Madam Chair, may I just say to the Speaker, by way of introduction, that just because Parliament has received a clean bill of health - an unqualified report from the Auditor-General - it does not mean that it is a healthy establishment at the present time. I also want to say to the Chief Whip of the ANC: "Sir, you cannot have oversight of the executive without having oversight of the Presidency as well. The Presidency is part of the executive to all intents and purposes, and you cannot avoid this fact. Oversight of the Presidency, sir, is to us an essential part of the wellbeing of this country".
I have to say at the outset that I fully endorse the approach adopted by the hon Davidson in this debate. [Interjections.] Maybe so, Mr Jeffery, but I promise you that if you listen, you will learn. For years and years the DA caucus has adopted a fairly conciliatory tone with regard to Parliament's Budget Vote, despite many misgivings over the years and a growing concern that we as a Parliament are prepared to accept mediocrity in our performance as guardians of national interests. [Interjections.] May I say that if Mr Jeffery really thinks that he is going to put me off my speech by making a few stupid interjections, he is really wasting his time.
We have expressed our concerns often, Mr Speaker. We have offered solutions and we have offered to participate in whatever structures or committees are set up to oversee the overall running of Parliament, but nothing, quite honestly, sir, has ever come of these proposals. This is because, regrettably, it would seem that mediocrity is an accepted norm in the ANC and that applies to how Parliament is run, as well.
My colleague, the hon Ian Davidson, has indicated very clearly the major concerns we have with regard to the financial control of Parliament and the oversight functioning of this Parliament.
The vague involvement - and I say that very intently - the vague involvement of the Parliamentary Oversight Authority in the running of Parliament, the fact that the Joint Rules Committee takes so long to achieve anything, and the fact that the National Assembly Rules Committee never meets, despite so many pressing issues, are all matters of extreme concern to us, and should be to Parliament as a whole.
There is also a lack of significance in the role played by the Chief Whips' Forum in Parliament these days. The Chief Whip of the ANC spoke about this body and its importance, but the Chief Whips' Forum has a crucial dual role to play: firstly, in respect of the running of the programmes of Parliament and, secondly, in ensuring the wellbeing of its members.
I have served on this body for 16 years and I well recall the days when we as Whips felt that we had a real and definite role to play - not long enough. That role under successive Speakers and Chief Whips has, I believe, been steadily eroded, and this body today has the potential to become little more than a talk shop within these hallowed halls of Parliament. Its levels of achievement have, quite frankly, dropped considerably.
I also say without a shadow of doubt that one of the reasons for this is the fact that the ANC itself places little emphasis on the role of the Whippery and, therefore, on the Chief Whips' Forum. This body, as I say, should play a crucial role in the general performance of our Parliament.
However, the problem starts with the Chief Whip of the Majority Party. We all know that the Chief Whip of the ANC is appointed by Luthuli House and is therefore responsible, first and foremost, to the ANC executive and only secondly to Parliament. We also know that the ANC changes its Chief Whips frequently, never allowing any one of them to make a real impact on this establishment. Both of these facts create a weakness in the Chief Whips' Forum because it is the ANC Chief Whip who chairs the meetings of this forum and is therefore, I suppose, its leader.
There is no stability and, as a result, often no follow-through on decisions taken and this is a major, major problem. We need stability in the forum and this can only be achieved by, firstly, appointing a Chief Whip who is dedicated to improving the overall running of the Parliament, and who is prepared, at all times, to work with the opposition in order to achieve this.
Secondly, there should be recognition by the presiding officers of the importance of the Whippery, both in respect of the proper running of Parliament, including the Parliamentary Programme, and its role with regard to members' interests, etc.
Thirdly - and the Chief Whip of the ANC made a note of this as well - dedicated resources should be allocated to the forum to enable it to do its job properly.
Unless these things happen, we will continue to see a steady decline in the standards of the running of this institution.
More specifically, through you, Madam Chairperson, to the Speaker, let me speak briefly about the Parliamentary Programme, which desperately requires overhauling. I have said to you before that you have it within your power to establish a legacy before, sir, you step down as Speaker or, alternatively, before Luthuli House makes you step down. That legacy could be a vibrant and stimulating Parliament in which the oversight function of members is played out to the full through meaningful debates, through a question time that is emphatic in what it is supposed to achieve, and with the introduction of new ideas into the programme, such as interpellations and opposition parliamentary days when opposition parties are given the opportunity to draw up the Order Paper for a particular day. This happens in the House of Commons. There is no reason whatsoever why it shouldn't happen in this House as well.
The hon Chief Whip of the ANC had some interesting things to say about this, as did the hon member from Cope. Some of these things too are being spoken about in the Chief Whips' Forum at present, but quite frankly there is a long, long way to go. You need to encourage this, Mr Speaker. You need to encourage, if not insist upon it.
Question time, which used to be the most exciting and regular part of our programme, now occurs very seldom and is the most boring part of our Parliamentary Programme. In addition to this, some members of the executive don't even bother to answer questions put to them, while others, if they do answer, do so in a manner that their answers undermine the entire principle of the executive being held accountable and downplay the importance of Parliamentary questions in holding the executive accountable.
In addition, the only debates we have in Parliament these days, as hon Corne Mulder has already said, are those related to national days and celebrations or Budgets Votes, and Budget Votes themselves are dreadfully underplayed, as hon Mulder has said. Motion after motion is proposed in this House, but never more than two or three a year are ever debated. Let's bring back party motions and members, motions and let's introduce a variety of other debates into this House that make this place a stimulating one. We need to reassess our entire Parliamentary Programme.
It is a challenge, Mr Speaker, and your office needs to work closely with the Whippery in order to achieve this. At the moment there is a huge chasm, I believe, between your office and the forum, and this does Parliament no good.
So I want to say, Mr Speaker, that for once in your time and my life, I would agree with you and say, "Working together we can do more." Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]