Only the Constitution and Rules determine Parliament's business
It is incorrect, even if inadvertently, to portray Parliament as a handmaiden of political parties, lacking proper processes in the conduct of its business and especially when exercising its legislative authority.
Such an impression could result from a reading of a statement issued when opponents of the Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill could not prevent the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) from considering and passing the bill. The statement made reference to “unacceptable steps that have been taken to ensure the rapid passing” of the bill and said that these “are undermining the very clear set out processes.”
On 4 March, the report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Development, which had considered the bill, was tabled and published in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports daily Parliamentary paper.
The report indicated that the Committee had agreed to the bill, referred to it by the National Assembly without proposed amendments.
The report also recorded that it had not been unanimously adopted and consensus had not been reached on clause 20(2)(c) of the bill. The view of the Democratic Alliance (DA) on this clause was included in the report.
In terms of the NCOP Rules, the House would start considering a Committee’s report only at least three working days after it has been tabled.
However, the same Rules also provide for the House,by resolution, to dispense with or suspend a provision of the Council rules fora specific period or purpose.
The motion to suspend the three working days stipulation was put to the House for three bills, of which the Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill was one and was agreed by the House. The NCOP plenary sitting on 5 March, therefore, considered the bills and the Committee’s report on them.
Such motions to suspend the Rule relating to the three days threshold have been agreed and implemented before. During 2013, for instance, the Council considered at least five bills where this occurred.
On Wednesday, at the end of debate on the Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill, the DA demanded a headcount. The Presiding Officer agreed and the outcome of the headcount vote was 21 in favour of the bill being agreed to, 9 voted against and one abstained. The bill was,therefore, agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
The facts show that normal processes, informed by the Constitution and the Rules, were followed in respect of all the bills presented to the Council for consideration on Wednesday, 5 March.
Enquiries:
Malatswa Evans Molepo
Tel: 021 403 8438
Cell: 073 297 1914
E-mail: mmolepo@parliament.gov.za
