KATHMANDU, Aug 12: Questions have been raised over lawmakers’ attendance and the quality of parliamentary debate after an important bill could not be presented in the House of Representatives due to a lack of the required quorum.
Amid the criticism, Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) lawmaker Ashika Tamang said MPs are often forced to leave Parliament after marking their attendance because they have to visit government ministries to raise constituents’ concerns.
“Do they just mark attendance and disappear? Seven hours in the House is fine,” Tamang wrote on social media.
She said lengthy parliamentary sessions are not a problem if debates are substantive, factual and focused on implementation.
Most MPs in constituencies, House lacks quorum
“Debates should raise concrete and factual issues and provide directions for implementation,” she wrote.
Tamang also criticised opposition lawmakers for repeatedly raising the same issues. She said parliamentary debates become unnecessarily long and tedious when lawmakers seek additional speaking time after the Speaker signals that their allotted time has ended, only to repeat points already made.
“There is nothing new, just repeating the same thing again and again. Doesn’t that make the debate long and boring?” she asked.
The issue of lawmakers’ attendance came under scrutiny after the House failed to meet the required quorum on Monday, preventing a bill from being presented.
Tamang attributed the shortage partly to lawmakers’ frequent visits to ministries.
“Lawmakers are lining up at ministry doors, waiting to meet ministers and secretaries and raise their grievances. How can the numbers in Parliament be sufficient?” she said.
She argued that lawmakers have little choice but to approach ministries and ministers with public complaints, as government employees remain responsible for carrying out administrative work even after a change in government or prime minister.
The episode has highlighted not only the importance of lawmakers being present in Parliament but also the quality of debate. Instead of lengthy speeches and repeated arguments, lawmakers need to focus on public concerns, evidence and practical solutions, while ensuring that parliamentary discussions translate into action.
