Debates of 10 Feb 2005

MR. SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:10 a.m.

VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:10 a.m.

Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Hon. Members, the Official Report is not ready. We will continue with the debate on the Message on the State of the Nation.
MOTIONS 10:10 a.m.

Dr. Francis Osafo-Mensah (NPP -- Mpraeso) 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank you very much for allowing me to contribute to this motion in thanking the President for delivering the State of the Nation Address.
The Address touches on three issues, human resource development, private sector development and good governance. The Address itself or the way it was presented has been a subject of comments by some of our hon. Colleagues. A format
was proposed as to how it should have been done but I do not think we can have one format for the Address. I think what my hon. Friend, John Mahama was proposing was quite obvious and therefore needed not to have been said.
Mr. J. Y. Chireh 10:10 a.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, what the hon. Member is referring to is not exactly what the hon. Colleague here proposed. He said the four years - We were not asking the President to tell us where we were; he has ruled this country for four years. We wanted him to tell us the state of the nation as he was presenting his Address and not to tell us where we were coming from. He is completely out of order in this case.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, when your time comes you will contribute.
Dr. Osafo-Mensah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. Friend, John is here. He made the contribution and if he did not say that we wanted to know where we had come from, maybe he would have made an intervention.
Mr. Speaker, my constituency is a rural constituency and fortunately I
also have had the opportunity of being a Regional Minister in these rural areas and the amount of development in terms of education, health and others which have gone on over these past four years is tremendous.
In the area of education some of our hon. Friends tried to explain or talk about the structure which should be used. But I am very much interested in the beginning, that is from age four in the kindergarten. Going round the villages, what I found out was that despite the number of classrooms and schools that have been provided, there was one small missing link; and that is the village communities from where these kids of four and five years come to the main community schools.
Some have to walk a distance of two to three kilometres; and this is where I would like to make a suggestion, that if we are going to start from age 4 and we have these communities which are not very far but still a bit difficult for the kids to walk to, then we must be thinking about providing these kindergartens in the village communities. I do not mean Accra; in Accra they go to school in cars and buses; there they walk. So I would suggest that we have, at least, two classrooms in these village communities where the three and four-year olds or the four-year and five-year olds may not be able to walk the distance and allow them to grow to walk to the community schools.
Then there is the question of classrooms without teachers. It is true that some of the settlements are such that teachers who have come from teacher training colleges may not even get accommodation to rent. I know of villages where the teachers stay in town and come to school almost every morning. Of course, because of difficulty in transportation some of them arrive late,
to the detriment of their pupils.
I know the Assemblies have started building teacher accommodation but if you take a whole district and there are so many schools in the district, building teacher accommodation for all of them is not going to be very easy or a one- day affair. But we should encourage the District Assemblies to continue with that aspect because there are so many places where they cannot get good accommo- dation; and with that we can get many young people attracted to the villages to teach.
The other thing I would like to
comment on is the question of health. The main programme or the project that this Government wants to use with regard to health is the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS). Those who were here during the last Parliament know the kind of debate and the problems we went through, those who thought the citizens had not been well informed with regard to this NHIS and those who thought that even the introduction and the process itself were being rushed indecently. I do not think one can rush indecently with regard to one's health.
There is also the problem of access to the programme or to the facility when it is provided. During the 2000 elections, I was on my campaign trail to a village and then ahead of me, or in front of me was a truck, the type the kids use to push plantain and other things in the market, coming towards me. But I saw something moving on it. I asked: “What have these people got, a goat, a sheep or a pig?
When the truck got nearer to me, what I discovered was that it was a pregnant woman in labour who was being carted to the roadside to be sent to hospital. Now, how are we going to solve this kind of
Mr. Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Hon. Member, your time is up; kindly conclude.
Dr. Osafo-Mensah 10:20 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The only thing I would like is that all hon. Members of this House do support the motion and give thanks unanimously to the President for his Address.
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho (NDC -- Avenor/ Ave) 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the motion on floor. Mr. Speaker, in doing so I would want to say that for the first time in His Excellency's Address, in opening this honourable House during a Session, the blame game was completely out; and that
is one significant thing that we have seen in this year's State of the Nation Address. But Mr. Speaker, it has been through a long struggle - a very, very long struggle -- because 2001, 2002, 2003 were a series of this blame game.

Mr. Speaker, I refer you to the Hansard of 20th February 2002. On that occasion I took issues with His Excellency the President with this style of blaming predecessor governments. I had the opportunity of referring to the very wise counsel of a leading member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) tradition - and he is still a leading member - who was then a Member of Parliament for Begoro and I had this to say -- you can find this in column 13 to 16 of the Hansard of 20th February 2002 and with your permission I beg to quote:
Mr. K. Agyei-Addo 10:30 a.m.
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Member just said “Member for Begoro”. There is no constituency called Begoro; there is a constituency called Fanteakwa.
Mr. Adjaho 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the young shall grow. Mr. Speaker, this quotation is from the Official Report of Parliament - [Interruption.]
Capt. Effah-Dartey (rtd.): Mr. Speaker, I want your guidance on the contribution that my hon. Colleague is
Mr. Adjaho 10:30 a.m.


making. He started by saying that this time round, the President's State of the Nation Address is minus the blame game. In other words, the President did not blame anybody. He went ahead and told us where we are and where we are going.

Now, my hon. Colleague is spending precious minutes of the time of this honourable House to talk about quotations referring to people not having to blame anybody. He should talk about what the President said; he has to talk on relevance, on the issue; and I am urging you to rule him out of order. He should concentrate on what the President said in this book, not what he did not say.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, when it is appropriate I will rule him out of order. Yes, Deputy Minority Leader, continue.
Mr. Adjaho 10:30 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I can understand him. These are not pleasant moments for people who are waiting for nomination.
Mr. Armah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The hon. Member for Fanteakwa sought your clarification - He said there was no constituency called Begoro. I expected the hon. Deputy Minority Leader to educate us as to whether at the time he was referring to that former Member of Parliament, it was Begoro constituency or Fanteakwa constituency so that those of us who are now growing will know which constituencies existed before our time.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, this is not a point of order.
Mr. Adjaho 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this quotation came from the Official Report of 29th April, 1981 to 21st August, 1981, the Third Republic; and the Member for Begoro was Dr. Jones Ofori-Atta. Mr. Speaker, it is good and that is the beauty of democracy that at long last His Excellency -- [Interruptions] -- That time it was Begoro constituency, Mr. Speaker. I
am very happy that His Excellency the President has now listened to the Minority.
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker., on a point of order. The hon. Member says he is quoting from 2002 Hansard - [Interruptions.] He said that. I think he is misleading the House. In 2002 Dr. Jones Ofori-Atta was not a Member of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, would you address that point?
Mr. Adjaho 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity of debating the State of the Nation Address on 20th February, 2002 in this honourable House and made reference to statements made by the then hon. Member for Begoro; and I ended by quoting the source. This is in the Hansard of 20th February 2002. I also quoted the then Member for Begoro from the Hansard - Official Report, Bound Volume, 29th April, 1981 to 21st August, 1981. Today, His Excellency the President has listened to the Minority side and for me, that is the beauty of democracy. Even though he did not immediately listen, at long last he has listened to our side, that the blame game is not going to advance the cause of this nation.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, are you rising on a point of order?
An hon. Member: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member is misleading the House. Mr. Speaker, there were two different times - in 2002, NPP had just taken over and it was a problem-solving stage; and when you identify a problem, you look for the causes of the problem and then you try to find solutions to those problems. So those times the President listened but it was not appropriate for him not to let the people know the causes of the woes of Ghanaians. So that is why he did not change the style of his Address. But this time, he has made the problems well known to Ghanaians
and as such he has changed the style of reporting.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, you have no point of order at all.
Mr. Adjaho 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the last time His Excellency the President played the blame game was 7th January, 2005 when he delivered his Inaugural Address. He has been in power all this time and that is why for the first time in this House he did not do it. We say that yes, we are moving forward. Mr. Speaker, I think that we are moving forward and now, as I said somewhere else, the President is now maturing.
Mr. Speaker, the second aspect that I would want to refer to briefly is with regard to one of the President's priorities, that is in term of human resource development. I think that it is a very important area that he has picked. I refer you to page 6 of the Address. And with your permission I quote the last but one paragraph:
“I recommend both Committee's report and the Government White Paper for study by hon. Members, and I sincerely hope that the measures will receive wide support to make their implementation easier.”
Mr. Speaker, the President is here recognizing that he needs the wide support of both sides of the House, of Ghanaians to help have this programme implementation to be very easy.

Mr. Speaker, the idea of the kindergarten is very, very noble but I have a problem with the increase of the senior secondary school to four years. I think experts in the field have passed comments already in

this House. Mr. Speaker, if I come from a rural constituency, and we are talking about kindergarten, we are even talking about basic school infrastructure.

Now I would prefer a situation where Government will shift resources from that extra one year into building infrastructure for the kindergarten. Mr. Speaker, I am saying this because most communities in the rural areas do not have the kindergarten facility. At the same time we are increasing the period of senior secondary school from three years to four years. Those resources that will be used for that extra one year should be diverted into building infrastructure for basic schools. If we are able to build that foundation for the kindergarten level and we decide to increase it to four years at the appropriate time, then we can look at it.

Otherwise, I can assure him that the kindergarten thing is not going to work even though it is a noble idea and I support it in its entirety. Donor partners have been calling for it, UNESCO has been calling for it, but I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that it is just not going to work. Already we have government policy of coming out with these model secondary schools which took off sometime ago. As we stand here, the question is, how many of the model secondary schools have been completed? There is none in my district.

So that programme itself is there; we have not done 50 per cent of it; we have not. So it is very, very important for us to divert resources into building infrastructure for the kindergartens. It is one way that the President can expect the wide and bipartisan support that he expected when he addressed this honourable House.

Mr. Speaker, I would now go to page 19 of the Address dealing with petroleum deregulation. Mr. Speaker, I have a

problem; either H.E. the President has not been properly briefed or those who wrote the script for him did not know what they were writing; or H.E. the President is not on top of the issue. Because, Mr. Speaker, deregulation was started long ago. Those of us who had the privilege of serving on the Mines and Energy Committee were even educated on the formula. The problem that we find ourselves in as a nation is that we were confronted with winning political power -- either winning an election or losing an election. So we decided not to bite the bullet again as we did in 2001 and 2002.

Mr. Speaker, the impression that we have not been paying realistic prices for petroleum products is not true. In 2001 H.E. the President came to this House and said that we should bite the bullet; we did and the prices were increased. In February 2003, the cost of petroleum products were again increased by almost 100 per cent and we were paying realistic prices.

Now, the NPP Government was confronted with increasing petroleum prices in an election year. And as for God, he is a wonderful God. They were confronted with the same problem that confronted the NDC and they were complaining that we piled up debts. Now they were confronted with the same problem and God was looking at them as to how they would resolve that problem. They said, no, they were not going to increase the price.

Now Mr. Speaker, after His Excellency had won the election he comes back and at page 19 of his Address he says, and Mr. Speaker, I beg to quote:

“At the moment the unrealistic pricing makes our petroleum products the cheapest within our immediate neighbourhood and prone to smuggling.
Mr. Speaker 10:40 a.m.
Deputy Minority
Leader, I hope you are watching your time.
Mr. Adjaho 10:50 a.m.
That is so. But Mr.
Speaker, you know politics is becoming interesting in this country. H.E. the President led a demonstration called “Yabre” when he was “Candidate J. A. Kufuor”, that we should reduce the prices of petroleum products; it was going to cause economic hardship. I remember the then Minority Leader joined in the demonstration and then came to join us as Leaders of the House to receive the petition from those who led the demonstration.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister for Foreign Affairs was a leading member of those who led the demonstration. Mr. Speaker, here we are! What pains us as a people is that issues of the economy should not be politicized. We have gone very, very far now as a people. Mr. Speaker, you just have to look at previous debates in this House, you have to look at the kind of
politics played some twenty years ago to realize that Ghanaians have come very, very far. So these issues of the economy, when we try to do politics with them, we will be consumed by that sooner or later.
Mr. Speaker, finally, I want to touch on something very, very close to my heart because it has cropped up again and again, and it appears we are not doing anything about it as a government.
Mr. Speaker, when H.E. the President appeared before this honourable House in 2002, he assured this House that he was going to promulgate a code of conduct. And Mr. Speaker, in order not to paraphrase him, I want to quote exactly what he told this honourable House when he appeared before it. And that would be found at page 4 of the State of the Nation Address and also found at column 1321 of the Hansard of 20th February, 2002 and again I quote, with your permission.
“Mr. Speaker, I intend to promulgate a code of conduct by which all members of the Executive branch of Government will have to abide. And as I have indicated, I shall live by example and ensure that the code is strictly implemented to the letter. This should give to our people and the international community the added confidence in our ability to turn the country around with honour and decency. Public service is a noble calling not intended to be avenue for splendour and loot.”

Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of attending the launching of the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition Survey on 31st January, 2001 and the keynote address was delivered by no other person than His Excellency the Vice President. This is

what he said on that occasion and it could be found in column 1322 of the Hansard of 20th April, 2001 and with your permission I quote:
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member is misleading the whole House. The Vice President has been here a few times and I do not ever remember him speaking into the Hansard.
So Mr. Speaker, if he has a quotation from another source which he has quoted before into the Hansard, he must make it clear but the Vice President has never spoken here into the Hansard.
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, are you reading from the Hansard?
Mr. Adjaho 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I did not say what he is saying; he should try and listen.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the best thing to do -- and he must know that -- is to show us the original source which he at one time or another quoted into the Hansard; and then you refer to it. But he
should not make it appear that the Vice President -- You see, Mr. Speaker, the original source of the quotation is not the Hansard. To that extent he is misleading all of us.
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, were you reading from the Hansard?
Mr. Adjaho 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I said that this was a keynote address delivered by the His Excellency the Vice President when the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition Survey was being launched. I was present and I used that document on the floor of the House and it could be found at column 1321 -- [Interruptions] --
Mr. Speaker, so clearly, where is
that code of conduct? I think that it is very important and I believe that when we produce a code of conduct that is acceptable to both sides of the House or if not even both sides of the House but discussed among civil societies and debated and we adopt it as a people, then we will know which code of conduct we have to condemn and set standards for ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, we would want to take His Excellency the President seriously; we do not want him to be coming and giving promises in this House which at the end of the day he will not be in a position to fulfil.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the developments in Togo in relation to the emphasis His Excellency the President is putting on good governance is not a welcome development for us at all. I was very happy when I monitored the airwaves and learned that the ECOWAS Heads of State condemned what happened in Togo and they are sending a delegation. We expect that the Minister for Foreign Affairs will come to this House and address this House on this matter so that we would
Mr. William Ofori Boafo (NPP --- Akropong) 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to make a contribution in support of the motion moved by the hon. Member for Akim Oda, thanking His Excellency the President for his Message on the State of the Nation delivered last week.
Mr. Speaker, the Address was clear, concise, condensed and concentrated. It was equally conciliatory and delivered in a calm, collected, cool, positive manner by His Excellency; and he demonstrated throughout the period that he was undoubtedly and unequivocally on top of his job.
Mr. Speaker, the import of the Address was very inspirational, directional and thoughtfully provocative. Hon. Members listened with rapt attention and described as such, this was vividly, clearly, conspi- cuously and convincingly captured by issue number 1336 of the Daily Guide of Saturday, February 5, 2003 where the Minority group led by the Minority Leader's picture was put on page five.
Mr. Speaker, the conciliatory choice of language and the message import, which is acknowledged by most of us in this House, is a clear indication to us to counsel ourselves, our peers and most importantly persons of our political persuasion to take a cue from His Excellency and reciprocate. Mr. Speaker, I believe we will not from this time on hear the “other speeches”.
Mr. Speaker, in his Message, His
Excellency referred to the need to incorporate the informal private sector into the formal economy. The sector comprises, by and large, the foot soldiers of our economy and they provide in some cases employable skills and training to the youth of our country. This may include the hairdressers, tailors, masons, carpenters, seamstresses, soap makers, painters, subsistence farmers, musicians and entertainers, just to mention a few. This is an area which, if effectively resourced and better regulated, could be expanded and organized to offer employment to the youth and thereby not only reduce unemployment but also assist in the human resource development and strengthen the nation's capacity-building.
Mr. J. D. Mahama 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I noticed that our hon. Colleague on that side has a penchant for verbosity but I shall advise that he commits his words to memory because in this House, the practice is not to read; he must speak ex tempore. [Laughter.]
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
Hon. Member for Bole,
I hope you do appreciate that this is his maiden speech. Go ahead.
Mr. W. O. Boafo 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
believe that the workshops and other programmes to be carried out by the special body to be established under the
Ministry for Private Sector Development will not be engaged in organising one or two days' workshops, but rather they will organise workshops for longer periods so as to allow proper assimilation of the studies made at the workshop.
Mr. Speaker, I believe also that the same special body will go to the extent of producing the ABC of business management methods and organisation to guide the participants and other people in the informal sector. This will be in a very simple language and probably even reduce local languages to serve as constant reference points for those engaged in that sector.
Mr. Speaker, in this regard, I would like
to recommend for the consideration of that special body, the Ghana Legal Literacy and Resource Foundation, which has been engaged in the production of booklets or pamphlets.
Mr. Speaker, in the area of good governance, His Excellency the President also referred to the need to strengthen constitutional bodies such as the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ). CHRAJ is a body which is performing creditably, in the country. Established in 1993, CHRAJ had, as at the year 2000, received and handled 64,805 complaints and in the year 2002 alone, CHRAJ received 12,381 complaints made up of administrative justice issues -- 2,525; family-related issues -- 6,850; property- related issues -- 1,692; miscellaneous issues -- 1,340.
Mr. Speaker, CHRAJ is tackling and harmonising conflicts in homes and in workshops. It is therefore fit and proper for His Excellency the President to choose CHRAJ, one of the constitutional bodies, as a developmental focus.
Some of the issues which will attract our attention in the House on CHRAJ may
be the following: First, the uncompetitive salaries and service conditions of the staff of the Commission which have resulted in a high turnover of personnel, particularly lawyers and constitute a great threat to the Commission's capacity to discharge it functions effectively.
Secondly, the increase of the membership of the Commission from three to seven to cater for the heavy workload of the Commission which combines human right's functions, Ombudsman's office and then an anti-corruption agency. The present strength is woefully inadequate. It will also enable persons from disciplines other than law to be appointed.
Mr. Speaker, I will urge us to review the constitutional or statutory provision which equates the Commissioner's status with that of an Appeal Court Judge or a High Court Judge. In my view, the coupling should be restricted to the security of tenure of these officers rather than coupling it to their salary structures. This is because one of the current Deputy Commissioners is a person who qualifies even to sit at the Court of Appeal, but at present because of his position, his salary is pegged at the level of a High Court Judge. Even those who are below his status cannot rise so far as salary scales are concerned because of the pegging of the salary at the High Court Judge level.
Mr. Speaker, the other area which His Excellency the President touched on was the National Media Commission. This is a Commission which is trying to promote free, independent and responsible media so as to sustain democracy and national development.
Mr. Speaker, the Commission has a Settlement Committee which in the year 2003 received 47 complaints and dealt with 33 out of the 47 and also received 32 rejoinders. This Commission has been doing well, but they need our assistance. Last year, the Government
Mr. W. O. Boafo 11 a.m.


allocated a bungalow opposite the Ghana Broadcasting Corporation (GBC) to the Commission and there is the need for the bungalow to be refurbished and rehabilitated to fit the purposes and the mission of the Commission.

Mr. Speaker, the sanction provisions of

the enabling Act must also be looked at, to give the Commission teeth to bite better so that recalcitrant journalists could be dealt with accordingly. We urge the House to consider giving the Settlement Committee the status of a High Court so as to help the work of the Commission.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I would like humbly to invite my hon. Colleagues to join me to thank His Excellency, the President, one of the chief architects of nation building, from the bottom of our hearts for his Message and to support his developmental and national growth vision which has been placed before us. We should also remember that one day we would stand at the bar of posterity in judgement. I would like to see and hear that we received tonnes of congra-tulations rather than millions of con-demnations.

Alhaji Seidu Amadu (NDC -- Yapei/

Kusawgu): Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to the motion to thank His Excellency the President for the Message on the State of the Nation that he delivered to this House on the 3rd of February, 2005. In my contribution to this debate, I wish to limit myself to five main areas.

Mr. Speaker, the first one I wish to draw your attention to is paragraph 2 under the caption “Current State of Affairs”.

Mr. Speaker, if you look at the second sentence of that paragraph, his Excellency the President appears to take pride in the achievements of his Government in creating a general atmosphere of freedom and a vibrant media scene.
Mr. W. O. Boafo 11:10 a.m.


Mr Speaker, I agree a hundred per cent with the President. But the question to ask is, does the President himself believe in a vibrant media? Mr. Speaker, some time last year, at a public function that the President attended, he took a swipe at the media and was widely reported in both the print and electronic media as saying that he was not prepared to use any media allegations against his Ministers and other State officials.

Naturally, if you say that you want to create a vibrant media, then you must be able to give a practical expression and a practical meaning to that assertion. Mr. Speaker, I believe if the President had taken those media reports and caused investigations into them the psychological trauma that some of his nominees had been put through as a result of appearing before the Vetting Committee could have been averted. So the President should come well on this issue again.

Mr. Speaker, my second issue has to do with page 11, paragraph 4. Mr. Speaker, in the maiden Address of the President in this House after winning the 2000 elections, he assured this House and promised this House that within one year he was going to eradicate guinea worm from Ghana. At the time, he accused the NDC Government of allowing guinea worm infestation to rise to an extent where Ghana was fourth on the league of endemic countries in the world.
Mr. W. O. Boafo 11:10 a.m.
On a point of order.
Mr. Speaker, I think the statement just made by the hon. Member is incorrect. I have never read or heard from anywhere that the President said he was going to eradicate guinea worm in less than one year. Mr. Speaker, I think what he is saying is incorrect and he is misleading the House.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, would
you address that point.
Alhaji Amadu 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am
surprised that my hon. Colleague on the other side is making a very wrong assertion. Mr. Speaker, I refer my hon. Colleague to the Official Report of 15th February 2001, column 496 and I beg to quote -- This was what His Excellency the President said:
“. . . Guinea worm infestations which declined substantially have in the past four years become a major health problem and indeed today, Ghana is number one on the list of affected countries. We are taking measures to fully eradicate it by the middle of next year.”
So what is my hon. Colleague saying?
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:10 a.m.
Mr.
Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, just to buttress the fact that the hon. Colleague is misleading this House. He said the President had assured the House that he was going to eradicate guinea worm within one year. That is what he said. Now he is saying that the statement that he is attributing to the President was made in February, and “within one year” was February 2002. But then, Mr. Speaker, he said the President said “within one and half years” -- by what he has just quoted. So he cannot be right. [Interruptions.] Mr. Speaker, one and half years is different from one year.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Order! Majority Chief
Whip, you will have your day. Carry on.
Alhaji Amadu 11:10 a.m.
Thank you, Mr.
Speaker. You see, the import and thrust of the statement I am making is that four years after this promise was made, whether it was made within six years or
two years, guinea worm infestation is still high in this country. Mr. Speaker, at the time that statement was made, Ghana was about fourth after Sudan, Uganda and Nigeria. Today, Mr. Speaker, under “Positive Change I”, Ghana has moved to the second point, beating Nigeria and Uganda to the game.
I strongly believe, Mr. Speaker, but for the crisis in Dafur and the activities of the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) in Southern Sudan, and then the Lord's Resistance Army also in Uganda and part of Sudan, Ghana would have been number one. I n West Africa we are number one; that is really sad.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to move to my third
issue, which has to do with the statement at page 15, paragraph 2. Mr. Speaker, if you read the statement the President made, he lamented bitterly about the fact that Ghana is a mono-economy. It is true that Ghana's economy is agrarian, and over the years we have done practically nothing to diversify the economy. We tended to depend so much on cocoa, and I am particularly happy that the President has talked about the need for diversification.
Indeed, if we want to accelerate the economic development in this country, then we need to diversify the economy. But what comes to mind, Mr. Speaker, are those cash crops for which Ghana has comparative advantage in producing. What readily comes to mind are coffee, copra, oil palm, cashew, sheanuts and then non-traditional exportable commodities such as chilli pepper, pineapples and mangoes.
Mr. Speaker, if you look at the spectrum of PSI that the President appears to be using to address the issue of diversification, I do not believe that we are going to achieve the desired results. For instance, if you look at the third sentence of that paragraph,
Alhaji Amadu 11:20 a.m.


Mr. Speaker, somewhere in 2000, iron rods that were imported from Ukraine tended to be cheaper than iron rods that were produced here. If you look at the component or what goes into building a house, we have cement, iron rods; we have aggregates, and all these things are very very expensive, including accessibility to land. So any policy on housing may have to take a deeper look at these issues.

Mr. Speaker, let me talk about my last issue which is on page 18. Again, dealing with the last paragraph that is paragraph 4 on the caption, “Infrastructure Develo-pment”, Mr. Speaker, in 1983, the Provi-sional National Defence Council (PNDC) introduced Economic Recovery Programme (ERP) in this country and this was followed by the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) in 1987. These programmes structured our relations with the donor community and the basis on which most of the support we are getting in all the sectors are coming from the donors.

Mr. Speaker, if you look at what the President appears to be saying here, you would realize that most of the policies he is talking about are already there. Following the Economic Recovery Programme and the Structural Adjustment Programme - In 1994 in particular - following the international conference in Brazil on drinking water, a lot of laws were put in place. Institutional frameworks including legal frameworks were put in place to address the issues of water. So in talking about water policy, I wonder what the Government has in store for Members of Parliament. Already, if

you look at the Public Utilities and Regulatory Commission (PURC), if you look at the law establishing Ghana Water Company, if you look at the law establishing Community Water and Sanitation Agency which was specifically established to address the issue of rural water supply to our rural communities, all the policies are there.

Again, if you come to the President's Special Initiative (PSI), which we started some time in 1994 to address the issue of urban water supply to the people of this country - all these laws are there. We are waiting to see if there is going to be anything new that the Government is going to bring in place. But of course, the issue of water still remains very, very important, particularly if you relate it to water-borne diseases such as guinea worm. I appeal to the Government to look at what it can do to address the issue of guinea worm infestation but putting it under health does not address the issue properly. It is rather important for us to look at the issue of water supply.

With this, Mr. Speaker, I thank the President for his State of the Nation Address.
Mr. J. B. Aidoo (NPP - Amenfi East) 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I also rise to lend my support to the motion on the floor of this House in thanking the President for the Message on the State of the Nation. Mr. Speaker, within a span of one month and in this very Chamber of the House, His Excellency the President has delivered two Messages; all on the state of the nation.
Mr. Speaker, on the 4th of January 2005, there was a Message on this floor of the House; before the dissolution of the last Parliament. And on 3rd February 2005, His Excellency the President came again to give another Message, all in the fulfilment
of his constitutional obligations.
Mr. Speaker, the debate so far has tended to concentrate on the second Message but the second Message cannot be discussed in isolation and, simply because of that, some hon. Members are saying that His Excellency the President's Message on the 3rd of February is empty. Some are saying it is not comprehensive and others are also saying that there is nothing new about that. Mr. Speaker, debating the second Address in isolation is like preaching from the New Testament as if there is no Old Testament.
Mr. Salia 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, my hon. Colleague seems to be misleading this House. The first Address of His Excellency the President in January is not presently before this House, so it cannot be the subject for this debate. In any case, it was not presented to this particular Parliament.
Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon. Member for Amenfi East, what do you say to that?
Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is that the debate should not be narrowed on one issue, that is on the second Address because they are all State of the Nation Messages. And we are looking at the affairs of the State as at now. Within a span of just one month, His Excellency the President gave a Message on the state of the affairs of the nation. That was on 4th January and then on 3rd February, he comes to give another Message on the same state of the nation.
Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon. Member, are you reacting to the objection? Please, speak to the motion that deals with the Message
Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:20 a.m.
That is exactly so - [Interruption.]
rose
Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon. Member, are you taking objection to what I have said?
Mr. E. T. Mensah 11:20 a.m.
No, sir. Sir, I have a point of order against one of the issues raised by the hon. Member who just spoke. He made reference to the Old Testament and the New Testament. He cannot preach.
Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the President, having been a parliamentarian before, knows the rules and the practices of this House and therefore will not come here to repeat himself. And that is exactly what the President did.
Mr. Chireh 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the point of order I am raising is that I was not a Member of the past Parliament. I have not been given officially the statement that he delivered as a Sessional Address closing the Parliament, and therefore, if you want me to speak to this one and refer to it, it would be unfair. We are asking him to simply say that he is making a mistake by linking the two documents.
Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
A Member has raised a point of order; I do not hear anybody else unless I give a ruling on that. Hon. Member for Amenfi East, please speak to the motion which is before the House. Let us go on.
Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, indeed, I am advancing my argument on the premise that the argument that has been made so far on the other side of the House is that His Excellency the President's Message on the 3rd of February is not compre-hensive, and
Mr. Salia 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my hon. Friend is persisting in the mistake he originally made. It will be recalled that when that statement to which he is alluding was made, you were not in this House, Mr. Speaker. You were not the Speaker then. And the previous Speaker actually did not agree to a debate on that particular document during the last Parliament. So for him to continue to refer to it, I believe, he is out of order. And you have called upon him to desist from doing so, but he continues to do it. I think he should respect the ruling of Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon. Member for Jirapa, you always have a Speaker; whether it is person ‘A' or person ‘B'. There is always a Speaker of the House. Hon. Member for Amenfi East, within the time allocated to you, you may kindly deal with this matter quickly so that we may go on. You have already exhausted part of your time. Kindly go ahead and wind up.
Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am aware. Mr. Speaker, referring to His Excellency the President's State of the Nation Address, page 2, paragraph 3 -- and with your indulgence I will quote:
“The five priori ty areas for d e v e l o p m e n t s e l e c t e d b y Government were dictated by the situation that confronted us in 2001. They have served us well; the achievements are manifest, and they remain essentially, work in progress”
Emphasis on “work in progress.”
Mr. Speaker, this means that already the five priority areas which were the thrust of the President's Administration in his “Positive Change Chapter I”, are still being implemented. This time round what is going to happen is that he has given three other essential areas which to him will give impetus and accelerate the implementation of these priority areas. And Mr. Speaker, these three important areas are -- and with your permission I quote from the same page
“Vigo rous human r e sou rce development; Private sector development; and a continuing emphasis on good governance”.
Because when you look at the first priority areas, good governance is included.
Mr. Speaker, I will want to talk just on
one of these areas; and that is the human resource development. Mr. Speaker, because of constraint of time, I will again concentrate my energy on basic education. Experience from the field indicates that at the moment we have so many children who are four years old but are not in school and therefore the policy thrust of His Excellency's Address is that this problem
ought to be tackled, and tackled very well. That is why there is indication that every child who is four years old should be in the classroom.
Mr. Speaker, indeed, the essence of that is that it will in a way relieve parents, particularly women and even some children; because in most rural areas what happens is that when the mother is going to the farm she leaves the child who is less than four years or even four years old with an elderly girl-child, in which case two children would not be going to the school. With this policy, every child who is four years old will be in the classroom; and this is very, very important.
But in bringing this policy, certainly, it will amount to a greater responsibility and commitment on the part of the State because we will need more nursery schools and we have to get more teachers and so on and so forth. And that is what we are hoping that my hon. Colleague Ministers will work on and ensure that we have enough school facilities to accommodate this laudable idea.
Mr. Speaker, another area I would want to touch on is the policy thrust on giving incentives to teachers. Mr. Speaker, honestly the manner and the condition in which our teachers work are not the best. Here I want to submit -- and I believe that my hon. Colleague Ministers will also take this thing up -- that in drawing up their respective specific policies, incentive packages like giving teachers car loans, housing loans to motivate them to work particularly at the basic level, in the primary schools, JSS and so on, will eventually benefit the country.
Mr. Speaker, on this note, I want to urge all my hon. Colleagues in this House to support this motion in thanking His Excellency the President. Thank you very much for the opportunity.
Dr. Ahmed Yakubu Alhassan (NDC -- Mion) 11:40 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Being the first time I am contributing to discussions in the House, I would like to say that my name is Ahmed Yakubu Alhassan, Member of Parliament for Mion, and to associate myself with the President's State of the Nation Address and to thank him also for it.
Having said so, I would like to say that I was a little bit surprised that the subject of agriculture, which is described as the backbone of our economy, was subsumed under funding in the President's State of the Nation Address. I think it should have been teased out and addressed as a serious subject, if it is the sector that drives our economy.
There was a statement made to the effect that agriculture would be modernised through mechanisation. I hope and pray that mechanisation would not mean another doze of tractors that are brought in for photo-sessions and without consideration to what soils these tractors would be working on. Mr. Speaker, I say so because mechanisation by itself would not modernise Ghana's agriculture; perhaps when we get the prose of the policy in the Budget, the skills and nature of the mechanisation will be well explained. But I would like to state that appropriate technology is what modernises agriculture.
It was unfortunate that we never had any information from His Excellency the President on how institutions that generate technology for agriculture in this country would be handled by the vision that was stated in the policy document presented by His Excellency. The statement on page 14 said that credits will be made available for small and medium scale enterprises. I also hope that small scale enterprises include small scale farmers.

The problem of agriculture in this country is that most of the planning does not seem to support the small scale farmers on whose back all of us sitting here ride. So I pray that credits for small scale enterprises will mean credits for small scale farmers who largely constitute my constituents in Mion.

The subject of cotton is very dear to the hearts of the people of my constituency and I am happy to say that this country has opportunity to make cotton the white gold of Ghana because of the enormous potential this particular crop holds for the country. I am aware that there is a draft President's Special Initiative (PSI) documents on cotton. I hope that the PSI on cotton will probably be fast-tracked so that the people of northern Ghana who constitute the largest producers of cotton will have some benefits from the numerous PSIs that we are to witness in the country.

Mr. Speaker, there is a vast potential for cotton in the country but what the cotton industry does not seem to have is investments from the public sector. In comparison with our Francophone neighbours, they did not start with cotton production earlier than us but for some reason they seem to have gone ahead of us. I hope that the PSI on cotton will result in the complete re-engineering of the cotton sector so that we can have some benefits.

In the last couple of years, the production levels of cotton has reduced considerably and this has had a telling effect on the thousands of households in northern Ghana whose livelihoods have depended on cotton for a very tong time. Indeed, the industry was a flourishing one until 1998-99 when the world price for cotton fell by more than 50 per cent, from about $1,750 to about $750. Perhaps, the PSI on cotton may have to consider the separation of production from processing so that we have production companies
Ms. Shirley A. Botchway (NPP -- Weija) 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you very
much for allowing me to contribute to the motion on the floor. Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that His Excellency the President is once again poised for action to build on the foundation that has been laid in “Positive Change Chapter I” by sharpening his strategy in the three policy areas he outlined: namely, private sector development, human resource develop- ment and good governance.
Mr. Speaker, of great interest was His Excellency the President's call to all sectors of the Ghanaian society to view Ghana as an entity that we will have a stake in. As stakeholders, citizens or shareholders of Ghana incorporated, there is the need to cultivate a collective sense of ownership of the Government's policies and programmes and the implementation of the entire development process. It is a collective effort that cannot be over- emphasized.
In contributing to the motion I want to specifically limit myself to three areas which fall within the priority areas the President outlined; the areas are tourism, the national health insurance scheme and good governance.
Mr. Speaker, tourism has the potential to become one of Ghana's pillars of economic growth and poverty alleviation by creating wealth and jobs to improve the living standards of Ghanaians through the sustainable conservation and development of the nation's culture, historic, natural and manmade heritage.

Mr. Speaker, for most developed and developing countries, tourism has become an important sector and has already overtaken agriculture and manufacturing as a major source of national income, employment and export earnings. In countries like Mauritius and Kenya,

tourism has displaced tea and textile production respectively as a leading export earner. In his Address, H.E. the President identified tourism potentials to make Ghana the preferred tourist destination in the ECOWAS subregion. It has been identified as one of the fastest growing sectors and in 2002, it contributed 3.9 per cent of GDP.

Mr. Speaker, tourism is now the fourth foreign exchange earner after cocoa, gold and inward remittances from Ghanaians abroad. Mr. Speaker, to achieve these targets by 2007, that is the target by the Ministry of Tourism and Modernization of the Capital City to increase tourism arrivals to one million and also make tourism the largest employer after agriculture and retailing, and create about 300,000 jobs in the formal sector and many more in the informal sector, and also to bring in about $1.5 billion from the $500 million that was raked in, in 2002, the Ministry would need to adopt two of the three pillars mentioned by H.E. the President, namely, private sector development and human resource development. The private sector must necessarily be roped in fully through public-private sector partnership programmes.

Tourism is private-sector-led, Mr. Speaker. Key areas where the private sector can be encouraged to play a significant role in the industry will principally include hotel and catering, airline, including charters and travel and tours. Mr. Speaker, it is rightly so that H.E. the President has earmarked tourism as one key area that will support his private sector development drive. Areas of support will include the injection of adequate funding, incentives and vigorous promotion and marketing of Ghana as a competitive tourist destination.

It is important to note that training will be playing a significant role in the human resource development of the
Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon. Member for Weija,
were you making a point that it covers the whole country?
Ms. Botchway 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I did
not say that.
Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Then go ahead, please.
Ms. Botchway 11:50 a.m.
Thank you, Mr.
Speaker. Good governance in our Ghanaian context should be differentiated from the understanding of the developed western democracies. We should strive to use good governance as a policy to deepen our democracy, as a process of empowering our people to build real freedom and real economic development, and to provide an enabling political and legal environment for economic growth and also to promote the equitable distribution of the national cake.
Mr. Yaw Effah-Baafi (NDC -- Kintampo South) noon
Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the motion to thank His Excellency the President for the Message on the State of the Nation which he delivered to this honourable House on Thursday, 4th February, 2005. Mr. Speaker, I have a few observations to make and I will restrict myself to issues pertaining to the development of agriculture.
Mr. Speaker, since 2001 each time His Excellency the President came to this House he indicated his intentions to modernize agriculture. Mr. Speaker, I was particularly elated by the statement he made in 2002 edition of his State of the Nation Address and Mr. Speaker, with your permission I beg to quote:
“Government has decided to step up on its rural development policy and aggressively support and modernize agriculture.”
Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that agriculture is the backbone of our economy and it is undertaken by 60 to 65 per cent of the adult population. It is estimated that about six million Ghanaians are engaged in this sector. Everyday, Ghanaians are being urged to undertake agriculture so that the level of unemployment and the rural-urban drift would be brought down.
Mr. Speaker, the modernization of agriculture and access to credit are two sure ways by which Ghanaians can be attracted to agriculture. In my view, modernization of agriculture starts with the importation into the country of tractors and their accessories as well as other farm implements to take away the
Ms. Anna Nyamekye noon
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I am the hon. Member for Jaman South and Deputy Minister for Agriculture. Our hon. Friend here is misleading the House -- [Interruptions.] All right, Acting . . . I agree. Yes, he knows that the Minister has imported so many tractors into this country and if he stands here to say otherwise, I want to believe that he is misleading the House and the whole country. Let him face facts. Some of the tractors are in his constituency.
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Member, I do not see the point of order. Let him continue.
Mr. Effah-Baafi noon
Mr. Speaker, I am aware that some quantity of tractors has been imported into the country but Mr. Speaker, this alone does not modernize agriculture.
Mr. Speaker, we have as many as about 6.5 million farmers undertaking agriculture and the importation into the country of about a thousand tractors is nothing to write home about.
Capt. Effah-Dartey (rtd.): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member began his contribution by making it clear that he thinks mechanization of agriculture is very important and that Government should import into this country tractors so that people can have access to tractors to farm. And then a point of order was raised, and his attention was drawn to the fact that, yes, indeed the NPP Government of President John Agyekum Kufuor has
been importing into this country a number of tractors.
Now, he is denying and at the same time conceding that 1,000 tractors have been brought but that they are not enough. Mr. Speaker, he is misleading the House. He is speaking to the whole country and he must address the fact that the Government of President John Agyekum Kufuor is doing his best to mechanize agriculture, to give implements, to give equipment to farmers.
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Member for Berekum, you have not made any point of order. Hon. Member, continue within the allotted time.
Mr. Effah-Baafi noon
The point I am driving at is that taking the number of farmers in this sector, as many as 6.5 million, and then the quantum of tractors that have been imported into the country, Mr. Speaker, it is grossly inadequate -- [Interruptions.] Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time that tractors have been imported into this country. It is important to note that in my constituency, in a particular community called Nante, an irrigation project was initiated by the previous Government but since the NPP Government assumed the power of governance, this project has been abandoned, and you are craving for -- [Interruptions.]
Ms. Nyamekye noon
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The hon. Member opposite is misleading the House. If we stand here and talk about our specific constituencies, then we are not doing justice to the nation. We have not stopped any project from the Ministry of Agriculture under the NPP Administration. We are working according to plan, and the plan will work.
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Member, we will give you time for you to make your own contribution in due course. In the
Mr. Speaker noon


meantime, the hon. Member for Kintampo South, sum up.
Mr. Effah-Baafi noon
Mr. Speaker, another important factor in the modernization of agriculture through mechanization is land acquisition. Mr. Speaker, the land tenure system in the country, as it exists today, is a disincentive to agricultural production and it needs a radical reform. Mr. Speaker, His Excellency the President indicated his intention to cause the initiation of moves for land reform when he delivered his Message on the State of the Nation in
2002 --
Mr. Baidoe-Ansah noon
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member has made a statement that is factually incorrect. He said that farmers population in Ghana is 6.5 million. Mr. Speaker, it is not true. [Some hon. Members: What is the figure?] Mr. Speaker, the figure available, which is closer to what he is saying describes agriculture and its allied -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Speaker noon
Order!
Mr. Baidoe-Ansah noon
Mr. Speaker, what I am calling for here is the source of the hon. Member's -- [Interruptions.] What he said is factually not correct.
Mr. Speaker noon
Kindly resume your seat. The point you have raised cannot be considered to be a point of order. Hon. Member for Kintampo South, kindly wind up.
Mr. Effah-Baafi 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, another important factor which affects modernization of agriculture through mechanization is land acquisition. Mr. Speaker, the land tenure system as it exists in the country today is a disincentive to agricultural production. And Mr. Speaker,
H.E. the President indicated his intention to initiate some moves for land reforms when he delivered his State of the Nation Address in 2002. Mr. Speaker, with your permission I would like to quote:
“Government has decided to step up on its rural development policy and aggressively support and modernize agriculture. Land acquisition is a critical factor in the policy. The land tenure system needs pragmatic reform. It is fortunate the current Minister for Lands and Forestry is a foremost authority on land management. Government had tasked him to initiate the moves for reform.”
Mr. Speaker, the foremost authority H.E. the President was referring to was Prof. Kassim Kasanga. Mr. Speaker, four years down the line no major land reform has been made.
Mr. Ernest A. Debrah 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I think the hon. Member does not know what is happening in the country right now, regarding land reform. Land reform has been initiated in the Ministry of Lands and Forestry. Reforms are going on, a lot of things are being done and one cannot say that for four years nothing has been done - [Interruptions.]
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Order! Hon. Member for Kintampo South, continue.
Mr. Effah-Baafi 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I further quote:
“The proposal would be put in the public domain this year.”
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon. Member, your time is up; conclude please.
Mr. Effah-Baafi 12:10 p.m.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would like to state that the

Capt Effah-Dartey (rtd) Mr. Speaker, with all respect, he has made a statement which is factually incorrect, that the Government is not doing anything about land reform. Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that the Ministry of Lands and Forestry has initiated several procedures. We have been to Swedru, we have been to Elmina holding seminars and Mr. Speaker, this is in the public domain. Mr. Speaker, the land administration policy project is ongoing and for a Member of Parliament to raise an incorrect statement of this nature, Mr. Speaker, is very serious.

Mr. Speaker, with respect, this noble House must be told the truth about what is actually taking place. If the hon. Member is not aware, if he is ignorant of what is going on, he must advise himself accordingly because the Ministry of Lands and Forestry is seriously undertaking all these exercises and so it is important that he withdraws, because he is throwing dust into the eyes of the people of this country.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon. Member for Berekum, we will give you a platform to air your points in due course. Hon. Member for Kintampo South, your time is up and kindly conclude.
Mr. Effah-Baafi 12:10 p.m.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, very important sub- sectors of agriculture which in my view need attention are the livestock, poultry and fisheries sub-sectors. Mr. Speaker, these sub-sectors are very important because they are the major sources of our dietary protein. Mr. Speaker, about 50 per cent or more of our protein requirements are derived from this sector. Mr. Speaker, the Tenth Annual Report of the Fisheries Commission established, and with your permission I quote:
“Fish production has shown a downward trend since year 2000
and the rate of fall has also been increasing over the period.”
Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to emphasize that since 2001, agricultural production with respect to maize especially has become much of a problem which the farmers cannot contend with. Mr. Speaker, the prices of farm inputs in general and fertilizers in particular have increased tremendously.
Alhaji Abu-Bakar Saddique Boniface 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I am the Member of Parliament for Salaga constituency. The hon. Member is seriously misleading the House. I do not know whether he has taken the pains to know the price of a bag of maize after comparing the price of a bag of fertilizer and the minimum wage to the farmer. I do not know whether he has taken the pains. At the same time, Mr. Speaker, he himself has acknowledged that this Government is doing well to improve the agricultural sector and that is why the Government has decided to set up a Ministry for the fisheries sector.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon. Member, you will have your turn. Hon. Member for Kintampo South, please conclude.
Mr. Effah-Baafi 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to indicate that farmers are now being stretched and I am happy that the Government has indicated its intention to include maize and sorghum under the President's Special Initiatives (PSI). I believe that the Government
Mr. Effah-Baafi 12:10 p.m.


[CAPT. EFFAH-DARTEY (RTD.] will seriously address the problem; I am hopeful that it will not be one of his vain promises.

On this note, Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity.
PAPERS 12:10 p.m.

Chairman of the Appointments Committee (Mr. F. W. A. Blay) 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 80 (1) which require that no motion shall be debated until at least forty-eight hours have elapsed between the date on which notice of the motion is given and the date on which the motion is moved, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Appointments Committee on the President's Nominations for Ministerial Appointments may be moved today. I respectfully move, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
MOTIONS 12:20 p.m.

Chairman of the Appointments Committee (Mr. F. W. A. Blay) 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that this honourable House adopts the Second Report of the Appointments Committee on the President's Nominations for Ministerial Appointments.
1.0 Introduction
Pursuant to article 78 (1) of the Constitution, His Excellency the President communicated to Parliament for prior approval, his nomination of thirty- four persons for various ministerial appointments. In accordance with Order 172 (2) of the Standing Orders, the Speaker referred the nomination to the Appointments Committee on 13th January, 2005 for consideration and report. The Committee considered the nominations and submitted its report to the House on 1st February 2005 titled “First Report of the Appointments Committee on the President's Nominations for Ministerial Appointments”.
In paragraph 5.7 of that Report, the Committee advised this honourable House to defer its decision on three of the nominees in order to enable further checks on certain aspects of their testimony before the Committee to be conducted. The affected nominees were:
i. Hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye -- Regional Minister-designate for Greater Accra
ii. Hon. Dr. Richard Anane -- Minister-designate for Road Transport
iii. Hon. Isaac Edumadze -- Regional Minister-designate for Central
The Appointments Committee relying on thorough checks by a sub-committee
constituted for the purpose has completed its work on the three nominees and hereby submits its report to the House in accordance with Order 172 (4) of the Standing Orders.
2.0 Reference Documents
The Committee made reference to the underlisted documents during its deliberations:
i. Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992
ii. Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana
iii. Supreme Court Ruling in J. H. Mensah vs Attorney General, 28th May, 1997
iv. Official Report (Hansard), Volume 14 No. 18; 14th Feb.,
1997
v. Official Report (Hansard), Volume 15 No. 27; 8th July,
1997
3.0 Procedure Adopted
The procedure adopted for considering the nominees was the same as what was set out in paragraph (3) of the Committee's First Report to the House. On appearing before the Committee, the nominees testified on oath and answered questions on pertinent issues, some of which were relevant to the positions for which they have been nominated. The reactions of the nominees were also sought on certain allegations/protests against their appointment as the nominees.
It may be necessary however, to
emphasise that the Committee was guided
in the determination of its decision on each nominee by the provisions of article 94 of the Constitution. 4.0 Observations
4.1 Hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye -- Regional Minister-designate for Greater Accra
Hon. Sheikh I.C. Quaye told the Committee that his first term as Regional Minister has seen a considerable control of armed robbery in the Region; fostering peaceful coexistence between traditional authorities and religious bodies on one hand and amongst the traditional authorities on the other. He said when approved, he would continue to ensure peace and security in the region and intensify his efforts to improve sanitation in the capital and thereby reduce the spread of communicable diseases.
In his response to a memorandum objecting to his appointment on grounds that he used his position to influence the award of a refuse collection contract to a company owned by his brother following the abrogation of a similar contract with Group Chagnon, hon. Quaye said his brother had been involved in waste collection long before he became a Minister and therefore won the contract on merit. He also denied imposing one Yemotele Quaye, a sister on an association in the Makola Market as chairperson.
Hon . Quaye conf i rmed , upon questioning, that he obtained two Diplomas in Journalism and in Management Studies as stated in his CV before the Committee. When asked to produce the said certificates, the nominee maintained that they were lost in a destruction of his family house at Alajo a long time ago. This was challenged by an hon. Member leading to the deferral of the Committee's recommendation on his approval to allow

for verification of the claim.

The Sub-Committee, which was set up to check on the veracity of this claim, could not confirm the claim or otherwise. Upon contact with the Rapid Results College (now known as RRC Business College) based in London, where the nominee said he took his courses from 1961 to 1962 for the two Diplomas, it was found that the College only offers courses by correspondence and does not award certificates. The source at the College (Margaret Peters) explained that certificates were awarded by various examining bodies chosen by the correspondents. Furthermore, the College does not keep its record of correspondents beyond five years and therefore considering the nominee's claim of having taken the courses in 1961-62, the College had no records on him.

On the other hand, the nominee insisted that he could not remember the name(s) of the examining body that awarded his diplomas and that the names of the awarding institutions were embossed on the missing certificates.

In the circumstance, the Committee was obliged by consensus of all eighteen members present and voting to recommend his nomination for approval by the House in spite of doubts raised by a couple of members.

4.2 Hon. Dr. Richard Anane (MP) -- Minister-designate for Road Transport

Hon. Anane told the Committee that during his tenure as Minister for Road Transport he supervised the successful negotiation with Ghana International to take over the operations of Ghana Airways. According to him, the operations of Ghana Airways were fraught with numerous technical and managerial problems. The Government's approach therefore was
Chairman of the Appointments Committee (Mr. F. W. A. Blay) 12:20 p.m.


generated by the public hearings. Indeed, the Committee itself feels inadequate to conduct checks on issues raised against nominees to its own maximum satisfaction.

The Committee would like to express its deepest gratitude to the media for its diverse support. Whilst some of their investigations and commentaries have prodded the Committee to perform its duties more meaningfully, the Committee is equally sensitive to the risk of turning its work into a forum where nominees could be scandalised beyond repairs based on media speculations and mere allegations.

The Committee would like to take this opportunity to advise the general public, particularly those who wish to submit memoranda for its work in future to keep in mind the publicised deadlines to enable the Committee to conduct relevant checks on issues raised where necessary.

Finally, the Committee would like to reiterate its call on this honourable House to enhance its technical and resource capacity to enable it discharge the onerous duties imposed on it by the Constitution and Standing Orders of the House.

In conclusion, the Commit tee recommends that this honourable House approves the appointment of the three nominees as follows:

a) by consensus in respect of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye -- Regional Minister-designate for Greater Accra, and

b) by majority decision in respect of:

i. Hon. Dr. Richard Anane -- Minister-designate for Road Transport; and

ii. Hon. Isaac E. Edumadze -- Regional Minister- designate for Central.

Respectfully submitted.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh (NPP -- Tema West) 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion for the adoption of this Report.
Mr. Speaker, in doing so, I wish to make a few comments about the work that was done by the sub-committee which I had the privilege of chairing and which has become the subject of some controversy.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee, acting under Standing Order 194, decided to set up a sub-committee. Mr. Speaker, the mandate of the Sub-Committee was limited and precise.
In respect of Dr. Anane, the Sub- Committee's mandate was to find out whether or not there was any occasion, or two occasions, where sums amounting to forty-five thousand dollars were transferred from his end to the United States.
Mr. Speaker, in respect of hon. Edumadze, the Sub-Committee's mandate was to find out whether or not he had at any time demanded the sum of two hundred and fifty million cedis from a contractor whose name is, I think, K. E. and Sons Limited.
Mr. Speaker, in respect of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye, the Sub-Committee's mandate was to find out whether he in fact undertook a course leading to the award of diplomas in Journalism and Management Studies.
Mr. Speaker, it is elementary principle that this Sub-Committee being an inferior body to the main Committee and exercising only delegated authority could not enhance these powers on its own. And so we jealously and religiously kept faith with our mandate.
Mr. Speaker, it is not true, as being peddled around, that the Sub-Committee shut its doors to any witness. In particular,
my very good friend, hon. P. C. Appiah- Ofori came before the Sub-Committee and insisted that we should enhance our mandate.
Mr. Speaker, the little law I know told me that that was not possible. That notwithstanding, the Sub-Committee on its own decided to reach out to all primary sources of evidence in respect of the allegation that the hon. Minister demanded that sum of money. The Sub- Committee on its own decided to get to the source of that allegation, even though it is elementary that he who alleges must prove. And so the Sub-Committee, the moment hon. Appiah-Ofori refused or did not testify, could have concluded that that allegation was not proven. That notwithstanding, contact was made with the alleged victim of the demand and he denied the allegation.
In the case of Dr. Anane, the sub- committee made contact with the lady who was supposed to have received the money. Mr. Speaker, the lady emphatically, categorically and most unambiguously denied ever receiving those sums of money. Mr. Speaker, in all honesty and sincerity, the lady's evidence in every material particularly corroborated that of the nominee.
As regards Sheikh I. C. Quaye, we contacted the RRC, the stated institution which offered the courses. After about five calls to the various places we got one lady called Mrs. Margaret Peters and she said she could assist us if we could give her the name of the certificate issuing institution. We called the Sheikh and we could not get that information.
Mr. Speaker, based on this Report, we did not make any recommendation. We submitted our report to the Committee and I believe that that has helped us a lot to bring out this Report. But I would want to make it clear that the nominees who did
not make any allegations or statements like Dr. Anane or Mr. Edumadze, have nothing to prove. Some people are saying that they must prove that the allegation is not true.

Mr. Speaker, there is no rule of law or evidence that requires persons in their positions to prove that something is true or is not true. It is also elementary that those who allege must prove. So the only person who had made an allegation which required proof was Sheikh I. C. Quaye, that is, on his Curriculum Vitae (CV). He claimed to have some documents which we wanted to see.

Mr. Speaker, I therefore want to submit that based upon the evidence before both the Sub-Committee and the main Committee, the Report that we have submitted to the House is worth supporting. Mr. Speaker, we were not running a court of law and we were not fishing for evidence to nail anybody, as you read in the Report. In fact, we all admit that in so many instances there were doubts about the testimonies given by the nominees. That is not in dispute. In each testimony with any of the nominees we came upon doubts.

Mr. Speaker, the issue was, do we resolve these doubts against them or in their favour? The Committee decided for obvious reasons that these doubts must be resolved in their favour. This is because, for instance there was no evidence that Sheikh I. C. Quaye did not attend the course, there was no evidence.

Mr. Speaker, in one instance, on his CV, there was an indication that he wrote the Cambridge School Certificate, that he was a student at Odorgonno Secondary School and when he was there he sat for the Cambridge School Certificate which was the certificate in those days. The Committee decided to write to the school
Mr. A. O. Aidooh (NPP -- Tema West) 12:30 p.m.


and we had a positive response that he, in fact, was a student there and I understand that there is another source of evidence in corroboration.

Mr. Speaker, upon these facts and in view of the Committee's Report, I would urge our Colleagues to support the motion for the approval of the nominees as Ministers; and I believe that my Colleagues would support us to waive even the requirement for voting as regards the other two nominees so that they can all go by consensus.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to support

what has been said by the Chairman of the Committee that the Committee laboured under very trying circumstances. In fact when we spoke to the witnesses, we even did not have a recording mechanism to record the evidence; we had to take them in writing. We however had access to a speaker-phone but we did not have recording materials.

There are some suggestions that we should have delved further or deeper into these matters. Mr. Speaker, it would, for instance, involve ferrying us or carrying us to the United States of America and other places and I believe that the Parliament of Ghana is not in a position to undertake such a venture. But I hope that as we go along, we would enhance our rules and our practices and have enough resources, maybe, to do some better job as the years go by.

On this note, I beg to second the motion.

Question proposed.

Minority Leader (Mr. A. S. K.

Bagbin): Mr. Speaker, I stand to

vehemently oppose the motion, that we adopt this second Report of the Appointments Committee on the President's nominations for ministerial appointments.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear from how my Colleagues are labouring to explain and convince Members to accept the Report that there is a serious difficulty and that there is something beyond the Report. Therefore, this Report should be rejected by this House.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to base my submissions on principles enunciated and accepted by this House as our understanding of the law governing our functions on giving prior approval to presidential nominees. Based on that, Mr. Speaker, I will move to what transpired at the Appointments Committee and then insist that the best we can do in the circumstances is to send back the Report to the Appointments Committee to do a better job and report back to this House.

Mr. Speaker, this is not the first

time that nominees from the President were scrutinised by the Appointments Committee.
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:30 p.m.
Mr.
Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member, says that the point he is
alluding to happened in 1997. The person that he is talking about was not part of the 1997 to 2000 Parliament, so what he is saying cannot be true.
Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Minority Leader, go on
Mr. Osei-Prempeh 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on
a point of order. Mr. Speaker, first, on the issue of the year -- it was 1993; and on the certificate, the question which arose was this: Hon. Agyarko Nti was at one time a student at the University of Science and Technology; he did not complete but he stated on his CV that he had attained a BSc. (Hons. Degree). That was the issue, and it was raised that he never completed university. When the Revolution came, he left to do aluta and he never went back to complete. So he had told a lie by saying that he had a degree, and that was the issue. So what the Minority Leader is saying is not the truth. He is hiding something and he must tell the House the truth.
Mr. Bagbin 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I continue and I say that he was nominated as Deputy Minister for Environment, Science and Technology. I did not say he was a Member of Parliament. That is the first point.
Mr. Speaker, I have the Official Report
or the Parliamentary Debates on the issue and that is what I am referring to. And I am saying that in 1997 when his CV came before the Appointments Committee, that was the issue that was raised; and it is true that he admitted that he attended the University of Science and Technology but he did not complete because of aluta and therefore he did not attain a BSc. Degree. Based on that issue raised, it was taken that he deceived the Appointments Committee by submitting such a CV. On the basis of that his nomination was withdrawn by His
Excellency the President.
Mr. Speaker, then came the other case
of hon. J. E. Ackah who at that time was a Member of Parliament for Jomoro constituency. He was nominated for Minister Without Portfolio and during the course of the vetting it was alleged that whilst a headmaster of a secondary school, in the handling of a matter he conducted himself in a manner that could be considered as misconduct, and that you may term in a very general term as indiscretion. On the basis of that, his nomination was withdrawn.
The third reference is to hon. Ofosu-
Ampofo. I am saying this, Mr. Speaker, because this is not the first time that the Appointments Committee had gone beyond just hearing people at the committee meetings. It is not only that we take decisions but we also listen to the value system of our people and we are guided not just by the value system but by the laws and I would refer to the laws too.
Mr. Speaker, in the case of hon. Ofosu-
Ampofo, the allegations were as to his farms. It was alleged that he had over a hundred acres of corn and that he had also had a child by a certain young lady working in a rural bank and he was not taking care of the child. A sub-committee was set up. In fact, a chairman of the then Minority party, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) came from the constituency to testify before the Appointments Committee and a sub-committee had to move to the area to inspect the farm and also to go to the bank to crosscheck whether it was true. It is not the first time that sub-committees have done this kind of job.

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, they came out that those allegations were false and the hon. Member got the nod of this House. Mr. Speaker, parting from that, I am surprised, extremely surprised that in this particular case, in spite of the doubts
Mr. F. W. A. Blay 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
rise on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, in this House when we say “consensus” it means Members there voting agreed together. And at this meeting that we held, the Appointments Committee met, including himself, and I am saying that the Report reflects what took place. All hon. Members from all sides of this House who were on the membership of the Committee present and voting decided that it should be by consensus. This is the fact.
Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon. Minority Leader,
the point is being made that at all material times you were a member of this Committee and that in respect of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye, there was a consensus. Did you deal with that matter?
Mr. Bagbin 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, he is aware
that I was present when the question of hon. Dr. Richard Anane was taken, and that was not by consensus. The recommendation was by majority decision. When they were discussing the case of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye, he is aware that I had to rush here for the Committee of the Whole meeting. So I was not there when they took the decision.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I was wondering whether because he was not there the decision was not consensual. Is that what he is saying, that because he was not there the decision could not have been consensual?
Mr. Bagbin 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, my response is to the fact that he said I was present. He said I was present throughout and I am
explaining that I was present in respect of Dr. Richard Anane. This is the explanation I am giving. And Mr. Speaker, I am not raising the issue of the consensus, I am raising the issue of a consensus in doubts raised by a couple of Members. [Interruption.] But Mr. Speaker, be that as it may, there is no -- and they can be sure that no heckling can prevent me from putting across my point; that they can be sure of -- [Interruptions]
Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Order, please! Hon. Members, let us have decorum and let us hear him.
Mr. Bagbin 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am doing this, very fortified by the provisions of our Constitution. If you look at article 35 (8) and article 41 (f) of our Constitution you will be clear as to what we as a people have set upon ourselves to do when it comes to many of the issues that appear before us. And Mr. Speaker, with your permission, I read article 35 (8). It say:
“The State shall take steps to eradicate corrupt practices and the abuse of power.”
Article 41, again with your permission, I quote:
“41. The exercise and enjoyment o f r i g h t s a n d f r e e d o m s i s i n sepa rab le f rom the performance of duties and obligations and accordingly, it shall be the duty of every citizen --
x x x x
(f) to protect and preserve public property and expose and combat misuse and waste of public funds and property.”
Mr. Speaker, under article 78 (1), His Excellency the President is enjoined to make nominations. In fact, he is to
appoint Ministers with the prior approval of Parliament. It is this prior approval that we try to give by the process of public hearing, commonly referred to as vetting. We do that and we report to this House. Mr. Speaker, at that committee we are guided by the law and our Standing Orders; in fact, we issued some guidelines as procedure and if I may read guideline 10, it says this:
“The major yardstick is the various constitutional provisions on disqualifications for public offices. -- For example, criminal conviction, adverse findings of committees of enquiry, allegations of stated misbehaviour, abuse of office, fraud, misappropriation of public funds, etc.”
And they refer to article 94.
Mr. Speaker, the nominees in question came for vetting; a number of allegations were raised against them by the public in the form of memoranda. Members made use of those memoranda and raised a number of questions for the reaction of the hon. Members in question.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on
Mr. Bagbin 12:40 p.m.
You insisted.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
They do not
Mr. Bagbin 12:50 p.m.
This is exactly what I
was saying. The Sub-Committee insisted on adhering to its mandate given by the Appointments Committee. [Interrup- tion.] It is not a matter of emotional explosion; it is a matter of stating facts and going by the facts and the law, that is all. So Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is that the mandate that, according to the Sub-Committee, was given was to go and investigate the issue whether on two occasions lump sums of $45,000 each was transferred by the nominee to the alleged lady Alexandra O'Brien in the United States.
Based on that they asked a simple question as to whether she ever received such moneys from the nominee; and her answer definitely was, no, but that between the year 2002 and 2003 she received various sums of moneys, some directly from the nominee and some through other persons and sources amounting to over
$90,000.

That was contained in the e-Mail sent to the Sub-Committee. And Mr. Speaker, she also referred to earlier documentation she had sent to other sources in Ghana. She referred to them and specifically mentioned that she had sent those documents to The Chronicle. Even the bank statements were sent there; they could crosscheck.

Mr. Speaker, fortunately, a Reporter for
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:50 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, nobody petitioned the Sub-Committee. Mr. Speaker, the Sub-Committee had no mandate to accept petitions because when we refer to our rules, the procedure that we have taken upon ourselves, the procedure does not permit the Sub-Committee to take any petition; and nobody, in fact, petitioned the Sub-Committee.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Well, the point is that nobody sent any petition.
Mr. Bagbin 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my hon. Colleague opposite is saying that nobody petitioned the Sub- Committee. The Clerk to the Appoint- ments Committee was the Clerk to the Sub-Committee and the petition was sent to the Clerk through the Sub-Committee, which was brought to the notice of the Committee. So what petition does he want to be given to him again? What more evidence? My hon. Colleague is aware of the petition.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, somebody brought a petition to me and I told the person that the Sub-Committee could not take the petition. Upon that the person took the petition to the Clerk and the Clerk received the petition as Clerk to the main Committee. The Sub- Committee never had any petition before it so we could not have received any such petition. That would have been beyond our mandate; and he knows that.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Minority Leader, you can go on but I want a little bit of clarification on what you are saying, you being a member of the Appointments Committee, whether this point you are raising here was raised before.
Mr. Bagbin 12:50 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, that is why I said I was around when the issue of Dr. Richard Anane was discussed; and I raised the issue of the mandate. I said that my understanding of the mandate was not what they were referring to and therefore, even if we were to accept what they were referring to, because of those petitions, we should refer them back for them to look at it, review their mandate and let them look at those petitions and report to the Committee; they said, no.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Order! Order! Hon. Members, let us have decorum. Hon. Minority Leader, please go on.
Mr. Bagbin 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is clear on that issue that in spite of the knowledge of the existence of other witnesses and evidence, the Sub-Committee decided to report without those evidence and witnesses.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speker, I am sorry, but we must get this thing clarified. Mr. Speaker, what was the purpose of the evidence that he is talking about? In view of our mandate, if you look at the Standing Order 202, Mr. Speaker, we do not have to admit every evidence. In view of our mandate, we were requested to ask the woman if some monies were sent to her -- US$45,000 in two batches -- and the woman has said no.
Mr. Speaker, if the woman had said yes, in that case, there would have been a conflict between the woman's evidence and the nominee's evidence and then we would have looked for external proof, bank statement, transfer documents and that kind of thing. But if the two persons, the nominee and the witness in the United States of America gave the same evidence, what other proof do we
need? If the woman had said yes, I have got the money, then we would have said, “Let us see your proof”. But the moment the woman said, “No, I do not have the money”, there was no need for any proof; it was most irrelevant.
Mr. Speaker, on my understanding of the Standing Order 222, committees of this House do not accept irrelevant piece of evidence, and in fact, that evidence was most irrelevant to our mandate. We asked the woman some questions; she gave answers. There is no doubt, he talked to us and we refused to look at any other piece of evidence. There was nothing to look at. The woman's answers were most unambiguous and therefore any other evidence that she had professed was irrelevant. There was no need for any proof; there was nothing to prove.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Minority Leader, kindly deal with this matter and go on.
Mr. Bagbin 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the woman in question sent an e-mail to the Sub- Committee. It would be interesting for you to read the content of the e-mail to see whether it supports the position that she received those monies from the nominee.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Order! Order!
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, if my hon. Colleague wants to play to the gallery, I would urge him not to do that. Mr. Speaker, hon. Bagbin is a seasoned lawyer and he knows what a mandate is; he knows what is evidence. I am surprised at what he is doing this afternoon.
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat again. If I have to assess an evidence in any matter and there is no conflict, both parties, in this case the nominee and the witness whose evidence is bound to contrast that of the nominee but he ends up collaborating that of the nominee, if you bring another witness whose evidence is hearsay, what is the relevance? I am surprised that he is saying these things. Mr. Speaker, I will say it here and anywhere, 100 times over, that there was no need -- and nobody can fault me on this; that there was completely no need to look for any evidence. He must know that; and I know he knows it.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Minority Leader, kindly address the point. The question is this: That since the lady involved corroborated the evidence of Dr. Anane -- I think that is the point; you address it and let us go on.
Mr. Bagbin 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I said that it would be important to read the e-mail she sent to the Sub-Committee. Mr. Speaker, let us even go to their Report, page 5. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of clarification we should start from paragraph 3 and then go to paragraph 4 where it starts with the name of hon. Dr. Anane. And Mr. Speaker, especially starting with line 4 where we have Dr. Anane --
“The nominee however denied transferring an amount of US $45,000 on two separate occasions amounting to US $90,000 to Miss O'Brien. This was strongly
Mr. Bagbin 1:10 p.m.
challenged by an hon. Member, leading to a referral of the Committee's recommendation to allow for further checks over the issue.
The Sub-Committee which was subsequently tasked to look into the matter made contacts with Miss O'Brien in the US. She informed the sub-committee that even though she had received over US $90,000 between 2002 and 2003 through various means for her upkeep, she never received an amount of US$45,000 in a single remittance from hon. Dr. Richard Anane or any source close to him.
Witness stated that apart from three occasions when the nominee personally handed specific cash amounts to her, the bulk of the remittances were received from persons related to or associated with Dr. Anane.”
She mentioned the occasions and the amounts as stated there: Accra -- $10,000 plus $3,000; Germany 5,000 Euros; and in London 1,000 pounds. So Mr. Speaker, I insist that the investigations were incomplete and that there is the need for them to go back and then allow further evidence to be taken on this matter.
Mr. Speaker, may I move to the other nominees. In the case of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye, Mr. Speaker, hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye appeared before a similar Appointments Committee in 2001. He submitted a C.V. which is in the possession of this House and stated the schools and institutions he attended and the qualifications obtained. Now the schools attended, apart from Police Training Depot Primary School, Achimota Training College, Odorgonno Secondary School, he also stated that he attended Institute of Bankers, London and Institute
of Management Studies, London.
As a result of that when he stated the qualifications to include Cambridge School Certificate, Diploma in Management and Diploma in Journalism, there was no need for any person to raise the issue because he had stated that he attended Institute of Bankers and Institute of Management Studies.
Mr. Speaker, he then came before the Committee this year with another C.V. In that C.V. the Institutes that he attended and mentioned in the other C.V., they disappeared. They now do not reflect on the C.V. and now we have only the qualifications of Cambridge School Certificate, Diploma in Management Studies and Diploma in Journalism. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Appointments Committee and as a former vice chairman of the Appointments Committee, I had possession of these documents. So it raised eyebrows, and I raised the question during the vetting of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye. And Mr. Speaker, I accepted to delete “Banker” from it because he said he worked in the bank for some time so he thought by virtue of working in the bank he was a banker -- [Uproar.] I said, “Well, that is not a profession.” It was put under profession and occupation so I agreed that that be deleted.
Now we went to the other certificates and truly, Mr. Speaker, we all heard what happened there. He said that his house was destroyed and therefore he could not get possession of these certificates. Now this is not the first time that certificates disappear before Appointments Committees; it happened before in the case of hon. Bamba and we went through it and we advised on this floor that we were very convinced -- I was one of those who urged His Excellency the President not to appoint him because I thought that he was not fit and suitable to hold the high
office of a Deputy Minister of State. The Majority had the day; we went ahead and we experienced it as a country.
Mr. Speaker, we are here today -- there is disappearance of certificates as a result of the destruction of a house. So it raised doubts and that is why we asked the Sub-Committee to go further into this issue. When the Sub-Committee was going into this issue, there was no mention of ‘attending' institutes; it was a correspondence course through Rapid Results College. Now Mr. Speaker, nowhere did he mention attending Institute of Management Studies where one could say that as a result of those attendances he did the courses and got a Diploma in Management Studies.
Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, even the Institute or Board awarding the certificates could not be recollected -- not the certificates, the institutes that awarded the certificates could not be recollected -- amnesia it could be; let us accept it. But Mr. Speaker, it is important for us as a House to always get ourselves convinced in our recommendations to His Excellency the President for appointments. If we have any doubts whatsoever that our power, authority and resources will not be in safe hands, it is advisable to err on the side of caution; and I think we should err on the side of caution.
Mr. Speaker, I insist that in spite of the beautifully crafted testimony from the Headmistress of Odorgonno Secondary School who initially gave evidence that all documents of the school connected with that period could not be traced because according to the information, they had moved premises now to Awoshie and maybe they misplaced them -- crafted a testimonial about how dutiful and respectful that he was and that he was even a school prefect and all those things -- I was told that his mates testified to that
effect and therefore they wrote it.
That is dangerous -- no records -- Current young lady headmistress testifying falsely, 51-58 -- [Laughter.] Mr. Speaker, there we go! At the end of the day the paragraph recommending that we should approve him says, and Mr. Speaker, I quote:
“In the circumstances the Committee was obliged by concensus of all 18 members present and voting to recommend his nomination for approval by the House in spite of doubts raised by a couple of members.”
Mr. Speaker, I think that if there are doubts, this House should not recommend that he should be appointed as a Minister of State.
May I, Mr. Speaker, now move on to hon. Isaac E. Edumadze. Hon. Isaac Edumadze who appeared before the Committee had so many petitions against him. We took him through the petitions; a few areas were not clear, we had doubts and said that the Committee should investigate further.
Mr. Speaker, again, I had a problem with the mandate of the Committee but the Committee insisted that the mandate given the Sub-Committee was on the allegation that he demanded an amount of ¢250 million from K. E. & Sons contractors before he could sign a certificate for the payment of bills owed them.
Mr. Speaker, I recollected and stated that when we talk about a contractor the reference was to Saraswati where it was alleged that on the basis of the Managing Director's refusal to construct a 4-bedroomed house for the nominee, the nominee terminated his contract.

Now I was told at the committee
Mr. Bagbin 1:10 p.m.


yesterday that that was not true, but I remember that before I rushed to my constituency I insisted that that should be part of the terms of the Committee. So it was not taken into consideration. The Managing Director and his Supervisor were available, trying to testify to prove their case on this matter but because it was not the mandate of the Committee, the Committee could not listen to their case.

In the case of K. E. and Sons, Mr. Speaker, even before the Committee could go into the matter they had gone on air to deny that allegation; so it was clear to all of us that there was no way we could investigate further if the person who was alleged to have given the money had denied it. Therefore I would be surprised if that would have been the mandate for the Sub-Committee to go and investigate further.
Mr. Hackman Owusu-Agyemang 1:10 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, this particular issue was flogged ad nauseam at the committee meeting yesterday and our clear understanding was that the hon. Minority Leader's understanding was not the Committee's understanding. Indeed, we had to go over and over more than three times as to what precisely they were supposed to investigate.
He can have all manner of opinions but what the Committee decided is what is germane to this whole argument. His understanding -- and he left on that day -- was not what was done and I think the records should be set straight lest it be understood that the Sub-Committee, the Aidooh Committee did not do what was asked of them.
What was asked of them is precisely what they have done and so in arguing the case, it cannot be said that the Aidooh Committee refused to see them
because that was not part of their terms of reference. It was not germane to the main issue and that has to be corrected. I think the hon. Minority Leader can have his own prerogative but as a committee, our decision is not what he is articulating on the floor of this House.
Mr. Bagbin 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, exactly
what I stated -- I said my understanding of the mandate was that they were to investigate the allegations concerning Saraswati Construction Company but the Sub-Committee insisted their mandate was to investigage the allegations concerning K. E. and Sons. Mr. Speaker, that is what the Committee itself at the meeting debated about, and at page 7 of the report of the Committee --let me refer to it -- page 7, paragraph 2; it is stated there:
“A section of the Committee argued for an expansion of the mandate of the Sub-Committee to enable it to take evidence of hon. Appiah- Ofori and his witnesses in respect of the other allegations against the nominee. The Committee could not, however, reach a consensus on this view and therefore voted by majority decision to recommend the nomination of hon. Isaac Edumadze to the House for approval.”
What I am raising is that that view was raised and the Committee could not come to a consensus on that view and so they voted. So Mr. Speaker, I am raising the issue that there are outstanding issues for the Committee to investigate. Mr. Speaker, this is a serious matter.
Now, my hon. Colleague used the term “failed to”; whether it was declined or failed or refused, it amounts to not hearing evidence from those witnesses but I am saying that the allegations and issues that were raised are so serious that the Committee should delve into them and report properly to this House to enable
the House to advise His Excellency the President as to whether the nominees are fit and proper to hold -- [Interrruption]--
Mr. Owusu-Agyemang 1:10 p.m.
The point at issue is that the mandate of the Committee was what was discharged. You cannot keep shifting the goal posts all the time because once we give them the mandate to investigate a specific allegation, they come back with an answer and then you say that they go back to another one. You cannot do that in any situation. That is not natural justice. If the hon. Minority Leader was not there at a point in time when we were deciding on the mandate of the Sub-Committee, well, it was too bad but that was the mandate that was given to the Committee. You cannot come back again; once they have been found not to be true then you shift the goal posts again and you go to another one.
There have been countless allegations and that is why the Committee of the Whole did not agree to the hon. Member's assertion that we should expand it post facto after we have done it. It would have been interminable so we decided to take a decision. Therefore if he wants to make a submission to this House please, let us do it in such a way that we do not keep changing the goal posts all the time; we could not do that as a committee and we needed to report, so we reported. So he should not make it look like he had other evidence and we refused to hear it. That is not the case or the point at issue.
Mr. Bagbin 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is not me
who raised the issue at the Appointments Committee. The report itself says it was a section of the Committee; a section could not be the hon. Minority Leader. There were a number of members who did that. But Mr. Speaker, I have gone beyond the issue of mandate and I said that with this knowledge it meant that the Committee had not finished the investigation.
When I referred to the Committee, I was talking about the Appointments Committee; I was not even talking about the Sub-Committee. Therefore, the matter should be referred to the Appointments Committee for further investigations so that we can be properly advised as to the suitability or otherwise of the nominee for the position that he has been nominated; this is simple and short.
Mr. Speaker, may I now try to refer -- because some people took some issues so lightly as if anybody could appear before the Appointments Committee and just say anything, whether true or untrue and go scot-free. It was as though it did not matter if a person said that he had this and at the end of the day he never had it. It did not matter. Mr. Speaker, it is important for us to look at our own Standing Orders which were couched from the constitutional provisions and expanded. I think articles 122 and 123 -- Mr. Speaker, that is on contempt of Parliament. I would particularly want to refer to Standing Orders 28 and 30. For the purpose of time, I will read the relevant portions of Standing Order 30.
“The following acts or conduct shall constitute a breach of privilege or contempt of Parliament --
x x x x
( d ) P r e s e n t i n g t o Parliament frivolous, false, scandalous, groundless or fabricated documents or such allegations in a petition;
( e ) a n y a c t o r c o n d u c t calculated or intended to deceive Parliament or any of its Committees;
( f ) del iberate mis leading of Parliament or any of its Committees”.
Mr. Bagbin 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, these are serious matters and in fact if you go through the Criminal Code, if you swear on oath and testify and give false testimony, that is perjury. Mr. Speaker, if you submit a document that on the face of it there are questions of its authenticity and this is raised, that is going towards forgery and possession of fault documents and tendering forged documents. These are all criminal offences. In spite of all these, from our own guidelines, Members say the benefit of the doubt should inure to the nominees. I beg to differ.

Mr. Speaker, this I believe is a serious matter, and this House should take it seriously because the good people of Ghana elected us to come and represent them here and make sure that their interests are protected. And I believe strongly that if we go this way, we will not be protecting the interests of the good people of Ghana.

Mr. Speaker, it is important for people to know that even though my attention was drawn to all this, I did not listen to the witnesses. I heard on air, I read newspapers as all of us did. But those who came, I insisted that I did not want them to come to me for it to look like it was being partisan. I could have gone ahead to listen to them but I said, no, go to the Committee and if the Committee is saying that the mandate is not correct we will go to the Appointments Committee and review that mandate so that they can take the evidence and inform Parliament properly. That was the reason behind the emergency meeting of yesterday.

Mr. Speaker, surprisingly, at the emergency meeting, a report of the Sub- Committee was submitted and I raised preliminary objection to that report, that the meeting was called for us to look at their mandate and make sure they listen to the other witnesses. The Committee led by
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a
point of order. Mr. Speaker, yesterday's meeting was not meant to consider our mandate. The meeting of yesterday was to consider the report of the Sub-Committee, and two, to discuss the nomination of hon. Christine Churcher for appointment as Minister for Environment and Science. There was nothing about our mandate.
Mr. Bagbin 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not
sure he was listening to me. I said that the reason behind the emergency meeting of yesterday was for us to consider the mandate of the Sub- Committee. But at the committee and on the Order Paper notice was given for some two items to be considered. That was what I said.
Mr. Speaker, at that meeting I raised a preliminary objection and brought in the issue of the mandate, that we should look at the mandate if they are looking at it technically so that we can review it for them to listen to. Even if nothing at all, an hon. Member who had dared -- and I think that he should be awarded, for coming out from the Majority side and petitioning against Members of the Majority and insisting that he be heard, having brought witnesses twice from Central Region and on the basis of the mandate were not heard and they went back to the Central Region -- [Some hon. Members -- O-o-o-h!] Mr. Speaker, I insist that the work of the Committee is unfinished business and the Committee should go back and do a better job and resubmit the Report to enable us, at least, advise the President better, in the national interest. Mr. Speaker, I do plead. It is because of these good reasons that I urge my hon. Colleagues to reject the Report and send it back to the Committee to do a better job and come back to this House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
Mr. John D. Mahama (NDC -- Bole/ Bamboi) 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to contribute to this debate. Mr. Speaker, I am a member of the Appointments Committee and participated actively in its work.
Mr. Speaker, in Ghana, our Constitution provides for an Executive Presidency that aggregates a lot of power in the President of the Republic. Mr. Speaker, to ameliorate that excessive power, Parliament is given certain responsibilities of oversight over the Executive; that is what is generally called in political science as“checks and balances”.
Mr. Speaker, some of the very important oversights that Parliament has over the Executive is in terms of approving the Budget that is submitted by the Executive. Mr. Speaker, Parliament has the responsibility of approving all loan agreements and international transactions that are entered into by the Government of Ghana. And another important check is that Parliament has the responsibility to grant prior approval before the President can appoint any person as a Minister of State. This is a very onerous responsibility and this responsibility has to be taken with all the gravity it deserves and must not be trifled with.
Mr. Speaker, we have a duty to
our people to discharge our duties as Members of Parliament with the clearest of consciences. Mr. Speaker, the first Report of the Appointments Committee was presented to this House and I would like to highlight the issues that were contained in the “Conclusion”. The Appointments Committee indicated that it faced two key constraints in discharging its duty: One, the technical and resource capacity to properly investigate petitions that were brought before the Committee. Two, time constraints.
Therefore the Committee was saying that we should look into the transitional arrangements so that sufficient time is provided for the Committee to be able to carry out a credible job and be able to advise this House appropriately. Mr. Speaker, these are all very important issues and I think that the lessons that are coming out in respect of this particular Report of the Appointments Committee upholds the need for this House to look urgently at the capacity of the Committee that we appoint to vet these nominees and the time frame in which they are expected to carry out this job. And I think that if that lesson is learnt from what is going on on the floor of this House today we would move a step forward.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee is very
severely constrained in respect of investigations and that is why we are seeing these problems with the Sub- Committee. The Sub-Committee, made up of two members and a clerk were given duties to perform. I am sure that as a result of the capacity that they were faced with those duties probably did not live up to expectation; and that is an issue we must address.
But Mr. Speaker, let me speak about the
mandate -- and the issue of the mandate came up strongly in our deliberations at the committee meeting yesterday. Mr. Speaker, in almost all the cases, we disagreed on what we thought the mandate we had given the Committee was. The hon. Minority Leader spoke extensively about this; and I would say that particularly in the third case, while we thought the investigation was supposed to relate to the issue of a construction company called Saraswati, Mr. Speaker, when the Sub-Committee presented its report, it was in relation to a ¢250 million bribery allegation relating to a company called K. E. & Sons.
Mr. John D. Mahama (NDC -- Bole/ Bamboi) 1:30 p.m.
We sit here as representatives of the people and the people expect us to carry out their mandate as thoroughly as we can. Mr. Speaker, we therefore argued that if there were technical problems to do with the mandate of the Committee, in the interest of justice both to the nominees and this House, that the Committee is able to advise this House properly, we should correct the problems with the mandate and let the Sub-Committee look at these issues again so that it can advise the Appointments Committee properly and on that basis the Appointments Committee can advise this House properly.

Unfortunately, we do have a problem of procedure: where the Committee is unable to agree on any matter, the view of the majority carries the day. So despite the fact that we argued very valiantly to try to correct the anomalies in the mandate and have the Sub-Committee review some of these issues again in the interest of justice and fair play, Mr. Speaker, at the end, it came down to the basic maxim that let the minority have its say and let the majority have its way. Mr. Speaker, that is the basis of the Report you see before you here today. The hon. Minority Leader has gone into the merits of individual cases and I am not going to go into that.

The only position I will canvass very strongly on the floor of this House is that we review the procedures in respect of some of these committees and Mr. Speaker, we take all possible actions to try to strengthen the capacity of your committees to do a very good job. In the case of the Appointments Committee, I think that the suggestion that where the Committee is stunted in respect of its investigative powers, a possibility of a referral of an investigation to a

state institution like the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) or BNI or whichever organiza- tion -

Mr. Speaker, let me make that point again. I said that where the Committee is severely stunted in terms of its capacity to investigate a particular matter, reference to an appropriate state institution that has the better investigative capacity can be used so that upon the termination of that investigation, whatever report it is would be submitted to the Appointments Committee, so that a better decision can be taken on the nominees in question. Mr. Speaker, I will urge very much that we take the lessons of today and we look at the issues that have been raised so that this Committee will do a job that is credible and worth its name.

Mr. Speaker, an hon. Member of this House petitioned the Committee and came with witnesses to testify. Yes, it is true that the mandate probably was wrongly assigned or did not reflect what exactly we had in mind. But Mr. Speaker, this is an hon. Member of this House who has taken it upon himself against all norms of conformism to put out a point, and I do think if we had just exercised a few more days, corrected the mandate, listened to the hon. Member and his witnesses and brought this advice back to the House, and a decision was taken, it would have been a better service to our people than we actually did.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank you for this opportunity. I will end my speech here.
Mr. Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Hon. Member at the back, you have less than five minutes.
Mr. Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Five.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to comment only on the report on hon. Edumadze. Mr. Speaker, all of us here mortal, one day will die and leave the scene. If therefore, today Ghanaians have entrusted us with the mandate to run the affairs of this country, we must do the best we can and leave the scene with a conscience that we have done our best. Other than that posterity will not forgive us.
Mr. Speaker, corruption has been the bane of the national economy. Before independence, prostitution was unknown to Ghanaian women. Prostitutes in Ghana came from Calabar in Nigeria. Also, Mr. Speaker, conservancy labourers in Ghana came from Liberia. But today, as a result of corruption, the opposite is the case. It is against this background that the framers of the Constitution brought about article 35 (8), which says, and with your permission I quote:
“The State shall take steps to eradicate or corrupt practices and the abuse of power.”
All of us here swore the oath to uphold the Constitution, so all of us owe a duty to ensure that corruption is minimized so that the style of living of the people will be enhanced. Anything in short of that, we are not fulfilling our mandate to the people.
Mr. Speaker, I brought these allegations there and I expected the Committee to give me the chance to prove them for the benefit of this country, for the benefit of the Government and for the benefit of our party. [Interruption.] Yes! During the 2004 campaign the National Democratic Congress Party's message against us was corruption; they used it extensively against us. If God had not been on our side, we would have lost our mandate. So,
we should demonstrate to the world, we should demonstrate to Ghanaians that we eschew corruption.
So Mr. Speaker, I have brought documents to prove that hon. Edumadze has not done what he was supposed to do. For instance, Mr. Speaker, article 87 (2) vests in the Auditor-General power to audit the public accounts; he is the only person who has the power to audit public accounts. Not even the President, not the Speaker, not the Chief Justice, only the Auditor-General. Article 87(3) says that if the Auditor-General is unable to investigate, he may appoint or authorize another auditor to do that for him.
Mr. Speaker 1:30 p.m.
You know time is not on your side, so kindly go ahead.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of national interest, so give me at least five more minutes. Mr. Speaker, he appointed an auditor who came to audit CEDECOM and within four days he issued this report. Mr. Speaker, immediately afterwards, hon. Edumadze terminated the appointment of the Chief Executive and appointed in the place of the Chief Executive the same auditor. The auditor was a friend of his, he was looking for a job for him, and then he conspired to do so.
Mr. Speaker, according to article 87 (5), it is only Parliament that has power to examine the Auditor-General's report or the public accounts. Hon. Edumadze has no power whatsoever under the Constitution to look at the audited accounts and then act on it. But he did that, and then fired that person. Mr. Speaker,
Alhaji Abu-Bakar Saddique Boniface 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I stand on a point of relevance. Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. Member is not speaking to the Report. Mr. Speaker, all that the hon. Member is saying cannot be associated with what we are here to discuss today. He is saying things that we do not know. Mr. Speaker, I think what the hon. Member is saying is totally out of place. He is making allegations.
Mr. Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Hon. Member, he has two minutes to go, so please let him finish.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1:40 p.m.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I understand I have five more minutes to go. Mr. Speaker, article 257 of the Constitution, clause 1 vests in the President all state lands. All the public lands in the country are vested in the President who holds the lands in trust for the people of Ghana. The Regional Minister therefore holds the lands in his region on behalf of the President in trust for the people of Ghana.
Mr. Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Hon. Member, you must

be about to wind up. I have given you more than ten minutes now, so try and wind up.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1:40 p.m.
I am winding up. In the Central Region we have a parcel of land at a place called Assin Amoabeng which covers 1,077 acres; it is a state land and he was the custodian of the land, holding it in trust on behalf of the President for the people of Ghana. But this man bulldozed his way and has appropriated the land and converted it into a cocoa farm for himself.
So Mr. Speaker, if a person abuses his own office, if a person corrupts himself -- and we are enjoined under article 35 (a) to eradicate corrupt practices -- it is unsafe to entrust such a high office to such a person. My argument here is that having abused his office and having corrupted himself, the House should not approve of his appointment. So I want to urge everybody here, including my Friends all over, not to give approval for his appointment. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Chairman, would you wind up? Hon. Majority Leader wants to say something; let us hear him.
Majority Leader (Mr. F. K. Owusu- Adjapong) 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thought others were going to speak, but since you want the Chairman to wind up, Mr. Speaker, let me give some few comments on the matter. Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate -- [Interruption.]
Mr. John Tia 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on the application list by the hon. Majority Leader, I think if he wants to have the last say on the other side then we also deserve to be heard on this side. I thought that you had told the Chairman to wind up but since he wants to have the last say, we deserve to be heard on this side also.
Mr. Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Let me have indication
from the Majority Leader. Do you want to say something?
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think normal rules in good Parliaments like this very good Parliament of ours indicate that when the Speaker calls for winding up it means that he is not going to take any further statement from anybody. And at least as the Leader of the House and more importantly since the Minority Leader has spoken, I think I am entitled to speak. But if the hon. Colleague thinks that he wants to plead with Mr. Speaker that maybe the winding up should be deferred, that is a different matter. But if Mr. Speaker still is talking about winding up, then I think the few amenities I should have as the Leader of the House should be respected by all, including my own Minority Chief Whip. On that basis I believe, Mr. Speaker -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Deputy Minority Leader, are you taking objection to that?
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we are not suggesting in any way that the Majority Leader of this House should not speak. Mr. Speaker, because he did not give the earlier indication -- Normally, we watch you and we watch the backbenchers for those who are standing up so that the Leadership does not block them. But because he did not give an earlier indication and we saw that hon. Members from both sides were getting up, we on this side decided to keep quiet; the Leadership decided to keep quiet until maybe you heard them. But when you gave the indication about winding up, the Leadership got up on both sides; and the normal practice is that you listen to one on our side and then take one from the Majority Leader and then call on the Chairman of the Committee who moved the motion to do the winding up.
Mr. Speaker 1:40 p.m.
I will do so. Hon. Members, I therefore direct that we are
going to have an extended Sitting; we will not close at 2 o'clock but maybe about 2.30 p.m. so that I hear you all. Go on.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to work on the assumption that you are prepared to allow both -- [Inter- ruption.]
Mr. Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Yes, I will.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 1:40 p.m.
In which case, I will wait and exercise my right as the last person to speak before the winding up. That is the right which I have.
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, you want to speak? Then you will speak and the Majority Leader will speak, and then the Chairman will wind up.
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho (NDC -- Avenor/Ave) 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, after you had been elected to the high office of Speaker on 7th January 2005, you administered the Oath of Members of Parliament to these hon. Members of this House. And Mr. Speaker, we can find this Oath in the Second Schedule to our Constitution. Mr. Speaker, with your permission, I will quote the Oath of a Member of Parliament:
rose
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, are you raising a point of order?
Mr. Hammond 1:50 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr.
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, as you know, you are completely out of order.
Mr. Adjaho 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it continues,
“. . . that I will uphold, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Republic Ghana; and that I will faithfully and conscientiously discharge the duties of a Member of Parliament. (So help me God).”
Mr. Speaker, at times in discharging this responsibility and this oath you have taken, it can be very onerous. Today is one of the days that the duty is very onerous, especially when this Report deals with our colleague Members of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, these hon. Colleagues on the other side are very good friends of mine but Mr. Speaker, my view is that this Report in this current form, does not advance the cause of this House, neither does it help the nominees.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, it is an embarrassment to this honourable House. Mr. Speaker, we are not being fair to this House with this Report and this Report is not also being fair to the nominees.
Mr. Speaker, why do I say so? Let us just look at the concluding part on the first nominee. Let us look at the last paragraph. Page four, the last paragraph on the first
nominee, and I quote:
“In the circumstance, the Committee was obliged by the consensus of all eighteen members present and voting to recommend his nomination for approval by the House in spite of doubts raised by a couple of members.”
Mr. Speaker, how do you have consensus and still have doubts?
rose
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Chairman, do you have any objection to this?
Mr. Blay 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is a point of order. I think the hon. Deputy Minority Leader is misleading this House. Indeed, just as we have reported that it was by consensus, although doubts had been expressed, the words speak for themselves.
Indeed, there cannot be a consensus sometimes without doubts but we did ask all members what their position was on the matter and everybody there and voting said they agreed. And it is expressive enough and clear enough. As to whether some people said they had one or two doubts, when the time came for voting, some of these people said that yes, in spite of those we could go ahead with it, including Minority Members who were on the Committee.
So Mr. Speaker, I am a little surprised that the hon. Deputy Minority Leader is creating an impression that indeed there was some confusion as to whether it was a consensus or not.
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, the point he is making is that although they had doubts, everybody agreed that it should go through. So kindly address that.
Mr. Adjaho 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, there are members on the Committee who reported to the Minority leadership that no vote was taken at all on this matter and that the Chairman of the Committee virtually imposed the nominee on them. [Interruptions.]
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Order! Order!
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, are you taking a point of order?
Mr. Hammond 1:50 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member is calling into disrepute the integrity of the “whole” First Deputy Speaker of this honourable House. He is saying that it is an imposition on the other members of that Sub-Committee and that no such decision was taken.
Mr. Speaker, either he substantiates it or he is told in no uncertain terms to withdraw it and to render an unqualified apology on the floor of this House.
Mr. Adjaho 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this is one occasion I will not withdraw but repeat it.
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, I should have called upon you before you spoke. That is the question that has been put to you. May I find out from you whether at all material times you were a member of this Committee.
Mr. Adjaho 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not a member of the Appointments Committee. But Mr. Speaker, we have members of the Appointments Committee from our side who are on their feet right now and
who are prepared to substantiate what I am saying.
Mr. Speaker, the Member for Ho Central (Capt. G. K. Nfojoh (rtd.)) is here; the Member for Ho East (Mrs. Juliana Azumah-Mensah) is here; they are members of the Committee.
Mr. Speaker, if you may give them the opportunity they would --
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, take it as a report coming from the Committee, and go on.
Mr. Adjaho 1:50 p.m.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So Mr. Speaker, clearly, there is a problem there. Mr. Speaker, the essence of the Chair referring a matter to a Sub-Committee is for the -- [Interruption.]
rose
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, any objection?
Mr. Hammond 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, with respect, a point of order was raised and we are saying that he called the character of the First Deputy Speaker into question. He should substantiate it; he has not. And we have not heard anything to that effect. He is moving on -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, you admitted that you were not a member of the Committee. That, in fact, really means that you had no cause to make the allegation that you did. Not being a member, you could not impute. So I think you would do the honourable thing and if any other members will have anything to say, they will say it. But at the moment, this is the document coming from the Committee, which has been signed by both the Chairman and the Clerk. And I do not think it is advisable at this stage to challenge its contents.
Mr. Adjaho 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, clearly, I
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
I would advise you -- you do not have to say it. You do not have the authority to say it. Let somebody else say it.
Mr. Adjaho 1:50 p.m.
Very well, Mr. Speaker. I was proceeding when he got up, which is out of order. After you ruled on the matter I was supposed to proceed to another issue but he got up again as if he was challenging your ruling and raised the matter again.
Mr. Speaker, you have ruled that I should continue.
Mr. Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, I thought you had indication from me as to what you should do. Because you not being a member of the Committee, what do you do?
Mr. Adjaho 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the second point -- [Uproar.] Well, Mr. Speaker, if it is your wish that I withdraw then I do so.
Mr. Speaker, let us move on. When reference is made to a committee, the essence of the reference from the Chair is to resolve all doubts and give a report to the House so that when a decision is taken we are very clear in our minds. When they reported that they agreed on a majority decision, we were very clear on what they said; that no doubt, it is a majority decision so we cannot fault the Committee on that ruling. But when they come back and report that there are doubts, meanwhile they have been given the right to investigate the matter and report to the House, under the Constitution and the Standing Orders, how can we do the
investigation on the floor of this House? Clearly, there is a problem there with this Report.
Mr. Hammond 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, unfor- tunately, I have another serious point of order. The hon. Member is misleading this House and the country. The hon. Member, I am told, is a lawyer and I am told again that he is a very good one for that matter. There is a basic misunderstanding of what -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Adjaho 2 p.m.
This is not a point of order.
Mr. Speaker 2 p.m.
Let us hear him. Order!
Mr. Hammond 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee was given a matter to investigate which, according to the hon. Minority Leader of the House, is a very serious one. He cited from the Constitution, and our procedures and he said it bordered on criminality. Mr. Speaker, it is for precisely that reason that that matter should not be decided on the preponderance of probabilities but rather on the criminal burden. So if they come to a point where there is --
Mr. Speaker 2 p.m.
Hon. Member, what is your point of order?
Mr. Hammond 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
point of order is that he must understand the legal basis for conclusion in this matter because if it is that serious there is room for doubt that that does not prevent the Committee from arriving at a consensus.
Mr. Speaker 2 p.m.
Hon. Member, if your
point is that he must understand, then you

know it is not a point of order.
Mr. Adjaho 2 p.m.
I thank you very much
for your ruling, Mr. Speaker. Another excuse used by the Committee in its Report before this honourable House is one of alibi, but it is the alibi of time constraint and lack of resources. Mr. Speaker, what is the time issue?
If the people of this country have made
complaints against the hon. Members, it is in their interest that this matter is investigated and then they are even cleared. It is good for their image; it is good for their public standing. Right now, there are doubts and they are saying that because of time constraint, because of resources -- What specific requests did they make on Parliament which we failed to grant them? They have not told us in this Committee's Report.
Mr. Speaker, for example, as Members of Parliament we just contested an election and we were asked to put even the last school you attended on the nomination forms. Taking a car from Parliament House to the National Electoral Commission to get the nomination forms in order to find out what he put there to determine a certain trend in filling his forms to know whether it was deliberate or otherwise could even remove certain doubts about the nominee's certificates and the schools that he had attended. How much money do we need to move from Parliament House to the National Electoral Commission? On this basis, this Report cannot be supported by some of us.
Mr. Speaker, it should be rejected
because they have not done their work well. It is an embarrassment to this House; it is bogus and a fraud on this House.
Mr. Blay 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, if you would
allow me, there is a little point of order for purposes of the record.
The hon. Minority Leader at the tail end of his contribution, made a categorical statement. He did say, “It is bogus”; I do not have any problem with that. He did say, “It is embarrassing”; I do not have any problem with that. But he also added, “It is a fraud on this House” This, from a leader of this House, is uncalled for. I am insisting, Mr. Speaker, that you ask the hon. Deputy Minority Leader to withdraw that.
Mr. Bagbin 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the question was directed to me and I never made that statement. Because he said “Minority Leader”, I am the Minority Leader and I never made that statement he said I had made.
Mr. Speaker 2 p.m.
Hon. Minority Leader, this matter was directed at your Deputy.
Mr. Adjaho 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy he has accepted the “bogus”. It is “one-one draw”; so I have withdrawn the “fraud”.
Mr. Speaker 2 p.m.
Thank you. And let us go on, please.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, once again the Chairman of the Appointments Committee and his members have done a yeoman's job.
Mr. Speaker, I was becoming worried when some Members were suggesting that we should abandon our responsibilities as one of the important estates of this realm and succumb to some Executive powers when it comes to performing our duties on the floor of this House.
Mr. Speaker, when we have a committee, it is a committee of Parliament and therefore if anybody has a problem and he begins to send it to the Executive
Mr. Bagbin 2 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, my hon. Colleague the Majority Leader is misleading the House. The fact that you give an area of your work to a State institution to assist you does not mean that you are not operating independently. He is aware that even the Appointments Committee refers these matters to the security agencies to cross-check on their backgrounds and on criminality before we go on. That does not mean that we are subservient to those agencies. So the suggestion by the hon. John Mahama for us to make use of State institutions does not mean we are whittling down our independence in any way; he is misleading the House.
Mr. Speaker 2 p.m.
Hon. Majority Leader, take that into account in your contribution.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2 p.m.
I am taking that into account, bearing in mind that if the Committee -- [Interruption.]
rose
Mr. Speaker 2 p.m.
Hon. Member for Bole, are you going to also raise another point of order?
Mr. Mahama 2 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, with your indulgence. Mr. Speaker, even on this very floor when issues to do with the Police Service and human rights have been raised, our hon. Colleagues on this side have said the Police Service is an independent State institution and it is not controlled by the Executive. Several hon. Members have canvassed that on this side.
So I am surprised that if we say
we should refer issues to independent State institutions -- I even mentioned Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice first. Unless he wants to tell me that the Executive controls the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice, I do not see any problem with it.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, let us make progress. All that I am saying is that when we set up a committee and they have a problem, I believe the best thing to do is what has been done by the hon. Chairman and his members; that they come back to the floor. If at today's Sitting, we are convinced that some more work needs to be done, it is this House, and only this House that should take that decision.
Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed listening to my Colleague, the hon. Minority Leader, when he said that two personalities appointed some time ago under the former regime had problems here and there, and I was expecting to hear from him -- “and therefore the Committee rejected the persons”.
Mr. John Mahama 2:10 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, no report was brought here asking that a nominee be withdrawn because that Government was a listening Government.
Mr. Speaker 2:10 p.m.
That is no point of order. Go on.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:10 p.m.
Hon. John Mahama is a very good friend of mine. We have a lot of things in common; he knows them except one which I will not say today. Mr. Speaker, what happened was that they were never rejected by the Committee. Perhaps, the former President withdrew those nominations for reasons quite different from what we are now imagining. We do not have any record anywhere that Ex-President Rawlings said: “I am withdrawing ‘A' and ‘B' because of what the Committee has found.” Now, we know that as the President of the country, President Kufuor has a better reach to information than most of us and therefore, if he has not seen the need to withdraw these three nominees -- [Interruption.]
Mr. John Tia 2:10 p.m.
On a point of order.
Mr. Speaker 2:10 p.m.
Order!
Mr. Tia 2:10 p.m.
That he never brought any
statement here to explain why he withdrew the nominees. I just want to put on record that the former President did not have any obligation to do so.
Mr. Speaker 2:10 p.m.
Hon. Minority Chief
Whip, certainly that was not a point of order.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
am happy with the additional information secured -- “Dr. Dr.”. I do not intend asking for schools attended or any other thing. I just want to go ahead and then move on. I would want to assume that the “Dr. Dr.” does exist and move ahead. Mr. Speaker, so if the former President, maybe, based on some additional information not
at all related to his took a decision, so be it.
As I said, I know that the Head of State, His Excellency John Agyekum Kufuor has more information available to him than us; and therefore, for him to have still kept the nomination with us means that possibly, what we are now seeing that there is not an iota of truth in what was being canvassed by others is his position. That is why we should go ahead with the recommendation of the Committee by the majority.
Mr. Mahama 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am
surprised because the hon. Majority Leader is subverting the constitutional responsibility of this House. If the President is all-knowing, then what is the need for an Appointments Committee in the first place? [Some hon. Members: Oh, how!] That is the thing. He said he knows more than us.
Mr. Speaker 2:10 p.m.
Hon. Member for
Bole, this is not a point of order. Let him continue.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I am happy about the way the Sub- Committee performed. Mr. Speaker, it is not everybody who, when given other powers, would want to keep to the limits within which he or she has been authorised to perform.
We know that we tend to create dictatorship by always assuming that people should do more than they are entitled to do. We must begin to learn from this exemplary behaviour of the members of this Committee, that if the Committee as a whole has decided to limit you to “A”, you do not come back saying that I have now secured additional information and therefore I want to do ‘‘A'', ‘‘B'', ‘‘C'' and ‘‘D.'' A day may come when they would even tell us that all of us in Parliament are doing other things and therefore they should continue to run the place for
Mr. Bagbin 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, my hon.
Colleague is seriously misleading the House and the entire nation by stating that the petitioner, who is an hon. Member did not suffer any injury from the action that he petitioned against.
Mr. Speaker, as a dutiful citizen, a representative of his people, he is duty
Mr. Speaker 2:20 p.m.
Hon. Majority Leader, what was the point you were raising in respect to that?
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:20 p.m.
The point I am raising is this, that the announcement that anybody who has a case against any of the nominee was made to the people of Ghana and when I read the petition received from this hon. Member -- he is always acting as agent for some other people -- I never saw anywhere that he said, “I have suffered myself”. That is why I am trying to draw attention to the fact that possibly -- [Interruptions.] Please, he should let me finish with it.
Mr. Speaker, we have been told about contempt; and in one of the documents that were submitted by my hon. Colleague, that hon. Member, he made reference to this K. E. & Sons man as part of the petition. So when he was called upon to give evidence, he said, “No, I am not giving any evidence on that”. And this is what the Committee possibly has gone ahead to give evidence on to substantiate. That might have convinced the Sub-Committee to say that, “Having been able to prove this, we can rely on your accusation and call others.”
Now, if there is going to be any contempt issue, let us look at it and see whether that is not contempt as was elaborately quoted by him that he had told the Committee that he had information that that lady had been connected. He has been saved by not even offering himself to give evidence an oath only for him to prove that K. E. & Sons says he never had any such information or gave him any such money.
rose
Mr. Speaker 2:20 p.m.
Are you having a point of order to raise?
Mr. Tia 2:20 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the rules of this House show that we should be decorous in our reference to our hon. Colleagues. I heard the hon. Majority Leader refer to one of our hon. Colleagues, hon. P. C. Appiah-Ofori as a “petition contractor”. I think that that is unacceptable to this House and it is unparliamentary; and I would call on the hon. Majority Leader to withdraw that statement and apologise to the hon. Member.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is a question of choice of words but if he says that is not parliamentary, I will never flout your directive and therefore withdraw it, except that our hon. Colleague through whom all petitions relating to this matter came to the House -- [Interruptions.] He is the major conduit for the giving of information on a particular nominee.
Mr. Bagbin 2:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, my hon. Colleague is misleading the House. Actually, the e-mails were sent in response to questions that were sent to her by the Sub-Committee. After the call they sent questions to her and she replied through the e-mail. So it is not like they were things that were fished out from somewhere and
Mr. Bagbin 2:20 p.m.


they were not reliable and therefore they were hearsay and that kind of thing; that is wrong. He is misleading the House.
Mr. Speaker 2:20 p.m.
All right, let him go on.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not referring to that e-mail. We have been reading the papers and various e-mails that are supposed to have been received by other parties here and there. Mr. Speaker, I think the best we can go for the Committee is to congratulate them, encourage them to do such serious work so that this country will benefit from their immense knowledge. With his over five years' experience as the Chairman of the Appointments Committee -- [Inter- ruption.]
Alhaji Abukari 2:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I did not want to do this but my very good Friend and the Leader of the House, who is not even listening now, has been constantly saying “Mr. Speaker” and yet he does not address the Chair. He is addressing the Chairman of the Committee who is vigorously nodding himself. I think it is not in order.
Mr. Speaker 2:20 p.m.
Hon. Member, it is not a point of order. Let him continue.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think I will learn not to speak looking to my right; if it is not audible, then nobody should complain.
Mr. Speaker, let me repeat by saying that we should congratulate our very experienced First Deputy Speaker and his hon. Colleagues, the hon. Deputy Chairman, Vice Chairman, Ranking Member and the other members of the Appointments Committee for being very serious and meticulous in the discharge of their duties; except that I have some regrets that when hon. Members go to
the Committee and they help in taking decisions and they later on begin to make it look like they were not party to those decisions; it undermines the whole committee system that we want to have here.
Mr. Speaker 2:20 p.m.
Chairman of the Appointments Committee, would you kindly wind up.
Chairman of the Appointments Committee (Mr. F. W. A. Blay) 2:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I want to take the opportunity to thank all hon. Members for this lively debate on our Report. Honestly, it has been a little difficult report and we tried as much as possible to articulate all factional opinions in the Report.
Indeed, it was not just a Report from one side but from all of us, and therefore, I would urge all hon. Members here to vote overwhelmingly for its adoption.

But Mr. Speaker, even before I do that and take my seat, I would like to take the opportunity to, for a minute or two, wipe out some wrong impressions that have been created by some contribution from hon. Members, particularly my very good Friend the Ranking Member and the Minority Leader in this august House.

One, the impression has been created

that the door was completely shut against an hon. Member of this House, namely, hon. P. C. Appiah-Ofori, on his petitions. I would not say he is a contractor of petitions but, indeed, he had brought up a couple of petitions in respect of the work we were doing -- not directly but putting together what he said were from some other quarters. And on page 6 of our Report we did mention that:

“The Committee fully discussed a petition submitted by hon. P. C. Appiah-Ofori in which a series of allegations were levelled against the nominee, branding him as a corrupt person. The nominee was therefore confronted with the allegations.”

Mr. Speaker, the work that we did was not just that we listened to denials from the nominee of the allegations that had been levelled against him. Sometimes they had not even seen or sighted those petitions; that may even be in the pocket of some individuals -- and ordinarily we had intended that this should not be used but we could not stop that; some members did use some of those petitions.

In spite of that, we allowed questions to be filed against the nominees and they did answer. After that we went into camera and we did ask -- as Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Speaker, before you as an hon. Member of this House -- every Member, “What did you find wrong with this man's evidence? Do you have any cause to agree or not to agree?” And it was after that we narrowed down to the issues that we had given the Sub-Committee to treat.

For example, in the case of hon. Edumadze, there was only one member who created the impression that he would

not agree and wanted to go by consensus. And we did ask, “What is your point of disagreement? Let us write it down.” And it was after having done that that we considered it to be an issue for the Sub- Committee to treat. And it was in respect of all the other nominees -- that is exactly what we did. And for that reason, Mr. Speaker, we did not find it necessary to expand the Committee's mandate after we had satisfied ourselves that those were the only issues to be dealt with.

The impression is being created that the Sub-Committee did not do its work, that there were other things that they should have looked at, and for that reason some people are speaking against this Committee's Report.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say here that the Committee did its work excellently and we were very satisfied with what it did except that we said we would not expand the Committee's mandate again to go into what we had already treated in respect of hon. P. C. Appiah-Ofori's case. So Mr. Speaker, we agreed that not all hon. Members would be very agreeable to it or satisfied with it but that is what, within the circumstances, we have been able to come out with.

We thank you for giving us the opportunity of doing this work for you. With a little help later on over the resources and the personnel that we have asked for, I believe we will come up with a better job to the satisfaction of the whole House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker 2:30 p.m.
Hon. Members ,
Standing Order 172, subclauses 4 and 5 are instructive at this stage --
“4. . . . Parliamentary approval
of persons recommended for appointment shall be by secret ballot or by consensus.
5. Each Member shall be provided with a sheet of paper on
Mr. Speaker 2:30 p.m.
which appears the names of all candidates for approval or rejection. Against the name of each candidate shall be two columns -- one for AYES, indicating approval; and the other for NOES, indicating rejection.”
And subclause 8 --
“A candidate who fails to secure fifty per cent of the votes cast is rejected.”

Hon. Members, maybe at this stage

we should put the question and then vote. Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, do you want to give any indications?
Mr. Doe Adjaho 2:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think
your first direction is the correct one because from the debate you got the sense of the House that there is no consensus and therefore what you did by referring to the various Standing Orders is actually the procedure. Otherwise, we will have to go through two or three stages. Mr. Speaker, in my view that is the proper step.
rose
Mr. Speaker 2:30 p.m.
Let us hear you.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:30 p.m.
Unfortunately,
I am unable to endorse the suggestion made by the hon. Deputy Minority Leader. Mr. Speaker, there is a motion on the floor; it is out of the motion that you can then go further to decide the consequences. The motion is that we adopt the Report of the Appointments Committee and when that is finished then the consequences where -- because they themselves are not talking about consensus in all cases -- consensus in one and two. So we need to accept the Report of the Committee, which has formed the basis of our deliberations and then after that we can look at the
consequences of our decision.
Mr. Speaker 2:30 p.m.
Let me hear from you, Minority Leader.
Mr. Bagbin 2:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, there
is a specific provision on Reports of the Appointments Committee and that provision is what you rightly referred to -- Standing Order 172. And (4) is the relevant part, and then (5) is the process of voting. The (4) says :
“The Committee shall report to Parliament within three days after it has concluded its proceedings when Parliament is Sitting. Parliamentary approval of persons recommended for appointment shall be by secret ballot or by con-sensus.”
That is the provision. Then you go to
(5) --
“Each Member shall be provided with a sheet of paper on which appears the names of all candidates for approval or rejection. Against the name of each candidate shall be two columns -- one for AYES indicating approval and the other for NOES indicating rejection.”
Mr. Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:30 p.m.
Mr.
Speaker, at this stage what is before us is the motion moved by the First Deputy Speaker and ably supported by the Vice Chairman of the Committee. Mr. Speaker, the conclusion of the motion is this, that
the Committee recommends to this House to approve the appointment of the three nominees as follows:
1. By consensus in respect of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye; and
2. By majority decision in respect of
(a) hon. Dr. Richard Anane; and
(b) hon. Isaac E. Edumadze.
So Mr. Speaker, that is the motion before this House. If on the other hand Mr. Speaker feels that in respect of hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye we cannot achieve consensus, then perhaps we could go the other way round. But I think the language is clear and unequivocal as espoused by the First Deputy Speaker. The motion before this House is that we approve by consensus hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye. Mr. Speaker, it is as clear as that -- that is the motion, ably supported by his Vice Chairman. That is the motion.
Mr. J. A. Tia 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, a short while ago my hon. Colleague on the other side and I had a consultation and we came out with the understanding that the motion before us is to carry the whole House by consensus on hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye, and the other two by a secret ballot. We concluded that from the sense of the House, there is no consensus to go along with the proposition so we should go by Standing Order 172 (4) and (5) as you rightly directed. So Mr. Speaker, you are right and I think that you should rule for us to go on.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that we only need to make things clear and go by your direction. Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that we are ignoring the fact that it is item 7 which
is the basis of the motion. The motion is, that this honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee of Selection on the composition of the Standing and Select Committees. That is the motion on the floor. But if now we are being told that for expediency we should begin to vote on each of them, so be it.
Mr. Speaker, we wait for your directions and guidance to move on. And then the question we would want to ask is that what then happens to the Report and the motion which have led all of us to talk extensively?
Mr. Speaker 2:40 p.m.
Order! Let me hear
from a maximum of two hon. Members and I will give a further ruling on this matter.
Mr. Yaw Osafo-Maafo 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think the motion before us are in two parts; one by consensus and backed by majority decision. If we want to amend it, somebody should move to amend the one on consensus. We cannot - [Interruptions] -- Yes, because that is not a motion. Are we rejecting the motion or not? The motion says that hon. Shiekh I. C. Quaye's should be by consensus; that is the Report before this House; we either go by it or amend it and then vote on all of them. But one cannot just ask us to set aside the Report; the Report before us is by consensus. Do we agree or not? If we do not agree, we should amend it and vote on the three; we cannot vote on the three without amending the Report.
Mr. Bagbin 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the motion is
not in doubt. The motion is clearly spelt out on the Order Paper; what he was referring to were just contents of the Report; those were not the motion. The motion is clear, that this honourable House adopts the Second Report of the Appointments Committee on the President's nominations for ministerial appointments; that is the
Mr. Speaker 2:40 p.m.
Hon. Deputy Majority
Leader, do you have any contrary view?
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, my
hon. Colleague has just said that somebody is not above him in parliamentary practice but I am sure that he has made a very grievous mistake in this matter.
Mr. Speaker, if you look at Standing Order 172 (5) which deals not with the

approval or adoption of committee reports but with the approval of nominees, there
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
the hon. Deputy Majority Leader is misleading this House. It is not every committee's report so he has to look at the Standing Orders strictly according to the subject matter under consideration then you know which Standing Order deals with it. Mr. Speaker, when we have a committee report on Bills, do we take votes on it? When the Minister of State comes to this House and moves the Second Reading and the Committee Chairman reads the Report of the Committee, do we take votes on it? He is misleading the House; we do not vote on it.
Mr. Speaker 2:40 p.m.
Hon. Members, Standing
Order 172 deals specifically with reports from the Appointments Committee so that is the law which is applicable; that is the rule which is applicable. And if you again refer to subclause (5), it says that there is one column for AYES indicating approval and the other for NOES indicating rejection. Therefore, we will go on with it and AYES would
indicate this motion has been accepted or otherwise. There does not appear to be consensus with the three. So let us go along with that. I therefore direct the Clerks to issue these ballot papers and let us go on with it.
rose
Mr. Speaker 2:40 p.m.
Hon. Member, do you have any indications to give?
Mr. Mahama 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is
rose
Mr. Speaker 2:40 p.m.
Majority Leader is
standing to raise a point of order.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I am surprised that possibly he is trying to teach us some of the few tricks they were using when they were in the Majority. I am surprised that he is teaching us these tricks. I believe we do not want to be tutored in this particular way. They should keep their methods of doing things to themselves and let us go on.
Mr. Speaker 2:40 p.m.
Hon. Members can
come to the table and the voting will be done assisted by the two Whips. I have asked hon. Members to come to the table, fill in the form, sign and go back.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I am becoming worried. Are you saying that these two gentlemen should see our voting? We are having secret voting and that is why we should stand at our places, vote and fold before we go - [Uproar] - Mr. Speaker, do not let us compromise on what is secret. Mr. Speaker, this will amount to giving opportunity to - [Interruptions.]
Mr. Speaker 2:40 p.m.
Order! Order! The ballot shall be secret -- secret in all respects.
Mr. Owusu-Agyemang 2:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,

I am saying that, if you vary it then we have to know on what basis it is being varied. The Question has got to be put, and Mr. Speaker, Sir, if you decide otherwise then you must let us know because we are setting precedents in this House and we cannot ignore a motion which has been duly moved and seconded. But if we do as you suggest now then we would not have adopted the Report, Mr. Speaker .

Mr. Speaker, I think that this particular

issue should not be allowed to fly in the face of the established rules and regulations of this House. Mr. Speaker, you would have to articulate under which Order you are setting aside a motion which is now the property of this House, duly seconded, otherwise the Question, I am afraid, will have to be put for the adoption or the rejection of the Report. That is
  • [MR. BAGBIN absolutely clear. There are no “buts”; there are no “ifs”; there are no two ways about this, Mr. Speaker. You cannot do anything about it.
  • rose
    Mr. Speaker 2:50 p.m.
    Hon. Minister for the
    Ashanti Region, do you have any contrary view?
    Mr. S. K. Boafo 2:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I think,
    with all due respect to the hon. Member, the Speaker has given his ruling; let us go ahead and take a vote. That is the proper procedure in this House.
    Alhaji Sumani Abukari 2:50 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, I find the behaviour of the hon. Minister for Works and Housing very unacceptable and unparliamentary. After the Speaker has given a ruling on a subject two times, he has the audacity to say that it flies against the rules and procedures of this House. If he wants to challenge the ruling of the Speaker, he should come by a motion. It is very clear; I do not see what sort of a challenge that is. Is he saying that the Speaker was wrong in ruling on this issue two times?
    Mr. Owusu-Agyemang 2:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker,
    Mr. Speaker 2:50 p.m.
    Hon. Minister for
    Works and Housing, I have not called you.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:50 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, you have already made your ruling and I believe that we should let this matter rest and then we proceed.
    Mr. Speaker 3 p.m.
    We will proceed at this stage, let us proceed -- [Interruptions.] Order! Order! Order! Hon. Members, there should not be any problem in this

    Order! Order! It does not appear that there is a consensus between the Leaders as to the procedure to be adopted. I therefore, direct that each hon. Member must appear at the Table, sign and collect his ballot paper and then go back and vote and return. That is all that we can do. Each one can come and collect a ballot paper and sign for it.
    Mr. Speaker 4 p.m.
    Hon. Members, I announce the results of the ballot. Hon. Sheikh I. C. Quaye:
    AYES -- 119
    NOES -- NIL 4 p.m.

    Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 4 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I thought we could handle committees but it seems the reports are not ready. Since it is already after 2 o'clock, I think that you can take your own decision.
    Mr. Speaker, the Appointments Committee will meet immediately after adjournment to consider the nominee for the Ministry of Environment and Science, that is the hon. Member of Parliament for Cape Coast (Ms. Christine Churcher). Mr. Speaker, you may therefore decide to adjourn the House till tomorrow at 10 o'clock in the forenoon.
    ADJOURNMENT 4 p.m.

  • The House was adjourned at 4.05 p.m. till 11th February, 2005 at 10.00 a.m.