LETTER | Intolerable excuse by speaker destroys good discussion
LETTER | Yesterday, we saw a good discussion in Parliament, besides Ahmad Tarmizi Sulaiman (PAS-Sik) raising an unnecessary topic which he and his friends can't prove in the House. For examples of bad discussion, please refer to the previous sittings of this special meeting, and maybe the next two sittings, I predict.
The interaction between a minister and members of the House is smooth, informative and healthy. It sets a good benchmark on how a minister should conduct a policy explanation in the House. Despite some might think that that is what a normal Parliament should do, considering our Parliament is still at the kindergarten level, I think credits should be given.
However, the smooth discussion in the House was interrupted by the speaker's rude rejection of the request to extend the time or invite the government minister to move such extension.
We must note that the current speaker, Azhar Azizan Harun (above), is not an elected member of the House. He is not even endorsed by the MPs who carry the people's mandate.
Why is he in this position is because of the blessing of Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, the unfair interpretation of the Standing Orders, and the immunity and privileges of the House not being reviewed by the court.
We know that, as per Standing Order (SO) 12, the Parliament sitting continues from 10am - 1pm and 2.30pm to 5.30pm. We are also aware that it is not uncommon that the Parliament continued to sit after 5.30pm, even in the BN era. The House even stopped the clock to allow the debates on bills after 11.59pm.
If a reasonable person presides the sitting and is able to observe the discussion, he or she would know that the discussion is fruitful, concerns raised are real and urgent concerns to be solved, and the minister and members of the House show the willingness and sincerity to have a discussion and seek for solutions even after 5.30pm.
An extension of time is beneficial to the nation rather than providing media coverage to politicians to "drama".
But Azhar instead of politely explaining his constrain, in a rude manner omitted and rejected to consider the request made by Hannah Yeoh (Harapan-Segambut) and Ngeh Koo Ham (Harapan-Beruas). He claimed that he is powerless besides allowing 15 minutes more after 5.30pm.
It is true that under SO 12, only a minister may move to vary the time of sitting of the House. However, it is also the fact that the speaker, under SO 90(2), may (it means his discretionary power) consent to a question of suspending any SO of the House and put the question before the House.
It means if the speaker consented and the House agreed with the motion to suspend SO 12, the discussion may continue after 5.30pm. This method was used in 2012 to stop the clock after 11.59pm.
SO 26(1)(f) and (m) provide that such motion from the minister for extension or from a member for suspension on SO 12 does not need prior notice. In another word, it may be decided by the House immediately.
Therefore, if the speaker is aware that such discussion is worth continuing after 5.30pm (it is an easy conclusion if he truly observes the discussion), he may either invite the minister to move the House, or "use his power" to consent for a suspension and put such question before the House to decide.
In either way, the House which carries the rakyat's mandate will decide whether a sitting after 5.30pm is necessary and beneficial.
If the minister refuses to move, he or she needs to answer to the public why the sitting should be extended. If the House rejects the suspension of SO 12 for extension, then they need to answer to their electors.
However, the "unelected" speaker chose to be the one who blocks the extension. Of course, if the ongoing discussion is meaningless or a waste of time, then your refusal to deal with extension might be understandable. However, it was not the case for yesterday's sitting.
Unless you shut your eyes and ears, or your thought process is full of political consideration, I am sure that the speaker would agree with me that extension of time should have been allowed. MPs raised serious concerns, the minister tried to answer all of them sincerely and one of the big parts of the vaccination policy - the PPV issue - is not concluded yet.
Mr Speaker, you have at least two options to choose from. First, invite the minister to move. Second, invite the MPs to move a suspension and consent to such suspension.
But you failed to consider the interest of the nation, the benefit of the House to have a discussion after 5.30pm. You have the power more than just giving extra 15 minutes, and you ignored it. You know that you may submit it to the House for decision, but you decided to take all the political responsibility on your shoulder.
You just failed to exercise the options and blocked the discussion. Not Covid-19, not the ministers, not the MPs and not the Health DG who blocked the extension. You are the one who blocked it.
Article 62 of the Federal Constitution states each House of Parliament shall regulate its own procedure. However, the House does not have the chance to regulate its own sitting time.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
