Chris Louw reports from Parliament
Behind the NP grumbles about unfair treatment lies a belated discovery: the cabinet’s no longer the seat of power
PARLIAMENTARY power is shifting inexorably away from the cabinet of national unity to the ANC-dominated standing committees. And since the NP based its negotiating strategy on shared power in the cabinet, it is being left high and dry at the committee level.
Plans are all but finalised to transform the standing committees — traditionally little more than “talk shops” — into powerful bodies with supervisory capabilities over government departments.
New rules will enable the standing, or portfolio, committees to give clear direction to civil servants, ensuring that they adhere to government policy.
When parliament reconvenes after the September recess, it will resume in terms of rules that will fundamentally transform the legislative process. Input on law- making will be more accessible to both the public and parliamentarians.
More importantly, the NP’s “power-sharing” arrangement with the ANC — provided for in the constitution — will be largely neutralised as executive power shifts to the portfolio committees.
The recent conflict over who would chair the portfolio committees, which had deputy president FW de Klerk warning that “red lights are flickering” for the ANC, was directly linked to plans to empower the committees.
“It was essential that ANC people serve as chairmen, as these will be influential positions,” an ANC MP said this week. “The chairmen will direct the course the committees take. But even more important, they will be the link to our communities. We cannot allow Nats in these powerful positions.”
In terms of proposals accepted by a subcommittee of parliament’s rules committee, the standing committees will:
* Have the power to summon any person, including cabinet members, or party to appear before them to give evidence under oath, or to produce any documents required.
* Be allowed not only to receive representations directly from the public, but also to send delegations to communities to get an input in preparing legislation affecting them.
* Perform functions “relating to parliamentary supervision of … government departments falling within the category of affairs assigned to it”.
These powers go beyond those prescribed by the transitional constitution, but they can be effected by the passing of normal legislation.
There are also plans for the committees to meet for a full week each month to cut out time-consuming, repetitive debates in the national assembly and the senate. During this time parliamentarians will be expected to do “constituency work”.
Although the NP — like all other parties — is represented in the standing committees, the party has so far intellectually and strategically been thoroughly outwitted by ANC members. Accustomed to relying heavily on technocrats, NP members are no match for the ANC, and tend to submit meekly to directives from the majority party.
ANC caucus members this week made it clear that the legislature was in no way bound by constitutional agreements prescribing consensus government at cabinet level. “There is no reference whatsoever in the constitution forcing the legislature to be part of the government of national unity,” said ANC justice committee chairman Johnny de Lange.
De Lange, the driving force behind the rule changes, rejected accusations that the ANC caucus was not acting “in accordance with the spirit” of agreements reached at Kempton Park. He also dismissed reports of conflict between President Nelson Mandela and the ANC caucus: “Our president receives a standing ovation every time he addresses the caucus.”
The proposed changes to the parliamentary rules have been accepted in part by the rules committee. They still have to be referred back to the various caucuses.
De Lange was optimistic the ANC caucus would have no problem accepting the new rules: “We already have a broad agreement on the direction and approach of the legislative process. Only the details need to be confirmed.”
The shift of power from the cabinet has exposed a serious flaw in NP strategy during the past year’s negotiations. It hinged on two assumptions: that final decision-making would reside with the executive (the cabinet); and that the state apparatus, including the civil service, would remain largely unchanged.
The NP believed it had achieved its goal in securing a commitment to consensus government at executive level and the retention of senior civil servants’ jobs. No thought was given to the role played by the legislature, made up of the national assembly and the senate.
ANC caucus members say it was soon realised that fundamental policy changes were almost impossible as long as present structures stayed in place.
ANC cabinet ministers soon realised that they had little room to manoeuvre as most of the groundwork for legislation was done by experts in their departments.
“It is not that we are accusing civil servants of bad faith,” said a senior ANC member. “Rather, it is a problem of mindset. These people come from the old dispensation and they have not been exposed to the kind of debates which have been going on in the ANC for many years.”
Interaction between portfolio committees and government departments was therefore essential: “It is the only way we will be able to start delivering on our election promises.”
The first signs of the ANC caucus flexing its muscle became apparent this week when two amendments were brought about to the Human Rights Bill after it was accepted by the senate justice standing committee. The amendments were introduced by an ANC member and referred back to the standing committee by the senate. The amendments were accepted by the standing committee, effectively changing the cabinet proposal.
It was pointed out that all legislation prepared by the cabinet and accepted on a consensus basis by the executive could be amended in this way, effectively neutralising the NP.
Parliament’s new movers and shakers
The new parliament’s stars are the MPs who have broken with tradition, setting their own agendas rather than act as meek pawns of the cabinet
AS the new parliament finds its feet, movers and shakers are coming to the fore — MPs who are already making their visible mark on the new dispensation.
The big star, without doubt, is the ANC’s Gill Marcus. Having essentially received her training in ANC policy meetings, she has surprised friend and foe with the ease with which she has adjusted to the demands of parliamentary life and the skill with which she chairs the powerful joint finance committee. Her performance so far is described as “remarkable”.
Thrown in at the deep end, she was forced to get her large committee going early, as it was the first to discuss a Budget vote. Right from the start, she handled committee meetings with flair and succeeded in getting all the parties to interact. Her biggest success, however, was in redefining the role of the finance committee.
For years, the Budget debate was opened by official opposition spokesmen on finance, previously Harry Schwarz and later Ken Andrew. This year Marcus broke with tradition when she opened the debate. She did not follow the ANC line and looked at the issues critically, clearly establising her role as a member of an independent committee and not as a spokesman for the government or its opposition.
Another rising star is Western Cape MP Johnny de Lange, who has made an unexpected entry into the national political scene and is firmly establishing himself as one of the prime movers in the standing committees.
De Lange, who chairs the justice committee, has taken the lead in changing the rules to make parliament more accessible to the public as well as to parliamentarians. He serves on the rules subcommittee and was primarily responsible for drafting new rules on law- making that will probably be accepted within the next fortnight.
The new rules will see the committees accorded real power for the first time in parliamentary history — and will see prominent people in the committee backrooms elevated to powerful public figures.
At a recent subcommittee meeting De Lange was quite frank about the reasons for the changes, admitting that he “knew very little of what happens in other parts of this building”.
Ordinary members, who are “at a complete loss” when legislation is discussed, had to be more directly involved in the legislative process, he argued. This requires a transformation of the way parliament functions.
MPs who can be expected to become more prominent in the next few months include Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi, chairman of the rules committee. A South African Communist Party member, Fraser-Moleketi has already made a name for herself as a capable debater who is on top of the issues.
However, she recently proposed in a subcommittee meeting that the media should be compelled to quote sources by name when reporting comments on committee issues. This has not endeared her to the press, but she did not pursue the issue.
One well-known figure making a clear impression on parliament is Pravin Gordhan, another communist. He chaired the negotiation forum and became known for his decisive interventions and no-nonsense style. He now chairs the constitutional and provincial affairs standing committee with equal aplomb.
The most powerful standing committee after finance is the one on defence. It is the only committee which, in terms of the constitution, is allowed to interfere directly on the terrain of the executive, in that it can make recommendations on the defence budget and is allowed to supervise the department.
This is a committee in which some strong voices can be heard, notably that of the Freedom Front’s General Constand Viljoen. Viljoen, although ideologically poles apart from most of the other committee members, is respected as a professional soldier.
On the ANC side, Thenjiwe Mtintso is quickly establishing herself as one of a band of influential women changing the male- dominated face of parliament. Mtintso is well informed and her contributions are taken seriously.
Tony Yengeni, also a communist, is another member of this committee who makes a definite contribution.
Up until now, many of the committee meetings have largely been information sessions, bringing members up to speed on what is going on in the various departments. But it is already possible to identify a list of names of people influential in committee decisions.
They include the ANC’s Carl Niehaus (chairman, Correctional Services); Baleka Kgositsile (Land Affairs), known for her commitment to women’s affairs; Janet Love (Agriculture, Water Affairs and Forestry), who is described as “sharp”; Max Sisulu (Finance); Blade Nzimande (chairman, Education); Yvette Myakayaka- Manzini; Phillip Dexter (Public Services and Administration); and white “lefties” Ian Phillips, Rob Davies and Raymond Suttner (Foreign Affairs). Nzimande, Dexter, Davies and Suttner are all SACP members.
The IFP’s most impressive movers so far are Ziba Jiyane (Communications) and Gavin Woods (Finance).
Democratic Party members making their mark include its acting leader, Tony Leon (“You may not like him, but you can’t ignore him,” as one source put it), Douglas Gibson and the elder statesman of parliamentary politics, Colin Eglin.
Patricia de Lille and Khiliphile Sizane are Pan Africanist Congress MPs making a strong input. Sizane is well-informed on constitutional issues and asks pertinent questions in committee meetings.
NP members see their role more as warning against pitfalls, based on their previous parliamentary experience. Few are making much impact on proceedings. Some, like Andre Fourie and Danie Schutte, look downright out of place in the new, non- racial environement — like the paintings from the apartheid era staring down from the parliamentary walls.