First presidential address

And the PML-N’s disregard of parliamentary traditions

The boycott of the presidential address by the joint opposition in the Senate is yet another indication that there is something seriously wrong with the way the government is treating Parliament. The move was all the more serious because it was initiated by a section of the opposition which otherwise has vowed to support the government in case of any attempt at destabilisation of the system. That it should take place on the completion of the first year of the PML-N tenure indicates that its leadership has got off on the wrong foot.

A perception persists in both the Senate and the National Assembly that the PML-N leadership treats Parliament casually on account of the ruling party’s numerical strength. The prime minister who is constitutionally responsible to both the Houses hasn’t cared to attend a single sitting of the Senate for a whole year, ignoring even a motion requiring his presence at least once week. He has treated the Lower House only a little better. Important cabinet members prefer to stay away from the opposition dominated Senate, sending instead junior ministers for briefings. Following in the footsteps of the prime minister, federal ministers frequently absent themselves from National Assembly sittings.

The PML-N leadership is yet to realise that democracy in 21^st century is much more than simple majoritarian rule. The prime minister is required to play a leading role in consensus building and taking the opposition along rather than refusing to listen to it or steamrollering it. Parliamentary committees play a crucial role in bridging differences through discussions and mutual concessions. Last year the government missed the July 5 deadline for the formation of the committees because of Nawaz Sharif’s foreign tours. Three more months were wasted because of delay in finalising the names of the committees’ chairmen by the prime minister. This contributed to government’s failure to pass a single law during the whole year. As little attention was paid to evolving consensus on the PPO, the government has relied on its periodic extension through ordinances. Compared to PML-N, the PPP government had treated Parliament with much more consideration. The prime ministers attended most of the National Assembly sittings. Despite its dependence on coalition partners, the PPP administration was able to build consensus over milestone constitutional amendments and the NFC Award. Zardari subsequently was able to deliver six presidential addresses.

It is an irony that while the PML-N government enjoys a comfortable majority in the National Assembly, rumours of possible destabilisation have gained currency within a year of its rule. The government has to realise that stability requires better relations with the opposition and a greater regard for Parliament.