1,DEWAN___ANSWER_ON INFRASTURETURE PROJECTS IN SARAWAK

2,REPORTS ON EFFECTS OF HAZE 

3,FINANCIAL ALLOCATION TO FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS IN SARAWAK

4,POULTRY/ANIMAL FEED PRODUCED LOCALLY

5,PLAN TO MAKE SIBU DIVISION A VIABLE TOURIST DESTINATION
 

Speeches /Debates

(a) Speech on Dewan Undangan Negeri (Privileges etc) Bill 

(b) Speech on Sales Tax Bill 

(c) Speech on Wildlife Protection Bill 

(d)Speech on Motion of Thanks to TYT 

Datuk Speaker, Sir,

The rationale for the introduction of the present Bill is to enhance the orderliness of proceedings in the Dewan. This is essential, in order that all members in this Dewan may be able to represent their constituencies to the best of their abilities and to exercise the Freedom of Speech without being interrupted or impeded or interfered with by other members in the Dewan or those from outside the Dewan. 

The procedure of the Dewan from British parliament. The 1997 edition of Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice contains a detailed discourse of the British practice. Cases of disorderly and disrespectful acts since the 17th century are cited as examples. At p.131, the learned authors says:

"The power of both Houses to punish Members and non-Members for disorderly and disrespectful acts has much in common with the authority inherent in the superior courts 'to prevent or punish conduct which tends to obstruct, prejudice or abuse them' while in the exercise of their responsibilities. By this means the two Houses are enabled to safeguard and enforce their necessary authority without the compromise or delay to which recourse to the ordinary courts would give rise".

Clause 4 of the Bill seeks to amend s.10 of the principal Ordinance, to allow the Speaker to remove strangers from the Dewan and the precincts thereof. There had been instances in some countries where brawls or fist fighting had taken place between opposing parties within the sacrosanct Dewan. This, of course, is not acceptable. 

There had been instances where members of the public attempt to assemble in the precincts of the Dewan to protest against certain measures and actions of the government against them. Perhaps, this is not the proper way to get their voices heard. This sort of action at the precincts of the Dewan should not be supported. These disgruntled people should be advised to seek redress through the proper channel. 

Clause 5 of the Bill seeks to amend and replace en bloc Part IV of the principal Ordinance and deals with the offence of giving false evidence before any inquiry conducted by the Dewan or any of its committees. Such inquiry will usually be the result of a complaint, e.g. a complaint saying this member or minister has made a baseless point or accusation, been mistaken as to a particular fact and ought to be rectified, and he refuses, and the matter of what has been said or done is to be examined by the Dewan or a Committee thereof.

In order to ensure that the person who is the subject of scrutiny will speak the truth risking contempt of the Dewan, certain machineries are required. These are embodied in Part IV.

There must, however, be a rider. Only certain conduct of members which are untruthful in an inquiry are to be dealt with by the contempt procedure. Otherwise, the freedom of speech as guaranteed by the 1963 Ordinance must be abided and should not be compromised. At p.108 of Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice, the learned author says:

"Generally speaking, any act or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results may be treated as a contempt even though there is no precedent of the offence. ? It should, however, be borne in mind that in 1978 the House of Commons resolved to exercise its penal jurisdiction as sparingly as possible, and only when satisfied that it was essential to do so".

With these observations, I voice DAP's and my support for the Bill.