The Other Scrutiny Committees

So the citizen with an ordinary grievance against the administration has, in this whole syllabus, remarkably few doors. The ombudsman abroad takes his complaint, chapter 1022's comparison; the Lokpal does not; the Central Vigilance Commission is not a grievance body, chapter 250; a Commission of Inquiry is appointed for a definite matter of public importance and not for one man's file. The Committee on Petitions is one of the few that remains, and an answer that mentions it when asked about the redress of grievances has noticed something most do not.

And its limits. It examines and reports; it does not decide; and a petition on a matter for which another remedy exists is not entertained.

The Committee on Papers Laid on the Table

What it does. It examines all papers laid on the table of the House by Ministers, other than those falling within the purview of another committee, and reports whether there has been compliance with the provisions of the Constitution, the Act or the rule under which the paper was laid, and whether there has been any unreasonable delay in laying it, and if so the reasons.

It is the enforcement arm of every laying requirement in this book, and that is why it belongs here.

Chapter 660: section 14(3) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, the annual report laid before each House. Chapter 680: section 22 of the same Act, notifications, rules and regulations laid for thirty days. Chapter 470: section 3(4) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, the report laid with an action taken memorandum. Chapter 1010: article 151, the audit reports laid before Parliament. Chapter 1230: the laying procedure for delegated legislation generally.

Every one of those obligations is on the Government, and none of them carries a penalty. Chapter 1240 shows that failure to lay does not ordinarily invalidate an instrument. So the only thing that stands behind a laying requirement is a committee that checks whether it was complied with and reports the delay.

Say that in an answer and the whole module coheres. The laying requirement is the paper's standard accountability device; this committee is what makes it more than a form.

The Committee on Absence of Members from the Sittings of the House

What it does. It considers applications from members for leave of absence from the sittings of the House and examines cases of members who have been absent for a period of sixty days or more without permission.

Why a syllabus on public authorities cares. Because of article 101(4): if for a period of sixty days a member is without permission of the House absent from all meetings, the House may declare his seat vacant. The committee is the machinery through which that constitutional provision operates, and it is a rare instance of a committee whose report can lead directly to a legal consequence rather than to a recommendation.

Note the qualification in the article: the House "may" declare the seat vacant, and in computing the sixty days no account is taken of any period during which the House is prorogued or adjourned for more than four consecutive days.

What the four have in common, and it is the examinable point

Each of them polices a duty that somebody else owes.

The Committee on Government Assurances polices a Minister's promise. The Committee on Petitions polices the House's own openness to the citizen. The Committee on Papers Laid on the Table polices the Government's statutory duty to lay. The Committee on Absence of Members polices the members themselves.

And three of the four have no sanction at all. They report. Only the fourth is connected to a legal consequence, and that consequence is the House's under article 101(4), not the committee's.

So the standard criticism applies to them as to everything else in this paper, and the standard answer applies too: the sanction is disclosure, and disclosure works to the extent that somebody acts on it.

A worked example

In Question Hour a Minister says that a report on a scheme's implementation will be placed before the House in the current session.

The session ends without it. The Committee on Government Assurances takes up the assurance, asks the Ministry for the reason, and reports the delay.

The report is eventually laid, four months late. The Committee on Papers Laid on the Table examines whether the paper complies with the provision under which it was required to be laid, whether there was unreasonable delay, and what the reasons were.

A citizen affected by the scheme petitions the House. The Committee on Petitions may examine it, unless another remedy is available to him.

Nothing in any of this compels the Ministry to do anything. Correct. All three committees report.

But now add the audit. If money was involved, the Comptroller and Auditor General may report and the Public Accounts Committee will examine the Secretary on it: chapter 1010. The small committees produce the record; the financial committee produces the confrontation.

And a member has not attended for sixty days without permission. The Committee on Absence of Members considers it, and article 101(4) allows the House to declare his seat vacant, no account being taken of periods of prorogation or of adjournment for more than four consecutive days.

What beginners get wrong

That these committees are unimportant because they are small. The Committee on Papers Laid on the Table is what stands behind every laying requirement in this book.

That the Committee on Government Assurances can compel performance. It reports the non-implementation.

That the Committee on Petitions decides a grievance. It examines and reports, and it will not entertain a petition where another remedy exists.

That the Committee on Absence of Members vacates a seat. Article 101(4) lets the House declare the seat vacant.

That the House has no grievance machinery at all. The Committee on Petitions is machinery, though it is not an ombudsman.

Quick revision

Committee on Government Assurances, 15: pursues the assurances, promises and undertakings given by Ministers on the floor and reports non-implementation. The only institutional answer to a Minister's answer that nothing follows.

Committee on Petitions, 15: examines petitions on Bills, on matters of general public interest connected with the business of the House, and on grievances for which no other remedy is available. One of the few doors left open to a citizen's grievance in this whole syllabus.

Committee on Papers Laid on the Table, 15: examines whether papers laid comply with the Constitution, Act or rule under which they were laid and whether there was unreasonable delay. The enforcement arm of every laying requirement in this book: s.14(3) and s.22 of the CVC Act, s.3(4) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, art 151, and the laying of delegated legislation.

Committee on Absence of Members, 15: considers leave of absence and absence of sixty days or more without permission, feeding art 101(4), under which the House may declare the seat vacant, disregarding prorogation and adjournments of more than four consecutive days.

Common feature: each polices a duty somebody else owes; three have no sanction; only the fourth connects to a legal consequence, and that consequence is the House's.

Test yourself

1. What does the Committee on Government Assurances do, and why does it matter? It scrutinises the assurances, promises and undertakings given by Ministers on the floor of the House, pursues whether they have been implemented and reports where they have not, together with the reasons for the delay. It matters because a Minister's answer at Question Hour is the commonest instrument of legislative control there is, and its commonest failure is that an assurance is given and nothing follows once the session ends. This committee is the only institutional answer to that failure, and it works by the method that makes the Public Accounts Committee effective, namely that it does not let a matter go. Its limitation is that it reports and cannot compel a Minister to keep a promise.

2. Why is the Committee on Papers Laid on the Table significant for this paper? Because laying before the House is the standard accountability device of every institution in the syllabus, and no laying requirement carries a penalty. Section 14(3) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act requires its annual report to be laid, section 22 requires notifications, rules and regulations to be laid for thirty days, section 3(4) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act requires a Commission's report to be laid with an action taken memorandum, article 151 requires the audit reports to be laid, and delegated legislation is subject to a laying procedure. Since Atlas Cycle holds that a requirement of laying is ordinarily directory, non-compliance does not invalidate anything. What stands behind these obligations is therefore a committee that examines whether papers were laid in compliance with the provision requiring them, whether there was unreasonable delay, and what the reasons were.

3. What is the constitutional significance of the Committee on Absence of Members? Article 101(4) provides that if for a period of sixty days a member of either House is without the permission of the House absent from all meetings of it, the House may declare his seat vacant, no account being taken in computing that period of any period during which the House is prorogued or adjourned for more than four consecutive days. The Committee is the machinery through which that provision operates: it considers applications for leave of absence and examines cases of prolonged absence without permission. It is unusual among the committees in this module because its report can lead directly to a legal consequence rather than to a recommendation, though the consequence is one the House imposes and the article is permissive.

4. What do these four committees have in common? Each polices a duty owed by somebody else: the Committee on Government Assurances polices a Minister's promise, the Committee on Petitions the House's own openness to the citizen, the Committee on Papers Laid on the Table the Government's statutory duty to lay, and the Committee on Absence of Members the conduct of members themselves. Three of the four have no sanction and can only report, which is the standing feature of every institution in this paper; and the fourth connects to a legal consequence which belongs to the House and not to the committee. Their common answer to the charge of weakness is likewise the paper's standing answer, that the sanction is disclosure, and that disclosure is effective to the extent that somebody acts upon it.