BEFORE the 2012 elections, political analysts in Lesotho predicted that the polls’ outcome would result in a hung parliament. And indeed it turned out to be just that, resulting in a coalition government. The entire nation sat back waiting to hear some melody, harmony or discord in the unknown song by the government. One thing is clear now; that what we have is not an orchestra but an uncoordinated experiment, signified by the recent by-elections.
By definition, the Eighth Parliament is not a lame duck session. It, however, has features characteristic of a lame duck session. For instance, parliament exists but is not effective and has many limitations. The recently handed-down adjournment sine die disabled it further, by formally making the elected House inoperative. During this period, there will be no sitting of the House, no debates, no tablings, no reporting and no Question Time for ministers etc.
Ironically, until adjournment sine die there had never been a single Prime Minister’s Question without notice. Political analysts are welcome to give explanations for this. Please comment on this vacuum. One notable feature of our ruling majority and coalition is their incapacity to, at least, improvise and come up with planted questions, just to window dress, if ever they realise the impact of this silence and the need to speak out.
A few examples might reflect the degree of ineffectiveness of the Eighth Parliament as displayed by the National Assembly and its Executive. Does the National Assembly have the skill, talent and capability to sanction the Executive to be fully responsive and accountable to parliamentary work? Failure of some ministers to attend meetings with their respective Portfolio Committees when called to do so is just too much for a competent legislature. The Congress government enactment of 2011 Public Finance Management and Accountability Act put heavy responsibility on the House and every individual minister of the Crown.
Such lapses should prompt an effective National Assembly to invoke a sanction of Cut Motion; to teach the ministers who play truant a lesson. This move would ensure they are answerable to the House, and that the master can reduce the requested budget as a way of expressing a no confidence in the delinquent ministers. Cut Motion is not a motion to reduce, which the Finance Minister frequently uses to adjust budget figures during the committee of supply. It could propose a reduction of M3 million from both the international travel and subsistence votes. It is doubtful if the ruling majority could support such a motion to Cut. The recent passage of the budget saw parliament just rubber stamp whatever the ministers wanted.
Specifically, let us examine the Ministries of the Head of Government and assess their effectiveness. The Military and Police on Mokhotlong assaulted a male inhabitant of Ha Amelia Khoeli in Bobatsi. The man later claimed M110 000 in damages. Both the Military and Police negotiated an out-of-court settlement which resulted in a M55 000 Order of Court in August, 2012.
On the October 23 2013, the MP from the man’s area had to reluctantly file an Urgent Parliamentary Question, demanding an explanation for the default in payment. That question has not been replied to, despite it being end of April 2014. Meanwhile, relatives of the man are at times told over the phone to check their bank account only to find no deposit made. The man, however, continues to suffer due to the injuries he sustained including a fractured jaw.
One wonders if the The Right Honourable Prime Minister is aware of this, since both the Military and Police Ministries are directly under his purview during this Eighth Parliament. One would expect a responsible government to have some follow-up mechanisms for such situations and timeously pay out civil claims.
Interestingly, parliamentary questions directed at the Ministry of Police and Public safety seem to largely serve an unexpected purpose to alert the ministry about its omissions: One question about Private Security Companies’ role in the fight against crime only enabled the Ministry to realise how it had left or forgotten all that relates to these companies at Home Affairs, and could not reply meaningfully. Yet another question alerted the Ministry of the omitted action to amend the principal law to provide for the transfer of Police portfolio to the Prime Minister’s Office. Meanwhile, that particular question is not likely to be replied to until the omitted amendment is effected. Without this legality of all actions by the current police authority remain questionable.
The forgoing is intended to reflect the modus operandi of the Eighth Parliament. How Ministries perform will have spillover effect into parliament. The unusually high turnover of incumbents in the offices of Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office and its Principal Secretary is likely to have some effect. Within the two years of this parliament, the current responsible Minister is the third and the PS is the second.
The purpose here is not to evaluate how Government performs, but to flag the need to improve. Otherwise, this will render the Eighth Parliament as a real lame duck session. Parliament is similarly urged to introspect and see how best it can improve its performance. Another key actor to bridge this wide gap and re-engineer processes is the Ministry of Parliament Affairs. It has to shoulder the blame for any deficiencies in our parliamentary democracy. Alternatively, a well-considered addition to the Prime Minister’s Office could get ministerial actions together. Otherwise we will continuously see Mehoula and hear Sehou until the next election.
The author is the Bobatsi Number 80 Constituency member of parliament (MP) and belongs to Lesotho’s main opposition party, the Democratic Congress (DC).
