frsrdg · GT04RS3 · 2005-12-14 00:00:00 — A study has been conducted on behalf of the Commission of the committees work procedures and workload. The overall assessment regarding the workload is that there are systematic differences which are also stable over time between the committees. In the opinion of the Commission, however, it is difficult to identify any specific groups of matters that can easily be transferred from the busiest committees to those with a slightly lighter workload. The committees in question all have well- coordinated and politically relevant areas of responsibility. transfer of significant parts of these areas of responsibility to another committee would risk creating new coordination problems and an increased need for statements between committees. The division of the budget into expenditure areas also limits opportunities for transferring groups of matters. Nevertheless, the Commission considers it justified for several reasons to transfer to the consideration of certain groups of matters associated with the vulnerability of society. These include, for example, matters concerning nuclear safety and radiation protection. This change would create better opportunities for achieving a holistic view and efficient use of societys resources. Since the proposal means that areas for consideration will be transferred from other committees to the somewhat less burdened it will help, although perhaps only to a limited extent, to create a more even workload among the committees. In the opinion of the Commission, the set-up of a , which was established for the consideration of security policy issues, has worked well. The Commission assumes, therefore, that this form of cooperation can be used again in the future. In other areas too, the appointment of joint committees may be a way of achieving better coordination between committees in certain major matters, as well as a better use of collective resources. Regarding gender equality issues, the Commission considers that all committees should continue to be responsible for analysing matters within their areas of responsibility from a gender equality perspective. 2005/06:RS3 BILAGA 3 SUMMARY that has evolved of referring gender equality issues that do not belong to any other committees area of responsibility to should, however, be written into the Riksdag Act. The Commission also considers that responsibility for consideration of integration issues should be transferred from to . Regarding the possibility of reducing the number of committees, the Commission considers that the areas of responsibility of on Civil should be transferred to a new committee called . However, the areas of responsibility of the new committee should be narrowed down somewhat by moving certain groups of matters to other committees. In the opinion of the Commission, there are many problems associated with the institution of private members motions. During the general period for the submission of private members motions, the party groups work with motions both arising from and without connection to the Budget is concentrated to a relatively short period at the beginning of the Riksdag session. Another problem is the large volume of motions submitted during the general private members motions period. This has troublesome consequences for the committees work situation. On the part of the committees, there is a risk that the consideration of motions may get in the way of other, partially new, tasks regarding the follow-up, evaluation and monitoring of EU issues in their respective areas of responsibility. During its examination of the institution of private members motions, the Commission has considered when private members motions that are independent of Government bills should be submitted. Two proposals have been discussed. According to the first, there would be two general private members motions periods, one covering the same period as the current general private members motions period, and the second during the two weeks following the and New Year recess. According to the second proposal, private members motions that are independent of Government bills could be submitted at any time of the year, also when the Chamber is in recess. The Commission admittedly considers that the current arrangement with a time-limited general private members motions period at the beginning of the Riksdag session has many weaknesses, but it has nevertheless reached the conclusion that this arrangement is preferable to the two alternatives discussed. The Commission has also examined the issue of the right to submit private members motions arising from written communications and reports and has come to the conclusion that the general right to submit private members motions should be abolished. The Chamber should instead examine each written communication and report on an individual basis and decide whether or not it should occasion the right to submit private members motions. This decision is to be taken on the basis of a proposal from the Speaker following SUMMARY BILAGA 3 2005/06:RS3 consultations with the party group leaders. The Commission assumes that a practice concerning the types of communication and report that should occasion the right to submit motions will gradually be established. Hitherto, the most tested approach for reducing committee work with private members motions has involved measures to simplify the consideration procedure. An increasing number of committees have started to apply new methods for dealing with motions submitted during the general private members motions period. They have drawn up long-term plans for the consideration of motions, considered motions in greater depth at specific times during the electoral period and simplified their consideration at other times. Even if experience of simplified procedures for the consideration of private members motions has been mixed, the Commission considers that the committees should continue along the same track and proposes that the procedure for simplified consideration of motions be standardised. In the opinion of the Commission, a simplified procedure for the consideration of motions could be applied, as hitherto, to two different types of motion: partly to those whose main content corresponds to that of motions previously submitted during the electoral period, and partly to those concerning conditions regarding which the Riksdag currently does not have any right of decision. Both cases concern objective criteria which should, in principle, be easy to apply. In the opinion of the Commission, the general rule should be that only special statements of opinion, and not reservations, should be included in committee reports resulting from a simplified consideration procedure. The Commission considers it difficult for the committees to have time to consider all the motions that are referred to them. This particularly applies to motions submitted towards the end of an electoral period. In order to deal with the problems associated with the heavy workload in the spring before an election, the Commission proposes that the option be introduced for committees to refrain from submitting reports on all matters. This option should be chosen when the consideration of a matter by a committee has not been completed towards the end of an electoral period. The committees should of course aim to avoid using this option, but if faced with the choice of postponing motions to the next electoral period or dropping the motion, this latter option should be made use of. Issues relating to research and the future It is important that the work and decisions of the Riksdag are founded on the best possible knowledge base. Various Riksdag bodies and individual mem- bers of the Riksdag need access to knowledge about relevant research find- ings on, and qualified analyses of, social developments in various areas. A study undertaken at the beginning of 2005 of the members work situa- tion also reveals that one of the foremost wishes of our MPs is to be able to devote more time to long-term work, in-depth study and reflection. Other studies also show that both the citizens and the members of the Riksdag 2005/06:RS3 BILAGA 3 SUMMARY themselves consider the Riksdag to be relatively poor at predicting future problems before they arise. The Commission has conducted a study of how issues relating to research and the future can be devoted more time and be better integrated into the work of the Riksdag, and whether any organisational or other changes are needed to accommodate this. In the opinion of the Commission, in-depth work with issues relating to re- search and the future must primarily be carried out within the regular organi- sation of the Riksdag. This is the best way of ensuring that this knowledge is incorporated into the day-to-day work and decision-making process of the Riksdag and contributing to well-founded decisions. The committees and committee secretariats, in particular, must assume substantial responsibility in this context. The Commission consequently considers that no special organ- isational solutions for issues relating to research and the future need be estab- . The Riksdag should be able to demand that the Government include, in important bills, an account of the state of knowledge on the basis of research, evaluation of technology, futures studies etc. in the areas concerned. The Commission also considers that events such as research and future days should be held at regular intervals, for example, every other year. Regarding increased support to the committees for issues relating to re- search and the future, it would be natural, in the opinion of the Commission, to provide this support to the follow-up and evaluation function that already exists at the today. The Commission also sees a need to strengthen contacts between the committees, the and the () and consid- ers that Rifos activities should be further developed. The finer details regard- ing the development of the Riksdags work with issues relating to research and the future should be formulated in a strategy for work with issues relat- ing to research and the future, which could eventually result in an action programme for presentation and discussion at the Chairmens Conference. The strategy should also include measures to highlight and generate interest in issues relating to research and the future. In 2001, the Riksdag decided to approve a set of guidelines for the Riks- dags follow-up and evaluation activities. As a result of this decision, follow- up and evaluation were incorporated into the Riksdag Act as one of the tasks of the committees, and an action plan for continued work with follow-up and evaluation was adopted. The parliamentary committees work in different ways and to varying ex- tents with follow-up and evaluation. The activities are primarily concerned with broadening the Riksdags knowledge base by using a variety of means to information about results achieved in relation to the Riksdags objec- tives and resources or in relation to legislation in preparation for a decision in the Chamber. The committees thematic follow-up and evaluation activities SUMMARY BILAGA 3 2005/06:RS3 normally concern larger initiatives to build up the knowledge base in connec- tion with the consideration of an item of parliamentary business. The commit- tees ongoing follow-up activities include assessing targets and target state- ments as part of their consideration of the Budget , and analysing informa- tion provided by the Government about results in relation to targets set by the Riksdag. This may also include assessing the methods used for the Govern- ments statement of operations. In the opinion of the Commission, the Riksdag is a key link in the chain of government, and in order to ensure the smooth functioning of government it is crucial that the Riksdag receives information about results. The commit- tees follow-up and evaluation activities are one way of receiving information about results and strengthening the link to decisions about legislation and the budget. The number of follow-up and evaluation assignments has increased, but the target set in the Riksdags decision from 2001 will not be reached until follow-up and evaluation are an integrated part of all committees con- sideration of parliamentary business. The Commission believes that follow-up and evaluation in the Riksdag should be forward-looking and should be used to provide a basis for well-founded positions in the consideration of business. The connection with the committees consideration of Government bills and private members motions needs, in many cases, to be made clearer. For a continued dialogue between the Riksdag and the Government, it is important that all committees examine the information about results provided by the Government in the Budget and communications about results, and that the Government complies with the Riksdags wish to receive more in-depth statements of operations. Opportunities for the committees to exchange in-depth information about follow-up and evaluation issues within the framework of the Chairmens Conference should be able to drive this development forward. In order to fulfil objectives set out in the Riksdags action plan, it is important that the committees work in a long-term by clarifying in their planning docu- ments how follow-up and evaluation are incorporated in their consideration of private members motions and Government bills. Finally, the Commission considers it important that support to the committees continues to be devel- oped. Work in the Chamber of the Riksdag Membership of Union has brought to the fore the issue of cer- tain changes to the Chambers schedule of meetings. As already pointed out by the Riksdag Commission, the Parliamentary Re- view Commission assumes that the committees will also meet in weeks when there are no meetings of the Chamber and during longer recesses, to the ex- tent that it is necessary. This may be increasingly relevant now especially during the summer recess following the Commissions proposals regarding 2005/06:RS3 BILAGA 3 SUMMARY a greater responsibility among the committees to monitor EU issues. On certain occasions, the Chamber may also need to meet during longer recesses in order to be able to take decisions, for example. arising from a committee initiative on an EU matter. Regarding the Prime Ministers reports from Councils meetings, the Commission emphasises how important it is that these sessions for reporting-back are held in the Chamber, and that they take place as soon as possible after the meeting. In the opinion of the Commission, developments indicate that the Riksdag should meet on a more even, continuous basis throughout the year. However, the number of weeks during which meetings are held should not, in principle, increase. The members must have time for contacts in their constituencies, for local work in their parties, for voters and for other tasks associated with their parliamentary duties, for example, participation in inquiries and interparlia- mentary cooperation. The Commission proposes that should consider shortening the summer recess by scheduling meetings some- what later in and possibly also in . The time devoted to meetings in the Chamber by the unicameral Riksdag has not changed very much. A noticeable increase can, however, be noted for the Riksdag session of 2004/05. The increase is mainly due to an increase in the number of interpellation debates and special debates (not leading to a parlia- mentary decision), which place increased demands on both MPs and govern- ment ministers and also on the parties as such, especially the smaller party groups. The Commission expects the Speaker and the leaders of the party groups to monitor developments and take appropriate steps if necessary. The Commission has initiated certain changes in debating procedures. The objective of the trials has been to revitalise the debates in the Chamber. In connection with debates leading to a parliamentary decision, for instance, a different debating order has been tested, with a brief introduction, shorter speaking times, and a new placing of debate participants in the Chamber. The Commission takes a positive view of the trials of a new structure for debates leading to a parliamentary decision, but considers it too early yet to make this model the norm. The Commission expects the Speaker and the leaders of the party groups to reach an agreement about the structure of debates leading to a parliamentary decision in the new Plenary Chamber. The Commission considers that trials of a question and answer session for the Prime Minister have been successful and have found a form that works well. It is, however, still too early in the view of the Commission to take a position on whether the members debates that are now being tested should be made permanent. The Commission expects the trial to be evaluated before the next electoral period. With respect to the scheduling of interpellation debates the Commission considers it imperative that there is a mechanism helping to reduce the pro- portion of late answers and which makes it possible to give a rapid indication SUMMARY BILAGA 3 2005/06:RS3 of when an interpellation will be answered. The order used in recent years, however, has been so disadvantageous to those making interpellations that the Commission approved the change put into practice as of the Riksdag session of 2004/05, that is, that in the final instance it is the Speaker who determines the meeting at which an answer will be given. In relation to voting the Commission notes that the time the Chamber de- votes to voting has diminished strikingly over the most recent 15 year period from 45 hours to 16 hours. The Commission does not consider that the time taken at this level constitutes a significant problem in the work of the Riksdag or gives any reason for modifying the voting system or the rules currently in force. The agreement in place to restrict the number of votes taken is not always observed, however. The Commission wishes to point out the possibil- ity of deciding an item of business, even in cases where a resolution is sub- mitted to the Chamber, by way of acclamation thus avoiding both rising and vote counting. The Commission notes that it is the responsibility of the lead- ers of the party groups to come to an agreement about recommendations to the party groups and members regarding any limitations on voting. The sys- tem of fixed voting times is considered to work well. According to the Commission it is also the responsibility of the party groups in the Riksdag to limit by voluntary agreement the occurrence of mass agreement in the Chamber, which assumes the character of applause. The Commission proposes the requirement in the Riksdag Act for a unanimous decision to be made in advance to be able to hold a committee meeting during interpellation debates and specially organised debates should be removed. Working for gender equality in the Riksdag In various connections, the Commission has raised the matter of Riksdag procedures in relation to a gender equality perspective. The Commission has also launched certain initiatives to push forward work on gender equality in the Riksdag and has closely followed work initiated in other contexts. Following a written communication from the Social in the Riksdag to , a working group was appointed in Decem- ber 2003 which in the autumn of 2004 submitted a report, 15 proposals for gender equality in the Riksdag (Utredningar från riksdagsförvaltningen 2004/05:URF11). In , decided to make the report the basis of its ongoing and future work on gender equality. The thrust of the proposals in the report is that the Riksdag must work in a planned and methodical fashion for increased equality between men and women. The 15 concrete proposals include increasing the visibility of the field and knowledge about it. The basic idea of the report is that for each 1 Enquiries from the . 2005/06:RS3 BILAGA 3 SUMMARY electoral period should set up an action programme for gender equality including various kinds of initiatives to be implemented dur- ing that electoral period. A follow-up should take place at the end of the elec- toral period. In , approved an action programme for the current electoral period. One element of the programme is the report Jämställt? Röster från riks- dagen2 (Utredningar från riksdagsförvaltningen 2005/06:URF23) based on in- depth interviews with female and male members of the Riksdag that was presented at a seminar in for the committee presidia. In the report, those interviewed give their vision of power relationships in the Riks- dag from a gender equality perspective. The possibilities of combining the duties of an MP with responsibility for home and family are illuminated. Despite some criticism, the picture emerges of a Riksdag moving towards gender equality. The intention is to disseminate the report more widely within the Riksdag and use it as background material in the ongoing work. In parallel with this, the Commission has discussed in more general terms the need for research into the duties of an MP from a gender perspective. In 2005, a public seminar was held in cooperation with (Jubileums- fond) at which an overview of existing research on the Riksdag as an institu- tion from a gender perspective was presented. The objective of the seminar was to initiate a debate on the need for further research and about whether such research can contribute to efforts to make the duties of an MP gender- equal. The Commission notes with satisfaction that centenary Foundation has shown interest in continued research in this area. Commission has also initiated various studies intended to shed light on such issues as the differences between the work situations of male and female MPs. In the view of the Commission, shortcomings in gender equality are in- compatible with the democratic ideas that determine our representative form of government. A smoothly functioning Riksdag presupposes that all mem- bers, both male and female, can exercise their political responsibilities under conditions of gender equality. The work of increasing gender equality in the Riksdag, however, is exceptional. Members of the Riksdag are not employees of the Riksdag and therefore they are not covered by the Equal Opportunities Act. For this reason special mechanisms are needed to handle gender equality issues in the work of the Riksdag. A good knowledge of various circumstances and problems is very signifi- cant for the ongoing effort. Various approaches and methods must be made use of. The reports mentioned constitute one element in this work and should serve as background materials for ongoing discussions in such forums as the party groups and in efforts to broaden and deepen knowledge of this area in the Riksdag. It is not just a question of attitudes and approaches in internal Views from the Riksdag. 3Enquiries from the . SUMMARY BILAGA 3 2005/06:RS3 work but also of realising how a deeper awareness of this field can find a long-term reflection in the consideration of various individual items of par- liamentary business. In the view of the Commission it is crucial that work on gender equality in the Riksdag is conducted in a planned, methodical and continuous fashion. For this reason the Commission considers that should continue to take special responsibility for this primarily by way of drawing up an action programme for each electoral period and by following up and evaluating the work done on gender equality. The Riksdag's need for inquiries of its own Inquiries on confidence in the Riksdag and opinions about the work of the Riksdag have proved to be of value for evaluation purposes and reforms of the Riksdag and its procedures.