Tensions rose in the National Assembly as lawmakers voiced concerns about delays in processing urgent questions, motions, and correspondence. Some members questioned whether Parliament is maintaining its independence from the Executive branch. Maun West Member of Parliament Caterpillar Hikuama accused the speakership of using procedural tactics to obstruct communication channels that lawmakers had agreed upon to facilitate dialogue between MPs and the Speaker.
“These delays are undermining Parliament’s independence and preventing urgent issues from receiving the attention they deserve,” Hikuama said. “The independence of Parliament from the Executive is important. The speakership is making some chicanery with the Executive to block urgent questions and motions. We must use the platforms we have agreed on to facilitate communication between the speakership and MPs.”
Leader of the Opposition Dumelang Saleshando echoed concerns about the slow response to urgent matters. He said correspondence addressed to the Speaker, often copied to relevant ministers, had suffered delays that diminished their urgency before the House could address them. “The urgency is being killed by the delays. We have dealt with other Speakers before, and letters have been submitted to get responses. The letter in question was submitted on Monday, and by Wednesday the urgency was already being affected by the delay,” Saleshando said.
In contrast, Mahalapye West MP and Minister of Communications and Innovation David Tshere defended the Speaker, insisting that complaints about the presiding officer should be dealt with through proper parliamentary channels rather than aired in his absence. Tshere directed MPs to the Business Advisory Committee as the appropriate forum for raising concerns about parliamentary business and the Speaker’s conduct. “You cannot start complaining about the Speaker when he is not there. The Standing Orders are very clear that these matters should be raised through the Business Advisory Committee. This continued assault on the Speaker is unfair and complicates matters,” he said.
Deputy Speaker Helen Pushie Manyeneng acknowledged the communication problems raised during the session, especially where delays had disrupted parliamentary proceedings. She stressed the need for better coordination of communication channels and urged a thorough review of outstanding issues to ensure they are addressed at the correct levels. “I am concerned because the total situation is really worrying. We need to coordinate properly at the relevant levels and ensure that the matter is handled correctly. We need to review and address the issues properly,” Manyeneng said.
This parliamentary confrontation reveals deeper institutional challenges regarding the independence and effectiveness of the National Assembly, particularly when urgent questions and motions are stalled by procedural and communication bottlenecks. While the speakership has a clear responsibility to enforce Standing Orders and maintain order, that authority must be exercised transparently and without creating the impression that parliamentary oversight is being stifled.
The complaints from Hikuama and Saleshando highlight the risk that delays can serve as a tool to defuse urgent matters before they reach the parliamentary floor. More troubling is Minister Tshere’s intervention. Though his call for MPs to use the Business Advisory Committee is procedurally sound, his vigorous defense of the Speaker risks blurring the line between the Executive and the legislature. The Executive should not appear to influence how Parliament manages scrutiny of its presiding officers.
The speakership must demonstrate institutional independence by ensuring that correspondence, urgent questions, and motions are handled promptly, consistently, and according to clear rules. Parliament cannot hold the Executive accountable if its own processes appear susceptible to executive influence. Likewise, ministers should exercise restraint when parliamentary disputes touch on the legislature’s independence and function.