28 Aug The Mechanics of Parliamentary Committees in India: Roles, Challenges, and Reform
This article covers “Daily Current Affairs” and topic details of the Joint Parliamentary Committee.
Syllabus mapping:
GS-2: Polity: Union legislature: working, envisaged role, and actual working.
For Prelims:
What are parliamentary committees: Specific committees, roles, functions, and composition?
What is a joint parliamentary committee its composition, functions, and recent examples?
For Mains:
What is the significance of various committees, their limitations, and the way forward to make them more effective in a parliamentary form of government?
Why in the News?
The Joint Committee of Parliament on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024 has invited public input on the proposed legislation. The Lok Sabha Secretariat has issued a press communique detailing the process for submitting suggestions. The Bill, introduced in the Lok Sabha during the Budget Session, has been referred to the Joint Committee chaired by Lok Sabha MP Jagdambika Pal. The Committee is expected to report on the Bill by the end of the first week of the Winter Session of Parliament this year.
What are the Parliamentary Committees?
The Parliament of India, due to its large size and the breadth of issues it addresses, requires assistance to manage and deliberate on various legislative and administrative matters. To ensure effective functioning, the Parliament is supported by various committees, which play a crucial role in detailed scrutiny and oversight.
Key Asepects:
Appointment and Election: Parliamentary committees are either appointed or elected by the House of Parliament or nominated by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha. This process ensures that the committees are composed of Members of Parliament (MPs) who are selected based on the rules and procedures of the respective House.
Direction and Functioning: Once constituted, these committees work under the direction of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha. The leadership provided by the Speaker or Chairman is crucial for guiding the committee’s functions and ensuring that it operates in alignment with parliamentary rules.
Reporting: Committees are responsible for presenting their reports to the respective House or directly to the Speaker/Chairman. These reports include findings, recommendations, and insights that help inform legislative debates and decision-making processes.
Secretariat Support: Each committee is provided with a secretariat by the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha. This administrative support is essential for the smooth functioning of the committee, including organizing meetings, managing documentation, and assisting with research and analysis.
Classification of Parliamentary Committees
1. Standing Committees
Standing Committees are permanent bodies functioning continuously or periodically. They are categorized as follows:
A. Financial Committees:
1. Public Accounts Committee: Examines government accounts for financial accountability.
2. Estimates Committee: Reviews expenditure estimates and suggests improvements.
3. Committee on Public Undertakings: Scrutinizes public sector enterprises.
B. Departmental Standing Committees: 24 committees focusing on specific departments to review their functioning and expenditure.
C. Committees to Inquire:
1. Committee on Petitions: Reviews public petitions.
2. Committee of Privileges: Investigates parliamentary privileges.
3. Ethics Committee: Addresses ethical conduct of members.
D. Committees to Scrutinize and Control:
1. Committee on Government Assurances: Monitors government assurances.
2. Committee on Subordinate Legislation: Reviews rules and regulations framed by the executive.
3. Committee on Papers Laid on the Table: Examines papers presented to the House.
4. Committee on Welfare of SCs and STs: Focuses on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes’ Welfare.
5. Committee on Empowerment of Women: Deals with women’s empowerment issues.
6. Joint Committee on Offices of Profit: Examines office of profit issues.
E. Committees Relating to the Day-to-Day Business of the House:
1. Business Advisory Committee: Plans House business.
2. Committee on Private Members’ Bills and Resolutions: Manages private members’ legislative business.
3. Rules Committee: Reviews rules of procedure.
4. Committee on Absence of Members from Sittings of the House: Addresses member absences.
F. House-Keeping or Service Committees:
1. General Purposes Committee: Manages general administrative matters.
2. House Committee: Oversees House facilities and arrangements.
3. Library Committee: Manages the parliamentary library.
4. Joint Committee on Salaries and Allowances of Members: Reviews members’ salaries and allowances.
2. Ad Hoc Committees
Ad Hoc Committees are temporary and formed for specific tasks:
A. Inquiry Committees: Investigate specific issues or scandals, such as the Joint Committee on Bofors Contract or the Committee on Food Management in Parliament House Complex.
B. Advisory Committees:
1. Select Committees: Examine bills in detail and report back.
2. Joint Committees: Consist of members from both Houses to review and report on bills.
Joint Committees on Bills
Defination: A Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) in India is a specialized committee constituted by both Houses of Parliament—the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. It is established to examine specific issues or pieces of legislation that require detailed scrutiny beyond the scope of individual Houses.
Purpose and Functions
1. Detailed Scrutiny: JPCs are primarily formed to conduct a detailed examination of particular Bills, issues, or matters of significant importance. They allow for a more thorough review than what might be possible in the floor debates of the individual Houses.
2. Report Preparation: The JPC examines the subject in detail, often taking evidence from experts, stakeholders, and public representatives. It then prepares a comprehensive report which is presented to both Houses of Parliament for consideration.
3. Resolution of Disagreements: JPCs help resolve differences or disagreements between the two Houses regarding a Bill or an issue. They facilitate consensus-building and detailed discussion on contentious matters.
Formation
1. Constitution: A JPC is typically constituted through a motion passed in either the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha. The motion is then communicated to the other House, which nominates its members to the Committee.
2. Composition: The JPC consists of members from both Houses of Parliament. The exact number of members and their party representation are determined based on the motion that establishes the Committee.
3. Chairmanship: The Chairperson of a JPC is usually appointed from among the members, with the appointment being agreed upon by both Houses.
Key Characteristics
1. Temporary Nature: Unlike standing committees, JPCs are temporary and exist only for the duration required to examine the specific issue or Bill for which they were constituted.
2. Wide Mandate: JPCs can be tasked with examining a broad range of issues, including but not limited to legislative Bills, financial matters, administrative issues, or public grievances.
3. Detailed Examination: JPCs often hold multiple sittings, gather evidence, and invite submissions from various stakeholders to ensure a comprehensive examination of the matter.
Examples:
1. Bofors Scandal: A notable example is the Joint Committee on Bofors Contract, which was formed to investigate allegations related to the Bofors gun deal.
2. Fertilizer Pricing: The Joint Committee on Fertilizer Pricing was established to examine issues related to fertilizer pricing and distribution.
3. Stock Market Scam: Another significant example is the Joint Committee on Stock Market Scam, which was constituted to investigate the stock market crash of 2001.
When a bill is referred to a Select Committee or a Joint Committee, it undergoes a detailed examination process that involves the following steps:
Clause-by-Clause Consideration:
Detailed Scrutiny: The Committee examines the bill clause by clause. This meticulous review ensures that every provision is thoroughly analyzed. Members assess the implications of each clause and its alignment with the bill’s objectives. Amendments: Members of the Committee can propose amendments to various clauses. These modifications are debated and voted upon within the Committee, allowing for adjustments based on detailed discussions and insights.
Evidence Gathering:
Public and Expert Input: The Committee has the authority to gather evidence from various sources. This may include: Associations, Public Bodies and Experts. Hearings: The Committee may hold hearings where these stakeholders present their views. This input helps the Committee understand different perspectives and potential impacts of the bill.
Report Submission:
Drafting the Report: After considering the bill and incorporating any amendments, the Committee drafts a report summarizing its findings, recommendations, and the text of the amended bill. Submission to the House: The Committee submits this report to the House for further consideration. The report includes detailed observations, the rationale behind proposed amendments, and suggestions for further legislative action.
Dissenting Opinions:
Minutes of Dissent: Members who disagree with the majority’s conclusions or recommendations can append their dissenting opinions to the report. This ensures that minority views are recorded and considered by the House. Transparency and Debate: The inclusion of dissenting opinions promotes transparency and allows for a fuller debate in the House, reflecting a range of viewpoints on the bill.
Importance of Parliamentary Committees:
Parliament is fundamentally tasked with making laws and holding the government accountable for its actions. Members of Parliament (MPs) represent citizens’ interests, passing laws, overseeing government operations, and ensuring effective allocation of public funds. Given the complex and technical nature of modern government operations, Parliamentary Committees play a crucial role in enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of parliamentary functions.
Enhanced Scrutiny of Legislation and Policies:
Detailed Examination: Committees provide a mechanism for the in-depth analysis of proposed legislation, government policies, and expenditures. They ensure that bills are scrutinized thoroughly, addressing complex technical issues that might not be fully examined in a full House debate.
Efficient Oversight:
Government Accountability: Committees help oversee the workings of the government and the allocation of public funds. They ensure that expenditures align with legislative mandates and are scrutinized properly.
Expert and Stakeholder Input:
Broader Perspectives: Committees can consult experts and stakeholders, providing a more comprehensive view of various issues. This input helps refine legislation and policy recommendations.
Detailed Deliberations:
In-Depth Analysis: Committees can spend more time on individual items compared to the limited time available during parliamentary sessions, allowing for more detailed examination and better decision-making.
Consensus Building:
Facilitating Negotiations: Committees help members from different parties to discuss and build consensus on various issues, leading to more balanced legislative outcomes.
Challenges and Constraints of Parliamentary Standing Committees:
1. Limited Scope of Examination
Exclusion of Major Policy Matters: Standing Committees typically do not address broad government policy issues but focus on the business or commercial functions of public undertakings. S. K. Verma emphasizes that this narrow focus limits their ability to influence significant policy decisions, suggesting that a broader mandate could enhance their impact.
Day-to-Day Administration: Committees do not engage in reviewing routine administrative functions. M. P. Jain points out that this limitation means ongoing administrative issues may not receive the detailed scrutiny they need, potentially leading to inefficiencies or oversight.
2. Limited Technical Expertise:
Lack of Technical Experts: Members of Standing Committees are generally parliamentarians who may lack specialized technical knowledge. R. C. Gupta highlights that this gap in expertise can compromise the quality of scrutiny, especially for complex or technical matters that require in-depth analysis.
Inadequate Expert Support: Committees often lack access to full-time technical experts or advisors. M. P. Jain argues that the absence of specialized support restricts the committee’s ability to conduct thorough investigations and produce well-informed recommendations. In other countries, such as the UK, USA, and Canada, Committees have access to specialist advisors, including lawyers, economists, and statisticians, which helps them conduct more thorough and informed inquiries.
3. Advisory Nature of Recommendations
Non-Binding Recommendations: The recommendations of Standing Committees are advisory and not binding. S. K. Verma contends that this advisory nature weakens the committee’s influence, as ministries are not required to implement the recommendations, which can lead to inaction or partial implementation.
Limited Enforcement Power: Committees lack the authority to enforce their recommendations. R. C. Gupta notes that this limitation means that even well-considered recommendations may not translate into effective policy changes or administrative improvements.
4. Limited Coverage
Number of Public Undertakings: Standing Committees can only review a limited number of public undertakings each year. S. K. Verma points out that this limitation means that many public enterprises may not be scrutinized, leading to potential gaps in oversight.
Focus on a Limited Number of Issues: Committees focus on a subset of issues due to time and resource constraints. M. P. Jain argues that this narrow focus can leave significant issues unexamined, reducing the overall effectiveness of the committee’s work.
5. Temporal Constraints
Annual Term: The one-year term of Standing Committees may not be sufficient for a comprehensive examination. R. C. Gupta suggests that extending the term or providing additional resources could help committees address complex issues more thoroughly.
Post-Mortem Analysis: The work of some committees can resemble a post-mortem, analyzing issues after they occur. S. K. Verma highlights that a more proactive approach could enhance the committee’s role in preventing issues rather than merely reviewing them after the fact.
6. Attendance and Participation Issues
Variable Attendance: Inconsistent attendance at committee meetings can undermine their effectiveness. M. P. Jain emphasizes that improving member attendance and participation is crucial for the success of committee deliberations.
Member Participation: Unequal participation among members can affect the quality of discussions. R. C. Gupta argues that ensuring active and equitable participation is essential for comprehensive and balanced scrutiny. The effectiveness of Parliamentary Committees is also contingent on the attendance and participation of members. On average, between 2009-2014, attendance in DRSC meetings serviced by the Lok Sabha was about 49%. Low attendance can undermine the effectiveness of Committee work, as fewer members mean less comprehensive deliberation and scrutiny.
7. Lack of Resources
Limited Secretariat Support: The secretariat often has limited resources, affecting the committee’s ability to conduct detailed research. M. P. Jain notes that enhancing secretariat support could improve the committee’s efficiency and effectiveness.
Budget Constraints: Financial limitations can restrict the committee’s ability to conduct inquiries, hold hearings, and invite expert witnesses. S. K. Verma suggests that increasing the budget and resources allocated to committees could address these constraints.
8. Procedural Constraints
Referral Discretion: The decision to refer bills to committees is discretionary. R. C. Gupta highlights that making referral mandatory could ensure that all significant legislation undergoes thorough scrutiny.
Lack of Mandatory Debate: There is no requirement to discuss committee recommendations in the House. S. K. Verma argues that mandatory debate on committee reports could enhance transparency and the impact of the committee’s findings.
Strengthening Parliamentary Committees
1. Referring Bills to Committees: Mandating the referral of all Bills to Committees and requiring discussion of their recommendations would ensure consistent scrutiny and improve legislative quality. Similar to the UK where the ordinary bill is automatically referred to the committee. During the 16th Lok Sabha, only 27% of Bills were referred to Committees, a significant decline from previous sessions.
2. Expert Witnesses and Research Support: Engaging with experts and stakeholders is crucial for a thorough examination of Bills and policies. Committees can consult these groups to understand complex issues better. For example, the Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment, which reviewed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2016, significantly improved the Bill through expert input.
3. Technical Support and Research: Parliamentary Committees frequently face insufficient technical support and research facilities. The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2002) noted this issue and recommended funding for inquiries, public hearings, and data collection.
4. Attendance of Members: The effectiveness of Parliamentary Committees depends significantly on member attendance and participation. From 2009-2014, attendance in DRSC meetings serviced by the Lok Sabha averaged only 49%. Low attendance can limit the quality of deliberations and scrutiny. Enhancing member engagement and attendance is crucial for improving the performance and impact of Committees.
5. Broadening Examination Scope: Expand the role of committees to cover major policy issues and broader governmental functions beyond commercial or business aspects. S. K. Verma argues that a wider mandate will enhance the committees’ ability to shape policy and perform comprehensive oversight.
6. Provide Specialized Training: Offer training programs for committee members on technical and specialized subjects. M. P. Jain recommends that increasing members’ technical knowledge through training will enable better evaluation and understanding of complex legislation.
7. Enhancing Recommendation Impact: Create procedures to track the implementation of committee recommendations. R. C. Gupta advocates for systems that monitor progress and hold accountable those responsible for implementing recommendations.
Conclusion:
Parliamentary Committees are integral to the legislative process, providing essential scrutiny and oversight of government functions. Their role in examining legislation, policies, and expenditures ensures that Parliament can address the complexities of modern governance effectively. Despite their importance, there are areas where committees could benefit from reforms to enhance their efficiency and effectiveness, including improved referral practices, better staffing, and higher attendance rates. Strengthening these aspects will help committees fulfill their role more effectively and contribute to more robust parliamentary oversight
PRELIMS QUESTION:
Q. with reference to the parliamentary committees consider the following statements:
1. The parliamentary committees are extraconstitutional mechanisms to make the working of parliament more effective.
2. The parliamentary committees exist only at the union legislature level but not at the state legislature level.
3. The parliamentary committees can only recommend but cannot issue orders.
How many of the above-given statements are correct?
A. Only one
B. Only two
C. All three
D. None
ANSWER: B
Mains question:
Discuss the various strategies that can be employed to enhance the effectiveness of parliamentary committees in ensuring rigorous legislative scrutiny and efficient government oversight.
(150 words 10 marks)
No Comments