Parliamentary Subcommittee Advances Plans for Presidency Oversight and System Reforms

A Subcommittee of the National Assembly met to finalize draft rules for several major reforms, including the establishment of a dedicated committee to oversee the Presidency and adjustments to parliamentary question procedures.

Oversight Committee for the Presidency

The subcommittee focused on implementing a previous Rules Committee decision to create a standing committee to enhance accountability within the Presidency.

Key Areas of Consensus and Division:

• Establishment and Mandate: All parties, including the ANC, DA, and EFF, supported the committee’s creation to scrutinize the administration of the Presidency. The committee’s functions are proposed to primarily focus on oversight of the Presidency’s budget (Vote One) and work.

• Presidential Appearances (Frequency):

  • Majority View: The President or Deputy President should appear once a year to respond to policy matters of national or international importance. This would be the seventh official appearance platform for the President annually (in addition to SONA, Budget Vote, and four question sessions).

  • Minority/Alternative Views: The EFF proposed quarterly appearances to give the committee “more teeth” and ensure deeper scrutiny, arguing that current question sessions are insufficient. The DA also emphasized the need for frequent accountability beyond a single annual meeting.

• Scope and Accountability: It was generally agreed that for operational matters and budget accountability, a Minister in the Presidency or the Director-General (DG) would be assigned to appear before the committee, rather than the President directly. The rules should not be overly prescriptive by naming the DG, allowing the President to assign the appropriate executive member.

• Committee Structure and Size:

  • Members agreed the committee should, for now, be limited to the National Assembly (NA), avoiding the scheduling difficulties associated with a Joint Committee involving the NCOP.

  • The size options considered were 11, 14, or 16 Members. Members like Rise Mzansi favoured 14 or 16 members to ensure broader proportional participation for smaller parties.

• Procedural Notice: There was agreement that the Presidency must receive advance notice of the general topics or policy subjects to be discussed, but not necessarily the specific questions, to ensure adequate preparation.

The DA specifically proposed that the Chairperson of the committee should be from a party other than the President’s party and that the committee’s scope should allow the Speaker to refer any urgent matter of national importance for Presidential accountability if other mechanisms are deemed insufficient.

Parliamentary Procedure Reforms

The subcommittee also addressed proposed changes to the current rules governing how MPs interact with the Executive.

Interpellations and Question Time:

• Hybrid Model: There was broad support for a hybrid model that integrates the current question system with elements of interpellations. This structure would specifically allow the original questioner to engage twice during the supplementary question exchange (taking the first and the last question).

• Supplementary Questions: The options of allowing either four or five total supplementary questions were discussed. The five-question model was noted as being better for preserving opportunities for smaller parties. A decision on the final number was deferred pending an analysis of the time impacts and question allocation formulas.

• Time Extension: Extending the overall question time by 30 minutes was considered to promote broader participation and accommodate the structural changes.

Oversight Visits by MPs (Unannounced Visits):

The committee reviewed draft guidelines for both announced and unannounced oversight visits following a directive from the Speaker.

• Strong Opposition to Restrictions: The discussion resulted in significant opposition to proposals that would require Members of Parliament to obtain the Speaker’s prior permission to conduct unannounced oversight visits.

• Constitutional Concerns: The EFF and DA strongly argued that requiring prior permission would be unconstitutional, effectively limiting Parliament’s ability to perform its constitutional oversight role.

• Constituency Restriction: Concerns were also raised about proposals to restrict oversight visits only to a Member’s constituency area.

While members agreed that guidelines are necessary for coordination and accountability, the restrictive sections concerning access and prior permission were deemed problematic and require revision. Parties will consult their caucuses before submitting further input.