More Parliament days useless if govt business dominates, says lawyer

 

Maha Balakrishnan said countries like the UK and Australia have given up time for urgent motions and bills from across the aisle, even if such motions were against the governing party. (Reuters pic)

GEORGE TOWN: There is little use in having more parliamentary sittings when government business continues to dominate while private members’ bills and motions by the opposition are ignored and buried, says a lawyer.

Maha Balakrishnan said countries such as the UK and Australia have given up time allocated for government business for urgent motions and bills from across the aisle – even if such motions were against the governing party – as it was part of the parliamentary culture there.

She said the move ought to be emulated, urging Parliament to “ring-fence” or fix an allocated time for motions and bills by backbenchers and opposition MPs to be heard.

Maha said more sittings might allow more oral questions to be asked, but felt the focus should be on quality, not quantity.

Maha Balakrishnan.

“There should be more time for oral questions, and opportunities should be given to private members’ motions. It’s no use having extended days only for these to be taken by government business,” she said in response to a question if longer parliamentary sittings were better at a forum hosted by Sunway University’s Jeffrey Sachs Center today.

Maha is the co-author of Malaysian Parliamentary Procedure: A Guide to the Standing Orders of the Dewan Rakyat and also a former Bar Constitutional Law Committee deputy co-chair.

She said that based on available data, the number of Parliament sittings have plunged to 56 between 2013 and 2017, compared to 2000-2010 with 77 sittings. In 2018, the number hit 70 and was 68 the following year. These numbers were less than half of those in the UK and Canada, where a similar parliamentary system is used.

She said another matter was the time for MPs to deliberate on laws to be passed by Parliament, as there was barely time for MPs to study the proposed laws or consult with relevant stakeholders between two readings of a bill.

Maha said parliamentary select committees (PSCs) ought to have a larger role outside of the House.

She said PSCs could also instil a change of heart among voters who judged their MPs in terms of physical presence at their constituencies alone. She said a two-year empowerment of PSCs and more time for opposition MPs could change people’s views on what parliamentarians are supposed to do.

Maha said the Parliament, in general, should change its mindset of serving the sitting government. Instead, it should be serving all MPs regardless of their political affiliation, by giving them all the support services and resources typically accorded to the government bench.

At the same forum, Bandar Kuching MP Kelvin Yii said PSCs should be allowed to hold sessions, especially on matters related to Covid-19, so that academic and health experts could deliberate on progress reports, vaccinations and other related matters.

The health, science and innovation PSC chair said his committee played an important role in steering policy related to future pandemics. He said the present nine PSCs should be ramped up to more for each federal ministry, to scrutinise their work.

Yii said the Parliament speaker had written to him, saying that his PSC could be held, so long it did not go against any present laws. - FMT