The rubberstamp that is our Parliament and oversight
Dithapelo Keorapetse | Friday April 17, 2015 15:19
Notwithstanding the fact that the 11th Parliament is young and educated in its demographics, it finds it difficult to provide effective oversight of the executive arm. The term oversight refers to the legislature’s ability to monitor the implementation of budgets, laws, and policy decisions passed during the formulation stage. Oversight has two functions; holding the executive accountable for its actions and to see if laws and policies are working the way they were intended. Parliamentary questions, themes or minister’s questions and statements by the Leader of Opposition are usually for the purpose of providing oversight. Oversight is also provided through parliamentary committees. Some motions are also meant to fulfill the oversight function.
The rationale for parliamentary oversight is to enhance public confidence in governance; ensure equitable distribution of resources; safeguard the basic rights of members of the public and individual liberties as well as for prudent management of the taxpayers’ money. Parliament can act at two key stages of the policy process: during the formulation of budgets, decisions, laws, and policies, and in the oversight of their implementation. Parliament can initiate legislation, amend existing legislation or proposed by the executive, make changes to the budget and approve or disprove policy decisions.
It is without doubt that Botswana parliament has the authority, that is legal powers in terms of the constitution, Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act, the Standing Orders and other laws to hold the executive accountable. However, it lacks the ability, that is, resources, expertise and qualified professional/skilled staff. Parliamentary staff in the PR, editorial and research divisions of Parliament inter alia are inadequate and in some instances lack necessary skills to assist MPs. Parliament in Botswana is a department in the Office of the president. It relies on OP for both staffing and its budget, in contrast with what obtains in other parliamentary democracies.
On attitude, that is, willingness to hold government to account, some members of parliament, both in the BDP back bench and members of the opposition, have exhibited some willingness to hold the executive accountable. The Botswana parliament has been dominated by the ruling party since independence and the opposition has been weak and fragmented resulting in monopoly politikos and or de facto one party state. Parliament in Botswana is not independent of the executive and this is exacerbated by the legislative-executive fusion where the executive members are drawn from among members of parliament. In fact about 40 percent of our MPs are ministers and assistant ministers. This is a big number, compared to other parliamentary democracies, like South Africa and Britain. Therefore, the robustness and agility expected of the assembly is diminished as those who are members of the executive are bound by collective responsibility expected of them. It is difficult for our parliament to enforcement its decisions. The motion on floor crossing and on declaration of asserts and liabilities are cases in point.
Parliament lacks capacity and some of its members interest on the house responsibilities is wanting. It is against this backdrop that I classify Botswana parliament as rubberstamp legislature. It simply endorses decisions made elsewhere in the political system, usually by the ruling party and/ or the executive branch. These types of assemblies are common in authoritarian or totalitarian regimes, where decisions are made by a leader or vanguard party, and in which parliament is expected to simply endorse their decisions. “Rubber stamp” generally connotes non-democratic. Rubber stamp legislatures also lack resources. This is in sharp contrast with transformative assemblies which not only represent diverse societal interests, but they shape budgets and policies. Transformative legislatures change policies and budgets proposed by government, and even initiate policies of their own. Not surprisingly, transformative legislatures are endowed with resources and they have highly complex internal structures (including strong committee systems), great information needs, and depend heavily on highly trained professional staff. The US Congress is probably the best example of a transformative legislature. Recognising the centrality of parliament in discharging the liberal democratic framework, Winston Churchill once referred to Parliament as ‘the workshop of democracy’.
Parliament, as a representative body of the polity, performs the basic dogmas of democracy; it articulates voter’s preferences, translates these preferences into policies through enacting legislation, and scrutinise the work of the executive arm of government. In another formulation, the primary responsibilities of parliament are to accord the public, through questions and motions in the floor of parliament and parliamentary committees, the opportunity to participate in the governance of a country.
Through parliamentary representation the public holds government accountable on issues of public interest, exert effective oversight on every aspect of public life, including the defence and security which has remained a prerogative of the executive since time immemorial. MPs must strive and advocate for Parliamentary Independence.