UNION INTERPARLEMENTAIRE
INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION
Association of Secretaries General of Parliaments
CONTRIBUTION
from
DR V.K. AGNIHOTRI
Secretary General of the Rajya Sabha of India
To the general debate on
THE ROLE OF COMMITTEES IN PARLIAMENTARY OVERSIGHT
OF THE EXECUTIVE
Panama Session
April 2011
Introduction
Accountability of the executive to Parliament is the very essence of
parliamentary democracy. An overview of the genesis of the parliamentary
system clearly indicates the gradual process by which the legislature has
systematically asserted its authority. The control that the legislature exercises
over the executive stems from the basic principle that the legislature embodies
the will of the people and, therefore, it has the authority to supervise the manner
in which the legislation enacted by it is implemented by the executive.
Committees of Parliament have often been described as mini-legislatures.
Parliament, being a large body, cannot elaborately examine the wider gamut of
administration due to paucity of time. Through Parliamentary Committees, the
scrutiny and oversight functions of Parliament become more comprehensive and
focused. The Committees, therefore, have evolved as potent and effective
instruments of legislative scrutiny and oversight of administrative actions.
Experience of the Parliaments/legislatures all over the world has shown
that in enforcing the executive accountability, the committee system, equipped
with adequate powers, is an appropriate mechanism to scrutinize in detail the
functioning of the executive. In fact, the committee system, as a distinguished
feature of parliamentary democracy, has become sine qua non for the successful
functioning of parliamentary system. It not only gives content to the concept of
executive accountability to Parliament but also contributes substantially towards
toning up administration and governance. Those Members who are often
described as back benchers, due to their non-participation in the House or those
who do not get enough opportunities to play their appointed role inside
legislatures for various reasons, find Committee meetings very useful to put
forth their points of view.
2
In a committee, the matter is deliberated at length, views are expressed
freely and the matter is considered in a calmer atmosphere. Even the so-called
backbenchers have a sense of participation and belonging. Its mandate to
scrutinize policies of the government, call for papers and summon officers to
record their views, alerts the executive to properly carry out its responsibilities.
The Committee deliberations make the executive more vigilant and thereby
impact positively on governance process. Committees, particularly in India,
have the great advantage of not having to function on party lines. They are,
therefore, in a better position to monitor the activities of the executive without
being actuated by partisan considerations. They help in ensuring more effective
deliberation and decision-making and afford more time and opportunity to
members to make an in-depth and intense study of selected issues. The
committees enjoy the confidence of the whole House and, therefore, as
mentioned earlier, are called a ‘mini-house’, ‘Little Legislature’, ‘House in
perpetuity’, etc.
Committees of the Rajya Sabha: Role in Scrutiny of the Executive
The Rajya Sabha has an elaborate system of committees. These
committees carry out their activities by following the Rules of Procedure and
Conduct of Business in the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) and Directions
given by the Chairman from time to time. As of now, there are primarily two
types of Parliamentary Committees, viz. (i) Ad hoc Committees and (ii)
Standing Committees.
Ad hoc Committees are those, which are constituted by the House on a
motion adopted in that behalf, or by the Chairman with a specific mandate.
These committees become functus officio after they have completed their
appointed task and their reports are presented to the House. The Select
Committees or Joint Select Committees which are appointed to consider Bills
also come under the category of ad hoc committees.
3
Standing Committees, on the other hand, generally function as per their
respective mandates. Thus, for example, the Committee on Petitions serves as
an effective instrument for the redress of public grievances. The Committee has
established itself as a forum which has brought people nearer to Parliament
since the petitions have touched upon a wide range of subjects. The Committee
on Government Assurances keeps a watch on the implementation of the
assurances, undertakings or promises given by the Ministers on the floor of the
House from time to time and ensures that these are fulfilled within a reasonable
time. The Committee on Subordinate Legislation considers and scrutinizes
rules and regulations and reports to the House to see whether the powers
delegated by the Constitution or a statute of Parliament have been properly
exercised within the framework of the Constitution or the concerned statute. It
keeps a watch on the executive so that it does not exercise arbitrary, unguided
and unspecified discretion under any rule. The Committee on Papers Laid on
the Table considers whether there has been compliance of the provisions of the
Constitution or the Acts of Parliament or any other law, rules or regulations in
pursuance of which the paper has been so laid and whether there has been any
unreasonable delay in laying the paper before the House, etc. There are some
other Standing Committees of the Rajya Sabha.
There are two financial committees of the Lok Sabha with which the
members of Rajya Sabha are also associated. These are the Committee on
Public Accounts and the Committee on Public Undertakings. These
Committees exercise budgetary oversight, which is ex post facto. The
Committee on Public Accounts examines mainly the accounts showing the
appropriation of sums granted by the House for the expenditure of the
Government in order to ascertain whether the money has been spent as
authorized by Parliament and for the purpose for which it was granted. The
Committee on Public Undertakings examines the Reports and accounts of
4
Public Undertakings and examines, in the context of the autonomy and
efficiency of the public undertakings, whether the affairs of the public
undertakings are being managed in accordance with sound business principles
and prudent commercial practices. These financial committees are considered
the most potent parliamentary mechanism for effective financial accountability
of the executive.
Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees
The need to further strengthen the Committee system, in order to make
the legislative surveillance over executive more extensive and effective, has
been an important aspect of the agenda of the parliamentary reforms. In 1989,
ten years after such committees were introduced in the House of Commons,
these were described as ‘parliamentary innovations of the twentieth century’.
In March 1993, the two Houses of Parliament gave unanimous approval
for the setting up of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing
Committees. On 8 April 1993, seventeen such committees were constituted. In
July 2004 an important step was taken to enhance the number of the
Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees to twenty-four to
strengthen the committee system in Parliament for ensuring more accountability
of the Executive to the Parliament. Out of the twenty-four Department-related
Parliamentary Standing Committees, eight Committees function under the
control and direction of the hon’ble Chairman, Rajya Sabha. The remaining
sixteen Committees function under the direction and control of the hon’ble
Speaker, Lok Sabha.
The Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees consider the
Demands for Grants of the related Ministries/Departments and report thereon;
examine Bills, pertaining to the related Ministries/Departments, referred to the
Committee by the Chairman or the Speaker, as the case may be, and report
5
thereon; consider the annual reports of the Ministries/Departments and report
thereon; and consider national basic long term policy documents presented to
the Houses, if referred to the Committee by the Chairman or the Speaker, as the
case may be, and report thereon. These Standing Committees do not consider
matters of day-to-day administration of the related Ministries/Departments.
The reports of these Committees are based on broad consensus. A
Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee does not ordinarily
consider matters which fall within the purview of any other parliamentary
committee. The reports of the Department-related Standing Committees have
persuasive value and are treated as considered advice. “The purpose of these
committees is to ensure the accountability of government to Parliament through
more detailed consideration of measures. The intention is not to weaken or
criticise the administration but to strengthen it by investing it with more
meaningful parliamentary support”.#
Functioning of Committees
The committee system in Indian Parliament has functioned quite
effectively. The Department-related Committee System has also come a long
way since its inception in 1993. These committees, which act as mini
legislatures in our system of governance, provide a forum where
parliamentarians from various political parties adopt a non-partisan perspective
to scrutinise any particular issue of public importance largely because the
proceedings are held in camera. Any Bill or subject referred to such Committees
is examined in detail and various recommendations are made to the Government
keeping in view the larger public interest. In the course of such examinations,
views of various experts from the concerned fields, civil society institutions,
#
Excerpt from the speech delivered by Shri K.R. Narayanan, the then Vice-President of India and Chairman,
Rajya Sabha at the inauguration of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on 31 March,
1993.
6
representatives from research institutions/universities and others are sought in
the form of written memoranda. They are also invited before the Committee to
give their oral evidence, which helps the Members to gain a wider perspective
and take into cognizance varied nuances of a policy proposal. Besides,
Parliamentary Committees often undertake study tours to various parts of the
country, including remote areas to find out the grass root reality by interacting
with various stakeholders, including the average citizen. The implementation of
various programmes and schemes of the Government is examined to ascertain
whether they are serving their objectives. The constructive criticism and
considered recommendations made by the committees have been found to be
useful by the Ministries and Departments concerned and helped them in fine
tuning their functioning and to formulate realistic budgets, plans and
programmes for the welfare of people.
The recommendations made by the Department-related Parliamentary
Standing Committees have been of wide ranging import. Their operations have
led to a greater flow and exchange of information from the executive to
Parliament and a better appreciation of the feedback received from the
Parliamentary Committees by the executive. It has been found that the
Ministries/Departments within the purview of these committees have been quite
receptive to their recommendations and have, by and large, accepted them and
initiated suitable action for their implementation. There have been very few
instances where Ministries/Departments have, for certain convincing reasons,
expressed their inability to implement the recommendations of the Committees.
Committee Impact
There have been several instances where the issues taken up by the
Committees have strongly influenced the thinking and policies of the
Government. For example, in recent times, major amendments made by the
Committee on Science and Technology, Environment and Forests in the Civil
7
Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2010, were finally accepted by the
Government and the Bill was passed by both Houses of Parliament. One of the
important recommendations related to the major issue of operator’s liabilities,
which was accepted by the Government. The Committee recommended that the
principle of no fault/strict liability of the operator should be explicitly stated in
the Bill and the operator’s liability should be increased from Rs.500 crores to
Rs.1500 crores. Yet another example is that of the issue of e-waste taken up by
the Committee on Industry. After the Committee took up the matter, the
Ministry of Environment and Forests has informed the Committee Chairman
that the concerns of the Committee have been accommodated while framing the
e-waste (Management and Handling) Rules. The Committee, by taking up the
issue of e-waste, has focused attention on an area which has assumed the
proportion of a crisis in the developed countries and taking the shape of a major
problem in the developing countries.
The Committee on Petitions took up the issue of water and air pollution
as early as in 1970s. The Committee in its 52nd Report dealt with the water and
air pollution in a town of Orissa due to discharge of industrial effluents by a
chemical factory. The Committee, inter alia, recommended that the Central
Board for the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution should immediately
collect, compile and furnish technical data relating to water pollution and
devices for its effective prevention and control, and that the Government should
prescribe, by law, that expenditure incurred by the industries to check pollution
is mentioned separately in their annual accounts and any violation of the
provision should be deemed a contravention of the pre-condition imposed in the
industrial licence.
8
Follow up of Committee Reports
It may be mentioned that there is definitive follow-up action on the
recommendations contained in the reports of the Committees. After the
presentation of the Report of a Committee to the House, attention of the
Ministry/Department concerned is drawn to the recommendations/observations
made in the Report and it is asked to submit an Action Taken Reply. The replies
received from the Ministry/Department concerned are examined by the
Committee Secretariat and if it is found that full effect has not been given to a
recommendation or the Ministry has not given sufficient reasons as to why it
does not intend to give effect to the recommendation, the matter is submitted to
the Committee for its consideration. The further observations of the Committee
on such items are included in a separate Action Taken Report and presented to
the House. However, the Ministry is not thereafter required to prepare a further
Action Taken Reply thereon.
In order to ensure that the Ministries give adequate attention to the
recommendations contained in the reports of the Committees, it may be
mentioned that in September 2004, hon’ble Chairman, Rajya Sabha and hon’ble
Speaker, Lok Sabha issued a direction stating that a ‘Minister concerned shall
make once in six months a statement in the House regarding the status of
implementation of recommendations contained in the Reports of the
Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees of Rajya Sabha with
regard to his Ministry’. As a result, the Ministers concerned make statements in
the House accordingly, from time to time. This has helped not only in ensuring
the accountability of the executive to the Parliament but has also enabled
Parliament and the people to learn about the Government’s response to the
Committees’ specific recommendations.
9
Conclusion
Wide media coverage given to the reports of the Parliamentary
Committees and the debates they generate in wider circles of academia, experts
and general public testify to the importance and relevance of these Committees
in the functioning of our parliamentary system. An opinion has been voiced in
some sections of the media that reports and recommendations of parliamentary
committees constitute a measure of quality of their work. This assumes greater
significance in the context of the public apathy and cynicism about the efficacy
of the parliamentary institutions in addressing the issues of governance and
development. The work done by committees will go a long way in restoring
public faith in our parliamentary institutions.
It is being realised increasingly that there is a need to strengthen the
secretarial and research assistance to the Committees of Parliament in order to
make their functioning effective. Emphasising on this aspect Shri K. R.
Narayanan, the then Vice-President of India and Chairman, Rajya Sabha, while
inaugurating the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees on 31
March 1993 had said, “I also feel that apart from the secretarial and research
assistance to be given to the Committees, we should have for the whole of
Parliament, indeed for every Member of Parliament, research and secretarial
assistance made available… so that they can fulfill the mandate of the people
efficiently and effectively”. Such steps would help immensely strengthen the
Committees for effective accountability of the executive to legislature and in
achieving the goal of good governance for the overall development and progress
of the country.
10