Opinion The next big thing
The monsoon may have partly failed,but the Monsoon Session of Parliament was easily the best in over a decade.
The monsoon may have partly failed,but the Monsoon Session of Parliament was easily the best in over a decade. There was very little of the acrimony and disruption which had regrettably become the norm for the two Houses. There have been suggestions from time to time that the future direction of growth for Parliament lay in its committee system,where,away from the glare of TV cameras,members get down to serious business in a non-partisan manner,even when Parliament is disrupted. Now,when it seems much more likely for a number of reasons that,at least for the next few years,the transaction of business in the two Houses may well be smoother,it would be worthwhile to see in what manner the committee system can best evolve.
It may seem paradoxical to suggest parliamentary committees as the direction for growth both when Parliament is working smoothly and when it is not. But the reasons in each case are entirely different. The fact that committees can work even when Parliament is not working (for whatever reason) is of course the crux in increasing executive accountability in width and depth. It needs,therefore,to be considered,given the large proportion of government time and resources tied up when Parliament is in session,whether committees which work with much greater all-round economy of effort are a better mechanism to enforce accountability,in tandem with Parliament itself.
With a good committee system,it may be possible,or indeed advantageous,for Parliament to have four smaller sessions instead of the usual three,but well-spread out over the entire year. This would ensure that Parliament gets to discuss all-important issues without too much gap in-between. The motion of thanks on the Presidents Address in the Winter Session in January and the general discussion on the Budget during the Budget Session in late February would give two separate and distinct opportunities to discuss government policies. Discussion on the working of ministries,instead of being confined to hurried debates during the Budget Session can systematically continue into the Monsoon and Autumn Sessions.
As a matter of fact,there is a report of a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the subject from as far back as July 2001. Pranab Mukherjee was the chairman of the committee (I was then joint secretary of the Rajya Sabha and helped draft the report). In effect,the JPC recommended that department-related parliamentary standing committees (DRPSCs) should be made into compact single-window (for a subject) committees with access to expert advice from outside government,in order to be able to better enforce the accountability of the executive to Parliament.
Creation of specialised parliamentary committees as mechanisms to examine and analyse government policy and even to influence it more directly than through serendipitous debate in the Houses is now a device that is gaining popularity in the UK,New Zealand,Canada,Germany and the US. In the case of the US,Senate and congressional committees are very powerful institutions in their own right. In many of these countries,these committees have developed expertise and the members have become specialists in their subjects. And the special expertise of the chairpersons of the committees and subcommittees is recognised,they are consulted by government,and their policy pronouncements have widespread impact.
Obviously,the committee system has to evolve within the broad framework of Indias own parliamentary practices. However,given the fact that they can work with comparative economy of effort,in a relatively non-partisan manner,all round the year,and can be enabled to go into matters in depth,they have strengths that need to be built upon and institutionalised. Already the DRPSCs have become more compact (with a strength of 30 instead of 45) and more focused (with jurisdiction over fewer ministries in each case). Qualitative change would however come about only if the committees step out of their present system of routine examination of government reports to identify and analyse issues and make recommendations on core policy matters of the various ministries.
This,given the current resource crunch in the Parliament secretariat may be a little difficult initially,and will require innovative solutions. However,there is no doubt that if this can be achieved,it can transform the nature of executive accountability to Parliament and make for vastly better governance.
The writer,an IAS officer,was joint secretary,Rajya Sabha from 1998 to 2002. The views expressed here are his own.
express@expressindia.com
Share
