The Ecology of Governance, Accountability and Parliament

THE ECOLOGY OF GOVERNANCE, ACCOUNTABILITY AND PARLIAMENT

Introduction

Day One presents: 1) the good governance concepts employed by the Laurentian Seminar 2) the principle of accountability and its relationship to the issue of corruption and 3) the role of parliament in ensuring accountability.

My role - the role of the presenter each day - is to introduce these subjects, after which the discussion shifts to your assessment of these concepts and their application in the South Asian context. The latter is the heart of the Laurentian Seminar.

(1) The Ecology of Governance

A mental map to help us think about the nature of governance, showing

Spheres of Governance - state, society and market making up the national identity surrounded by the global village.

This map reminds us that it is no longer possible to think of governance as solely the business of the state. Each of the spheres has distinct functions necessary to human well-being.

Governance is concerned with the development of healthy relations between state, society and market, relations that promote human well-being.

Institutions - including legislative, executive and judicial branches of the state, a wide array of organizations in civil society and commercial enterprises large and small in the market.

The number and diversity of institutions is one indicator of the health of the ecology of governance. Mono-culture is as unhealthy in governance as in the natural environment.

In governance, the "synergy of institutions" is a basic resource. The good governance capacity of institutions like parliament depends primarily on the development of networks of relations with other institutions in the state, society and economy.

The Commons - the principles, traditions and customs that hold together or destroy the national identify under the gale force winds of globalization. We live at a moment in history when the destructive forces appear stronger than the forces of unity.

Parliament is an institution that should serve to strengthen the commons by serving as a bridge between state and society. It should carry out its functions - legislation, oversight and representation – in such a way as to support the principles of accountability, transparency and participation.

(2) Accountability and Corruption

As noted above, the capacity for good governance is dependent on the health of relations between state, society and economy, as well as between institutions such as the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the state.

It is for this reason that corruption is a serious threat to good governance. It deforms and weakens those relations, as well as the institutions themselves. Let us briefly consider how.

Accountability is one of the requirements for good governance because it is a building block of trust. The concept may be defined as the obligation to answer for the management of responsibility. Easily defined, the concept is complex and ever changing. Over the past decade or so, there has been a major shift in the concept from "compliance" accountability to "results" or "performance" accountability. Whatever the meaning, the critical question is whether there are effective mechanisms to enforce accountability?

Corruption is one of the ways in which accountability is undermined, although it is by no means the only way. If an official is incapable of managing his\her responsibilities, accountability is rendered impossible. It is important to stress this point so that we do not attribute to corruption all of the problems associated with ineffective accountability.

Corruption might be thought of as a member of the family of institutional weaknesses that undermine accountability and good governance. Defined as the illegal use of public office for private gain, corruption substitutes private interests for public obligations. For those united in the corrupt act, it serves common interests; for the public interest, it imposes costs, one of which is eroding confidence in the integrity of institutions. This may reach the point where the basic order of the society is threatened.

Tomorrow, we will explore in greater depth the nature of corruption and lessons learned in attempts to control it. In particular, the discussion will focus on the importance of strengthening accountability as a way of curbing corruption and promoting good governance.

(3) Parliament, Accountability and Corruption

Whatever the causes and consequences of corruption, evidence from around the world shows that it is associated with weak systems of public accountability.

Earlier, we noted that parliament that should carry out its legislative, oversight and representative functions so as to strengthen the good governance values of accountability, transparency and participation. In a healthy ecology of governance, parliament should serve as an institution of public accountability.

On the third day of the Seminar, we will focus on one of the most important tools at parliament’s disposal to strengthen accountability, namely the budget process. We will see then that accountability is not a simple oversight activity that involves only "checking the books" and "catching the crooks." It requires effective parliamentary participation in all stages of the budget process, from the setting of budget priorities, through debate of the budget document itself to the monitoring of budget implementation and the scrutiny of public accounts.

On the fourth day of the seminar, we turn our attention to the key question of how parliament can go about strengthening itself as an instrument of public accountability? In seeking answers, two very different kinds of obstacles present themselves: lack of commitment and weak capacity.

Lack of Commitment – The issue here is whether parliamentarians are so compromised by the political process that they lack credibility in tackling corruption. What sorts of obstacles are put in the way of parliamentary effectiveness by party politics? Can parliament and parliamentarians rise above the powerful temptation to use corruption as a convenient weapon in the political wars?

Weak Capacity - Assuming that commitment can be generated, there still remain serious capacity obstacles standing in the way of parliament being an effective instrument of accountability. Many parliaments in the world lack the resources (eg: competent research services) necessary to effectively scrutinize government. In these circumstances, parliamentarians should think first of ‘the synergy of institutions" by building working relations with specialized watchdog bodies, and with civil society and business organizations. Where resources are scarce, these may account for most of the potential gain in parliamentary effectiveness.