Debates of 21 Mar 2007

MR. SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10 a.m.
CORRECTION OF VOTES 10 a.m.
AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE 10 a.m.
OFFICIAL REPORT 10 a.m.
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
page 13, Finance Committee - Attendance, (vii) and (xi) are the same names, that is hon. Dr. Ben Kunbuor whose name has been repeated. At least, one should be deleted.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Thank you for the correction.
PUBLICATION IN THE 10 a.m.
HERITAGE 10 a.m.
Mr. Bagbin 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, before item 3, I just want to raise a concern about a publication on the front page of The Heritage - The Heritage publication of Wednesday, 21st March, 2007, which is today, says that I did say that the death of Members of Parliament (MPs) was as a result of abject poverty. The heading of the article is:
“Gospel According to Bagbin -- Abject Poverty, cause of MPs deaths.”
Mr. Speaker, I never said any such thing anywhere. Yesterday, in a contribution to welcome our hon. Colleague I did mention that because of the not-too-well conditions of service for Members, Members were

compelled to look somewhere else to get additional income. That is all what I said, if he is talking about conditions of service and Members trying to get additional income. I never attributed that as the cause for the death of hon. Members.

I think that that publication is a misrepresentation and I would want to take this opportunity to urge our colleagues of the Parliamentary Press Corps that when they are in doubt on any of these issues they should kindly consult the person who made the statement on the floor.

I have been called several times by various FM Stations to react to it and I have reacted just like what I am saying. And before even the call, some of the hosts have had occasion to use unfriendly language to my person and I think that there is no need in trying to always raise these red herrings and trying to poison the political discourse and the democratic development in the country.

So Mr. Speaker, it is with this that I would want to urge, once again, the members of the Parliamentary Press Corps to always get in touch when they are in doubt. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
URGENT QUESTION 10 a.m.
Minister for the Interior (Mr. Albert Kan-Dapaah) 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, there has been a long-standing dispute over a parcel of land lying near Abokobi in Accra and covering an approximate area of 87.68
acres and surrounded on all sides by land belonging to the Boi stool. The dispute is between Akporman, a Teshie village, and Boi, an Osu village. Both Akporman and Boi are located in the present Ga East District.
Since 1982, the parties have sought to
resolve the dispute in the courts and the case has since travelled through the High Court to the Supreme Court. In all the rulings, judgement was given in favour of Akporman.
Mr. Speaker, the final ruling was given in 2006 by the Supreme Court. Immediately thereafter, there arose a controversy over the area of land that the ruling covered. Boi insisted that it was only 25 acres whilst the people of Akporman claimed that it was much larger than that, and that it included the whole of the Boi village and the areas around the Adjankute hill.
On 1st November, 2006, conflict broke
out between the two villages during which two casualties were recorded. There were no deaths. Following this, the District Security Committee met and they formed an ad hoc committee to find an amicable settlement. The committee was chaired by Nii Afutu Brempong III, the chief of Damfa.
The people of Akporman were represented by Nii Akpo Mensah, Mr. Samuel Okoh Sowah and Mr. Abraham Adjei Boi. The representatives of Boi were Mr. Nicholas Noteye Dowuona and Mr. Joseph Odartey-Lamptey.
At its first meeting on 14th December, 2006, a Memorandum of Understanding to observe peace was signed by the representatives of the two villages. It was witnessed by the chairman of the ad
hoc committee, Nii Afutu Brempong III, chief of Damfa.
Mr. Speaker, the terms of the memorandum of understanding were as follows 10:10 a.m.
(1) That there will be no firing of guns from both villages;
(2) That nobody would prevent anybody from going to his or her farm;
(3) That nobody would be attacked in a vehicle either from Boi or Akporman;
(4) That nobody will be attacked when working on the land; and
(5) That the representatives promise to inform all the citizens from their respective villages to observe the peace.
Mr. Speaker, significantly, the memorandum of understanding also stated that in the event of any breach of the above and any other act that will disturb the peace by any faction, the signatories of the memorandum of understanding will be held responsible.
Mr. Speaker, two other meetings were
held on 29th December, 2006 and again on 24th January, 2007. Following these meetings the legal advisor to the District Assembly was tasked to make a follow-up to the Supreme Court to find out the exact acreage covered by the ruling of the Court. He was informed that the Supreme Court would send surveyors to the disputed land to show the exact area that their ruling covered.
Mr. Speaker, the Akporman people have since obtained a court order to take possession of the land. However, the Assembly has stepped in and the Assembly has reached an agreement with the elders
of Akporman that they should wait for the Supreme Court to determine the exact area of the land covered by its ruling so that if any part of the land covered by its ruling had been sold to developers by the people of Boi, the Assembly would be able to arbitrate to get the developers to reach an amicable settlement with the people of Akporman.
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my hon. Friend and the House that since the signing of the memorandum of understanding, there has been absolute peace in the area and I am rather amazed that the hon. Member should bring this matter to the floor of the House, since the Ga East District Assembly of which he is a prominent member has so effectively handled the matter.
I pray that the matter is not politicised since that would disturb the peace that exists in the area.
Alhaji Sorogho 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, before I ask my question, I just want to make a small clarification and also to seek your guidance as to whether when a Question is filed as urgent, time is of essence. I filed the urgent Question as far back as six months ago, when tension was so high; but then the Question is now being answered and the hon. Minister presents it as if at the time that the Question was being filed, things were so rosy -- I am very, very sorry, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. F. K. Owusu-Adjapong 10:10 a.m.
Mr.
Speaker, it is unfortunate my hon. Colleague is misleading the House. I have with me here the Agenda for the House as at 30th January, 2007 and there was no such Urgent Question. I have checked up with the Clerk's office. This is a very new Question that has been sent and approved by you and therefore for him to suggest that it has been in the system for six months, I think he must withdraw that, since I have a copy of the official document to support it.
Alhaji Sorogho 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thought when the hon. Majority Leader got up he would have told me exactly when the Question was filed.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, you ask your supplementary question.
Alhaji Sorogho 10:10 a.m.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is that, the hon. Minister is saying that ever since the memorandum of understanding was agreed on, none of it has been breached. I am saying that as recent as last week and last two weeks, guns were still being fired across. So, at least, one of the agreements has been breached. So I am surprised that he can -- Is he aware of that?
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, what is your supplementary question?
Alhaji Sorogho 10:10 a.m.
My supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, is that, is he aware that as late as last week, and last two weeks gunfire was still being exchanged across Boi and Akporman, contrary to what he is saying that there is absolute peace since then?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not aware that there has been any such exchange of gunfire in recent days. I will
also add that if there is confusion between landguards for people who own lands in the area, it should not be construed as confusion between the people of Akporman and Boi.
As far as we are aware, there has been relative peace between these two people. If he is informing me that there was some confusion between landguards for people who own land in the area, landguards acting for such individuals, I will check up on it; but I do know from our reports that there has not been any escalation in the conflict since the memorandum of understanding was signed.
Alhaji Sorogho 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in the hon. Minister's Answer, he also denied that there has ever been loss of lives. I want to say that five years ago, there were shooting incidents and there was loss of life and the Madina police had to come and take the body. If he is talking of just recent --I want to find out if he still stands by his word that there has never been loss of lives as far as the conflict between Boi and Akporman is concerned.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this is
a long-standing dispute. It is possible that there might have been deaths in the past. I was very, very specific in my statement. I said that following the final ruling by the Supreme Court, there has been one major conflict that broke out and that was on the 1st of November 2006, and that during that time there were no deaths. And I want to stand by the statement that I made that there were no deaths when that conflict erupted on 1st November 2006. There were only two casualties.
Alhaji Sorogho 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to find out from the hon. Minister whether there has been any effort to compensate
Mr. Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Hon. Member for Abokobi/Madina, this is not a supplementary question.
Mr. J. Y. Chireh 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister in answering the question said there were two casualties. And when he said “two casualties”, I wanted to find out what casualty is in this case. Does it include death?
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
fortunately the two casualties did not involve loss of human life.
Mr. Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Hon. Minister for the Interior, thank you for appearing to Answer this Urgent Question. You are discharged. Item 4 -- Statements.
STATEMENTS 10:20 a.m.
Mr. David Oppon-Kusi (NPP -- Ofoase/Ayirebi) 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the appropriate and inappropriate use of the 30 km dual carriageway linking Accra and Tema, commonly called the motorway, has often come up for public discussion. The last one was what I will call the Trassaco saga. Before then, there had been other incidences relating to the use of unapproved access and exit routes, unauthorized U-turns, and the unfortunate accident involving our former head of state some years back. Again, the motorway has
often been a scene of horrific and fatal accidents that have claimed precious lives.

The Accra-Tema Motorway was constructed as a special facility to link the port city of Tema to Accra and provide freeway transit for goods to and from Tema. At that time the two cities were completely separate settlements.

Today, the motorway can no longer function as a special facility and we need to face that practical reality so that the authorities will be encouraged to modify the design of the road to allow it to not only serve the ports and factories, but also serve the corridor within which the road lies. The current emotional discussions on maintaining the road within the confines of its original objectives only serve to frustrate the managers of the road.

Mr. Speaker, as I speak, the long- awaited extension to the motorway will be constructed under the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) and this portion will go through a heavily built corridor from the Tetteh Quarshie Interchange through Lapaz to Mallam. The design will of necessity recognize the requirement of properties, facilities and road users along the corridor and make provisions that will include lay-bys, signalized intersections, service roads, walkways as well as other safety measures to optimize the use of the road.

To further illustrate my point, Mr. Speaker, I will cite the recently completed Ofankor-Nsawam dual carriageway. This road also lies along Ghana's busiest

of current and future needs of settlements along the corridor. The same could be said for the Mallam-Kosoa Highway.

Mr. Speaker, I have been prompted to bring this issue up so that the public discussion will be moved from the narrow confines which is more of an emotional attachment to the old motorway concept than an assessment of the practical realities of the current land use patterns. The Trassaco saga is more about our emotions than about practical engineering.

The road as it is now has very few safety measures and practically no speed limits. It is used by a mixture of swift new cars, old rickety trotros, heavily loaded trucks, and even tractors, not to mention pedestrians who have to cross the road at great risk from speeding vehicles.

Let us task the road agencies to take a second look at the motorway and redesign the facility to include a service road on the northern side of the road, provide appropriate lay-bys, signalized inter- sections as well as other safety measures, the provision of about two accesses onto the main road from this service road will still ensure that users pay their tolls. Mr. Speaker, we must move with the times and begin to modify what we have to efficiently and effectively serve our current needs as a nation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Minority Leader (Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin) 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is appropriate that we add our voice to that of our hon. Colleague who has just made this Statement on the motorway.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that there is the need for some urgent action to be taken to improve what was done just immediately after independence by the First President and founder of our nation.
Mr. Speaker, I, myself, resident of
Lashibi, Community 19, am sometimes faced with this dilemma of whether to use the Spintex Road which sometimes takes over two hours, or to try to use an entry onto the motorway which, according to the existing law, is unlawful but the most appropriate thing to do now to save cost and other things to the nation.
Mr. Speaker, just over the weekend we had the opportunity of putting this matter across to the Ministry when we went to consider the Performance Audit Report of the Ministry, conducted by the Auditor- General's Department.
Ministry humbly admitted that there was the need for us not only to construct exits from that motorway because we now have residences, very good residential areas along the motorway and there is the need for somebody moving from Accra to Tema, Tema to Accra, to be able to exit into his residence along the motorway, than to come to Tetteh Quarshie Roundabout and go all the way back to around Ashaiman because there is no exit --

Mr. Speaker, the Ministry told us that they have agreed to the construction of two overpasses in addition to the one that has been constructed around Ashaiman and that would give enough room -- they mentioned that one is to be sited around the Trassaco Junction area where our lady Tamara tried to resist the unlawful construction of some entrance onto the motorway.

Mr. Speaker, the submission by the Ministry was quite comprehensive and it was gladdening to all of us. What we need to do is to make the resources available. My hon. Colleague, the Majority Leader who is now at the Ministry of Transportation is not listening to the submission. It is important that we urge the Ministry to which he is the

construction of exits and entry roads onto the motorway.

The motorway has served a very useful purpose but times have changed; the two cities have overgrown the initial concept of the motorway and we need to actually put the service roads and appropriate lay-bys as stated by the maker of the Statement.

It is important again, Mr. Speaker,

to mention the frustration of the law enforcement agencies. We always see the policemen along the roads trying to enforce the law but they have seen that the law is now anachronistic; we have gone beyond it. So what do they do? Sometimes they are compelled to be lenient to those who break the law. But it is important once again to emphasize the fact that we still need to maintain the tolls that are charged at the toll booths along the motorway.

What we also need to insist on is the proper accountability of those moneys that are collected there. That was raised again at the meeting and we called upon the Ministry to submit a comprehensive account from what has been submitted by the private contractor that has been given access to the toll booths.

We have seen that the income seems to be reducing from the toll booths, in spite of the heavy traffic and we suspect that there are a lot of leakages. That is why we call on the Ministry to look at that area so that if we are able to generate enough revenue we can support the construction of these features that have just been mentioned.

It is with this, Mr. Speaker, I think, that I commend the maker of the Statement.
Minister for Public Sector Reforms (Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom) 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this Statement bothers me greatly. Quite often for expediency sake and because
people have shown up, we say we should make certain changes and we should make them with some urgency. Mr. Speaker, we should not fall for this. It is important that the proper planning is done not just for money sake but also for safety sake.
If changes are to be made to what was constructed several years ago, then the changes must be planned carefully, publicly made available and debated so that everybody knows what sort of changes are to be implemented, so that we do not wake up one fine day and find that some work is going on, that we will all then rise up another day and say it was not done well, it was not done properly. We must not make haste in a way that would bring difficulties to us later on.
Mr. Speaker, if we go all around Accra/Tema, because the population has increased significantly many, many people have shown up in a number of different places that are making life difficult and discipline also difficult to enforce. And so, yes, the law enforcement agencies are overwhelmed in a number of different areas but it shows us the difficulty we have encountered in not planning adequately and making sure that whatever the situation is we have made provision whether it is for access roads, water or whatever the case may be.
So while recognizing that the people living in and around the area of the motorway have difficulty with travel, transportation, access and all of that, I think it is important that we still take adequate time to ensure that the technical plans are sound, to ensure that human safety is assured and that whatever is done is not done for expediency sake.
Mr. Ibn Mohammed Abass (NDC -- Bimbilla) 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the maker of the Statement for drawing our attention to this issue. I

motorway and have felt the same way as the maker of the Statement. But for me I want to say that in doing the structural changes to the motorway, we should not do anything that would end up making the motorway another “Spintex Road”. They should ensure that the congestion that we have on the other roads is not transferred onto the motorway.

So I want to suggest that parallel roads should be constructed on both sides of the motorway. In doing so we would take care of access roads and also ensure that congestion is not transferred from the other roads onto the motorway.

With this short addition, I thank you and I thank the maker of the Statement.

Majority Leader/Minister for Parlia- mentary Affairs/Acting Minister for Road Transport (Mr. F. K. Owusu- Adjapong): Mr. Speaker, let me assure my hon. Colleague, the Minority Leader, that first I was aware of this Statement and that I was also hearing all that he was saying except that he wanted me to look at his face.

Mr. Speaker, I take what have been given as useful pieces of advice which the Ministry should take into account, should money be available, to implement some of the numerous suggestions given to the Ministry in solving the problem along the motorway.

Mr. Speaker, definitely in this day and age, there are lot of technical ways of solving the problem -- interchange, access road, overhead, all those sort of things. But the bottom-line is the ability to pay. Therefore, it is my hope that next time around, hon. Colleague Members of Parliament would increase the allocation of resources given to the Ministry.

In the 2007 Budget we were given 54 per cent of the money required to do

what have been identified and concluded as the needed projects for the country. Perhaps, we had no choice but to share the money fairly and equitably, that is why the Ministry got 54 per cent.

It therefore means we all need to work hard enough as a country and as a nation to increase the resources available so that it would not only be this road we would be taking up but even doing another road to improve the Spintex Road and other such roads. There is supposed to be a 4-kilometre road off the Spintex Road which when done would perhaps prevent people who try to do those short-cuts. Definitely, we should not also allow this to make us conclude that people should not be law abiding. It is because there are problems that is why we have made these laws.

So long as we have not been able to secure the funds to provide what is the best alternative, we should not be seen or heard suggesting that the police should start giving up and therefore should not be enforcing the law.

I hope we would encourage them to enforce the law as it is now as we search for more money to develop not only access roads to the motorway but also access roads to all other places. There are places that are maybe suffering more than this; for example if you use Navrongo-Wa road, you would then say that we should go there first before we come to look at this motorway.

World Water Day

Mr. Samuel Johnfiah (NPP --

Ahanta West): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to make

Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, is the World Water Day and Ghana will join the rest of the world in celebrating this important occasion. Upon the recommendations of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), the 22nd of March every year is observed as World Day for Water, a day in which the world's attention is focused on critical issues relating to the conservation and development of fresh water resources.

The 2007 World Water Day is being co-ordinated by the Food and Agricultural Organization under the theme “Coping with Water Scarcity”. With population growth and economic development, the problem of water scarcity becomes more acute. The crisis is reaching global dimension and requires action at all levels to address the problem.

The theme for this year offers an opportunity to reflect on the subject and promote active participation by everybody in addressing this global challenge. It must be mentioned that water scarcity issues and the way they are addressed will affect the successful achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.

The eradication of poverty and hunger in the rural areas is related closely to fair and equitable access for the most vulnerable people to basic livelihood assets, including land and water for domestic and productive uses. Water scarcity management is also crucial to achieving the goals of environmental sustainability. Today, agriculture accounts for 70 per cent of all water used globally, and up to 95 per cent in several developing countries including Ghana.

Water is critical for our socio-economic development and also essential for life and the proper functioning of the environment.

It is probably the most important indicator of the quality of our environment. Unfortunately, water resources in this country have been taken for granted, misused and poorly managed at all levels.

The identified causes for the decrease in quantity include the indiscriminate clearing of vegetation along water bodies, especially rivers during the dry season and the improper use of land for agriculture along river banks resulting in erosion, leading to siltation of the river channel. Water quality considerations have become increasingly important due to environmental problems arising from human activities leading to land degradation, waste discharges from domestic, municipal, industrial (including mining) and agricultural sources into rivers and aquifers.

There is the need to raise the issue of water management to the highest level by beginning to develop a higher sense of belonging within our communities. As a nation, we need to free our women and children from the daily burden of walking great distances in search of water. Such time and effort could be better spent on education and other economic and community improvement projects. Educating women and other vulnerable groups in water resources issues will advance progress in the efficient use of the resource and thus reduce water- borne diseases and alleviate poverty. Furthermore, we need to improve the efficiency of our irrigation systems by encouraging water-use efficiency techniques to increase food production.

One of such techniques is to promote the message, “more crop per drop”. In addition, we need to emphasize and improve on the potential sources of water to complement our traditional surface and
Mr. Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo (NDC -- Wa Central) 10:40 a.m.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to support this Statement. Mr. Speaker, the maker of the Statement has been very timely with this intervention. When such days are set aside, it is to focus on the importance of the critical need that the day is meant for.
Water indeed is a very important
resource and because of the crucial need for it, the day which falls tomorrow must be observed very critically by Ghana and Ghanaians, so that we question ourselves, or soul-search ourselves to find out what we have been doing to ensure that the water bodies in Ghana, the wetland areas in Ghana are properly preserved and protected not only for today but for the future.
Mr. Speaker, water in Ghana today is a problem; we all see it in Accra which is the melting point of all policy decisions and the place where all these policies are generated.
Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt or question about it, that water forms about 75 per cent of the human body fluid and it also forms 75 per cent of the earth area. This is a signal by God to humanity that water is of necessity and, compulsorily, we need to protect it. But Mr. Speaker, the sad thing about our attitude towards water in Ghana is that we are treating water as if it is something that can be there forever. Mr. Speaker, if wetland areas are
Mr. Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo (NDC -- Wa Central) 10:50 a.m.
In most instances and in most places, we see ponds and dams drying out, the reason being that farms are situated near the banks of the rivers, sometimes buildings are put in the way of rivers and ponds and other wetland areas, thereby stopping water from flowing into the areas; and indeed that kills them. They have a lifespan which depends on the way we take care of them; once we are not protecting them, the possibility is that they die off and humanity is the one that suffers and in this sense, Ghanaians are the ones that will suffer.
On this occasion, Mr. Speaker, I would call on the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing to come out strongly with a national policy to protect our wetland areas to ensure that we are protecting the water sources not for today but for tomorrow. Today, at a population of nearly 20 million, we are crying for water; what happens in a situation where we reach 40 million?

Mr. Speaker, we do not seem to be planning towards the future and this is what is replicated all over the country. In all regions, people cry for water, not because there is no water in Ghana, but because there is failed policy on how we tackle our water resource base.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very big challenge

to governance, policy-makers and to all legislators to ensure that we find a way of ensuring that the small water sources that we have, we protect them. We find a way to ensure that we do this not just because we want to have good water today but because we want to ensure that in the years
Mr. J. K. Gidisu (NDC -- Central Tongu) 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to get associated with the Statement.
Mr. Speaker, when talking about water, we should bear in mind that mostly we are referring to fresh water which is equally potable water, and for us in Ghana, we are fortunate to be one of the very few countries that could proud themselves of the availability of sources of such fresh water or potable water.
But Mr. Speaker, for the last two decades, the water system in the country is gradually but steadily drying up as a result of environmental degradation. For us it is opportune to be reminded, on this World Water Day, of the fact that there is the need for policy makers to be more proactive in looking at the water situation against the future.
Mr. Speaker, in doing so, we should also be reminded that the drying up of the water sources in the country is as a result of the environmental degradation which I mentioned earlier on and which is more pronounced in our rural areas.
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, those rural communities are the greatest sufferers when it comes to the issue of potable water in the country. I would want to say that as much as possible, there is the need to constantly take environmental awareness to them, that, as they are closer to nature, by way of protecting these water sources, there is the need for us to be circumspect. Otherwise, within the next two decades the country will be facing a very grievous shortage of potable water.
Mr. Speaker, this Statement cannot be addressed effectively without looking at the fact that as at now, if you look at the supply of potable water in the country, most rural communities are faced with the payment of what we call “counterpart funding” in the provision of water through the Community Water and Sanitation Projects. Unfortunately, the urban areas which are the greater users of most of this water are not faced with this provision.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to draw the Ministry's attention to the fact that this counterpart funding is slowing down the extension of water to most of these deprived rural communities. Mr. Speaker, I want to be more specific. As at now, there is an ongoing three-district water projects for Dangbe East, Dangbe West and North
Tongu, and the greatest setback to that project is counterpart funding. These rural communities are being asked to pay very huge sums towards the cost of that water system.
So on a day like this, we should be reminded of those factors that mitigate at our local level against the provision of potable water and even the protection of fresh water systems which are virtually the target of water when we talk of a water day like tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank you for the opportunity and hope that like the hon. Member who made the Statement intimated, there is the need for us, as a country, to sit up and get geared up towards the future security of our water systems.
Mrs. Gifty Eugenia Kusi (NPP -- Tarkwa-Nsuaem) 11 a.m.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to the Statement on the floor.
Mr. Speaker, water is very essential for human survival and I just want to say that women and children are the most affected when there is scarcity of water. Mr. Speaker, women get up very early in the morning to fetch water for the household, wherever it may be found. Mr. Speaker, it affects our way of life and the girl-child suffers most. Sometimes, because she has to go and fetch water, she does not even go to school. She absents herself for a long time and sometimes she loses interest in going back to school.
Mr. Speaker, the theme -- “Coping with Water Scarcity” -- is a theme that all of us should reflect upon. Most areas in this country, Mr. Speaker, are blessed with high rainfall rates but are we putting it to good use? Mr. Speaker, in addition to boreholes which most of us want our communities to have, we should also explore the possibility of harvesting
rainwater to supplement whatever the country is making. And I am saying that this is going to help us, and the scarcity will be a thing of the past, if we explore that source as well.
Mr. Speaker, due to the scarcity of water a lot people resort to using various unhealthy sources, which is very detrimental to human health. Mr. Speaker, the sachet water that has come to be accepted by everybody, what we call “pure water”, has come to stay with us; and even though it is serving a good purpose, the quality of some of the brands leaves much to be desired.
Mr. Speaker, there are sediments that have been found in most pure water brands which in a way may be very harmful to our survival. So I want to urge the association to scrutinise their members' work. Mr. Speaker, go to the houses and see how they are operating. Sometimes most of these places from where they manufacture this water are in very unhealthy environment, and if we all check that -- [Interruption.] I want to urge the Ghana Standards Board not to rest on their oars but try as much possible to inspect every household where pure water is being manufactured, so that the country and for that matter the citizens will not be drinking unwholesome water which will also mean another thing when it comes to diseases such as skin rashes as well.
Minority Leader (Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin) 11 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I just want to add a few remarks. The challenge we are facing as a country is the fact as stated by one poet, “water, water everywhere but none for us to drink”.
Mr. Speaker, we have about two-thirds of the earth's surface covered by water. We have a lot of streams, rivers, lakes yet
Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing (Mr. Hackman Owusu- Agyemang) 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity and I want to thank my hon. Colleagues for all the suggestions that have been made which we will diligently
take on board.
Mr. Speaker, it was not for nothing
that the name of the Ministry which used to be “Ministry of Works and Housing” was changed to “Ministry of Water Resources, Works and Housing”. This was to underscore and underline the importance that this Government attaches to water and its availability to its people.
Mr. Speaker, everything is being done to improve the water situation. There have been rather some dramatic increases in water availability but because of the very low level of coverage that we were coming from, it has not really translated into visible advances.
Mr. Speaker, some time back, we had about thirty-six per cent coverage; now we have about fifty-seven per cent. And I can assure my hon. Colleagues that by the year 2015, we would have reached the eighty- five per cent coverage that is required of us by the Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS II) as well as exceed the United Nations (UN) millennium development goal of seventy-five per cent.
Mr. Speaker, a lot of very exciting proposals have been made, both in the Statement and in the contributions; that I said will be taken on board. But I must assure hon. Members that as I speak now, before Cabinet is the National Water Policy Paper which is being examined and will eventually come to the House. All these concerns have been captured and I believe that the issues will be raised.
I want to assure my hon. Colleagues that last year the Volta Basin Authority was set up, and this encompasses all the various sources of water. Why it was not done before -- twenty, thirty, forty years
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think our hon. Colleague is out of order. If he wants a day to come and make a policy statement on water, he could be granted a day but this one is a Statement to celebrate World Water Day so he cannot be talking about all these policies in his Ministry. Some of them are not germane to the issues that have been raised on World Water Day, which deals with food and agricultural organization.
Mr. Owusu-Agyemang 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, most of the points that needs to be made
have been articulated on this floor and I think it is only proper that the concerns of hon. Members of this House are also addressed in a way. I am not making a policy statement but I am reacting and giving assurances and hope to the people.
Just as His Excellency the President said, never before in the country have so much money been invested in this sector, so I want to give hope to the people and I do not think I am out of order, if I tell them what efforts are being made. I was going to address the issue that he raised. If you raise the issues and we do not respond to them, what impression do we give to the nation? I do not think I am out of order at all.
Mr. Bagbin 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this is a Statement and should not provoke debate. The statement he just made can provoke debate because we are talking about when you are looking at quantum you must be looking at value. So you may have a larger amount today but that does not mean that the value of that larger amount is higher than a smaller amount forty or fifty years ago.
So Mr. Speaker, we should not raise these debatable issues; he is provoking debate. I was in the water sector from 1996 to 2001. [Hear! Hear!] I can debate most of these issues he is raising. We started the reforms; we brought all those institutions in place that they have inherited. So if they are building them, do not raise debatable issues.
Mr. Owusu-Agyemang 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I did not think that the hon. Minority Leader can usurp your powers. You are the one who determines whether I am provoking a debate. Mr. Speaker, I do not think I am provoking a debate. What I am doing basically is reacting and also, as I said, giving information on the situation.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
At the Commencement of Public Business, item 5 -- Laying of
Papers. The following Papers to be laid, Minister for Lands, Forestry and Mines.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to crave your indulgence to allow me to lay this Paper on behalf of the hon. Minister, who is outside the country.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Go ahead.
PAPERS 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Members, may we turn to item 22 -- Food and Drugs (Amendment) Bill at the Consideration Stage.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Minority Leader and I had opportunity to look at this Bill and we are of the opinion that this Bill is trying to solve two problems, one of which we can conveniently take when we are looking at the Retention of Fees Bill. The other one we seem not to have got the two Ministries to come to a clear conclusion as to what they want to achieve for this country.
Perhaps, there may be the need for them to bring an omnibus law that will
Mr. Bagbin 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I can confirm that we had serious discussion on this Bill. It is a one-clause Bill meant to amend the Food and Drugs (Amendment) Act of 1992, Act 305 (b). Mr. Speaker, there are only two concerns in the Bill -- the power to charge fees and the power to retain some portion of the fees, if not all.
Mr. Speaker as rightly stated by the hon. Majority Leader, we have the opportunity under the Ministries (Retention of Funds) Bill which is now at the Consideration Stage before this House, given the proposed amendment by the hon. Deputy Majority Leader, to take care of the concerns of the Bill.
Therefore, we would urge on the hon. Minister in charge of the Bill, that is the Food and Drugs (Amendment) Act of 2005, to consider withdrawing it, and let us capture the concerns under the Ministries (Retention of Funds) Bill. We agreed on that and we spoke with some of our hon. Colleagues, in Leadership and we think that is the correct path to move.
Mr. Speaker, I support the submission of the hon. Majority Leader.
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Item 22 deferred. Item 7.
Suspension of Standing Order 80 (1)
Attorney-General and Minister for
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, there may be the need for us to defer this motion .
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Item 9 -- Minister for Manpower, Youth and Employment. Majority Leader, do you have a problem with this?
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it looks like we are having some technical problems with the distribution of the Report and that was why I said we will check up.
Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
May we take item 13?
Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Majority Leader, which is the next item?
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, if we can take item 18 whilst we get the Minister for the Interior to come and take item 11.
BILLS -- THIRD READING 11:20 a.m.
BILLS -- SECOND 11:20 a.m.
CONSIDERATION STAGE 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Kwadwo Adjei-Darko 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 8, paragraph (f), delete and substitute the following:
“Appoint the Rector, Vice-Rector, Lecturers and other persons to academic and administrative positions in that Polytechnic.”
Mr. Speaker, this is in conformity with what was originally proposed in the Bill, which the Committee sought to amend and which was agreed upon by the House. But upon the advice of the Attorney-General and looking through carefully, we advised that appointments are made but cannot be regulated in the form we want the Bill to capture.
Secondly, clauses 24 (2), 26 (2) and 28 (2) have already taken care of the determination of conditions of service of the Rector, the Vice-Rector, Lecturers and other members of staff, so that we maintain what was in the original Bill instead of the amendment.
So the amendment which I now move is for us to maintain the (f) as it was in the original Bill which now appears on the Order Paper.
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the proposed amendment that we go back to the original proposition of those who submitted this Bill. I think that clause 8 (f) was appropriate and therefore re-inserting it and doing away with the earlier accepted position is better and it will make it much more elegant.
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do not have any objection to the amendment. But we are not getting the import of the amendment clearly. The mover of the amendment referred to an advertisement on the Order Paper for today, but we are not getting it on page 13.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 8 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 39 -- Transfer of assets and liabilities.
Mr. Adjei-Darko 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 39, delete and substitute the following:
“39 (i) Subject to the directions in writing of the Minister the liabilities, obligations, assets, rights and properties held by or on behalf of all for the purposes of a polytechnic in existence immediately before the commencement of this Act are by this section transferred to the respective polytechnic established under this Act.
(ii) The persons employed for a polytechnic in existence immediately before the coming into force of this Act shall continue to hold as if appointed to that office under this Act. ”
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this
Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon. Member, you have not been given permission to move for a Second Consideration Stage yet; you have to ask permission first.
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that the motion for us to take the Bill through a Second Consideration Stage must be convincing enough for us to do so. What my hon. Colleague is doing now is to raise issues that are not well considered. For example, what was just decided by the House is to give the power to the Council to appoint the rector, vice- rector, lecturers and other persons to academic and administrative positions in the polytechnics.
Mr. Speaker, councils do not appoint other staff to administrative and academic positions; councils can have the power to appoint a rector, the vice rector and lecturers. But to go down to the other staff and workers is not usually the duty of council; it is the duty of management -- the rector and his vice and the rest -- the management of the institutions. These proposals would have to be reconsidered.
We cannot be passing laws like this. Even the appointment of housekeepers to the council? Oh, no! As we sit here, the Board of the Parliamentary Service does not appoint junior staff; it is by management.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Minority Leader, are
you taking us back to clause 8? That is what you have taken us back to.
Mr. Bagbin 11:30 a.m.
That is so, Mr. Speaker.
Looking at what is on the ground, what is being done and what is the best in terms of management and administrative practices, that is what I am saying; it was not delegated, so I think that we should separate the two. If we are minded
to give the power to the council to appoint the rector, the vice-rector and the lecturers, I have no problem; but going to administrative and academic staff, I think that is going too low.
Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Minority Leader, you can raise this again, but it seems as if we have passed that; we are now on clause (39), so let him deal with the procedural matters first.
Mr. Adjei-Darko 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that clause 39 of the Polytechnics Bill passes through a Second Consi- deration Stage.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Mr. Adjei-Darko 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 39, delete and substitute the following:
“39 (1) Subject to the directions
in writing of the Minister, the liabilities, obligations, assets, rights and properties held by or on behalf of or for the purposes of a polytechnic in existence immediately before the commencement of this Act are by this section transferred to the respective polytechnic established under this Act.
(2) The persons employed for a polytechnic in existence immediately before the coming into force of this Act shall continue to hold office as if appointed to the office under this Act.”
Mr. Speaker, the proposed rendition for this clause is to separate the transfer of employees from the transfer of rights,
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to be convinced of the first line -- “subject to the directions in writing by the Minister . . .” Is he saying that if the Minister refuses to give such directions then people would cease to be employees or whatever it is? I am trying to find out why he wants this direction to be given, because I believe that if we pass this Bill and it becomes an Act then things should move on.
But if it should take one year for the Minister to give his direction in writing, are we not encouraging bureaucracy at the highest level? So if he can explain why he wants that and not make it a straight route for us to follow.
Mr. Joseph Y. Chireh 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I really do not see why we should go through this because if you see what is the original one in the Bill, that is the one which captures the thing quite well. In any case it just transfers -- As the Majority Leader was saying, we do not now have to wait for the Minister to decide to write. By this Act that we are going to pass they have automatically transferred all those things.
So I do not see the need for separating these things and bringing this amendment. We should reject it.
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that this new proposition is needless, and with all respect, a waste of time of this House. We had gone through this saving provision and it was approved by this House. Mr. Speaker, if you read clause 39 (1) and (2), the short note says, “transfer of assets and liabilities” and clause 39 (1) appropriately deals with it, supported by (2).
We do not need to go through any Second Consideration Stage; I think that clause 39 (1) -- If his problem was with employees, he may read clause 39 (2) properly. It says that,
“Subject to section (1), the assets, rights and properties held by or on behalf of or for the purposes of a polytechnic in existence imme- diately before the coming into force of this Act and the persons employed . . .”
It has been captured and I think that we should just get this Polytechnics Bill go through Third Reading rather than a Second Consideration Stage.
Mr. Adjei-Darko 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. Member who just contributed is referring to the original rendition of the Bill, but he should not forget that if he looks at the Votes and Proceedings of 14th March, the House accepted an amendment to clause 39. So clause 39 (1) and (2), as they appeared in the Bill, are no more there. But what the House agreed and which should appear if we do not separate the two -- and with your permission I beg to read:
“Amendment proposed -- delete and substitute ‘The assets, rights and liabilities, subsistence, obligations and properties of a polytechnic in existence immediately before the coming into force of the Act and the persons employed at that polytechnic are hereby transferred to the respective polytechnics established under this Act'.”
That was clause 39. So subclauses (1) and (2) were deleted. So by our proceedings of the 14th March, what the hon. Member is referring to now is not valid. But what this amendment is trying to do is to take us back to what was the original rendition, where we were separating the transfer of assets, liabilities and rights from the transfer of persons. Mr. Speaker, this is being done on the advice of the Attorney- General.
Mr. Bagbin 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I scarcely

see the error that my hon. Colleague is trying to put right by this Second Consideration Stage of the Bill. Mr. Speaker, there is nothing with putting the two together at all in a clause or a section of an Act. What they are rather proposing now is going to subject the rights, liabilities and properties of an institution to the directives of a Minister.

How can a Minister be dictating liabilities and rights of an institution? It is saying: “Subject to the directions in writing of the Minister . . .” How? The Minister has no right. These are liabilities that the institution has incurred; these are the rights that are accrued to the institution. Why should those rights and liabilities be subject to the dictates of a Minister? Not at all. Mr. Speaker, I insist that the amendment that was accepted by the House was the right thing to be done. That was the right decision of the House and we should maintain that and reject this one in toto.
Mr. Lee Ocran 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we have been debating this Bill for quite a long time and I think, to move on, we should reject the hon. Member for Sunyani's amendment. He himself is saying that because the Attorney-General has said so, that is why he is proposing it. The Attorney-General has gone away -- [Interruption] -- Ah! He is here. If he is here, he should talk; if he is not talking, then we should reject this thing completely and move ahead. There is no need to seek the permission of any Minister to do the right thing.
The Bill itself is well written; there is no need for any amendment.
Mr. Yaw Osafo-Maafo 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, as our Leader rightly said, if we subject this to the direction of a letter to be written
by the Minister and after we have passed this law, if for six months or one year that letter has not gone, what happens? Any time we are making a new law to replace an old one there are certain normal things which take place in terms of taking over assets and liabilities, and that cannot be subject to a letter from the Minister. So this amendment is unnecessary.
The very clause he read indeed protects the institution and the transfer of these assets and liabilities and I think we should stay where we are. The amend-ment we made is correct and this is unnecessary. This is just introducing red-tapeism into the whole thing. I do not see the merits of this amendment really and I think we should reject it.
Mr. Kwame Osei-Prempeh 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that instead of saying that the amendment should be rejected outright, we should look at it critically. I do agree that the portion -- “subject to the direction in writing of the Minister” should be deleted. But in separating the two, I believe there is sense in that. Mr. Speaker, if you look at what we did on the 14th of March, Votes and Proceedings, it says that --
“The assets, rights, liabilities, certain obligations and properties of a polytechnic in existence immediately before the coming into force of the Act and the persons employed for that are hereby transferred to the respective polytechnics established under this Act.”
Mr. Speaker, the persons cannot be transferred to the polytechnics; they are maintaining their positions. They are already there and the new rendition is --
“The persons employed for the
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, except that this wording, “persons employed for”. I think it should be “persons employed by the polytechnic”. They are employed by the polytechnic which is a corporate body and not for it.
Mr. Osei-Prempeh 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to move a further amendment that clause 39 (1) as proposed be further amended by deleting all the words from “subject to the direction in writing of the Minister” and maybe “the liabilities, obligations, assets, rights and properties held by or on behalf of or for the purpose of the polytechnic in existence immediately before the commencement of this Act are by this section transferred to the respective polytechnics established under this Act.”
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move . [Interruption.] No, the (2) stands.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Deputy Majority Leader, it seems we are confusing ourselves here.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 11:40 a.m.
I further propose that the word “for” be deleted from subclause (2) and the word “by” substituted
in its place.
Mr. Speaker, this is because the polytechnic is a corporate body and it employs the people -- the people are employed by the institution and not for the institution.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon. Members, the amendment is that we delete and substitute the following -- 39 (1) and (2).
Question put and amendment negatived.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon. Minister, you may move your motion now for the Third Reading.
BILLS -- THIRD READING 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Item 21 -- Resolution.
RESOLUTION 11:40 a.m.
Minister for Women and Children's Affairs (Hajia Alima Mahama) 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that
WHEREAS by the provisions of article 75 of the Constitution any treaty, agreement, or convention executed by or under the authority of the President in the name of Ghana is made subject to ratification either by an Act of Parliament or by a Resolution of Parliament supported by the votes of more than one-half of all the Members of Parliament.
IN ACCORDANCE with the said article 75 of the Constitution the President has caused to be laid before Parliament through the
Minister responsible for Women and Children's Affairs the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, Maputo, 11th July 2003 on 6th December 2006.
N O W T H E R E F O R E , t h i s honourable House hereby resolves to ratify the said African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, Maputo, 11th July 2003.
Ms. Esther D. Obeng 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Item 19, Chairman of the Committee on Lands and Forestry.
MOTIONS 11:40 a.m.
Chairman of Committee (Mr. Asamoah Ofosu) 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that this honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee on Lands and Forestry on the Revised African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to read portions of the Report whilst praying the Hansard to capture the Report in its entirety.
The Revised African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources was laid before Parliament on 3rd November, 2006 and referred to the Committee on Lands and Forestry for
Chairman of Committee (Mr. Asamoah Ofosu) 11:40 a.m.
iii. to harmonise and co-ordinate policies in these fields with a view to achieving ecologically rational, economically sound and socially acceptable development policies and programmes.
Observations
Mr. Speaker, your Committee observed that the Revised Convention commits parties to improving soil conservation and introducing sustainable farming practices particularly at a time when desertification is threatening food security within Africa and undermining efforts by African Governments to reduce poverty among its citizenry.
Your Committee further noted that the Convention seeks to encourage collaborative management of water resources. The management and use of water resources has generated a number of conflicts within Africa and it is hoped that this proposal of the Convention will help minimize some of these conflicts.
Your Committee also noticed that apart from assessed contributions of Parties to the Convention, the Treaty will also receive funding from the AU and contributions from other institutions.
The Committee observed that the Convention constitutes a road map for the sustainable management of Ghana's natural resources within the context of the UN Conference on Environment and Development and Agenda 21 which has been endorsed by Ghana.
Conclusion
In order to actual ize Ghana's commitment to the Convention and for the country to enjoy the benefits thereof, your Committee is recommending to the House for approval, the ratification of the Revised African Convention on the Conservation
consideration and report in accordance with Order 177 of the Standing Orders of the House.
Your Committee held two sittings to deliberate on the Convention. In attendance was the Minister for Lands, Forestry and Mines, hon. Prof. Dominic Fobih and other technical staff of the Ministry who briefed the Committee on the object of the Convention and its benefits to the country. Background
The original Convention was adopted in 1968 by the then Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in Algiers. Developments over the years within the International Community, particularly in respect of international treaty law necessitated the revision of the Convention. The OAU was therefore called upon in 1980 to initiate steps to revise the Convention. The revised text was presented to the Heads of State of the OAU Assembly at its meeting in July 2003 in Maputo, Mozambique where it was adopted.
Thirty-two (32) countries including Ghana are signatories to the Revised Convention out of which only four (4) have since ratified the Convention. The Convention will enter into force once fifteen countries have ratified it. Ghana was the fifth country to ratify the original Algiers Convention in May 1969.
Objects of the Revised Convention
The objectives of the Revised Convention are as follows:
i. to enhance environmental protection;
ii. to foster the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources; and

of Nature and Natural Resources.

Respectfully submitted.
Alhaji Collins Dauda (NDC -- Asutifi South) 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion and in doing so I wish to indicate that this Agreement is a very useful one and has to be supported by all. Mr. Speaker, it is an Agreement that seeks to ensure sustainable management of our natural resources.
Mr. Speaker, it has come at a time when environmental degradation has become topical in the world and countries are finding ways and means of addressing environmental issues. Mr. Speaker, this happens to be one of the Agreements that seek to kind of bring on board principles and prescriptions that would ensure sustainable management of our natural resources.
This particular one cuts across all natural resources and I am glad that the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing is in this House this morning and certainly would make an input to this Agreement so far as water resource management is concerned.
Mr. Speaker, but the ratification of this Agreement will not necessarily give us sustainable management unless, as a country, we are determined to do what would ensure sustainable management of our natural resources. Mr. Speaker, if I should restrict myself to the forest resources of this country I would say that a lot of activities and actions undermine sustainable management of these resources.
Mr. Speaker, this Agreement focuses on farming practices as one of the issues
Mr. Akwasi Osei-Adjei 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS --CONSIDERATION noon
STAGE noon
RESOLUTION noon
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho noon
Mr. Speaker, this is the information provided and for now we are satisfied with the information, and I support the amendment.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
The Schedule as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The Long Title ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Suspension of Standing Order 131 (1)
Minister for Finance and Economic
P lanning (Mr. Kwadwo Baah- Wiredu): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move,
BILLS -- THIRD READING noon
MR. SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr. J. K. Hackman noon
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS -- SECOND READING noon
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu 12:10 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, you have allowed the hon. Minister to proceed in reading the report. It is a very important Bill but as we sit here we do not have copies of it. I thought that as important as the matter is, the timing is inappropriate for him to be reading it.
We need to have time to scrutinize many of these reports. When it is rushed in within the next five, ten minutes, even without me having reference to my United Nations or ECOWAS Convention on Small Arms and you are called to make a contribution, it may not be informed and it may not be intellectual. We should discourage that attitude in this House. We
should subject committee reports to proper scrutiny, especially on an important Bill like the Small Arms Bill.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon. Members, it appears that some hon. Members have not got the Report while others have. I believe that is what is being shared. But hon. Member, the hon. Minister was not reading the Report of the Committee; he was just referring to salient points to support his motion. But definitely, you are right there; you must have the Report and I believe it is a short Report and you can absorb it within a very short time. So the hon. Minister was giving salient points to buttress his motion.
Mr. Kan-Dapaah 12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, we also need the Bill to respond to a specific regional obligation which is to enforce the decision of the Conference of Heads of State and Government on 10th December, 1999 on the establishment of a national commission for the fight against illicit proliferation and circulation of light weapons.
Mr. Speaker, the Bill essentially seeks to establish a National Commission on Small Arms and Light Weapons and also to deal with matters relating to small arms and light weapons. It goes further to provide the framework and also undertake programmes of action to prevent, combat and eradicate illicit trade in small arms and light weapons and to educate and sensitize the public on the dangers of the use of small arms and light weapons.
Mr. Speaker, the Commission on Small Arms will be an independent body as it operates at the moment and it will be under the directive of the Ministry of the Interior through which international donors may provide some assistance to the Commission.
Mr. Speaker, the objects of the
Alhaji Sumani Abukari (NDC - Tamale North) 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to contribute in support of the motion on the floor. I think that this is a very important Bill that we should all wholeheartedly support.
Mr. Speaker, we have problems of small arms and light weapons not just in conflict areas like Liberia, Sierra Leone, la Cote d'Ivoire or Congo, but even within our peace haven in Ghana. Mr. Speaker, most of the conflicts that we have had from various parts of this country have been prolonged or even initiated because people have arms in their possession. Without the possession of illegal arms, I believe that most of these conflicts would have ended up either in courts or settled traditionally; but when people have arms and they think that, alright, we can fight and take over this area, they refuse to reason.
Mr. Speaker, we have a problem in this country. In fact as far as I am concerned, the figure as given by the hon. Minister and the Deputy Chairman of the Committee are figures that are not very accurate because I believe that we have many, many more of these arms in circulation than we have here.

Mr. Speaker, as we talk now, I believe that if we go to certain areas of this country the manufacturing of illicit weapons is going on. Mr. Speaker, one finds that most of the time when armed robbers are arrested, the weapons that they are found to be using are locally manufactured ones. Occasionally, they get hold of sophisticated live weapons; from wherever they get them, we do not know, but they get hold of them and fight the police. But most of the time, the weapons they use are

locally manufactured weapons. Mr. Speaker, I believe that with this

Bill, the Commission that would be set up would be able to come out with policies and directives that will help curb the manufacture of local arms within the country. Mr. Speaker, as I said, some of the manufacturers have become so sophisticated that sometimes it is even difficult -- they give them fake numbers and all that and it is difficult to see whether they are locally manufactured or not.

Maybe, when the Bill is passed, the Minister for the Interior may have to sit down with the Commission and see how they can group these experienced manufacturers of illegal arms together into small viable cooperatives or maybe small companies that would be licensed to manufacture guns. Those guns can be registered on the national database and those guns can be sold or even exported to keep them in their jobs.

If we say that we are going to stop them from manu-facturing the guns outright, I believe that it is going to be very difficult. They would go underground and it would even be more difficult. To make sure that proliferation of these illegal arms are reduced to the barest minimum, I think we ought to put them together to allow them to do their trade in a legal atmosphere.

So Mr. Speaker, I will suggest to the hon. Minister that the local manufacturers of guns should be put together and registered and controlled because that will reduce the proliferation of illegal arms.

Mr. Speaker, some of us are also very happy about this step being taken, that is the passage of this Bill, to legalise the existence of the Commission. Some of us come from very volatile areas and we think that the problems we have will be reduced when the proliferation of these small arms is also reduced. We think that so far the security services in this regard are doing
Alhaji A. B. Sorogho 12:20 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, my hon. Senior Colleague is misleading the House and I think we have to draw his attention to it. He started saying categorically that only the Military and the Police can carry arms. But I can tell him that other civilians too are mandated, if they register their arms to carry personal arms. So he cannot get up and say that “only”. It is not “only”. Those who are also registered, like some of us here, can also carry arms. So he should not create the wrong impression that only the Military can carry arms. [Interruptions.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Order! Order! Point of order sustained. Hon.
Member, take that on board.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon. Member, I have sustained his point of objection. Those individuals who have duly licensed their weapons are entitled to carry them.
Capt. Effah-Dartey (retd): Mr. Speaker, that one is not an issue. Mr. Speaker, my worry is the misuse of weapons that take place in our land. I was referring to the killing of the journalist. Mr. Speaker, just recently, two days ago or so, it was in the news that at a place in the Volta Region, I think Kpasa to be precise, when security agencies stopped a car and they were searching the vehicle, they saw ammunition being smuggled to certain parts of this country. It is these illicit weapons, it is these illicit arms which are always being used to create confusion -- armed robbery, explosion of chieftaincy disputes and other matters that make us feel unhappy.
Mr. Speaker, it has been established that these small arms and light weapons that are illegally in existence are supplied either through smuggling or through unauthorized manufacturing of the weapons. All over the country we have identified certain places where local goldsmiths or blacksmiths, call them what you will, manufacture these weapons, but do not have the licence to do so. They do not have the authority to do so but they do it underground all the same.
Mr. Speaker, my recommendation is that apart from passing this Bill, which I encourage all my hon. Colleagues to
support massively, we should mount or we should sustain the educational process. We should do public awareness campaign programmes as much as possible. Mr. Speaker, we should do it not only at lorry parks but also in the churches, at the market centres, wherever people congregate.
We should spread the message that they should be aware of light weapons and illicit arms so that our collective security can be guaranteed. At the same time, Mr. Speaker, I want to recommend that we should rigidly enforce the law on small arms. If anybody is found in possession of arms without proper authorization, he should be prosecuted so that we can let everybody get the message loud and clear that if one is holding a light weapon, if one is holding an arm, it must be authorized otherwise one would be punished.

Apart from that, Mr. Speaker, I think our soldiers, our police and especially the Ministry of the Interior and its agencies should carry out regular cordon and search operations so that they can identify, arrest and discipline people who are in possession of unauthorized weapons. Mr. Speaker, all of us, each one of us, including we the hon. Members of Parliament, are at risk of small arms and light weapons attacks; and it is our collective responsibility to make sure that this country is rid of people who wield weapons without authority so that when we are moving, we can be guaranteed our security.

Mr. Speaker, I was once a soldier and I can assure you that any soldier who misuses a weapon is brought to justice. The military authorities do not joke at all. In fact, even in the Police Service on this matter, if you misuse a weapon, you would be dealt with according to the law; and there is no mercy. Now, if even those who are authorized to handle weapons treat themselves with such rigidity, how
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.


Mr. Speaker, with these few words, I also support the motion.
Dr. Benjamin Kunbuor (NDC -- Lawra-Nandom) 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is actually my pleasure to also make my modest contribution to this all-important Bill.
Of course having had the privilege of leading the first research team that worked on this document that subsequently became the ECOWAS Convention on Small Arms and Light Weapons, I think it is gratifying that today we are beginning to implement the national obligations imposed on us by that particular Convention.
It is equally worth noting that this is one of the first international conventions about which there is quite a lot of speed to actually get Parliament to begin to establish the national framework for implementation and I think that this is a useful step.
Mr. Speaker, this Convention that we
are trying to implement in Ghana also has a very long history that is worth recording at this particular point. Around 1998 or the latter part of the 1990s, unilaterally and in a very pioneering move, ECOWAS was the first sub-regional block to actually come out with a gentleman's arrangement to restrain the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, what came to be known as the ECOWAS Moratorium on Light Weapons. Mr. Speaker, what was unique about this is that they have actually set
up ECOSOC, that was the implementing body that monitored the proliferation and movement of these weapons, despite the fact that the moratorium was not a binding legal instrument.
Of course, the practice over the years and the provision in the moratorium for renewal actually lapsed by 2001 and was decided unanimously that they should put in place a more binding legal framework and that was what led to all the effort to get this Convention in place.
At that particular time, Mr. Speaker, the Arms Trade Treaty Arrangements of the United Nations were also put in place and under the United Nations programme of action Ghana also had reporting obligations. All these international developments also complemented the moratorium. But there are two very essential things that I want to draw attention to in relation to this. The first one has to do with some essential provisions of the Convention that we need to keep at the back of our minds so that it can go hand in hand, in terms of implementation.
Three essential ones in terms of local manufacture have to do with tracking, marking and the notion of the visitor's certificate. These are very, very essential. If you have a commission, you put in place the national action plan but if you do not have the mechanisms for dealing with the marking and tracking and the visitor's certificate, you would find that these arms would keep circulating.
Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportu- nity to also look at the national or draft national action plan on small arms and light weapons, and the four important areas that have been identified need to be disaggregated and studied very, very closely so that we do not have tensions and pressures in terms of implementation.
The first has to do with where some of our traditional institutions have armouries as part of their traditional paraphernalia.
We have to find a way of dealing with it without engaging in running battles with traditional authorities because we need these very same authorities to assist us in the implementation.
The second one has to do with the traditional armouries and the inventory procedures that we have. The Ghana Armed Forces, the Police Headquarters and I am sure the Customs Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS) Headquarters certainly can have what would pass the test of a standard armoury.
But if you notice that there are policemen down even to the sub-district level of this country, if you see most of them renting private houses in which these arms are kept, we need to take a second look and ensure that at least minimum armouries are actually constructed; because anytime there are ethnic conflicts or there are disturbances, those loose armouries are always the target and that is where the proliferation of these weapons starts.
The third significant one is the alternative livelihood that the hon. Ranking Member has indicated. You do not just go out and criminalize the manufacture of these weapons if you do not find an alternative livelihood for those who have practised it over the years and it has become either a vocation or a business activity. We must also be thinking of the alternatives, and when we talk about alternative livelihoods, we are thinking of a situation in which they can conveniently move and invest, which should be relatively as lucrative as the arms industry or manufacture. Otherwise, no matter whatever intervention you put in place, people would go underground and continue to manufacture these weapons. Public education is most important and not just about the Convention.
If you see the negative effects of small arms and light weapons, particularly within the ECOWAS sub-region -- and I guess Ghana has its own fair share -- that type of education with some pictures indicating the extent to which small arms and light weapons affect our own sustainable development, would be a very useful way of looking at these things.
With these few comments, Mr. Speaker, I support the motion.
Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. A. Osei-Adjei): Mr. Speaker, I fully support and endorse this Bill before us. It is long overdue that Ghana should sign to also complement the effort of other countries.
Mr. Speaker, when you live in the region where conflicts have become the order of the day, honestly you have to put in place a mechanism whereby you can stop it. We know very well that peace and security are things we should strive for in order to progress and to develop and it would be in our interest to ensure that these small arms coming into the country are regularized so that we can monitor and make sure that these arms do not fall into the wrong hands.
Mr. Speaker, I have been a victim of an armed robbery and the experience that I had, I do not wish any of my hon. Colleagues here to have the same experience. Nevertheless, we cannot say that because these people are producing the arms here we should not criminalize the activity that is taking place.
I fully support and endorse that we should have a sort of orientation and we should talk to them but that should not stop us from arresting those people producing the small arms in this country.
Mr. Speaker, with these few words, I fully support the motion.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Albert Kan-Dapaah 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am most encouraged by the concerns of hon. Members with regard to the problems posed by the proliferation of illicit arms and light weapons in the country. It probably has not caused as much damage in our country as it has done in countries that have been engaged in national conflicts. But all the same, we have also had our fair share of the problems. We have suffered from armed robberies and also other gun-related crimes and we have also witnessed the destructive nature of these illicit arms and small weapons during ethnic conflicts in the country.

Mr. Speaker, I have taken note of the advice to get the police and law enforcement agencies and the Ministry of the Interior to increase its efforts to rid this country of the proliferation of arms and small weapons. I have taken note also of the advice to take seriously the marking and tracking with respect to the locally manufactured arms and also to consider carefully how to handle the armouries that are maintained by traditional authorities.

Mr. Speaker, I have also taken note of this suggestion that we probably should legalize the manufacture of arms and small weapons in the country. And I want to thank hon. Members for showing so much concern and also for supporting the Bill.

Question put and motion agreed to.

The National Commission on Small Arms Bill was accordingly read a Second time.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 12:40 p.m.
STAGE 12:40 p.m.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, subclause (3), after “Minister” -- [Pause] -- “Ministry” insert “Department and Agencies”.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon. Member, I see “Ministries” here rather than “Minister”, as you said. And I think there was a constitutional matter raised by hon. Ayariga and you were supposed to confer and resolve that.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
But the word here, “Minister” is a mistake; it should be “Ministries”. The amendment is to insert the words “Departments and Agencies” between the words “Ministries” and “shall”.
Mr. Speaker, I spoke to my hon. Friend and he agreed that he is now minded to withdraw his objection.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon. Ayariga, you had raised a constitutional matter; are you satisfied now?
Mr. Ayariga 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the truth of the mater is that I think different people are reading that clause differently. And the argument that is being urged upon us by my hon. Colleague on the other side is that, because it says “Departments of Government”, Department of Govern- ment can be construed to mean “Ministry, Agency”, whatever.
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I am totally
convinced, but in the circumstances and considering that it is being made a policy to allow every government institution
or any government institution that the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning approves to go ahead and charge levies and go ahead to retain those levies, I think I would have no serious objection to what is being urged on the House.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
There is another amendment, subclause (3); hon. Ayariga, would you like to move that amendment? Well, that falls. Hon. Ayariga, so that amendment is withdrawn?
Mr. Ayariga 12:40 p.m.
That is so, Mr. Speaker.

Clause 1 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 - Established Ministries to retain funds.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in clause 2, I propose that we delete the heading “Established Ministries to retain funds”, because the clause is an amending clause which is amending a number of existing legislations -- Therefore, I beg to move, clause 2, delete the heading as it appears in the Bill and in its place substitute the following: “Existing enactment amended”.
Mr. Chireh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I support the amendment. It will not make sense to say “Establishing Ministries” -- In that clause we are actually going ahead to amend existing legislation. So I urge the House to support the amendment.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Clause 2 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 3 - Ministries empowered to internally generate and retain funds.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that in the heading, between the words “Ministries” and “empowered”, insert the words “Departments and Agencies”, and then in the body of the clause itself after “Ministries” insert the same words, “Departments and Agencies”.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
“Ministry”, not Ministries.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
That is it, “Ministry, Department or Agencies”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
There is another amendment in clause 3 by hon. A. O. Aidooh.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, that goes to the body of the clause.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
It is consequential.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
I think that it is, yes.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Very well.
Clause 3 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 4 and 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the preceding amendments that I have made, there is no point defining
Mr. Kwadwo Agyei-Addo 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, First Schedule, delete “Efua Sutherland Children's Park” and substitute “Ministry of Women and Children's Affairs (Efua Sutherland Children's Park)”.
Mr. Speaker, the reason is that Efua Sutherland Children's Park as constituted as at now does not really have an independent existence of its own. So, the retention will be to the Ministry, but then for the benefit of Efua Sutherland Children's Park.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Kwadwo Agyei-Addo 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we would want to bring a further amendment with your permission, if I may so do. I beg to move that, under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, delete “15%” “and substitute “25%”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
First Schedule --
further amendment, hon. Abraham Ossei Aidooh.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to amend the advertised amendment, that is, 50 per cent as it appears on the Order Paper and substitute therefore 25 per cent.
Having done that, Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that the First Schedule be amended by the inclusion of the following:
“Food and Drugs Board -- 25%”.
Mr. Yieleh Chireh 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to seek the permission of my senior hon. Colleague to further amend his amendment to say that “Food and Drugs Board -- 100%” because currently the Food and Drugs Board is taking 100 per cent of whatever it is that they are doing.
Again, if you drastically reduce it even to any other figure, it means you are scaling down the activities that they currently are carrying out. The other point is that if you look at the Food and Drugs Board, it has enormous responsibilities that it is carrying out and therefore it requires technology, and it requires to motivate the staff. So I will still urge that it be - [Interruption] - Well, I urge that it be moved to 75 per cent. [Laughter.]
Dr. A. A. Osei 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to crave the indulgence of my senior hon. Colleague. There have been some questions about the information coming from the Food and Drugs Board. The service director, as I speak, has been on the phone trying to provide us with information which will support the percentage. So I crave his indulgence, as we discussed earlier, that we roll it back to 50 per cent. When we have the right information we can always come back to seek the proper amendment.
So I crave his indulgence to further amend his amendment.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
You want to propose that he should withdraw his amendment?
Dr. A. A. Osei 12:50 p.m.
I crave his indulgence to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Very well. Hon. Yieleh Chireh, let us hear from you.
Mr. Chireh 12:50 p.m.
Well, I am reluctantly withdrawing it. But the point I wanted to raise before withdrawing this amendment to further amend it to 50 per cent is that the way this Bill came to us, I really expected that the Ministry, upon detailed discussions with the various agencies, departments and Ministries, should have known what it is that we are expecting them to hold from what they earn currently. It does not appear to be so.
So it means that either there is reluctance on the part of those who are collecting the money to tell the Ministry -- But I think that to suddenly reduce the percentage will reduce their performance. But I agree that well, they are holding the kitty; I am not holding it.
So I will agree with the 50 per cent and I further amend by saying “50 per cent”.
Dr. A. A. Osei 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, you will see that originally the Food and Drugs Board was not even under our list. They were coming through the Ministry of Health to ask for 100 per cent. The point we are raising is that they are not providing us with enough information. Today, on the phone, when the Bill is going to be passed, they are now trying to provide us with the information.
I think that that is not very proper -- we think that that is not very proper. And we think that there are enough arguments to suggest that 50 per cent for a start may be reasonable. But we will come back after we have seen the details to further amend. For now, I crave your indulgence
to, as it were, ask my senior Colleague to withdraw his amendment and let the old amendment stay.
Alhaji Muntaka M. Mubarak 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rather want to go with hon. Yieleh Chireh in the sense that I happened to be -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, he has withdrawn his amendment.
Alhaji Mubarak 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am trying to further propose an amendment to maintain the 75 per cent in that if you look at the amendments that we are carrying today, even though we have not gotten there, if you look at 7, 8, 9, they clearly show how the ideas would be used. It is even saying in turn that the failure to comply with 7, 8 and 9 constitutes an offence and the Head of Department is summarily liable to sanction.
Mr. Kojo Armah 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point or order. I believe the hon. Member who moved the amendment himself has, as he put it, reluctantly agreed with the hon. Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning and withdrawn the amendment. I think it is out of order for him to say he is going back to that same amendment and then arguing for it. I think he is out of order.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, the point that is being made is that the amendment you are proposing had already been proposed and withdrawn and you are going on to the same matter

which has been withdrawn on the floor of the House.
Alhaji Mubarak 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. I believe I was not the one who withdrew it and I believe unless someone will refer me to the Standing Order that says that when this happen, I could not also propose - Maybe, the information that he was giving was not strong enough to convince hon. Members. And I am coming with further explanation, with the hope that it could convince hon. Members to see reason why we should keep the 75 per cent.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Member, you do not have a ground for that. If the withdrawal was done, which is by the leave of the House, and agreed to, and you come back to the same matter that has been agreed to by the House, that is not proper.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, do you want to help?
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
have a general problem because I do not think that - We are talking about 50 per cent, 20 per cent of what? What is the quantum? If the quantum is even made available to this House, we can even justify 100 per cent, we can justify 75 per cent, and we can justify 50 per cent; but now we are just given absolute figures. I learnt one of the reasons why 50 per cent is being given to Food and Drugs Board is the fact that Standards Board has been given 50 per cent. But Mr. Speaker, the truth of the matter is that the amount of resources that goes to Food and Drugs Board is nowhere near what goes to Standards Board. So even though they all might be 50 per cent, the 50 per cent,
that goes to Food and Drugs Board is far more than the 50 per cent that goes to the Standards Board.
Mr. Speaker, I therefore believe that we are not doing this House any good without knowing the quantum that we are dealing with. We are only talking about 50 per cent, 50 per cent; but what is the actual amount that we are retaining? What is the justification for it? Nobody here has provided to this honourable House -- Mr. Speaker, it is on that basis that certain agreement has been reached with the Leadership opposite.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member, you are out of order, you should have raised this during the Second Reading. [Interruption] - What is the “no, no” for? I am ruling you out of order.
Mr. Adjaho 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a certain percentage.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member, you are talking of a principle now; that is out of order - totally out of order.
Mr. Adjaho 1 p.m.
I bow to the Chair on this matter but the point being made is that there is a certain agreement that has been reached with the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning and the Majority Leader; and the Majority Leader is supposed to brief the mover of the amendment who is his deputy as to the percentage. After all, if we realize that the 25 per cent is not sufficient, we can always come and amend it and make it 50 per cent. I agree that yes, the amendment should be there, but my position is that --
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Do not come in a clever way through the back door. Resume your seat; you are out of order.
Mr. Adjaho 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we are at
the Consideration Stage and therefore I can also move an amendment to the amendment which is there; and it is allowed.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
That is a different matter but for now, please resume your seat.
Mr. Adjaho 1 p.m.
Very well, I bow to the Chair.
Mr. Yiele Chireh 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I was holding the fort when he was away and he did not allow me to brief him. Because the point reached with you was that, what he is canvassing was the one canvassed but we agreed as a House that no, we should go back to 50 per cent. They are taking 100 per cent now; he is talking as if we are already giving them 50 per cent, but we are not giving them 50 per cent.
Mr. Adjaho 1 p.m.
On a point of order. Who gave them 100 per cent?
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Order! He rose on a point or order so let him land.
Mr. Chireh 1 p.m.
The issue is whether it is illegal or not. How they were monitoring, how they were effecting the thing is important. So where we are now, at least let us give them the 50 per cent so that they can, and with the agreement that we have reached -- the issue of saying we should know, I raised it earlier. I said the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, the Departments and the Ministries should have come to a conclusion so that we know the quantum of things that we are approving in percentage terms. That one I raised. So the issue is that, we need now to allow for the 50 per cent even though they were getting hundred. And if you want to scale down, the risk that we are going to suffer; that is why I am saying that we should go along with the first proposal
of 50 per cent, but not to go backwards.
Mr. Adjaho 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this House should guard its jurisdiction with jealousy. This House has never given the Food and Drugs Board any authorization to retain 100 per cent. If they are doing that, that is a different matter that should be taken up by this House for them to account for those illegal monies that they have collected.
But if we are now bringing this law on board which is a very good thing they have done, which the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning is doing to make sure that all those Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) which do not have a law in terms of retention are brought under a certain legislative framework, that is correct.
But if they are doing illegal things that do not offer justification that they wanted 100 per cent or they are charging 100 per cent, as if it is a favour being done them -- This House has not authorized the Food and Drugs Board to retain 100 per cent of the fees that they charge and that should not be a basis to offer any justification on the floor of this House.
Mr. J. K. Avedzi 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have in my hand the 2007 Budget. We approved a figure for the Food and Drugs Board, that their collection for the year would be ¢34 billion, and the retention is the same ¢34 billion which means that we have approved 100 per cent retention for them. Why are we reducing the figure now? So I need your guidance on this issue.
Dr. A. A. Osei 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the memorandum that came with the Bill is self-explanatory. We are now formally trying to legalize a practice that several MDAs have been undertaking in the past. One such institution is the Food and Drugs Board. The fact that you approved ¢34 billion does not mean we have an Act specifically on retention; that was not there. So we are trying to correct the
Mr. Adjaho 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in addition to what the hon. Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning said, I think this exercise we are doing is coming under article 176 of the Constitution and it should be by an Act of Parliament. We are now giving legal effect to the budget proposal because even though that provision has been made, there is no legal authority for them to retain. It is this thing that we are trying to do now, and once the Bill comes we are at liberty to do any amendments and change any of the figures.
Mr. Ayariga 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think the Food and Drugs Board, obviously, even if it is an illegal practice, has been receiving some funds and based on those funds they made their projections, budgeted, planned, et cetera, for the year and this House approved and committed itself to allowing them to retain 100 per cent of those funds --
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member, you are out of order.
Mr. Ayariga 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not raising a point of order, I thought you gave me the permission to --
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
You are out of order. It has been explained that that was done but like the hon. Deputy Minority Leader pointed out, this has to be backed by legislation, which is being done now.
Mr. Ayariga 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the inconsis- tency is in the fact that we assured them in the budget that they would retain 100 per
cent and we are now enacting a legislation to reduce it to 50 per cent. And I am saying that would really push them into a crisis at the barest minimum. Let us move up to 75 per cent. And so we are simply saying that let us be consistent in terms of our promises to them in the budget, vis-à-vis the legislation that we are enacting now.
It would be unfair that we promised them 100 per cent and they planned based on 100 per cent projections and we are now coming to cut it down by half, 50 per cent; and it is neither here nor there for us in this House to say that we do not know the figures; then what were we promising? If we did not know that they were going to get, minimum, this amount, 100 per cent, then what were we promising when we assured them that we would allow them to retain 100 per cent?
So I am saying that to keep faith, at least, let us appreciate it to 75 per cent because if you promise somebody 100 per cent and then he plans based on the 100 per cent and you give him 50 per cent it is going to be very, very disastrous for their own plans and budgets. So let us move up to 75 per cent. That is all that we are saying.
Dr. A. A. Osei 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of information. At the Budget time, as I said earlier, the information given to us by them was so incomplete. We virtually said, “you brought 34 and spent 34”; it was incomplete information.

As I speak, today they are trying to get information to us for the purposes of this Bill. We want to promise you that let us compromise at 50 per cent. As soon as we come back we would have gotten more information and if there is the need to go up to 75 or 100 -- but at least this allows them - We are not even into half

year yet, so there is no reason for them to have planned. Expenditures are made on the basis of estimates from revenue. There is still time to do that. The 50 per cent is sufficient enough for them to at least within the half year do their work appropriately. We crave your indulgence.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Order! Order! Order! I will put the Question.
Mr. Osei-Adjei 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, which amendment are we voting on?
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
I have stated the amendment. I have said that it is amendment to Schedule 1 which says that add “Food and Drugs Board at the retention percentage of 50 per cent”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
There is further amendment. Chairman of the Committee, to Schedule 1.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, First Schedule, delete “Registrar- General's Department”. The reason is that, it appears in the Third Schedule and to retain it here as well will amount to double counting.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
You are saying it has appeared in the First Schedule?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
It does appear in the Third Schedule.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Very well.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
The First Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Second Schedule -
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in the column that deals with existing Acts, I beg to move, add “Food and Drugs Board Act, PNDCL 305 (b)”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
There is further amendment to the Second Schedule.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, that goes for the amended provision. Mr. Speaker, I was wondering whether this should be “amended provisions” or “amendment provision”, but for now it is “amendment provision”. Mr. Speaker, I intend to make this new provision, that is, to empower the Board. As at now, Mr. Speaker, the Board has no right to charge fees. I beg to move, Second Schedule, Amending Provisions to “Food and Drugs Board Act (PNDCL 305 (b)” add the following:
“Section 28 of PNDCL is amended by the insertion of a new paragraph (d)(i) as follows: ‘Charge fees approved by the Minister for services rendered under this Act'.”
That is, we are empowering the Board to charge fees approved by the Minister for services rendered under this Act.
Mr. Speaker, we also now have to authorize them to retain some money; we have agreed on the percentage. And so we also insert a new clause (3). Clause 28 has two clauses and I propose that we add clause 3 which will empower the Board to retain the agreed figure of 50 per cent and the new clause 3 appearing in the Order Paper should be as follows:
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Very well.
Mr. Osei-Prempeh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is in the same light that -- I share the view but my problem is with the (a) and the 47 (b) where charged fees must be approved by the Minister, and then in the 47 (b) an L.I. specifying fees to be charged for services rendered. There seems to be a little bit of contradiction there; but if we pass it subject to the draftsperson shaping it, then I agree with that.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Hon. Members, the Question is that the principle of the amendment be accepted but left to the draftsman to fit them and arrange them properly.
Mr. Adjaho 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think the Deputy Attorney-General has raised a very fundamental point. Who is appro-ving the fees? Because, normally it comes by a Legislative Instrument and the Legislative Instrument comes to this House. This House might approve, reject or annul the Legislative Instrument. So the way they put it, I think it is a very fundamental point.
Are we giving that function to the Minister? We have to clarify that aspect because once we say it is going to be by a Legislative Instrument then a Minister will have to be in charge of the Legislative Instrument on the floor of this House and for it to be referred to the appropriate committee, the Subsidiary Legislation, to look at. So when we say they “approve”, then it sends a certain signal as if the Legislative Instrument may not come -- Once the Minister approves the fees then it takes effect. That is a principle that we have to agree on before the draftsperson does the English Language and the niceties of the drafting.
So we have to look at that aspect, that it is not the intention of this House to let the Minister approve the fees; and
of the Bill.
Third Schedule --
Mr Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, Third Schedule -- under “Registrar- General's Department” delete “15%” and substitute “20%”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Chairman, there is a further amendment to the Third Schedule.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, Third Schedule, add “Office of State Protocol 50%”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Still under the Third Schedule there is a further long-proposed amendment.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, New clause - add new clauses as follows:
“7. Despite any other provision in any enactment to the contrary, Internally Generated Funds (IGFs) can only be utilized when the activities on which the expenditure will be incurred have been programmed and approved in the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) expenditure budget by Parliament”.
“8. Ministries, Departments- and Agencies (MDAs) with the approval to retain and utilize IGFs can only incur expenditure funded by IGF for a particular month if the collection for the previous month duly reconciled with bank lodgements, and expenditure returns for the previous month have been submitted to the Ministry of Finance.”
Clause 3 -- “The Board may retain the percentage specified in the Second Schedule out of the moneys realized in the performance of its functions.”
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Alright, go on with the rest of the rest.
The final one which is an amendment to section 47 of the Act is to provide the means of fixing the fees. So I beg to move that section 47 which deals with regulations, we amend it by adding a new paragraph. That is after 47 (b) we add a new paragraph as 47 (b)(vii). If I may read all --
“The Minister may after consultation with the Board by Legislative Instrument make regulations specifying fees to be charged for certain services rendered under this Act . . .”.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Hon. Members, I hope you are following the amendment he is proposing to PNDCL 28 and PNDCL 305 (B).
Mr. Adjaho 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that the intention of this amendment is right but it is the drafting that we may have to look at. Maybe, we should agree to it and then refer it to the draftsperson to look at, because for example, I do not see why he put the (b)(vii) there. They will find the exact place to locate it under section 47, for example; but I think the purpose is right. There should be need for a Legislative Instrument (L.I.) to charge the specific fees from which the money can be retained. So I am in agreement with the amendment but I think that they may have to look at the rendition very well.
the matter ends there. It should have to be by a Legislative Instrument because in the last portion of his amendment he introduced Legislative Instrument which is very, very important. So once the Legislative Instrument comes then the picture becomes clearer.
Mr. Chireh 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask him to approve this further amendment which drops the Minister, to say: “charge, fees for services rendered under this Act”, and then the subsequent one now specifies the thing under the regulations. I am saying so because the Act itself must give the power to charge the fees. Then how it would be done would be under section 47 which is already the one providing for the regulations. So if he drops “approved by the Minister” then it follows that the L.I. which would be made by the Minister would specify what would be charged. So if he agrees to that we then drop “approve by the Minister”.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, after my hon. Colleague had spoken I was going to make the same point, that we delete those words and have it, “charge fees for services rendered under this Act”. Then the section 47 takes care of the procedure for fixing the fees. So that is all right.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
If that is the understanding, the Question is that the amendment be accepted as further adjusted so that the draftsperson will put the arrangements in the proper order.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
First Schedule as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Second Schedule ordered to stand part
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.


do? Indeed, if you look at it specifically the offences and liabilities they are talking about really should not be in this Act in terms of the Financial Administration Act which has sanctions already. So I would want a further amendment to delete the two.
Dr. A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with my hon. Colleague about clause 10. But the clause 7 is for emphasis. The expenditures must be made after Parlia- ment has approved it. That is for the emphasis we want to make there; that is why clause (7) is being put there.

I want to go on to clause 8. I crave the indulgence of the Chairman to further amend clause 8. Mr. Speaker, the difficulty is that the pieces of information that come from the banks do not give any MDA the opportunity to reconcile within four weeks. So if you put this clause there, each one of them will be in violation of it. So I want to remove the words “duly reconciled” from that amendment, otherwise nobody will meet it. If the Chairman does not mind, I want to further amend that new clause. As long as they submit it, I think it will be all right.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Hon. Chairman, I hope you are taking note because you will have to respond to them.
Mr. Chireh 1:30 p.m.
Having listened to him, I think I have changed my position on clause 7. I stand by clause 10, that we should remove it, but the clause 7 should be retained.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Very well. Hon. Chairman of the Committee the -
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, that makes my work easier because clause 7 is now retained. For clause 8, if we are maintaining that reconciliation would
“9. Internally Generated Funds” (IGFs) shall not be used for the payment of staff salaries, benefits and other allowances except where the allowances are directly related to the provision of services that will lead to increased revenue, and payment of the allowances should be authorized and be consistent with existing regulations.”
“10. The failure to comply with 7, 8, and 9 constitutes an offence and the head of department is summarily liable to sanction.”
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the amendment. But the last bit - (10) - is what I do not seem to appreciate. The failure to comply with 7, 8 and 9 constitutes an offence and the head of department is summarily liable to sanction; if he can explain that to us.
Mr. Osei-Prempeh 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have three issues; one is on the (9). The last but one line which says the allowance should be authorized, seems incomplete. We have said that Parliament should approve of the programme before they expend; I think that is redundant. And on the (10), Mr. Speaker, I believe that there are financial regulations which regulate spending and the sanctions and penalties are already there. So specifying that a head of department is summarily liable to sanctions -- What kind of sanctions? I believe that the (10) is not very necessary and needs to be looked at. I believe the Chairman can tell us why it should remain.
Mr. Chireh 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I also think that having in the clause (1) already where the preparation and submission of estimates and the reporting accounting for them are subject to the Financial Regulations Act, I do not see why we should further subject them to this new subclause (7) and then also the (10) as we are all concerned. What is it supposed to
unduly delay the ability to utilise the funds, I believe we can do away with that. But the returns must be submitted, which is here.
What I am saying is that if the reconciliation, as the Deputy Minister has just said, would unduly delay the utilization of the funds, I believe we can do away with it.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Very well. And then clause 10?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
For clause 10, what we wanted to achieve was just emphasis.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Then you could emphasise by invoking the sanctions in the financial regulations.
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Very well, Mr. Speaker. So then we can delete that.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Hon. Members, I believe the picture is clear, and the Question is that the amendment proposed, subject to the agreed adjustments -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Osei-Prempeh 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that clause 9 be further amended by the deletion of the words - ‘and payment of the allowances should be authorised and be consistent with existing regulation'.
Mr. Speaker, we are saying in clause 7 that Parliament will approve the activities for which the money should be used, and once we approve of it, they will pay. It is not just that at another time, they come to get approval for paying of allowances; it should be captured in that. Therefore, I believe that that portion in clause 9 is redundant and it is not very necessary - [Interruption] -- the words - ‘and payment of allowances should be authorised and be consistent with . . .'
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Hon. Members, I hope you follow that. Chairman, what do you say?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, very well.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
I will put the Question on the Third Schedule.
Mr. Chireh 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, they are not part of the Third Schedule; these are new clauses.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Are they not coming under Third Schedule? [Some hon. Members: No.] Very well, these are new clauses so the draftsman will position them properly in the Bill - the new clauses.
This means the Question for the Third Schedule will be put separately?
Question put and motion agreed to.
Third Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
New clauses ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The Long Title -
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, Long Title, line 1, before “reten- tion” insert “generation and”.
Mr. Speaker, the idea is that we are dealing with two groups of beneficiaries. There are those who are currently already generating, and there are others who are now going to generate and we need to give them the legal backing.
Mr. Chireh 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, whilst supporting the idea of generation, I
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Hon. Yieleh Chireh, do you get it?
Mr. Chireh 1:30 p.m.
I see the point he is making. Mr. Speaker, I would not mind leaving it as it is.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
The whole thrust is the authorisation of retention. Very well.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, consequen-tially, we have to amend the Short Title as well, to insert the words - ‘departments and'.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
The Short Title as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
The Long Title as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
That brings us to the conclusion of the Consideration Stage of the Bill.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, one more item, I think we can take it. Item 7, it is not controversial at all. It was stood down earlier.
Suspension of Standing Order 80(1)
Attorney-General and Minister for Justice (Mr. Joe Ghartey): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that withstanding the provisions of Standing order 80(1) which require that no motion shall be debated until at least forty-eight hours have elapsed between the date on which notice of the motion is given and the date on which
the motion is moved, the motion for the Second Reading of the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) (Amendment) Bill may be moved today.
Mr. I. A. B. Fuseini 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS -- SECOND READING 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Joe Ghartey 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) (Amendment) Bill be now read a Second time.
Question proposed.
Mr. I. A. B. Fuseini 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Report of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs.
Mr. Speaker, I crave your indulgence to read the Introduction and the Observations and entreat the Hansard Department to capture the Report in totality.
1.0 Introduction
The Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) (Amendment) Bill 2007 was presented and read the First time in Parliament on Thursday, 15th March 2007. The House subsequently referred the documents to the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs for consideration and report pursuant to Standing Order 179 of the House.
2.0 Deliberations
The Committee met with the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice, hon. Joe Ghartey and the technical team from the Ministry to deliberate on the referral. The
Committee is grateful to the hon. Minister and his team for their attendance and input on the subject matter.
3.0 Reference Documents
The Committee made reference to the underlisted documents during dis-cussions on the Revised Edition of the Laws:
a. The 1992 Constitution;
b. Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) Act, 1998 (Act 562);
c. Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) (Amendment) Act 2006, Act 711;
d. The Standing Orders of Parliament.
4.0 Background
Under section 8 (2) of the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) Act, 1998 (Act 562), the President pursuant to Parliament's approval by resolution of the Revised Edition of the Laws is empowered to issue a Legislative Instrument to specify the date of coming into force of the Revised Edition of the laws. The Bill seeks to amend section 8 (2) of Act 562 by effecting a change in the type of Instrument by which the President specifies the commencement date of the Revised Edition of the Laws.
5.0 Object of the Instrument
The Bill seeks to amend the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) Act, 1998 (Act 562) to provide for the commencement date of the Revised Edition of the Laws of Ghana.
6.0 Observations
The Committee noted that the requirement under section 8 (2) of Act
think that we have done something fundamen-tally important in this Bill, that is amending existing enactments. So if it can also be part of the Long Title -- [Interruption] - What I am saying is that if you look at it, you are authorising them to retain, so if you say you are authorising them for the generation and retention, and also amending existing legislation and for related matters - I want a further amendment to the Long Title.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
Hon. Chairman, did you get him?
Mr. Agyei-Addo 1:40 p.m.
Unfortunately, I did not.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
He is saying that your amendment is to amend existing legislation and what you are amending now does not reflect in the law that you are amending. So he is proposing a further amendment.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, if you look at the Second Schedule, these are laws that have been amended to authorise the institutions to retain money and therefore the opening words of the Long Title - ‘An Act to authorise the retention . . .' adequately takes care of that. These laws have been amended to give them authority to retain funds.
Therefore, if you decide to insert the words -- ‘amending those laws' then you do not need the word ‘authorise' here, because that is the authority you are giving them now. By amending those laws that exist now, you are giving them authority. Therefore there is no need to add that these old laws are being amended. It is not necessary.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.


562 that, the President may by Legislative Instrument published in the Gazette specify the date of coming into force of the Revised Edition of the Laws of Ghana creates a legal problem in the light of article 11 (7) of the Constitution which provides inter alia that, all Orders, Rules and Regulations issued under power conferred by the Constitution and/or any statute are required to be laid before Parliament and come into force on the expiration of twenty-one Sitting days unless annulled by the House.

Some Members of the Committee held the view that, in the light of the requirements of article 11 (7), even after the said provision has been amended by Executive Instrument, it still has to be subjected to the twenty-one day scrutiny rule. This view they contend is premised on the fact that the act of communicating the commencement date is in itself an order and therefore subject to article 11 (7) of the Constitution.

Secondly, Parliament could raise objection with the commencement date the President may specify in the Instrument which could frustrate the intent of the Instrument.

Majority of Members on the other hand were of the view that, as has been the usual practice of the House, Executive Instruments in the nature of the one proposed in the referral have never been subjected to the twenty-one day scrutiny rule and as such does not consider it necessary for such an Instrument to be made subject to the strict requirement of article 11(7).

Furthermore, the President's act of specifying the commencement date would always be preceded by scrutiny of the revised edition of the laws by the House and the passage of consequential

resolution by Parliament to approve same. It is therefore difficult to conceive of any cogent reason why Parliament may object to a commencement date specified by the President.

However, the Committee having taken note of all the above concerns proposes the following amendment to the Bill to cure the defects associated with the section 8 (2) of Act 562.

7.0 Amendment Proposed

Clause 1 - amendment proposed, delete “executive instrument” and insert “notice”.

8.0 Recommendations and Conclusion

The Committee has examined the referral and is of the view that the amendment is necessary in order to avoid the legal problem created in construing the provision of section 8 (2) of Act 562 in the light of article 11(7) of the Constitution. The Committee accordingly recommends that this House pass the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) (Amendment) Bill 2007 subject to the proposed amendment.

Respectfully submitted.
Mr. F. A. Agbotse (NDC -- Ho West) 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we looked at the Instrument and it is agreed that it is not Executive Instrument (E.I.) that is in the Act; it is Legislative Instrument (L.I.) and that is what we are amending for “notice” to replace, not E.I. The L.I. recommended in the Act, we are replacing with “notice” by Gazette.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I support the motion but I honestly do not know what kind of notice the Committee is talking about. Mr. Speaker, these matters are dealt with by either Executive Instruments or Legislative Instruments. That is what I know. I must confess I do not know of any other notice. So if the Committee can give us some more education on that matter, I would be
talking about commencement date of laws, who is the one to decide that? If it is Parliament, then the amendment itself should be seeking to say that Parliament should designate the commencement date of whatever revised laws that have been approved by us. If we so do, then we do not put the President in this embar- rassment. The President cannot bring an L.I. to us. He has taken decisions issuing Executive Instruments and that is the power that the Executive has.
Indeed, in the Law Reports, you would see that supposing the Minister for the Interior wants to deport a dangerous person from this country, he would come and lay the L.I. or E.I. before us just because in the Constitution article 11(7) says that all orders and things should come here? No! The laws of Ghana as stipulated by the Constitution itself says that it consists of the Constitution itself and all the other laws. And I know that the case law supports the position that E.I.s are what the President and the Ministers should use in doing this.
But if we are talking about the commencement date, then we should decide who decides on the commencement date of laws, and that should be a different matter rather than to say that they should come by notice. In any case, ‘notice', I do not see anywhere that a President should give notice. About what?
Mr. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, when the Executive takes a decision, it commu- nicates to the people by Executive Instruments; that is it. So if we want to give the President power to indicate the commencement date, when he decides, he must tell us by an E.I. There is no other notice that I know of which can suit this matter. I therefore suggest that the report be amended or whatever, to the effect that the date for the commencement should be given by the President by an Executive Instrument. That decision must be told to the country by an E.I. and not by any
grateful. That apart, I support the motion.
Mr. Fuseini 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we were of the view that the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) had already been passed by this House and that the project itself had been completed; and the Laws of Ghana (Revised) has been launched by the President, except that the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) did not provide for a commencement date which in the law itself requires that, that be provided for by a Legislative Instrument and that in itself was wrong.
So we thought that even by substituting the Legislative Instrument contained in the law with an Executive Instrument would require that this Instrument be laid in this House for 21 days while the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) is presently being used in the courts and by the judges. So we were of the view that the President by notice published in the Gazette could provide the commencement date for the Laws of Ghana. That would remove this ambiguity of having to lay the laws before this House, wait for the 21 days, when the laws in fact are being used now.
Mr. Chireh 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that this problem of notice is a contrived one. When you say ‘notice', what does it mean? Notices are by either Legislative Instruments (L.I.s), or Executive Instru- ments (I.E.s). Apart from that, in this House, we passed Act 600 authorising the President to designate as Ministries or as Departments or whatever by Executive Instrument, and there is nothing wrong with that. Unless we are saying that we are going to take back the power we have given as a Parliament for Ministers and the Executive to issue Executive Instruments, I do not see the argument that is being made here.
The second issue is that if you are
Mr. Chireh 1:50 p.m.


and reprobating. Parliament has already passed it; it goes to the President and comes back to Parliament. The truth of the matter is that as my hon. Leader is holding, everybody now has a copy of this; it has been launched.

Twenty-one Sitting days would come into effect at our next Sitting and this is a mistake; it is inadvertent. So with respect and in summing up, I would say that everybody supports it. The only debate is whether it would be an E.I. or a notice. I support my hon. Majority Leader. A simple notice by the President is a little problematic for me.

I think that the President notifies the world by way of Executive Instruments and I think that it is not every E.I. that comes before Parliament under the article that says that every order, rule or regulation should come before Parliament. Indeed, it is not every order. When the Speaker reconvenes Parliament, it does not lie before Parliament for 21 days.

What has gone on just now at this Second Stage is almost the Consideration Stage so I would sum up by respectfully requesting leave of Leadership and the House that the Consideration Stage be taken immediately after the Second Reading. It is just one clause and it would take one minute. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
Hon. Members, you have heard the various arguments and I hope we are also mindful of not taking a decision that appears to have retrospective effect, in view of the fact that these laws are already being applied, in order not to run into some problems.
Mr. Ghartey 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, with respect, the last point you made, I did not hear you.
So even though this process does not actually change the substance of laws, it may change the law. And also to say that it is not officially being used, that is the problem that we are trying -- Officially, this volume is not in force and that is the problem we are trying to deal with. The only question is, what is the process to bring it into force? As for the commence- ment date, it is not a problem. If we agree, whether by notice or by E.I. the com- mencement date can be from tomorrow, when-ever the E.I. is signed.
But the problem we have is the L.I. and the L.I. is an unnecessary duplication because Parliament has already passed it by resolution. That is the only problem but I am saying that, with respect, I am of the opinion that the President in exercising presidential authority as the head of the Executive exercises the authority by Executive Instrument, and it should not be by notice. That is the only point I am making.
Dr. Kunbuor 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think we need to take a closer look at this thing we are dealing with. The issue of the Law Revision Commissioner's powers should not be interpreted to make it look like some semblance of legislative power has been vested in him. There are three areas; the first is that some laws after a particular period cease to have any effect; the National Reconciliation Act, for instance. There must be an express stipulation that after this period this law has become defunct. The Revision Commissioner can deal with that.
There are situations on commence- ment that we pass a law subject to a particular activity or contingency for the law to commence that can also be handled by the Law Revision Commissioner. But one of the things that we must do is that even where there is a specific provision
other notice.
Mr. Ghartey 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that we are all in agreement on a number of things. The first thing we are all in agreement with is that the position of the current law, as stated by the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) 1998, Act 562, section 8 (2), is unsatisfactory. It is unsatisfactory to the extent that what it did was to say that when you finish revising the laws of Ghana, including laws that have already been passed by Parliament or by some process which at that time was legal, and even if it was passed not under this Parliament, we all know that the written laws of Ghana include the decrees and all other laws that have been made -- bring it back to Parliament and then Parliament by resolution of the majority shall approve of it. That has been done.
Then it goes on to say that after that it would come into force on the date that the President may by L.I. published in the Gazette specify. Indeed, I suspect that the thinking of Parliament at the time was to take into consideration the dual role of Parliament and the President in bringing laws into force. It was the spirit of the Constitution as dictated by article 106, I believe, of the Constitution, where Parliament brings a Bill into force and the President assents; that influenced their thinking in this regard.
But then they left a fundamental flaw, with the greatest of respect, and that flaw was that they said it should come by L.I. laid before Parliament. So the same Parliament which had already approved the revised laws by a resolution would have an L.I. come before it.
Mr. Speaker, if you look at the Constitution, when an L.I. comes before Parliament, for 21 days, it has to be laid and the only thing that can happen to it is that it can be annulled when two-thirds of the Members of Parliament reject it. So indeed, this 8 (2) was approbating
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
I was saying that when we are talking about the processes, we just have to be careful that we do not take a decision that makes the effective date of the laws be retrospective, in view of the fact that we have no power to pass retroactive laws, in view of the fact that we have been told that already, these laws are being applied, and so you would run into a problem as to what is the effect of having applied the laws when they were not really put into action.
Mr. Fuseini 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, that is actually the problem. These are the revised laws. These are laws of Ghana that have only been revised to bring them into conformity with the laws as they are applied now, and they are being applied even in their former state and we are suggesting a commencement date which -- That is why we thought that a notice that these laws have now come into force might do the trick, except that Act 29 is the law of Ghana; it is being applied up till now and it has been revised. So if we say that the commencement date is today, now, then what happens? That is the problem that we were trying to avoid.
Mr. Ghartey 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, with respect, I completely agree with him and also with your advice that we cannot, as it were, stand here and make retroactive decisions; we do not have the power. But the point is that it is not as simple as Act 29 is already being applied. The revised Act 29, I have not looked at it, may be different from the former Act 29 because if you look at the power of the Statute Law Revision Commissioner as provided in section 2 (1) (xi) (b), it states that he shall make adaptations of and amendments to Acts in order to bring those Acts into conformity with the Constitution of Ghana, 1992.
Mr. Ghartey 2 p.m.


Dr. Ben Kunbuor if he has any comments.
Dr. Kunbuor 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry but I heard only half of the proposal.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
So could the Deputy Majority Leader repeat it?
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe our hon. Colleague from Tamale Central is better situated to respond to what I said.
Mr. Fuseini 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think that the issue was whether to go for a notice simpliciter or to go for an Executive Instrument and after listening to the Deputy Majority Leader and the Attorney-General, I am convinced that if the President communicates to the world by Executive Instruments some of which need not come to Parliament then we could as well go for the Executive Instrument; and in this particular one it need not come before Parliament.
Dr. Kunbuor 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I guess that the position is understandable but because some case law exists on it, particularly ex parte bombarde, which I am sure the Attorney-General is, this might indeed be the limited situation. But where an Executive Instrument looks like it is legislative in nature, then we need to be very careful based on that authority and the dichotomy between self-executing Executive Instruments and those that are of a legislative nature. So if it is just notice that this has happened, I do not have any difficulty with that.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
Very well. But are you in agreement that we can take the Consideration Stage? [Interruption.]
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
Very well. So hon. Deputy Attorney-General,
move, Act 562, clause 1, substitute the words “legislative instrument” with the words “executive instrument”.
Mr. F. A. Agbotse 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the amendment is agreeable and therefore I second it.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 2 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, do I understand the situation to be that this law will now come into effect by an E.I.?
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
Yes, that is the amendment.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 2 p.m.
So that there is no amendment because the Bill returns to substitute for the words “L.I.” with the words “E.I.” So there is no amendment?
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
That is right. So hon. Fuseini, I think you will withdraw your amendment.
Mr. Fuseini 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I was not amending the Bill. I was reading an amendment of Act 562. I just read the Short Title, Amendment of Act 562 and I read substituting in that clause - Mr. Speaker, if my rendition caused any confusion I beg to -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
At least, the wording of the Bill takes care of your concerns.
Mr. Fuseini 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, then I crave your indulgence to withdraw the earlier proposal.
The Long Title ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Suspension of Standing Order 131(1)
Mr. Ghartey 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to
in an Act that also gets spent just because of its peculiarity, he can abstract only that one and then update the law to be in line. We should look at that from the perspective that it is not that he can just amend if circumstances come; he does not have that power.
There must be some provisions that enjoin him to remove, as it were, vestigial aspects of our law from time to time and perhaps to commence laws that we did not give a commencement date for, which the constitutional general commencement is also not applicable in that situation. Otherwise, if we present it as if he can at any time he thinks a law has become obnoxious, change the content of the law, then we will be having a constitutional problem there.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
Hon. Members, but for the request of the Attorney-General that we could as well take the Consideration Stage, I would say that we should resolve this bit of it. So that when we come to the Consideration Stage, the matter would have been satisfactorily resolved. What is the thinking of the House -- Deputy Majority Leader?
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I honestly do not think that there is anything to resolve. I agree that most hon. Members agree with the Executive Instrument (E.I.). Therefore, we may go on and take the Consideration Stage. Mr. Speaker, I think the E.I. seems to be the better option.
Some hon. Members -- rose --
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Whip or Acting Chairman of the Committee, are you all right?
Ms. Akua Dansua 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to defer to my hon. Colleague, hon.
Mr. Osei-Prempeh 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, you have not put the Question -- [Interruption
] --
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
Yes, I want to get an agreement - if you are all agreeable.
Question put and motion agreed to.
The Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) (Amendment) Bill was accordingly read a Second time.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
Hon. Attorney-General, you first seek leave --
Suspension of Standing Order 128 (1)
Mr. Ghartey 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 128 (1) which states that when a Bill has been read the Second time, it shall pass through the Consi- deration Stage in the House which shall not be taken until at least forty-eight hours have elapsed, the Laws of Ghana (Revised Edition) (Amendment) Bill be now taken through the Consideration Stage.
Mr. Fuseini 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 2:10 p.m.
STAGE 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Fuseini 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to
Mr. Fuseini 2:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS - THIRD READING 2:10 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT 2:10 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2.15 p.m. till 22nd March 2007 at 10.00 a.m.