The successor to Gavin Woods as chairman or chairwoman of the standing committee on public accounts (Scopa) was always going to have to be a remarkable individual. Scopa is, not to put too fine a point on it, in a state of devastation after its arms-deal ordeal, which left Woods feeling that he could no longer manage the ultimate watchdog over public money.

His successor would have to be someone with the political capacity and clout to win the respect of representatives of all parties, and lead them and the committee out of the wilderness into which it marched itself last year.

It would have to be someone adept at dealing firmly with both an African National Congress component, inclined these days to toe the party line regardless of the public interest, and a Democratic Alliance delegation sometimes willing to put political point scoring ahead of overseeing those interests.

It would also have to be someone with the technical capacity to do the job well. This applies both to the complicated organisational skills needed to ensure the committee effectively deals with dozens of reports annually from the auditor-general and the auditing skills required to assess those reports.

Does the new man, the New National Party's Francois Beukman, have what it takes?

The least of his problems is the one that the opposition is making most noise about. There are good reasons for the convention that the head of Scopa should be a member of the opposition. Therefore, it is not ideal that he is a member of a party that has concluded some kind of working arrangement with the ruling ANC. It is a moot point whether the NNP is any longer an opposition party.

Woods himself, though, offers the best possible precedent that it is not a fatal flaw. He turned out to be as good a Scopa chair as SA could have asked for. Yet he was a member of a party, Inkatha, that has a similar relationship with the ANC. And his appointment was condemned by the DA's predecessor as vigorously as Beukman's.

Beukman can succeed. It must be said that he does not currently appear to carry the sort of stature, clout and self-confidence that is required to do so. Whether he develops it, however, depends on him alone. Even as his performance is closely monitored, he should be given the space to develop. If he does not, it will affect more than him alone. The public reputation of the committee, and of Parliament as a whole, stands at risk too.

With acknowledgement to Business Day.