Monday, November 4, 2024

Let us raise the bar on who becomes the Speaker of Parliament

Last week’s showdown in the National Assembly during the second reading of the proposed law on floor crossing is a sharp call for introspection on the integrity of Parliament as a law-making body.

Our respectable Parliament turned into a madhouse after Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, Pono Moatlhodi, “suspended” parliamentary standing orders and started directing parliamentary business through his whim.

The debates were short circuited. Opposition MPs were not allowed to make clarifications or interject in any way. Only ruling party MPs were allowed to interject and ask for clarifications
Although he used his discretion and exercised public power, his rulings and general guidance over the proceedings were generally unreasonable and unfair. It was obvious that his partisan interest had completely blurred his sense of fairness.

Moatlhodi could not even explain to legislators why he had earlier adjourned parliament to consult ‘elders’, a fad within government enclave.

Another revelation that emerged from this particular sitting of parliament is that Moathodi lacks the competence to chair parliamentary debates. The position is too enormous a task for him to handle.

He has also failed on many occasions to demonstrate leadership and impartiality. Unlike the substantive Speaker Margaret Nasha, Moathodi’s rulings always live MPs grumbling.

In our view, to be a competent Speaker of the National Assembly, one needs to be neutral, impartial, understanding, tactful, composed and an utmost good listener. More importantly one has to be schooled and well versed with public policy.

These qualities or traits usually come in handy depending on the situation. However, one needs to be careful and adjust his abilities to various situations that may arise in Parliament.

The individual also needs to be firm and be able to instill order without necessarily running the house like a military compound. Occasionally, a little humour will do but should not be allowed to become the order of the day.

It is often wise for a Speaker to totally refrain from participating in partisan politics if he is chairing parliamentary proceedings.

Now, can it safely be said that the Tonota South legislator has these qualities? Does his conduct last week unveil an individual who has respect for Members of Parliament, who is impartial, a good listener and a man of tact?

We say nay.

He has failed dismally to live up to the job’s expectations.

Not only because he has demonstrated a bias and unquestionable prejudice against the opposition but that he has also failed to appreciate the importance of granting Members of Parliament freedom to voice their views, however different, during a debate on the floor crossing constitutional amendment bill.

He is on record pushing very hard for the bill to be passed quickly despite the fact that other legislators wanted to unpack the issues and engage more on the issue.

We feel the bill was serious and deserving MPs’ contributions because it involved the constitution. A delicate and important document. He failed to arbitrate between the government position and the opposition.

It was really awkward that legislators, properly elected to represent the people at Parliament, could not take part in a debate that is integral to their job as law makers.

Their mandate from the people was hamstrung by the speaker’s indiscretions.

The whole episode was a tragedy because it was the assault on the integrity of Parliament.
As a law-making institution, we expect Parliament to be an institution whose credibility and sanctity are beyond reproach. It is when institutions of democracy are allowed to develop that democracy grows.

Where the constitutional designated law makers are not afforded an opportunity to adequately debate a proposed bill, the result can be nothing but a disastrous law, which does not represent the aspirations of the people.

This experience is an eye opener and perhaps an indication that if parliamentary debates are to run smoothly and productively, Botswana needs a Speaker appointed from outside parliament and without any partisan inclinations.

We should strengthen our institutions and worry a lot when they are under threat. Parliament can never be “Independent” if the executive is allowed to covertly run its proceedings.

The nature and manner of handling of debates in parliament should not compromise the law making process. By at least subjecting a bill to three phases of debate, the framers of the constitution intended for rigorous debates to ensue before a bill becomes law.

Botswana is acclaimed as a front runner in democratic politics in Southern Africa. With our parliamentary debates losing credibility, our reputation as an example of a shining democracy is dangling over a cliff. Democracy goes beyond casting a ballot and holding regular elections.
It is also about the independence and effectiveness of parliament as a legislative body. A closer look would reveal it has a lot to do with the quality of people we choose as “SPEAKERS.”

RELATED STORIES

Read this week's paper