Standing committees

IN a news item on FT 14/01, the chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights had commented on some of the issues brought up in submissions made to the committee.

These submissions were on the Bills that were referred by Parliament to the committee, to review and scrutinise and for which public submissions were being called.

In my view, there is really a very thin line, on one hand, between trying to be transparent and accountable to the public and the media and, on the other hand, to one’s responsibility to the terms of reference given to it by Parliament.

In my humble opinion, chairpersons and members of committees should be very wary as to where they draw the line and the boundaries that should not be crossed.

By way of clarification, let me just say that a committee is specifically tasked by Parliament to undertake the review and scrutiny of a Bill and it is to Parliament that it must first report any of its findings.

Procedurally, the committee cannot be reporting to anyone else beforehand nor can it, as far as I know, publicise the details of the submissions made to it, in the process.

The biggest “No No”, in my opinion, is to make public, via media statements or interviews, the recommendations it intends to table in Parliament before even reporting back to it.

I just hope the committees are aware of all these and that we do not see any procedural faux pas in due course.

Such a premature move, in my view, can be disrespectful to Parliament – the first “port of call” in the process.

EDWARD BLAKELOCK

Pacific Harbour