Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz today denied that a Parliament Department will be set up. He blamed the media for the mix up.

Instead, he said that a 'new office' with the same functions and not 'department' will be established.

Amid strong objections from parliamentarians on the setting up of the department, he claimed that reporters had misinterpreted his statement last Thursday.

"When I said 'jabatan', I was referring to it in small 'j' not capital 'J' which means department. Maybe journalists misunderstood what I said," he told a roundtable conference at the Parliament House.

"The confusion could have also arose because I said a director-general would be appointed to head the office, therefore reporters immediately thought it is a new department. In view of this, we might change the designation of director-general to manager," he added.

Nazri denied that he was a singing a different tune now after being pressured when asked why he waited for four days before clearing the air.

According to him, he needed to find the right opportunity and timing to clear the confusion.

The roundtable conference themed 'Save Parliament' was organised by the DAP. The meet saw the attendance of opposition parliamentarians and representatives from non-governmental organisations.

Parliamentarians and civil societies feared that the establishment of the department - to oversee administrative matters - could be a threat to the doctrine of separation of powers and would erode parliamentary independence.

Washrooms, food and claims

Nazri said the purpose of the new office is to manage parliamentary affairs such as "washrooms, food and MPs' expenses claims" more efficiently.

He stressed that it would not interfere in matters related to parliamentary proceedings in chambers.

However, most of those present remained unconvinced and urged the minister to junk the idea.

"Will this small 'j' be a baby step leading to a big 'J'?" asked labour rights movement Tenaganita head Irene Fernandez.

She also asked the government to revive the Parliamentary Services Act 1963. The Act, repealed in 1992, allowed Parliament to administer and manage its own affairs, including the recruitment of staff and wages.

Police Watch's legal advisor P Uthayakumar said it was not necessary for the government to set up a new office merely to oversee matters related to washrooms and food.

Agreeing, economist Charles Santiago said the Public Works Department could handle 'toilet' problems and there was no need to waste public funds and set up a new office for this.

He warned that it could become a laughing stock.

Calling it a 'dangerous precedent', lawyer Amer Hamzah Arshad said the current built-in mechanism to overlook such matters should be revamped and improved instead.

The House Committee, chaired by the Speaker, oversees matters connected with the comfort and convenience of services and amenities available to members of the House.

Responding, Nazri said the idea was mooted with good intentions, leading another lawyer present Fahri Azzat to remind the minister of the famous adage 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'.

Name it office or department, Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timor) said it will nevertheless pose a threat to the doctrine of separation of powers.

Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (Keadilan-Permatang Pauh) said the confusion would not have come about if Nazri had discussed the matter with parliamentarians first.

Meanwhile, Nazri said the new office would not just oversee 'toilet, food and claims' but did not elaborate on its other functions.

On the suggestion to revamp the House Committee, he dismissed it as too 'idealistic'.

The minister said he was in trouble now for merely defending the dignity of parliamentarians, adding that he could not wait until everyone is convinced to implement the proposal.

"The people will judge my performance on what I am doing now as a minister," he said.

In the Dewan Rakyat earlier, Speaker Ramli Ngah Talib rejected an emergency motion tabled by Lim to debate on the matter on the ground that it was not urgent.