Ministerial questions ‘manipulated’
THE DA wants an investigation by Parliament into the alleged manipulation of parliamentary questions for ministerial replies.
This call, and a request to meet Parliament’s presiding officers, followed the party’s own enquiries, which showed departments were given prior notice of questions in what was described as vetting.
Often departments given such notice proceed to edit the MP’s question and then proceed to answer not the original, but a tailored version, without agreement of the relevant MP.
Parliamentary questions are a tool to hold ministers and their department accountable for their performance and how they execute their power, alongside question-and-answer sessions with the president, deputy president and ministers in the House.
Parliamentary questions cover topics from the very local, like the closure of a particular school or levels of equipment at a particular police station, to broader issues of, among others, how much is spent on travel and cars. Often political prickly issues like the Nkandla saga are also raised.
DA chief whip John Steenhuisen yesterday said “it could be a constitutional violation that the executive determines the shape of the question”.
And the quality of replies had declined since the May 2014 elections, he said, adding: “The executive is trying to creep and take over all aspects of the political scene.”
Steenhuisen said MPs also had to shape up and ensure they asked questions to solicit information, not a simple yes or no response.
The claims of manipulation of parliamentary questions come as Parliament’s rules subcommittee is discussing extending the deputy president’s questions time every two weeks in the House to between one and three hours, with a broad national and international focus.
Steenhuisen said this would cut into ministerial question time and was a sign that the ANC appeared uncomfortable about having its ministers answer questions on the spot.
Departments are vetting them, DA enquiries show
In its submission to the rules subcommittee, the ruling party argued that questions were posed for politicking.
But Steenhuisen dismissed that. “It’s like sailors cursing the sea,” he said.