Debates of 15 Nov 2006

MR. SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Hon. Members, we may have to defer item 2 as we do not have the Votes and Proceedings. We will take item 3 -- Questions. Is the Minister for the Interior in the House?
Mr. F. K. Owusu-Adjapong 10 a.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Question number 640 -- hon. Alex Asum-Ahensah, Member of Parliament for Jaman North, you may ask your Question.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 10 a.m.
MINISTRY OF THE INTERIOR 10 a.m.
Minister for the Interior (Mr. Albert Kan-Dapaah) 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I had cause to answer a similar Question in this House a couple of weeks ago. And Mr. Speaker, in my Answer to that Question, which was indeed posed by the hon. Member for Jaman North, I indicated that eighty- five (85) critical areas in the country with no fire tenders, including Sampa, have
been identified. Mr. Speaker, plans by Government are far advanced to secure a Belgian loan facility for the procurement of new fire fighting equipment, including fire renders.
Mr. Speaker, I have been assured that Sampa will definitely be a beneficiary if the Ministry takes delivery of the fire fighting equipment.
Mr. Asum-Ahensah 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for the information given on the effort being made to procure fire fighting equipment, including fire tenders, for some critical areas in the country, including Sampa. But Mr. Speaker, in paragraph one of the Answer that the hon. Minister gave, he refers to a similar Question that I asked a couple of weeks ago. I would like to say that this is not correct.
The truth is that I asked a Question on the provision of office accommodation for the police at Sampa. The Question the hon. Minister is referring to in paragraph one of his Answer was scheduled to have been asked on Thursday, 2nd November, 2006, but it was not captured on the Order Paper that morning.
Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the House, I would like to ask the hon. Minister to provide the details of the Answer he is referring to, since the Question under reference was not asked on the day it was advertised.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Hon. Member for Jaman North, if you have a relevant supple- mentary question, ask.
Mr. Asum-Ahensah 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, what I am trying to do is to ask the hon. Minister to provide the House with the Answer he was supposed to have given to the Question that he was making reference to, on that day. He said he answered this
very Question a couple of weeks ago, but I am saying that I am interested in the Answer he was supposed to have given the House; but the Answer did not come. So I would like the hon. Minister to come out with the Answer.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Hon. Member, you have asked a Question; if you have a supplementary question to ask on the Answer given, you may ask.
Mr. Asum-Ahensah 10 a.m.
All right, thank you.
Mr. Evans Paul Aidoo 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
would the hon. Minister provide a list of the eighty-five (85) critical areas available to this House, since he promised to do so last two weeks?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I will have no difficulty providing the list of those (85) critical areas, but I do not think there was any specific coordination to provide it as an Answer. If he does contact me, I would be able to provide it for him.
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, could we be told when the Ministry would take delivery of the fire fighting equipment?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this loan agreement was considered at the last Cabinet meeting. A couple of questions were asked and I hope to resolve those issues at the next Cabinet meeting, and immediately thereafter I hope to present it to the House.
Mr. Bagbin 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not talking about a loan; I am talking about when they would receive the fire fighting equipment. If he is saying that they are still at the preparatory stage so he cannot tell us when they would receive it, it is
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we
have concluded discussions with the suppliers and we are about ready to sign an agreement, but this is all contingent upon getting the necessary funding support. It is only when the funding has been put in place that we can sign the agreement. Until that time, we cannot be specific as to when the equipment will arrive.
Mr. Alfred K. Agbesi 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, by the Answer of the hon. Minister, two weeks ago, he indicated that there are 85 critical areas and he would make the list available. Mr. Speaker, as the hon. Minister is in the House today, I wonder why he has not provided the list to us, so that we would know the critical areas that he is talking about.

Mr. Speaker, it was not this House that asked him to bring the list; he volunteered that he would be prepared to come to this House and provide a list of the bad areas. Today he is in the House and I want to know from him why he has not provided the list.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am here to answer a specific Question. I think I did say a week or two ago that the list was available. Yes, the list is available; I can make it available to him anytime he requests for it. I can make it available to even any hon. Member, Mr. Speaker, who wants it today. But they should just make a request to me and I will make it available to them.
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, all hon. Members, I believe especially on
our side, are interested in having copies. Mr. Speaker, I am requesting that the hon. Minister makes copies available to all Members of Parliament, especially those on this side.
Sefwi-Akontombra Police Post (Upgrading)
Q. 644. Mr. Herod Cobbina asked the Minister for the Interior when Sefwi-Akontombra police post would be upgraded and a new station opened at Sefwi-Nsawora to provide security services to the people.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the provision of facilities such as permanent office and residential accommodation are some of the major challenges facing the Ghana Police Service. The Ghana Police Service is unable to come out with a precise date as to when the Sefwi- Akontombra Police Post will be upgraded and a new station opened at Sefwi- Nsawora. However, the Ghana Police Service and the Government are aware of the urgent need to establish new police stations in several parts of the country and are looking for appropriate funding to address the office/accommodation problems facing the police, which have been estimated to cost about ¢100 billion to complete.
Mr. Cobbina 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, from the Answer given by the hon. Minister for the Interior, Akontombra is positioned in a way that it is 67 kilometres from Sefwi-Wiawso and 30 kilometres to la Cote d'Ivoire. There is already an existing police station housed in a dilapidated building with only three personnel at the station. There is no communication material and no vehicle.
Mr. Speaker, what immediate plan has his Ministry to rehabilitate the structure currently in use and provide
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Question was very specific -- when we were going to upgrade the Sefwi- Akontombra police post and also to open a new station at Sefwi-Nsawora. And the answers are as I have given. My hon. Friend now wants to know when exactly vehicles and communication equipment will be provided to these stations. Mr. Speaker, I will need to come back to give specific answers to those ones. I do not readily have them.
Mr. Cobbina 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, looking at his Answer — I requested for a new police station at Nsawora which is also 20 kilometres away from Sefwi-Wiawso, 49 kilometres to Akontombra and centred within three forest reserves. Nsawora is the centre for social and economic activities for farmers and people over there. What assurance can his Ministry give to this House that when that private effort by the chief and people, the District Assembly and the Member of Parliament to provide the needed structure of office and residential accommodation for the new police station to be opened at Nsawora and Akroefua in Sefwi-Wiawso district will bear fruit soon?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it does help greatly when the District Assembly and Members of Parliament come to the aid of the police and provide these offices and residential accommodation. I can, Mr. Speaker, assure my hon. Friend that if the Assembly and the Member of Parliament will team up to provide these facilities I would be very, very supportive and would do everything to ensure that this project is speeded up, and also provide them with the men and women to man the stations.
Mr. Cobbina 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the hon. Minister for the Interior why

all these days police personnel have been trained all over the country and they are being posted everyday but Akontombra police station has never had any new personnel posted to the area.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, what is your question, please?
Mr. Cobbina 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my question is that, Akontombra police station has only three police personnel posted there and over the years new personnel have been trained throughout the country and deployed. So why is it that Akontombra police station has never had any new personnel over the years?
Mr. Kan-Dappah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have taken note of the question that my hon. Friend has asked and I will try to find out exactly what has been the case.
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the last sentence, a very lengthy sentence of the Answer to Question 644 — I will just quote it; it is unclear. It says:
“However, the Ghana Police Service and the Government are aware of the urgent need to establish new police stations in several parts of the country and are looking for appropriate funding to address the office/accommodation problems facing the police, which have been estimated to cost about ¢100 billion to complete.”
Mr. Speaker, is he telling us that the cost of constructing offices and accommodation for the police throughout the country will cost about ¢100 billion? Is that the cost? I ask this because that definitely would be incorrect. That would be very, very incorrect.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
You better resume your seat whilst --
Mr. Bagbin 10:10 a.m.
Because he is nodding his head to me, that is why I am --
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
I did not take notice of that.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we do have a couple of ongoing projects which have been started by the police and which have not been completed, but which deserve to be completed as quickly as possible. We estimate that this and other projects which are needed in some very critical areas will need about a ¢100 billion to complete. And we have quoted the ¢100 billion only to illustrate that it is a very huge amount of money and that we need some external funding for it. Indeed, we are in the course of trying to raise some external funding to be able to provide these facilities.
Mr. Sampson Ahi 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister in his answer said that the Ghana Police Service is unable to come out with a precise date as to when the Sefwi-Akontombra Police Post will be upgraded; and he did not tell us the reason why the Police Service is unable to tell the Akontombra people when the police post will be upgraded. I would want to know the reasons why the Ghana Police Service is unable to give a date and time for the upgrading.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, for
the very simple reason that to open a new police station or to upgrade an existing police station, money is needed. And as at now they do not have that kind of money to be able to do it. We are looking for funding and when we do obtain that funding it will be possible to undertake those projects. Until we have an assurance of funding it will be misleading to give precise dates as to when these projects will be undertaken.
Thirteen (13) Patrol Vehicles at Highway Patrol Unit
Q. 672. Mr. James Klutse Avedzi asked the Minister for the Interior whether he had noticed that out of 13 patrol vehicles at the Highway Patrol Unit at the Police Headquarters only one is roadworthy; if yes, what is the Ministry doing to reverse the trend?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, yes, I am aware that the Highway Patrol Unit has a large number of its patrol vehicles undergoing repairs. The Unit therefore has to rely on other Units for patrol vehicles for essential assignments.
Mr. Speaker, this is rather unhealthy. Fortunately we are taking delivery of some Tata vehicles from India which have arrived at the Tema Port. I may also add that Parliament last week approved a Loan Agreement between GOG and Stanbic Bank Ghana Limited for the procurement of goods including vehicles for the Ghana Police.
It is our hope that by the end of the year, most of the vehicles currently under repairs would be back on the roads and these will be complemented with some new ones from India and also from South Africa.
Mr. J. K. Avedzi 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to find out from the hon. Minister why the Service should wait until all the vehicles come to a halt before they send them for repairs. Why should the Service not make provision that as soon as the vehicles break down they repair them? They waited for all the thirteen vehicles to break down; why should the Service do that?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I cannot say that the Police Service has a very good maintenance arrangement in place. These vehicles are used quite so often and from time to time they do break down. It was not planned for all the

vehicles to go for repairs at about the same time. It just happened but as I said, we are trying to augment the fleet with some new vehicles and hopefully that problem would not arise again.
Mr. Avedzi 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in the
hon. Minister's Answer he said that new Tata vehicles are to be received from India and have arrived at the Tema Port; that was how he ended that sentence. May I know from the hon. Minister when those Tata vehicles will be given to the Units so that they can have vehicles on the roads to do their patrol duties.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
vehicles have just arrived and they are going through the clearance processes and as soon as they are released from the port they obviously will be given to the Units concerned.
Mr. Lee Ocran 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have
taken note of the hon. Minister's Answer to the supply of vehicles to the police to replenish their stock. But in view of the constant breakdown of police vehicles, would it not be appropriate for the police to standardize on a few vehicles, instead of having vehicles from India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and all those places?
Mr. Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Hon. Member for Jomoro, who mentioned Pakistan? [Laughter.]
Mr. Ocran 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, India and
South Africa --
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do
not personally believe that is the problem but I will pass on his advice to the Ghana Police Service.
Mr. G. K. B. Gbediame 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Question was specific as to whether he is aware that out of thirteen vehicles
only one is working. But in his Answer he mentioned that he is aware that a large number -- But the Question was specific; we would want to know whether it is true that out of thirteen vehicles only one is on the road.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is
all a question of timing and it is possible that at a point in time only one of the thirteen vehicles was working. But Mr. Speaker, can I point out to my hon. Friend that the fact that there is only one working does not mean they are working with only one. Other vehicles would have been taken from other Units to allow them to do the work that they do.
Mr. Joseph Amenowode 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, last Session, I think by a similar Question to the Minister's predecessor, I expressed concern over the giving of the repair contract to outside mechanics whilst there are mechanics employed by the Police Service. May I recommend that the police personnel should be sent to wherever they are importing the vehicles for training so that they will be competent in repairing them themselves.
May I ask the hon. Minister if he could consider sending some of the police mechanics to India, Tata Company to be trained so that they will be capable of repairing their vehicles and not subletting them to private mechanics?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
think I can only say that I will let the Police Service be aware of his suggestions so that they can take them into account.
rose
Mr. Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Question 673, hon.
Francis Aggrey Agbotse, are you asking the Question for him?
Mr. Bagbin 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am
sorry there is a supplementary question. I

wanted to give room to my hon. Colleagues to ask -- I am very sorry; I just wanted to know how many of the Tata vehicles have arrived at the Port recently awaiting clearance.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I think it is important I do not give the wrong number; if he will give me notice I can let him know. But I do not remember that offhand.
Hlefi Police Station (Occupation by Police)
Q. 673. Capt. George K. Nfojoh
(retd) (on behalf of Mr. Francis Aggrey Agbotse) asked the Minister for the Interior when the Ghana Police Service would move into and utilize the Hlefi Police Station building constructed by the chiefs and people of Hlefi in the Ho Municipal Assembly.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Police Administration Estates Department has been tasked to provide furnishing and to connect electricity to the station to enable the local Police move into the new building. I have demanded that the Police should complete the outstanding works and move into the new premises before the year runs out. And I will try to make sure that this is complied with.
Kpedze Police Station (Vehicle and Communication Equipment)
Q. 674. Capt. George K. Nfojoh
(retd) (on behalf of Mr. Francis Aggrey Agbotse) asked the Minister for the Interior when a vehicle and communi- cation equipment would be provided for the Kpedze Police Station which is a border station.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, as
indicated earlier on, under the India Exim Bank Loan facility the Ministry is clearing about 124 units of Tata vehicles
at the Tema Harbour for the Security Agencies including the Police. Kpedze Police Station will be allocated one of these vehicles as soon as the Police take delivery of their allocation.
Mr. Speaker, in respect of commu- nication equipment, the hon. Minister for Foreign Affairs and NEPAD has signed an agreement with a Chinese company a couple of days ago for a dedicated telecommunication network for the Security Agencies. The Ghana Police Service would be a beneficiary. The Kpedze Police Station which is a border station would be taken care of under the project.
Mr. C. S. Hodogbey 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my question to the hon. Minister is, police vehicles just like military vehicles, are designed specifically for the nature of their job and the terrain on which they ply. When they order these vehicles -- I am just culling the question from his Answer -- what kind of specification do they normally give them? I am asking this question because of the continuous breakdown of our police vehicles?
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Member for North Tongu, this is not a supplementary question; if you have other questions, please ask. Hon. Member for Amenfi?
Mr. George Kofi Arthur 10:30 a.m.
Mr.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Order! Order! Hon.
Minister for the Interior?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
am aware that a number of hon. Members of Parliament have also given such equipment and facilities to help their

police stations -- [Hear! Hear! ] -- But I will take into account the suggestions that have been made by my hon. Friend and ask whether one mobile phone or two or three can be made available to the police station.

Volta Regional Police Headquarters (Completion)

Q. 675. Capt. George K. Nfojoh

(retd) (on behalf of Mr. Francis Aggrey Agbotse) asked the Minister for the Interior when the Volta Regional Police Headquarters would be completed and commissioned.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Volta Regional Police Headquarters project has been suspended for some time now because of lack of funding. We are actively looking for funding for this project and are optimistic that construction works will start again in the coming year.
Capt. Nfojoh (retd): Mr. Speaker, I want to find out from the hon. Minister whether the funding is coming from within or from outside the country.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
am hoping that all things being equal -- and I need to choose my words with care -- we are hoping that we can have some budgetary allocation for it next year and that the money would in that case come from within.
Mr. Alfred Kwame Agbesi 10:30 a.m.
Mr.
Speaker, I want to know from the hon. Minister when this project was suspended. Mr. Speaker, I am aware that if a project is declared a priority project then it means that priority must be given to it. I am aware that this project was suspended over fifteen years ago. [Uproar.]. I want to know from the hon. Minister when this project was suspended and whether he is considering it to be a priority area whilst the suspension continues to be in force up to today.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Order! Order! Hon.
Member for Ashaiman, what is the specific question you are asking?
Mr. Agbesi 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my specific
question is that, I want to know from the hon. Minister when the project was suspended and whether he still considers this project to be a priority project when the suspension continues to be in vogue.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I have to thank my hon. Friend for the information that the project was suspended by the National Democratic Congress (NDC) fifteen years ago -- [Hear! Hear!] -- I would try to find out exactly what happened and see how we can speed it up.
Mr. Agbesi 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Order! Order! Hon.
Member for Ashaiman, let me hear you again on that.
Mr. Agbesi 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I take
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Are you asking a
question?
Mr. Agbesi 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, no. I am
taking objection to the statement made by the hon. Minister.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
About the question of fifteen years?
Agbesi: Mr. Speaker, yes.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
You said it?
Mr. Agbesi 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I said so;
But he is saying that I said that the NDC suspended the project and I am saying that it is not true. I never said so, the NDC had never been in power for fifteen years; and that his information to the House or to the country is wrong. Mr. Speaker, I never said so.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Order! Order! This
is not a supplementary question. Hon. Minister for the Interior, thank you very much for appearing to answer these Questions. You are discharged.
STATEMENTS 10:40 a.m.
Mr. I. K. Asiamah (NPP -- Atwima- Mponua) 10:40 a.m.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to the Statement on the floor. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Member who made the Statement for this wonderful piece.
Mr. Speaker, I think chieftaincy, whether we like it or not, is very critical to our survival as a nation. The institution is very important to us as a nation. Mr. Speaker, protecting our rich cultural values should be the duty of each and every Ghanaian, for that is the source of our livelihood.
Mr. Speaker, of late my major concern has been about how some Ghanaians attack those who hold in high esteem our rich cultural heritage; I am talking about our chiefs. Mr. Speaker, I think education is important, everything is important, mortality is important; but Mr. Speaker, we should never forget the fact that our chiefs are the source of our inspiration and motivation. Our utterances and comments about our chiefs should be guided in such a way that at the end of the day we do not in any way undermine the very institution that we pride ourselves in; that is very important.
Mr. Speaker, I think another problem with the chieftaincy institution is the issue of land disputes, mostly resulting from double sale of lands. Mr. Speaker, I think we expect our chiefs to know that the lands that they hold in trust belong to Ghanaians and therefore in protecting the lands we should be mindful of the fact that at the end of the day, it is the Ghanaian who will have to utilize the land. But instances whereby you buy a piece of land from a chief and his brother comes in and holds title to the land, the abusuapanin comes in and says
Mr. C. S. Hodogbey 10:40 a.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. Member is confusing the House. He is the same person who said chiefs should be given some kind of respect, and at the same time he is saying they should conduct themselves accordingly. This is a paradox; he should please speak to the Statement.
Mr. Asiamah 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is strange that my hon. Colleague is misconstruing whatever I am saying. Mr. Speaker, respect is earned; it is reciprocal. So the fact that they are our chiefs does not mean that they should ridicule the institution that they themselves hold in high esteem. Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is that, it is strange my hon. Colleague does not seem to understand me, but the key point is that, yes, we respect them, we give them all the respect, but as I said, it is reciprocal.
Mr. Speaker, let me continue -- [Interruption] -- the issue of land disputes, we expect our chiefs to make sure that whoever acquires the land gets the right documentation from them, and that the same land is not sold to another person.
Mr. Speaker, another issue I want to touch on is how to inculcate these rich cultural values in our youth. It is important that right from our schools we should make sure that we have embedded in the curricula issues of chieftaincy so that children from the kindergarten up to the university level would understand and appreciate the essence of our culture.
Mr. Speaker, this is because culture is for development. Other countries that have used culture well have today developed. The basis of our development is our culture, so if we harness the potential that we have in our rich cultural heritage,
Ghana would be developed. We will not be wasting many resources on things that do not matter. We will not waste many resources on other extravagant things.
Mr. Speaker, let us look at our own traditional outfit. This batakari that I am wearing, for example, if we make it part of our lives, if we promote it well, Ghana can market the batakari and the kente and get more revenue from them; that is why I say that culture is the basis for our development. So we should be able to reap many benefits from the things that we have inherited and those we produce locally.
Mr. Speaker, with these few words, I thank you for the opportunity.
Mr. Abdul 10:50 a.m.
None

Wa Central): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to the very important Statement made by my hon. Colleague for Odododiodioo.

Mr. Speaker, before the intervention of the colonial administration the chiefs were the basis of our governance and they defined the trends as to how we organized our systems. And Mr. Speaker, right after the colonial administration, the recognition of the chief vis-à-vis the present system of government was so serious that they cannot be relegated to the background. They represent the culture of our people and they are a sacred institution and must be held as such. Mr. Speaker, if this recognition wavers then we would have a problem in our political system. We would have a problem because the chiefs represent the spiritual essence of our people; and for that matter people are willing to indeed sacrifice their lives for the course of principles and the spirituality chieftaincy represents.

Mr. Speaker, because of the fact that
Mr. James Appietu-Ankrah (NPP -- Lower West Akim) 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the hon. Member who made the Statement.
Mr. Speaker, our modern day chiefs have proved that chieftaincy is not just about traditional festivals and sitting in state to deliberate over the local issues but has gone beyond that by initiating programmes in the areas of sanitation, education, preservation of our forests and the conservation of our water bodies. Mr. Speaker, in this area, I would want to congratulate our chiefs for being at the forefront of the development of this nation.
However, I would also want to draw the attention of our chiefs to some of the issues that have come out of late; and this is in the area of the installation of development chiefs. Mr. Speaker, we have seen cases where some overseas volunteers just donate about two bundles of roofing sheets and as a result are installed as development chiefs.
Mr. Speaker, if you compare the contribution of some of the local people, over the years, what they have done towards the development of their areas, as compared to the two bundles of roofing sheets or a couple of bags of cement, then you would ask yourself: What was the basis for installing such a person as a development chief? I am of the view that this goes to dilute the dignity of our
chieftaincy institution and I would want to appeal to our chiefs to look at this area.
Mr. Speaker, before I resume my seat, I want to again congratulate the hon. Member who made the Statement and also urge our chiefs to do more in the area of development for their people.
Mr. Eric Opoku (NDC -- Asunafo South) 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to associate myself with the Statement on the floor of this House.
rose
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Hon. Member for Amansie West, do you have a point of order to raise?
Mr. K. K. Mensah 10:50 a.m.
Precisely, Mr. Speaker. I think my hon. Friend there is misleading the House. A chief is a chief not because the Minister decreed so. A chief is elected by his people and his tradition. That is my point of order.
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Hon. Member for Asunafo South, go ahead.
Mr. Opoku 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. Colleague was not listening.
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Please, go ahead.
Mr. Opoku 10:50 a.m.
The queenmothers are also elected by the royals. He should understand this. So whatever the Government is giving to the chiefs, the same should be done to our queenmothers so that there will be equity in the sharing of the cake.
Besides, we also have the National House of Chiefs but do we have a National House of Queenmothers? I believe this is also important and our gender activists should take this up and then ensure that our female counterparts are also given the same treatment.

Capt. Nkrabeah Effah-Dartey (retd) (NPP -- Berekum): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this very important Statement.

Mr. Speaker, the institution of chieftaincy is a very noble, sacred and unique institution which I would even go so far to say that it is very peculiar to Ghana.

Mr. Speaker, in the past, prior to the advent of colonial rule and even during the greater part of colonial rule, any chief, once he was installed, played five major roles in the State: He was the Head of State; he was the head of Government; he was the Army Commander; he was the Chief Justice and he was the Chief Priest. He played all these roles as a chief.
Mr. Opoku 11 a.m.
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, with the advent of colonial rule, the imposition of indirect rule and all manner of transformations that have taken place in the society, today every chief in Ghana, even though nominally is supposed to play these roles on behalf of his state, on behalf of his people, these functions have been taken over by government.
But by and large today, Mr. Speaker, every chief that we have in Ghana is the human embodiment of the traditional area; a man who is entitled to respect, a man who is supposed to lead his society. Some of the chiefs are creating problems for the institution, but some of them also are going far, the extra mile to do the best they can for their people.

Mr. Speaker, permit me to mention at

least somebody like the Agbogbomefia of Ho, the Okyenhene of Kyebi, the Asantehene Otumfuo Osei Tutu. Let me also mention Odeneho Gyapong Ababio and also Osagyefuo Oseadeayor Agyeman Badu of Dormaa. Mr. Speaker, I cannot forget to mention the Nayiri whom I met in his palace and also the Yagbon Wura. These are some of the chiefs who are going the extra mile to attract investments to their traditional areas, to raise education fund for their people, to bring in development for their people.
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
Order! Order!

Capt. Effah-Dartey (retd): I am
Mr. E. T. Mensah 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
presidential aspirant is misleading this House. [Laughter.] This is a harmless statement and why is he drawing His Excellency the President into it? I do not think that he is going to be reinstated as the Deputy Minister before the campaign, so he better stop disturbing us.
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
Hon. Member for
Berekum, you may conclude now.
Capt. Effah-Dartey (retd): Mr.
Speaker, I think that the hon. Member for Ningo-Prampram, Mr. E. T. Mensah, is a very experienced senior Member of this House and I would not expect him to hit below the belt.
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
Please, go on.
Capt. Effah-Dartey (retd): I am
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
You may conclude.
Capt. Effah-Dartey (retd): In
concluding, I think that it is important that the Government should resource the various Regional Houses of Chiefs, especially the judicial committees. Mr. Speaker, I am speaking as a lawyer --
Mr. Lee Ocran 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon.
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
Order! Order! Hon.
Member for Berekum, please conclude.
Capt. Effah-Dartey (retd): Mr.
Speaker, in concluding, I am calling on the Government, especially the Minister for Chieftaincy Affairs to remember that the various judicial committees of the Houses of Chiefs, have a lot of cases which are pending largely because they do not have sitting legal counsel. So I am praying that the Minister for Chieftaincy Affairs, hon. S. K. Boafo, would make it one of his top agenda to get lawyers to sit in at the judicial committees.
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
Are you concluding,
hon. Member for Berekum?
Capt. Effah-Dartey (retd): In
conclusion, none of us here can go to a town without visiting the chief, and it is important therefore that we recognize the role that Nananom are playing in local governance.
Mr. Speaker, with these few words, I add my voice in praising Nananom and calling upon them to contribute their quota to national development.
Mr. Stephen Kunsu (NDC -- Kintampo North) 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to contribute to the Statement on floor. Chieftaincy is a very important institution in the political set up of the country. When used properly, it can be a very powerful tool for development. It is therefore appropriate that Government provides an enabling environment for the chieftaincy institution to function effectively.
Mr. Speaker, it is rather unfortunate that the institution is facing a lot of intractable problems, including financial problems. In order to make the institution functional, I would suggest that part of the District Assemblies Common Fund is given to the chiefs. Mr. Speaker, chiefs should also be integrated into the district assembly concept so that they become advisers to the various District Assemblies. Mr. Speaker, as we talk about chieftaincy, we must also not forget about our queenmothers who play very important roles in the districts or in the traditional areas. May I suggest that a way be found to include them in the Houses of Chiefs in Ghana.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Minority Leader,
before I call the Minister, if you have a contribution you can make it.
Minority Leader (Mr. A. S. K.
Bagbin): Mr. Speaker, I have a few remarks to make in support of the Statement. Let me just clarify the issue of who is a chief. Mr. Speaker, by our Constitution, article 277, a chief means a person who, hailing from the appropriate family and lineage has been validly nominated, elected or selected and enstooled, enskinned or installed as a chief or queenmother in accordance with the relevant customary law and usage. Mr. Speaker, so queen- mothers are covered under the term “chief”.
Mr. Speaker, we have recognized

the importance of chieftaincy and the institution of chieftaincy, and this recognition is amply stated in our legal framework, as stated in the 1992 Constitution. Mr. Speaker, we are faced with challenges, challenges from the fact that historically, chieftaincy has developed very well in some communities, and we can see that those communities do not only recognize and respect them but they are using the institution of chieftaincy as an instrument for development.

In some communities, chieftaincy was imposed and in those communities, there have not been conscious efforts to iron out the parameters and operational activities of the institution; and those areas are rife with chieftaincy disputes.

Mr. Speaker, as a country, we have not continued the initial efforts that were made after the 1957 Constitution, in fact, after independence, to consciously modify, reflect on and strengthen the institution of chieftaincy. So today, the institution is having serious problems; and in fact, in some areas it is struggling to survive.

I know that in the Upper West Region there are a lot of vacancies because of chieftaincy disputes. I know some chiefs have been supposedly installed but they cannot even get back to their own villages or to the palaces. Therefore, as a country, since this is threatening the peace and security of our nation, we have to refocus on the institution of chieftaincy, and that is why I laud the efforts of our President who tried as much as possible to get a political head to focus on that institution, with the creation of the Ministry of Chieftaincy Affairs.

But it seems we have rather confused the whole issue in our Constitution. We
Mr. E. T. Mensah 11:10 a.m.
On a point of
order. Mr. Speaker, he is not the very first Minister for Chieftaincy Affairs. Mr. Tanoh was PNDC Secretary for Chieftaincy Affairs and “Secretary” was coterminous with Minister. So he is not the very first Minister for Chieftaincy Affairs.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Minister, con-
clude.
Mr. Boafo 11:10 a.m.
It is all right. Mr. Tanoh
Mr. Yieleh Chireh 11:20 a.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, the hon. Member who just spoke is saying that he is the first Minister for Chieftaincy and Culture, but I know that during the PNDC era, there was a Minister for Chieftaincy and also a Minister for Culture. Indeed, the history of this country cannot be distorted like that; we must be consistent.
I think that we need to recognize the past because we have the tradition of always saying “this is the first time we have done it”. And we are confusing our history students; we should not do that. There was a Minister for Chieftaincy, there was a Secretary for Culture and there was a Secretary for Chieftaincy; and this is part of our history.
Mr. S. K. Boafo 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, let me go on. Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. Member that people who are not royals should not lay claim to stools, skins and so on. I believe this is one of the areas where disputes arise. There are people who become rich and then they try as much as possible to annex stools and skins to enhance their social status; and that has brought about what we call chieftaincy contractors. They are the people who are fomenting the disputes. The chiefs themselves, per se are not trouble-makers at all, and I am glad that the hon. Member has also noticed that.
Most of the concerns that we raised are the things that we are at the moment handling. For instance, all hon. Members would agree with me that Nananom had legal powers but all these powers have been taken away, apart from the judicial committee of the House. There are so many minor cases that we need not worry the courts about, and I believe that with the new Chieftaincy Bill that is yet to be passed -- probably it will soon be sent to Parliament -- these areas would be covered; and judging from the consensus,
Mr. S. K. Boafo 11:20 a.m.
Another problem that I am also facing is with the remuneration of the legal officers -- Counsels. There are so many areas that do not have legal counsels and therefore the work of the judicial committees are still standing still; and there is no provision for their salary structure. I hope the new Bill will take care of it so that, they can equate their salaries with those working at the Attorney-General's Department.
Mr. Speaker, the area that has really come to my notice is the installation of the development chief. [Interruptions.] As soon as I assumed office, I made mention of it. I made a statement to the effect that some of the Europeans coming from overseas, sometimes if you check their backgrounds as to how they became the nkosuohene or development chiefs in this country, it is very pathetic; and I have newspaper cuttings and so many documents with me which show that some of them, with the greatest respect -- are not worth their salt in their countries yet become chiefs overnight. And they use that system to collect huge funds outside for themselves and they bring about two hundred dollars to this country. These things must be discouraged and I am glad that hon. Members are also appreciating this.
The next point that is also very
important is the “minor cases” and also the disrespect for the chiefs. When we were young, anytime Nana summoned you, you would just go and listen but nowadays what do we see? People are completely ignorant of our culture; they do not know where we belong. People just disregard the summons of a chief -- the Ghanaian is cultured because he is hard-working. The Ghanaian respects authority and the Ghanaian obeys the rules, the family tradition, and respects them; but now the institutions are being attacked.
They at tack the inst i tut ion of

Parliament; they attack the Chieftaincy Institution, they attack the Judiciary and they are attacking the Presidency. What do we have now? These are some of the cultural things that we as Members of Parliament should not be partisan about; we should ensure that we maintain our identity because without identity no one can tell who you are -- Do we want to become second-class citizens elsewhere?

These are some of the things that all of us have to protect and this cuts across the political divide. I am a Ghanaian because of my language and I can be identified -- You can even see somebody and you would ask the question, whose son are you? Why? Because the person is not cultured and it is the institution of chieftaincy that can preserve our culture. I do not want anyone of my hon. Members to be asked the question, whose son are you? If you are asked that question, then it means you are not cultured; you are finished.

We must introduce these cultures and I am glad that today, all of us agree without mincing words that this is an institution which needs protection. And I believe that the maker of the Statement, the hon. Member for Odododiodoo has done very well. He has personally come to see me and there are so many things that we are doing together. So I want to assure the House that it has nothing to do with politics.

Hitherto, Nananom did not have a voice in Parliament like this. They did not have a budget that could be sent to the House and therefore they were using the Chieftaincy Secretariat, which did not have the power. But all hon. Members know that as Colleague MPs we can all agree on this in order to protect Nananom. And I believe that when the Budget is drawn, we would not forget the chieftaincy institution; we

will talk about it. The way hon. Members are contri-buting to the Statement, I think they would approve the budget before it is read.

M r. S p e a k e r , t a l k i n g a b o u t queenmothers, I am glad that the hon. Minority Leader actually hit the nail on the head. In some areas, queenmothers are also chiefs. They act as the Ohenmaa and the chief at the same time, and their roles have been defined in the Constitution.

On their remuneration, I believe when we took over, it was two hundred thousand cedis; it has been raised to four hundred thousand cedis per month, and we have one hundred and ninety three paramount chiefs. This excludes the queenmothers; so I believe that there is a need for better remuneration for them. Their travelling allowance is less than forty thousand cedis or so and this is just peanuts for Nananom. And at every function you see Nananom with their retinue attending. Who pays them? I am saying that Nananom should be protected, should be encouraged.

When we talk about politics, we have

active politicians and we have -- everyday life is politics. I am an active politician; I belong to a political party and I stood for election as a Member of Parliament. The hon. Member is also an active politician but he is also a chief. The moment one becomes an active politician and holds a card, he or she loses his or her neutrality. Let us all accept this.

But there is nothing wrong when we go and consult Nananom and ask them to do special duties. This will generate confidence in all of us because we know that Nananom will be able to discharge their duties well. So I believe that we must not try and read so much meaning
PAPERS 11:20 a.m.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 11:30 a.m.
STAGE 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, with your indulgence, I will seek leave of you to move an amendment to clause 1. Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, delete “is” and substitute with “shall be”. The Bank of Ghana shall be the licencing, regulatory and supervisory authority to give effect to this Act.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee, do you want to consult the draftsman?
Nii Adu Daku Mante: Mr. Speaker, we will leave that to the draftsman.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Do you want to consult the draftsman?
Nii Adu Mante: Mr. Speaker, that is so. Mr. Speaker, these days, they claim there is a new style of drafting, so that is their field.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
So you are saying this is correct?
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, if the drafts-people are unable to do what is right, it will reflect outside that this is the Bill this House passed. We have the opportunity; we are at the Consideration Stage and I have moved the motion so the Chairman of the Committee may choose to second or to oppose it. But I do not think that this is a matter that we should refer to the draftspeople. How can you say that “the Bank of Ghana is the . . .”? It is not right. It should be “the Bank of Ghana shall be. . .” So he should just support it and we will make progress.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon. Member for Tamale South, I am of a different opinion. It looks as if this is a drafting matter. It seems to be a drafting matter.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I accept your guidance.
Mr. John Ndebugre 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I also would want to apply to propose an amendment even though I did not have it published. It is similar to the point raised by the hon. Member for Tamale South; but this one is a bit more substantive.
If we look at subclause (2) of clause 1, it says that “the Bank may require”. I presume the “Bank” there refers to the Bank of Ghana because I have looked at the Interpretation clause and it says that “Bank” means the “Bank of Ghana”. And it says, “the Bank may require a person who is resident or who conducts business in the country to furnish the Bank with details . . .”
Then (b), “provide returns in the form discussed by the Bank of Ghana”. That “of Ghana” ought not to be there because we have already defined the “Bank”.
So if we put “of Ghana” there,
somebody may confuse it with the first bank, when the person has not gone to the Interpretation clause. So it is my proposition that the word “of Ghana” be deleted. I have discussed it with the Chairman of the Committee.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee, what do you say to it?
Nii Adu Mante: Mr. Speaker, I have no objection but presently, insofar as this Bill is concerned, my Vice-Chairman, who had the opportunity of being with the other members of the Committee, will handle this Bill during this transitional period. And I would want to crave your indulgence that he does that.
Mr. Yieleh Chireh 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on the same clause, I still want to revisit the matter raised by the hon. Member -- [Interruption.] Please, it is for your guidance because this is a matter that is strictly not a drafting problem. I want us to find out what constitutes a drafting problem here. Because -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon. Member for Wa West, we may come back to it but in the meantime let us deal with the point raised by the hon. Member for Zebilla.
Mr. Chireh 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I support what he is saying and it should be removed, otherwise we are going to have two definitions of a Bank, one which is the Bank of Ghana and the Bank of Ghana again in the main law. So wherever the “Bank of Ghana” appears there should have been the Bank; the drafters should take note. And I think this is the only time that we can ask the draftsmen to take note.
Minority Leader (Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin) 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we take decisions. Because after that the Clerk's Office will have to compile the decisions that we take in respect of these clauses. Experience shows that a number of times we have asked the drafting people to fill in the gap by using their technical
Alhaji Sumani Abukari 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, really, I am surprised to see this “Bank of Ghana” business appearing in the Bill as printed here. The Chairman of the Committee is here; I think we agreed at the meeting that anywhere we have a capital “B”, that is “Bank of Ghana”, and like the hon. Minority Leader said, anywhere we have a small “b” that refers to the other banks.
So as to the hon. Member for Zebilla (Mr. John Ndebugre's) observation, I think I agree with him that anywhere we have “Bank of Ghana” we should delete the “of Ghana” and leave “Bank”, and anywhere we have it with capital “B” it should be “Bank of Ghana”, so we do not have to write the full title there, “Bank of Ghana”.
I also agree with the Minority Leader that “Authority of the Bank” is sufficient as the heading and not “Authority of Bank of Ghana”. So we will take it that the draftspeople will take note that they should put “Bank” with capital “B” for Bank of
Ghana and “bank” with small “b” for the other banks.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 1 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 2 -- Responsibility of Bank of Ghana.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, subclause (3), line 1, after “may” insert “by notice”.
So the rendition becomes “the bank may by notice make rules, issue guidelines and manuals and request information to ensure the effective implementation of this Act”.
Mr. Bagbin 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am taken aback by this amendment and I am not convinced that there is the need for us to insert “by notice”. Because Mr. Speaker, rules, guidelines and manuals are notices by themselves. So why do we say “by notice” again? They are issued by the relevant authority including Parliament, when we make rules, when we make orders, when we make laws and then they are published. When they are published they are notices and I do not know why we are saying “by notice” again.
Mr. Speaker, I oppose the proposed amendment and I call on hon. Members to vote against it because it is repetitive and it is incongruous even with legal language and it is something that we should jettison and should not allow to reflect in our legislation.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Deputy Chairman of the Committee, are you persisting with this proposed amendment? What is the need for this?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this is to make this particular subclause consistent with the other clauses in the Bill, because we have the same “by notice” in clauses 16, 17 and 18; and we wanted to have consistency.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon. Deputy Chairman,
do you not think adding these words “by notice” would make the whole thing completely redundant? What is the point?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, when we met with the Bank of Ghana officials they insisted that is the way they operate; that they always issue directives by notices. So they thought they were more comfortable with that rendition.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
So what are you saying
to this amendment?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 11:40 a.m.
I believe we would
want to maintain it as we have proposed.
Mr. Chireh 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think it
is absolutely unnecessary. In fact, I was going to move that we remove it from clauses 16, 17 and 18 because what “is notice”? We must ask the basic question; what is notice? If “by notice”, is it something that you call by name? No! Notice is when somebody says something or somebody publishes something to your hearing, but if you say “by notice”, what is it? Is it a type of Act? No! I think we should keep out “by notice” to make it smaller as a document and neater.
Mr. F. W. K. Blay 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
am inclined to agree with the hon. Vice- Chairman of the Committee. Indeed, the Bank of Ghana is definitely not a law- making body but it can regulate in its dealings with the various institutions, and so forth. But if they make those regulations and keep them in their offices without
giving notice to the various institutions or the smaller banks that they are dealing with, then there is a problem. It is being said that if you are going to make any regulation dealing with those banks, you should give them notice, so that they cannot plead that they are not aware of what is happening; that is different.
Even with our House, when we make any law we gazette it; and that is notice. But in this case we are saying “by notice”, if you come out with any regulation notify the various institutions. So Mr. Speaker, I would insist or align myself with the Chairman that it should remain.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Will anybody be
required to comply with rules where the person has not been given notice? This is the problem.
Mr. Bagbin 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to
respond to the submission of the hon. First Deputy Speaker, hon. Freddy Blay. Mr. Speaker, he is addressing a different issue altogether. If we are talking about making the rules, the rules are first made. Now he is talking about the form of publication, the form of letting the people know that rules have been made and that they should be sent to them like notice. So that cannot be combined with the making of the rules; the rules are first made by the body and then they are communicated to them in the form of notice.
So Mr. Speaker, that could be a different clause where we would say the bank shall publish these rules and guidelines and manuals by notice. But it is not the making of the rules that is by notice; there are differences. It is like saying that here when we are making our laws, Acts or such things, we state in there that we are making it by an Act of Parliament. No! So that is the second stage, and if they want us to state that, yes; they must
communicate to the relevant bodies these rules, regulations and guidelines that they have made by notice. That is the second stage but we cannot combine it with the making of the rules.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, if we
look at the “Interpretations” column, the word “notice” is defined and with your permission, I want to read:
“Notice means publication in the mass media”.
So I believe it must be there.
Alhaji Sumani Abukari 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I think we have to carefully examine subclause (3). Mr. Speaker, even if it means shelving the “by notice” issue for the meantime, the subclause reads: “the bank may make rules, issue guidelines and manuals and request information”.
Mr. Speaker, this is a body which is supposed to make rules and issue guidelines and manuals. Now, we are saying that in the same breath they should be requesting information -- from whom? And they are to effect implementation of this Act? I think these are two issues that ought to be separated; making rules for them is different from requesting information from them.
Mr. Speaker, that aside, when they say
“by notice,” the bankers insisted that that is a term of art for their business; that is a technical point for the banking side. They insisted that we should insert “by notice”. But Mr. Speaker, my problem is, as stated by the hon. Minority Leader, the notice is not what they need to make the rules. The notice is a publication of the rules and the guidelines.
So they have to make the rules and
Mr. P. C. Appiah-Ofori 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
we have to make sure we do not make mistakes unnecessarily. We are dealing with something in the banking industry and they have a way in which they do things. I am a member of the Finance Committee and I was present when this was discussed and the technocrats from the Bank of Ghana explained that if Bank of Ghana is giving any rule, it does so by notice. So it has become part of the industry and therefore we should remain consistent.
In past laws we made for them we introduced this “by notice”; today in our system it is wrong. What are we doing? So please, let us accept this because according to Bank of Ghana it is part of the way they do things; we do not have to change it.
Mr. Chireh 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, if they
say that this is a term of art, then this House may have to go along with what they are saying; but we have the ultimate responsibility of looking at the contradictions that they introduce. If “by notice” is what the definition is in the Interpretation section, one begins to wonder how else they could have been making their guidelines, regulations and
rules. Is it that they sit in their boardroom and say they have made this rule, or what are they going to do?
Indeed, all government institutions and agencies, if they are to notify the public, they would either gazette whatever it is they have done, including Bank of Ghana.

If Bank of Ghana does not gazette its notices, then there is something basically wrong and we should correct it. I think that what is important as the hon. Member for Tamale North (Alhaji Abukari) was saying, is that rather than confusing this other point of giving information with requesting information we should separate -- If we are to give information, fine. If we are to request for information, we must make it a separate thing; but I think the term of art issue does not arise here at all.
Mr. Bagbin 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I still insist that we should not allow a practice that cannot properly be grounded in law to prevail in this House. Just now we have been told that there is modification of drafting and that instead of saying that “the Bank of Ghana shall” we are now saying “the Bank of Ghana is”. So we should not be that conservative to be held down by the fact that this is how we do things and therefore it must continue that way -- business as usual. We should move away from it.
Mr. Speaker, when the thing is communicated for publication, what is it? Because, we were told about the definition of the notice which is defined here to mean publication in the mass media. What is sent to the mass media to be published? What is it? So Mr. Speaker, that is why we are saying the making of the rules and guidelines is different from the publication, which is the notice. They are first made and then they are published
by notice.
So when we say they shall be made by notice, then the two are being combined. And if we want that, we should separate them, state the making and then we can continue to say that they would now be published by notice. The two cannot be combined because they do not happen at the same time. The rules are to be made first, then they are sent to be published. That is all that I am saying.
Mr. Kwame Osei-Prempeh 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I find it very difficult to understand the hon. Minority Leader.
First and foremost, I am a member of the Finance Committee and I remember at our meeting this issue came up that these are some of the powers which this House granted to the Bank of Ghana in the Bank of Ghana Act itself and therefore we may not seek to change it. Mr. speaker, what it means is that if the Bank of Ghana wants to give any directives, all it needs is to publish it.
So what it means is that if Bank of Ghana is making rules they may not have to do regulations like a legislative instrument which may come to this House, for instance for endorsement. They can publish it and that is all; it will be enforceable and it would be obeyed by the banks.
Mr. Speaker, all that it means is that when Bank of Ghana makes rules, through notice, and that notice is through mass publication it has a force of law; it must be obeyed. I do not understand my learned colleague saying that the rules which have to be published constitute two different things.
Mr. Speaker, all that he is saying is that one has to make laws, one can make the law and what constitutes the law? If the law is made, we are not going to gazette it, we are not going to send it to Parliament for it to lie there for 21 days to become
Mr. I. A. B Fuseini 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to associate myself with the hon. Member who last spoke. I think what the provision is seeking to do is not to take away the power of the Bank to make rules or regulations or whatever for the purpose of dealing with the Foreign Exchange; it is simply to say that where such rules are made they can only come into force by notice being sent to those who are supposed to be regulated by those rules.
So I think that if it is the way the Bank of Ghana has to operate then it is proper, so to speak, to qualify the making of the rules or regulations by the insertion of the words “by notice”; so that if notice is not given on the promulgation or passage of such rule then they cannot be complied with. So Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate myself and support the amendment being proposed to the clause.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 2 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would seek your leave to move an amendment to clause 2 (2). The rendition there is clumsy and the intent there is lost. It says “The Bank may delegate to a person or class of persons the exercise of any of
the powers conferred on the Bank under this Act except the powers in section 19.” I would rather want to amend it to read as follows: “Except for the powers of section 19 of this Act the Bank may . . .” then it can continue. But to bring it at the end, I think, is too clumsy. We should say that “Except for the powers in section 19 of this Act . . .” We would have to reconstruct the whole provision in clause 2 (2).
Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon. Member, are you talking about rearrangement?
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, rightly so.
Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon. Member for Tamale South, it is not normal that we start these clauses with “Except”.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I abandon that.
Clause 3 -- Requirement of licence.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (3), delete and substitute “The Bank shall issue or renew a licence to engage in the business of dealing in foreign exchange subject to conditions that the Bank shall determine from time to time.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 3 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 4 -- Application for a licence.
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, subclause (1), line 2, delete “Board of Directors of the”.
This is because the aplication is made to the Bank and not to the Board of Directors.
Mr. H. Iddrisu noon
Mr. Speaker, I failed to catch your eye before you put the question on clause 3 (2). I do not know whether you would permit me to take us back a little.
Mr. Speaker noon
Which clause are you going back to?
Mr. H. Iddrisu noon
Clause 3 (2), the word, “prescribe” in the first line — “The Bank of Ghana shall prescribe the banks or other corporate bodies . . .” Mr. Speaker, we have been told that the Bank of Ghana is either to license or regulate or supervise. So I think that the word, “prescribe” must be deleted and substituted with “license”.
So, clause 3 (2), first line, after “shall” delete “prescribe” and insert “license”.
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Chairman, do you need time to consider this; or do you need time to come back to it?
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, the Bank of Ghana just does not license, it determines who qualifies to be licensed. That is the sense that we wanted to put here.
rose
Mr. Speaker noon
If you feel strongly about it, we will come back to it. Let us continue with clause 4; we shall come back to it.
Mr. Bagbin noon
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Chairman has rather confused us. He said the Bank of Ghana does not license; it is to determine -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
I am sorry, that is where you are wrong. I just did not say it does not license. That is not what it does. It determines before it licenses; it just does not go ahead to license.
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Chairman, if you
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, I beg to
move, clause 5, subclause (1), delete and substitute the following:
“The Bank shall grant a licence to the applicant within sixty days after the receipt of the application, if he is satisfied that the application has —
( a ) s a t i s f i e d t h e conditions required for a licence, and
(b) paid the prescribed licence fee.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 5, subclause (2), delete.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 5, subclause (3), delete.
Mr. H. Iddrisu noon
Mr. Speaker, I have been labouring to catch your idea. Indeed, if you permit me, even in clause 5 (2) there is “the applicant” in the fist line. The “the” must be substituted with “an”. [Interruption.]
But subclause (3), I am against its deletion. It rather must be re-phrased to read:
“When a person is refused a licence and he is dissatisfied, he must be given the right of action to proceed to court for a redress.”
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Chairman, why are you deleting this subclause (3)?
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, there is a new clause that will deal with refusal of licence, and I believe that will address that.
Mr. Bagbin noon
Mr. Speaker, I think that we need to move cautiously. The first proposed amendment on clause 5, where it says, subclause (1), delete and substitute the following:
“The bank shall grant a licence to the applicant within sixty days after the receipt of the application if he is satisfied that the application has
(a) satisfied the conditions required for a licence, and
(b) paid the prescribed licence fee.”
The “application” paid the prescribed licence fee. Mr. Speaker, it should be the “applicant” and not the “application”. “. . . if it is satisfied that the applicant has satisfied the conditions required for a licence and paid the prescribed licence fees.” It cannot be “application”.
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Chairman, have you seen the point there?
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, I do not have any problem with it.
Mr. Speaker noon
What problem do you not have?
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Between the application” and the “applicant”.
Mr. Speaker noon
So you made a mistake, is that not it?
Mr. Agyei-Addo noon
Mr. Speaker, that is
what I am saying.
Mr. Speaker noon
So we should go back and instead of “application”, we say “applicant”.
Hon. Members, then we have to go back and put the Question. Do you have other complaints about this same clause?
Mr. Bagbin noon
Yes, Mr. Speaker. The Proposal in the next one -- subclause (2) delete. Now, Mr. Speaker, if you look at the clause 5 (2), there is good reason why there should be a clause like that because they will need to give the applicant reasons for refusing to grant a licence -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Speaker, my attention is being drawn to the fact that it will be taken care of in clause 13. So I have to get to clause 13 to see whether it is taken care of.
Mr. Speaker noon
But hon. Members, the first correction has to be made in respect of clause 5 -- the first amendment to sub- clause (1) -- “If it is satisfied that the applicant…” and not “application”. So I will put the Question on this amendment.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Speaker noon
Then we will continue with subclause (3) -- delete --
Question put and amendment agreed to.
rose
Mr. Speaker noon
Hon. Member for Wa West, what is the problem? You were standing.
Mr. Chireh noon
Mr. Speaker, I had wanted to find out from you which one we are dealing with now.
Mr. Speaker noon
We are now dealing with clause 5 (vi).
Mr. Chireh noon
Yes, clause 5, I have something to say there and that is that I
support the deletion because if you look at clause 13, it is taken care of. But the way my hon. Friend presented the matter, he did not make cross-references to give reasons why he is making the amendment and that is unnecessarily generating confusion.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 5 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 7 -- Register of licences.
Mr. Bagbin 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have looked at that clause 13 and I think that it does not take care of the concerns that we are raising. Clause 13 talks about review -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Minority Leader, but at this stage, you may confuse us if you go to clause 13. You can come back to have a second consideration --
Mr. Bagbin 12:10 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, but I would want it to be noted, under the same clause 5, that the issues raised in clause 5 were not taken care of in clause 13 so that we can come back for a second consideration.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
That is all right.
Clause 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 8 -- Non-transferability of licence.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg
to move, clause 8, subclause (1), delete “Board” and substitute “Bank” and do same wherever it occurs in the Bill.

Question put and amendment agreed to.

Clause 8 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Clauses 9, 10, 11, 12 -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Bagbin 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry. Mr. Speaker, clause 9 (1), maybe it is a typographical error, but at least we need to draw their attention, if not they would not look at it. Renewal of a Licence; (a) “a application of renewal” -- I think it is: “An application for renewal of licence shall be made to the Board”. I thought we said earlier on that it is to the Bank and not the Board. It was not stated and the way it is applied here it cannot be -- we have to state it specifically or else the drafters will not see it and rectify it.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Chairman, clause 9 (1), it is “an application” not “a application”.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that it is a typographical error.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clauses 9 to 12 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 13 -- Review and appeal.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg
to move, clause 13, headnotes, delete and substitute “Reviewing, Suspension and Revocation of Licensing”.
This is to make the headnotes reflect the content of clause 13.
Mr. Chireh 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know why he wants to make it “reviewing”, but I support the amendment. I would have wished that we maintained review,
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Chairman, what are you substituting? Let us get it right.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do not really see where he is coming from.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
The question is, what are you substituting for the headnotes? Is it “review” or “reviewing”?
M. Agyei-Addo: Mr. Speaker, we can take “review”.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Review, suspension, revocation of licence, or licensing?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, of licence.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Yes, but these are matters you must correct.
Mr. Benjamin Kunbuor 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, as a practical drafting matter, I do not see what legal violence that this clause 13 does, as it stands. All it is doing is to describe a particular state of affair, and the section is detailing out the circumstances under which review and appeal can take place. So we do not have to itemize all the circumstances; rejections, suspensions — then it means almost everything in the body of the clause should be made the headnote.
So a review and appeal are broad enough; I do not know why we should have an amendment to that particular provision, given the current situation of what they think headnote should be doing
in an interpretation subsequently.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, what do you say to this?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe what we have replaced rather tells anybody who looks at the headnotes what is in it. So I do not see what he is suggesting would add to what we want to achieve. So I believe we should maintain our amendment.
Mr. Kunbuor 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I guess that there is no convincing reason whatsoever for the type of innovation that they want to introduce. Because the simpler drafting is, the easier it is for people to follow; and prolix is certainly not a mark of good legal scholarship. I am not sure it is a useful thing just to keep adding words for the sake of where words can be found in the body. This is purely a descriptive arrangement. I thought that there was a legal reason that if we do not put suspension and rejection and those other things there, then it would change the legal effect of what we want to do with that particular clause.
If it is not going to have any legal effect then I do not think that the mere fact that we want it to strike somebody that this is what the section is about — review and appeal are sufficient to strike anybody who is interested in finding out what the clause seeks to do.
Mr. F. W. A. Blay 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think I am also inclined to agree with the Chairman. Indeed, if you look at the other headings, for example, clause 12 -- even notice of suspension or revocation of licence, does not deduct anything from what he is suggesting. It is good for easy reference. When not only lawyers but ordinary people want to know which law applies to what we are dealing with then they can easily go with it. I think it is all right to talk about review, suspension and revocation, it does not deduct anything.
Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
First Deputy Speaker, this clause also deals with appeal?
Mr. Blay 12:10 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, I said the appeal should also come, I am not saying that it should be withdrawn, it should also be included.
Mr. Bagbin 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, maybe the hon. First Deputy Speaker is not looking at the clause properly. The clause is talking about the suspension, the revocation, violation or refusal. When that happens, do you have any process after that?

Can you go for a review of a licence that has been rejected, or a review of a licence that has been suspended? Can you go for a review of a refusal? After it is reviewed, can you go further for an appeal? These are the things that clause 13 is talking about — a review of the suspension, review of the rejection, review of the refusal. Then after that by the Bank, can you go beyond the bank? They say yes, you can go beyond the bank to appeal.

So the headnote should be “Review and Appeal”; that is straightforward and it covers all. But clause 12 is dealing with the suspension, the revocation and violation. That is all right. But after that can you ask that this suspension be reviewed? And that is what clause 13 is talking about. So the review and appeal are all right and should not be amended. I think that we should reject the amendment.
Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, you want us to vote on that?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:20 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, we feel strongly about this since the amendment or the headnote represents the real issues in that clause. Of course, it makes life easier for anybody, just looking at it.
Dr. Kunbuor 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is not a very good practice to always rush to vote. Where the issue is not divided, why do

you want to get divided on it? This is a simple technical issue that does not divide us. So it will be better just to withdraw and make it safe. Were we to vote and then this amendment goes through, we are going to have the absurd situation that is not addressing the concern in the Bill. What we seek to do in the Bill will not be addressed by this proposed amendment. So it should not just be an issue that, yes, we must vote on it, but we must also keep our records tidy.
Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Chairman, again, what do you lose by retaining “review” and “appeal”? What do you really lose?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe at this stage I would want to withdraw.
Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Yes, you have done the proper thing. It is withdrawn. Clause 13, there is an amendment there. You may wish to move that.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 13, subclause (1), paragraph (a), line 1, delete “grant or”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 13, subclause (3), line 2, at end, delete “Court” and substitute “Minister”.
Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, even before we go to the place if you look at clause 1(b), we have mentioned all the things but we left out “variation”. So I would suggest that we add “variation” after “revocation” because it is one of the things that we have itemized before this clause. But when we were itemizing the things that somebody can request for an appeal or review, we did not add it.
Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Are you taking us back?
Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
Yes, I was standing but I
did not catch your eye; that is why. Clause 13 (1) (b) -- suspension or revocation or variation of the licence.
Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Chairman, we are going
back to 13 (1) (b), what do you say to that? He is adding another word, suspension or revocation or variation.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we do not have any problem with that.
Mr. Inusah A. B. Fuseini 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, clause 13 (1) (a), in fact, the removal will be done. But Mr. Speaker, we were made to understand that clause 5 (2) and (3) were being deleted because of clause 13. Clause 5 (2) and (3) deal with situations where the Board has refused the grant of a licence and the remedy contained therein has been deleted because they said the remedy for a refusal would be contained in clause 13. And now an amendment has been brought to delete “grant”, meaning where a person has been refused the grant of a licence he will have no remedy at all; and that is what we have done.
So Mr. Speaker, I am saying that we should revisit this issue and not delete “grant” in clause 13 (1) (a) because if we do so, we will be preventing a person who is aggrieved by a decision to refuse to grant him a licence from getting any remedy at all.
Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
We will come back to that, you note it. Now we are on clause 13, the top of page 4. That is subclause (3), line 2, delete “Court” and substitute “Minister”. This is what we are dealing with at the moment.
Alhaji Abukari 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to appear to be drawing us back but actually it is not drawing us back. I think it is a very serious observation that I want to make.
Mr. Speaker, clause 5 (2) was deleted
because it was said that the remedies provided there were contained in clause 13. Mr. Speaker, those remedies I do not see in clause 13. Clause 5 (2) says: “Where the Board refuses to grant a licence to the applicant the Board shall inform the applicant in writing of its decision and the reasons for the decision within three months after the receipt of the application”. Mr. Speaker, this is not contained in the clause 13.
Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
We will come back to it, you note it. We can have a Second Consideration Stage but in the meantime let us go on with this.
Mr. Bagbin 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think I oppose the proposed amendment. Mr. Speaker, I think at that stage what is required is a judicial decision and there is good reason why the appeal should be to the court and not to a Minister. Mr. Speaker, the process that is being ironed out here is that after the Board has refused an applicant either for a grant or renewal or whatever, the person should be entitled to go to court, not to the Minister. If you draw in a Minister there, it is going to bring in a lot of politics. I think that we should insulate these things from political flavours. In all it will now be depending on which Minister is in charge, which Government is on top and that kind of thing; but the court is the body that is to resolve disputes.
Here is a case where somebody feels strongly that he should be granted a licence or his licence should be renewed and the Bank refuses and he goes for a review and the Bank insists, why should it be to the Minister? I think it should go to the court.
Mr. Opare-Hammond 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that it is enshrined in the laws of the country that anyone who is aggrieved
can go to court. But we are talking about a situation where for some reasons, an applicant has been refused a licence. In that case, we believe that he must be given the opportunity of at least seeing the Minister and appealing first of all to the Minister before going to court.
I remember at the committee level when we discussed this, we said that. I cannot remember exactly where, but there is a place where provision has been made in certain cases that the applicant could go to court immediately; but specifically, we are saying that to go to court just for refusal of licence for these things.
It is a right that is already that of the applicant but we believe that he must be given an opportunity at least to seek redress with the Minister before looking at other avenues for settlement.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am wondering whether I can move my point of order. I thought when he was on his feet it was prudent for me to move a point of order that he should not allow his later coming to this Consideration Stage to bog down the discussion. We have deleted clause 5 (3) and (4) which is what he is still referring to. We have long passed there and we said that there is no opportunity for anybody to send an application to the Minister. So he should restrict himself to where we are and the court process and not what has been dealt with by this House.
Mr. Freddie Blay 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do agree with what the last but one speaker has said. Indeed, what he proposed here in terms of amendment is to amplify, not to restrict the choices of righting any wrong that one perceives. What he is saying is, it is one's right if one is aggrieved with anything that has been made into law here, to go to court if he has to. It states, “you may”. On the other hand, if you think
Mr. Bagbin 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I recollect very well that we passed the Bank of Ghana Act and we insulated the Bank of Ghana against these kind of interference. The Bank of Ghana is not under a Minister, it is not under anything. It is an independent financial institution; we gave it autonomy. So if it takes its decision, why should people now petition against those decisions to the Minister?
Mr. Speaker, in the performance of its duties and functions, by the Bank of Ghana Act, it is not subject to the direction or control of any Minister. It is there in the Bank of Ghana Act.
So Mr. Speaker, it is not right for people to be appealing against a decision of the Bank to the Minister. That is why it should go to the court.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Constitution guarantees everybody right to go to court. So we do not have to make a law and say that if you are aggrieved you should go to court. You do not have to say it. You do not have to tell anybody that if you do not agree with me, go to court. The court is there for everybody to go to.
So Mr. Speaker, it is true that the Bank of Ghana is independent of the Ministry
of Finance and Economic Planning, but it is also true that the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning has supervisory powers over all financial institutions belonging to the State. So as the first contributor said, in order to avoid unnecessary litigations, let the aggrieved person make a representation to the Minister, for the Minister's intervention, to probably come in. This is the way we are saying it. We are not saying that if he is not satisfied he can go to court but we do not have to put it in the law that go to court because everybody has the right to go to court.
Mr. Felix Abayateye 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we are on clause 13, and in fact, earlier on, I wanted to draw your attention — we had deleted that an applicant who has been refused a licence by the Bank may petition the Minister for redress. We deleted it. So if we have deleted that he need not seek the redress of the Minister then why are we now saying that when he is refused, he should go to the Minister? The point I am making is that we have repealed clause 5, subclauses (2) and (3), and now we are saying we should appeal to the Minister. The person must go to court, therefore I stand against the amendment and ask that it should be withdrawn.
Mr. Opare-Hammond 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am on my feet once again because I believe that we do not want to subject applicants to all sorts of litigation. We must provide some administrative processes, proce- dures or systems in place that will help them seek redress, other than going to court on, so to speak, minor issues such as the refusal of licence.
Mr. Speaker, to add to this, it is part of international best practices that in cases like this the applicant is given an opportunity to seek redress, maybe, with the Minister other than going to court.
Mr. Speaker, going to court is the fundamental thing that is guaranteed in the Constitution, the laws of this country. And we do not have to make provisions for it again in this case. What we are saying is that we should allow this proposed amendment so that people would use all the administrative channels that are available to them to seek redress other than going to court at the first instance, which is of course faster.
Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon. Member for Adenta, the question which is being raised is this, that since the Bank of Ghana is an autonomous institution, of what effect will any appeal to the Minister be? That is the question which is being asked. How effective is any appeal to the Minister going to be since the Minister cannot impose any opinion?
Mr. Opare-Hammond 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that if we have it as part of the Act, then somehow, someway, the Bank of Ghana will be obliged to listen to the Minister because that is why we are putting it in the law. So that by law, they would have to listen to the Minister.
Deputy Attorney-General (Mr. Kwame Osei-Prempeh): Mr. Speaker, I believe that there is no need to give any more powers to the Minister. In fact, what the Bank of Ghana Act sought to do was to make the Bank of Ghana autonomous and remove it from the ambit of the Minister. So that you cannot come through the back door to put the Minister there. If anybody is aggrieved, he should go to court; and that is all.
Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, are you withdrawing this amendment?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, before I do so, I want to let hon. Members understand that i t is an option -
Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
How effective is this going to be as an option? How effective?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I said I withdraw, but before I do that - [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon. Members, this is accordingly withdrawn; let us proceed. Clause 13, Chairman of the Committee, there is a further amendment.
Clause 13 - Review and appeal.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, with your indulgence, I want us to step this down and move on, we will come back to that.
Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
You want to defer this?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:40 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Clause 14 -- Foreign exchange business and international payments.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 14, subclause (1), line 2, at end, insert “and any other authorized dealer”.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I oppose the amendment. Mr. Speaker, if you allow this amendment to go, you will be giving opportunities for unscrupulous people to defraud the State of foreign exchange and ideally if you allow it to stand, it will be inconsistent with an earlier enactment we have passed here.
Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to audit the accounts of some private companies for the Revenue Agencies Governing Board, and in one of the companies, I found out that the company
claims to export its manufactured goods.
Mr. Speaker, under the Value Added Tax (VAT) law, exports are zero-rated. It means that exports do not attract VAT. That company sells goods locally, fills in exports and imports forms prescribed under imports and exports law and gets Customs and Excise at the borders to certify that the goods have crossed the border while in fact the goods have not crossed the border. Having sold the goods locally and then charged VAT, the company appropriates the VAT instead of passing it on to the Government.
So when I asked the company to show me evidence of repatriation, the explanation given was that the money was brought through the border and they went to a Bureau d'change to change it into cedis. Unless, we insist that such exports proceeds should be lodged in a bank. But if you create an opportunity that they can go to any dealer, then this will indefinitely continue in this country and the nation will be the loser.
The country needs money to push its balance of trade position. We are always in deficit and if we export with the intention of earning foreign exchange and this job done, you lose the foreign exchange and at the same time the VAT which could have gone to the State is also lost, then what are we doing? So you do not have to create opportunity for anybody to defraud the State; that is one.
Again, the VAT Bill was brought here and I drew the attention of the House to this. So an amendment I proposed was accepted. In so doing what we were saying was that all export proceeds should be repatriated from an external bank into a bank in Ghana in order to prevent the recurrence of what I found when I went to audit. If you allow this one, you are going to create an opportunity for people
Alhaji Abukari 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think I completely agree with hon. P. C. Appiah- Ofori on this issue. In fact, yesterday, we were at a workshop with the Association of Ghana Industries, and one of them raised concerns about these transactions. Mr. Speaker, he did indicate that sometimes these women come in from neighbouring countries with their CFA and they do not pay into the bank. They come and change it in the open market where they get higher prices for their CFA.
But when they buy these goods and leave, the company does not have evidence that this money was properly channelled through the bank and therefore they find it difficult to claim a repatriation of the VAT that they would normally have benefited from. Though they were saying that is a very big problem for them and that they thought we should look at it critically. Mr. Speaker, if we leave it to “any other dealers” the money this country should be earning from proper monetary transaction through the banks would be lost to the State.
So it is not in our interest to add “any other dealers”; that is only creating avenue for defrauding this country of revenue that we are entitled to. So Mr. Speaker, I am also opposed to this particular amendment.
Mr. Bagbin 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that
the amendment is in the right direction. The interventions made by my hon. Colleagues are introducing a second issue. We are talking about payments in foreign currency and what the clause is talking about is that it should be done through banks. Now we realize that there are bureau d'changes. Bureau d'changes are not banks but they are authorized dealers in foreign currencies. If somebody is to
remit moneys from outside to a Ghanaian in Ghana, it should be done through the bank or bureau d'change -- or we call them money transfer units -- like Western Union. That is all what is intended to be captured in addition to the bank that it can be done through, says Western Union.
The issue of people not passing them through the bank and therefore measures to get all to be passed through the bank cannot be captured under this clause. It has to be addressed separately so that when people are caught with these moneys not passing through the banks -- payments in respect of transactions -- then some action should be taken against them. But that does not negate the provision that these payments should come through the bank and other authorized dealers. It is another way of trying to resolve or find a solution to the problem that they are raising but it is not adequate. Unless they want to add something, I do not think that this proposed amendment should be opposed because it is widening the area, and I think that it should include other authorized dealers, not only the banks.
Mr. Opare-Hammond 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I want to support the hon. Minority Leader on this and just to add that yesterday, your Committee on Finance was with the members of the Association of Ghana Industries and this issue came up. Mr. Speaker, they were narrating some of the experiences they have had in the past, and that is to say that they have people coming from the neighbouring countries who want to buy some of their products and send them back to those countries.
When they want to go through the bank, the only bank they can use now is Ecobank, and because Ecobank is enjoying monopoly, the processes, the commission, et cetera is so high that many of these traders avoid the banks. They come into Ghana, change their money at the black market or wherever they can find
the cedis and then they come and buy the goods and take them back to either Togo or Benin or to Nigeria. When this is done, the company that sells the goods is not able to claim the money that they should claim as VAT refund.
Mr. Speaker, I believe we should allow this amendment so that other avenues can be created for such traders. So when they come, at the border they can find a Forex Bureau, they can find an authorized dealer whom they can change money from; it goes through the system and then when they have purchased the goods, the VAT refund can be taken by the company that sells the goods to them. Mr. Speaker, I believe that this amendment must be allowed to pass.
Mr. Kenneth Dzirasah 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the proposed amendment for the reasons assigned, except that I would like to indicate that in place of the word “and”, we should substitute “or”. This is because if it does not take that form, the last leg of the sentence will read: “shall be made through a bank and any other authorized dealer” which means there would have to be two fora for dealing in one transaction. So the “and” there must be replaced by “or” as proposed.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on
the last issue raised by hon. Dzirasah, I believe that is in order -- the “or”. But as regards the amendment, I believe the operative word is “authorized”; the Bank of Ghana has authorized the body to do certain things. If they are authorized to handle the foreign exchange transfers, why not? So if we will agree that the Bank of Ghana should authorize certain people to do certain things, of course, we cannot in one breath say you can do this and in another breath take it away from the person. So I believe our amendment is in order and we want to see it through.
Thank you.
Mr. Chireh 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I support
the proposed amendment as further amended by my hon. Friend Dzirasah. I am opposing my Friend's opposition to this because the whole purpose of this Bill is to liberalize the foreign exchange regime. It was strictured and held back in the Bank of Ghana but he knows, as well as I do that because it was held back there, all kinds of transactions are going on without anybody being in the position to police them.
So if you are talking about authorized dealer, which means that these are the bodies that have been licensed by the Bank of Ghana, all you should be concerned about is how Bank of Ghana will, after they have made these transactions monitor, police and see that they themselves are not engaged in any wrongdoing. Otherwise, this proposed amendment is proper and consistent with the law we want to make. If we oppose it, it means that we are restricting the transactions only to banks.
If we look at it now, there are not many banks in some places, particularly in my constituency. So if they get to Wa and there is a forex bureau there which is licensed by the Bank of Ghana, they should be able to do their transactions. So I support it, and I recommend it to all of you to vote against the hon. Member for Asikuma-Odoben-Brakwa (Mr. Appiah- Ofori).
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Member for
Asikuma-Odoben-Brakwa, very briefly before we put this Question.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we
are here to save this country and we do not have to do anything that will destroy this country. I will give him the reasons why I think that we have to be very cautious.
I have said without wasting time that
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 12:50 p.m.


people here -- let me say something -- Mr. Speaker, give me just two minutes. A certain top public servant told me that a Lebanese was coming to invest in this country and so what the Lebanese asked a lawyer in Ghana to do was to look at the financial laws in the country, identify the weaknesses in these laws so that he would exploit these laws to his advantage. This he did, so anytime he did something wrong and was taken to court he went away with it. Having seen that people are not exporting but they are also playing these tricks, if the opportunity has come to us to prevent them from defrauding the State and we allow this to pass by, generations yet unborn will not forgive us.

So Mr. Speaker, I am proposing that let us step this down so that an opportunity is given us to introduce another clause dealing with imports and exports. My argument is based on import and export while this one actually may be confined to bringing dollars in and going to the bank to change.

But this law does not make provision for export proceeds exclusively so if we allow it to stay as it is -- that is where my amendment is following. But as soon as this amendment is introduced, what I want to achieve by my second amendment may not succeed. I am suggesting that we step this down so that we now introduce another clause to deal with exports and imports so that we safeguard the interest of the nation.

Question put and amendment agreed to, viz:

Clause 14, subclause (1), line 2, at end, add “or any other authorized dealer”.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 14, subclause (1), line 2, insert “a” between “and” and “non- resident”.
Mr. Speaker, line 2 of clause 14 (1), there is a word “and”. “And” is a coordinating conjunction which joins two sentences or two phrases or two words of equal status. So the “and” there is joining “a resident”. But “non-resident” has not got that indefinite article “a”. So I am saying that it should be “a resident” and “a non-resident”. It is just a grammatical error and I want everybody to support it.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Chairman of the Committee, what do you say?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is an omission, we will want to go with it.
Mr. Chireh 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that as was observed earlier on, normally in law, if you do not use the word “and” properly, the interpretation becomes a difficulty. So I would have even preferred to deal with this issue by using “or” instead of “and” wherever “and” appears. Because “and” when it is used like this means that if it is an act it must be performed by both before it constitutes a crime or whatever. So instead of introducing “a” and all that, we should rather make it “or” wherever “and” appears in this because the effect is the same.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Member for Asikuma-Odoben-Brakwa, do you accept that?
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I did not quarrel with the “and”, I quarrelled with the omission of “a”. My amendment is that we should introduce “a” there. So if the House thinks “or” is there, all that I want is “a non-resident” so that the conjunction would be joining two equal clauses. So I do not think what he is saying is right. Please, let us go with mine.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
There is a further amendment again standing in your name, hon. Member for Asikuma/Odoben/ Brakwa.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 14, line 2, after “non- resident” add a phrase “involving transactions including merchandise imports and exports”.
Mr. Speaker, if one looks at the whole thing, it is payment in foreign currency to or from Ghana. It does not talk about import or export. Mr. Speaker, I remember very well that when I did this audit and queried those people, they said the Foreign Exchange Act did not say that when exports are made proceeds should come to Ghana. Therefore, if they have exported and have not brought the money to Ghana it is not an offence under any law.
Mr. Speaker, if we allow it, then the whole corrupt practice would continue. So I want us to be specific that in addition to ordinary physical currency coming in, this one also affects payments relating to imports and exports. So that anybody who does not comply with it shall commit an offence. It will prevent people from actually selling things locally and claiming that they have exported the goods and therefore they should be given various rights under the VAT law.

But Mr. Speaker, with the preceding amendment having been adopted, it will make this my amendment, if adopted, useless. It will really give industrialists, exporters the right even to collect money and go to other places.

So Mr. Speaker, I want to --

[Interruptions.] Those things disturb me
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member for
Asikuma-Odoben-Brakwa, do not lose your temper.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
want to introduce it in another form at the Second Consideration Stage. So that it will be able to separate payments from export proceeds in order that it will rather take care of and prevent people from selling goods in Ghana and claiming that they have exported and depriving the State of foreign exchange and Value Added Tax. So Mr. Speaker, if you would allow me, at the Second Consideration Stage, I would bring the amendment to take care of this.
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
But at this stage, are you withdrawing this amendment?
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
Yes, I am withdrawing it for you to give me a chance for it to be reintroduced.
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
Allright, it is withdrawn.
There is also a further amendment standing in your name. You may wish to move it.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this amendment too is consequential.
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
Is it withdrawn?
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
It is stood down, please. If you could stand down the two amendments so that I will introduce them in the Second Consideration Stage.
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member for Asikuma-Odoben-Brakwa, the impression I had was that you had withdrawn the earlier one. Are you withdrawing this one too?
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, would you allow me to reintroduce them during the Second Consideration Stage?
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
Why not? I have no power to stop you from introducing it.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
Oh! Praise God -- [Laughter.]
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
But at this stage, you are withdrawing that?
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
All right.
Clause 14 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 15 to 18 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 19 -- Imposition of temporary restrictions.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, subclause (1), line 1, delete “is satisfied” and substitute “determines”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, subclause (1), paragraph (c) and (d), delete.
Mr. Kenneth Dzirasah 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, he must assign reasons. Mr. Speaker, this is because we are dealing with the general foreign exchange regime and if the economy is such that it is difficult for the Bank of Ghana to operate or the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning to operate efficiently, and it is imposing rules to regulate the inflow and outflow of foreign exchange, I think this should not be objected to even if it relates to individuals who are holding it and circulating it around.
Mr. Speaker, apart from that I would suggest strongly that rather than vest the Governor, in consultation with the
Minister, with making rules, it should come in the form of regulations that will come before the House. [Interruption.] Well, that is another dimension that I am adding to it. I am sorry, I did not have the opportunity of putting in an amendment. So that the House can make an input to determine that in fact and in reality, there is the need for the Governor or the Minister for that matter to impose restrictions. These are desirable checks and balances that we need in the economy.
Mr. Opare-Hammond 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I think there is a fundamental mistake, probably on the part of the hon. Chairman, and I am sorry to point that one to him. At the committee level, what we said with regard to this one was that: either paragraph (c) or (d) should be deleted because each is a repetition of the other. If you read the thing there, it is the same thing that has been repeated. So the amendment there is just that we delete one paragraph; either (c) or (d). And if you look at the Order Paper, the amendment is delete (c) so that we will have only (d) there. So Mr. Speaker, that must be maintained.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, there
is a mistake here. Paragraphs (c) and (d) talk about the same thing. So we are deleting one; either (c) or (d). So we will delete the (c).
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
You are deleting
subclause (1), paragraph (c); is that what you are deleting? Let us know which one you are deleting. We are now dealing with paragraph (c).
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
paragraph (c) should be deleted.
Mr. Alfred Abayateye 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
Order! Order! Hon.
Member for Sege, we are now dealing with paragraph (c).
Mr. Abayateye 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is that the paragraph (c), which is clause 19 at (xix) and then we have (xx), we cannot delete the (xix) and let the (xx) stay. We delete the (xx) and the (xix) then stays. So the (c) is “… acquisition, holding and use in the country of foreign currency or traveller's cheques by persons …” That should be there and then the second one rather goes off.
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
The hon. Chairman of
the Committee, let us hear you on that.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
(c) is more expansive than the (d). So we would delete the (d) and maintain the (c).
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
So what are you doing
to the (c)? Are you withdrawing this amendment?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. So
we are proposing that we delete (d).
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
No, at this stage, we
are at (c).
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
We have withdrawn
what we put across first as amending (c).
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
So, you are withdrawing (c), at (xix)?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker. Right. That is withdrawn.
Then we go to (xx).
Amendment by leave withdrawn.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, subclause (3), line 3, delete all -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
No, -- (xx), clause 19, there is a further amendment. So what do
you do to that?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, subclause (1), paragraph (d), delete.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg
to move, clause 19, subclause (3), line (1), at the beginning insert “Despite subclause (2)” and delete “Bank” and substitute “Governor”.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the word
“despite” is not parliamentary; it is not legislative. [Laughter.] Notwithstanding -- So if he is coming he must come properly.
Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Hon. Member for South
Tongu, is that the only problem you have on that, the word “despite”?
Mr. Dzirasah 1:10 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, it
does not sound well. It is not common in legislative drafting.
Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
They have now forgotten
about “notwithstanding”. They say “notwithstanding” is now archaic, so we should go to “despite”. That is what they are saying now.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:10 p.m.
Is that the advice of
the draftsperson?
Mr. Blay 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the same
subclause, that is, clause 19 (1) (3), the last line and with your permission I will read the whole subclause:
“The Bank in consultation with the Minister may extend the time …”
We have changed that to mean --
Mr. Blay 1:10 p.m.


“The Governor in consultation with the Minister may extend the time frame designated for the operation of the rules for a period of not more than three months and for any subsequent period that the Governor or the Minister may determine.”

There should not be “or”, it should be “and the Minister”. It is in consultation with either one of them. But in this case they made it to be that either one of them may determine; when in the earlier one they said “in consultation”, one would be in consultation with the other. So if it could be properly clarified or it should be amended to reflec, or make more sense.
Mr. Abayateye 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
think at the committee level we took that into consideration; it is not so here. We said that in the subsequent period “the Governor and the Minister”. So the “or” should be changed to “and”. We did it at the committee level.
Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Chairman, what is the
situation now?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
amendment that we proposed is that “the Governor in consultation with …” It is listed on the Order Paper. That is the last amendment proposed for clause 19.
Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
So what do you say to
the clause 19?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
what I am saying is that we have already proposed an amendment, unless he wants to come up with another amendment.
Alhaji Abukari 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do
not think the Chairman is following the arguments on the floor. We are not talking about replacing “bank” with “governor”, that is not what we are saying. Further down the line, we are saying that any

subsequent period that the Governor “and” the Minister may determine, instead of “or”. That is what they are saying.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
We have already
taken care of that. The hon. Member should look at Order Paper (xxii), that issue is addressed there.
MR. FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Yes,
you made a point that it should rather be “and”?
Alhaji Abukari 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, yes,
instead of “in consultation”, we should just put “and the Minister” because he would have consulted the Minister already. So now the determination is by the two of them.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
They are two issues; the second one is to do with subsequent and -- [Interruption.]
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
It makes no difference, hon. Chairman. If it is in consultation with the earlier one instead of “or”, if you add “and” then of course it makes more sense on that issue.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Fair enough.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Clause 19 as amended ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Clause 20 -- Provision of information
by banks.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
beg to move, clause 20, subclause (3), line 1, after “bank” insert “and any other authorized dealer.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, there
should be a consequential amendment to that “and”. It should not be “and”; it should be “or any other authorized …” drawing the spirit from an earlier amendment that has been approved by the House.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg
to move, clause 20, add a new subclause as follows:
“a bank or authorized dealer which fails to furnish information or produce books, accounts or other documents commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not exceeding five hundred penalty units or to a term of imprisonment of not less than four years or to both.”
Mr. Dzirasah 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, what is the reason for it?
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, can you explain? They are saying that they have come out with a few “do nots” and if you are in breach of them you ought to be penalized and the provision is made for penal units or term of imprisonment or both. That is what they have come out with. Is there any need for more revision?
Mr. Dzirasah 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, there is
nothing wrong with requiring -- [Inter- ruption].
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
The
rendition or what?
Mr. Dzirasah 1:20 p.m.
No, there is nothing
wrong in requiring the production of information but it stands out there in isolation. I do not know where it is linked to in the entire Bill. If there is any connection I do not have any objection; but since it is a new subclause that is being introduced, he has a duty to explain to those of us who were not at the committee meeting so that we can also keep track of the changes that they are introducing in the Bill. That is all I am asking for.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Well,
maybe, Chairman, I do not have to take part in this debate. Chairman of Committee, could you convince him?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:20 p.m.
If he wants to - He
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
What
he was saying was that, if you could explain why this new subclause. What is the rationale for this new subclause? Can any member of the Committee come out with any explanation?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, what I
said was that I did not hear what he wanted to know; it is not that I do not have an explanation. I did not even hear what he wanted to know.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
That
is what I have just told you. He says that he wants the rationale, once you are introducing a new subclause. He says he was not at the meeting like many of us, and he says he is not entirely satisfied or he is not quite sure of what you are talking about. So if you can give an explanation.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Well, maybe a lot will depend on the kind of information you want which is legitimate in accordance with this regulation. If you are asked in accordance with the Act to provide certain information and you do not do that, hon. Member, then of course you are liable to some sanctions being imposed on you and these are the sanctions we provided for. Hon. Ken Dzirasah, if you are all right with it.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, if I may
explain further.
incongruous.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think
this is a drafting issue.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
But it is
quite serious, so we should not leave it to him. Are we sticking to the 500 penalty units? If we are sticking to that, then of course, there should be a correspondence term of imprisonment or if you want to talk about four years then we have got to change it the other way round.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
The Chairman is saying that we should leave it but I will suggest that we look at it carefully, so we stand it down.
Mr. Bagbin 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I agree
with you. In fact, we passed legislation on this matter. The correspondence, if you have these units, should be the term of imprisonment. We have legislation on it, so they can consult that.
But I am concerned about the use of words, “fails to furnish information”. If it is coming under clause 20, as hon. Dzirasah is talking about, the term to use is not “fails to furnish”, “refuses”, because they are requesting them for that information. So if you do not give it, it means you are refusing to comply with the request.
But when we say “fail to”, it is a duty that you should perform that you are not performing; you are not being prompted even, if you do not need “to be prompted” then you “fail”. But if you are to be prompted, you are requested to do something you do not do, you refuse. So it should be that “A bank or authorised dealer which refuses to furnish the information
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Yes.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:20 p.m.
This requirement of information has not just descended from nowhere. It must have some link with the entire body of the Bill. All I am asking is, is this referable to any clause which requires that there shall be information? Because if there is no requirement of information, there cannot be punishment for breach. So this is standing on its own and all that I want is the nexus between this and the entire Bill. [Interruption.]
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
I understand it very well.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:20 p.m.
But Mr. Speaker,
clause 20 (1) talks about that and I think that should be enough to answer what he wants.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:20 p.m.
Then in that event you have misallocated it.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
I am
saying that he should have looked at it.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:20 p.m.
Yes, he should have.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Yes, then
hon. Members, we move ahead.
Alhaji Abukari 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am
not against the amendment. I think, as he says, this amendment was derived from clause 20 (1) but my problem is the fines and sentences. There is now a table for fines and sentences. Five hundred (500) penalty units should not attract four years imprisonment. If they want to amend the penalty units to read a higher penalty unit, fine, but not 500 penalty units. The 500 penalty units should not attract more than one or two years; and I think the drafts- people have this table.
So maybe we have to get them to re-adjust it. Either we increase the penalty units or we reduce the term of imprisonment because the two are not
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, if you look at the headnote, it says “enforcement and compliance”. And to be able to do that you will need information. And if you demand information and it is not forthcoming, how then do you prosecute your enforcement?
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Mr.
Chairman, I believe you will agree with the suggestion from the hon. Minority Leader?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:20 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, I
do not have any problem with that.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Fair
enough.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Clause 20 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 21 - Provision of information by persons.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
beg to move, clause 21, subclause (1), line 4, delete “detecting” and substitute “to detect”.
Mr. Speaker, a part of the clause reads as follows 1:20 p.m.
“. . . the designated person may require to secure compliance with or detecting an offence in contravention of this Act”.
Mr. Speaker, “or” is joining to “secure”
and to another word which only should begin with “to”. So I am saying that it should be “to detect' instead of “or detecting” because grammatically, it is wrong. “The designated person may require to secure compliance with or to detect an offence in contravention of this Act” not “or detecting”. It does not make it correct.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Yes, hon. Chairman, are you all right with that? That

is the proposed amendment.
Alhaji Sorogho 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to seek guidance on something that I have just observed. Mr. Speaker, the Foreign Exchange Bill is a very important Bill that we should all take keen interest in. But Mr. Speaker, as we Sit now, we do not form a quorum at all, especially at the Majority side -- they are only eleven. Mr. Speaker, for such an important Bill at the Consideration Stage, we sit here with less than 30 per cent of Members Sitting and considering - [Interruption.]
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
So what is your point?
Alhaji Sorogho 1:20 p.m.
My point is that we do not form a quorum and for that reason I will advise that if we can - [Interruption.]
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
You have
drawn my attention to that but what is on the floor at the moment is a proposed amendment of hon. Appiah-Ofori. Any contribution to that?
Alhaji Sorogho 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
You
are not supposed to react to that. Hon. Appiah- Ofori's amendment is that clause 21 be amended by the deletion of the word “detecting” and in its place the substitution of two words, “to detect”.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 21, subclause (4), line 4, delete all the words after “both”.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, my problem is that I do not understand why he is deleting it because “persons” here, as I understand it, cover corporate entities.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
we are of the opinion that whilst the person has already been convicted and is in prison -- And this is specific to the provision of information. We thought once the conviction is done, then no other punishment is needed because he or she would already be in prison.
Alhaji Abukari 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to say that I do not agree with the Chairman of the Committee because this one is a penalty, a fine or imprisonment. If it is a company and it pays the fine but continues to be in breach, there has to be another penalty for the continuation of the breach.
So I think that this amendment is not in the interest of the law that we want to pass, otherwise people would simply go and pay the fine and then go on disobeying. But if they realize that if even they pay the fine there is still an extra fine they are going to pay, if they are in breach, they may call themselves to order.
So Mr. Speaker, I think that we should withdraw this amendment, with respect to my Chairman.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Yes, hon.
Chairman of the Committee, are you all right with that?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
believe if we follow the hon. Member's line of reasoning, it makes sense so we want to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment by leave withdrawn.
Alhaji Abukari 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it suffers the same defect about the fine and the sentence - [Interruption.]
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
The Table
Officer has just checked; as a matter of fact, the earlier one, the penalty units and the corresponding years are correct but --
Alhaji Abukari 1:30 p.m.
Five hundred penalty
units and four years?
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Yes, four
years. I have just been informed that it is correct and so maybe you need to revise yours.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Clause 21 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 22 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause 23 -- Search and seizure.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to
move, clause 23, subclause (1), paragraph (a), line 4, after “aircraft” insert “any other means of transport”.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do not see by any conjecture any other form of transport. After having mentioned vehicles, vessels, or an aircraft -- unless we have to talk about spacecraft which is indeed an aircraft on its own. So the addition of “any other means of transport” - maybe, if he can explain what it means, because they have mentioned all the known types of transport -- vehicles include motor cycles, ships and what have you.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
What
about travelling by donkey across the border at Aflao?
Mr. Dzirasah 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is not
mechanized. You look at the class of
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
That is
why we are saying that “by any other means”.
Mr. Dzirasah 1:30 p.m.
Yes, but it must belong
to this class.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Very well,
Chairman of the Committee?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we
wanted to have a situation where any other means of conveyance could be captured under this subclause and that is from the amendment that we proposed.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
It is drawing your attention to the fact that there is a class of vehicular movement and he says “any other” means “all other vehicular movements” which have been covered and he does not see the reason - I believe maybe he will withdraw his objection.
Dr. Ben Kunbuor 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think the concern that hon. Ken Dzirasah has raised makes sense as a matter of inter-pretation. Perhaps his anticipation is that that general provision covers all the possible situations and we are saying it does not because that general provision will take its colour from the specific itemized movement arrangement. So except he is very clear in his mind that he wants an ombudsman thing to cover it, it will always be interpreted to relate to these specific things.
But there are other ways of movements, of getting these monies across the borders as it were, which this particular provision will not cover. That is why we wanted to know why the Chairman has itemized these specific ones in this way.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Very well,
hon. Chairman of the Committee, what do

you say to that?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, as
I said earlier on, we wanted to have a situation where every other means by which conveyance could come into play could be captured and this involves the physical movement of currency; and so it is not like the electronic --
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Mr. Appiah-Ofori 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 23, subclause (1), paragraph (a), line 2, delete “may be” and substitute “has been”.
Mr. Speaker, if one reads the clause there, I am of the opinion that “may be” should be changed to “has been”. Mr. Speaker, let us look at it --
“If the Court is satisfied by information given under oath by a person authorized by the Bank to act for the purpose to determine
(a) that an offence under this Act has been or is being committed and that evidence of the commission of the offence has been found at the premises specified in the information or in the vehicle, or aircraft . . .”
I am of the opinion that since it “has been found”, it will be wrong for us to say “may be found again”. So let us make it “has been found”.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Mr. First Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Chairman
of the Committee - Hon. Members, it appears that -- [Pause] -- Somebody has drawn my attention that it is a very important Bill and enthusiasm for further work appears to be waning. And I am being prompted for that reason that we bring proceedings at least to a suspension and may be continue tomorrow. If that is the sense I gather, I would want to draw the attention of the Leader of the House.
Mr. Felix K. Owusu-Adjapong 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we have been concerned about tomorrow's assignment which is the Budget. And hon. Members felt they would want to do some more exercise because immediately after the Budget Statement hon. Members are compelled to make comments here and there. I know hon. Kunbuor is going to prepare for the first time as the Ranking Member for

Finance. So the idea is that we give hon. Members the opportunity - Again, there are a lot of committee meetings and that is why I beg to move, that this honourable House do now adjourn till tomorrow at 10.00 o'clock in the morning bearing in mind that we will be listening to the Financial Statement for the following year.
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT 1:40 p.m.