MPs add spark and flair to PM’s Question Time

By Alex Ndegwa

The verve with which MPs took on the Prime Minister during his inaugural Question Time in Parliament showed they were yearning for the session.

And the numerous interruptions of Raila Odinga’s address by impatient backbenchers indicated they were not in the mood for yet another of bureaucratic speeches.

Members wanted to cut to the chase and question the PM on touchy national issues such as the controversy over Leader of Government Business position and maize scandal.

Speaker Kenneth Marende, however, restricted the questions to the one on the order paper, which was the directive to bar couples from working together in the Finance Ministry parastatals.

Following complaints by members who wanted the session opened up to more questions, Marende promised to make a ruling next week.

Nominated MP George Nyamweya interrupted the PM’s address, saying the chair should not shield the PM from questioning.

Chepalungu MP Isaac Ruto was more blunt, saying if the PM’s Time becomes a forum for speeches it defeats the purpose to allow MPs interrogate him on the performance of Government.

Raila defended himself saying it was fitting he makes a policy statement on the first day and added he had dealt with the only question asked.

Members to probe PM

The new Standing Orders designated a 45-minute Prime Minister’s time from 3pm every Wednesday. During the session the PM may make a statement, or respond to questions relating to matters of Government policy or performance.

In future I believe the session must provide an opportunity for members to probe the PM on various issues of national interest free of restrictions. After all, like Garsen MP Danson Mungatana posed, why defer pressing matters when the PM, who co-ordinates and supervises ministries, is in the House?

Citing the tradition in other Commonwealth countries, Marende directed that MPs wishing to ask questions file them on the Thursday preceding the Wednesday session.

Indeed, in the UK House of Commons backbench MPs wishing to ask the PM questions must enter their names on the Order Paper. The names of entrants are then shuffled in a ballot to produce a random order in which the Speaker of the House of Commons will call them.

However, we must also acknowledge our unique political arrangement does not blend with the practice elsewhere. For instance, in the House of Commons there is a clear sequence after the session’s ‘curtain raiser’ —usually a routine question from an MP about the Prime Minister’s engagements. Traditionally, the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the next largest opposition party are called up next in that order after the ‘open question’.

But in the absence of the Official Opposition, the Tenth Parliament cannot adopt such tradition yet.

Extensively briefed

Instructively, after the first question other MPs are called to ask supplementary questions. This means that the Prime Minister will not know what questions he will be asked. However, the Premier will be extensively briefed by government departments in anticipation of likely subjects he could be asked about.

Likewise members of the Tenth Parliament are justified to demand they probe the PM freely. The assumption is he is aware of what matter(s) is of political significance and therefore must ensure relevant authorities adequately brief him on the same.

After all, such sessions are not for exchanging niceties but for critics to interrogate Head of Government. In the House of Commons, Opposition questions are usually highly critical of government policy, with the response from the PM also usually equally caustic. This often sparks highly combative, confrontational debate between the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition.

Since backbenchers have vowed to keep the Government on its toes, it’s only fair that debate is not put on a leash. Moreover it is also an opportunity for backbenchers to highlight an issue of particular concern to their constituencies for a nationwide audience.

The performance on the Dispatch Box requires quick wit, eloquence, humour and a broad grasp of varied policy since MPs often ambush the PM with cunning questions.

The upshot is that the PM’s Time must have spark and flair. Rigid rules must not be allowed to choke it into a dull affair.

—alexndegwa@eastandard.net