What exactly does the Secretary to the NA do?

It's a very interesting question. The Secretary to the NA firstly is the chief adviser on matters of procedure for the National Assembly, not just in the chamber, but for the National Assembly as a whole. We advise on a range of issues. But our main focus is that the business of the House is done both in terms of the rules; in terms of the law and, of course, the Constitution. So that is one aspect. The other aspect is that we provide secretarial functions. We are the Secretariat of the National Assembly. So for the National Assembly itself, the production of the minutes of the House, the production of what we refer to as the order paper, and ensuring that all the papers that are required for the House are available. When I say papers, I'm basically referring to information that is supposed to serve before the House. So if there is a committee report that is supposed to be dealt with by the House, we must ensure that that report is available and has been finalised. By the time it gets to the House, it's ripe for consideration by the House. We also support the committees of the House, like your Program Committee, your Rules Committee, Powers and Privileges Committee. You might have seen me at Powers and Privileges at some points. I'm responsible for all of that. Making sure that the National Assembly is able to function properly in terms of the law, in terms of the rules.

What experience does one need to be effective in your position?

I joined Parliament several years ago. I suspect that is an understatement as I joined Parliament in 1994. But the point I'm trying to make is that when I joined Parliament, I joined as a Committee Secretary and I supported various committees. That area of work is often referred to as the engine room of Parliament. That is really where things happen. That is where you learn to apply procedure. You learn to apply the rules. You get to understand the journey that a bill travels within parliament. So by the time it gets to the House, you know what has happened to that bill. And then after a few years, I joined the Table in our research and parliamentary practice unit within the Table. I was placed there for about two years and from there, I was placed within the House proceedings unit.

In terms of processes and programming, that's when I started dealing with programming of the House. So to be a Secretary to the House, you really need to have had exposure to be effective. As a Secretary to the House, you must have had exposure to the workings of committees, in my view, otherwise you're going to have a great deal of difficulties. And of course, you must have had exposure to the goings-on in the House at a lower level so by the time you are where I am, you can basically do any of those things. I mean, if I were to be told now that there is a portfolio committee that needs to appoint the chairperson, and there's no staff available, I'll be able to run it because I've done it before. And that's really the issue even with these other subcommittees of the House, whether you talk about the Rules Committee, Powers and Privileges Committee, because I've been there, I know how this is run. So you do need that experience. So you may not have people who started here in 1994 but as long as you have had exposure to these and you are a fast learner. A bit of law does help as a qualification, just because there's a lot of interpretation that happens here, understanding of the rules and naturally the Constitution. Some of these things can get boring if you don't have a keen interest in legal matters. That's the experience needed. So it does not take 30 years to be selected to the House. It can take maybe 10 years, then you could manage to do these things. People are also different in their uptake of issues.

What does a typical workday in your life look like?

My typical work day starts at 5 am. Yes. Let’s take a sitting day. My colleagues always tell me, “Please don't send us WhatsApps, we are still sleeping!” Because you need to be ready for the day. If the House is sitting tomorrow, it starts today because I must approve the agenda for the sitting day. And of course, that is subject to political approval. But by the time it goes to the political principal, I must have okayed it. Then we get to the sitting day itself, and the documents for the House are ready. There's something we call the guide. This is a script for the House. So every House sitting has a script. The reason we do it is because there are procedures that must be followed with everything that gets to the House. So if it's a committee report, there's a way to deal with the report. If it's a bill, there's a way to deal with a bill, if it's an appointment of an office bearer, let's say a Chapter Nine, there's a way to deal with that. So our script which we call the guide, will detail that procedure, what the chair must say, and know how the Members must respond to that. So I must look at that. I must also arrange briefings for the presiding officer so that they are ready for the House. Of course, once a week we try as procedural staff to meet together to anticipate issues. What do we think could arise here? And what is the threshold? What is a quorum for that item? We already have rulings from the previous week. What rulings do we need to prepare? Are there any preemptive rulings that we may need to prepare for the presiding officer? What can we expect? What are the kinds of scenarios in view of the items that are before the House? So we are really never caught by surprise by anything, because we do that scenario planning with the team. We think rules, we think Constitution; we think precedent; we look at our digest of rulings. And of course, I interact on various issues with all the parties, basically I get calls from whips on this and that, how is it going to be dealt with by the House. As the Secretary to the House, I prepare notes on any ruling that would go to the presiding officer and we'll discuss with the team. So that's really my typical day. Of course, then two o'clock comes and as you know, in Parliament two o'clock is two o'clock. So if a sitting is scheduled for two, at two we must enter that place and hold prayers. That kind of gets into your system – even outside of Parliament when things don't start on time…. you are not used to that. So that's my typical day. After the House, if it's been a very dramatic sitting, we would have a reflection on the issues that have arisen in the House.

What do you find most rewarding about the work that you do?

I feel a sense of fulfilment daily. Any call that comes - there's something I didn't mention - apart from what we do in the House, there's a lot of correspondence that we process from members of the public about a whole range of things, whether it's a petition or it's what we refer to as an unsolicited submission. Let's say you have a problem with a company or a government entity – they're not processing your matter and you're not getting a response – people write to Parliament and we have to give advice. This is okay, let's call the department or let's refer this to a committee. So, I derive a lot of fulfilment from that. And of course, when the House sits, and there are no procedural glitches - I’m not talking about other issues - and the business of the House is able to continue without any issues, bills are passed according to what the Constitution requires and the House is able to transact its business in terms of the law, and things run smoothly now smooth for us is relative [laughs], we feel that we've done our job. If there is a situation as long as it is dealt with in terms of the rules, it's not an issue because this is a parliament. One should understand that people hold strong views about issues. They will be robust in expressing those views sometimes. And there's nothing wrong with that. That's what happens in a parliament, as long as those views are able to converge... of course, some people would feel strongly about things. For instance, a member would say something that we view as unparliamentary and they refuse to withdraw it. The rule says the Member must leave the House and if the Member leaves the House, there is no crisis. The business of the House goes on. We all understand that the Member feels strongly about the matter, and they did not think they needed to withdraw that statement. For us. It's really about the application of the rules. And once that happens, we really feel a sense of fulfilment when they are able to pass bills, to pass reports and are able to have robust debates when people disagree and agree and fight politically. When I say fight, I mean within the framework of the law and the rules. That's exciting. That's democracy at play.

If you consider the number of bills and committee reports that are passed, then the majority of how sittings go off flawlessly, that's really a tribute to you.

Thank you so much…and my team. People think that I know everything. Sometimes I sit there and have to send a message to my team. Tell me that rule. What is that rule? I know there's a rule. But I can't remember the rule number because we amended the Rules in 2016. So I don't remember everything. But I've got a team that I work with – they're fantastic.

I've asked you about what's been rewarding? What would you find most challenging?

Look, I've found challenging moments, I must tell you. Maybe this is how I can respond to that question - we have had big happenings in the nation. There was a time when we had a motion of no confidence in the previous president, and that motion had to be done by secret ballot. That was a first. We had no procedures in place to vote on a motion by secret ballot – that had never been done before. That was particularly challenging – but we were able to deal with it – and the team devised a method for that.

When we started in 2014 and there were new things - House sittings could potentially collapse. We had never been exposed to that and we had to devise ways to deal with it to enable Members to express themselves, but also for the House to transact business in terms of the Constitution. We had to devise mechanisms even before we had new rules to deal with that.

We had a situation where a president resigned, and literally the next day a new president had to be elected. The announcement was made at 10 pm and at 2 pm the next day you must elect a president. That had never happened before. and we had to grapple with that. And it is strenuous. I mean when you see it, it's nicely arranged with no problems. But behind the scenes, a lot goes on. So those are really challenging.

When there's disorder in the House, for me, it's always about how do we resolve it, what can I advise the Speaker on how we resolve this. So I'm never excited when there are unmitigated disagreements in the House, and people start saying nasty things against each other. I like a robust environment. But when things become chaotic, I don't get excited. We don't derive any pleasure when we see something like violence happening in the House or in terms of the removal of Members. My role really is to find solutions, which I find challenging, sometimes in a positive way because it helps us to come up with new ways of dealing with issues. My role is to give solutions to my principals – whether it is the Speaker or the Chief Whips Forum because that's another forum I interact with, and we give options on how they deal with this.

For instance, when we went to the City Hall, we now had to do open voting or voice voting, which is not done. However due to the circumstances, we did not have a venue. We did not have a voting mechanism and we had to devise how to deal with that. We put it to the Chief Whips, this is how the parties are going to sit. Of course, sometimes there are disagreements, and we must come up with options to make it work. When they disagree in the Chief Whips Forum about any issue, my responsibility is to find a way to make it work. That sometimes involves having to talk to the whippery individually, the individual whips, and try to persuade them on the best approach.

The role of a Secretary to the House is administrative but you also need to have a good understanding of the politics of the time and how political parties work and who matters in political parties. When I say who matters – where the decisions lie, and how to approach them and the sensitivities as well. You also have a responsibility to make these parties work together, of course, in your own limited way. I don't want to over-emphasize our role as if we are the ones that make things happen here – our role is limited, but it's very important. And you need to have a good working relationship. When I say I work with all the parties, I'm not exaggerating. When I say I get calls from all the parties, it’s literally all because that's how it works. So this is challenging, but also quite exciting at the same time.

What are your reflections on the Sixth Parliament?

The Sixth Parliament has been a busy one. It's been a very busy Parliament. You had the Zondo Commission, the State Capture Commission Report which we've been grappling with. I think we are making some progress. Committees have been working on this matter and there's a lot more that we can still do to attend to these things. So there's a lot more that we can do in terms of processing the recommendations of the State Capture Commission. Now what we would always like people to understand is that those recommendations and those remain recommendations which relate to the functioning of Parliament. Parliament can say yes, Parliament can say no. You will know that Parliament, for instance, on certain issues, the Rules Committee has said, "No, we don't think we're at a point where we can have chairpersons from other parties". That does not mean that maybe another Parliament could take a different view. So we have had the State Capture Commission Report that we have to process as parliament.

We've had the High-Level Panel Report on the Assessment of Key Legislation and Acceleration of Fundamental Change which comes from the Fifth Parliament to this parliament. We're not really on top of the recommendations of that high-level panel on the effectiveness of transformative legislation. We must still find a handle on the issues there. I can say without any fear of contradiction that I'm not comfortable that we are not on top of that. But with the current leadership in Parliament, we are beginning to really knock hard in making sure that we open that door so that we can deal with these issues. So the High-Level Panel and the State Capture reports will be the legacy of this Parliament. Of course, we now have a strategic framework which is trying to deal with these issues and take oversight to another level, in making sure that we are responsive.

Of course, the fire that gutted our buildings has been a major highlight in a negative way. The COVID-19 pandemic forced us into spaces that we never knew about before. We now have a way of running meetings virtually or through hybrid effectively. I don't want to say this – so that we don't go back to physical – but since we started doing hybrid sittings of the Houses, we have never had quorum problems. Yes, because people are able to connect from wherever they are, and participate, not just vote but participate, and then vote. So COVID-19 for me has been a highlight, the State Capture process and report have been a highlight. The building issue has been a highlight for us - but Parliament has permanently continued to function.

Of course, the Seventh Parliament will have its own set of issues – we now have the possibility of Independents joining Parliament. We already have even dealt with that from the side of procedure. Of course, the Rules Committee will deal with some of these issues. We are trying to find an effective means to deal with petitions. We do have a procedure for petitions but the amount of time it takes to process a petition in parliament is just unacceptable. We're trying to deal with that so one can attend to a petition within a defined period. I will present the new Petitions Framework to the Joint Rules Committee this coming Wednesday for adoption. For me, those are some of the highlights of the Sixth Parliament.

A bit of a curveball question that we wanted to pose is do you think there's anything that the NCOP does that the NA could learn from?

Yes, the NCOP has put a timeframe for processing bills. For Section 76 Bills, this is an eight-week period. In the NA, we don't have it. We might have good reasons why we don't have it, but we need it. We need it because currently, we have an open-ended approach to the lawmaking process. It's not helping. The rules actually do empower us to have time limits, which we currently don't have. For me, that is something good that we think the NCOP is doing well. To what extent it is effective and has been adhered to, that House would have to comment on that. But the principle itself is good.

The other issue – but this one we must still reflect on – is the NCOP has a Petitions and Executive Undertakings Committee. We don't have that. Our approach has been you have portfolios of government, and for any matter that comes into the system, there is a portfolio committee that should deal with that. But we really think we may need a dedicated committee to deal with these matters. I think those would be the two highlights. The two Houses have different mandates; I'm happy with our mandate but those two matters, for me, are what we can learn from the NCOP.

You've seen many Parliaments come and go, so what are you most looking forward to or anticipating from the Seventh Parliament?

Whether I should call it a gripe but something that continues to bother me is how we deal with House decisions…House resolutions. I can say with a degree of confidence that we've not done very well on that front. There's a lot that the House decides on, there's a lot that the House anticipates will be a problem if not dealt with – and that would come through committee reports and are sent to the executive – but the tracking of that… And I'm looking forward to us being able to deal with that area decisively because these recommendations or resolutions come out of a great deal of effort by the committees, whether they go on oversight undertakings and then make recommendations to the House. The House agrees and it's communicated to the executive and nothing becomes of it. It's our responsibility as parliament to follow up on those issues to hold the executive accountable. If we were to do just that part of our work effectively, it would deal a huge dent on some of the challenges of our nation. Not that is going to solve everything but at least there will be accountability. The service delivery will be affected in a positive way. Therefore I am looking forward to that for the Seventh Parliament – that administratively we can get that thing going.

We don't know how things will look like after the elections; we don't want to speculate; but from the side of the administration, we have a responsibility to make this place work effectively. We want to find a way to manage the lawmaking process properly and administratively. I've already hinted at the issue of timeframes. Yes, I'm hoping that between Parliament and the executive there will be an understanding that if you are going to introduce a bill, it must first be a bill that you really need. Also, a bill that you are ready to implement, you have the resources to implement. Parliament must put the right mechanisms in place to make that assessment at the point the bill comes into the system so that if you're not ready with this bill, we don't deal with it. Currently, there's an unacceptable backlog of legislation. It's not purely a political issue. I think administratively there's a lot more that we could do to help our principals manage the space. I'm hoping that the Seventh Parliament will be able to do those things. Look, this place is terribly busy. When we are in session, some of these ideas that one has basically are difficult to sponsor effectively, because of the various things that happen. But I am setting my eyes on those issues to play the role that I can play together with the House being led by the Speaker so that we can find ways to assist the process because we're here to make things work for our principals. When I say principals, I mean for, for the political parties that are within Parliament as a body. So that's really what we are looking forward to. Of course, we all may have mixed feelings about what type of Parliament we are going to have after the elections. But that bridge will be crossed when we get to it. All I can say from our side, whatever happens, we'll find ways of assisting the process.