Transmission of Inquiry Committees: White Smoke Did Not Appear

Live broadcasts from inquiry committees will likely have to wait. A legislative initiative by the FPÖ, which was discussed for the first time at the end of the National Council's plenary week on Thursday evening, did not seem to have majority support. The ÖVP literally deemed the proposal "unsuitable". However, the four other parties all expressed positive views on live broadcasting.

FPÖ General Secretary Christian Hafenecker argued that there is already a live ticker from the committee. So why not present the interrogations in images as well, he asked. Hafenecker would like a viable solution by the start of the interrogations in the Pilnacek inquiry committee in mid-January. A planned joint trip to Germany, where direct broadcasting is possible under certain circumstances, is intended to serve this purpose.

Criticism from ÖVP

The ÖVP expressed concerns about the violation of personal rights. The model preferred by the FPÖ, where the committee chair should decide on exceptions to the broadcast, was described by VP delegate Andreas Hanger as "unsuitable". If it is legally possible, live broadcasts should be enabled, if not, then not.

SPÖ delegate Jan Krainer is fundamentally in favor, suggesting that the media themselves should (legally) decide which interrogation to broadcast. This mode could work, said NEOS delegate Nikolaus Scherak. He could also imagine a time-delayed broadcast, for example. Green delegate Nina Tomaselli, like her predecessors, saw legal challenges. However, these could be overcome if there is a will, Tomaselli said, looking at the ÖVP. The legislative proposal will now be discussed in the Rules of Procedure Committee and could be passed by the National Council in the event of an agreement (even amended) in the near future.

Deadline for Inquiry Responses

A second legislative initiative by the Freedom Party regarding parliamentary proceedings, which underwent an initial discussion, is also unlikely to be implemented. The FPÖ wants to align the deadline for responding to parliamentary inquiries with that of the Freedom of Information Act, i.e., generally four weeks. Additionally, government members should be under an "obligation to tell the truth" as in parliamentary inquiry committees.

The ÖVP rejected the proposal through delegate Wolfgang Gerstl. He believes that the FPÖ's true intention is to undermine trust in the institutions. SPÖ delegate Muna Duzdar pointed out that the Freedom Party has almost sought to paralyze the ministries with extensive mass inquiries in recent months. Therefore, she could not support a shortening of the response deadline.

The third coalition party saw the latter differently. NEOS delegate Nikolaus Scherak found it almost bizarre that parliamentarians have to wait longer for answers than private individuals. Green delegate Alma Zadić shared this view. Both can imagine an alignment with the Freedom of Information Act. However, they were against invoking criminal law through an "obligation to tell the truth". Instead, both Scherak and Zadić supported the possibility of an organ dispute procedure.

(APA/Red)

This article has been automatically translated, read the original article here.