A needless controversy was kicked when Om Birla, the Speaker Lok Sabha invited the President of the Senate of Pakistan to attend the centenary celebrations of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on the 4th and 5th December, 2021. All the chairs of the PACs of the Commonwealth countries have been cordially invited to attend the centenary celebrations. The genesis of the Indian PAC is intertwined with the Government of India Act,1919, under which, India had, for the first time, a bicameral legislature, the Legislative Assembly and the Council of States . Sir Fryderick Whyte-nurtured by the traditions of the British House of Commons-the President of the Legislative Assembly set up the first PAC in the year 1921 and W. M. Hailey was its first ex-officio Chairman, being the Finance Member in the Executive Council headed by the Governor General. The PAC became a parliamentary committee with India becoming a republic, and since then the Chairperson of the Committee is appointed by the Speaker from its 15 members of the Lok Sabha. From the year 1954-55, 7 members of Rajya Sabha are also made members of the Committee, making a combined strength of 22. In 1967, M.R. Masani, a member of Swatantra party, an opposition group, was appointed as the Chairman, laying the foundation of the convention of the PAC chair going to the opposition. Adhir Ranjan Chaudhury of the Congress heads the PAC in its centenary year.
Interestingly, the origin and evolution of the PAC is closely intertwined and intermixed with the evolution of parliamentary democracy in Great Britain. In the current context when the PAC is viewed for its adversarial role-rather than a friend of the public exchequer, it was Gladstone, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the premier of Great Britain- who moved a motion for appointment of the PAC ‘as a permanent piece of Commons’ financial machinery for exercising effective control over the appropriation of public moneys’. The adoption of the motion symbolized the eventual triumph of the democratic principle of parliamentary control over public purse after incessant, and often, acrimonious parliamentary debates. However, the PAC felt handicapped in exercising effective financial oversight as it was not able to undertake detailed scrutiny of government expenditure without expert external assistance. The British Parliament, therefore, passed the Exchequer and Audit Department Act, 1866, making it mandatory to audit Government accounts annually and their examination by the PAC. The enactment proved immensely helpful in mounting effective financial vigil over public expenditure. The well documented audit reports of the C&AG became a valuable tool and since then the PAC became a scourge of civil servants who squandered public money, caused wasteful expenditure or whose acts of omission and commission led to loss of revenue.
Right from the hoary past to its centenary year, the PAC has built a formidable reputation as a powerful parliamentary watchdog not only of public expenditure but of public moneys. The Committee, in the words of one of its legendary Chairman, Dr Murli Manohar Joshi, ‘chases the rupee-where it comes from and where it goes’. Thus, apart from going into the wisdom and faithfulness of expenditure, the committee assures itself, and the parliament, whether the money due to the treasury has been realised or there has been loss of revenue. The Constitution Review Commission headed by Justice Venkatachaliah aptly observed that ‘the PAC is the conscience keeper of the nation in financial matters’.
As an official associated with the PAC for long, and privileged to be associated with the drafting of reports on subjects like Operation Vijay, procurement of hermetically sealed aluminium caskets, allocation of spectrum to telecom companies, Adarsh Housing Society, Commonwealth Games, allocation of coal blocks, etc, I wish to say with certitude that the successive PACs were able to make unanimous and impactful reports due to bipartisan functioning of the PAC, except in the case of spectrum allocation as the committee got polarised at the fag end. Due to unanimity in an all party parliamentary committee of both the Houses that it is, the recommendations of the PAC are deemed to be supreme in financial matters and viewed as ‘the strongest supporter of Treasury Control’. At the time when the PAC was examining the C&AG report on spectrum allocation and when polarisation was visibly building in the PAC, Pranab Mukherjee, the then Finance Minister, observed, ‘the Indian governance system is fortified with strong checks and balances such as the PAC and the C&AG’. The C&AG is rightly considered as ‘the friend, philosopher and guide of the PAC’. The PAC can exercise effective financial oversight if the committee retains its bipartisan nature and the C&AG remains fiercely independent and robust in the discharge of its constitutional obligation. There can be no manner of doubt that if the oversight potential increases, the level of democracy enhances. Besides, according to a World Bank study, it helps reduce poverty, remove systemic shortcomings and defects, promotes transparency, accountability and good governance, which are at the core of the functioning of the PAC and the committee system at large.
On a historic occasion like the centenary celebrations, it is time to reflect and ponder how to retain the apolitical nature of the PAC and the entire committee system. Prof. Woodrow Wilson, writing about the US Congress famously said, ‘The Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, whilst Congress in its Committee-rooms is Congress at work’. This holds equally good about the Indian Committee system including, more so, the PAC. Examples abound when the Houses are forced adjourned due to unruly scenes, or, when members troop to the well of the House. But, the plus side is, the Committees have been meeting and conducting their usual business. However, of late, there have been attempts to derail the committee work when current subjects of wider public concern were sought to be examined but some members brought a motion of breach of privilege against the Chairman. Some ruling party members in even took the plea that when opposition is stalling the business of the House, why should the committees transact business. Such a plea goes against the very culture of our sound committee system, so assiduously nurtured and preserved so far. Like wise, there is a growing tendency not to allow selection of subjects which may expose acts of omission and commission of the executive. At times, there is deliberate, and unconscionable, delay in furnishing the statistics or the information sought by the PAC or other committees. If the committees continue to polarise invoking such weird pleas, it would sound the death knell of our committee system, known for unanimity and their well considered recommendations.
A lot of pious and platitudinous talk is imminent, and for good, on an occasion like the centenary celebrations of an august constitutional body. This is an occasion to remind us of the separation of power principle enshrined in Article 98 of the Constitution which directs that ‘each House of Parliament shall have a separate secretarial staff’ and that ‘Parliament may by law regulate the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed, to the secretarial staff of either House of Parliament’. Unfortunately, the constitutional provision has been brazenly disregarded as senior most bureaucratic positions in are being held by the retired or other trusted officials of the executive branch. No law has yet been enacted to regulate recruitment and the service conditions of parliamentary officials. However, it’s a happy augury that the Honourable Chairman, Rajya Sabha-Venkaiah Naidu- a statesman and scholar that he is, upheld the Constitution by appointing an in House officer of proven experience and caliber as the Secretary General, Rajya Sabha-resisting all pressure. In many countries, they have parliamentary commissions for recruitment and to consider service related matters of the legislature secretariat. India takes legitimate pride being the largest democracy of the world, yet we have miles to travel before others view us as a model democracy and a ‘Viswa Guru’ of edifying democratic practices and traditions.
For effective functioning of the PAC, it’s imperative that the C&AG remains independent and an effective and credible institution. In the words of Dr Ambedkar, what he said in the Constituent Assembly, ‘the C&AG is probably the most important officer in the Constitution and his duties, I submit, are far more important than the duties even of the judiciary’. The C&AG must discharge his constitutional mandate without any external pressure or influence. In the context of speculation that there have been deliberate delays, in some significant cases, in bringing out timely the audit reports, or bringing reports which are skeletal and without full facts, there is a strong need to put in place an institutional mechanism for the appointment of the C&AG. The Chief Justice of India and the Chairman PAC must be made members of the selection committee. Parliament may consider to make the C&AG a multi- member body like the Election Commission so as to avoid any public misgivings about the integrity of the C&AG and to insulate it from hydraulic pressure of the executive. Hopefully, such or more novel innovative measures would be discussed, and healthy parliamentary practices across different jurisdictions shared, at the centenary celebrations of the PAC which is to be inaugurated by the President of India with address by the Vice President and the Prime Minister.
The author is ex Addl Secretary, Lok Sabha and has served the PAC and other leading committees of Parliament over three decades. Views expressed are personal.
On a historic occasion like the centenary celebrations, it is time to reflect and ponder how to retain the apolitical nature of the PAC and the entire committee system. Prof. Woodrow Wilson, writing about the US Congress famously said, “The Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, whilst Congress in its Committee-rooms is Congress at work”.
