The demand for independent, well-furnished office spaces for National Assembly’s Members of Parliament (MPs) is not a frivolous request. It is a fundamental need that highlights the importance of strengthening our democratic institutions.

With 29 MPs currently sharing offices—two to a room—the limitations of the current arrangement are undeniable. Privacy, efficiency, and professionalism are compromised, hindering the ability of our lawmakers to fulfil their duties effectively.

The shared office model undermines productivity and creates practical obstacles. MPs represent diverse constituencies with pressing needs, and their responsibilities extend far beyond attending parliamentary sessions. Engaging with stakeholders, conducting meetings, and deliberating on policies demand confidentiality and focus that a shared office cannot provide.

Imagine an MP negotiating sensitive agreements or discussing critical matters while constantly mindful of another occupant’s presence. Such circumstances diminish the dignity and functionality of the office, making it ill-suited for the work of a legislator.

Historically, MPs operated out of offices located outside the Parliament Building. This posed logistical challenges, particularly during parliamentary sessions when proximity to the Speaker and Deputy Speaker is crucial for effective co-ordination. The move to the Parliament Building in the third government’s term addressed some of these concerns, notably enhancing security and accessibility. However, the solution remains incomplete.

The demand for individual office spaces is not a luxury but an acknowledgment of the evolving needs of our democracy. Legislatures worldwide recognise that independent offices are essential to fostering efficiency and accountability. As Bhutan matures as a democracy, ensuring that MPs have the tools and environments to perform their duties effectively is a natural step forward.

Critics may argue that the costs of creating independent offices could strain the national budget. While fiscal discipline is vital, this investment is not an indulgence but a necessity. The costs of maintaining a robust and efficient legislative system pale in comparison to the costs of inefficiency and underperformance in governance. Moreover, independent offices would improve access for constituents, allowing MPs to engage directly with the people they represent without interruptions or logistical hurdles.

If our governance system is to be strengthened, we must provide our lawmakers with the tools they need to function effectively. Independent office spaces are a simple yet significant step toward aligning our democratic practices with the vision of good governance.

The demand for individual offices is not just about convenience; it is about building an institution that reflects the dignity of its responsibilities. It is about creating an environment where MPs can think, deliberate, and act in ways that best serve the nation. To deny this request is to accept mediocrity in the operations of the highest legislative body of the land.