The move by House Speaker Kenneth Marende to allow State-run Kenya Broadcasting Corporation to cover parliamentary proceedings live on television beginning today is laudable.

The development- which earnestly puts Kenya in the ranks of countries such as Canada, US and UK which allow live coverage of events in their Parliaments - gives taxpayers an edge in auditing their 222 representatives, at least based on their participation in debates.

Operations in the House, which have been among the most secretive of all Kenyan public offices, will be put in the public limelight as they happen, making MPs more accountable while ensuring accessibility.

But this will only serve the purpose if media houses concentrate more on the important part of debates as opposed to sideshows and drama, which some media-savvy MPs might intentionally get into to be in the news.

This can only be done if Parliament stipulates clearly on the extremities of what can be shown on TV through well crafted guidelines.

But again, the guidelines should not curtail the media to a point where the logic of the whole project will be defeated.

Were we to go the UK way, from which we borrowed our parliamentary system, cameras for example must focus only on the MP who is contributing to a debate, or the Speaker.

The cameras must not show disorderly scenes, e.g. MPs yawning or dozing on the benches, unless they are seated behind the MP who is speaking.

The ball is in Mr Marende's court to give us guidelines while media houses brace to follow them to the letter.

It's only through collaboration that we will nurture this first one for Kenya, achieved by only a handful in the league of developing nations where Kenya belongs.