Union interparlementaire inter-parliamentary union


The sitting was opened at 10.00 am



Download 469.13 Kb.
Page6/10
Date20.10.2016
Size469.13 Kb.
#5408
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10

The sitting was opened at 10.00 am




1. Introductory Remarks
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, reminded members of the deadline for candidates for the Executive Committee.
The President informed members of a new project between the IPU and UNDP to produce an annual report on Parliaments. An invitation to tender had been issued seeking a principal author for this report. A consultative council had been established to advise on this work; the President was a member of this council, which had met for the first time in September. The aim was to produce the report in time for the next International Day of Democracy in September 2011. In preparation for the report, questionnaires would be sent to national Parliaments, and the President encouraged secretaries general to ensure that the questionnaires were completed and returned in good time.
Mr Alain DELCAMP (France) asked if this presented an opportunity to promote the work of the ASGP, in particular his idea of an encyclopedia of parliamentary good practice.
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, undertook to raise this matter with the consultative council.

2. New Members
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, said that the secretariat had received several requests for membership which had been put before the Executive Committee and agreed to. These were:
Mr KWON, Oh Eul Secretary General of the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea

(replacing Mr Park, Kye Dong)


Mr Sadettin KALKAN Secretary General of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey

(replacing Mr Ali Osman Koca)


Mr Irfan NEZIROGLU Deputy Secretary General of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey
The new members were agreed to.

3. Communication from Mr Manuel Alba NAVARRO, Secretary General of the Congress of Deputies of Spain, on “Transparency and exemplarity as criteria guiding parliamentary activity”
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, invited Mr Manuel Alba NAVARRO, Secretary General of the Congress of Deputies of Spain, to present his communication, as follows:
“1. Regardless of the type of political system each country has given itself and of the very different situations each nation faces, it does not seem contentious to state that our Parliaments and their members are not presently at the height of their popularity.
I cannot deny that my thoughts are influenced by my country’s own circumstances. However, they are also significantly influenced by readings and contacts with the reality in other countries, whose Parliaments have recently seen their image and credibility seriously tarnished.
2. Within an extremely complex situation, which would require a detailed and in-depth analysis, we could list a number of causes that have contributed to this phenomenon. Without ranking them in terms of relative importance, we could stress, amongst others, the following:


  • Failure to adapt traditional parliamentary procedures to a social reality that has undergone considerable transformations, in the light of which certain practices appear, at the very best, incomprehensible.




  • The inadequacy of certain election systems, widely contested by citizens, the effects of which are particularly visible in the internal workings of Parliaments.




  • The fierce competition Parliament suffers in what is perhaps its main task: representing the people. This competition comes from at least two main fronts:




    • civil society itself, through its networks (a clear example being NGOs)

    • the media, more powerful than ever before, who have appropriated most (or all?) of the public sphere, deciding what matters to citizens and what does not, and establishing its own codes regarding what is (current) newsworthy and what is not. Ultimately, we are faced with the age-old question of controlling the agenda.




  • The challenge, inherent to Parliaments themselves, of establishing unified communications strategies that are homogenous and vested with clear institutional significance. In a context like Parliament, where not all actors are rowing in the same direction, this handicap is practically impossible to overcome.




  • Last but not least, the worldwide financial crisis has not made a beneficial contribution to the perception of the political class and of parliamentarians in particular.

3. All these causes, and some others which I am sure will spring to mind, are compounded, if not by a disappearance of ideologies or the traits that differentiate one political option from another, at least by a process of mainstreaming whereby, if not more active, citizens are clearly less ‘aligned’ in the sense of providing unconditional support to one or another political force and are often critical of them all. The common expression “they’re all the same”, applied to politicians, sums up what I mean.


In these circumstances, where citizens are unwilling to accept parliamentary discourse without taking a critical stance, the value of representatives’ words, pledges, projects and programmes inevitably lose part of the strength or power of attraction they once had. And all of this regardless of whether they are inherently good or bad.
In other words: what parliamentarians say takes a back seat to what parliamentarians do. Citizens today are resolved to demand from their representatives, universally and unavoidably, that old virtue: exemplarity.
This question has been pointed out in a number of recent publications.
4. Clearly this is not the relevant forum for a political-philosophical dissertation, nor do I intend to offer one. If I raise this question (in my communication) here, it is because this phenomenon, which I would dare to describe as universal, has a direct impact on the organisation and procedures within our Parliaments.
Firstly, this reality demands an extra effort in terms of transparency, which has not always been an element of parliamentary custom, to put it mildly. The old principle of interna corporis acta, whereby parliamentary independence provided a comprehensive justification for not disclosing Parliament’s internal affairs, can no longer be sustained.
It is possibly true that all our Chambers have taken steps towards a greater transparency. But it is possibly also true (and one need only cast an eye over the press in the past few months) that efforts have not been sufficiently intense or sincere. In addition to this, we must bear in mind that today’s technologies allow for public scrutiny by each individual and not necessarily through the traditional institutions devoted to these tasks (Courts of Auditors, Prosecutors, etc.). Gone are the days of instrumental excess and false clothes – the Emperor is naked again and exposed to public opinion.
5. Regardless of each country or each Chamber’s specificities, I am probably not mistaken in saying there are features that are sensitive for public opinion the world over. These naturally include parliamentarians’ compensation, both monetary and in the form of (benefits) "perquisites", travel expenses, activities in (parallel) addition to their parliamentary mandate, major works or refurbishment carried out on parliamentary premises, and, in general, the Chambers’ budgets. This list could be more extensive, but I have kept it to the most obvious or universal items.
6. The Spanish Parliament has recently adopted a number of decisions that may appear elementary to other Chambers, but nonetheless represent a turn towards greater transparency and exemplarity in the conduct of its institution and its members.
Amongst others, I would point out the following:


      • Including on our website references to Members’ financial conditions (wages, etc.) and material support (offices, computer equipment, etc.), as well as (compensation for) reimbursement of expenses.




      • Also including on our website the conditions governing severance payments or pension bonuses for parliamentarians.




      • Stipulating and reviewing rationalised criteria for travel funded by the Chamber. This has resulted in restrictions on certain activities and even suspending our participation in some international Parliamentary Assemblies.




      • Review of the Standing Orders to allow for disclosure of plenary sittings dealing with Members’ activities (in parallel) in addition to their parliamentary attributions.




      • Adopting a new electronic format that is more understandable and easier to circulate for the Register of Members’ Interest and Activities, including all the activities they declare and are approved by the Chamber.

7. One could say that these or similar measures may not ensure citizens’ satisfaction with the performance of their Parliament or its members. One could also think that they are insufficient contributions in the search for exemplarity in public office. But to my understanding, they are steps in the right direction. If we want to reset the connection between representatives and those they represent, there is no other option than to move towards our citizens, understand their position and attempt, once again, to bring them closer to Parliament.”


Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, thanked Mr Manuel Alba NAVARRO for his communication and invited members present to put questions to him.
Dr V.K. AGNIHOTRI (India) said that transparency concerning the conduct of MPs was becoming more important as a result of a combination of declining standards of conduct and the increasing right to information. Activists were engaged in trying to uncover wrongdoing by MPs. Within Parliament, registers of interests were one way of increasing transparency, while Ethics Committees could enforce sanctions where standards had been breached.
Dr Ulrich SCHÖLER (Germany) asked about the travel activities of Spanish Members of Parliament. What measures could be taken to combat mass-media populism, which wanted to see Members of Parliament engaged on the international stage without ever spending any money on travel? He asked for further information about those international assembly activities in which the Spanish Parliament had decided not to participate.
Mr Alain DELCAMP (France) thought that there was a philosophical and principled dimension to this issue. The fact was that the more Parliaments were transparent, the more people would complain about those things that were hidden. It was important to be exemplary, but also not to be paralysed by fear of public opinion. Transparency was not sufficient to make for a functioning society.
Mr Brendan KEITH (United Kingdom) asserted the principle of accountability, and stated that transparency was a modern manifestation of that principle. There was no choice but to be transparent: for one thing, it was provided for in the law of many countries. The British parliamentary system of ethical regulation was much as in India. Lords’ interests could be placed on the internet within 15 minutes of the information being received.
Mr Zingile DINGANI (South Africa) said that this subject was provoking a broader debate about the role of parliamentarians and what citizens believed they stood for. Party lists distanced parliamentarians from citizens compared with constituency-based systems. Parliaments needed to show how they had added value to the lives of the people of their countries.
Mr André GAGNON (Canada) asked whether the decision in the Spanish Chamber of Deputies to cut spending on travel had preceded or succeeded the publication of information on this spending.
Mr Sadettin KALKAN (Turkey) spoke of the situation in his country, where parliamentary proceedings were available on the internet and television. Freedom of information requests needed to be responded to within 15 days. 1 million visitors every year visited the Turkish Parliament.
Mr Philippe SCHWAB (Switzerland) spoke of competition between Parliament and celebrity judges, who in Switzerland conducted very public inquiries into political issues in which parliamentarians were already involved. This often placed pressure on Parliament to launch committee inquiries into sensitive issues such as the financing of political parties, which had to be conducted both transparently and in an exemplary manner. He asked whether the role of the celebrity judge was affecting the work of the Spanish Parliament.
Mrs Jacqueline BIESHEUVEL-VERMEIJDEN (Netherlands) described a situation in her Parliament in which Members had been conducting a parallel debate on Twitter at the same time as a debate in the Chamber. The Speaker had complained that the comments on Twitter damaged the transparency of the parliamentary debate.
Mrs Barbara GEORGOPOULOU (Greece) described developments in her country, including public contracts for defence equipment, a review of parliamentary immunities and a redesign of the parliamentary website.
Mr KWON Oh Eul (Republic of Korea) said that the media did not always report parliamentary behaviour in a way that was in the public interest, reporting information selectively and partially in order to attack parliamentarians and the National Assembly rather than promoting transparency.
Mr Damir DAVIDOVIC (Montenegro) said that proceedings in his country were as transparent as they could be. All travel requests were discussed in a collegium of senior parliamentarians. The fact (but not the cost) of travel by Members of Parliament was reported publicly. Disclosing financial information about Parliament had relieved pressure from campaigners, but Parliament still remained a punching bag for the media and NGOs. Secretaries General were sometimes placed in a difficult situation when Members made commitments to journalists on reducing expenditure which they had no intention of meeting.
Mr Manuel Alba NAVARRO (Spain) commented on the large number of interventions there had been. His purpose in making the communication had been to concentrate on the broad ideas of transparency and exemplarity, rather than to describe every single example, and not to boast of any particular achievements in Spain. He was not sure if self-regulation, as described in India, was adequate, or if external control was required. The Bureau of the National Assembly sometimes reacted to particular situations rather than looking at the broader picture. In response to Dr Schöler, Members of the National Assembly did not now take part in the WEU Parliamentary Assembly, and took part in only one of two gatherings for the Mediterranean region. The public did not recognise MPs as having the status of aristocrats, as suggested by Mr Delcamp. Obligations of transparency and exemplarity could be fulfilled in different ways. Politicians in Spain appeared on popular television programmes more often in order to reach a wider audience. On travel, there was relatively little transparency compared with some other countries, but a lot of internal pressure to cut costs. There had been many problems in Spain with simultaneous parliamentary committee inquiries and judicial inquiries, sometimes conducted by “star judges” (some of whom were now on trial themselves). MPs in Spain were not allowed to access the internet within the Chamber or to broadcast proceedings. Technology was a means to an end: it could prevent as much as enhance transparency. Partial transparency was a bit like partial pregnancy. Spain was far from a perfect example of transparency and exemplarity.
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, thanked Mr Manuel Alba NAVARRO and those members who had put questions to him for such a lively and interesting debate.
4. Communication from Dr V.K. AGNIHOTRI, Secretary General of the Rajya Sabha of India, on “Introducing information technology in the Chamber”
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, invited Dr V.K. AGNIHOTRI, Secretary General of the Rajya Sabha of India, to present his communication, as follows:
Introduction

1. Enormous technological advances, particularly in the field of information technology, have impacted every field of human endeavour, transforming our lives in an unprecedented manner. Working of Legislatures has been greatly transformed due to adoption of such technologies. As in the legislatures of the world’s advanced countries, information technology is widely used in the Indian Parliament. It has embraced new technology to bring greater efficiency to parliamentarians’ work inside the Chamber as well as in terms of connecting with their constituents. Presiding Officers continue to make several efforts with regard to efficient management of scarce legislative time so as to enhance the effectiveness of the Legislature. A number of innovative changes in the established norms and conventions have been made by the Indian Parliament in this regard from time to time. In recent times, certain innovative information technology tools have been put in place inside the Chamber of the Rajya Sabha, the Upper House of the Indian Parliament, which aim at effective time management of the House. This paper focuses on two such applications, which have the potential to bring about a perceptive change in the way parliamentary activities are carried on inside the House.


Time Management for Effective Functioning of the House

  1. With a view to managing effectively the limited legislative time, technological know-how has been put to use over the past couple of years. Among various modes of debates, discussions and interventions in the House, the device of 'matters raised with the permission of the Chair' (what is commonly known as the ‘Zero Hour’) provides an important opportunity to the Members to highlight pressing issues affecting the lives of people across the country. Generally, the issues agitating the minds of the Members were so involved and the number of Members eager to raise the issues were so many, that often the 'Zero Hour' turned out to be not only long-winded but also less orderly and more difficult to manage. Several initiatives were taken in the past to regulate the Zero Hour, which, inter alia, included fixing the time limit of three minutes for those Members whose notices had been admitted by the Chairman to raise issues of urgent public importance. For this, a digital clock was installed in the Chamber to compute the duration of the three minutes with a countdown timer. After the stipulated time, the mike of the Member was automatically switched off through remote control. This system proved to be a success as Members followed the time restriction and were able to articulate their views within the available time. Thus, up to ten matters could be articulated within a period of less than half-an-hour.




  1. Taking a cue from its success, newer information technology tools have been developed to effectively manage the time for other discussions and debates that take place inside the Chamber of the Rajya Sabha. Even the digital clock with countdown timer has been subsumed under an Integrated Talk Time Management and Display System, which has been recently put in place for time management during different discussions, including the Zero Hour submissions.


Integrated Talk Time Management and Electronic Display System

  1. An Integrated Talk Time Management and Electronic Display System has been successfully installed in the Rajya Sabha. The system, in addition to the Zero Hour submissions, also covers Short Duration Discussion, Calling Attention, Discussion on the working of the Ministries, Discussion on Government Bills as well as Private Members’ Bills and Resolutions. The Rajya Sabha Secretariat has brought out a manual on this new system, which explains its operation in detail. In brief, the system is controlled by the Presiding Officer with the help of a touch screen PC placed on his/ her table. The information contained in the five lines on the touch screen is also displayed on the two LED boards installed on the two sides of the Chamber. The top of the touch screen shows the topic for discussion. The system consists of various modes depending on the type of activity going on inside the Chamber. For example, the ‘Zero Hour’ mode is switched on to operate in the Zero Hour. Accordingly, for the ‘Zero Hour’ mode, the first line of the Touch Screen shows the name of the Member who is speaking along with his party/ group affiliation. The Member’s division (seat) number is shown at the left side of the second line and a count down timer, in ‘minutes: seconds’ format, appears on the right side of the line. The time is displayed in the descending order from 03:00 (3 minutes) to 00:00 (zero seconds). The mike of the Member is automatically switched off when the timer reaches 00:00. The third line shows the party affiliation of the Member speaking and the fifth line shows the name of the Presiding Officer (namely the Chairman, the Deputy Chairman or the name of the Vice-Chairman). When the Chair calls the next Member to speak, his mike gets activated and the process is reiterated.




  1. At the time of a discussion, such as General Discussion on the Budget or a Short Duration Discussion, or discussion on Bills, etc., the 'Discussion' mode is selected. Along with the topic selected, the touch screen shows the name of the Member who is speaking and his/ her party/ group at the time, his/ her division number, and the time taken in the form of a count-up timer. It also indicates, in appropriate cases, the total time allotted to the Member's party/ group and the time already consumed by earlier speakers of his/ her party/ group, if any.




  1. As regards the Calling Attention, Discussion on Private Members’ Bills/ Resolutions, etc., the 'Member Speaking' mode is selected and the time consumed by the participating members is indicated individually, on the display board.




  1. There is also a 'Pause' function button which has been provided to pause the timer in case of any disturbance in the Chamber. Once paused, the button changes to the [Start] button. The [Start] button should be touched after the interruptions are over. The timer starts from the time it was stopped. Further, by pressing the 'Message' button, a pre-recorded message can be displayed on the boards, such as 'House Adjourned till 02:00 p.m.', 'Prime Minister's Reply', etc.




  1. The touch screen also has provision for only the Chair to view the time allotted and consumed by various parties/ groups at a given point of time by choosing the appropriate 'Party Time' buttons.




  1. Further measures to upgrade the system are in progress.


Dashboard Application System

  1. In order to assist the Chairman to effectively conduct the business of the House, a need had been felt for some time that information regarding Members, the location of their seats, party affiliation, States to which they belong, their involvement in the Question Hour in terms of asking Supplementary Questions, and other such data should be made available to the Chair. Another important consideration had been to streamline the process of allowing Supplementary Questions to the Members so that the Question Hour could be made more efficient and effective. The role of the Presiding Officer in giving opportunities to Members across the spectrum to ask relevant supplementaries is one of the notable features of the Question Hour. For example, a Member who has been permitted by the Chairman to put a supplementary question on the previous or the same day may not generally be given another opportunity during Question Hour on that day. In the Rajya Sabha, the Chairman has regulated the number of supplementaries to starred questions besides emphasizing the need for asking short and crisp supplementaries.




  1. In such a scenario, access to relevant data in an organized and coherent format was thought to be of considerable assistance to the Chairman, who earlier had to rely on the information provided to him manually or had to seek the help of the officer(s) at the Table. Against this backdrop, a Dashboard Application has been developed and subsequently installed on the Chairman’s table in the Rajya Sabha Chamber. Data entry and updation required for the software are taken care of by the Secretariat through backroom operations. With the entire seating arrangement of Members, including their party affiliation and other personal details, displayed on the screen on the Chairman’s table, he is able to make informed selection of Members in giving them opportunities to ask relevant supplementaries.




  1. On logging into the Dashboard Application, the opening screen displays a graphical presentation of the seating arrangement in the Chamber with the membership of different political parties indicated in different colours. The numbers mentioned on each coloured strip represent the Division Number assigned to each Member. These Division Numbers are pre-fed into the system and on clicking at a particular number, details of the Member, who has been assigned that particular seat, get displayed on the screen with the photograph of the Member, his/ her name, the State to which he/ she belongs, his/ her party affiliation and division number. Information regarding ‘Supplementary Question Status’ indicating the supplementaries asked by the Member during the previous sitting, during the current week and also during the current Session is displayed at the bottom of the window. It also shows the number of such questions asked by the Members belonging to the same political party. In case of a Member of the Council of States, who is a Minister in the Union Council of Ministers, the Supplementary Question Status Window does not contain any information other than the information concerning supplementary questions asked by the Members of his/ her party during the session.




  1. The Seating Arrangement data is available in visual as well as list form. The task bar at the bottom of the screen shows the following options for seeking a list or graphical display of a set of Members:




  • Party wise,

  • State wise,

  • Gender wise,

  • Ministers in Rajya Sabha,

  • Nominated Members,

  • Supplementary Questions, and

  • Council of Ministers.




  1. When ‘Party Wise’ option is clicked, the ‘Select Party’ scroll down menu bar, containing names of political parties in the Council, comes on the screen. Upon selecting a party name, the screen shows the graphical layout of the seating arrangement of that particular party in a pre-designated colour. For example, Indian National Congress (INC) has been allotted the blue colour; so, the division numbers (seats) which INC Members have been assigned is shown in blue colour. On selecting ‘ALL’ in the ‘Select Party’ menu bar, the graphical layout of the entire Chamber in multi-colour can be seen, each colour indicating a certain party. The legend on the right hand corner of the screen shows the names of the various parties (in alphabetical order), their respective number of Members and the colour code by which they are identified in the software. The smaller parties, each represented by a few Members, have been assigned a single colour and are collectively indicated as ‘Others’.




  1. Similarly, when the ‘State wise’ option is clicked, the scroll down menu bar gives the names of all the States, and on selecting a particular State, all the Members who have been elected from that State, belonging to different parties (indicated in different colours in the graphical presentation) gets displayed. The ‘Gender wise’ option generates a graphical display of the male and female Members in the Rajya Sabha belonging to various parties. In the same manner, information regarding Nominated Members and Members of Rajya Sabha in the Union Council of Ministers can be accessed.




  1. The same information in the list form can be obtained by clicking on Seating Arrangement (List).




  1. On the extreme left of the Task Bar, 'Report' option is there to facilitate the Chair to find out particulars about the business in the Chamber during a particular sitting or on a specific session/ date. When it is clicked, the List of Business, the papers to be laid on the Table of the House, the Part-I Bulletin containing brief record of the proceedings of the meeting of the Rajya Sabha on a particular day, the Part-II Bulletin issued for the information of the Members, synopses of the previous sittings, the Questions list, Ballot list, Minute book, Notices, Questions related information, Council of Ministers, etc. are accessible to the Chair.




  1. The Chair may also read the References through the Dashboard Application. Facility has been provided to scroll page-wise or automatically setting the scroll speed.




  1. The Hindi version of the Dashboard Application is also available.


Conclusion

  1. It is generally acknowledged that howsoever developed the technology may be, it is ultimately a tool in the hands of the user and its success or otherwise depends on the way it is handled. In any Legislature the Presiding Officer acts as a referee and, whatever tools are placed at his disposal, it is ultimately his discretion and judgment to use them effectively. Same is the case with the utilization of information technology in the Rajya Sabha Chamber. A lot depends on the Presiding Officer, who can give a delicate human touch through his sense of fair play and discretion. For example, during a discussion, if a Member exceeds the time allotted to him, as displayed on the Board, the Chair can grant him extra time considering various circumstances. Similarly, the personal interaction which a Chairman has with the Members informs his choices when inviting supplementaries during the Question Hour. With the aid of the software, the Chair can now instantaneously access details about the Member and this information, combined with the acumen of the Chair can, no doubt, enhance the performance of the Legislature manifold.”


Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, thanked Dr V.K. AGNIHOTRI for his communication and invited members present to put questions to him.
Mr Ashfaque HAMID (Bangladesh) said that the automatic microphone cut-off device was very useful for occupants of the Chair.
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, asked if parliamentary groups had more time than the three minutes normally allotted, whether speaking time could be traded among Members and whether it was difficult to ensure that Members occupied the seats allocated to them.
Mr André GAGNON (Canada) asked how the new system had influenced the way in which debates were managed from the Chair.
Dr V.K. AGNIHOTRI reinforced that the new system had been introduced in three stages. The reverse time clock was only used in ‘zero hour’ debates when any matter could be raised. When parties did not speak at all in a debate, the Chair could reallocate their time to others.
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, thanked Dr V.K. AGNIHOTRI for his very instructive communication.
5. Communication from Mr Vladimir SVINAREV, Secretary General of the Council of the Federation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, on “Current issues in supporting the activities of the Council of the Federation”
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, invited Mr Vladimir SVINAREV, Secretary General of the Council of the Federation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, to present his communication, as follows:
“1. No efforts are being spared to improve performance of the Council of Federation Staff. The relevance of this line of work is high as the CoF law-making process is gaining momentum. During the last spring session alone, the Council of Federation passed as many as 250 bills achieving the best score registered over the past years.
The Council of Federation holds numerous events both on the national and international scale. This year, the Council of Federation sponsored The 3rd Neva International Environment Congress in Saint-Petersburg, The 2nd “Russian Historical and Cultural Heritage” Parliamentary Forum, various academic and research seminars and workshops.
Since 2000, the Council of Federation has been and continues to be an active participant of The Baikal Economic Biennial Forum that held its sixth session in early September 2010. The high prestige of this international forum is evidenced by its high international attendance including delegations from China, Mongolia, Japan, Korea, Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
The above events help improve the parliamentary law-making performance and offer an effective channel of communication with the experts and civic organisations in Russia and worldwide. The arrangement of such events is a responsibility of the CoF Staff.
Improvement of the events planning has been described by the CoF Chairman as a major objective.
Last summer, the Council of the Upper Chamber approved the draft guidelines to be applied when planning events arranged by the Upper Chamber.5 The document sets out new provisions designed to enforce accountability with respect to events planning. By way of example, during a spring (autumn) session a CoF committee or commission may change the events agenda by shifting the event timing of cancelling the event altogether only once. New events that may be suggested for inclusion in the events agenda and that require funding will not be reviewed until they have been agreed with the CoF Funding, Maintenance and Support Assurance Commission and the CoF Finance Directorate.
2. Maintaining a swift and reliable interaction by and among the CoF Staff and our counterpart organisations in the RF regional legislative assemblies is a major line of our efforts. Regular workshops arranged by the CoF for legal, administrative and press services have been an established practice for a long time now. Last year, analysts and experts from regional legislative assemblies attended a workshop which addressed issues relating to the provision of analytical support to the law-making process. The participants discussed a potential contribution that analyst and expert communities can make to the legislative process. The workshop was attended by representatives of the RF Presidential Administration, RF Government Analytical Centre, Public Chamber and State Duma. This year, the invitations to attend the workshop will be extended to counterpart services with the RF regional governments. The workshops are becoming increasingly important for us considering the new and widely acclaimed form of legislative initiatives, i.e. the consolidated legislative initiatives that are jointly elaborated and jointly submitted by the Council of Federation and the legislative bodies of the Russian Federation constituent entities.
3. The Council of Federation, Upper Chamber of the Russian Federation Parliament, has a varied reserve of experience in terms of the relationship with regional legislatures. This experience could be attractive to many nations, specifically to federal nations, nations where territorial entities forming the union have legislative bodies with ample powers or nations with an effective local self-government system. We invite all Parliaments that are members of the European Centre for Parliamentary Research & Documentation (ECPRD) to attend the workshop that will tentatively be held in Moscow under the ECPRD auspices in 2011.
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, thanked Mr Vladimir SVINAREV for his communication and invited members present to put questions to him.
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, asked if all of the events organised by the Council of Federation took place in the parliament buildings. He also asked about the planning process for such events.
Mr Vladimir SVINAREV (Russian Federation) explained that his Parliament had constitutional powers to organise events and activities, in the case of his Chamber, particularly to do with the regions. The Chamber as a whole considered and approved a schedule of events and activities for each session. Every event was conducted in co-operation with other bodies, including the Executive, the judicial community and civil society.
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, thanked Mr Vladimir SVINAREV for his communication.
The sitting rose at 1.10 pm.

FOURTH SITTING

Tuesday 5 October 2010 (Afternoon)
Dr Hafnaoui AMRANI, President, in the Chair



Download 469.13 Kb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page