WE WANT DELTANS TO PARTAKE IN LAWMAKING PROCESS – SPEAKER

The Speaker, Delta State House of Assembly Rt. Hon. Victor Ochei, in this interview with KOLA NIYI-EKE, speaks on issues relating to the state legislature under his watch, including its relationship with the executive arm. He also discusses how his leadership has been able to carry along opposition lawmakers and get them to join it in pursuing a common purpose.
How has your experience been as Speaker of the House?

I want to say that being Speaker for this period has been quite interesting and challenging. You know that, in a state that is this complex, with a lot of ethnic colorations, when you are Speaker, you assume a selfless position, whereby you are now a member and representative of all the constituencies in the state put together.

That does not undermine the fact that you have your own primary constituency to look after. So, it has been very interesting and with some intrigues, and challenging. There have been lots of gains as well. Being able to manage the House has brought out a lot of strength within us as a House and we are beginning to see the strength in our diversity as a people.

How were you able to achieve this?
First and foremost, it has been by the grace of God, in that He gave strength and good health for me to be able to function effectively as Speaker, and to have good working relationship with my colleagues. But, I must also tell you that one thing that has endeared me to them has been that I have come with transparent hands. When your actions are not shrouded in secrecy and you are not trying to be unnecessarily self-centred or bullish each time you come out with a strong position, that it is always in the overall interest of the institution, which is the institution, and by extension, their interest.

So, when they realised that you are not on a self-serving mission, then, of course, confidence is reposed in your administration, and that strengthens the relationship between yourself and other members. This also translates to staff. We have had issues with workers where we disagreed with staff, as management of Delta House of Assembly, but it is always a give-and-take situation.

You spoke of intrigues and challenges; can you speak on them?
There are times that certain discussions are taken and people say that your action or decision is influenced by the fact you are an Anioma man and you are doing that to undermine other ethnic groups. Sometimes, they feel you should have been more lenient the way you handled a situation. On the other hand, it’s your duty to explain to them, especially when, sometimes, such things come in festering situation.

You need to come with reasonable and cogent reasons for them to consider and see the fact that you are coming from a position of due process, and, as such, you do not have any ulterior motive for your action, and that process is not a one-off thing - that you have to say it, act it and live it. And all of that process does not come easy. All these are part of intrigues. For example, you must have heard once or twice that they wanted to impeach the Speaker or they wanted to do this or do that. These are also intrigues. I can also tell you that this is the first time in the 21-year history of the state where you have a full opposition in the house.

We have been able to manage the opposition. I am not sure you have heard of any bickering or that the opposition is complaining that they are being marginalised. That is not to say we don’t have our internal disagreements or crises; but have been able to rise above our party differences in the larger interest of Delta State and its citizens. For instance, there is no way we can believe that someone who is coming from the opposition party will, with ease, agree entirely with the policies and programmes of the ruling PDP.

But, as a family, we have been able to come together to say that the policies of the PDP, so long as they are geared towards the wellbeing of the average Deltan, we must allow it fly. We have been able to work together as a team, and team work rises above sectional or ethnic considerations. So, those are part of the intrigues and challenges that we have surmounted over the period. That is why I say it has been interesting because we have been able to harness our God-giving potential to serve Deltans.

It is being said from the outside that the opposition party members are totally at home with the leadership of the House; what is responsible for this?
That is true (and I have little doubt it is) because of the relationship that the House leadership and the entire membership have been able to build, based on grounds of fairness and equity. We believe that everybody should be treated well and fairly and that is the message we have carried through since I became Speaker. More importantly, as a House, we represent various constituencies which are all equal.

We have ensured that, since all constituencies are equal, everybody is properly carried along, rather than making them feel short-changed. One thing is sure; it goes to underscore the kind of things we put on the table to have earned their confidence: integrity, transparency and, of course, ensuring that everybody is carried along.

What is the relationship between the House and the executive arm of government?
People are always interested in what happens between us, the legislature, and the executive because they believe that we are at each other’s throat all the time. For me, we have had the most cordial relationship with the executive. What is responsible for this is mutual respect? We have areas of disagreements and we disagreed regularly, in principle. But the ability to sit down and resolve our differences, a capacity we have evolved and consolidated, is part of the beauty of our relationship, our democracy and our mutual respect for each other, as different arms of government.

Members of the public do not know that we occasionally have disagreements; they feel we are a rubber stamp to the executive. But this (erroneous impression of the subservience of the legislature to the executive) is okay, so long as our cordial relationship is moving the wheel of democracy progressively forward in the state, and in the best interest of Deltans, we have no issue with that one.

What has been the most remarkable challenge?
The most remarkable challenge I have had to face is being able to manage a House where you have a proper opposition in such high numbers go along with members of the ruling party and not have friction and where the bills and policies are not debated in such harsh tones that people begin to wonder if we can ever make a headway.

It’s been a challenge. Because we don’t say it does not mean such a challenge does not exist; it does, but we have been able to fashion out a situation where we sit down as members of the house, at executive sessions, and, after intense debates, we resolve our contentious issues, and by the time we come, we come in one accord.

But that does not mean that members of the opposition parties, which are as vibrant as other members of the House, do not come out spitting fire as they want to do; that we are able to decisively deal with this makes that a success story of the House. That has been one of our biggest challenges because what it means is getting those in opposition to trust your sense of judgement to the point that you are not leading them astray.

What’s your single most spectacular achievement?
Let me say that the single most spectacular achievement has been the unity that we have found in one another. I do not want to sound immodest that we have achieved that, but that is the collective glory of the House, not mine, because even though I, as Speaker, symbolise the legislature as an institution, the House comprises 29 members, all of who equally  share  in the glory of that achievement.

For me, if there is anything at all that I can count as my achievement, it is the fact that 29 members of the House can raise their hands and, as a House and a body, see that we are not divided on issues on all fronts, in spite of our minor individual differences. So, for me, the unity of the House is what I particularly give glory to God for.

Recently, Delta Assembly made a law that enabled the executive to put in place caretaker committees for local councils in the state. Concerns are being expressed as to their legality, given that councils ought to be democratically elected; what is your view on this?
Section 7 of the Constitution empowers State House of Assembly to make laws for the administration, functions and structure of local governments. So, if in its wisdom the State House of Assembly finds that there is a lacuna arising from the lapse of the term of office of the elected leaders and, since we cannot allow a vacuum, decides to put in place a law that enables the executive to avoid this vacuum, would that be wrong?

The caretaker committee members are appointees; if you can have appointees of the state governor run ministries and the like, I do not see anything extraordinary or out of place if you empower them by law to get appointees to run councils. However, in running the councils, they should not run them against the provisions of the law.

What was the motivation of the House in moving for the dissolution of DEPOPADEC Board?
We did not have any motivation, in the sense of your question. The Board was dissolved because we found that there were certain things that were going on that made it not to function optimally for the benefit of Deltans, particularly the oil-producing areas.

So, we decided to take advantage of the law establishing the Delta State Oil Producing Area Development Commission (DESOPADEC) to dissolve the board and call on the governor to pronounce it; that has been done and we acted within the provision of the law. The most important thing is for you to look at the board before it was dissolved and now and see whether there is no significant improvement in what they are doing.

What do Deltans look up to in 2013?
First, we give God the glory that 2013 is here. From the State House of Assembly, we want to continually make laws that make for good governance. That is our sworn commitment, and to ensure that, as a House, we stabilise the polity by making sure that the checks and balances that we provide the executive arm of government are also very much in place. We have already started planning a situation whereby the law-making process is all-encompassing by way of public hearings, and by encouraging people to submit memoranda so that it can, more and more, be a people’s government, a people’s House, and the laws, the people’s laws.

We want to avoid a situation where a lot of people may be tempted to say they do not understand the laws we are making for them. We want the people to be part of the lawmaking process and one of the ways of ensuring that is by ensuring that lawmaking in the House is not restricted to only the 29 members of the House, but becomes the responsibilities of the entire citizens of the state.

Nobody should imagine that we are magicians or that we have monopoly of knowledge in all areas of human endeavours, as legislators. In spite of the obvious devotion of our members to the effective discharge of their duties to the public, there are still areas of human activities which affect our lawmaking process and, in which, with all sense of modesty, we are not experts. In such areas, we need such experts to share with us their knowledge to guide us in our lawmaking responsibility.

People can even write in or participate in our public hearings to draw our attention to our perceived faults so that we can better serve our people, provided, of course, that these experts are themselves motivated, like us, by the solemn desire to selflessly serve our people. I can assure you of this - that Deltans should be rest assured that, as a responsible House, we will come together, and whatever is sent in as law is done with the best professional advice on offer, and in the best interest of all.

So, what are the strategies for achieving that?
In reaching out. Every lawmaker has a constituency office opened in his/her constituency, and we will also try to ensure that, as a law, in every quarter, we must visit our constituencies so that when laws are to be made, we should be able to inform our constituents on time to enable them make their contributions to the process of lawmaking.

Aside that, the committee of the House which has responsibility for the law-in-making will put out public notice to constituents so that they can be part of the process. At the same time, programmes like town hall meetings can be held by legislators.

Culled from Vanguard