#EvalCrisis Blog - 11 - Legislatures in Crisis

#EVALCRISIS BLOG - A DEVCO/ESS INITIATIVE

Legislatures in Crisis

COVID-19 and Evidence use

JOSEPHINE WATERA

Legislatures play key roles of improving the quality of governance through ensuring transparency, accountability, shaping citizen expectations and democratic values(Power, 2012). The ability of Members of Parliament to perform their roles along the policy and legislative cycle is significantly shaped by their access to authoritative and reliable information(IPU & IFLA, 2015, p. 6). Evidence is needed to provide background for informed decision-making, build capacity of representatives, supply a common body of facts that can facilitate political agreement, provide legitimacy of the legislature’s actions and enhance the role of the legislature in the overall policy process of the nation(Bullen, 2005). In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, unprecedented pressures engulfed many institutions and parliaments were no exception. Parliaments had to oversee emergency responses, evaluate and pass legislation, and approve funds to meet urgent public needs(Prior & Komberg, 2022).

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) noted that it was crucial for Commonwealth Parliaments to take appropriate, proportionate and reasonable measures to facilitate the continuation during the global pandemic whereby the functions of parliament as a legislative body were arguably most needed(Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, 2020, p. 5). The Association proposed the following: amending or suspending their Standing Orders to make the necessary changes that would allow the services of the House to continue if large numbers of Parliamentarians were forced to work from home or were absent due to illness; additional solutions such as taking evidence from witnesses by video link; committee members taking part electronically with only the Committee Chairperson in the inquiry room as the Parliamentary Committee systems’ scope and function become significantly restricted due to the global pandemic; parliamentarians to identify any unintended effects of emergency measures and to suggest changes where necessary in the absence of robust scrutiny during the passage of emergency legislation; push for time-bound provisions within a bill through sunset clauses; drastically reduce the number of Members of Parliament in the House temporarily following the measures of ‘social distancing’ and minimising contact during a global pandemic; putting aside party-politics considering that managing the crisis meant having fewer parliamentarians available in the process of decision-making in the House; and carefully  balance their role in scrutinising and holding the government to account without unnecessarily hindering a swift and urgent national response.

Evidently, different measures were adopted by different legislatures across the globe. An aerial view of these measures reflects the desire to keep the legislatures open and engaged with many examples at hand.

Closure of Parliaments and the introduction of teleconferencing

Some legislatures opted to completely close at the peak of the pandemic. Such was the case in China, the Czech Republic, Denmark and Eswatini. In other cases, around half of the world’s parliaments resorted to virtual or remote operations by introducing teleconferencing. Countries that did this include Albania, Angola, Canada, Denmark, South Africa, and Uganda amongst others.

Amendment of rules of procedure

Parliaments worldwide are generally run in a traditional manner, with operations being guided by their own Rules of Procedure or manual/s. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, many parliaments found that they needed to amend the rules of procedure under which they usually operate. For example, Argentina amended their Rules of Procedure to allow remote working via video conference under exceptional circumstances. The parliament of Uganda, like other countries, amended its Rules of Procedure to enable a hybrid approach whereby party whips nominated a total of 100MPs to attend physical meetings whilst others attended remotely.

In March 2020, the Belgian House of Representatives amended its Rules of Procedure to allow Members, under certain conditions, to be considered as "present" at selected committee and plenary meetings even when they are not physically present in the chamber, and to vote electronically or by email. In Canada, a motion was passed directing the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs “to study ways in which members can fulfil their parliamentary duties while the House stands adjourned, including the temporary modification of certain procedures, sittings in alternate locations and technological solutions including a virtual Parliament”. The Parliament's Bureau of Croatia agreed to adopt changes to its Rules of Procedure to deal with the functioning of the Parliament in extraordinary circumstances, such as those presented by the corvid-19 pandemic. The Constitutional Committee of the Parliament of Estonia (the Riigikogu) agreed that current legislation may be interpreted to allow teleworking if all relevant conditions for participating in the sitting, like making remarks, asking questions and voting, are ensured. Guests invited to committee sittings are advised to participate via a video bridge. Remote voting and virtual participation are also under consideration in the context of plenary sittings. 

Changes and reduced sitting hours

In many countries, the COVID-19 pandemic led to the introduction of national lockdowns and curfews which impacted parliament operations. The Parliament of Uganda reduced the length of working days by three hours. In the Dominican Republic, both Chambers introduced a special working schedule: with working hours of 8:00 until13:00 and work on Fridays suspended during the emergency period. The Parliament of Estonia (the Riigikogu) reorganized its work by only holding sittings on Mondays, with Question Time on Wednesdays. The committees of the Riigikogu have been meeting once a week with priority given to teleworking.

Revised number of MP sittings and revised physical participation arrangements

To continue operating, a number of parliaments restructured their sitting arrangements to adhere to the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) guidelines. The Afghanistan House of the People continued to meet physically, with a limited number of plenary sessions and committee meetings and fewer parliamentarians and staff allowed into the building at any one time; remaining staff members continued to work remotely. The President of the Democratic Republic of Congo authorized a plenary session with a reduced number of MPs (Only 64 out of 500 MPs from the lower house and around 30 out of 109 from the upper house).In Denmark, meetings in Parliament are taking place only in the case of urgent matters and with a reduced number of parliamentarians. In Austria, based on changes in the sitting arrangements in the chamber, MPs were provided additional space in the gallery. The Parliament of Greece and the Parliament of Iceland (the Althingi), also reduced the numbers of MPs in their plenary sittings.

Oversight of government response to COVID-19 Pandemic

In the midst of the pandemic, many parliaments pushed for greater oversight on the executive, especially due to pressures from the public regarding the response of the governments. The Senate of France unanimously adopted a draft resolution to create an enquiry committee to evaluate public policies for pandemics in light of the COVID-19 crisis and how it was managed. The enquiry committee evaluated whether adequate contingency plans were in place; how the health crisis was managed by the political and administrative systems and the lessons learned from the experiences of European and Asian countries. The National Assembly of Ecuador agreed upon a draft resolution setting out political and social commitments to deal with the COVID-19 crisis. The resolution recognized the important role played by the National Health Service and called for resources to be assigned to it as a matter of priority. During the debate, MPs insisted on the importance of continuing to exercise parliamentary oversight of the executive to ensure transparency and access to information.

Collaboration with the government to manage the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic

The dynamic and tremendous challenges arising from the pandemic pushed many parliaments to build collaborations and better working relations with other governments as a united front.

The Wolesi Jirga (House of People) of Afghanistan supported national efforts to stem the pandemic, including the Safe Hand Hygiene Campaign (#SafeHands) launched by WHO. The legislative authority of Bahrain worked with the government to ensure the safety of citizens during the COVID-19 pandemic and the implementation of the government’s economic and financial package to address the pandemic's consequences. It also adopted a number of proposals referred to the government, including on distance learning; partial curfews; enhancement of e-government services; bonuses for staff and volunteers serving on the coronavirus front lines; financial aid to medium, small and micro, private sector companies and institutions; the establishment of a provident fund with contributions from businesses, national companies, banks and individuals as well as remote work for working women.

The Swiss National Assembly members assumed their share of the global struggle against the COVID-19 pandemic by contributing to the COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund – the partnership between the WHO, the United Nations Foundation and the Swiss Philanthropy Fund. Every member of the Hungarian Parliament agreed to send 50 per cent of their 2020 Annual IPU membership fee, which is deducted from their remuneration, to support the Solidarity Response Fund. The National Assembly of Ecuador also issued a solidarity statement signed by all parties. It called for  the Ministry of Economy and Finance to release all available cash resources to cover the costs and investments required by the state of emergency, particularly to support a fully functioning national health service and to keep the social protection system and ancillary services (police, security, logistics) running.

Ugandan MPs withdrew the ambulances they had donated to their constituents and surrendered them to the Ministry of Health to support the fight against COVID-19. The Chamber of Deputies in Argentina decided to earmark the savings in subsidies and the transport costs of medicines and supplies to support the country’s health system and some Senators agreed to donate part of their salary to the cause. Both chambers promoted the information provided by the Ministry of Health on COVID-19 and the Senate’s website links to the Ministry’s recommendations and preventive measures.

Implications of COVID-19 on evidence use eco-system in parliaments

Despite the proposed measures by the CPA, the Global Parliamentary Report emphasise that broader citizen engagement can draw parliament’s attention to matters that would otherwise not appear on the parliamentary agenda and could be overlooked, providing means for communities to promote their interests, voice their concerns and influence policy decisions that affect their lives(IPU and UNDP, 2022, p. 16).  The 37^th Speaker of the House of Commons, Hon. Anthony Rota further called upon parliaments to be of impact on the post-COVID-19 recovery by providing a forum for debates to continue, for solutions to be proposed, for questions to be asked and for the government to be held accountable for its decisions(Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, 2022, p. 24). All of these efforts point to the need for evidence and its use.

With restrictions on physical access to parliament and its committees as well as low access to the internet in underdevelopment countries to facilitate virtual participation, there were fewer opportunities for public stakeholders like Civil Society Organisations and academia to present evidence to inform decision making.

In the exercise of their budget approval mandate in the wake of the pandemic, parliaments were forced to divert most available resources to the pandemic which meant compromising resources for other sectors like infrastructure and general utilities. In Canada, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health and the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance held virtual weekly meetings weekly as of 30 March 2020 to receive evidence related to the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

While parliaments are mandated to oversee the executive, the emergent COVID-19 pandemic made it hard for parliaments to perform this role effectively due to reduced working hours, budget cuts to facilitate parliament business as well as total closure of parliaments in some countries. With restricted movements triggered by lockdowns and curfews, there were fewer opportunities to collect, synthesize and use evidence for effective oversight in a state of emergency. Parliaments had to rely on evidence of reports from government departments which are sometimes biased and outdated. As pointed out by Prior and Komberg (2022), the pace of the pandemic also meant that parliaments had to act fast, making decisions about emergency responses within hours and days rather than weeks and months[1].

Through their representation function, Parliaments revitalized their responsiveness to emerging issues during the crisis. For example, The Congress of Colombia spearheaded a gender-sensitive approach to the COVID-19 response by highlighting alarming levels of violence against women, especially intra-family violence, as well as the specific needs of rural women which called for essential services such as violence prevention and response as well as support to victims. Reports of domestic abuse in the country increased by 200 per cent at the peak of the pandemic. The country launched a social media campaign called #MujeresSinVirusdeViolencia to sensitize the population on preventing and responding to gender-based violence. The Chairperson of the Women’s Rights Parliamentary Committee of the European Parliament issued a press release urging the European Union and its member states to increase support to victims of domestic violence during the COVID-19 crisis.

A report pointed out that MPs and parliaments have a unique role in governing systems as the representatives of citizens in decision-making(Deveaux, et al., 2021, p. 6). There are specific parliamentary privileges that MPs have in order to meet their mandate that are difficult to maintain during an emergency. The right to freedom of expression for MPs is often tied to being physically present in the precincts of the parliament. Pipelines for access to information were cut or limited during the pandemic. Yet evidence information is the lubricant that ensures the machinery of governance and oversight is functioning properly.

Parliaments went ahead to use the evidence on the impact of the pandemic to enact necessary responsive legislation. For example, the Egyptian parliament passed a package of important laws to address the repercussions of the pandemic: making an additional appropriation in the state's public budget to counter the consequences of the pandemic; postponing the payment of taxes in sectors affected by the pandemic; and amending the emergency law to include allowing the President of the Republic or whoever he delegates to take appropriate measures to deal with the health emergency, including closing schools and universities, closing or partially closing government ministries and departments, and letting people delay payments for electricity, gas and water services. In Bolivia, specific laws were passed to address the COVID-19 pandemic such as the laws passed for the prevention, containment and treatment of coronavirus, and on reprogramming credit payments and basic services. Measures included in these laws comprised of free treatment of COVID-19 patients; sanitary control points at borders, land and air terminals to detect the coronavirus; a reduced working day for both public and private sector workers; deferment of debt payments; a 50 per cent reduction in monthly payments for essential services such as drinking water, sewerage, electricity, household gas and telecommunications. In Guatemala, the first emergency law to protect civilians from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic decreed that vulnerable families would receive coupons to buy essential goods. Measures were introduced to help the elderly and to support farming production. Plans were made for a laboratory to be set up in each region for testing and containing COVID-19, and for more medical staff to be hired. The law was also used to set up an employment protection fund and to grant loans to stimulate the economy. A subsequent decree introduced additional measures to protect the public, including guaranteeing essential services, such as drinking water, power, and telecommunication services. As a parliament adapts to the pandemic and begins to initiate appropriate adjustments to its work, it will be important to return to a more detailed process for scrutinizing draft legislation to ensure a detailed review by committees and multiple debates over a number of sessions(Deveaux, et al., 2021, p. 32).

Conclusively, like other institutions, parliaments all over the world experienced unprecedented challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic.  As echoed by the European Parliamentary Research Services, the pandemic has been a veritable test bed for new parliamentary practice and procedures. Never before, in recent history, have parliaments had to adapt in such a short timeframe to a situation clearly putting into question the very idea of legislatures as collective deliberative bodies adopting decisions after unmediated, public and pluralist debates taking place in the free and fair setting(Crego & Mańko, 2022, p. 2), which has greatly impacted on the processes of generation and use of evidence.

References

Bullen, A. M. (2005). Parliamentary Committees: Strategy for improved information use. University of Stellenbosch.

Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. (2020). COVID-19: CPA Toolkit for Commonwealth Parliaments. Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. (2022). Reflecting on two years of COVID-19: How have commonwealth parliaments delivered parliamentary democracy during the pandemic? The Parliamentarian, 103(1).

Crego, M. D., & Mańko, R. (2022). Parliaments in emergency mode: Lessons learnt after two years of pandemic. European Parliamentary Research Service.

Deveaux, K., Natália Švecová, & Bake, T. (2021). Parliaments Responding to a Pandemic: Lessons Learned for Emergency Planning. House Democracy  Partnership and  Swiss Agency for  Development and  Cooperation.

IPU and UNDP. (2022). Global Parliamentary Report 2022:Public engagement in the work of parliament. Inter-Parliamentary Union and United Nations Development Programme.

IPU, & IFLA. (2015). Guidelines for Parliamentary research services. Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Power, G. (2012). Global Parliamentary Report: The changing nature of parliamentary representation. Inter-Parliamentary Union and United Nations Development Programme. https://www.ipu.org/resources/publications/reports/2016-07/global-parli…

Prior, A., & Komberg, M. (2022, March 18). Pandemic parliaments lessons learned from two years trying to run democracies living under COVID-19. Https://Theconversation.Com/Pandemic-Parliaments-Lessons-Learned-from-Two-Years-Trying-to-Run-Democracies-Living-under-Covid-19-177964.

[1] https://theconversation.com/pandemic-parliaments-lessons-learned-from-two-years-trying-to-run-democracies-living-under-covid-19-177964. Accessed on 29 May 2022