A PRESENTATION BY HON.

CLETUS AVOKA, MP FOR ZEBILLA AND FORMER

MAJORITY LEADER OF THE PARLIAMENT OF GHANA AT THE POST-ELECTION
SEMINAR FOR THE PARLIAMENT OF UGANDA ORGANISED BY THE
COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION
FROM 27TH JUNE 1ST JULY, 2016
TOPIC: PARTY CAUCUSES AND THE WHIPPING SYSTEM OF PARLIAMENT
INTRODUCTION
This paper traces the whipping system of Parliaments deeply rooted in the Westminster
parliamentary democratic systems as a strategic measure of political parties influencing
decisions in Parliament. It delves into the history of the whipping system, and the
functions and qualities of a Whip. It also draws on examples within the Commonwealth
and in particular what pertains in the Parliament of Ghana.
PARTY CAUCUSES VIS--VIS WHIPPING SYSTEM
Party Caucuses in Parliament refer to groups of Members of Parliament of the same
political party or sometimes a coalition of parties. The Caucuses are very critical for the
creation of more effective representation of political parties as well as the efficient
organization and management of legislative business. They serve as the means through
which political parties:
1. organize themselves in the legislature to prosecute the agenda of their
respective parties;
2. solve collective problems of individual legislators, coordinate their
interests; and
3. discipline those who violate the party rules.
Voting on policy issues, Agreements entered into by the ruling government and other
significant Bills are integral part of parliamentary democracy. In this regard, Party
Caucuses in Parliament often strife to ensure cohesiveness among Members so that
they vote in a way that conforms to their respective party positions or the social

contract they signed with the citizenry through elections. The Caucuses carry this
through the disciplinary measures or perhaps persuasions. The practice which dates
back to the inception of parliamentary democracy has evolved to what is termed the
whipping system.
HISTORY OF THE WHIPPING SYSTEM IN PARLIAMENT
The origin and the first usage of the parliamentary term, the whip in parliamentary
discourse is not exactly known. However, it is believed to have originated from the
British Parliamentary System and has long been part of the parliamentary discourse in
the Seventeenth Century.
The term is derived from the British hunting phrase "whipper-in" which referred to a
huntsman's assistant who keeps the hounds from straying by driving them back into the
pack with a whip. The first parliamentary occasion when reference was made to the
presence of a Parliamentary Whip was in 1769, when it was reported that the
government had "whipped-in" its supporters for a debate in the House of Commons on
a petition from Middlesex freeholders regarding Parliament's decision to unseat a
particular Member.
It was originally used metaphorically to mean ensuring that the MPs for the party get to
the chamber in order to vote, but it has since been expanded to mean the control in
general exerted by a party over its MPs. In modern usage, Whips are parliamentary
enforcers who provide inducements and punishments to MPs who do not "toe the party
line".
As alluded to earlier on, it is the fundamental responsibility of the Party Whip that every
member from their party turns out to vote particularly when the voting strengths of the
main political parties are close. In accomplishing this, Whips sends a weekly or daily
circular or communication to each Member traditionally by post but these days by

emails, text messages and whatssup on the business of the House with one, two or
three lines drawn underneath.
The degree of importance is indicated by the number of times that the parliamentary
business item is underlined:

Items underlined once, thus a single-line whip, are considered routine and
there is no implied incentive or punishment for MPs to attend or vote with the
party on the issue.

Those underlined twice, thus a two-line whip or double-line whip, are more
important and attendance of MPs is required and voting must be done according
to the party's "line".

Items underlined three times, thus a three-line whip, are highly important and
is an order to attend and vote, with serious consequences threatened. If an MP
votes against the party or fails to attend the vote, the consequences can be
severe.

Nowadays, in Ghana, the Chief Whip or one of the deputies will call a Member on phone
and indicate to him or her the importance of a business item on the floor requiring his
or her attendance. The tone of the Whips is enough to signal to the Member the
importance of the business item or the number of lines.
In Ghana, there have been occasions where the Party will send someone specifically to
monitor voting patterns of MPs. Failure by MPs to attend a vote with a three-line whip is
usually seen as a rebellion against the party. For those who step out of line. Chief Whip
has an array of disciplinary powers. The Whip may for instance, choose to
i.

reprimand a Member privately,

ii.

to censure the Member in Caucus or exercise powers such as to withdrawing

of privileges (flights),

iii.

the refusal of leave of absence,

iv.

the refusal of permission to participate in overseas study trip,

v.

suspend the Member from Caucus,

3

vi.

put the Member in parliamentary committee which could be perceived as

Siberia or

vii.

work behind the scene to prevent the Member from contesting in the next
election on the party ticket.

In the 4th Parliament of Ghana, an Hon. Member of the then Majority Caucus alleged
that Members of his party caucus took $US5,000.00 each to vote in favour of a
transaction entered into by his own party. Famous for his anti-corruption stance, the
Member went to the extent of making all kinds of unsubstantiated allegations on the
airwaves. He was ostracized for not toeing the party line and also for making
unsubstantiated allegations. He was prevented from attending meetings and other
official engagements. He was a senior Member of the House but was sent to the
backbenches. His seat in the House was changed almost on daily basis to frustrate him.
INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE WHIPPING SYSTEM
The structure varies across the Commonwealth. In Ghana, each Party designates a
member of its caucus as Chief Whip who is assisted by two deputy whips. From time to
time, the Whips form committees to come with strategies to deal with urgent
parliamentary businesses or debates as well as tackle issues concerning the welfare of
Members. Though nominations are carried out consensually among the party Members
in Parliament, the National Executives of the Party are usually consulted. Usually, they
are senior Members of the House who might have served a number of terms, say two
or three terms.
The remuneration of the Whips varies but they enjoy similar facilities accorded to
Ministers of State. Other benefits associated with the position of Whip are more regular
and frequent contact with the leadership of the party, access to inside information
regarding party strategy, and the opportunity to influence the party leadership on
matters of policy and parliamentary strategy.

FUNCTIONS OF WHIPS OF PARTY CAUCUSES

Though Party Whips performed similar roles across the Commonwealth, the roles can
be classified into three major responsibilities administration or management
communication, and persuasion.
Administrative or Management
The task of management is the longest-standing function of the party whips, deriving
from the need of the government to secure a majority in votes and, on behalf of the
Opposition to try to keep that majority as small as possible. It includes the need to
organize the business of the House, to liaise with the other parties through what are
called the usual channels, and to keep backbench MPs informed and organized. No
government would survive long without the effective management of its business and
its parliamentarians. The need for good management, even when the government has a
huge majority.
In Ghana just like most Commonwealth parliamentary jurisdictions, Party Whips are
engaged in a wide variety of administrative or management functions directly related to
planning and organizing the activities of the parliamentary caucus. Among the activities
are:

the allocation of members' offices

the selection of members and allocating chairmanship to serve on parliamentary

committees

monitoring attendance of members in the House, and the preparation of a duty

roster for members to ensure a parliamentary quorum

organization of speakers in the House for parliamentary debates

communication of information to members regarding votes and attendance in the

House

accounting officer of the caucus

recommending members to serve on parliamentary delegations.

5

Communication
The Whips constitute a channel of communication between the front and the back
benches. As part of their management role, the whips inform backbench MPs of the
leaderships plans as well as communicate the views of the backbenchers to the
leadership, especially when discontent is brewing. They are the governments eyes and
ears, monitoring feelings on the backbenches, warning the Government of any
difficulties ahead.
Persuasion
If an MP looks likely to deviate from the party line, then it is the role of the whips to
persuade him or her back into the fold. The widely held view of Whips being tyrants
can be misleading because Whips do accomplish more by persuasion and quiet
diplomacy than by threats. Party cohesion is maintained not by the threat of sanctions
and penalties but rather by the self-discipline of individual members, and by peer
pressure from colleagues. Parliamentary Caucuses as human institutions, differences of
opinion would exit on a variety of issues. The role of whip is to contain dissent and to
promote cohesion, and to determine whether accommodation can be reached when the
party position and that of an individual member come into conflict.
PERSONAL QUALITIES OF WHIPS
The task of Party Whips requires that they develop a "personality profile" of each
member of his caucus, the knowledge of which he can use to assist him in predicting
how individual members will react in a wide variety of situations. With this quality the
Whip will be able to achieve party discipline through persuasion.
In many occasions, Whips will be privy to highly sensitive, personal information
regarding a member's activities. Hence, it is important that Whips exercise considerable
discretion in their relations with parliamentary colleagues. The ideal party whip would
6

be an experienced member who has mastered not only the formal and legalistic rules of
parliamentary procedure, but who has come to understand the informal customs,
conventions and practices of parliamentary life.
The Whip must be approachable, modest, and be someone who exudes a sense of
confidence among caucus members thereby promoting frank discussion. A whip should
be viewed as a "party loyalist" but should not be openly identified with a particular
faction within the party. In times of intra-party conflict, a whip should remain
emotionally detached from the debate, and should assume the role of an impartial
mediator.
CHALLENGES OF THE WHIP AND THE WHIPPING SYSTEM

The failure or inability of political parties to adequately fund parliamentary

candidates elections may make some MPs not to succumb to whipping in
parliament.

Dealing with human beings and sometimes ordering them about can have
serious challenges.

The conflict between independent minded MPs and party principles/directives

can lead to conflict with the whip system.

Whips can incur the displeasure of some MPs who think differently from the
party on an issue in parliament.

The whipping system can sometimes become dictatorial and tyrannical if not
well managed by the whips.

The whipping system can undermine freedom of speech and voting in parliament
(democratic abuses).

Whips can be perceived to be biased in favor of some members of parliament

and this can lead to discontent.

Members can embarrass the whip and leadership by open defiance, withdrawal
from the chamber during a critical debate or at the time of voting.

MPs can pass a vote of no confidence in the whip and this can lead to conflict or
crisis in the caucus.

CONCLUSION
In a nutshell, the whipping system in Parliament has evolved from the traditional role of
mobilizing support for votes on important party decisions in the Parliament to that of
management of the Members of the party caucuses. Threats are also giving way to
persuasion in whipping Members in line with party position. Therefore, in the choice of
party Whips, it is essential that this is kept in view of the respective parties in
Parliament in order to effectively execute the social contracts signed with the citizenry.
Without whips, there could be anarchy in parliament and so the whips help to oil and
deepen party discipline and unity of purpose in parliament.
GRATITUDE

Thank you Hon Members

Thank you Rt Hon Speaker and Government of Uganda

Thank you Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA)

HON. CLETUS AVOKA (MP)

PARLIAMENT OF GHANA
References
The Whips - http://www.parliament.uk/about/m...
The Whip's Office - http://www.parliament.uk/documen...Written 7 May 2012
View Updates
https://www.quora.com/Politics-of-the-United-Kingdom-What-is-a-three-line-whip