Rules amended: Assembly overhauls rules of procedure

24 amendments to Rules of Procedure 1997 passed

LAHORE:

Twenty-four amendments were passed by the Punjab Assembly on Wednesday to the Rules of Procedure of the Punjab Assembly, 1997.

Earlier, the leader of the opposition was assured by the law minister that the amendments proposed by opposition members would also be considered.

The session, spread over of four hours, included intense debate over the failure of the government to incorporate all amendments proposed by the committee formed for the purpose.

The amendments made to the Rules of Procedure of the Punjab Assembly, 1997 include a new section on the declaration and removal of the leader of the opposition.

The amendments also include an annual calendar detailing the sessions of the assembly. It will be provided by the government to the speaker upon the commencement of a parliamentary year. The assembly will be summoned on the dates mentioned in the calendar. The governor might summon a session on other dates. Another amendment makes it obligatory to have at least three sessions annually. The duration of these sessions will be not less than 100 days.

A new chapter has been introduced on a ‘zero hour’. A member might take up an issue requiring urgent attention during the hour. However, they might only speak on it for no more than five minutes. A member will now be allowed to move only one adjournment motion during a sitting. The number of standing committees has been increased from 32 to 36 through another amendment to the rules.

At the start of the session, Leader of the Opposition Mehmoodur Rasheed had expressed his resentment over the government’s failure to incorporate amendments proposed by him last week. They were about granting standing committees suo motu powers, increasing the duration of the question hour to 90 minutes, allowing call-attention notices on four days and requiring government departments to answer parliamentary questions within 15 to 30 days of their submission.

“There was consensus among lawmakers over the amendments developed over the past five months. Who is the law secretary to drop these? This is a disgrace to the committee and this House,” Rasheed said. He demanded that standing committees be given suo motu powers and be authorised to give their input on budgetary allocations at departments concerned in consultation with the bureaucracy.

Rasheed asked the law minister for an assurance that the dropped amendments would be taken up later. Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid’s Vickas Hassan Mokal disagreed with him.

Mokal, who was also part of the committee reviewing the rules, said that the proposed amendments needed to be passed as a package. He claimed that over the past 12 years, no business had been referred to the Standing Committee on Management and Professional Development.

The law minister said that none of the dropped amendments had been discarded. “They have only been held back to allow further deliberation. Of the 26 amendments proposed by the committee, 19 have been considered in full and five taken up partially,” he said. He said that there was no bar on any member to refer business to standing committees.

Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf’s Asif Mahmood then pointed out the quorum. The House proceeded to complete the legislative business on the agenda after completing the quorum within five minutes.

In the absence of the Opposition, the House then passed two bills: the Canal and Drainage (Amendment) Bill 2015 and the University of Okara Bill 2015.

The law minister introduced the Punjab Maintenance of Public Order (Amendment) Bill 2016 and the Punjab Local Government (Third Amendment) Bill 2016 in the house.

On a point of order, Rasheed demanded that the prime minister take back his remarks about the National Accountability Bureau (NAB). “The PM’s statement against the NAB amounts to creating hindrances in their work. It creates an impression that the government leaders are not serious about accountability,” he said. Rasheed demanded a resolution on the issue.

The House will debate the Orange Line Metro project during Thursday’s session.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 18^th,  2016.