to help drive democratic and social progress.

Hon. Kamla PersadBissessar, SC, MP

Mrs Persad-Bissessar is the Prime Minister of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. She leads the United National Congress and the People’s Partnership coalition.

A lawyer, she was a Senator in 1994 before entering the House of Representatives in 1995. She has held several senior political posts, usually as the first Trinidadian woman to do so.

female, it is easy to appreciate the wisdom of the late former leader of the People’s Republic of China, Mao Zedong, who once said “women hold up half the sky”.

With such historical wisdom, and the reality of today, the need to inspire change for women in leadership as drivers of democratic and social progress is not only appropriate, but also imperative.

Hon. Kamla Persasd-Bissessar, MP I welcome this opportunity to connect with my distinguished Commonwealth parliamentary colleagues, through this forum, especially on the theme “Inspiring Change”, with the International Women’s Day 2014 celebrations.

Inspiring change among women, Caribbean women in particular, has been one of my guiding priorities since assuming the leadership of my country, Trinidad and Tobago, in 2010.

On the basis of statistics alone, in a world population of over 7 billion people, 49 per cent of which is

Factors mitigating against women as leaders As women leaders, as Parliamentarians and as social activists, we have a clear understanding of the factors which have in the past sustained a disparate balance of political power: • Laws and institutions do not adequately ensure women’s equity; • Financial resources are not adequate to meet the requirements to advance change; • The politics of politics which make it difficult for young women to enter and rise in political structures; • The need for sustained change

and commitment to new politics which truly reflects the ideals of liberty and social justice; • The multiple roles of women in the workplace, the family and the community and finding the right balance; • The need for comprehensive rethinking of gender roles in society; • The need to insist on inclusion and equality, because public business is women’s business; and • The need for cultural empowerment for women, to change the prevailing thinking from “how do we bring change” to “I can be a change leader”.

Caribbean Regional Women’s Colloquium These were among the top issues addressed at a forum I hosted in June 2011 in Port of Spain, Trinidad - the Caribbean Regional Women’s Colloquium on Women Leaders as Agents of Change. This forum was hosted in collaboration with the Commonwealth Secretariat, the Caribbean Institute of Women in Leadership (CIWiL), the Organization

14 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Persad-Bissessar.indd 14

21/03/2014 11:45:54

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP

of American States (OAS), UN Women and the Network of NGOs for the Advancement of Women.

Women political leaders, Parliamentarians and civil society representatives came together to share their experiences and challenges as women leaders; raise awareness of the gender equality commitments made in key international agreements and agree on priority goals and strategies for advancing women’s empowerment

and gender equality in the political, public and private sectors in the Caribbean.

A number of key strategic goals emerged from this forum targeted to increase the numbers of women in political leadership acting as change agents, including: • Increased women’s representation in Cabinet, Parliament and local Government to a minimum of 30 per cent, and where this has already

been achieved, strive for parity or 50 per cent; • A review of the criteria and processes for appointments to decisionmaking bodies in the public and private sectors to facilitate increased women’s representation; • Gender-sensitive leadership training programmes for men and women, (including young people) who are preparing for or are in decision-making positions in the public and private sectors;

Above: The Prime Minister speaking at the opening of the 25th Intersessional Meeting of the Heads of Caricom.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 15

Persad-Bissessar.indd 15

21/03/2014 11:46:04

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP

Speaking at the opening of the Trinidad and Tobago Embassy in Beijing.

• The promotion of shared family responsibilities between women and men to increase women’s participation in public life; • Ensuring gender-responsive national budgets and development plans; and • Undertaking economic diversification towards service sectors such as creative/technological industries, ensuring women’s equal participation.

In Trinidad and Tobago and the wider Caribbean, we still have a long way to go to achieve these goals, and this Regional Colloquium provides us with a strong consensus on the way

forward and presented a blueprint for action for women in the Region.

A New Ministry Prior to the hosting of the Colloquium, during a major re-alignment of my Cabinet, I introduced a new Ministry of Gender, Youth and Child Development partly charged with reviewing our country’s draft Gender Policy and the development of guidelines for Gender Responsive Budgeting (GRB).

The Ministry of Gender, Youth and Child Development facilitates ongoing interactive training sessions on gender responsive budgeting.

Over 30 senior officials in Central and Local Government, and 75 policymakers, have already benefited from these events, emerging with a commitment to implement strategies and enhance current institutions.

International intervention Achieving the objective of more women in leadership as drivers of democratic and social progress has also involved advocacy beyond borders.

Following the Regional Colloquium, I also co-hosted a high-level side event in the margins of the United Nations

General Assembly 66th Session in September 2011, to formulate and structure implementation strategies to effectively increase women’s participation in representative politics.

The side event was co-hosted by other women leaders including the President of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff; the former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham-Clinton; Administrator of the UNDP Helen Clark, and the UN Deputy Secretary General AshaRose Migiro.

A key outcome of the side event was the signing by all co-sponsors of a joint declaration with concrete recommendations on

16 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Persad-Bissessar.indd 16

21/03/2014 11:46:15

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP ways to advance women’s political participation. From this we made a tough call for increasing women’s political participation and decisionmaking across the world.

As women leaders we:

of the world remain significantly marginalized from decision-making, often as a result of discriminatory laws, practices, and attitudes, and due to poverty disproportionately affecting women.

• Re-affirmed the human rights of women to take part in the governments of their countries, directly or through freely chosen representatives, on an equal basis with men, and that all States should take positive steps to respect and promote women’s equal right to participate in all areas of political life; • Stressed the critical importance of women’s political participation in all contexts, including in times of peace, conflict and in all stages of political transition; • Re-affirmed our commitment to the equal rights and inherent human dignity of women enshrined in the United Nations Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other international human rights instruments; • Called upon all States to ratify and fulfill their obligations under the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and to fully implement Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) on women and peace and security and other relevant UN resolutions; and • Called upon all States, including those emerging from conflict or undergoing political transitions, to eliminate all discriminatory barriers faced by women, particularly marginalized women, and we encouraged all States to take proactive measures to address the factors preventing women from participating in politics, such as violence, poverty, lack of access to quality education and health care, the double burden of paid and unpaid work, and to actively promote women’s political participation, including through affirmative measures.

Further perspectives from Trinidad and Tobago In this regard I continue to make every effort to ensure that in Trinidad and Tobago our girls and boys are given equal opportunities from the outset placing particular focus on education.

Intense efforts are underway to expand and deliver universal access to pre-school education, even as Trinidad & Tobago now has universal primary education as well as universal secondary education. Successful efforts are also ongoing to increase the amount of persons accessing tertiary education.

I must highlight that while our girls and young women are surpassing their male counterparts academically at all levels, this is still not yet translating into a stronger presence into the political arena.

I believe that in Trinidad and Tobago that “crisis of confidence,” noted before, may be at play.

Questioning of self, perhaps a reluctance to be in the glare of public scrutiny and that all too present “burden of care” remain major disincentives to taking that step into politics.

This reluctance was particularly evident when I assumed office.

Several women were approached but were reluctant to join State and Statutory Boards, despite their clear capabilities and skills in specific areas.

I know only too well that for a woman a career in politics is not an easy choice to make.

I entered the political arena in 1987, some 27 years ago, as an Alderman in the local government system and it has been a long, often grueling journey but one which has now afforded me the privilege to serve my country as Prime Minister.

With that background and experience, in our recent consultations on local government reform, we asked our citizens to

Even as we stood united in defense and support of women worldwide, we acknowledged that to a large extent discrimination continues and women in many parts

consider, among other reforms, the election (or appointment) of three special representatives in each local region – namely male and female youth representatives and a representative for women and children.

Such an initiative is directly linked to our aim of increasing women’s political participation.

We want to start to get our women-especially young womeninvolved from the community level, so they may gain a better understanding of democratic processes, while honing their skills and leadership qualities, in preparation for higher leadership roles.

Save for one of 14 Municipalities, the 2013 Local Government Elections saw women achieve just about the 30 per cent representation suggested by the Regional Colloquium.

My government will therefore continue to support the mentorship and leadership programmes offered by local and regional NGOs and institutions, working to advance the conversation on women in leadership and empower potential women leaders with the tools for success.

I strongly affirm that the voices of our women must be heard to ensure that our policies and programmes are meeting the needs of all our citizens.

Even as I urge our women and girls to step out of their comfort zones to embrace greater leadership roles, I also understand that human need for appreciation of effort and indeed the universal principle of expressing gratitude.

To this end, in 2011, I introduced another category to our country’s National Awards. The Medal for the Development of Women became another accolade in our Nation’s list of honours to deserving citizens.

Since the inception of this new award, eight respected women have been honoured with the Medal for the Development of Women, in areas such as law, higher education, religion and community service.

I have also appointed two of these women, well-known women’s rights activists Ms Hazel Brown

and Ms Brenda Gopeesingh, to serve as special envoys to look at women’s and children’s issues in the Commonwealth Caribbean.

Without a doubt it is absolutely necessary for more women to take up the challenge of becoming leaders – inspired, transformational leaders who value equality, equity, and social justice.

By transformational leader I refer to those “women with a vision of social justice, individually and collectively transforming themselves to use their power, resources and skills in nonoppressive, inclusive structures and processes to mobilize others around a shared agenda of social, cultural, economic and political transformation for equality and the realization of human rights for all”.

Conclusion In Trinidad and Tobago, I have sought to challenge our women and girls to take on the responsibility of becoming transformational leaders in their communities, in the workplace, and ultimately at the national level.

I believe that such leadership would have an exponentially positive effect on the development of our young nation and our region.

Further motivated by the honour of the International Association of Political Consultants Democracy Award 2013, which I shared with fellow CARICOM Head of Government, Mrs Portia SimpsonMiller, Prime Minister of Jamaica, I strongly believe that we are doing something right – not just in the Trinidad and Tobago but in the region.

Despite the challenges which we face, it is essential that women around the world continue to emerge as leaders to contribute to the eradication of poverty, hunger and disease; the promotion of sustainable development; the full realization of human rights and the achievement and maintenance of international peace and security.

We must grasp the reins of power with confidence, trusting in our ability to succeed and to create a better world for our women and girls as well as our boys and men.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 17

Persad-Bissessar.indd 17

21/03/2014 11:46:24

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN IN THE PACIFIC

RESERVED SEATS FOR WOMEN: ENCOURAGING FEMALE POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN THE PACIFIC Women’s political representation in the Pacific remains an ongoing issue for Parliaments in the Region. While some would argue that the issue of reserved seats for women has helped to increase female political participation, the Chair of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Pacific Region Steering Committee suggests it could in fact be having the opposite effect, leaving many women to be regarded as second class citizens.

Hon Elizabeth Burain, MP

Ms Burain was elected in 2010 to one of Bougainville’s three reserved women’s seats, brought in under the constitution in 2004.

She is the current Chair of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, Pacific Region Steering Committee.

Hon. Elizabeth Burain, MP

International Women’s Day (8 March) provides an important opportunity for all men and women Parliamentarians to reflect on how much has been achieved to increase women’s political participation and the significant work ahead. I believe that it is incumbent upon those who have achieved leadership roles to provide support, mentorship and inspiration to those young women who are emerging leaders in our communities.

Coming together as the Pacific Region Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians (CWP) provides a significant platform to share experiences and to discuss how we

have responded to challenges. I am extremely proud to be the current Chair of the CWP Pacific Region Steering Group and to have the company of many talented women MPs in the CWP.

levels, is crucial to their democratic development and sustainability.

Systemic, institutional and cultural barriers inhibiting participation must be removed if gender equality in the Pacific region is to be achieved.”

Women’s political participation in the Pacific region Female parliamentary participation rates within the Pacific are amongst the lowest in the world (sitting around four to five per cent). While women’s representation within the Pacific region fluctuates, this is well behind the global average figure of around 20 per cent, and the commonly accepted target of 30 per cent. It is clear that we must make progress. The view of the Pacific Women’s Parliamentary Partnerships Submission to the Pacific Plan Review 2013 was spot on by stating that:

The Pacific region faces a number of challenges: a geographically vast and isolated area, both from each other and from the rest of the world.

Of the member Parliaments, only New Zealand is not a developing country. Only Papua New Guinea and New Zealand have populations over one million, some have less than 100,000, some less than 20,000.

One of the goals of the Pacific region is to lobby for the creation of a CWP group in every Parliament, even in those with no women Members of Parliament. The belief is that if the group exists in theory, even though not in reality, its presence will serve to normalise the representation of women and the expectation that women will and should be members.

Another key part of this belief is that meaningful change cannot occur without the backing and recognition of male Parliamentarians.

“There has been little positive change in women’s political representation in the Pacific region in the past decade. Increasing women’s participation in democratic processes, at both central and local government

18 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Burain.indd 18

21/03/2014 11:50:39

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN IN THE PACIFIC

the first session of the CWP in Johannesburg in 2013, a holistic approach is needed for change to accelerate. Attitudes towards women and girls must change in the home – boys and men need to be educated about women’s rights. If we do not, we risk depriving our Parliaments – and countries – of the skills and talents of our women.

The benefits of gender diversity are widely recognized to lead to better performance, and of particular benefit to the Parliament, better decisionmaking, financial accountability and risk-management. It is well accepted that achieving a critical mass of women MPs means that there will be greater prioritization of women’s issues on the political agenda and in policy development. From my own experience in Bougainville, women also play a pivotal role in peace processes and political stability.

As Chair of the CWP Pacific Region Steering Group I support the view that promoting and increasing women’s political participation will not be achieved without clear strategies and priorities or without a coordinated action across the region. Factors which are critical to our success in increasing women’s participation include: • Strong networks to support women who are currently in decisionmaking positions and seeking parliamentary election; and • Ensuring women in the Pacific are aware of how they can access support, mentoring and encouragement.

The entrance to the Parliament building of Papua New Guinea.

The barriers to women entering leadership positions are not unique

to the political sphere; we experience them in the domestic and private

business spheres as well. As I impressed upon participants during

I am heartened by the way our mission to increase women’s engagement and participation in politics has brought women from the Pacific and Australian CPA Regions together. I am encouraged by the continued cooperation and synchronicity in our work programmes to ensure effective capacity building and gender-sensitive Parliaments.

I was very pleased to attend the CPA and New Zealand Branchhosted Gender and Democracy Seminar for the Pacific Region in The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 19

Burain.indd 19

21/03/2014 11:50:51

© Josh Estey/CARE

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN IN THE PACIFIC

March of 2011. It was attended by women Parliamentarians from the Pacific regions, as well as the former Chair of the CWP Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA, and Deputy Chair, Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, MP. It was in Wellington, that the CWP Pacific Region Steering Committee was formed, with myself as Chair and Tangariki Reete, of Kiribati, as the Deputy Chair. Our recommendations included that countries with poor representation of women MPs need to review their electoral system and seriously consider temporary special measure of reserved seats.

Likewise, the inaugural meeting of the Pacific Women’s Parliamentary Partnerships (PWPP) project, assisted by AusAid, in February 2013 has provided a valuable space for debating issues and inspiring action.

The PWPP and CWP Australia Region initiatives for young women are extremely exciting, such as the w.comm forum which aims to connect young women with politics and the ideals of the Commonwealth.

Increasing women in politics The member branches of the

Increasing women’s engagement and participation in the Pacific region remains an ongoing struggle: Left: women in Papua New Guinea; Right: The Parliament of the Solomon Islands, which committed to a policy of ten reserved seats for women in 2012.

CPA acknowledge the benefits of increasing women in politics – so how do we actually get there? Put simply, many of us have not made enough progress in ensuring gender-sensitive Parliaments. Throughout discussions at the various fora, two major themes in women’s participation as Parliamentarians and parliamentary candidates in the Pacific emerge: first, the active encouragement of women to stand as candidates, and second, reserved seats for women.

Special workshops Women’s access to leadership positions is vital if Pacific women are to participate as equals in the democratic development of their countries. A number of elections have been preceded by special workshops for potential women candidates.

These have aimed to encourage and assist the women in developing the relevant skills and knowledge to conduct successful election campaigns and to be effective members of parliament.

For example, in Bougainville prior to the 2010 election, the Centre for Democratic Institutions conducted

a three-day training workshop for potential women candidates.

Seventeen women contested the three regional seats reserved for women. Five women stood in local constituencies; none had done so in 2005. Honourable Joan Jerome, Hon. Rose Pihei and I were elected from the reserved seats. Ms Pihei initially held the position of Minister for Community Development and currently holds the portfolio of Minister for Culture and Tourism.

Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu are among those who have had similar workshops. I have no doubt that these workshops are of benefit to women considering entering into public office.

Reserved seats: experiences from around the Pacific There is robust debate around the issue of reserved seats in the Pacific Region. Reserved seats are seen by some as a way to help women overcome the cultural barriers they face in attempting to win election to Parliament. Some see reserve seats as a mechanism by which to mitigate unconscious biases that result in no

women standing or being elected at all. This has certainly been our experience in Bougainville.

However, others raise concerns that women will find themselves restricted to reserved seats only, or that women elected to reserved seats may be regarded as second class MPs. Some Pacific women MPs support reserved seats, while others believe they are unnecessary and that women have shown they can compete with men.

Some question its democratic principle, for example with respect to the Parliament of Kiribati – Maneaba ni Maungatabu. President Tong said in 2012 that his government would encourage greater participation by women, which would happen of its own accord as women took on leadership roles in the community.

He wondered, then, whether it would be democratic to put as a matter of law that women must have reserved seats.

In Papua New Guinea, the passage of the Equality and Participation Bill in 2011 amended the constitution to enable the creation of 22 reserved seats for women,

20 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Burain.indd 20

21/03/2014 11:51:03

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN IN THE PACIFIC

but in 2012 the Bill to determine the seats’ boundaries failed to pass.

Consequently there were no reserved seats in the 2012 election. Since the election all three women MPs have stated their opposition to the Bill, although PNG Member Delilah Gore would like to see four reserved seats, one for each region. The MPs said they had proven that politics is no longer a man’s domain and that women should win votes on their own accord to show that they are capable.

I understand that Papua New Guinea’s Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates Commission completed its review of the Organic Law on Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates in April 2013 and presented it to Cabinet. Among the Commission’s proposals was a requirement that ten per cent of a party’s candidates must be women.

The proposal was aimed at allowing gender equality in the decisionmaking process.

In the Solomon Islands, the Prime Minister announced in 2012 that the government was committed to its policy of ten reserved seats for women, but would take a

developmental rather than rightsbased approach. He said that the idea of reserved seats must be in the context of the constitution, and be compatible with its spirit in terms of promoting equality for all citizens.

A Political Parties Integrity Bill was introduced in July 2013 with the aim of developing a strong, viable and transparent political party system to ensure stable government in the Solomon Islands. Included in its provisions was a requirement that, subject to demand by women for places, at least ten per cent of a party’s candidates must be women.

Parties could claim SBD$10,000 to cover the campaign costs of each woman elected as an MP, and an administration fund of SBD$20,000 would be payable annually to parties for each of their MPs. The Bill was highly controversial, for reasons other than the provisions relating to women, and was eventually withdrawn in October for further consultation.

The select committee to which the Bill was referred thought that the issue of women in politics should be addressed in its own separate piece of legislation. The suggestion was

made to reserve a certain number of seats for women. The committee acknowledged and supported the idea of bringing women into the Solomon Islands’ Parliament, but said that the political will and motivation of all fellow male politicians was required to find an amicable solution to the on-going debate on the issue.

Honorable Vika Lusibaea, elected in 2012 and the second women in Solomon Islands political history to enter the National Parliament, has urged women to prepare early for the 2014 election and is confident that it is possible for women to win without having to request reserved seats.

In Samoa, women are now guaranteed a minimum of five seats in the Parliament from the next general election, after the constitution was amended in June 2013. If fewer than five of the 49 members elected are women, additional seats will be added to make up a total of five women. The additional seats will be allocated to the losing women candidates who gained the highest percentage of votes.

The Bill had been controversial.

Supporters said it would help knock down the barriers to women entering Parliament and open up opportunities for them, while opponents thought that women in the reserved seats would be stigmatized as “gap fillers”, not elected on their own merits.

Both Samoan women MPs, Hon. Fiame Naomi Mataafa, MP, and Hon. Gatoloaifa’na Amataga Alesana Gidlow, MP, supported the Bill. I am sure you will, like me, watch this process with interest.

The three reserved women’s seats in our Parliament in Bougainville made a huge impact and helped change attitudes – it was increasingly recognized that women could and should take on public roles. We, the three women MPs, aim to have women contesting all of the 33 open seats in the next election in 2015. I look forward to updating the CPA of our success!

into developing print and digital resources, in Pacific Island languages.

We will undertake activities to raise awareness of the CWP and opportunities for women to participate in political life.

The Pacific Region wants to not only ensure current Members are well-connected, but also to encourage future Pacific women Parliamentarians.

In closing, on International Women’s Day it is my hope that all men and women Parliamentarians take the opportunity to pause, reflect and commit to the work ahead.

Endnotes 1. Pacific Women’s Parliamentary Partnerships submission to the Pacific Plan Review 2013, para 5.

2. OECD (2012) Putting All Our Minds to Work: harnessing the gender dividend.

3. Governance and Leadership in the Pacific: Options to Increase Female Participation, Carly Stephan, The Foundation for Development Cooperation Briefing Note No.11 – July 2010.

4. Pacific Women’s Parliamentary Partnerships Project: Pacific Women Shaping Pacific Development Initiative.

5. PNG, Islands Business, 11 April 2013 http://www.islandsbusiness.com/news/papuanew-guinea/845/news-rules-for-political-parties-less-than-five-me/; Parties required to have women, The National, 26 June 2013 http:// www.thenational.com.pg/?q=node/51937 6. Political Parties Integrity Bill 2013, 25 July 2013 http://www.parliament.gov.sb/files/ committees/bills&legislationcommittee/2013/ Political%20Parties%20Integrity%20Bill%20 2013.pdf; Bills and Legislation Committee, Report on the Political Parties Integrity Bill 2013, Sept. 2013 http://www.parliament.gov.sb/files/ committees/bills&legislationcommittee/2013/ Report%20on%20the%20Political%20 Parties%20Intergrity%20Bill%202013.pdf; Party bill sets for Solomon Islands parliament: PM Lilo, Islands Business, 18 July 2013 http:// www.islandsbusiness.com/news/solomon-islands/1991/party-bill-sets-for-solomon-islandsparliament-pm-/; Lilo backs down, Solomon Star, 4 Oct. 2013 http://www.solomonstarnews. com/news/national/19043-lilo-backs-down

Looking forward to 2014 So what is next for the CWP Pacific Region? I am very excited that this year the region will be looking

7.

Constitution Amendment Act 2013, 25

June 2013 http://www.parliament.gov.ws/images/Constitution_Amendment_Act_2013_-_ Eng.pdf

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 21

Burain.indd 21

21/03/2014 11:51:31

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION

PROMOTING WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION AND EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION IN PARLIAMENT Gender equality in politics is still a distant reality across the globe, with only one-third of Commonwealth countries exceeding the global target of 30 per cent women’s representation in Parliament. Organizations like the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is fighting to change this, writes the UNDP’s Parliamentary Advisor, through its support of various projects and forums to help strengthen Parliaments and encourage female engagement and participation at the decision-making level.

Mr Charles Chauvel

Mr Chauvel is the Parliamentary Development Advisor to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Prior to his current role, he was Shadow Attorney-General, and Shadow Minister for Justice, Courts and Corrections in the New Zealand Parliament.

Mr Chauvel is the only person of Pacific Island ancestry to have served on the front bench of any major NZ political party.

Special acknowledgement goes to Ms Marilyn Cham, Parliamentary Development Consultant, UNDP, for assisting in researching this article.

Why is the UN Development Programme interested in encouraging more women to be active in politics, and then trying to ensure that they can participate effectively in public life? Simply this: the evidence1 shows that sustainable human development – whether reducing child and maternal mortality; improving access to education for women and girls; combating HIV, TB, malaria and other diseases; or improving the environment – works much better in societies that are more equal.

Despite constituting half of the world’s population, women continue to be disproportionately underrepresented in governance and at all levels of decision-making. Last year, a milestone2 was reached in women’s participation in Parliaments, with one in five MPs in the world now being female. However gender equality in politics is still a distant reality in most countries. Progress has been slow toward achieving even the minimum target of 30 per cent representation of women in national Parliaments, regarded as a “critical mass”3 level of representation. As of 1 December

Mr Charles Chauvel

2013, the worldwide average was only 21.4 per cent.4 UNDP is currently working to strengthen Parliaments in 22 of the 53 members of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association is an important partner in this work, including in efforts to increase women’s political participation. The Harare Commonwealth Declaration of 19915 reaffirmed the commitment of Commonwealth countries to gender equality. The Commonwealth Plan of Action for Gender Equality 2005-20156 draws on international commitments for the realization of

women’s rights. The Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians association7 does significant work on strategies to increase women’s participation in Parliament and mainstream gender considerations in all CPA activities and programmes.

In 2013, eleven Commonwealth member countries were in the top 40 countries for mainstreaming women into Parliament: Guyana, Grenada, Lesotho, Mozambique, New Zealand, Rwanda, Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago and Uganda.8 Member nations such as Rwanda, with 64 per cent representation of women in Parliament, are showing real global leadership in this field,9 closely followed by Seychelles with 43 per cent and South Africa with 42 per cent.10 However, it is still the case that only one-third of Commonwealth countries have exceeded the global target of 30 per cent women’s representation in Parliaments11 envisioned in the 1995 Beijing Declaration,12 representing a global commitment to achieving equality, development and peace for women worldwide. A lack of gender balance

22 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Chauvel.indd 22

21/03/2014 12:03:04

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION

still persists, with continued weakness in Pacific Island member countries where women represent an average of only four per cent of all elected representatives, and only 10 per cent in the West Africa region.13 Late last year, over 300 women MPs from around the world – including many from the Commonwealth - met at the European Parliament in Brussels for the Women in Parliaments Global Forum Summit.14 Along with former MEP Ms Begona Lasagabaster15 – now head of governance at UN Women – I convened a panel on women’s parliamentary representation entitled “Beyond the Numbers”. The promoter of New Zealand’s marriage equality law, Ms Louisa Wall,16 was one of the three women MP panelists. The purpose of the session was to promote a discussion on the barriers that exist to women’s political participation, and mechanisms that women MPs - and their male allies - have used to overcome them.

The discussion in Brussels reflected on a number of factors

contributing to why women are still politically under-represented, and why many still face obstacles in entering and advancing in public life. Economic dependence; a lack of access to economic resources and employment; abuse of religious and traditional practices; patriarchal societal structures; prejudice and cultural stereotypes; limited educational opportunities; a lack of adequate funds and resources to run as candidates; violence in politics; and discriminatory institutional, political, legislative and electoral frameworks that have discouraged and disadvantaged women – all of these came up in the experience-sharing part of the panel discussion.

The forum also discussed some of the constitutional and parliamentary mechanisms that have helped in a range of countries to address these barriers. Most fundamentally, political rights and civil liberties for women embodied in national constitutional documents establish the broadest context for political gender equality.

This is especially true of voting rights, the right to hold public office, and

the right to exercise public functions, removing any residual forms of sex discrimination or limits to equal citizenship. Gender equality legislation can provide an important basis for promoting women’s political rights. It should embrace election, campaign finance, and political party laws.

Elected bodies should also review their internal procedures to ensure the inclusion of gender-sensitive policies, rules and code of conduct, structures and working methods and conditions, including consideration of parliamentary sitting hours and the provision of childcare and maternal facilities within parliaments.

Parliaments can also ensure that new women members have equal access to capacity development through induction programmes and training on parliamentary rules, legislative drafting skills, and debating procedures. Parliaments can and should harmonize national laws in accordance with international standards promoting and advancing gender equality, including in the area of politics, for example the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination

Left: A Rwandan female MP speaking to people in her constituency. The country is setting an encouraging example with 64 per cent of its Parliament consisting of women.

Above: The statue of a woman holding a child’s hand outside the Parliament building in Kigali. against Women.17 Gender equality commissions and women’s crossparty caucuses in Parliament have often helped to promote gender equality. Not only can they promote public policy that effectively responds to women’s demands and interests, but they can also have a positive effect on the consolidation and progress of women’s political leadership. Finally, temporary special measures - such as quotas – have been instrumental in promoting women’s political participation.

The UN system is committed to making gender equality a reality in democratic processes.

Right now, 39 of UNDP’s 68 parliamentary strengthening projects specifically promote women’s empowerment. These include candidate training, induction and mentoring programmes; and awareness campaigns to counter gender stereotyping of candidates, and are being implemented on

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 23

Chauvel.indd 23

21/03/2014 12:03:14

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION

every continent. Some examples of recent successes and best practices worldwide include: Algeria: UNDP sponsored a parliamentary forum on effective and sustainable participation of women in elected assemblies in December 2013, which facilitated the launch of an Algerian action plan for women MPs. Enabling mechanisms and legal frameworks were identified to promote a meaningful and sustainable participation of women in decision-making processes. A network of women Parliamentarians in the Arab region was also consolidated and empowered to promote such vision at regional and national levels.

Argentina: we helped develop a toolkit for legislators on gender mainstreaming.

Bosnia and Herzegovina: we assisted members of the Committee for Gender Equality to come to an in-depth awareness of relevant international obligations and national frameworks for the promotion of women’s political participation.

Iraq: we provided training to the Women’s Committee within the Iraqi Council of Representatives on lawdrafting and legal reviews through a gender lens. We also worked with the Women’s Committee on a Bill to establish a High Commission on Gender equality.

Jordan: we supported the finalization of a Gender Strategy for the Independent Electoral Commission. We are also working with political parties to develop a common Gender Strategy to ensure the parties are actively creating opportunities and space for women

to participate and get nominated to Executive positions and for elections.

A political party legal framework review (including internal regulations of parties) was conducted and resulted in a list of interventions to ensure active women political participation including through the establishment of a women caucus to conduct mentorship programmes and advocacy for active women participation.

Kosovo: we provided support to the Gender Equality Committee in drafting the new designs, methods and techniques for monitoring of the law implementation in Kosovo.

Socially sensitive laws, such as the Law on Gender Equality, were monitored with a new strategy which implied usage of online selfadministered questionnaires for respondents and randomly sampled

institutions to be visited by MPs. This approach has shown to be more time and cost effective and has enabled the Committees to reach in-depth information and data from a broader number of institutions.

Libya: we facilitated intensive workshops for 180 women candidates who were trained in media skills and electoral campaign management in advance of the General National Congress elections; eight of these women are currently elected members to the National Congress.

Lebanon: we funded a gender legal review of all current Lebanese legislation that produced a list of new laws to be drafted or current laws to be amended for the promotion of gender equality.

Tunisia: we supported Tunisian Parliamentarians’ knowledge

24 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Chauvel.indd 24

21/03/2014 12:03:24

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION

This page: Female members of the Iraqi National Assembly at a press conference. The UNDP worked with the Women’s Committee on a Bill in Iraq to establish a High Commission on Gender equality.; Right: Female politicians from Bosnia and Herzegovina., where the UNDP assisted the Parliament’s Committee on Gender Equality.

of international best practice on gender equality, quotas, and constitutionalization of equality provisions. The new Constitution of Tunisia (adopted on 26 January 2014) is ground-breaking in its provisions to assure women’s equality, in explicitly committing to eliminate violence against women, in promoting women’s assumption of positions of responsibility in all sectors, and in working towards parity in all elected bodies within the country. UNDP has also been promoting equal access for women candidates to political parties campaign funding. Last November, I participated in a training session in Tunis for 120 representatives from Tunisian political parties on party regulations and disclosure mechanisms to redress gender inequities in political party campaign funding.

Commonwealth-specific examples of our recent work include: Samoa: A ‘Women’s Parliamentary Forum’ in Samoa on 8 and 9 October 2013 was held to coincide with Parliament’s October sittings. The initiative was designed to inform and encourage women by acquiring the skills and knowledge necessary to enter the realm of politics or sustain interest in it; and to serve as a medium to promote and support women’s participation in the legislative process.

The programme aimed to provide them with: basic knowledge of parliamentary procedures and processes; exposure to Parliament and interactions with Parliamentarians to initiate and encourage interest in politics; as well as practical elementary legislative training with the assistance

of Parliamentarians and parliamentary staff. Participants were asked to assist with formulating a framework for future parliamentary capacity building support, including for women from different sectors of the country leading up to the 2016 general election.

Solomon Islands: A mock Parliament for women was also conducted at the National Parliament of Solomon Islands from 10 to 13 February 2014, as part of the efforts to advance women’s participation in leadership and decision making.

The three-day training programme was aimed to provide participants with necessary skills and knowledge of parliamentary procedures, the Electoral Commission, good governance and parliamentary leadership in Solomon Islands, separation of powers (Executive,

Judiciary, Legislative) and Parliamentary Committees. A total of 35 women participants from across the country took part in a mock debate about the Rural Constituency Development Fund (RCDF) and its effectiveness in funding some essential services such as health, education, rural development & domestic violence.

Tonga: Tonga’s first Practice Parliament for Women will be held on 10-11 April 2014 hosted by the Legislative Assembly of Tonga in Nuku’alofa. Candidates will undergo training and mentoring programmes with current MPs and former women MPs on 7-9 April, followed by a live broadcast of the two-day sitting. It is part of UNDP’s efforts to help the Speaker, Lord Fakafanua, fulfill his stated commitment to building a modern and more representative

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 25

Chauvel.indd 25

21/03/2014 12:03:37

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION

Parliament for Tonga which currently has only one woman in Parliament.18 It will be an opportunity for Tongan women to demonstrate their talent, knowledge and potential capacity while empowering them to have their voices heard and to prepare for the upcoming 2014 General Election in November. Previously, UNDP has also assisted national Parliaments to arrange mock Parliaments in Papua New Guinea and Kiribati.

Lesotho: In Lesotho, selected Members of Parliament, Political Party Representatives, and Senior Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) officials participated in the Gender and Elections Building Resources in Democracy, Governance and Elections (BRIDGE) training from 29 July to 2 August,

2013. The BRIDGE training was designed to expose trainees in ways of mainstreaming gender in elections.

UNDP also held a workshop for women Parliamentarians from 4 to 7 June 2013, to enhance their confidence and increase their participation in parliamentary debates. Major conclusions from the meeting found that the Women’s Caucus should raise awareness for women related issues in Parliament including maternity leave, the Married Person’s Equality Act and all laws of equal importance.

Another recommendation pushed for networking with other women in different Parliaments for skills sharing purposes and training in conflict management.

Nigeria: UNDP has supported the

development of the two-year strategic plan of Nigeria’s National Assembly Gender Technical Unit (GTU). The GTU supports gender mainstreaming and women’s rights agenda at the Parliament. Its main functions include: to provide accessible resource tools, research materials and skills for the analysis and articulation of gendersensitive legislations by all law-makers in Nigeria; provide technical support particularly to female legislators to enhance quality participation and contributions to legislative processes; and provide links between legislators and civil society groups, corporate organizations and individuals doing gender work in Nigeria. The institutional capacity building and development of the GTU as well as support for specific activities, as

outlined in the strategic plan, have been included in UNDP’s upcoming interventions.

India: UNDP has called for the formation of a caucus of women political leaders across party lines to enhance women’s participation within political parties, and to advocate for the Women’s Reservation Bill (which would provide for one-third of the seats in national and state assemblies to be reserved for women) as a collective voice.

The Bill passed the Rajya Sabha in 2010 but at the time of writing had not come to a vote in the Lok Sabha.

Caitlin Wiesen, UNDP Country Director, summed up the outcome of the Roundtable by saying, “the key ingredients of success for women’s participation in politics are money,

26 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Chauvel.indd 26

21/03/2014 12:03:49

INSPIRING CHANGE: WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION development, and the International Knowledge Network on Women in Politics (iKNOW Politics20). We welcome participation, directly and via AGORA and iKNOW Politics, from all who share the objective of empowering women politically, and increasing the percentage of women legislators globally.

Left: The National Assembly of Nigeria. The UNDP has supported the development of Nigeria’s National Assembly Gender Technical Unit (GTU), which supports gender mainstreaming and women’s rights agenda at the Parliament.

Below: Bangladeshi women visiting the Parliament pictured in the background. A UNDP project that includes a specific gender focus aims to increase the representation of women in Parliament and committees.

Endnotes 1. http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/ home/librarypage/womens-empowerment/ powerful-synergies/ 2. http://iknowpolitics.org/en/2012/10/iputransforming-parliament-redress-gender-deficit 3. http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/ egm/eql-men/ 4. http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm 5. http://secretariat.thecommonwealth.org/ shared_asp_files/GFSR.asp?NodeID=141095 6. http://www.justice.gov.za/docs/otherdocs/2005_GenderPoA20052015.pdf 7.

http://www.cpahq.org/cpahq/Mem/

About/Organisation/Commonwealth_Women_Parliamentarians/Main/Women_MPs/ About_the_CWP.aspx?hkey=8251fefc-a08e441a-b575-e23e8ecd9a1f 8. Women and political leadership in the Commonwealth, Commonwealth Secretariat Information Brief http://secretariat.thecommonwealth.org/files/256109/FileName/ 9. http://www.voanews.com/content/

mentoring, mobilization and men”.

Women who had contested in local self-government elections pointed out that having a large base of elected women at the Panchayat (local self-government) level is not enough to ensure that more women will contest or win elections at the state or higher levels. Hon. Shalini Tomar who contested state Assembly elections from Uttar Pradesh said, “education, self-confidence and leadership skills are very important to bridge this gap. For this capacity development, networking with other women in politics and mentoring is very important”.

Pakistan: UNDP has supported the establishment of a Women’s Caucus, whose aims include cutting across party lines, allowing consensus-building around priority issues concerning women, and ensuring that gender concerns are

addressed through legislation, policies and programmes.

Bangladesh: UNDP’s project includes a specific gender focus, through interventions which aim to increase the representation of women in Parliament and committees.

Specific support has been provided to women Parliamentarians as part of a multi-party caucus on gender and via the Standing Committee on Women and Children Affairs.

All knowledge material developed by the project encompasses a gender component. For example, a study on gender mainstreaming in the Bangladesh Parliament was submitted to the Committee for Women and Children Affairs leading this Committee to initiate the drafting of an action plan for the implementation of key recommendations. UNDP also ensures gender messages are a

central component of parliamentary education initiatives; i.e.: roundtable discussions focusing on the gender aspects of the budget were held with parliamentary committees, and increasing their understanding of their role in budgetary oversight from a gender perspective.

Other activities include: ensuring that the Parliament’s human resources management systems are gender sensitive; developing a gender policy for Parliament; facilitating the introduction of a social impact assessment of legislation; and supporting women’s access to parliamentary committees’ inquiries.

rwandan-parliament-female-majority-targetsequality/1757899.html 10. http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm 11. Dhaka Outcomes Document from the Commonwealth Workshop on Women’s Political Party Caucusing, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 16 June 2013 12. http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/ beijing/platform/declar.htm 13. Women and political leadership in the Commonwealth, Commonwealth Secretariat Information Brief http://secretariat.thecommonwealth.org/files/256109/FileName/ 14. http://gfwip.org/ 15. http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Bego%C3%B1a_Lasagabaster 16. http://www.labour.org.nz/people/louisawall

In addition to this work being implemented by UNDP Country Offices, we are cooperating with partners to host two global online knowledge platforms - AGORA19 - the portal on parliamentary

17. http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/ cedaw/cedaw.htm 18. http://matangitonga.to/2014/02/13/ speaker-wants-more-women-parliament 19. http://www.agora-parl.org/ 20. http://www.iknowpolitics.org/

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 27

Chauvel.indd 27

21/03/2014 12:04:01

OVERCOMING THE BIG CHALLENGES FOR A SMALL PARLIAMENT: THE COOK ISLANDS

Glenn van der Knijff/Lonely Planet Images

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: COOK ISLANDS

In 2015 the Cooks Islands celebrates 50 years of self-governance.

With a population of around 18,000, the challenges facing the island and its Parliament are constant and ever-changing, as conveyed by its Speaker in her speech made at the Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers of the Commonwealth in January 2014.

Hon. Niki Rattle

Mrs Rattle is the Speaker of the Parliament of the Cook Islands. Prior to her current role, she was Secretary-General of the Cook Islands’ Red Cross from 1995 to 2012. She was former President of the National Council of Women and a Co-Founder of the Pacific Islands AIDS Foundation.

This article is based on Mrs Rattle’s speech given at the Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers of the Commonwealth that took place in Wellington, New Zealand in January 2014.

Hon. Niki Rattle

Kia orana. “Kia orana” is the greeting of the Cook Islands, which means “May you live long”. “Kia ora” is the greeting of the New Zealand Māori, the natives of New Zealand. With such similarities between the two countries, it’s not surprising that the Cook Islands and New Zealand have a very special relationship.

The Parliament of the Cook Islands was built in the 1970s for the workers who had come from New Zealand to build the national airport in Rarotonga. Originally a dormitory it was transformed into a Parliament building. Given we are about to celebrate our 50th year, this small

place of business has served us well.

So, as small as it might be, it does the work of the country that it committed to do many years ago. Do not be fooled by small; small can also be very good.

The Cook Islands began as a British colony but later became under New Zealand rule. It was in 1964 that talks began for Cook Islanders possibly to look after their own business.

Hence two options were presented: become independent or self-governed. The option of selfgovernment appeared the most attractive because you could become citizens of New Zealand. This included enjoying the comforts that New Zealand provided, but be responsible for your own business, except in some matters with foreign affairs, where we do not have a military.

The first election in the Cook Islands took place in 1965. Albert Henry was the man responsible for forming the Cook Islands Party. He left New Zealand, and with the help of his sister, stood for election in Aitutaki.

After asking her to give her his seat in the constituency, he made a deal he

would help her if he won. Albert Henry did win, and his sister, Mrs Marguerite Story, became the first non-member Speaker in our Parliament.

As Speaker, my position is somewhat on and off. This is because it depends on the government of the day and whether they want a member of Parliament to be the Speaker or a non-member to be the Speaker of Parliament. Being a New Zealand citizen with a New Zealand passport is the result of our becoming a selfgoverning country in free association with New Zealand.

However there is a downside, because our population is now so small. Most Cook Islanders live in

28 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Rattle.indd 28

21/03/2014 12:10:25

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: COOK ISLANDS

The streets of Rarotonga, the main island of the Cook Islands.

New Zealand—maybe about 50,000 or 60,000 of them. We like to say we have 18,000 people living in the Cook Islands, because the rest of them are in Australia. And so while it is a very good arrangement, it also has a downside. We cannot offer Cook Islanders that live overseas to come back and support the country, because we do not have the money to pay them. They get more money being overseas. In 2015, we will be celebrating 50 years of self-governing in the Cook Islands.

Parliament has a Prime Minister plus 24 members of Parliament.

There are 15 islands in total – 12 of which are inhabited, and represented

in Parliament. The Prime Minister is the leader of the ruling party, which is currently the Cook Islands’ Party (CIP).

Each of those islands are so far away from the main island. I come from one of the far north islands and it takes me four hours to get to Parliament, and costs $NZD1,300 one way. So when you begin to think later about engaging with the community, those are some of the challenges for a very small country. It may be small in numbers of people, but there are very big challenges divided by the Pacific Ocean.

In order to achieve a stable government in the Cook Islands, it was thought that party-hopping

legislation would fix all the problems and stabilize the Government.

However there were problems with this, and legislation was put in place to fix it.

It has not however really fixed the problem because with a majority CIP, and with the Opposition Democratic Party, we do not know where a Member legally fits. One of the problems that I have had to deal with in Parliament is: “Point of Order, Speaker. I am a Democratic Member”.

And I respond, “well, I did not know what to say, actually, to be honest. It is not clear. What is he? He sits there, but he voted from here”.

Although the constitution of

the Cook Islands that was made by New Zealand in 1964 spells out the three governance areas of Judiciary, Parliament, and the Executive, people do not know what that means in practical terms.

So what does this mean for Parliament to be an entity with its own powers? It is not very clear. What I have found is because things are done a certain way year after year, people just tend to do things without really questioning “is this the right thing to do?”

We encounter difficulties in the separation of powers, in that we are instructed on how we will function, but still have to “provide the best you can,

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 29

Rattle.indd 29

21/03/2014 12:10:37

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: COOK ISLANDS

The parliamenary building in Avarua on Rarotonga island.

and provide all the services that are required to be done”.

Impartiality is something that can maintain a stable government. I have learnt as a Speaker that you cannot take sides with either. I don’t belong to any side, nor do I have an opinion for either. I just sit in the middle and do my work, which I enjoy very much.

Sometimes I can see the difficulties that exist if you belong to one side.

I think it is very important in Parliament for the Speaker to be equal, and for the staff to be equal with everybody in how we treat people.

It’s important for the Parliament to support everyone, whether they are government or opposition Members.

It is very easy to deviate and think: “oh, that’s the Prime Minister. I think I

should do this or do that, because—I don’t know.” In Parliament we cannot afford that. We need to stick to what we are there to do.

As I mentioned we only have two parties. Rather than making things easier, it makes it difficult because there are no other opportunities for people to take these governance roles. There have been a couple of independent Members who have stood. It’s a difficult position however given that citizens do not trust them as they don’t really have a big mandate.

We have an Act in the Cook Islands regarding the governance, management, and the role of the Speaker, that is currently under review. I would like to thank our Commonwealth partners, particularly

the Parliament of Western Australia, and we receive a lot of assistance through the New Zealand office. The review is really necessary because we have got caught up in management because the Act is so old. While today we are demanding performance from people, we do not have the legislation to support the work that we are trying to do. We are required to make a business plan every year.

I have come to realize you can spend hours doing a business plan and present it, but you get nothing for it. You cannot have new initiatives.

You cannot do anything different. It is just status quo from year in, year out, and it does not allow you to do anything new.

I took the opportunity to ask some

of my colleagues from the Pacific what are some of the big challenges we have, and the first thing they said was “money.” I came to this meeting by myself, given that unlike my fellow delegates, our Budget says “we don’t have any money”. This takes away the opportunity to go and learn from other people. This is the challenge for many of us in the Pacific, because we are given so much money, but you have to struggle to be able to make do.

I am here because New Zealand paid for me to be attend and because I am making a presentation. In normal circumstances it would be really difficult. The Cook Islands is planning a staff development training course in March, and while we have the funds for our staff, they have to pay

30 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Rattle.indd 30

21/03/2014 12:10:47

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: COOK ISLANDS

their own airfare. I know it is a shared struggle not only for the Cook Islands but also for my friends in the Pacific and maybe other smaller countries.

In governing and managing our Budget in the Cook Islands, we have the Public Accounts Committee. We failed miserably in the assessment that was just done a few months ago.

It is the only committee that works in the Cook Islands Parliament, mainly because everybody is busy doing their own things, and this is a requirement for the committee to do its job. People simply do not have the time to sit.

Two things were asked to be done: review the audited accounts of the year before, and review the budgets that were passed to make sure the ministries were doing their

work. The audits are three years behind, making it ultimately difficult to maintain good governance and good management.

I am the only appointed Member in the Cook Islands. I originally trained to be – and still am – a nurse. I worked for the Red Cross and did lots of community work with women. For almost 20 years carrying out my nursing and Red Cross work, I visited every island in the Cook Islands. I knocked on every Minister’s door in that time looking for help. I came with a purpose for the people who voted them into Parliament; not for myself, not for the Red Cross, but for the people. So they began to know me.

In 2011 I was invited to be the chairperson of the international conference of the Red Cross in Geneva. I attended the meeting with our Prime Minister, and he sat in the audience while I sat in the Speaker’s seat as Chair.

In April 2012 I was called to the Prime Minister’s room, and he asked me if I could take on the role of Speaker of Parliament. Given the current Speaker at the time was ill, the position needed to be filled. After watching me chair the meeting in Geneva, he told me “I figure if you can chair a meeting with 2,000 people, you can chair a meeting with 24 members of Parliament.” Although I told him I knew nothing about politics, he compared the values.

He said: “What do you have to do for Red Cross?”. I said: “Humanitarian, first. Impartiality is a principle of Red Cross. Neutrality is a principle of Red Cross. Independence is a principle of Red Cross. Unity, universality.” He said: “Those three things are all you need to know. The rest you can learn.”

That is how I became the Speaker.

So I went home. I said: “I cannot tell you my answer now. I have to go home and talk to my family because this is different. I have never ever lived in this life before.” I went and talked to my children first and talked to my husband. They all said to me: “Mum, with the work you have done in the community—and sometimes we hear you complain about what can be done.” They said: “You do not have to

complain now; you can go and be part of the fixing if you want something done differently.”

So I took the job on. I finished a Red Cross building that cost a million dollars, which was my biggest project, and I was going to retire that May because that was my 20th year. I left Red Cross on 6 June and became the Speaker the next day, and straight into the Budget. It wasn’t easy but I had great support from New Zealand, the Parliament here, and support from Western Australia.

I have been discriminated as an appointed Member. I have had a

“However there is a downside, because our population is now so small. Most Cook Islanders live in New Zealand— maybe about 50,000 or 60,000 of them.”

Member of Parliament stand and say: “You cannot tell me what to do because you are not an elected member.” I said: “The Standing Orders are very clear, if you would like to refer to them. There is no difference whether you are elected or not. The role of the Speaker is exactly the same.” Only one thing I cannot do: I cannot have a deliberative vote; I can only do a casting vote. Otherwise, I can do anything, and everything else.

There are many benefits, the salary not being one of them! I was at one point the lowest paid member of staff in the Parliament. Well, I am happy to say that in the last fortnight I was paid a better pay, so a bit more than the staff in Parliament. I guess you can say that is a benefit but the main benefit for me is working in such a way that I can make a difference for many people. This is where I love my job about being a Speaker. I go back to being a Red Cross woman in working with the community.

I know the community of the Cook Islands. I already know where the vulnerabilities are, but where politics was involved it was a bit different. And gender—I have worked with women groups for a long time and I know how I can do that in Parliament.

Our staff turned away the opportunity to be trained in gender equality a little while ago because they are nervous about it. “There is nothing wrong here, Speaker. We do not need to go down there. We are all right.”

I say: “How can we be all right? We are about to celebrate our 50th year and the most women we have had in Parliament is three to four out of 24 members.

So how can you say there is no problem?” We are working on it in the Pacific women in Parliament project with the AusAID programme. We are succeeding. I spoke to the Speaker of the Parliament of Australia, Hon Bronwyn Bishop, MP, who knows the programme really well. We are going to start training with our staff and getting them involved in gender equality.

Women of the Cook Islands say: “We do not have a problem. You win on your own merit. We do not want any special things happening.”

I disagree. I think that our traditional voting system needs to be reviewed because culturally there is a way of thinking. There is a mindset of doing this and women do not feature. I think that is going to happen.

The other thing about connecting with the community is our broadcasting. In the constitution it says all our Acts in Parliament have to be translated into Cook Islands Maori and the sessions are done bilingually.

It is great because the people of the far north say “I was listening to Parliament today and this happened and that happened”, and it is really encouraging.

However the problem is that it takes twice as long. Nevertheless, it is a way to connect with the people of the outer islands.

I have taken my challenge of a small Parliament with the big challenges. Thank you, meitaki maata, for your attention.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 31

Rattle.indd 31

21/03/2014 12:10:58

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: BERMUDA

SMALL PARLIAMENTS BIG CHALLENGES Small Parliaments face a vast number of challenges from their larger counterparts. From limited office resources to an insufficient number of Members to staff and administer Joint Select Committees, the Speaker of the House of Assembly of Bermuda outlines the challenges, and his recommendations for helping to overcome them.

Hon. K.H. Randolph Horton, JP, MP

Mr Horton is the Speaker of the Bermuda Legislative Assembly. He was first elected in 1998, and has since served as both Minister of Labour and of Education. He was elected Deputy Speaker in 2011, before being appointed Speaker in February 2013.

This article is based on the speech given at the Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers that took place in Wellington, New Zealand in January 2014.

Hon. Randolph Horton, MP

Bermuda is a small island state with 65,000 inhabitants, approximately 38,000 eligible voters within 21 square miles. Its Parliament is the oldest in the Commonwealth outside the British Isles and dates back to 1 August, 1620 when the Governor at the time, Nathaniel Turner, summoned a General Assembly to convene at St. Peter’s Church in the Town of St. George, Bermuda’s first capital and now a World Heritage site. These structures have provided for a stable political structure throughout our history. The singular fact that separates Bermuda from many jurisdictions is that it is a

limited democracy given its status as a U.K. Overseas Territory with power over internal affairs in accordance with provisions of the Bermuda Constitution Order 1968. Defence and external affairs are vested in the United Kingdom Government and exercised by a Governor appointed by Her Majesty the Queen.

Bermuda’s small size leads to a number of unique features in its Legislature. First, the Cabinet or Executive Branch has tremendous control over the Legislature since up to one third of the 36 Members of the Legislature can be appointed Cabinet Ministers. Second, the governing party, now the One Bermuda Alliance, is in a structured minority position in the 11-Member Upper House, the Senate, where five Senators are appointed by the Premier, three by the Leader of the Opposition and three Independent Senators appointed by His Excellency the Governor. In many other respects, though, Bermuda is a microcosm of the Westminster-style government with all the challenges of this modern era. And yes, as Speaker I can state without reservations that whilst debate can reach the

lofty heights of Westminster, it can also compete with Westminster on occasion in terms of feistiness.

Achieving stable government According to John K. Johnson, writing for the World Bank in 2005, scholars tend to agree that there are three functions common to Parliaments in democracies:

32 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Horton.indd 32

21/03/2014 12:18:29

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: BERMUDA

• Representation; • Law-making; and • Oversight In his paper, “The Role of Parliament in Government”, Johnson articulated that Parliaments represent the diversity of individuals and groups in a country. The many diverse groups

in Bermuda are represented in Parliament – different races, religions, genders and sexual orientation. As the supreme law-making institution in a country, Parliaments make the rules by which society is governed and they are designed to oversee Executive spending and performance. Oversight roles must be adopted to ensure ability to respond to the challenges of

our contemporary world.

Hon. Max Sisulu, MP, the Speaker of the National Assembly in South Africa, wrote in The Parliamentarian that Parliament must formulate its rules in such a manner that expression is given not only to representative democracy, but also to participatory democracy. Parliament’s mandate requires that it engages with

Above: The picturesque port of Bermuda.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 33

Horton.indd 33

21/03/2014 12:18:39

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: BERMUDA

The Parliament building of Bermuda.

the electorate on an on-going basis to ensure not only that we stay abreast of issues that affect our people, but also that their voices find expression in our work.

The challenge here is that governments may have to pay a significant price for not listening carefully to the needs of constituents,

as Bermuda’s Governing Party, the OBA, recently learned. There was widespread objection in the community to the announced closure of the Lamb Foggo Urgent Care Centre which was built by the former PLP Government to ease congestion at our acute care hospital, King Edward VII Memorial Hospital.

The government cited insufficient use of the clinic and loss of revenue as reasons for closure. Constituents, led by the Opposition MP in the area, solicited approximately 3,000 signatures requesting that the clinic remain open, (bear in mind that there are only 1100 constituents in the area). The objectors marched on the

House of Assembly and presented the Premier and the Minister of Health with their petition and accompanying signatures. The government backed down and changed its mind. The Urgent Care Centre remains open.

Constituents throughout the world identify MPs in very personal ways.

They refer to Parliamentarians as “my MP”, “my Senator”, etc. In a small island country like Bermuda where there are only 1100 + voters per constituency, constituents have no hesitation in personally approaching their Members of Parliament.

Once Parliament makes a decision that has a direct impact upon constituents’ lives, they let their elected members know exactly what they think. With the size of the constituencies, there is also no excuse for not knowing the needs of constituents. Or is there?

The challenge here is that unlike many larger Parliaments which provide constituency offices and staff for MPs, we do not have similar provisions in little Bermuda. Certainly, appropriately resourced offices would help Bermuda’s MPs to become more effective in the discharge of their responsibilities. Regrettably, given the current economic climate, this will not happen soon.

Additionally, there is the challenge of visiting constituents in their homes.

MPs are expected to make calls on constituents. Otherwise, there is the commonly heard refrain: “I only see you when you need my vote!” Many a politician in Bermuda has lost his/ her seat because the voters were unhappy that the MPs did not visit them; a reason, we were informed, why our former Premier lost her seat in the 2012 General Election.

In addition to representation by establishing policies and budgets that govern a country, Parliament oversees the actions and spending of the Executive. The Legislature seeks to ensure that programmes are carried out legally, effectively and for the purposes for which they are intended. Parliaments scrutinize government spending and activities to determine whether money has been spent appropriately and whether or

34 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Horton.indd 34

21/03/2014 12:18:58

SMALL PARLIAMENTS: BERMUDA

not the people have received “value for money”.

Legislative oversight tools include Premier and Ministers question period, use of the Public Accounts Committee, Sessional Committees and Joint Select Committees. There is no question that the increased attention on government corruption worldwide has led to more focus on this aspect of parliamentary responsibility. Bermuda has not escaped in that regard.

It is important to understand that oversight is aimed at enhancing accountability through the scrutiny of government policies and spending in order to ensure stable government and improve democracy. It is not a fault finding exercise to embarrass the government – at least it should not be.

Reflecting on the Committee System in U.K. the former Deputy Prime Minister 1st Viscount William Whitelaw said: “A sound select committee system is vital to the detailed probing and criticism of the Executive upon which most successful democracies and good government depended.”

Former Canadian politician Hon. Yvon Pinard, PC, commented in 1982 “experience has shown that smaller and flexible committees when entrusted with interesting matters can have a positive impact on the development of our parliamentary system and the role of MPs”.

The challenge for Bermuda – and I would suggest other small Parliaments – is the lack of sufficient resources to staff and administer Joint Select Committees to provide the quality of scrutiny that enables effective oversight.

The following four standing committees mandated by Standing Order 34 in Bermuda include: • The Private Bills Committee – 5MPs + 2 Senators; • The Public Accounts Committee – 7 MPs; • The Committee of the Office of the Auditor – 5 MPs; and • The Committee on Register of

Members’ Interest – 5 MPs + 2 Senators.

The following three Sessional Committees are established in accordance with Standing Order 35: • The Standing Orders Committee – Speaker + 5MPs; • The House and Grounds Committee – Deputy Speaker + 4MPs; and • The Regulations Committee – 5MPs. • Then there are three Joint Select Committees (JSC) appointed at request of the House of Assembly: • JSC on Parliamentary Governance and Reform – 3MPs + 2Senators; • JSC on Elections – 5MPs + 2 Senators; and • JSC on Mandatory Drug Testing – 3MPs + 2Senators.

The challenge is that the aforementioned committees and committee-structure completely stretch the staff at Parliament.

Bermuda only has one Clerk, a Deputy Clerk and an Assistant Clerk to service and support the administration of these committees, in addition to other responsibilities. There are only seven full-time employees in our Assembly. In order to enhance the support given to the various committees in Parliament, it would be necessary to hire professionals outside of staff of Parliament.

Severe constraints on the time and resources of MPs and Senators who sit on these Committees have a deleterious effect upon its ability to function effectively. These committee members are either backbenchers or opposition Members, part-time politicians, many of whom have other jobs. This raises the question: should non-members of Parliament sit on Committees? It can be argued that if democracy is a two-way process, merging the elected with the nonelected – without the elected being tyrannical dictators – then clearly there is scope for more non-elected participants in the committee system.

What would be the role for persons

other than elected representatives: How would they be chosen?

Questions have been raised regarding the utility and the effectiveness of committee arrangements in small Legislatures.

Advantages include: • It allows government and opposition to arrive at consensus on issues before debate in Parliament; • It provides a forum through which Parliament can be made aware of the effects of government policies on the people; • It provides checks and balances in existing policies and, when functioning effectively, provides a means for a legislative body to consider in-depth or a wide range of topics and identify politically and technically feasible alternatives; • Committee Members discuss issues informally and develop relationships with representatives of other parties, thereby creating a collegial environment; and • Small committees are more effective than large committees which are oftentimes unwieldy and ineffective.

I am a strong advocate for the Parliamentary Committee System.

In that regard, whilst serving as Bermuda’s Minister of Education, I suggested the formation of a JSC on Education which had as its mandate the scrutiny of policies within the Department of Education.

Additionally, I had a most rewarding experience when chairing a JSC which investigated the rising violent crime and gun violence in Bermuda. The attention that Members gave to the challenges with which we were confronted spoke volumes and reflected well on their interest in improving Bermuda.

It was country before party. There was outstanding rapport amongst the Committee members. Additional challenges that present themselves include: • Absenteeism may stall or retard discussions and initiatives; and • Small quorum may lead to misrepresentation.

Recommendation In order to manage the ratios of Committees to MPs effectively, consideration might be given to limiting the number of committees operating at any one time.

This kind of arrangement would avoid an over-extension of Members.

At the same time, consideration might be given limiting the number of committees upon which Members can sit, particularly majority party MPs. Small Legislatures pose challenges for the Committee System both in terms of practical arrangements and defectiveness.

These problems are intensified by situations of majority party dominance and absenteeism.

A big challenge can occur should the Premier and Cabinet stand opposed to the appointment of a committee set up to scrutinize a particular issue.

I experienced this in attempting to have the House of Assembly agree to a JSC to look into crime and gun violence in Bermuda. It took me close to a year before my Party (PLP), the government at the time, agreed that I could make a Motion to have a JSC formed for this purpose.

Once the Committee was formed and I chaired it, the public was very supportive and provided input that allowed the production of an excellent report with major recommendations.

Once the report was complete, the Party was hesitant to allow me to table it and then debate and have the House approve the recommendations. I was only allowed to do a “take note motion” which meant there was no commitment from the government.

In a small Parliament where the Executive is one third of Parliament, these situations can occur.

In closing, while there are significant challenges for small Parliaments to run efficiently, small Parliaments are able to achieve efficiency and stable government as a result of outstanding representation and to quote Mr Sisulu, “giving expression to participatory democracy”.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 35

Horton.indd 35

21/03/2014 12:19:07

CODES OF CONDUCT QUEBEC

AN ETHICAL FRAMEWORK FOR MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF QUÉBEC Ethics and transparency in political life have become core values in today’s democracies. With many societies facing widespread public disaffection with politicians, citizens expect their elected representatives to conduct themselves with integrity. In an effort to regain the trust they require to fully exercise their role, implementing Codes of Conduct are becoming widespread throughout Parliaments across the globe. The President of the National Assembly of Quebec accounts how such a framework is working in its Parliament.

Hon. Jacques Chagnon, MNA

Mr Chagnon has been President of the National Assembly of Québec since 2012 and is the Chair of the CPA Québec Branch.

He also holds the titles of Chair of the Québec Branch, Parliamentary Confederation of the Americas (COPA), and Chair of the Québec Branch, Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie (APF). Prior to being elected President, Mr Chagnon was Chair of the Committee on the National Assembly from 2012 to 5 March 2014.

Hon. Jacques Chagnon, MNA

The emergence of a code In Québec, the Act respecting the National Assembly was passed in 1982. Its purpose was to enshrine the operating rules of the National Assembly of Québec in a new legislative framework. It expressly set out general rules of ethics for Members and introduced provisions on conflicts of interest and on the incompatibility of certain offices.

It also inaugurated the office of jurisconsult, making Québec the first

legislative assembly in Canada to appoint a code-of-conduct adviser.1 The jurisconsult’s job was to answer Members’ requests for confidential advisory opinions on any potential incompatibility of office or conflict of interest.

After 2000, the National Assembly embarked on an in-depth review of its operations and of the rules governing its deliberations.

In conjunction with these reform discussions, the question of introducing a Code of Ethics and Conduct for Members was examined.

By 2004, on the initiative of former President of the Assembly, Hon. Michel Bissonnet, MNA, a committee formed of Parliamentarians, public servants and ethics experts began meeting to propose a comprehensive code of ethics for the National Assembly and its Members and specific rules of conduct for the latter. The committee conducted a comparative study of the subjects covered in various codes of ethics

adopted by legislative bodies in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand.

The former President of the National Assembly, Yvon Vallières, then produced a draft code, which served as a foundation for Bill 48, the Code of ethics and conduct of the Members of the National Assembly.

It was introduced in the House on 14 May 2009, by Government House Leader and Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions, Hon. Jacques Dupuis, MNA. The final version wasn’t adopted until 19 months later, on 3 December 2010. A parliamentary committee— the Committee on Institutions—held 27 sittings to examine the Bill, during which it met with representatives of organizations such as the Barreau du Québec (Québec Bar) and numerous experts, including National Assembly jurisconsult Claude Bisson. The Committee also adopted a total of 155 amendments for a Bill that initially comprised only 129 sections. This

36 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Chagnon.indd 36

21/03/2014 12:22:53

CODES OF CONDUCT QUEBEC

demonstrated how important the Bill was in the eyes of the Members, since it would provide a framework for their conduct during and, to a degree, after their parliamentary careers.

Why a Code of Ethics and Conduct?

Before the Code was adopted, the provisions of the Act respecting the National Assembly that dealt with conflicts of interest comprised about a dozen sections worded in general terms. Members had few guidelines they could rely on to govern their conduct in specific situations.

The Code therefore required a need for the kind of clarity and precision that was lacking in the old rules. Still, a code could have been adopted without turning it into a law, so why legislate it? The following answer by the jurisconsult sums it up well: “Legislating is the most solemn manner by which a democracy expresses itself. Therefore, establishing rules of conduct and ethics for public office holders

through legislation is the most appropriate way of demonstrating the importance accorded to those rules and to their observance. Such a demonstration is made not only for those who are subject to the rules, but also for the people on behalf of whom they are enacted, that is, the entire population.”2 To a large degree, then, the Code of Ethics and Conduct is a concrete response to the public’s concerns about the conduct of their elected representatives. But it also serves the Members, who seek the full confidence of their fellow citizens and want reliable guidelines to govern their conduct.

In its preamble, the Code states that the people of Québec expect their elected representatives, due to the very nature of their functions, to observe certain rules of conduct. The Code clearly affirms the broad ethical principles: “Members must adhere to and establishes specific rules of conduct they must follow, hence the title Code of ethics and rules of conduct of the

Members of the National Assembly.”3 The term “ethics” refers to the values set out in Title I of the Code, which all Parliamentarians must adhere to from the outset. The “rules of conduct”— the rules set out in Title II, applicable to all Members, and in Title III, applicable to Cabinet Ministers—represent the concrete application of those values to everyday life.

The values of the National Assembly Section 6 of the Code gives the following expression to the values of the National Assembly: • Commitment to improving the social and economic situation of Quebecers; • High regard for and the protection of the National Assembly and its democratic institutions; and • Respect for other Members, public servants and citizens.

It also states that the conduct of Members must be characterized by benevolence, integrity, adaptability, wisdom, honesty, sincerity and justice.

Consequently, Members must

Above: The National Assembly of Québec

• Show loyalty towards the people of Québec; • Recognize that it is their duty to serve the citizens; • Show rigour and diligence; • Seek the truth and keep their word; and • Preserve the memory of how the National Assembly and its democratic institutions function.

Subsequent sections affirm that not only do Members embrace these values, but that observance of them is an essential condition for maintaining public confidence in the Members and the National Assembly. It also helps to enable Members to fully achieve their mission of serving the public interest.

Rules of conduct for Parliamentarians In addition to these broad ethical

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 37

Chagnon.indd 37

21/03/2014 12:23:03

CODES OF CONDUCT QUEBEC

principles, the Code enacts specific rules of conduct applicable to all Parliamentarians.

To begin with, it sets out rules on the incompatibility of different offices and posts.

Hence, a Member may not also be a mayor or municipal councillor or an employee of the government, a foreign country or an international non-profit organization. Newly elected Members must resign from any incompatible office or post before taking the oath of office. Members are also prohibited from acting as lobbyists within the meaning of the Lobbying Transparency and Ethics Act.4 Second, the Code sets out

“...we may safely assume that the more the Members’ conduct is seen to be exemplary, the more the public will be inclined to find them trustworthy.” conflict-of-interest rules. Members may not place themselves in situations where their private interest or that of their families may impair their independence of judgement in carrying out their duties of office.

They are not allowed to communicate information obtained in the course of their duties to further their own or another person’s private interests. Nor may they be a party to a contract with the government or engage in acts of favouritism. They are required to declare any private financial interest bearing a connection to a matter being discussed in the Assembly, and abstain from debating or voting on that matter. Finally, they may not receive remuneration or any other benefit from a political party, except a reimbursement for reasonable expenses incurred in the course of a partisan activity.

Third, the Code stipulates that

Members may not accept any gifts or other benefits in exchange for speaking or taking a certain position on an issue. They must also refuse to accept gifts that may impair their independence of judgement or compromise their integrity.

Members are entirely free to dispose of their time as they wish in carrying out their duties, but the Code requires them to maintain a good attendance record and not be absent from sittings for an unreasonable length of time without a valid reason.

Cabinet Ministers are subject to special restrictions. Since Ministers are required to devote themselves exclusively to the duties of their office, they may not simultaneously sit on a board of directors or be a director of a business or association. Once their term of office has ended, former Cabinet Ministers are subject to strict post-term rules. They must conduct themselves in such a way as to avoid obtaining undue benefit from their prior office, and must refrain from disclosing confidential information obtained in connection with that office. In addition, they may not accept an appointment or job with a business, body or agency, other than a State entity, with which they had official, direct and significant dealings in the year before they left Cabinet.

Implementation and monitoring mechanisms An Ethics Commissioner is responsible for the administration of the Code. As is the case for the other Officers of the National Assembly, such as the Auditor General and the Chief Electoral Officer,5 the Ethics Commissioner answers directly to the Assembly.

To ensure the Commissioner’s independence and freedom from political influence, he or she is appointed on the joint recommendation of the Premier and the Leader of the Official Opposition, after consultation with the leaders of the other parties represented in the Assembly. The appointment must be approved by a two-thirds majority in the House.6 The Commissioner’s fiveyear term may be renewed.

The Commissioner may be seen as the caretaker of Parliamentarians’ ethical concerns.

Specific rules of ethics also apply to the Commissioner, who must carry out their duties exclusively, with a focus on information and prevention, confidentiality, objectivity and impartiality. Like private Members and Ministers, the Commissioner is required to make and publish an annual disclosure statement.

The Commissioner’s role is multifold. Beyond answering Members’ requests for advisory opinions on matters of ethics and conduct, the Commissioner has the power to conduct inquiries if they have

reasonable grounds for believing that a Member has violated the Code.

Such inquiries may be conducted on the Commissioner’s own initiative or at the request of another Member.

The Commissioner’s inquiry reports are tabled by the President of the National Assembly.

The Assembly, by a vote of its Members, ultimately rules on whether the sanctions recommended by the Commissioner will be applied.

Possible sanctions range from a simple reprimand to the loss of a Member’s seat or dismissal from Cabinet.

While the draft code was being studied, the Members came out

38 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Chagnon.indd 38

21/03/2014 12:23:14

CODES OF CONDUCT QUEBEC

Commissioner immediately and remedy the situation.

Finally, gifts worth more than $200 from the same source must be declared to the Commissioner.

in favour of the idea, expressed by some of their number, that the office of jurisconsult be retained.

An amendment was passed to that effect, thus allaying any fears that Members’ requests for advisory opinions, made in good faith, could result in an inquiry being launched against them.

The jurisconsult’s advisory opinions are confidential and not binding on the Commissioner, but they may not be given to Members under verification or inquiry by the Commissioner until the verification or inquiry process has been completed.

Members are required to file an annual disclosure statement

with the Commissioner concerning their own and their family members’ private interests, including income, immovable property other than personal residential property, business interests, and any professional, industrial or commercial activities they are engaged in. Cabinet Ministers have to make a more detailed statement that includes their assets and liabilities, their immovables, and information on any proceedings in which they are involved before a court of law or an adjudicative body.

Members who, despite their best efforts, find themselves in a conflict-of-interest or incompatibilityof-office situation must inform the

Outcomes: To be Determined The Code of ethics and conduct of the Members of the National Assembly has been fully in force since 1 January 2012.

For the past two years, the Commissioner has spent much of his time and energy presenting and explaining the new rules to the Members,7 who now find themselves under the major obligation of filing a disclosure statement of their own and their family members’ private interests. Though familiar enough to Parliamentarians in other Canadian assemblies, this is a new addition to the workload of the Members of the National Assembly.

Under the Code, the Commissioner may request a meeting with a Member in order to verify the Member’s disclosure statement and discuss their obligations under the Code. In this regard, the Commissioner has thus far fulfilled his role in systematic fashion. During his first term, he met with all private Members and Cabinet Ministers individually to discuss their disclosure statements.8 This exercise was useful to both groups, as it has helped them “domesticate” the Code.

The Members clearly take the new rules very seriously, as is demonstrated by the number of requests addressed to the Commissioner. In 2012–2013, the Commissioner answered 237 such requests (including 19 for written advisory opinions),9 in an Assembly that numbers only 125 Members. Furthermore, several former Cabinet Ministers consulted the Commissioner about post-term rules of conduct. This not only demonstrates that Members require clarification on various points of the Code, but also that they are strongly motivated to act in accordance with its ethical principles.

As the Code was implemented only two years ago, it is still much too

early to tell whether it will change the public’s perception of its elected representatives. But we may safely assume that the more the Members’ conduct is seen to be exemplary, the more the public will be inclined to find them trustworthy.

The Code constitutes a clear commitment on the part of the Members of the National Assembly to observe the rules prescribed for them.

By 1 January 2015, the Commissioner must submit a report to the President on the implementation of the Code and the advisability of amending it.

The report will then be studied by the competent parliamentary committee. At that point, the Members will have an opportunity to state their views on whether the Code serves the objectives they had in mind when they adopted it.

Endnotes 1. Presentation by Jean-Pierre Charbonneau, President of the National Assembly, at the Colloque sur l’éthique et les conflits d’intérêts dans la vie politique, 25 November 1999, 6 pp.

2. Bisson, C “Pourquoi légiférer l’éthique?

Pour apaiser le public ou pour soutenir l’exercice d’une charge publique?”, Éthique publique, Vol. 13, No. 1 (2011).

3. Compilation of Québec Laws and Regulations (CQLR), chapter C-23.1.

4. CQLR, chapter T-11.011.

5. The other Officers of the National Assembly are the Public Protector and the Lobbyists Commissioner.

6. The first Ethics Commissioner, Jacques Saint-Laurent, was unanimously appointed by the Members of the Assembly on 9 December 2010.

7.

Thus far, the Commissioner has produced

two inquiry reports. On 28 March 2012, he ruled that an inquiry request filed by a Member against a former Minister was unfounded (Ethics Commissioner, Activity Report 2011-2012, pp. 23-24). The second report, produced in June 2012, was the result of the Commissioner’s own initiative to inquire into a Member’s prolonged absence from the House. For more information, see http://www.ced-qc.ca/.

8. Ethics Commissioner, Activity Report 20112012, p. 16.

9. Ethics Commissioner, Activity Report 20122013, p. 33.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 39

Chagnon.indd 39

21/03/2014 12:23:27

CODES OF CONDUCT

UNDERSTANDING CONDUCT, ETHICS AND CODES The conduct by which MPs behave matters in a parliamentary democracy, because ultimately it helps achieve the best government in the interests of the people. Associate Professor of Monash University, Dr Ken Coghill, discusses the types of conduct and factors that affect how an MP conducts themselves, plus the various codes and their effectiveness.

Hon. Dr Ken Coghill, PhD

Dr Coghill is an Associate Professor at the Department of Management at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. He was a former Member of Parliament of the Legislative Assembly, Victoria, and also served as Parliamentary Secretary of the Cabinet and Speaker.

Hon. Dr Ken Coghill, PhD

As an MP, do you need a code to tell you what is ethically right or wrong?

Very few think they do, but if that is so, why are significant numbers of MPs accused of unacceptable conduct and why have so many Parliaments considered, proposed or adopted codes?

Ultimately conduct matters because it helps achieve the best possible government in the interests of the people – the citizens in the democratic system.

This is because our democracies are complex systems founded in the relationships between the people, Parliament and other institutions.

Democracy works best when those relationships are trusting relationships.

That is, relationships in which the people trust the Parliament to be acting in their best interests. If the people feel that the Parliament is addressing their concerns, they are more likely to support the parliamentary system, giving it credibility and legitimacy. Where there is such trust, there is a freer exchange of views, beliefs and ideas, more creative policy making and more innovative solutions to problems facing any community.

Parliamentary system integrity However, Parliament is itself a system – a key sub-system within the broader system of government.

As an MP knows, it is not some giant, mysterious “black-box” that can only be judged by its outside appearance.

It is the sum of its “parts” – its individual members (MPs) and various internal organizations of MPs such as committees and political groupings (i.e. parliamentary political parties).

Whether the people see Parliament as trustworthy largely depends on how MPs conduct themselves and

how this is reported to the public.

Questionable conduct by even a small number within a large Parliament can be enough to taint perceptions of the whole Parliament.

What types of conduct are seen as misconduct? Some of the following examples deliberately “test the envelope” to help us think through just what we mean.

Clearly, breaches of the criminal law are unacceptable and (at least in Westminster-heritage Parliaments), MPs are liable for prosecution in the normal way.

A code is unnecessary for enforcement in cases such as bribery, theft or other misappropriation, or assault. In the same way, courts have found MPs to be public officers who are liable for conviction for the common law offence of misconduct in public office. Illegal actions are regarded as separate from unethical conduct.

As an MP, you are a community leader and are expected to follow higher standards of ethical conduct than the minimum of compliance with the law – common law and statutory provisions. We see this in conduct that

40 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Coghill.indd 40

21/03/2014 12:27:03

CODES OF CONDUCT

attracts public attention and which leads to MPs being sanctioned or resigning office. In summary, these may include: conflict of interest; misuse of entitlements; personal behaviour; fiduciary duty; and discharge of a public trust.

Conflicts of interest – potential, perceived, or actual Conflict of interest arises when an MP is faced with a decision which could either advance the public interest or some special interest but not both.

For example, if funds were allocated to a project in which the MP had no personal financial interest but which served the public interest at least as well, or even better, than funding of a different project to be constructed by a particular contractor through which the MP would profit personally.

The MP would have two interests in conflict: an obligation to serve the public interest and an incentive to

seek personal advantage. Sometimes the special advantage is not direct but may be to a family member, a friend, a business partner or a group with whom the MPs has or seeks a relationship. The “relationship” may be a simple as seeking political support for re-election or appointment to higher office.

MPs involved in fundraising for personal or party campaign funds face particular risk of conflict of interest. It is difficult to avoid the perception, even if not the reality, that donors to political parties hope for favourable treatment when decisions are made affecting their own interests.

Likewise, individuals paying exorbitant amounts to attend meals with leading MPs do so in the expectation of privilege access to those MPs and the chance to influence policy or even specific decisions affecting their interests. Where directors authorize donations, legally they exercise their

judgement that to do so is in the best interests of that firm, necessarily ahead of the general public interest and thus putting the MPs in a starkly obvious conflict of interest. Whilst MPs may claim that they act ethically and they are not influenced by such conflicts, evidence of human behaviour in other occupations (e.g. scientific testing of medicinal drugs) suggest that people do succumb to such influences all too often, albeit unconsciously.

As an MP, you are expected to avoid not just actual conflicts of interest but perceived and potential ones too.

Fair – but to whom?

A slightly different question rarely asked in our Westminster tradition concerns the very nature of representation. We accept that the Parliament’s basic functions include representation, legislating and

Above: The 1215 Magna Carta.

The historical document was a codification of the relationship between the monarch and the British people, and continues to be a foundation to establish the accepted conduct of the monarch.

scrutiny of the political Executive i.e. the government. Accordingly each individual MP has corresponding roles. In our tradition, representation goes beyond acting as a trustee of the constituency in debating and voting on legislation; it includes taking up grievances with the government on behalf of constituents.

Not all democratic systems accept this as ethical. In Executive presidencies, the president and his or her Executive (ministers or other title) are deliberately separated from The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 41

Coghill.indd 41

21/03/2014 12:27:14

CODES OF CONDUCT

the Parliament by the constitution.

MPs do not have a Westminstertype relationship with the Executive.

In at least some such presidencies, MPs believe it is unethical to favour some constituents by taking up their grievances with the president’s Executive, thereby giving those citizens an advantage not available to all.

Does that issue have relevance in Westminster-heritage systems?

Perhaps we could consider cases in which travel resource limits do not enable an MP to meet and hear the grievances of constituents remote from the capital city. As an MP, is it ethical to advantage some constituents over others who have limited access to their MP whether due to location or political allegiance?

Allowances, entitlements How as an MP you have used entitlements to allowances is a common reason for claims of unethical behaviour. Here we are thinking of the rights to receive money for purposes related to duties as an MP, including in the constituency, or to be reimbursed for funds so spent, in both cases from public funds.

Whether the MP is right to use or claim public funds for carrying out responsibilities as an MP is the key test for these entitlements. It is clear cut if the MP participates in an event because of his or her constituency, subnational or national role and status.

Less clear and therefore demanding better ethical judgement are cases such as the costs of maintaining a second home close to

Parliament in order to attend sittings, committee meetings and other capital city activities, if the MP lives too far away to commute from home.

Claiming the costs of uncommonly expensive housing or house maintenance, such as infamously dredging the moat at a then UK MP’s estate, may be within the “black letter” of entitlement rules but is unlikely to be seen as reasonable or ethical.

Whether and to what extent personal behaviour is seen as unethical varies widely. Local culture plays a part and that may change over time. We have seen instances of personal behaviour in private life cause severe embarrassment, or worse, in some countries whilst revelations of similar behaviour in another country or at another time

have passed with barely a ripple.

These first three types of unethical conduct are relatively obvious and straightforward. Some other types of conduct raise deeper issues.

A fiduciary duty?

Fiduciary duty requires that someone who has power to make decisions affecting others should not put their own interests above those of the people affected. The principle is widely applied in the duties of, for example, company directors. In the public sphere, historically it obliged the British monarch to put the interests of British subjects ahead of the interests of the royal family. Although the Glorious Revolution, Bill of Rights and subsequent democratic reforms tended to supplant that fiduciary

42 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Coghill.indd 42

21/03/2014 12:27:23

CODES OF CONDUCT

Left and right: the exterior of the Parliament of Australia, and the Sovereign entrance to the Houses of Parliament, United Kingdom.

Both Parliaments have encountered cases of unethical conduct by its Members.

duty, we should ask: does the very notion of democratic rule imply that the Parliament and the elected representatives who fill its benches have a fiduciary relationship with the people? In other words, if democracy means rule which is responsive to the preferences of the people, each citizen having an equal voice, then should the decision-makers entrusted with making decisions act consistently with the best interests of the society as perceived by its citizens? If this argument is accepted, then it is unethical, but not illegal, for MPs to put special interests ahead of the public interest in the legislative and other decisions they make in Parliament or as members of the political Executive.

This argument could be extended further, to include choices between

the public interest having regard to the preponderance of scientific or other evidence or populist decisions which carry emotional appeal and associated electoral support. Here we must ask: is this a question of ethics or more properly a matter for democratic political discourse? Who should answer that question: those with vested interests in the answer (MPs, or more particularly, a parliamentary majority) or the citizens and if the latter, at the ballot box? If it is the MPs, does a code have a role?

Public trust?

The exercise of a public trust is another, deeper issue. In a similar manner to the argument that Parliament has a fiduciary duty to the citizens, so it can be argued that

it exercises a public trust in that it acts as a trustee to protect matters which are shared in common by the community, such as public lands, waterways and the atmosphere.

Again in this case, in making decisions about the use or management of such an item, the Parliament and its MPs are expected to put the public interest ahead of special interests.

However, current litigation in USA takes this further and seeks judicial support for a positive responsibility to protect crucial natural resources from harm, in accordance with the Public Trust Doctrine. Atmospheric Trust Litigation (ATL) launched in many States and federally by teenagers and young adult supported by Our Children’s Trust, argues that state Legislatures (Parliaments), governors

and federal agencies should be compelled to protect the atmosphere from pollution that is causing global warming and climate change. ATLs have been upheld in some courts and continue to be fiercely contested.

At its heart is an ethical question: do MPs have an ethical responsibility to take positive action to prevent harm or should this be a matter for political discourse?

Why codify?

These examples set the scene to consider whether it is enough to rely on you as an MP to know, understand and practice the ethical standards that you are expected to uphold in your conduct both individually and collectively as a member of the parliamentary institution. Alternatively,

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 43

Coghill.indd 43

21/03/2014 12:27:39

CODES OF CONDUCT

should these standards be codified i.e. written into a code and subject to some form of sanction if breached?

In either case, should you as an MP be offered support in developing your capacity to recognize ethical issues and apply your own unique values to addressing ethical issues (ethical competence).

Let us first deal with codification.

It has an ancient lineage. The 1215 Magna Carta was a codification of the relationship between the monarch and the British people. It continues to be a foundational code establishing the accepted conduct of the monarch.

Its principles have contributed to the incremental evolution of our parliamentary democratic system.

If we think of it from a systems perspective, we recognize that systems operate more effectively – lead to better outcomes – where there is a moderate level of regulation within the system.

A society (social system) without internal controls to restrain power tends to degenerate into severe inequality, dominated by oligarchies (i.e. by a small number of very powerful individuals or groups and large numbers of powerless, disaffected subjects) and lesser overall well-being.

Of course the reverse can be as bad, albeit different: a society with strong, oppressive internal controls tends to rigidity, inflexibility and incapacity to respond innovatively to society’s problems.

Some will argue that very few MPs behave unethically and therefore they do not need a code to avoid wrong-doing. Whilst it may be true that overall few offend, the record shows that some do, that sometimes large numbers do and that instances and even what seem like outbreaks of unethical conduct are unpredictable.

A few examples make the point: cash for questions (UK, 1995); abuse of entitlements (UK, numerous MPs, pre 2010 elections); inappropriate claims of entitlement (Australia, numerous MPs and Senators, 2012); diversion of public funds to political party via government contracts (Canada, 1993 to 2003); improper intervention in regulation of broadcasting (Canada,

2013); numerous, diverse breaches of fund-raising, disclosure and other provisions (USA).

The abuse of entitlements by British MPs was especially widely reported and it is difficult to believe that any MP anywhere could have been unaware of them and of the clear indication that the behaviour was unacceptable.

These breaches demonstrate that despite MPs own values and their near-certain knowledge of breaches elsewhere, breaches remain all too common. It is important to note that some MPs enter a parliamentary career with very little experience in dealing with the types of ethical issues discussed here and hence limited relevant skill.

Just as the continuing occurrence of criminal acts necessitates criminal law, so measures are necessary to help define unethical conduct, guide MPs in their observance and provide sanctions for breaches.

These measures may take a number of forms including programmes to help MPs develop their ethical competence, advisory services, codes, provisions for investigation of alleged breaches and provisions for sanctions.

Ethical advice Ethical programmes for MPs are unlikely to succeed if designed as instruction on conduct that is acceptable or deemed unethical.

Rather programmes should aim to facilitate the development of a culture of integrity amongst MPs and should help each MP to develop ethical competence i.e. to develop his or her own values, to use them to recognize issues requiring ethical judgement and to apply moral reasoning to resolving those issues.

As an MP, advice from a trusted, disinterested source can be invaluable. In Australia that is available from the St James Ethics Centre, completely confidential and cost-free.

However many MPs prefer a service directly linked to the Parliament, such as the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards (UK), the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner (Canada), and the

Queensland Integrity Commissioner (Parliament of Queensland, Australia). They are not empowered to investigate or make findings on alleged breaches of a code.

The trust and value placed on the services of such an adviser is based on the total confidentiality of any conversations they have with MPs. Function of codes Codes serve a different function. They represent the Parliament’s definition of the limits of acceptable conduct. A summary of several recent codes was prepared by Deirdre McKeown of the Australian Parliamentary Library and published in 2012.

Those and other codes have a range of titles reflecting differences in their objectives and provisions e.g.: Members of parliament code of conduct (UK); Code of Conduct [forthcoming 2014]. Lok Sabha, Code of Conduct, Rajya Sabha (India); Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons (Canada); Code of Conduct with Regard to Financial Interests, South Africa; Rules of the House

of Representatives Code of Official Conduct, and the Senate Code of Official Conduct (USA); requirement for disclosure of pecuniary interests provided for in the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives (New Zealand); proposed Members of Parliament Code of Conduct (Australia). At a supra-national level, the EU has the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament with respect to financial interests and conflicts of interest (EU).

A particularly useful source is the Handbook on Parliamentary Ethics and Conduct. A Guide for Parliamentarians by Greg Power, published by The Global Task Force on Parliamentary Ethics. It provides advice on the context, design and enforcement of codes.

Although codes do vary, almost all include provisions for the avoidance of conflicts of interest. There is usually a requirement to disclose assets and sources of income, which are recorded in a register and made public. The variations between codes provide opportunities for Parliaments to learn from each other’s experience

44 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Coghill.indd 44

21/03/2014 12:27:47

CODES OF CONDUCT

Left: The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner of Canada, Ms Mary Dawson.

MPs can seek advice directly from a service directly linked to Parliament.

This page: the Parliament of Canada.

and adapt the better features of code design to their own culture and practice.

Codes of ethics or codes of conduct are liable to become a dead letter (i.e. ineffectual) if they serve only as a guide to unacceptable behaviour and there are no sanctions for breaches.

There are several different ways of dealing with allegations of a breach of a code. In some instances the Presiding Officer (Speaker or President of the Chamber) has authority suspend an MP for a short period or to “name” the MP following which it is customary for a resolution to be carried to suspend the MP for one or more days. These cases usually relate to conduct during proceedings.

In more serious cases of misconduct, it is common for allegations to be made to the Presiding Officer and referred to an

all-party committee (e.g.: Privileges Committee; Committee on Ethics) for investigation and report. Where sanctions are available, these systems fail if the culture of the committee or the Parliament encourages partisan considerations to prevail over applying principles of justice. Failure to apply sanctions in cases of clear breaches risks rendering a code ineffectual.

Sanctions are applied by the Parliament itself (if bicameral, the MP’s chamber) on the recommendation of the committee.

The Parliament’s decision is final, due to its sovereign status.

Enforcement of codes by the Parliament is fundamental to the effectiveness of codes in ensuring that a Parliament fulfils its role within and in support of the broader democratic system.

Whilst proven breaches are infrequent, parliaments do apply sanctions where allegations have

been proven to its satisfaction. For example, U.K. MPs were suspended without pay in the “cash for questions” scandal, and a U.S. Congressman was forced to submit to a humiliating admonition in front of the House of Representatives. In a somewhat different case, the Massachusetts State House recently expelled a Member after he was jailed for six months after a criminal conviction unrelated to his role as a legislator, and so was unable to take his seat.

However, sanctions are the final resort, and apply only where all other steps to ensure ethical conduct has failed.

Protecting the parliamentary system An MP’s greatest protection against breaches is his or her ethical competence. Most are elected with considerable life-experience and well-developed understanding of

how to recognize ethical issues and resolve them. However, reports of apparent breaches demonstrate that not all do. Some Parliaments have implemented induction or professional development programmes to assist MPs develop their ethical competence. Further, a measure of ethical competence, developed by Uppsala University’s Professor Kavathatzopoulos, can be used to help MPs better understand their own capabilities. Parliaments may find it desirable to bring in specialist expertise to assist with such programmes and some may find it preferable for political groupings to provide them.

Parliaments and their democratic systems stand to deliver better outcomes for their people where each MP is supported through professional development and codes which facilitate ethical conduct by all MPs.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 45

Coghill.indd 45

21/03/2014 12:27:59

PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE

PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE: ANCIENT ORIGINS, MODERN RELEVANCE Parliamentary privilege is integral in allowing exclusive control for Members to speak freely during parliamentary proceedings without fear or favour. However, the scandal involving UK MPs’ expenses in 2009 raised questions over Members using parliamentary privilege to protect them from prosecution. Consequently a Green Paper was published on the subject and a Joint Committee was set up to scrutinize its findings. A former Whip from Margaret Thatcher’s Government, Lord Brabazon of Tara chaired the committee and outlines the findings from the report.

Lord Brabazon of Tara

Lord Brabazon of Tara is a British Conservative politician. He entered the House of Lords in 1977, and was a Whip in Margaret Thatcher’s government from 1984-6. He then became a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department of Transport, holding that post until 1989. He was made a Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and in 1990, he returned to the Department of Transport as Minister of State, holding that post until leaving office at the 1992 general election.

From 2002 to 2012 he was Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords

Lord Brabazon of Tara

The rights and immunities of Parliament are collectively known as parliamentary privilege. In the United Kingdom privilege comprises, in brief, the right of the House of Commons and the House of Lords to exclusive control over their own proceedings and, flowing from this, the right of those participating in parliamentary proceedings, whether or not they are members, to speak freely without fear of legal liability or other reprisal.

Although the details may vary, similar rights and immunities are found in most Parliaments around the world.

There are good reasons for these privileges. In 1999 a Joint Committee on parliamentary

privilege stated that Parliament is “the place where ministers are called to account by representatives of the whole nation for their decisions and their expenditure of public money. Grievances, great and small, can be aired, regardless of the power or wealth of those criticized”.

Parliamentary privilege ensures that Members of Parliament, and others participating in proceedings, can carry out their duties without fear or favour.

Although parliamentary privilege in the U.K has ancient origins, it came to public attention after a scandal over parliamentary expenses in 2009, which saw three former MPs and one member of the House of Lords claim in court that they were protected from prosecution for false accounting by parliamentary privilege.

While this case was still being considered by the courts, in May 2010, the two political parties comprising the coalition Government undertook to publish a green paper on parliamentary privilege, with the intention of ensuring that it could not be used by Members of either House to evade justice. In the event, the United Kingdom Supreme Court

ruled later in 2010 that privilege gave no protection to Members charged with false accounting, but the government continued its work and the green paper was published in May 2012. I chaired a Joint Committee from December 2012 to June 2013 tasked with scrutinizing the green paper. The government response to our report was published on 18 December.

The extent of free speech in Parliament One of the most concerning proposals in the paper, apparently brought forward in response to the 2010 case, was that legislation should allow prosecuting authorities to disapply Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689 (the statutory basis for freedom of speech in Parliament in the United Kingdom) in such a way as to allow evidence relating to proceedings in Parliament to be admitted as evidence in criminal trials.

There is undoubtedly a tension between the public interest in bringing to justice those accused of criminal offences, and the public interest in the absolute protection afforded to

46 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Brabazon.indd 46

21/03/2014 12:36:50

PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE

freedom of speech in Parliament. But historically the consensus has been that Parliament should be kept free from interference by the Executive or the Judiciary.

We were not prepared to consider overturning a historical consensus which has survived for so long and which has become a fundamental constitutional principle.

We roundly rejected the proposal to allow prosecuting authorities to disapply privilege in order to enter parliamentary proceedings in evidence in a criminal trial—and were

A session taking place in the United Kingdom House of Lords

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 47

Brabazon.indd 47

21/03/2014 12:37:04

PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE

A silhouette of the Palace of Westminster, London

relieved to hear that the government had changed its view during the course of our inquiry and now no longer intends to take such a step.

Penal powers Among other issues raised in the Green Paper were the powers of both Houses to punish “contempts.” A contempt is an action which interferes with the ability of either House to carry out their respective function: one example might be a witness who lies when giving evidence to a Select Committee.

In 2011 a Select Committee inquiry into allegations of phone hacking by members of the media led to accusations that certain individuals had misled the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select

Committee. This resulted in a debate about the extent and enforceability of select committee powers.

The Clerk of the House of Commons told a committee in 2012 that “recent events have shown to a wider audience what all insiders always knew; that there were considerable doubts about whether the House would really impose its will on those whom a committee wished to summon, or punish those who gave unsworn false or misleading evidence to a committee”.

Parliament faces several difficulties when considering how to punish contempts: it has been well over a century since either House last used its penal powers (for instance, to fine or imprison those guilty of contempt); the procedure for using

those powers is far from clear; and, while domestic courts may be unable to review or challenge proceedings in Parliament, the European Court of Human Rights does claim jurisdiction, on the basis of Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which provides for the right to a fair trial.

The government told the committee that it did not believe current procedures provided appropriate safeguards for the successful prosecution of an individual for contempt, and stated that “in order for the defendant in any such proceedings to be given a fair trial, the House would have to significantly change its current procedures and practices”.

The committee first considered

whether it was necessary for select committees to have the powers to summon witnesses, to compel the provision of certain papers and to punish individuals who refuse to co-operate. We unanimously agreed that such powers, while undoubtedly only rarely employed, must be kept in reserve if select committees are to function effectively.

Once we accepted that both Houses should indeed have credible penal powers, we asked how this might best be done. It became apparent there were two options.

First, Parliament could pass legislation putting its penal powers, and an appropriate enforcement mechanism, on a statutory basis.

Second, Parliament could assert its existing powers and set out how

48 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Brabazon.indd 48

21/03/2014 12:37:17

PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE

“There is undoubtedly a tension between the public interest in bringing to justice those accused of criminal offences, and the public interest in the absolute protection afforded to freedom of speech in Parliament.”

they might be applied in a modern context.

While we acknowledged that legislation had worked well in Australia since the late 1980s, our preference was to avoid legislation, which we believed could risk a radical shift of power from Parliament to the courts, opening up the possibility of judicial scrutiny of parliamentary proceedings, and potentially increasing uncertainty about how contempts which were not covered by any criminal statute could, or should, be dealt with.

Instead, we urged both Houses to assert their existing privileges and put in place procedures to exert those privileges that meet contemporary standards of fairness and due process. Our report set out in detail

what those procedures might involve, including issues such as a right of reply and access to legal counsel. The government, in their response to our report, agreed that legislation was not the right approach and supported our call for the two Houses to set out how clearly their powers would and should be exercised.

Judicial questioning of proceedings in Parliament Another area of concern addressed by the green paper was judicial questioning of proceedings in Parliament. Underlying the relationship between Parliament and the judiciary in the UK is what has been described as the principle of “comity”. Both Parliament and the judiciary recognize that conflict

is likely to damage the constitution as a whole, and they therefore each “respect the sphere of action and the privileges of the other”.

Despite the general principle of comity, which nobody would challenge, there is occasional tension.

The main current area of concern is the growth of “judicial review” cases, where ministerial statements to Parliament have on occasion been admitted as evidence.

Even more disturbing have been several instances of courts going much further, praying in aid select committee reports when reaching decisions.

In an adversarial system, the admission in evidence of select committee reports by one side will necessarily lead to its questioning

by the other side—contravening the basic tenet that proceedings in Parliament should not be questioned in the courts.

After considering several options, including legislation, we concluded that the current concerns were not sufficient to warrant legislation. We made clear in our report, however, that Parliament should be prepared to legislate to protect its privileges, should the courts encroach further into Parliament’s area of exclusive jurisdiction.

The government agreed with us that there was no need for legislation at the present time, and stated that the issue could be revisited should there be an increase in inappropriate judicial questioning of Parliament.

Conclusion I have covered here only the most significant of the many issues raised in the green paper. Throughout the inquiry it was clear that, although the origins of parliamentary privilege in the U.K. are ancient, it remains relevant in the modern world.

The fact that privilege is nowhere codified means that it can adapt and evolve, even while the essential principle – that Parliament should be able to carry out its work effectively and without interference –remains unchanged.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 49

Brabazon.indd 49

21/03/2014 12:37:29

ADDRESSING PUBLIC HEALTH

TACKLING PUBLIC HEALTH IN MALAWI

Lord David Chidgey

Lord Chidgey is the spokesman for International Development and Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in Africa for the Liberal Democratic Party in the House of Lords, United Kingdom.

After my return from a trip to Malawi in September 2013, I looked at the challenges faced by Malawi, and at strengthening links between the country and the United Kingdom.

The key purpose of the trip – organized by U.K. Charity RESULTS UK was to see first-hand how Malawi is providing health care for its citizens and how the country is using the money granted through the U.K. international aid and development programme.

Thanks to support from partners like the U.K., Malawi has made significant progress towards tackling its pressing health concerns.

Vaccination rates for children under the age of five are at 97 per cent – one of the highest in the region – and the country has decreased tuberculosis (TB) infections by 28 per cent, with deaths from the disease falling by 20 per cent since 2003.

Despite this success Malawi continues to face real challenges in

Lord David Chidgey

health care provision. The country has very few doctors, hospitals and clinics, with one doctor often serving a population of 300,000.

Due to issues of poverty and a large rural population, Malawi still has high death rates from preventable diseases like Malaria and HIV as well as severe malnutrition in the underfives.

Almost half of all toddlers suffer from “stunting”, a restriction in growth

and mental development resulting from malnutrition in the first 1,000 days of life.

During my trip, I visited some of the projects being introduced attempting to tackle the pressing health concerns. These included the Martin Preuss TB/HIV integrated treatment clinic, where such diseases are being tackled in combination. Despite being regarded as a disease of the past, TB still claims 1,400,000 lives worldwide every year, mostly among the poor and vulnerable. This is despite the fact that the disease is preventable and treatable, with a course of antibiotics costing just $20. TB and HIV interact with one another to deadly effect with HIV positive patients up to 30 times more likely to catch TB, and one in four AIDS related deaths worldwide believed to be due to TB. It was uplifting to see the great work going on at the Martin Preuss Centre to integrate TB/HIV treatment. Clearly the response to

50 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Chidgey.indd 50

21/03/2014 14:57:08

Images of Lord Chidgey in Malawi courtesty of Felix Jakens

Money granted through international aid and development is assisting Malawi in addressing issues of public health. After visiting the country in September 2013, the spokesman for Development and Foreign Affairs in Africa writes about the improvements, and what more can be done to strengthen ties between Malawi and the United Kingdom.

Images of Lord Chidgey in Malawi courtesty of Felix Jakens

ADDRESSING PUBLIC HEALTH

Left: cattle walking past Lake Malawi; This page: Lord Chidgey at the outreach clinic, witnessing babies being weighed and measured under a tree. Malawi has one of the highest rates of “stunting” in the world; a result of an ongoing nutritionally deficient diet.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 51

Chidgey.indd 51

21/03/2014 14:57:21

ADDRESSING PUBLIC HEALTH

“Malawi is on course to meet Millennium Development Goal 4 (to reduce child mortality by two thirds), and has made good progress on vital steps that are being taken to address tuberculosis.”

(TB) and undernutrition.”

Lord Chidgey speaking with the locals in Malawi

these two deadly diseases has to be fully integrated if we are to have a chance at defeating them in our lifetime.

My trip also included a visit to a district hospital, a regional clinic and an outreach site – literally under a tree – to see how healthcare is being delivered at these three levels. Although underfunded and understaffed, the district hospital was well-run, and at the district clinic, I heard about the wide range of services provided in one location, from ante-natal programmes, to vaccine delivery and all types of blood tests. However what I found most memorable was the outreach clinic, with just a rural school building being used to vaccinate babies brought in from surrounding villages, with children being weighed and measured under a tree in the heart of the village, some eight miles down a dirt track.

At the clinic, a range of basic health services and monitoring takes place to protect and track the development of children.

I watched babies being weighed for signs of malnutrition from a scale hanging from the branches of a huge

tree. They were then measured to see if they were the right height for their age. All this while hundreds more were getting their jabs in the empty school building.

I was pleased to see evidence of recent involvement by charities Save the Children, and from UNICEF, for which I am a Parliamentary Ambassador, in buildings, equipment, and therapeutic food such as “Plumpy Nuts.”

The programmes for tracking the weight of children are hugely important for the ongoing monitoring of development. Malawi has one of the highest rates of “stunting” anywhere in the world. A stunted child suffers from low height for age as a result of a severe and ongoing nutritionally deficient diet. Stunting is irreversible and can have lifelong negative effects on physical and mental development. Yet this is a challenge that countries are only becoming aware of, with the U.K. running its first nutrition specific programme in the country.

I along with other Parliamentarians, including the former Leader of the Liberal Democrats, Lord David Steel, visited a site

while motivating and encouraging its government to do more for its people. set up specifically to treat severe malnutrition in infants and to provide nutritional support to pregnant and breastfeeding mothers.

Many of the projects in Malawi are supported by aid from the U.K. Government, and the group met with the country representatives from the U.K. Department for International Development (DfID) to discuss the effectiveness of these taxpayer funded schemes. It was reassuring to see how dedicated the DfID team in Malawi are, working under such difficult circumstances.

I also met Rt. Hon Ephraim Chiume, MP, Minister of Foreign Affairs in Malawi, to discuss wider issues engaging the two countries.

It was encouraging to see the progress the country is making in tackling some of its most pressing health concerns.

Moreover, it was a great opportunity to see how U.K. aid money is reaching those people genuinely most in need, providing life-saving vaccines and delivering treatment for TB and malnutrition, all the way out to remote villages.

It is paramount that Malawi maintains support from the U.K.

Strengthening the U.K’s relationship with Malawi in the context of public health Malawi’s economy is making a fragile recovery from a particularly difficult few years which have included significant problems in agriculture, a lack of foreign exchange reserves, fuel shortages, and a period of political change when the presidency changed hands.

Despite these challenges, progress in health is evident, especially in reducing child deaths.

Malawi is on course to meet Millennium Development Goal 4 (to reduce child mortality by two thirds), and has made good progress on vital steps that are being taken to address tuberculosis (TB) and under-nutrition.

In such a challenging environment, the presence of the U.K. as a partner with the Malawian Government, and as its largest aid donor, is vital in ensuring it can manage these problems, and deliver essential health services to those most in need. This is precisely where U.K. aid should be concentrating, in the most challenging settings and where it can make the biggest difference.

52 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Chidgey.indd 52

24/03/2014 13:29:39

Parliamentary Report

NEWS AND LEGISLATION FROM COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTS QUÉBEC: Bills in response to the LacMégantic Railway accident Page 55

AUSTRALIA: Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Act 2013 Page 58

NEW ZEALAND: Royal Succession Bill Page 63

NEW ZEALAND: Maori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Maori) Amendment Bill Page 65

PRE-PRE-ELECTION BUDGET FOCUSES ON JOB CREATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH

Page 54

FILLING CASUAL SENATE VACANCIES IN AUSTRALIA

INDIA GOVERNMENT PASSES ANTICORRUPTION BILL

DEBATING THE EUROPEAN REFERENDUM BILL

Page 57

Page 59

Page 66

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 53

Parliamentary news pages.indd 53

24/03/2014 13:37:27

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

CANADA

PRE-PRE-ELECTION BUDGET FOCUSES ON JOB CREATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH On 11 February, Hon. Jim Flaherty, MP, Minister of Finance, delivered his tenth federal budget. With a general election expected in October 2015, some observers referred to it as a pre-pre-election budget. For the most part, it continued along the path set out in the government’s previous budgets and focused on encouraging job creation and economic growth, while aiming for a balanced budget in 2015.

Reducing the federal budget deficit has been a government priority ever since it resorted to stimulus spending to address the global economic and financial crisis. At the height of the crisis in 2009-2010, the deficit reached $55.6 billion. By 2012-13, it had been reduced to $18.9 billion and the government anticipates that by 2015-2016, there will be a budget surplus of $6.4 billion.

In terms of the ratio of debt-togross domestic product (GDP), the government hopes that by 2017-18 this will have fallen from roughly 33 per cent currently to below the pre-recession level of about 28 per cent.

Except for an increase in the taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products, which will increase government revenue by $685 million in 2014-2015, the government plans to reduce the deficit largely by controlling direct programme spending. It plans to keep this spending at about the 2010-11 level over the next six years, with anticipated savings over that period of $9.1 billion. In addition to freezing

Hon. Jim Flaherty, MP

departmental operating budgets for two years, the government will seek changes to public servants’ disability and sick leave benefits when it negotiates the next round of contracts and will seek to increase the amount paid by retired public servants who participate in the Public Service Health Care Plan (PSHCP). For these people, the government currently pays 75 per cent of the benefit costs and it will reduce this to 50 per cent of the costs.

This would result in increased costs for retirees and an individual retired public servant can expect the cost to go from $261 per year to roughly $550. At the same time, future retired public servants will need to work six years to be eligible to participate in the PSCHCP, rather than the current two years. Overall, the government expects that changes to the PSCHCP to result in savings of $7.4 billion over six years.

Despite the government’s emphasis on reducing the deficit, the budget also contained a few

modest spending promises.

These included $1.5 billion over the next decade to fund university research, $500 million over two years to support the Canadian automobile industry, $391.5 million over five years to improve infrastructure in national parks and $305 million over five years to expand broadband internet service in rural and northern communities. In addition, there were a number of measures to help Canadians find jobs, to increase trade and investment and to support responsible resource development. The budget also addressed consumer issues, by announcing that it will introduce legislation to cap wireless roaming rates and to reduce the gap between consumer prices in Canada and the United States.

While setting the stage for next year’s pre-election budget, Minister Flaherty was also careful to sound a note of caution, pointing out some of the external factors that could change the government’s forecasts.

In his speech in the House of Commons, he noted the world economy remained fragile, Canadian household debt was higher than he liked, and while many Canadians were looking for work, some employers could not find enough workers. He also said that a return to a surplus in a few years would not mean reckless government spending.

Legislation On 20 December 2013, the

54 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Parliamentary news pages.indd 54

24/03/2014 13:37:41

CANADA Supreme Court of Canada struck down Canada’s prostitution laws and gave Parliament a year to come up with a new approach.

The case revolved around sections of the Criminal Code that, in order to prevent prostitution from being a public nuisance, prohibit keeping a bawdy-house, living on the avails of prostitution, and communicating in public for the purposes of prostitution. The Court agreed with the plaintiffs

that these provisions put the safety and lives of prostitutes at risk, as they prevent them from, for example, hiring security guards or screening potential clients.

The Court ruled that the provisions are inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically section 7, which reads: “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the

right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.” The Court said that while Parliament has the power to pass laws against public nuisances, it cannot do so at the expense of prostitutes’ health and safety. In February, Hon. Peter MacKay, MP, Minister of Justice, said legislation would be introduced well before the December 2014 deadline set by the Court.

On 4 February 2014, Hon. Pierre Poilievre, MP, Minister of State for Democratic Reform, introduced legislation making significant amendments to the Canada Elections Act. The 242-page bill, known as the Fair Elections Act, will make a number of changes to the role of the Chief Electoral Officer and establish a 10-year term for that office rather than requiring him or her to retire at age 65. The Bill will also limit

THIRD READING: QUÉBEC The National Assembly of Québec undertook its fall sessional period on 17 September 2013. It passed 12 Bills during the period, including 11 unanimously, in sectors ranging from the social economy to mining.

Bills in response to the Lac-Mégantic Railway accident The first Bill passed was in response to the tragedy that occurred on 6 July 2013, in Ville de Lac-Mégantic. A train carrying 72 tank cars of crude oil derailed, causing an explosion that decimated the town centre. In addition to taking the lives of 47 people, the tragedy caused considerable damage to the environment and the economy. In the circumstances, the National Assembly had to act quickly to facilitate a return to normal life and the resumption of normal activities in the community.

During the first week of Assembly proceedings in September, the MNAs set aside certain rules governing the legislative process in order to pass Bill 57, An Act in response to the 6 July 2013 railway disaster in Ville de Lac-Mégantic. To foster continuity in the administration of the municipality, the Act deferred to 2015 the general municipal elections to be held in LacMégantic, as throughout Québec, in the fall of 2013. The Act also contains a number of measures to help the town meet certain needs, ensure safety and re-organize its territory. Similarly, on 6 December 2013, the Assembly passed a Bill establishing a special procedure to replace and reconstitute some 100,000 notarial deeds destroyed in the disaster.

Social economy On 10 October 2013, the Assembly unanimously passed Bill 27, the Social Economy Act. This framework Act recognizes the contribution of the social economy to the socioeconomic development of Québec, within numerous sectors of activity.

Two organizations grouping together social economy enterprises —the Chantier de l’économie sociale and the Conseil Québécois de la Coopération et de la Mutualité—are designated as the government’s primary interlocutors.

In collaboration with these organizations, the government must adopt an action plan before 1 April 2014, that includes reporting mechanisms as regards to the commitments it contains and the actions of the administration with respect to the social economy.

Moreover, the Act provides that ministers must take the social economy into consideration in their measures and programmes, and promote initiatives in this field in Québec and abroad.

Farm land On 30 October, the Assembly passed Bill 46, An Act to amend the Act respecting the acquisition of farm land by non-residents. Under its terms, non-residents who intend to buy farm land must live in Québec for 36 out of the 48 months that precede or follow, as the case may be, an acquisition of farm land. Furthermore, the Act limits the total area of farm land that the Commission de protection du territoire agricole du Québec may authorize to be acquired in a year by persons who do not intend to settle in Québec.

Public infrastructures The Assembly passed a second Bill on 30 October, establishing governance rules for public infrastructure investment planning and public infrastructure management. Two organizations, the Société immobilière du Québec and Infrastructure Québec, were amalgamated to form a joint-stock company called the “Société québécoise des infrastructures”.

The Société’s main mission is to support public bodies in managing their public infrastructure projects. In addition, the Conseil du Trésor will be required, each year, to propose to the government a plan for the public infrastructure investments to be made by government bodies over the following 10-year period. Ministers will be required to draw up and submit an annual management plan for the public infrastructure investments made by each minister’s department and by the public bodies under his or her authority.

Voluntary retirement savings plans Bill 39, the Voluntary Retirement Savings Plans Act, passed on 3 December, follows up on the report of the Expert Committee on the Future of the Québec Retirement System (D’Amours Report), tabled in the Assembly on 18 April 2013. It creates, effective from 1 July, 2014, a type of retirement plan that is accessible to all individuals, including self-employed workers.

Employers having five or more eligible employees who do not have a retirement plan must automatically enroll those employees in a plan, but are not required to contribute to the plan themselves.

Employees have the right to renounce membership of the plan. It is up to individual plan members to determine their own rate of contribution to the plan. Voluntary retirement savings plans are to be administered by insurers, trust companies or investment fund managers who must hold an authorization granted for that purpose by the Autorité des marchés financiers.

The plans must be registered with the Régie des rentes du Québec.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 55

Parliamentary news pages.indd 55

24/03/2014 13:37:54

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

the extent to which he or she can communicate with voters.

The Bill also changes the status of the Commissioner of Canada Elections, who enforces the Canada Elections Act and who is appointed by the Chief Electoral Officer. In the future, he or she will be appointed by the Director of Public Prosecutions and work out of that office, albeit independently.

Among some other noteworthy changes, the Fair Elections Act will change the rules regarding the identification of voters and eliminate the practice by which an elector may vouch for the identity of another elector.

The amendments will also address problems related to the unsolicited telephone calls political parties make to prospective voters and increase the limits for financial contributions to political parties.

In addition, the Bill will end the

CANADA prohibition on communicating election results from the eastern regions of the country before polls close in the western regions; social media has made this prohibition unworkable.

After debate at second reading, which, pursuant to a government motion, was limited to four days, the Fair Elections Act was referred to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

Membership changes in the Senate and the House of Commons Before Parliament adjourned for the holiday recess in December, Conservative Senators Hon. Gerald J. Comeau and Hon. David Braley retired before reaching the mandatory retirement age of 75 years. Conservative Senator Hon. Hugh Segal also announced that he would retire early in June 2014.

Mr Bruce Hyer, MP, who

had left the New Democratic Party caucus in April 2012 to sit as an independent, became the second member of the Green Party caucus, joining leader Hon. Elizabeth May, MP. In January 2014, Conservative Hon. Brian Jean, MP, resigned.

When the House resumed sitting on 27 January, four MPs (two Conservatives and two Liberals) who had been elected in by-elections in November 2013 took their seats.

Change in the size of House of Commons committees In December, the House of Commons concurred in a report from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs amending the Standing Orders to reduce the size of standing committees from 12 members to 10—six members from the governing Conservative party, three from the Official Opposition

THIRD READING: QUÉBEC Mining The Assembly’s fall sessional period ended on 6 December 2013. However, the Premier called an emergency sitting of the Assembly on 9 December and passed Bill 70, An Act to amend the Mining Act, introduced in the Assembly on 5 December. In the last few years, three attempts to reform mining legislation had stalled. The last of those attempts, Bill 43, was withdrawn from the Order Paper after the opposition MNAs, who have a majority in the Assembly, voted against its principle on 30 October 2013.

Under the new Act, a mining lease cannot be granted until a scoping and market study as regards to mineral processing in Québec is submitted. In addition, the government may, on reasonable grounds, require that the economic spinoffs within Québec of mining activities such as mineral processing be maximized.

A new chapter of the Mining Act is devoted to the consultation of native communities. Regional county municipalities are allowed to delimit any miningincompatible territory in their land use and development plan. In addition, the involvement of local communities is encouraged through the establishment of a monitoring committee for each project.

Mining development must be carried out in a manner respectful of the environment and of local communities. To that end, public consultations are to be conducted by the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement regarding all projects involving mines or mineral processing plants having a capacity of 2,000 metric tons or more per day and regarding rare earth projects. For the other projects, a consultation must be conducted by the mining company in accordance with government guidelines. Lastly, the quantity and value of the ore extracted from each mine and the royalties and other contributions paid to the State by the companies are to be made public.

Staffing in the public service Bill 41, An Act to amend the Public Service Act mainly with respect to staffing, was passed on 19 November 2013. It modernizes the selection process for public servants by eliminating competitions and lists of qualified candidates. These are replaced by other qualification mechanisms and banks of qualified persons. As well, government departments and bodies will now be required to table a five-year human resources strategy.

New Democratic Party and one from the Liberal Party.

As a result, before committees could resume work when the House resumed sitting in January, they had to wait for the Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to establish a new list of members and then elect a chair.

Parliamentary reform In November 2013, the Supreme Court heard arguments on the government’s reference on proposed Senate reforms.

While the Supreme Court prepared its opinion, Senate reform was kept in the spotlight when in late January, Liberal Party Leader Mr Justin Trudeau, MP, suddenly announced that the 32 Liberal Party Senators would no longer be part of the national Liberal caucus—which was made up of Senators and MPs—and would sit as independents.

Caught off-guard, the former Liberal Senators decided nonetheless to continue sitting as a group known as the “Liberal Senate caucus.”

In a statement on 29 January, the Speaker of the Senate, Hon. Noël A. Kinsella, ruled that, under the Rules of the Senate, the group met the definition of a recognized party and he recognized Sen. the Hon. James S. Cowan as the leader of the group.

Meanwhile, the House of Commons agreed to a motion instructing the Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to look into establishing an electronic petitioning system.

The Committee was given a year to report its findings to the House. As it stands, petitions must be submitted on paper. In a separate motion, the House of Commons also gave the Committee six months to study the election of committee chairs by the House of Commons through the use of a preferential ballot system. Currently, committees elect their own chairs.

56 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Parliamentary news pages.indd 56

24/03/2014 13:38:06

AUSTRALIA

FILLING SENATE CASUAL VACANCIES IN AUSTRALIA As part of supplementary budget estimates between 18-22 November 2013 the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee examined the filling of Senate casual vacancies. The examination focused on the vacancies caused by the resignation of Sen. the Hon. Bob Carr. At the election on 7 September, Senator Carr was elected to a new term commencing on 1 July 2014. Soon after the election he resigned and was required to lodge a double resignation, from his current term and from his term commencing in 2014. The Senate Procedural Information Bulletin (SPIB) noted that “while this has not happened before, the situation is contemplated in Odgers’ Australian Senate Practice in the case of a Senator either choosing to resign or becoming subject to a disqualification”. The President of the Senate advised the Governor of New South Wales of the double vacancy. Following receipt of advice from the Crown Solicitor, the New South Wales Parliament opted to fill only one of the vacancies. Senator Deb O’Neil was appointed for the vacancy up until 30 June 2014. During estimates consideration of this matter, the Clerk of the Senate, Dr Rosemary Laing commented that “the New South Wales Parliament has taken the view, quite validly, that, because there is currently only one vacancy, they have filled the current vacancy until 30 June 2014. That means

that at some point in the future, and perhaps following the logic of the advice that the New South

Sen. the Hon. John Faulkner

Wales Parliament tabled, they will fill the second vacancy at some point next year. I expect not until after 1 July”.

Senator the Hon. John Faulkner noted that “if that process is followed, we will see a situation where the vacancy will not be filled until effectively there is a vacancy. So it is not beyond the realms of possibility, if this current course of action is progressed, that we would see Senator O’Neill cease to become a senator on 30 June 2014, and then become a Senator again at a new joint sitting of the New South Wales Parliament?”

Senator Faulkner asked what issues would arise for the Senator and her staff when she ceases to be a Senator on 30 June. Dr Laing responded that “the issues that arise are both procedural and practical. In practical terms, Senator O’Neill will cease to be a Senator on 30 June—therefore,

she will not continue to be paid as a Senator during the interim; her staff will be subject to the provisions in the MOP(S) Act that cover parliamentary staff; she will have the usual period of grace with her office accommodation, and of course we would look at being very flexible with regard to her”.

On a different matter, the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee examined the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) over its administration of the Western Australian halfSenate election in which a recount was ordered and subsequently 1370 ballot papers were found to be missing. The Australian Electoral Commissioner, Mr Ed Killesteyn, commented that “the failure to account for all Senate ballot papers in Western Australia has left doubt in the minds of the candidates and wider electorate about the results of the Senate election, something I was seeking to overcome when I ordered that a recount should take place in accordance with section 278 of the act in respect of the announcement of the first poll result”.

Mr Killesteyn advised that “on 15 November 2013, the Australian Electoral Commission lodged a petition with the High Court, acting as the Court of Disputed Returns. The petition was lodged on the basis that the result of the Western Australian Senate election was likely to be affected as a result of the omission of 1370

Senate ballots misplaced by the AEC and that the election should be declared void”.

Senator Dean Smith noted that of the six Senate positions available “there should not be dispute regarding the first four candidates”. Mr Killesteyn agreed stating that “there were no differences in the first four candidates irrespective of whether the missing ballots were included or not”. Senator Smith then made the point as to why it was necessary to seek to void the entire election through the petition. Mr Paul Pirani, AEC, responded that “the issue here is that it is a half-Senate election.

We cannot divide up that election.

The writs that were issued by the Governor for Western Australia was for a half-Senate election of six senators. We could not think of a way in which the first four senators could somehow be separated from the total election which is a half-Senate election of six senators”.

Senator Lee Rhiannon asked the AEC what lesson had been learnt from the incident and whether “more training needs to be given to people following an election so that you have more experienced staff”.

Mr Killesteyn responded that “it is a range of things. It is training but it is also moving to efficient systems. The fact that we have had technology applied to the pre-election period in terms of the close of rolls, notwithstanding that we have set records across all factors, enabled us to do 85

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 57

Parliamentary news pages.indd 57

24/03/2014 13:38:18

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

per cent of the 670,000-odd enrolment transactions that we carried out in the close of rolls period online. We had 1.3 million applications for postal votes.

We would not have survived had we not introduced an online postal vote application system, which lightened the load by

AUSTRALIA some 370,000. You have to not only deal with the efficiency and effectiveness of using modern technology but also deal with the people challenges”.

Senator the Hon. Jacinta Collins focused on the decision by the AEC to appoint a retired Australian Federal Police (AFP)

commissioner, Mr Mick Keelty, to conduct an inquiry rather than call in the AFP from the start.

Mr Killesteyn responded “that we had no information about the circumstances of the ballot papers being missing. Just like any other organization, before we make a referral to the AFP, we

try to establish some facts. That is what this inquiry is intended to do: to establish some facts.

If ultimately Mr Keelty believes that there was some criminality or the potential for criminality, and provides some information as to that, that might be a basis for us to refer to the AFP. But, at

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Act 2013 On 15 November the Treasurer, Hon. Joe Hockey, MP, introduced the Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill for the purpose of increasing the Commonwealth debt ceiling from the current $300 billion to $500 billion. Mr Hockey commented that “the legislative limit has been lifted three times since it was introduced by Labor in 2008. Of course, we never had to have a debt limit, because we paid off the debt that we inherited previously from Labor. And, what’s more, we left the previous Labor government with more than $50 billion in the bank. So, we did not need to have a debt limit, because what we did was wipe out all of the net debt and left money in the bank”.

The Labor Opposition took a hard line approach to the government’s proposal arguing that they would only agree to raise the debt limit to $400 billion in the first instance. The Shadow Treasurer, Hon. Chris Bowen, MP suggested that if the government claims that it would need to introduce legislation in another six to 12 months raising the debt limit beyond $400 billion then it should. Mr Bowen stated “well, if they need to come back for more they should come back, and we will consider it based on the evidence put before the House. And we will be constructive, just as we are being constructive on this occasion”.

The Australian Greens initially supported Labor’s approach to increasing the debt limit to $400 billion in the first instance. However, the Greens and the government later struck a deal to scrap the debt ceiling altogether in exchange for the government agreeing to a range of accountability measures. The Greens currently control the balance of power in the Senate.

Senator Christine Milne stated that “the Australian Greens are pleased the government has agreed to our proposals to abolish the phoney debt ceiling and to increase parliamentary scrutiny and justification for government debt”.

Senator Milne further stated that “because of the Greens agreement, the public will now be able to see whether the government is incurring good debt to invest in our future, or bad debt to cover up a shortfall in revenue. It’s time Australia had a much more mature debate about how to fund the long-term infrastructure that the nation needs like high-speed rail and better public transport. The Commonwealth will now have to be much more upfront and transparent about how projects will be funded”.

During debate in the Senate on the Green’s proposals, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Sen. the Hon. Penny Wong, noted that much of what Senator Milne was seeking was already available on the public record.

Consequently she asked the Assistant Treasurer, Sen. the Hon Arthur Sinodinos, if “he could advise the Senate of what additional information the

Australian Greens have actually obtained as a result of the agreement with the Treasurer”. Senator Sinodinos responded that “what the debt statement will be doing is consolidating information that, as Senator Wong mentions, is available in a number of places. As part of this, it will also be including, as I understand it, the within-year peak in debt, which can fluctuate”. He noted that “importantly, these debt statements will not be issued just at the time of the Mid-Year Fiscal and Economic Outlook, the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook or the budget; they would be issued—and hopefully this would be a rare occurrence—every time there is an increment of $50 billion or more since the last budget, MYEFO, PEFO or additional statement in the actual face value of Commonwealth stock and securities on issue”.

The House of Representatives accepted the Senate’s compromise offer on the Bill after initially disagreeing to the Senate’s amendment to reduce the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion. The Senate Procedural Information Bulletin (SPIB) noted that the “proceedings were somewhat unusual in that the Senate made a request, as well as amendments, on the consideration of the message from the House disagreeing to the Senate’s amendments”.

The passage of the legislation through the Senate was notable because of the late stage in which the Senate made a request. The SPIB notes that “when requests are made at an earlier stage in proceedings, the Bill is not read a third time in the Senate and any amendments are not conveyed to the House, until the House has transmitted its decision on the requests to the Senate and the Senate has accepted the decision”. In this particular case the Bill had already been read a third time.

Section 53 of the constitution provides that the Senate may not amend a Bill so as to increase any proposed charge or burden on the people.

However, in these cases section 53 does allow the Senate to make ‘requests’ of the House of Representatives to omit or amend certain items.

The SPIB notes that section 53 provides that a request may be made at any stage and this is the crucial point in the context of this Bill. Senate standing order 140 elaborates on the procedures available to the Senate under section 53 and expressly provides that a request may be made at specified stages in the consideration of a Bill including on consideration of any message from the House of Representatives referring to the Bill. The SPIB notes that “despite the availability of this procedure since the standing order was first agreed to in 1903, it is not apparent that the Senate has ever made a request at this late stage in proceedings, as part of an alternative package consequent on the rejection of the Senate’s amendments”.

58 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Parliamentary news pages.indd 58

24/03/2014 13:38:34

AUSTRALIA/INDIA New Clerk of the House of Representatives

Hon. Bronwyn Bishop, MP

the moment, we have nothing”.

Following further questioning, Mr Killesteyn advised that the AFP indicated that they would not accept a referral early in the process because “there was no information as to the circumstances of the missing ballots”.

On 12 December the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Bronwyn Bishop, MP, announced the appointment of Mr David Elder as the new Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Mrs Bishop commented that “I am pleased to announce the appointment of Mr David Elder as Clerk of the House of Representatives, effective from 1 January 2014, following the retirement of Mr Bernard Wright”.

As the principal advisor in relation to the proceedings of the Parliament and CEO of the Department of House of Representatives, the Clerk of the House is crucial in maintaining Australia’s parliamentary democracy. Mr Elder was

appointed to the position in accordance with the selection process required under the Parliamentary Service Act 1999.

The Act requires that a person cannot be appointed as Clerk unless the Speaker “is satisfied that the person has extensive knowledge of, and experience in, relevant Parliamentary law, procedure and practice”, and consults with Members before making the appointment.

Mrs Bishop noted that Mr Elder began working for the Department of House of Representatives in 1981, and has extensive experience in parliamentary committees, including the House Standing Committee on Finance and Public Administration which, in the early 1990s conducted a major

inquiry into the Australian banking industry. Mr Elder has been the Deputy Clerk of the House since 2010, and secretary of the House of Representatives Committee of Privileges and Members’ Interests since 2000. Mr Elder has a Master of Arts degree and an Executive Master of Public Administration degree”.

The retiring Clerk Mr Bernard Wright worked for the House of Representatives for more than 40 years, and had been Clerk of the House since December 2009.

Mrs Bishop stated that “I would like to publically thank Mr Wright for his enormous contribution to our Parliament, his dedication and the knowledge he has freely given myself and others. I wish Bernard an enjoyable, well-deserved retirement”.

INDIA GOVERNMENT PASSES ANTI-CORRUPTION BILL The enactment of an effective anti-corruption Bill called the Lokpal Bill dominated the 2011 Monsoon and Winter Sessions of Parliament. The demand was made by the civil society groups led by Shri Anna Hazare. A Joint Drafting Committee (JDC) consisting of the representatives of Shri Hazare and the Union Government was constituted by the government to prepare a draft of the Bill. After several meetings of the JDC, the government introduced the Lokpal Bill, 2011 in the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2011. The Bill provided for the establishment of the institution of Lokpal (Ombudsman) to inquire into

Dr Manmohan Singh, MP allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries. It was referred to the Departmentally Related Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law & Justice for examination and report on 8 August 2011. Shri

Hazare asked that their version of the Bill called ‘Jan Lokpal Bill’ be passed by Parliament by 15 August 2011. The Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, Smt. Sushma Swaraj, MP, (BJP) asked why the Prime Minister was being kept out of the purview of the Lokpal Bill introduced by the government.

On 17 August 2011, the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, MP, made a statement in the Lok Sabha on the issue of Lokpal and the agitation launched by Shri Hazare, who was arrested on 16 August. While agreeing that a Lokpal Bill must be passed as early as possible, he also insisted that it was the Executive’s

responsibility to draft a Bill and place it before Parliament. It was Parliament’s job to debate and adopt the Bill. In the process of adopting the Bill, there would be opportunities for Shri Hazare and others to present their views to the Standing Committee.

The Prime Minister said he was not aware of any constitutional philosophy or principle that allowed any one to question the sole prerogative of Parliament to make a law. In making a law on Lokpal, the government had faithfully adhered to the wellsettled principles and Shri Hazare was questioning these principles and claimed a right to impose his Jan Lokpal Bill upon Parliament.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 59

Parliamentary news pages.indd 59

24/03/2014 13:38:49

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

The representatives of the people in Parliament “must be allowed to do the job that they were elected for”, said the Prime Minister.

On 27 August 2011, the then Finance Minister and the Leader of the Lok Sabha, Shri Pranab Mukherjee, MP, made identical statements in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, on the issues relating to setting up the Bill. He highlighted the issues of the Citizen’s Charter, setting up of Lokayukatas at

President Pranab Mukherjee

state levels and bringing lower bureaucracy under the ambit of the Lokpal. These issues had been raised by Shri Hazare and his team members through their Jan Lokpal Bill. The Minister proposed to adopt a resolution by consensus at the end of the debate which might satisfy Shri Hazare. Shri Mukherjee, however, asserted that the supremacy of parliamentary democracy and constitutional framework must be maintained.

As provided in the Jan Lokpal Bill, the anti-corruption wing of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should be brought under the Lokpal. Smt. Swaraj said that the selection body for appointment of Lokpal should not be dominated by the government and proposed to have more members from the outside.

The House agreed in principle on the following issues: A Citizen’s Charter, lower bureaucracy under the Lokpal through appropriate mechanism,

INDIA and establishment of Lokayuktas in the States. As requested

by Shri Mukherjee, Speaker, Smt. Meira Kumar transmitted the proceedings to the Departmentally Related Standing Committee for its perusal while formulating its recommendations on the Lokpal Bill.

In its report, presented on 9 December 2011, the Standing Committee made a number of recommendations suggesting major amendments to the Bill with regards to the scope and the content. Subsequently, the government withdrew the Bill and introduced a new one, the more comprehensive Lokpal and the Lokayuktas Bill, in the Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011. On 27 December 2011 when the Bill was placed before the Lok Sabha for its consideration, Smt. Swaraj said the Bill suffered from enormous discrepancies and termed the Bill as weak. She suggested for referring the Bill back to the Standing Committee for further improvement. Intervening in the debate, the Prime Minister said the task of legislation must rest with the legislators; others could persuade and have their voices heard. With regards to the CBI functioning under the Lokpal, the government believed this would create an Executive structure outside Parliament, which was accountable to no-one. The Lok Sabha eventually passed the Bill on 27 December. However, the Constitution Amendment Bill seeking to provide constitutional status to Lokpal and Lokayukta fell through due to the lack of requisite numbers as required for constitutional amendment bills.

On 29 December 2011the Rajya Sabha also had a discussion on the Bill as passed by the Lok Sabha. The Bill could not be passed before the Rajya Sabha was adjourned sine die at midnight. Subsequently, the Rajya Sabha adopted a motion on 21 May 2012 referring the Bill as passed by the Lok Sabha

to its Select Committee for examination and report.

Smt. Meira Kumar

The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, included some of the following: • An establishment of the institution of the Lokpal at the Centre and the Lokayukta at the level of the State, thus providing a uniform vigilance and anti-corruption road map for the nation both at the Centre and at the States; • The Lokpal should consist of a chairperson with a maximum of eight members of which 50 per cent were to be judicial members and the remaining 50 per cent to come from amongst the Scheduled Castes (SCs), the Scheduled Tribes (STs), the Other Backward Classes (OBCs), minorities and women; and • The selection of the chairperson and the members of Lokpal would be through a selection committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of India or a sitting Supreme Court Judge nominated by the Chief Justice of India and an eminent jurist to be nominated by the President of India.

The Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Shri V. Narayanasamy, MP, moved the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2011 for consideration of the Rajya Sabha on 13 December 2013. On 17 December, when the Bill was taken up for consideration, Prof.

Ram Gopal Yadav (SP) raised certain apprehensions. He said the Bill should not be passed as it was not in the interest of the nation as once enacted, the bureaucracy would be afraid to take decisions.

Shri Kapil Sibal said the Select Committee had carefully looked at various provisions of the Bill and made comprehensive recommendations. He praised the Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Shri Arun Jaitley (BJP), for taking a very constructive approach to ensure that there was a comprehensive and thought-out legislation. The Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha recommended to remove the part of the Bill relating to State Lokayuktas. It was one of the provisions which had stalled the passage of the Bill in December 2011. The recommendation was to set up an institution of the Lokayukta through enactment of a law by the State Legislature within a period of one year from the date of commencement of the Act. The government accepted the recommendation. The Select

Shri Kapil Sibal, MP

Committee had recommended a number of amendments in the Bill with a view to strengthening the CBI such as setting up a directorate of prosecution headed by a Director of Prosecution.

The essence of the legislation, according to Shri Sibal, was that the investigating agencies would be independent, and the appointment of the CBI Director

60 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Parliamentary news pages.indd 60

24/03/2014 13:39:13

INDIA

People protesting in favour of the Lokpal Bill

would be carried out through an independent and transparent process. The prosecution by the CBI agency with reference to matters referred to it by the Lokpal would also be overlooked by the Lokpal. Consequently, there was no element of governmental interference in dealing with matters of corruption.

Shri Jaitley (BJP) said the debate was an extension of the debate held on 29 December 2011. He said the Samjwadi Party’s contention that people would be afraid to take decisions was unfounded and, in fact, people would be afraid of taking wrong decisions. The fight against

corruption could be carried out within the federal structure of the country, and search and seizure would be without prior permission as this would help in checking corruption.

Shri Satish Chandra Misra (BSP) welcomed the Bill and said his party was against corruption.

He suggested that after the Bill was passed, the government should send the Act as a model to all the States, asking them to consider and adopt this within a one-year period. Shri Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M) said corruption had two sides - supply and demand, and it would be difficult to stop corruption without

tackling the supply side. Funding of political parties by corporate houses was also responsible for corruption and should be banned through amendment in the law.

Referring to the Opposition leader’s view that bringing all the private agencies, etc. into the ambit of the Lokpal would be unmanageable and it would be a gross interference in the democratic rights and privacy of such agencies. He suggested that the public-private partnerships and the corporate sector needed to be under the purview of the Lokpal.

Shri Sukhendu Sekhar Roy (AITC) referring to the provision

that “the chairperson or a member shall not be a member of Parliament or a member of the Legislature of any Sate” wanted to know why only judges would be appointed to head such bodies.

Shri Shivanand Tiwari (JD-U) welcomed the Bill commented that legislation alone would not be able to check corruption. Dr V. Maitreyan (AIADMK) suggested excluding the Prime Minister, since the Prime Minister was already covered under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and any misconduct on the part of the Prime Minister could be investigated otherwise. Similarly, the Chief Minister of any State

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 61

Parliamentary news pages.indd 61

24/03/2014 13:39:25

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

should also be kept out of the purview of the State Lokayukta.

Dr K. P. Ramalingam (DMK) while expressing his party’s wholehearted support for the Bill had doubts about the efficiency of the CBI. While bringing the Chief Minister of a State under the purview of Lokayukta, care had to be taken against any misuse of the law. He also supported the view that religious institutions and charitable institutions should not be exempt from the purview of the Bill.

Shri Baishnab Parida (BJD) said it was the duty of all the political parties, the government, members of Parliament and the people of the country to see to it that this Bill was implemented in letter and spirit. For Shri Rajeev Chandrasekhar (Independent) the Bill was probably the single most important legislation that would be passed in the postIndependence India on the issue of governance. The future and current generations would thank the MPs for their near unanimous support for the Bill and their efforts at cleaning up governance. Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad (BJP) thanked the social activist Shri Hazare for inspiring Parliamentarians through his

Shri Thol Thirumaavalavan

movement and for early passage of the Lokpal Bill.

Shri M.P. Achuthan (CPI) stated that the unholy nexus between the government, political leadership, corporate houses and the bureaucracy was the root

INDIA cause of corruption in India. He argued that leaving the corporate houses and the private sector out of the purview of the Lokpal was however its main drawback.

Dr Bhalchandra Mungekar (INC) while supporting the Bill said bringing the incumbent Prime Minister under the purview of Lokpal would lead to an erosion of moral authority of the Prime Minister. He believed the source of corruption in the country was basically the absence of the rule of law. Shri Birendra Prasad Baishya (AGP) said strong Lokayuktas should be established in all the States simultaneously to curb corruption. Shri Naresh Gujral (SAD) opined that if guilty officers or public functionaries were not given exemplary punishment, the institution of Lokpal would be totally ineffective.

Replying to the debate, Shri Sibal hoped that all State governments would take note of the strong Lokpal Bill passed

by Parliament as a model Bill.

The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill which was already in place dealt with the supply side corruption. As far as the issue of Prime Minister was concerned, it was the consensus of the House that the Prime Minister should be included, added the Minister. The Bill, as amended, was passed.

On 18 December 2013, the Lok Sabha took up the motion for consideration of the amendments made by the Rajya Sabha in the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2011. Smt. Kumar, in view of the expectations of the people regarding the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, directed that the House might take up consideration of amendments made by Rajya Sabha in the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2011 before the notices of Motion of No-Confidence given by some members were brought before the House.

Moving the motion for

consideration of the amendments made by Rajya Sabha in the Bill, Shri Sibal said the discussion on this Bill had been going on for the last two and a half years, and the Lok Sabha had already discussed the Bill before passing it on 27 December 2011. Since comprehensive discussions had already been taken place, he requested the members to pass it without further discussion.

Smt. Sushma Swaraj, MP

Smt. Swaraj pointed out that on 27 December 2013 when the Bill was brought before the Lok Sabha, she argued that the Bill would not create a strong and effective Lokpal given its many flaws.

She said she had suggested referring the Bill to the Standing Committee once again which was not accepted and the Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha.

She was happy that Rajya Sabha took cognizance of the weakness in the Bill and sent it to a Select Committee. She complimented the members and Chairman of the Select Committee for bringing an extremely good Bill by incorporating 15 recommendations. She was happy that the government even though it had reservations on certain recommendations, accepted all recommendations.

Shri Rahul Gandhi (INC) said the establishment of the Lokpal was necessary to strengthen the fight against corruption and ensure accountability of public officials to the people.

As the Lokpal Bill alone was not adequate to fight corruption there was need for a comprehensive anti-corruption code in the country. He said all pending anti-corruption Bills should be passed before the expiry of the term of the Fifteenth Lok Sabha.

Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav (SP) said the Lokpal Bill was fraught with such dangers that officers would avoid responsibility. He requested the president of the INC party to withdraw the Bill.

Shri Dara Singh Chauhan (BSP) stressed on enforcing the legislation with utmost honesty.

Shri R. Dhruvanarayana (INC) hoped that the Bill would help the government clean up the Executive system and bring more transparency.

Many Members including Shri Kalyan Banerjee (AITC), Shri Sudip Bandyopadhyay (AITC) and Dr Mirza Mehboob Beg (J&KNC) wholeheartedly supported the Bill. Shri Thirumaavalavan insisted on including the chairpersons of National Commission of SCs and STs, Women and Minorities in the selection committee of the Lokpal. He requested the government include the corporate

Shri Rahul Gandhi

sector under the purview of Lokpal.

At the end of the debate, the motion was adopted and the amendments made by the Rajya Sabha were agreed to. The Bill received Presidential assent on 1 January 2014.

62 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Parliamentary news pages.indd 62

24/03/2014 13:39:38

NEW ZEALAND

NEW REGIME FOR NEW ZEALAND MPS’ REMUNERATION AND SERVICES The Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill, which was passed with unanimous support on 14 December 2013, brings into a single statute all the provisions governing members’ remuneration, services and allowances. The Bill, introduced in 2011, followed a 2010 report

Hon. Christopher Finlayson, MP

by the Law Commission calling for greater transparency, clarity and independence in light of the complexity of the existing provisions and public concern.

Introducing the second reading on behalf of the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General, Hon. Christopher Finlayson, MP, (National) said that under the Bill an independent authority, the Remuneration Authority, would be “responsible for determining accommodation services for MPs and Ministers, and also travel services for family members of MPs. The Speaker is responsible for setting directions on travel and communication services for MPs and party and member

support funding, and the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services is responsible for determining any additional travel services for Ministers over and above those set by the Speaker for Members of Parliament”. At the third reading Mr Finlayson said that this division of responsibility reflected intersecting interests, “one interest being that of having entitlements determined independently from those who receive them, and the other being the democratic interest in the proper operation of the House and the ability of its members to carry out their functions”.

The Bill as introduced would have shifted responsibility for some travel services from the Speaker to the Remuneration Authority. Hon. Ruth Dyson, MP, (Labour) who chaired the parliamentary select committee examining the Bill, said: “We

Hon. Ruth Dyson, MP

changed, by unanimous agreement…the provision in regard to the travel for Members of Parliament. Because we view the travel that Members of

our view that the work-related requirement of a Member of Parliament to be able to travel to

Parliament undertake as being a fundamental part of the work of a Member of Parliament. It was

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND Royal Succession Bill The Royal Succession Bill passed through its Second Reading, Committee of the whole House stage and Third Reading on 10 December 2013. The Bill implements in New Zealand law changes to the rules of Royal succession that remove male primogeniture in succession to the throne, the restriction on sovereigns marrying Catholics, and the rule that all descendants of King George II must have the sovereign’s consent to marry.

At the third reading the Minister of Justice, Hon. Judith Collins, MP, (National) said: “The changes result from an agreement made at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth in October 2011. All 16 realms of which Her Majesty the Queen is Sovereign agreed to the three specific changes.”

Speaking in support, Mr Scott Simpson, MP, (National) noted: “These days it seems, by our standards of society, that anything other than a gender-neutral royal succession would be something completely unacceptable in a

modern society.” Ms Tracey Martin, MP, (New Zealand First) said: “It is wonderful to see this House, along with 16 other nations, endorse the fact that a woman can stand there and rule equally as well as—if not better than—any man in history.”

Hon. Maryan Street, MP, (Labour) observed that “this Bill is a sign of modernization. We are slowly, 479 years on, making our way to the 21st century.”

However, Mr Andrew Little, MP, (Labour) expressed the “hope that this might be the first step to a period of reflection, so that we might make a change so that we do not have to pass more laws about an institution that is increasingly less relevant to us”. Mr Gareth Hughes, MP, (Green) stated: “What this Bill does is discriminate against New Zealanders, because what we are seeing is an English head of State for New Zealand…I cannot vote for a Bill that enshrines discrimination…But I am also not going to vote against modernizing and against ending sexist, discriminatory practices”.

The Bill passed with 97 votes in favour and 16 abstentions.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 63

Parliamentary news pages.indd 63

24/03/2014 13:39:54

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

perform their duties…is really critical to not only fulfilling your job as a Member of Parliament but also ensuring that we have a healthy democracy.”

The Bill also imposes new reporting requirements on travel and accommodation costs and parties’ use of the inter-parliamentary relations programme. Mr Chris Auchinvole, MP, (National) said: “It is important that the public has confidence in the regime for setting entitlements. The Bill puts more power in the hands of independent decision-makers appointed to do the job. The Speaker and the government have already taken several steps to improve transparency around entitlements, and this Bill takes that a step further and sets it in legislation.”

New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill The New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill, which passed its Third Reading in a personal vote on 12 November, gives legal effect to an agreement between the government and Skycity Entertainment Group Ltd. Skycity will build a $402 million convention centre near the site of its casino in Auckland and

Ms Metiria Turei, MP

operate it for 35 years. In return, the government is extending Skycity’s casino licence until 2048 and granting regulatory concessions, including allowing the casino to add an additional

NEW ZEALAND 230 single terminal gaming machines and 40 gaming tables and to operate cashless, cardbased technology and ticket-in, ticket-out technology.

Deputy Prime Minister Hon. Bill English, MP, outlined the economic benefits of the agreement, saying: “The Bill will enable the construction

Hon. Bill English, MP

of [a] convention centre that seats up to 3,500 delegates.

This will be achieved with very little, if any, investment by New Zealand taxpayers.” In response to Opposition criticism in earlier readings about the benefits to Skycity, Mr English compared the Bill to Treaty of Waitangi settlements and the Rugby World Cup legislation, adding that “many pieces of legislation confer benefits on a particular party or activity”, and noting that “the government could not function if contracts did not extend past the ending of particular governments”. He also drew attention to provisions in the agreement requiring Skycity to pay compensation to the government if it breached its operating standards.

Ms Metiria Turei, MP, (Co-Leader, Green) queried the government’s claims about the agreement’s economic benefits, particularly the job numbers: “There might be around 350 jobs in construction [and] 300 jobs maybe in the operation of [the centre]—certainly not the 800

and the 1,000 that [Ministers] talk about.”

Citing the Deputy AuditorGeneral’s report into the process leading up to the government’s decision to negotiate solely with Skycity, Mr Andrew Williams, MP, (New Zealand First) said: “The Auditor-General concluded that Skycity got special treatment…after the Prime Minister personally intervened and had meetings with Skycity.

The Auditor-General’s office determined that Skycity was treated very differently to others tendering for the contract.”

Leader of the Opposition, Hon. David Cunliffe, MP, (Labour) said that under a future Labour Government “there will be one set of rules for all again”. He also said: “Labour will regulate to prevent gaming harm…we will make sure that the proper antigaming functions of government are upheld, and there will be no compensation for the normal processes of government. That means no guarantee of extra gaming tables, no guarantee of extra pokies, and certainly no guarantee of compensation.”

The Bill passed its third reading by 61 to 59.

of need and eligibility for State housing and income-related rent subsidies from Housing New Zealand to the Ministry of Social Development. During the Committee of the whole House Dr Smith had commented that “at heart is a position by the government that says that social housing is for the period of need, as compared with an Opposition that says that social housing is for life”.

Hon. Maryan Street, MP, (Labour) said the Bill “transfers money to the third sector for housing purposes, which we do not oppose, but we wish it were sufficient and not simply an abrogation of the government’s own responsibility to be the

Social housing reform The Social Housing Reform (Housing Restructuring and Tenancy Matters Amendment) Bill introduced under urgency on 16 May was passed under urgency on 19 November. Introducing the Third Reading, the Minister of Housing, Hon. Dr Nick Smith, MP, (National) said it contained “the biggest changes that have occurred in 75 years in the way in which the government provides housing for our citizens with the greatest need”.

Among the Bill’s significant changes were provisions for reviewable tenancies, making income-related rent subsidies available for the first time to community housing providers, and the transfer of assessment

leader and the prime provider in affordable housing and social housing in this country”. Ms Turei emphasized that the community housing providers “are not being properly funded and cannot cope with the influx”. However, Mr Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga, MP, (National) said: “we know that the community housing sector does a far better job than Housing New Zealand does to work with the needs of the disabled, to work with the needs of the mentally ill, and to have the wraparound services.”

Mr Denis O’Rourke, MP, (New Zealand First) was concerned that the policy of reviewable rentals was “based solely on the assessed ability of tenants to move into private

Hon. Maryan Street, MP

64 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Parliamentary news pages.indd 64

24/03/2014 13:40:07

NEW ZEALAND accommodation…when in the main population centres…the cost of homes has exploded and the rents for rental properties, if they can be found, have rocketed out of control”.

Mr Phil Twyford, MP, (Labour) asserted that the reviews “will do incalculable damage to families”, and that “expert submitters… said that this Minister of Housing’s policy, which gives him the power

Mandela and his cause.” Mr Kevin Hague, MP, (Green) echoed this sentiment: “If anything binds this country to Nelson Mandela and to his legacy, it is the work of the anti-apartheid movement.”

Mr Te Ururoa Flavell, MP, (Co-Leader, Māori Party) reflected on Mr Mandela’s legacy: “Some things have been achieved while some things remain for the generations to come to aim at.”

Hon. Peter Dunne, MP, (Leader, United Future) closed the debate by saying that “He will be a memory that will create a tradition that people will want to aspire to for the future … he will be able to rest contented and peacefully, his long walk to freedom is over, his journey is done, his people are safe, and his country is on the road to prosperity and to progressivity in the future.”

Mr Te Ururoa Flavell, MP

to throw senior citizens out of their houses simply because there are not enough State houses, will pose a public health risk”.

Obituary debate: Nelson Mandela On 10 December 2013 Parliament held a debate to express its sorrow at the passing of former South African President, Nelson Mandela. Members from many parties took the opportunity to speak. Mr English led the tributes, saying that “Nelson Mandela’s passing will cast a long shadow. His place in history is unassailable”. He noted that “the Prime Minister, Rt Hon. John Key, has led a small group of distinguished New Zealanders to pay respects to Mr Mandela at his official memorial service in South Africa”.

Referring to the 1981 South Africa rugby union tour of New Zealand, Hon. David Parker, MP, (Deputy Leader, Labour) said: “Many of us here marched in protest and in support of Mr

2013 adjournment debate In the final debate for 2013 Rt Hon. David Carter, MP, thanked members for their support in his first year as Speaker, singling out two “particular and challenging decisions” he had made. The first was to accept the resignation

Rt Hon. David Carter, MP

of the General Manager of Parliamentary Service following the release of information by staff to a ministerial inquiry, including information on the movement of a journalist within the parliamentary precincts.

He said this controversy had highlighted “the unique privacy issues that confront Members

of Parliament every day...the importance of a free media to report the deliberations of both the Executive and Parliament… and the distinction between the Executive and the House of Representatives.”

The other decision arose as a consequence of the Electoral Commission’s decision to de-register one of the government’s support parties when its membership fell below the prescribed threshold.

The Speaker had decided that the United Future Party could not be recognized for parliamentary

purposes, which had implications for procedures in the House and funding the party’s parliamentary activities, until the party was officially re-registered.

He acknowledged that the “decision to de-recognize United Future initially and then to re-recognize the party subsequent to the Electoral Commission’s re-registration of the party…was not a decision that pleased all political parties in this House,” but he hoped that “a review of Standing Orders next year will mean that these rules are clearer in the future”.

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill The Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill passed through all but its first reading under urgency on 19 November with the unanimous agreement of the House. The Bill followed a 2008 review of the operation and effectiveness of the Māori Television Service.

The service was established under legislation passed in 2003 to recognise that the Crown and Māori together have an obligation under the Treaty of Waitangi to preserve, protect and promote Te Reo Māori [the Māori language].

The Minister of Māori Affairs, Hon. Dr Pita Sharples, MP, (Māori Party) described the changes to the principal Act as “fine-tuning” so that the service was “well positioned for the digital switch-over and can continue its strong focus on promoting our language and our culture”.

Ms Clare Curran, MP, (Labour)

said the Bill had to be debated under urgency as the switch-over from analog to digital television broadcasting across New Zealand was scheduled to be completed on 1 December 2013.

Mr Kris Faafoi, MP, (Labour) outlined how the Bill would transfer ownership of the “analog frequency that was allocated to Māori Television…to another organization called Te Pūtahi Pāohi.” This was important, he noted, as “one analog spectrum can create up to eight or 10 digital television channels”.

Dr Sharples said Te Pūtahi Pāohi would not be able to “provide the use of the spectrum to any third party without the consent of the Ministers involved—and there are two of us, the Minister of Māori Affairs and the Minister of Finance”.

Ms Curran said that the Bill allowed for “the appointment of a mediator if the responsible Ministers and Te Pūtahi Pāoho [can] not resolve any disagreement about the administration of spectrum management rights that would require their joint determination”.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 65

Parliamentary news pages.indd 65

24/03/2014 13:40:19

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

UNITED KINGDOM

DEBATING THE EUROPEAN UNION REFERENDUM BILL The progress of Hon. James Wharton, MP, (Con) European Union Referendum Bill was one of the talking points of the parliamentary session. The Bill is a Private Member’s Bill, but the Conservative Party gave it its official backing and whipped its Members to support its passage through the House of Commons.

The Bill began its progress in the House of Lords with its Second Reading, on 10 January.

To become law the Bill faced a tight timetable. The final day on which the Commons could consider any amendments that the Lords might make to the Bill was 28 February. If the Lords amended the Bill and did not pass it by then, then it would run out of parliamentary time. Even if the Lords did send the Bill back to the Commons before 28 February, the Commons would have to agree the Lords’ amendments to avoid it running out of time.

Second Reading therefore took place against an expectation that supporters of the Bill would try to hurry it along, whilst opponents would try to slow it down and amend it. The debate began with an exchange between the Government Chief Whip, Baroness Anelay of St Johns, and Labour peers about the time that the House would rise. The House of Lords does not have a fixed rising time, but there are conventions around the time that the Government Whip would normally end the sitting. Baroness Anelay noted that there were 92 speakers in the debate and

Hon. James Wharton, MP

suggested that backbench peers should aim to speak for around four minutes. She estimated that the debate would be able to conclude on that basis at around the House’s normal rising time on a Friday of 3pm. Lord Richard (Labour) pressed her to ensure that the House would rise at 3pm.

He argued that to do otherwise would be unfairly to favour the Bill over others. Baroness Anelay replied that ending at 3 pm was the intention, but there was no time limit and if Peers spoke for longer than four minutes the House would rise later. The question of rising times was to recur throughout the Bill’s progress in the Lords.

Opening the debate, the Bill’s promoter in the Lords, Lord Dobbs (Con), set out his case for the Bill. He argued: “The principle behind this Bill is that the people have a right to decide their own future. We had a vote of course in 1975, in which we embraced the Common Market by a huge majority. I was one of those voters. However,

that vote needs reinforcing.

The institutions of Europe have changed beyond imagination since then and no one in this country below the age of 60 has had any say.”

He briefly addressed issues that had been the subject of amendments in the Commons – for example, the nature of the franchise and the terms of the question. Noting the tight timetable, he argued that these were important issues, but that none of them important enough to risk the Bill itself.

Opposing the Bill on behalf of the Labour Party, Lord Liddle, denied that the Opposition was against referendums in general.

He noted that the Labour Party had held the first referendum on EU membership in 1975.

However, he argued that the Bill “is playing Russian roulette with the British economic recovery.

If the business world was to think seriously that this Bill had the slightest chance of passage and that the Conservatives were likely winners of the next general election, the uncertainty generated over our continuing membership of the EU for the next four years could have a devastating economic effect”.

It is rare for peers to vote against the second reading of a Bill. So, despite a number of primarily Labour, Liberal Democrat and Cross-bench (CB) peers expressing their dissatisfaction or opposition to the Bill, after six and a half hours of debate the House gave it a

66 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

Parliamentary news pages.indd 66

24/03/2014 13:40:30

UNITED KINGDOM

The U.K. Prime Minister, Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP, speaking about the country’s future with Europe

second reading before rising at 4.50pm.

Two weeks later, on 24 January, the Bill returned to the Floor of the House for its Committee Stage. Peers had tabled nearly 80 amendments to the six-clause Bill. The first debate was on a group of amendments led by Lord Armstrong of Ilminster’s (CB) amendment to change the question in a referendum. The question proposed in the Bill was: “Do you think that the United Kingdom should be a member of the European Union?” Lord Armstrong’s amendment would have replaced it with “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”

Moving his amendment, Lord Ilminster argued that the existing question implied that the United Kingdom was seeking to join a body of which it was not yet a member, rather than asking whether it should leave one of which it had been a member of for over 40 years.

He proposed instead, “[a] form of words which the Electoral Commission has recommended […] [that] provides a question which defines correctly, clearly and unambiguously the nature of the choice which the voters will be asked to make”.

Lord Ilminster spoke for only

a few minutes, but the debate on the group took over two hours.

Supporters of the Bill, such as Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con), dwelt on the fact that amending the Bill would probably lead to it running out of debating time.

He argued that for the unelected House of Lords to prevent the Bill becoming law would damage the reputation of the House and obstruct the will of the elected House of Commons.

Supporters of the amendment, such as Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB), drew heavily on the Electoral Commission’s report and noted that the Scottish Government had agreed to change the question for the referendum on Scottish independence on the advice of the Electoral Commission.

Peers also punctuated the debate with debate over the procedure. For example, Lord Foulkes (Lab) accused the Chief Whip of unfairly privileging this Private Members’ Bill over others.

Baroness Anelay responded by saying she had followed the same procedures as her predecessors.

She asked that the Labour Chief Whip, Lord Bassam, give an assurance that he did not leak a private letter regarding the matter to the Daily Telegraph. Lord Bassam gave that assurance, provoking claims from Labour

Peers that she should apologize for making the suggestion.

Winding up the debate on the amendment, Lord Dobbs, said “I believe that the commission’s concern that some voters might be confused, because they are unaware that we are already members of the European Union, is a little oversensitive”.

He noted that the Electoral Commission’s role was advisory and that there was “a very large and unreasonable elephant” in the room, that opponents of the Bill would use any opportunity to try to kill it. He said that if the Bill were to become law it would need to get through the House very quickly and asked that Lord Ilminster withdraw his amendment.

Lord Ilminster did not withdraw the amendment. His view was “we should not shirk our duty to scrutinize the Bill and, if we can, improve it, and that, with the greatest respect to the House of Commons, if that House feels that the Bill is so important, it should then adjust its procedures in order to deal with it”. The House passed the amendment by 245 votes to 158.

By the end of the first day in Committee (just before 6pm), the House had considered 49 of the amendments tabled to the Bill and agreed to two of them. The

second day of Committee was held on 31 January. Because of the amendments passed on the first day and the conventions of the House regarding intervals between stages, the Bill would have to complete its Committee Stage on that day in order to have any realistic chance of further progress.

By 3pm on the second day of Committee, the House had debated less than ten further amendments and made one of them. Lord Lipsey (Labour) observed that the Companion to the Standing Orders says “it is a firm convention that the House normally rises…by about 3pm on Fridays”. He argued that there was no prospect of the Bill completing Committee Stage until two or three in the morning and that the House should not be expected to sit that long. He therefore moved a motion that the House resume, which would lead to its adjournment.

Responding to Lord Lipsey, Baroness Anelay said that if the motion passed “I will not be able to offer my noble friend Lord Dobbs more time for the Bill because the House itself will have collectively indicated that it no longer wishes to consider the Committee stage. If the House disagrees the Motion, I will take that as a desirable, clear indication that we should complete the remainder of the Committee stage today”. She then moved that the Question be put – ending further debate on Lord Lipsey’s motion.

The House voted for Lord Lipsey’s motion by 180 votes to 130, ending debate for the day and effectively killing off the Bill for the remainder of the Session. Following the debate the Prime Minister, Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP, (Con), said the Conservative Party would look to bring the Bill back in the next Session and would look to use the Parliament Act to bring it into law.

The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 67

Parliamentary news pages.indd 67

24/03/2014 13:40:42

CPA MATTERS

CPA StAtement of PurPoSe The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association mobilizes its Parliaments, Legislatures, their Members and staff to advance the consideration of good democratic governance and the institutional and professional development of its membership. It works in the Commonwealth through meetings and publications to discuss: • The democratic representation of all sections of society and both genders; • Parliamentary oversight of the executive; • Parliamentary involvement in formulating legislation and government policy; • The role of small Parliaments; • Parliamentary outreach to the people, and • The independence of Parliament from the executive government.

Adopted by the CPA General Assembly, Colombo, Sri Lanka, September 2012.

68 | The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One

CPA Statement of purpose left page.indd 68

24/03/2014 13:42:01

CPA SHOP CPA pens

Silver-plated photoframe, clock and pen in holder

CPA silver-plated cardholders

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

Inside back cover.indd 37

21/03/2014 15:06:14

GOT YOUR COPY?

THE PARLIAMENTARIAN

To subscribe to The Parliamentarian, please email pirc@cpahq.org.

Members of Parliament: Please contact your Branch Secretary.

Outside back cover.indd 168

21/03/2014 15:04:19