SMALL PARLIAMENTS: BERMUDA
not the people have received “value for money”. Legislative oversight tools include
Premier and Ministers question period, use of the Public Accounts Committee, Sessional Committees and Joint Select Committees. There is no question that the increased attention on government corruption worldwide has led to more focus on this aspect of parliamentary responsibility. Bermuda has not escaped in that regard. It is important to understand that
oversight is aimed at enhancing accountability through the scrutiny of government policies and spending in order to ensure stable government and improve democracy. It is not a fault finding exercise to embarrass the government – at least it should not be.
Reflecting on the Committee
System in U.K. the former Deputy Prime Minister 1st Viscount William Whitelaw said: “A sound select committee system is vital to the detailed probing and criticism of the Executive upon which most successful democracies and good government depended.” Former Canadian politician Hon.
Yvon Pinard, PC, commented in 1982 “experience has shown that smaller and flexible committees when entrusted with interesting matters can have a positive impact on the development of our parliamentary system and the role of MPs”. The challenge for Bermuda –
and I would suggest other small Parliaments – is the lack of sufficient resources to staff and administer Joint Select Committees to provide the quality of scrutiny that enables effective oversight.
The following four standing committees mandated by Standing Order 34 in Bermuda include:
• The Private Bills Committee – 5MPs + 2 Senators; • The Public Accounts Committee – 7 MPs; • The Committee of the Office of the Auditor – 5 MPs; and • The Committee on Register of
Members’ Interest – 5 MPs + 2 Senators.
The following three Sessional Committees are established in accordance with Standing Order 35:
• The Standing Orders Committee – Speaker + 5MPs; • The House and Grounds Com- mittee – Deputy Speaker + 4MPs; and • The Regulations Committee – 5MPs. • Then there are three Joint Select Committees (JSC) appointed at request of the House of Assembly: • JSC on Parliamentary Gov- ernance and Reform – 3MPs + 2Senators; • JSC on Elections – 5MPs + 2 Senators; and • JSC on Mandatory Drug Testing – 3MPs + 2Senators.
The challenge is that the aforementioned committees and committee-structure completely stretch the staff at Parliament. Bermuda only has one Clerk, a Deputy Clerk and an Assistant Clerk to service and support the administration of these committees, in addition to other responsibilities. There are only seven full-time employees in our Assembly. In order to enhance the support given to the various committees in Parliament, it would be necessary to hire professionals outside of staff of Parliament. Severe constraints on the time
and resources of MPs and Senators who sit on these Committees have a deleterious effect upon its ability to function effectively. These committee members are either backbenchers or opposition Members, part-time politicians, many of whom have other jobs. This raises the question: should non-members of Parliament sit on Committees? It can be argued that if democracy is a two-way process, merging the elected with the non- elected – without the elected being tyrannical dictators – then clearly there is scope for more non-elected participants in the committee system. What would be the role for persons
other than elected representatives: How would they be chosen? Questions have been raised
regarding the utility and the effectiveness of committee arrangements in small Legislatures. Advantages include:
• It allows government and opposi- tion to arrive at consensus on issues before debate in Parliament; • It provides a forum through which Parliament can be made aware of the effects of government policies on the people; • It provides checks and balances in existing policies and, when function- ing effectively, provides a means for a legislative body to consider in-depth or a wide range of topics and identify politically and technically feasible alternatives; • Committee Members discuss is- sues informally and develop relation- ships with representatives of other parties, thereby creating a collegial environment; and • Small committees are more effec- tive than large committees which are oftentimes unwieldy and ineffective.
I am a strong advocate for the Parliamentary Committee System. In that regard, whilst serving as Bermuda’s Minister of Education, I suggested the formation of a JSC on Education which had as its mandate the scrutiny of policies within the Department of Education. Additionally, I had a most
rewarding experience when chairing a JSC which investigated the rising violent crime and gun violence in Bermuda. The attention that Members gave to the challenges with which we were confronted spoke volumes and reflected well on their interest in improving Bermuda. It was country before party. There was outstanding rapport amongst the Committee members. Additional challenges that present themselves include:
• Absenteeism may stall or retard discussions and initiatives; and • Small quorum may lead to mis- representation.
Recommendation In order to manage the ratios of Committees to MPs effectively, consideration might be given to limiting the number of committees operating at any one time. This kind of arrangement would
avoid an over-extension of Members. At the same time, consideration might be given limiting the number of committees upon which Members can sit, particularly majority party MPs.
Small Legislatures pose
challenges for the Committee System both in terms of practical arrangements and defectiveness. These problems are intensified by situations of majority party dominance and absenteeism. A big challenge can occur
should the Premier and Cabinet stand opposed to the appointment of a committee set up to scrutinize a particular issue. I experienced this in attempting to
have the House of Assembly agree to a JSC to look into crime and gun violence in Bermuda. It took me close to a year before my Party (PLP), the government at the time, agreed that I could make a Motion to have a JSC formed for this purpose. Once the Committee was formed
and I chaired it, the public was very supportive and provided input that allowed the production of an excellent report with major recommendations. Once the report was complete,
the Party was hesitant to allow me to table it and then debate and have the House approve the recommendations. I was only allowed to do a “take note motion” which meant there was no commitment from the government. In a small Parliament where the
Executive is one third of Parliament, these situations can occur. In closing, while there are
significant challenges for small Parliaments to run efficiently, small Parliaments are able to achieve efficiency and stable government as a result of outstanding representation and to quote Mr Sisulu, “giving expression to participatory democracy”.
The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 35
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72