MPs mull setting up of a parallel chamber for private Bills
Lawmakers are planning to establish a parallel debating chamber in the next Parliament that will be exclusive to private members’ Bills and issues raised by backbenchers, the Nation has learnt.
Lawmakers are planning to establish a parallel debating chamber in the next Parliament that will be exclusive to private members’ Bills and issues raised by backbenchers, the Nation has learnt.
It will be similar to the ‘Westminster Hall’ of the UK, which is used for debates on select committee reports and enables members to ask oral questions for quick answers from ministers.
The details are contained in a proposal by the Procedure and House Rules Committee and, if adopted by the 13th Parliament, could go a long way in fast-tracking legislative procedures.
At the Westminster Hall, votes are not taken and if a question by a member is challenged, the chair of the debates reports it to the House, which could then lead to a vote in the main chamber.
In a report on the review of the Standing Orders of the 12th Parliament, which adjourned indefinitely yesterday, the procedures committee termed the proposal as progressive.
While proposing the establishment of the second chamber, Kibwezi MP Patrick Musimba said it would be effective in providing additional time for second reading of Bills.
“It would afford members with vested interests who would like to contribute to the specific debates an opportunity to dispense of all their views,” he said.
Mr Musimba said he did a comparative study of the practice in the UK, where the Westminster Hall is used for debates on reports of selective committee and private members’ questions on constituency issues.
He observed that in Australia, a federation chamber has been established for the same purpose and that in 2016, the Parliament of Malaysia also introduced a second hall.
Legislative role of Parliament
He said Kenya should follow suit. The lawmaker noted that if adopted, the proposal would expedite the legislative role of Parliament. The House Rules Committee chaired by Deputy Speaker Moses Cheboi said the proposal will be subjected to further consideration.
“The committee noted that the proposal was progressive and would provide additional for debate of the house business especially business from individual members,” the committee stated in its proposal.
The review of the Standing Orders is the sixth since independence. Standing Order 264 provides for the periodic review of the regulations at least once every term of Parliament.
The first comprehensive review was done in 1966 following the amendment of the constitution to abolish the Senate, thereby transitioning Parliament from bicameralism to unicameralism.
There were minimal changes of the Standing Orders between 1966 and 1991. However, following the repeal of the Article 2A of the constitution in 1991 to accommodate multi-party politics, a second review was done.
Standing Orders, also known as rules of procedure, regulate the proceedings of Parliament and govern the procedures to be adopted in carrying out its mandate. By practice, they do not lapse at the end of a session or term of Parliament.
In most jurisdictions, reviews of Standing Orders are conventional, considering the ever changing landscape in governance. The changes may be necessitated by not only the prevailing political organisation of the country but also socio-economic realities of the time.
