Focus on track records. Forget the toktok!

J. Roughan
5 July 2010
Honiara

Most political parties are currently busy publishing lists of their preferred candidates who will stand for the party in the 4 August national election. Unfortunately when I read the names of former parliamentarians—those who sat in the nation's 8th Parliament—some should never appear in any party's candidate list.

Today's political parties have inherited a great tool for weighing up who should be included in the list of preferred candidates and who should never make the list at all. Transparency Solomon Islands did a marvellous job of studying which member of the recently dissolved parliament had attended sittings and how many times a member had contributed to the passing of legislation.

TSI's report covers the full four years of the 8th Parliament. Unfortunately, It makes for less than happy reading. Five members, for instance, could only drag themselves to the parliament building less than 50% of the time while national debate was going on. Another 13 members missed out on more than 30% of the time. Attending parliamentary sittings is a member's most important task. Everything else is secondary!

What's more upsetting however, many members not only missed out showing up at Parliament sittings but when they finally did get there rarely had anything to say. When it comes to actually participating in the legislative practice, they were conspicuous by their lack of adding anything to the process. For all intents and purposes, most parliamentarians added little to the legislative debate and simply sat mute in their chairs.

For instance, only 14 Parliamentarians had little to say in a third of the bills. The vast majority of members hardly ever spoke for or against the 44 bills brought to parliament. Solomon Islands uses representative democracy to govern.  This means that its representatives—the Parliamentarians—have the right and the duty to speak on behalf of those whom he represents in parliament.

Not to speak up, to fail to be part of the public discussion and not to represent one's people during parliamentary debate times is a fundamental weakness among our elected members. Pushing development projects, acting like welfare officers or functioning as a walking ATM dishing out money is not the essential work of parliamentarians.

All of these kinds of work can and should be done by others. What can't be accomplished by others—representing voters in parliament,—can only be done by the elected member himself. All other works are simply secondary to the most important role of the Member, attending parliamentary meetings and participating in its debates.  

It's important, then, for political parties to cast a serious and critical eye over candidates whom they wish voters to seriously consider when voting in a national election. Many potential candidates' track record on public service and leadership quality are hard to come by. But political parties have been given a gold mine with Transparency Solomon Islands findings. Its study makes it clear which members were serious about their commitment to parliament's essential work and who weren't.

Poor health, chronic sicknesses and serious physical weaknesses are other signs that a person is unfit to carry the heavy work of the parliamentarian. David Sitai's decision not to run in this upcoming election was a brave one. He had been one of the longest serving members of parliament since 1978. I wish that others who are just as sick as he make the same decision and allow their constituencies to be represented by some one of robust health, able to do the onerous work of being a Parliamentarian.