Zimpapers Logo

Lloyd Gumbo Mr Speaker, Sir
Legislators are entitled to US$75 per sitting for both committee and House sessions. This means the 290 backbenchers that we have in both houses would chew almost US$22 000 per day if they all attended. This is in addition to hotel accommodation, meals and fuel coupons translating to at least US$40 000 per day.

It is public knowledge that Treasury is under pressure financially due to other pressing demands. Legislators have been convenient victims. MPs have on occasions been forced to subsidise Government by buying fuel using their own money to attend parliamentary business.

Some of them require over 500 litres of fuel to travel from their constituencies to Harare and back, meaning they would have to fork out more than US$700 for trips that must be sponsored by the State.

While there is certainly a case for Members of Parliament to be paid their allowances and be given their fuel coupons when they fall due, there is an even stronger widespread public resentment over whether parliamentarians must be paid at all.

This outrage is occasioned by failure by legislators to push for the voters’ interests while making noise about their own welfare.
But it would be wrong to say all MPs are like that because there are some across the political divide who mean business when they come to Parliament.

They diligently carry out their duties because they want to see the country develop as a result of their participation as the third pillar of the State. But there are also charlatans who masquerade as honourables yet they have mastered the art of defrauding the State by attending committee meetings or House sessions just to mark themselves present before walking out within minutes.

This, they do, so that they get the US$75 sitting allowance.
How dishonourable?

Parliamentarians are there to make laws, play an oversight role on the Executive and to representing their constituents. These are roles that justifiably must be a permanent feature in our body politic to make sure citizens are not short-changed.

While it may be desirable to have parliamentarians sitting on a daily basis to perform these duties, our situation is unique in that the State cannot afford to pay them because of the cash crunch.

Basic economics say there is no need to keep accumulating debts when not necessary hence there is need for the State to seriously consider applying some basic economics.

Parliamentarians play an important role in governance and there is need for the State to do a cost-benefit analysis.
The State cannot continue accumulating debts without coming up with cost-cutting mechanisms like trimming the number of sittings.
Yes, constitutionally, they must sit for between 60 to 80 days per year but we cannot afford that luxury when there is no serious business to be transacted.

There is every reason for the State to cut on the number of days that parliamentarians come to Harare for parliamentary business. This will cut costs on sitting allowances, fuel coupons and hotel accommodation.

While it may appear sustainable now because Treasury is not paying them timeously, the State will always owe these legislators and will be bound to pay them in future.

Some people may argue that cutting the number of sittings days would be tantamount to making Parliament impotent but how justified is it to have legislators sit for 80 days to transact business that could be done in 40 days?

The public can still be involved in law making process as provided for in the constitution within a few days.
Portfolio committees can still carry out their mandate within a week than two weeks.

Since the inception of the First Session of the Eighth Parliament, there has been no serious business in both Houses except for the budget processes.

The National Assembly sat for 21 days while the Senate sat for 22 days between September 3 and December 5, 2013 yet they did not pass any legislation or play any major role in governance, bar the pre-budget consultations.

A few motions were debated during that time, of which most of them were politically poisoned making it impossible for the House to seriously debate the issues.

The Senate has even struggled to introduce motions, a situation that has seen the Upper House on some occasions adjourning after sitting for less than 20 minutes yet they will be entitled to full benefits.

Parliament must only sit when necessary especially when they have to consider Bills.
It is important that the executive engages the legislature over parliamentary programmes so that if there are any Bills coming from the former they must be gazetted around the same time so that business can be consolidated.

There is need to make sure parliamentary business is consolidated and be done within at least two weeks when necessary.
Why should Parliament be sitting when there are no Bills to be considered while at the same time backbenchers are reluctant to introduce Private Members’ Bills?

Since legislators are in Harare to debate the proposed 2014 national budget, it would have been ideal if about five Bills had been gazetted so that they would debate them at the same time.

The law also allows Parliament to extend sittings into the night when necessary, something that our administration must seriously consider.

This tendency of sitting for about two and half hours is not good for an ailing economy, as such all cost cutting mechanisms must be adopted.

Legislators with the interests of the nation at heart will not argue against sitting late into the night to avoid increasing the number of days.

Yes, democracy may be expensive but we cannot afford that luxury.

Email: [email protected]