Debates of 28 Oct 2008

MR. SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Order! Order! Hon. Members, Correction of Votes and Proceedings of Monday, 27th October,
2008.
Majority Leader/Minister for Parlia-
mentary Affairs (Mr. A. O. Aidooh): Mr. Speaker, just some correction. On page 17, I note that the Speaker was supposed to have left the Chamber at 12.15 p.m. but that was after the Long Title of the Lands Commission Bill had been taken and also after the first clause of the National Communications Authority Bill had also been taken through Consideration Stage. I therefore, beg that we amend the Votes and Proceedings to reflect these errors.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Thank you so much.
Hon. Members, we have two Official

Item 3 -- Questions -- Minister for

Education, Science and Sports?

Question No. 1064 -- Hon. george

Kofi Arthur, Member of Parliament for Amenfi Central?
Mr. Emmanuel Kwasi Bandua 10 a.m.
Mr.

Speaker, I have the permission of the hon. Member to ask the Question for him.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
go ahead.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 10 a.m.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, 10 a.m.
SCIENCE AND SPORTS 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker 10 a.m.
Minister, you may
answer the Question, please.
Minister of State for Education,
Science and Sports (Ms. Elizabeth Ohene): Mr. Speaker, the statistics on students' death at the University of Education, Winneba during the period referred to revealed the following causes of death:
Maternal deaths;
Deaths through accidents; and
what the doctors call age maturity.
In ghana, they are pegging the life
expectancy at fifty-eight years and the demography of students at the University of Education, Winneba indicates that over eighty per cent of the students are between the ages of forty and fifty-eight. Most of these students enter the University when they are a bit advanced in age and as such, their age profiles are different from what one would find in other universities which admit predo-minantly post-senior high
school students.
The University therefore provides through its counselling centre, support for older students to adapt to the fast pace university environment. That is, having to juggle the demands of academic work and family obligations which most of them have and tends to take toll on the middle- aged persons.
Five of these students died through motor accidents, ten students died of natural causes and another five through complications of childbirth.
In addition, the University Council and Management have initiated the following:
They are requesting the Director of District Health Services, Winneba to conduct studies to inform the formulation of an appropriate policy.
They have initiated a policy as an interim measure for students to undergo a second medical examina- tion for continuing students, and this was to start in the 2007 and 2008 academic year. But unfortunately, the student leadership is against this and we are still trying to negotiate with them.
They are constructing a new clinic, which is 95 per cent completed and would be developed with govern- ment's support into a hospital to serve the University and its immediate communities.
There are advertisements for various medical personnel to operate the new clinic and an ambulance would be required to facilitate emergency response to critical health situations.
I have attached the details of the deaths of the twenty-one students to the Answer, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Bandua 10 a.m.
In her Answer, the
Minister said that a policy had been initiated to enable the students undergo a medical examination for the continuing students that was to start from 2007 and 2008 academic year but the student body had kicked against it. May we know the reasons why the student body has kicked against this policy?
Ms. Ohene 10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the student leadership feels that they should not be subjected to two different medical examinations. That is, normally, when the students are coming to the University, they have to undergo medical examination but the University decided that maybe, there was a case to have an extra medical examination simply because of these deaths that they have been experiencing but the student leadership does not want it.
Mr. Bandua 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we have also learned from the hon. Minister's Answer that the Director of Health Services, Winneba had been requested to conduct studies to inform the formulation of an appropriate policy. May we know whether the Ministry has received any reaction to this request.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Which request are you referring to, hon. Member for Biakoye?
Mr. Bandua 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, she said that in order to ameliorate the situation, the Minister had requested the Director, District Health Services, Winneba to conduct studies to inform the formulation of an appropriate policy to help ameliorate this situation. It is captured in her Answer to the Question. I want to find out whether they have received any response for those
Mr. Bandua 10:10 a.m.


requests.
Ms. Ohene 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this is an ongoing situation. It is not like we have asked for it and that is the end of it. They are talking about it.
Mr. Kojo Armah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister stated earlier in the Answer that one of the causes of deaths at the University was maternal deaths. Un- fortunately, I do not have the statistics that she promised as attached to this Answer and therefore, we do not know the scale of maternal deaths. Maternal deaths normally are involved either during childbirth or pregnancy or things of that nature. I want to know if that is the case and what measures have been taken to forestall these incidents at the university.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Minister, would you want the question to be repeated? Yes, please, kindly repeat the question?
Mr. Armah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am saying that in the Answer to the Question, the hon. Minister stated that maternal deaths were one of the causes of deaths at the university. And she also stated later that she had attached the details, which we do not have, to this Answer and therefore, we do not know the scale of the problem there. And I want to know whether it is the normal maternal death involving pregnancy or childbirth, which is the cause there and how serious the matter is.
Ms. Ohene 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, five of the students died during childbirth. They were students; often, some of them were interns, some of them were having the babies while they were on holidays, but none of those childbirths took place on campus. But they were students, that is why it is reflected in the statistics of the university.
Mr. Lee Ocran 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the advanced age of the students and the fact that the Minister is attributing the death of the students to old age, would she consider it advisable to impress on the university authorities to establish a branch of Help Age ghana at the university to advise them on how to conduct themselves in their old age.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Hon. Member for Jomoro, which unit were you referring to?
Mr. Ocran 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, Help Age ghana.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
This is not a supple- mentary question.
Dr. Kwame Ampofo 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in her Answer, the hon. Minister tells us that over 80 per cent of the students are between the ages of 40 and 58. But I know that the compulsory retiring age in this country is 60. So if the majority of students -- (80 per cent) are close to retiring age, what then is the Ministry's policy on age limit in the admission? Because financially, I think it is a problem. We are training people only to die in school or to come out and retire.
Ms. Ohene 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, many of them are in their 40s that still live. The policy of getting to be sponsored by the Ministry to go to the university so that you do not pay, that is “Study Leave with Pay” -- Study Leave with Pay indicates that you must, after you have graduated, be able to serve at least 5 years.
Now some of the teachers who have been teaching for a long time and who feel that, they have to improve upon themselves feel hard done by that. By the time they get the opportunity to get into the university, they do not qualify for this study leave with pay. Because what it means is that you must get it and graduate
and still have five years of service. Some of them choose to go anyway so that they too can say that they have a university degree. Nobody can argue with that. They might not have paid study leave but they still go.
So we try to make sure that those who are approaching the cut-off date are the first in line so that they can at least have some time left after they have finished their courses before they retire.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
Question 1294 - Hon. Joseph Tsatsu Agbenu?
Mr. Raphael Kofi Ahaligah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member is on assign- ment outside Parliament and has therefore asked me to ask the Question on his behalf.
Mr. Speaker 10:10 a.m.
go ahead and ask the Question.
Amankwakrom Agricultural, Fisheries and Technical Institute
Q. 1294. Mr. Raphael Kofi Ahaligah (on behalf of Mr. Joseph Tsatsu Agbenu) asked the Minister for Education, Science and Sports what plans the Ministry had to solve the acute accommodation problem facing Amankwakrom Agri-cultural, Fisheries and Technical Institute.
Ms. Ohene 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Ministry
has an elaborate plan to improve facilities in all the technical institutes. And with the gES, we have started re-equipping all technical institutes in order to improve the quality of training in line with the 2007 Education Reforms. Infrastructural requirements for technical institutes have been identified and rehabilitation will begin in all technical institutes including the Amankwakrom Institute.
Within the short-term, the Ministry's
priority is on the provision of tools and equipment, and the reactivation of constructional works on the Carpentry and Building Workshops for the Institute. The issue of accommodation will be considered when more funds become available.
Mr. Ahaligah 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I know Amankwakrom Technical Institute is very far away from the town and teachers who are posted there normally refuse going there.
Would the hon. Minister be kind enough to tell me when exactly her Ministry will be taking up the accommo- dation of the teachers?
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the accommo- dation for teachers is on the short to mid- term programme. In other words, I think 2009/2010 is when the accommodation for teachers for that institute is scheduled to be seen to.

Holy Trinity Senior High School

Q. 1414. Johnathan Nii Tackie-Kome asked the Minister for Education, Science and Sports what the Ministry was doing to improve infrastructural facilities at the Holy Trinity Senior High School in the Odododiodioo Constituency.
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, most of the infrastructural works in the secondary schools used to operate under a programme called the Public Investment Programme (PIP), which is financed by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning.
Currently, there is a freeze on new projects because there are over 500 projects under this programme scattered all over the country at various stages of completion.
The ghana Education Trust Fund
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.


(gETFund) has also come in to do many of these projects. We are completing many of these projects that have already been started and doing new ones and we are faced with the problem of insufficient funding, therefore, we are a bit reluctant to start new projects. The Holy Trinity Senior High School would therefore be considered along with others when current projects have been completed.

Nii Tackie-Kome: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister's Answer indicates that there is a freeze on the Public Investment Programme (PIP) owing to the 500 projects scattered around the country.

May I know from the hon. Minister whether this implies that there is no urgent arrangements for needy and deprived schools like HOTCASS?
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, certainly, the needy and deprived schools take precedence in our order of priority. But I am not at all sure that the Holy Trinity School is classified as a deprived school.
Nii Tackie-Kome: Mr. Speaker, may I know from the hon. Minister the criteria used by the Ministry in the allocation since her Answer indicates that there are already 500 projects scattered. I wanted to know the criteria. Probably if I know the criteria then I may know why.
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that I understand the question. If it is about the criteria that are used for deciding which school is seen to first before the other, I will say, deprived schools, certainly, are on top of the priority list and then there are schools also where even though they are not deprived but they are popular and they are the places where most people want to go. Therefore, it is in our interest to make sure that we do not let them go down.
But then he knows, of course, that we do have a programme by which we are upgrading deprived schools so that the number of schools that would become popular schools would be more. So we have just added 31 more to the number of schools that should become popular schools.
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on the issue of deprived schools, she said the Holy Trinity cannot be a deprived school and the conclusion is that it is because it is in Accra but there are deprived areas in Accra.
She said the Ministry had elaborate plans to rehabilitate these schools and that they started and they ran out of funds and so they had been put on hold. May I know when the programme was started and when it was put on hold?
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I did say that I thought the PIP was an old programme which was started in the 1990s. Some of the abandoned projects, in fact, were started in the 1970s. So I was not claiming that we started the projects. Many of the projects are scattered around the country and as I said, some of them were started in 1970 and there are over 500 of them. So we have decided that there was no point in starting new projects all the time, because instead of having 500 uncompleted projects, we might end up having 1,000 uncompleted projects. So we thought it is better to stop and complete those that have been abandoned rather than starting new ones. So that is what we have decided to do.
Holy Trinity Senior High School (Bus)
Q. 1415. Jonathan Nii Tackie-Kome asked the Minister for Education, Science and Sports when the Ministry would consider giving the Holy Trinity Senior High School a bus for school activities.
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Ministry intends to supply all 500 senior high schools in ghana with school buses to enhance their smooth operation. Indeed, we have just finished distributing 200 and we are expecting some more.
The Holy Trinity Senior High School and other senior high schools would certainly benefit when we start the next round of distribution to implement this policy.
Nii Tackie-Kome: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for the Answer, but can she assure this House that HOTCASS would benefit should the next batch of buses arrive?
Ms. Ohene 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I could not give that undertaking, but the Holy Trinity Senior High School would certainly be considered in the next allocation.
Mr. Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Hon. Minister of State, thank you very much for appearing to answer these Questions. You are discharged.
MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES, 10:20 a.m.
Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing (Alhaji A. S. Boniface) 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Bill for the establishment of an Engineering Council for ghana, has passed through various stages and has now been submitted for the consideration and approval of Cabinet. If it is approved,
it will be brought before the House for debate and passage.
The Bill will provide legal framework for ensuring the professional integrity, independence, competence and res- ponsibility of about 3,000 professional engineers, and 500,000 other engineering practitioners in the country.
Mr. Speaker, they include the Ins- titution of Incorporated Engineers (IIE), the garages Association and the Suame Magazine Industrial Development Organization (SMIDO).
Mr. Speaker, the general membership of the engineering profession, the Attorney- general and Ministry of Justice, all Ministries with related engineering activities and members of the general public had to be consulted through seminars, workshops and public fora throughout the country in the preparation of the Bill.
Dr. Ampofo 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my Question was to know from the hon. Minister when to expect the Bill before us. Will it be in November, next year, or in two years' time? I want a time frame because I am aware that the Bill has been submitted to Cabinet.
Alhaji Boniface 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I wish tomorrow Cabinet would give me approval. I cannot give you a specific date, but as far as I am concerned, the document of which I have a copy here, has been submitted to Cabinet and I as an individual and a member of the Cabinet cannot tell you exactly when; but very soon, I believe, we would handle it before we rise.
Dr. Ampofo 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in the hon. Minister's Answer, he stated that the Bill
Dr. Ampofo 10:30 a.m.


had passed through various stages and had now been submitted for consideration and approval. I want to know from the Minister when this document was submitted to Cabinet -- this year, last year, three years ago, four years ago, I want to know.
Alhaji Boniface 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this year. It has been submitted to Cabinet and it has passed through all the various stages; it has gone through validation and has been submitted this year.
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to know from the hon. Minister when the document was submitted this year. We are at the end of the tenth month of the year, so when was it submitted? I want the day and the date.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Whip, how many questions are you asking?
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, just one question, that is, on which day and date the document was submitted. I have travelled that route before, he should know the date that it was submitted not just in the last quarter.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, have you filed the Question you are asking?
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is a follow-up to his own Answer.
Alhaji Boniface 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, this Bill has gone to Cabinet on several occasions and had been turned back for several corrections. It went in the first, second and third quarter and we have now taken it. So as far as I am concerned, I sent it this quarter and hopefully we would consider it this year before we leave.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Question number 1578 -- hon. Member for Sefwi Akontombra?
Mr. Lee Ocran 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask the Question on behalf of hon. Herod Cobbina.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
go ahead.
Hydrological Studies and Assessment
Q. 1578. Mr. Lee Ocran (on behalf of Mr. Herod Cobbina) asked the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing what had been the outcome of the hydrological studies and assessment carried out at Kojokrom, Aprutu and Bopa with a view to solving the serious soil erosion problems facing the communities.
Alhaji Boniface 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hydrological studies and assessment have been carried out by the Hydrological Services Department of the Ministry. To control the soil erosion in the four (4) communities, the Hydrological Services Department has proposed a system of drains and silt traps with an estimated total cost of gH¢1,161,756.00 which has been captured in the Ministry's 2009 budget. The project would commence when the budget is approved and the money required is released.
Mr. Ocran 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister says the money for the project has been captured in the 2009 Budget. May I know from him when that Budget would be read?
Alhaji Boniface 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Budget would be read hopefully in 2009 and I am definitely optimistic that this particular estimate would be captured in the 2009 Budget, but that would be determined by the hon. Minister for Finance and Economic Planning.
Alhaji M. M. Mubarak 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, if you look at the Question and the Answers that the hon. Minister has given, he said that the survey was done. I want to know when the survey got completed that warranted that it ought to be put in the
2009 Budget and not earlier.
Alhaji Boniface 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the survey that he is calling for was done after the 2008 Budget and as he knows, we always have to carry forward, do assessment of other projects that have not been done and do a cost estimate of such projects that would have to be captured as a rolling on for the following year's Budget that should be considered.
So it is not something that we just decided based on the Question that was raised but we go round tasking our department to carry out a survey and be able to capture those that are very urgent as has been brought forward.
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to know from the hon. Minister whether the figure that was quoted in this year's Budget is what has been repeated for next year.
Alhaji Boniface 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, what I quoted is ghana cedis, what happened in 2008 used to be old cedis in billions. This is in million, ghana cedis, this is being prepared for 2009 Budget and not 2008 Budget.
Mr. Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing, thank you very much for appearing to answer these Questions. You are discharged.
At the Commencement of Public Business, item 5 -- Laying of Papers.
PAPERS 10:30 a.m.
MOTIONS 10:40 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee (Nii Adu Daku Mante) 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that this honourable House adopts the Report of the Finance Committee on
the Request for waiver of tax liability on equipment/materials to be imported or purchased locally, corporate tax and other taxes totalling gH¢5,149,208.48 in respect of the implementation of the first phase of the National Communication Backbone Network Project.
Mr. Speaker, may I present to you your Committee's Report.
1.0 Introduction
The above request for tax waiver was laid in the House on 15th October 2008 and referred to the Finance Committee for consideration and report in line with article 174 of the 1992 Constitution and the Standing Orders of the House.
To consider the request, the Committee met with the Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, hon. Dr. Anthony Akoto Osei, Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, hon. Prof. george gyan-Baffour and officials from the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning and reports as follows;
2.0 Background
Hon. Members would recall that on Friday, 28th July 2006, Parliament appro- ved by resolution, a Loan Agreement for an amount of US$ 30 million for the implementation of the first phase of the National Communication Backbone Network Project.
Under article 10.1 of the Contract Agreement, the project is exclusive of the payment of local tariffs, VAT, taxes
(including corporate income tax and stamp tax), duties, withholding tax, levies, charges or fees that may be applicable in the country.
During the consideration of the Agreement, the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning assured the Committee that a formal request for the waiver would be brought to the House.
This request is what is now before the House.
3.0 Purpose of the Request
The purpose of this request is to seek the waiver from the payment of import duty, corporate tax and other taxes totalling gH¢5,149,208.48 for the National Communication Backbone Network Project (Phase 1).
4.0 Tax Waiver
The total taxes to be waived as assessed by the Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS), VAT Service and the Internal Revenue Service amounts to gH¢
5,149,208.48.
The breakdown is as follows:-
Item Amount (¢)
1. VAT -- 678,762.48
2. Corporate tax - -
1,007,768.00
3. Import Duty -- 3,462,687.00
Total -- 5,149,208.48
Attached as Appendix D is a list of the equipment and materials imported for the implementation of the works.
5.0 Observations
The Committee was informed that article 10.1 of the Agreement states that:
“The contract price is exclusive of local tariff, VAT, taxes, duties, withholdings, levies, charges or fees that may be applicable in the country by all authorities for the performance of the contract. In case there is a local requirement on the contractor for such payment, or any retention and/or withholding being made on the payment to the contractor, the prices quoted shall be adjusted accordingly”.
The Committee observed that article 10.1 of the Agreement indicates that if these exemptions are not granted and the contractor is made to pay the taxes, he would have to adjust the prices quoted accordingly. In order to prevent the contractor from adjusting the prices, there was the need to waive the project of the tax.
The Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, hon. Dr. A. A. Osei informed the Committee that due to the exigency of phase 1 of the project, temporary tax waivers were

granted by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning for clearance of the equipment and materials for the project pending the actual approval from Parliament. This was to ensure that the project did not come to a halt.

The Committee was informed that the phase 1 of the project has been duly completed and the network has undergone testing.

The Minister of State informed the Committee that in order to comply with the Agreement, there is the need for Parliament to grant approval for the waiver of taxes and duties as applicable to the project.

6.0 Conclusion

The Committee is of the view that this request is in compliance with the Agree- ment and therefore, recommends to the House to adopt this report and approve the request for waiver of tax liability on equipment/materials to be imported or purchased locally, corporate tax and other taxes totalling gH¢5,149,208.48 in respect of the implementation of the first phase of the National Communication Backbone Network Project in accordance with article 174 (2) of the Constitution.

Respectfully submitted.

“HEAD OFFICE

Near IRS Head Office Ministries Area

P. O. Box gP17177, Accra

Tel : 661525/661526/674 Fax : 674186

The Hon. Minister Ministry of Communications Box M. 38 Accra.

Dear Sir,

SUBMISSION OF VAT/NHIL ASSESSMENT
PAYMENTS MADE BY GHANA 10:40 a.m.
GOVERNMENT 10:40 a.m.
AND THEIR SUBCONTRACTORS IN 10:40 a.m.
CONNECTION WITH THE OPTIC FIBER 10:40 a.m.
Mr. P. C. Appiah 10:40 a.m.
None

Asikuma/Odoben/Brakwa): Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity given to me to second this motion.

Indeed, in 2006 Parliament gave approval to the government to contract

Page 26

Page 27

Page 28

Page 29

Page 30

Page 31

Page 32

Page 33

Page 34

Page 35

a loan of $30 million to finance the installation of communication backbone network in the country. Mr. Speaker, after the government had spent so much money to install this facility, to make ghana Telecom (gT) more efficient, the government turned round to sell the gT, and this one was also given to them as a give away. Mr. Speaker, now the damage has been done and if we are now being called upon to waive this tax, I pray that everybody should support it.

Question proposed.

Mr. Haruna Iddrisu (NDC -- Tamale

South); Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to associate myself with the motion and in doing so, may I refer you to paragraph 2, page 3 of your Committee's Report.
Mr. Speaker, with your indulgence, I beg to quote 10:40 a.m.
“The Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, hon. Dr. A. A. Osei informed the Committee that due to the exigency of phase 1 of the project, temporary tax waivers were granted by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning for clearance of the equipment and material for the project pending the actual approval from Parliament.”
Mr. Speaker, clearly, I am doubting the authority of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning to have exercised this authority; it is clearly not consistent with article 174 (2) of the Constitution and with your indulgence, Mr. Speaker, I beg to quote:
“Where an Act , enac ted in accordance with clause (1) of this article, confers power on any person
or authority to waive or vary a tax imposed by that Act, the exercise of the power of waiver or variation, in favour of any person or authority, shall be subject to the prior approval of Parliament by resolution.”
Dr. A. A. Osei 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point
of order. Mr. Speaker, I think that my hon. Friend means well, but the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning does not grant waivers; it does give clearance on permit. The Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning is not allowed to grant waivers. So I think my hon. Friend needs to take that into consideration.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I quoted
from your Committee's Report, line 3 of page 3, second paragraph and I repeat
“…temporary tax waivers were granted by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning . . .”
Mr. Speaker, it means that what this House has been called to do now is just to rubber-stamp what they have done for which they have no mandate. The Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning has no such mandate.
Dr. A. A. Osei 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a
point of order. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if my good Friend slept well last night or not. [Laughter.] I am just telling
him that I agree with him but the Ministry does not grant waivers, the Ministry gives permission for clearance on permit. I do not know where he learned the English language but the two are completely different.
rose
Mr. H. Iddrisu 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am yielding a minute to the hon. Deputy Minority Whip.
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, if he has read the Report -- [Interruption] -- You have read it very well, but listen to the concerns that we have here, sir. We are talking about
“The Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, hon. Dr. Akoto Osei informed the Committee that due to the exigency of phase 1 of the project, temporary tax waivers were granted by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning for clearance of the equipment and material for the project pending the actual approval.”
So he gave an approval, that is what has been captured here, and that is what we are talking about. If he wants to withdraw or amend it -- but what is here, you can get the Chairman of the Committee to withdraw if - [Pause.] They are saying that that was what was captured out there.
Mr. Aidooh 10:50 a.m.
I think there is no need to fight over this. Mr. Speaker, the effect of this is that payment of taxes was deferred; that is the effect of the construction; not that taxes were waived but payments were
deferred and the goods cleared; that is the practice.
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:50 a.m.
Sir, our concern is that we have a document before us which would be captured in the Hansard. Some years would come that we would not be here to defend it and we are saying that what is here contravenes the Constitution. It is saying that “ A temporary waiver was given pending actual approval.” That is what has been put here and we are saying that it is not correct. The spirit of what we are saying must be properly captured for posterity.
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Hon. Member for Tamale South, please, go on.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, so I was just raising an objection so that we can avoid such -- I consider it to be contempt of Parliament, that somebody would grant a tax waiver without it --
But Mr. Speaker, let me further refer
you to some of the attached appendix of your Committee's Report. Mr. Speaker, we are being called upon to approve an amount of gH¢ 5,149,208.48. Now, if you look at the first appendix, we are told that total tax liability -- we have an indication of gH¢3,462,000. So one would have to do a little arithematic because if you follow the other appendix attached we have 125, and we have 53 and we have 1,554; we have to reconcile that against what is numbered 19 in order to arrive at the actual figure in terms of what the Commissioner has approved. Because 2.7 plus what we have here, 3.4, quite clearly exceeds even the gH¢5 million mark. So there must be a proper reconciliation of the figures. In the first page, we have gH¢3,462 in the appendix 19, we have gH¢2,783 and then we have smaller additional figures that are to be added on. I think that it is proper that we have proper reconciliation of all these figures.
Mr. J. B. D. Adu 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my hon. Friend alluded to the fact that the fibre optic backbone has been sold to Vodafone and I want to make that correction. It is not the property of Vodafone. We have an enlarged ghana Telecom which has 70 per cent Vodafone and 30 per cent government of ghana. Mr. Speaker, so it is not the property of Vodafone. He is misleading the House.
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
This is no point of order. Please, continue.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 10:50 a.m.
Maybe Mr. Speaker, he does not appreciate what majority
shareholder ownership means. Vodafone has 70 per cent and it is the majority shareholder. Indeed, there were specific provisions relating to the National Fibre Optic Backbone, not just this US$30 million invested by the Chinese government. But even Voltacom, a fibre asset originally owned by Volta River Authority (VRA) was included in this, worth about US$56 million.
That is why we were cautioning against the inclusion of the National Fibre Optic Backbone as part of the assets of ghana Telecom.
With these few comments, Mr. Speaker I associate myself and I support it because this House originally in 2006 gave approval to an agreement which committed us to this, other than that we should be objecting to it. Because I do not see why we should be financing Vodafone with public resources of tax waivers.
Mr. Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee, do you have anything to say?
Nii Mante: Mr. Speaker, may I thank all hon. Members for their input into this. But particularly, it was the printer's devil when we said temporary tax waivers, which should have read “temporary permits”. So Mr. Speaker, if that could be corrected in the Hansard -- Not “temporary tax waivers”, but “temporary permits”. The intent was not to give a waiver but a permit.
Question put and motion agreed to.
RESOLUTIONS 10:50 a.m.
MOTIONS 10:50 a.m.
Mr. P. C. Appiah-Ofori (NPP -- Asikuma/Odoben/Brakwa) 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to second this motion.
Mr. Speaker, about 342,000 people living in and around the Sunyani Municipality are dying of thirst. It is the duty of the government to bail them out of their predicament. And for this reason, the government intends to contract this loan to enable the ghana Water Company Limited to provide the needed water for the people.
Mr. Speaker, all of us know the importance of water in the life of a human being. If the people there find it difficult to get water to drink, I do not think we are doing them good. So we should not waste time in supporting this request for this loan facility. As a matter of fact, the loan is repayable in ten years. Out of this, there is a moratorium period of two years and a repayment period of eight years. It will not cause any cash flow problem for the borrower. So I pray and hope that every hon. Member here would give support and approval without let or hindrance.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker 11 a.m.
Item 9 -- Resolution, hon. Minister for Finance and Economic Planning?
GOG/BHP PARIBAS Mixed
Credit Facility
Minister of State, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (Dr. A. A. Osei) 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that
WHEREAS by the provisions of article 181 of the Constitution and section 7 of the Loans Act, 1970 (Act 335), the terms and conditions of any loan raised by the government of ghana on behalf of itself or any public institution or authority shall not come into operation unless the said terms and conditions have been laid before Parliament and approved by Parlia-ment by a Resolution supported by the votes of a majority of all Members of Parliament;
PURSUANT to the provisions of the said article 181 of the Constitution and section 7 of the Loans Act, (Act 335) at the request of the govern- ment of ghana acting through the Minister responsible for Finance, there has been laid before Parliament the terms and conditions of the Mixed Credit Facility between the government of the Republic of ghana and the BHP PARIBAS for an amount of US$62,436,000.00 for the implementation of the Sunyani Water Supply Rehabilitation and Expansion Project on turnkey basis.
THIS HONOURABLE HOUSE 11 a.m.
H E R E B Y R E S O LV E A S 11 a.m.
MOTIONS 11 a.m.
Mr. P. C. Appiah-Ofori (NPP -- Asikuma/Odoben/Brakwa) 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in the year 2003 the government of ghana embarked upon programmes to rid this country of poverty and the activities were to be financed from the Consolidated Fund and resources that the government will access externally. This programme has been going on successfully. But as and when new programmes come, more money is needed to make it easily accessible by the people. And therefore, the need arises for the government to go in for this facility in support of the budget.
Indeed, part of this money is for this year's budget whilst part of it is also for next year's budget, all in support of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Programme.
Mr. Speaker, this loan has a grace period or moratorium period of ten years and a repayment period of thirty years, meaning therefore that maturity period is forty years. By that time, I will not be alive; only the young ones, maybe, those yet unborn are going to pay. Therefore,
it is not going to cause any cash flow problem for the government if we go in for this money.
I, therefore, recommend to everybody here to support the motion and give approval without let or hindrance.
Question proposed.
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu (NDC -- Tamale South) 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to associate myself with the approval of an amount of €19 million for the multi donor budget support programme.
And Mr. Speaker, in doing so, may I refer you to paragraph 5.0 of your Committee's Report. We are being told that a number of partners; Canada, Denmark, France, germany, Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom are part of the bodies with the African Development Bank which are supporting this. And we are further being told by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning that of the €19 million, only €10 million would be drawn for purposes of this year's budget and that the additional €9 million would be charged against the 2009 Budget Statement.

Mr. Speaker, my concern is that

sometimes, I am sure the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning can give some other details as to which areas of the budget some of this funding is likely to support; whether it is the area of potable water provision, it is in the area of infrastructure specific to roads. We should know. But just a blanket that I am going to alleviate poverty, for that matter we should support it; a worthy loan; nobody -- the terms are very good, but I think that we should have specific details
Dr. A. A. Osei 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, just a point of information for my young friend. Mr. Speaker, budget support is the budget that this august House approves for our salaries, for item 2, for item 3 and item 4. Mr. Speaker, the fact is that when the money goes into that account on any particular day, you cannot tell whether it is for salaries, but it is for the budget that you approved; that is why it is called budget support.
It is not tied to any specific item. But when you approve the budget back in November, you allow series of activities for all the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) for 2008. So you have already approved it; it is not tied to any specific thing. I cannot tell him that it is for salaries; it could be salaries that we are paid as Members of Parliament (MPs); it could be for so many other things.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am just saying that for the purpose of the scrutiny of this House, the fact that we have approved a budget, it is not all the donor requirements of the budget that you would be able to meet. Therefore, if we know what the €19 million would do; in any case, you are only even going to account for €10 million for now; the €10 million is against the future. We are only saying that as much as it is for budgetary support, I am very convinced that the Europeans would not sit down for him to use this money for salaries. I would be very surprised that they would permit us to use this money for payment of salaries.
rose
Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Minister of State,
please, exercise patience; you will be called.
Dr. A. A. Osei 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, please, I want to educate my young friend. He would be surprised that they would allow us to use this for his pay cheque; that is why it is called budget support; it gives us flexibility to use it in the way that you appropriate it. So if he did not know before, I want to educate him that the Europeans to his surprise will allow us to use this to pay his wages.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:10 a.m.
And probably the pensions -- [Laughter.] Mr. Speaker, I support this.
Reference is also to the growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy II which was the second platform of this government's attempt and assault on poverty. And I think that sometimes it would be appropriate that we have periodic briefs as to whether or not we are attaining the key objectives in the poverty reduction strategy. For instance, issues of maternal mortality, infant mortality, what percentage of the population has access to water; we are still told that a mass of the people.
With these few comments, Mr. Speaker, I associate myself.
Question put and motion agreed to.
RESOLUTIONS 11:10 a.m.
Dr. A. A. Osei 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, that
WHEREAS by the provisions of article 181 of the Constitution and section 7 of the Loans Act, 1970 (Act 335), the terms and conditions of any loan raised by the government of ghana on behalf of itself or any public institution or authority shall not come into operation unless the said terms and conditions have been laid before Parliament and approved
by Parliament by a Resolution supported by the votes of a majority of all Members of Parliament;
PURSUANT to the provisions of the said article 181 of the Constitution and section 7 of the Loans Act, 1970 (Act 335) at the request of the government of ghana acting through the Minister responsible for Finance, there has been laid before Parliament the terms and conditions of the Loan Facility Agreement between the government of the Republic of ghana and KfW of germany for an amount of nineteen million euros (€19,000,000.00) for the Multi Donor Budget Support Programme.
THIS HONOURABLE HOUSE 11:10 a.m.
H E R E B Y R E S O LV E S A S 11:10 a.m.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 11:10 a.m.
STAGE 11:10 a.m.
  • [Resumption of Consideration from 27/10/08]
    • Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
    Clause 4; hon. Member for Tamale South, are you going on with your amendment?
    Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:10 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, with your leave, I withdraw the amendment in respect of clause 4.
    Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
    Amendment withdrawn.
    Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 5 -- Functions of the Commis- sion.
    Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:10 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 5, paragraph (j), delete and insert the following:
    “ensure that through sound, sustainable land use, planning, socio-economic activities are consistent with long-term national development goals.”
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to make a correction. If you look at page 8, there should not be a comma before “planning;” it should just be: “land use planning” -- “. . . socio- economic activities are consistent with long-term national development goals.”
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:10 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I
    rise to oppose the amendment by my hon. Colleague and Friend. Mr. Speaker, initially, I was tempted to agree with him. But then looking at the amendment he has made, all that he has tried to do is just to display some acrobats with the words. Mr. Speaker, there is a defect in the original rendition; that is, if you look at (j): “ensure that socio-economic activities are consistent . . .” The work
    Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
    Which is the new
    proposed amendment? We do not have it.
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:10 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, it is the (j) and the rendition would read as follows:
    “ensure sound, sustainable land use, land utilization and planning are consistent with the socio-economic development goals of the country.”
    Mr. Speaker 11:10 a.m.
    Hon. Member, for Tamale South, have you got a new version?
    Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:10 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I want to yield to the hon. Member for Bawku
    Mr. Mahama Ayariga 11:20 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I think that if we look at the original rendition and the amendment proposed by hon. Haruna Iddrisu, we have the end and the instrument. The end is to ensure that socio-economic activities are consistent with long-term national development goals. Now the original rendition places the responsibility on the Commission without paying attention to the fact that the Commission itself cannot ensure that socio-economic activities are consistent with long-term national development goals except through the instrumentality of land policies, planning activities, et cetera.
    So if we read this current amendment by hon. Haruna Iddrisu, he is introducing the instrument by which the Commission could ensure that socio-economic activities are consistent with long-term national development goals. That is why he says that “to ensure through” and he then introduces the instrument by which the Commission could achieve that objective. So he says that “through sound sustainable land use planning socio-economic activities are consistent”. If there is anything, Mr. Speaker, what we need to do is to address the comma after “land use” and then we can have an accurate rendition which then imposes an obligation on the Commission to use land use planning as an instrument for ensuring that socio-economic activities are consistent with long term national development goals.
    Mr. Speaker, that is the object of this amendment by hon. Haruna Iddrisu. And so, I think if there is anything we should ensure some rearrangement there, deal with the comma and we can have a perfect rendition.
    Mr. Speaker 11:20 a.m.
    I direct that you put your heads together and produce an acceptable amendment for the House. We will deal with it in due course, but today.
    Clause 21 -- Functions of the Land
    Registration Division.
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr. J.
    B. Aidoo): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 21,paragraph (d), delete all the words after “registers” and insert “which shall be conclusive evidence of title or interest in a land of a proprietor”.
    Mr. Speaker, we debated this matter
    yesterday and following that we did all the consultation. What we have been told is that the words which have been conclusive evidence of title or interest here are to give indication of credibility to whatever is being put in the register. In other words, it will sort of strengthen the position of the register which will eventually be produced by the Commission. So Mr. Speaker, your Committee still stands by its amendment.
    Mr. Aidooh 11:20 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, yesterday
    I cautioned the House on this matter and my hon. Colleague, the Chairman said that this rendition could be found in the Land Title Registration Act of 1986. That is true. I have that Act here, PNDC Law 152 section 18. But Mr. Speaker, in that Act the conclusiveness is in fact not conclusive. There are instances where this concept does not apply. So my advice is that because we are not lifting the whole section 18 of PNDC Law 152 which in fact has about four subclauses, and we are lifting only the first clause we will have some amount of distortion in the law.
    This Act will say registration is conclusive whereas in the PNDC Law in certain cases it is not conclusive. So my advice is that we must retain this rendition
    Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:20 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I rise to associate myself with the proposal by the Majority Leader. Indeed, yesterday he cautioned this House as to what scrutiny the PNDC Law was subjected to. And Mr. Speaker, the matter of what is conclusive evidence is in the bosom of the courts, not this House. We are making a Bill. We want to maintain a lands register which will give us records of people's interest in land. We cannot sit here and determine that whatever registered interest that person has is conclusive evidence that he has title to that land.
    Mr. Speaker, you know ghana, many people will walk without investigating title, acquire property from stools and skins with some interest in land and one cannot; if one is going to say that -- Mr. Speaker, there will be multiple owners of land in ghana because anybody says that I have this interest in land registered by the Land Registry there is conclusive evidence that he has title. I think that we should go with the Majority Leader's proposal
    and I will urge the Chairman to drop this amendment and let us maintain it.
    In any case, Mr. Speaker, much of functions of land valuation divisions, functions of land registry division, functions of survey mapping division are all being lifted from existing laws, so why do we want to introduce new things to it. So Mr. Speaker, we will plead with the Chairman to drop this amendment and let us maintain the original as it is in the Bill.
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:20 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I still stand by the position of the Committee in the sense that by inclusion of those words, it will bring some sanctity to the Land Registration Division which is going to fall under the new Lands Commission so that whatever is being registered -- because here we are talking about deeds and interests in lands which are to be registered. If we are not careful and we leave it open it will lead to all manner of litigation at the courts. So it is left to the House to actually bring about some amount of credibility to whatever goes into the register. It is what is going in and it will also compel the staff of the registration office to ensure that whatever is going to be registered is credible. That is what this clause is seeking to actually do. So Mr. Speaker, I am still standing by the decision of the Committee.
    Mr. W. O. Boafo 11:30 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the objection by the hon. Majority Leader.
    Mr. Speaker, my first objection is based on the rules of interpretation. Mr. Speaker, he has already pointed out that under PNDC Law 152, we have this provision which deals with conclusiveness of records as to titles with exceptions in that Act. If
    Mr. Benito Owusu-Bio 11:30 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker,
    I rise to support the Chairman and the Committee's position.
    Mr. Speaker, we, the members of the Committee paid a visit to Her Majesty's Land Title Registry just to acquaint ourselves with best practices. Mr. Speaker, over there, we were shown the steps and then also the titles and deeds and then the registration of all land titles that are done in UK. We asked questions regarding these, and we were told that whatever is produced there is a final document, it is conclusive; we were even shown copies of them.
    Mr. Speaker, if this Bill is supposed to cure the defects that we have within our land sector, I think it would be better for us to have a conclusive thing instead of leaving everything to be decided through arbitration or the courts.
    Mr. Speaker, I think in that case, I support the Committee's amendment and its rendition.
    Mr. Ayariga 11:30 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the issue
    before this House, I believe is whether or not evidence of registration at the Lands Registry should be conclusive evidence of title and ownership. Mr. Speaker, that is my understanding of the amendment:
    “That the registration shall be conclusive evidence of title or interest in a land of a proprietor”.
    Mr. Speaker, I think that it would be ideal that we have some centre where once the registration is done and a certificate or whatever document is issued, that should be conclusive in terms of the determination of title and proprietorship.
    Mr. Speaker, the difficulty here is that this Bill is not about the processes for the acquisition of title and the registration of title. This Bill is not about the processes; if we were sure of the processes that we have a full proof process by which you will end up registering and then the Registry would capture your registration, then we can say we are satisfied with the process, and therefore, let us legislate that once you get to this stage that is final in terms of the determination of your title.
    So whilst in the United Kingdom, it may be the case, that once you have that registration done, that is conclusive evidence -- I am sure they are convinced about the propriety, the full-proofness and et cetera of the processes -- Mr. Speaker, this is not about processes, this is about institutions, the designing of institutions.
    So if we jump to making conclusive statements about processes which I believe maybe, these institutions after they had been established might develop an appropriate process and bring to this House for us to legislate on, then we are creating a very dangerous situation. Because I know, and I have handled cases in which several people -- we
    Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Chairman of the Committee, you referred to best practices in the United Kingdom (UK), can you assure this House whether there is no inquiry held before certificates are issued in UK? Do they not have inquiry?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:30 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I will give just one example. In the UK, what her Majesty's Registry does is that when a piece of land is being brought for registration, they do not look for the precise boundaries; just a sketch of the map is enough conclusive evidence that that land exists somewhere for title to that land, and for which reason such an evidence can be registered.
    Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to do is that if a deed is registered or an interest is going to be registered in the Register, it is presumed that that piece of information or document would have gone through all the processes, and therefore, it is coming with credibility before it enters the register. And
    for which reason, there will be no question whatsoever of challenging its existence in the register. And that is what we are trying to do now.
    Mr. Speaker, if we leave it as it is, we are saying that the function of the new Lands Commission, that is as far as the Lands Registration Division is concerned, is to maintain land register that contains records of land. What records of land? We are talking about guaranteeing the ownership of land, because what we are doing eventually is to ensure that there is ownership of land, there is title to land, there is security in land. So if we do not include this provision, it will leave a big gap in the law eventually.
    Mr. Aidooh 11:30 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I understand his concerns but his concerns have been addressed in an earlier Act. The process of registration of land titles, and the effect of registration are covered by PNDC Law 152, and that law is not being repealed by this Bill, that Act is still in force. How to register, how to acquire lands, where and how to register it, what forms to fill and then the effect of registration, and that Act says that when you have done all those things and you have registered the land title, it is conclusive evidence of ownership or title.
    But that law also says that in some instances, for instance, if I may read sub section (2), it says that in some instances, the conclusive nature of the title does not apply.
    Sub-section (1) Mr. Speaker, I quote does not affect a right or an interest in the land acquired under the law relating to Prescription or the Limitation Act. So there is a delegation from clause (1).
    Now, if you brought only clause (1) into

    this Bill, what happens to the others? Like my hon. Colleague said, it will mean that there is conflict in the two enactments, because this Bill will exclude sub-sections 2, 3 and 4 of PNDC Law 152.

    This is why we are advising you that this Bill is about setting an institution to do a certain act -- to compile registers. But how to do it, and the effect of compilation and registration are covered in PNDC Law 152. And so if you want to bring that bit of conclusiveness here, then we may have to lift all the sections in PNDC Law 152 (18) -- and since we are not doing that -- we are telling you that you are only making a law that would conflict with an earlier registration. I know that you are an expert in land law but all the big lawyers here are saying that you are wrong, and I would advise you to take this.
    Mr. Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon. Members, we are dealing with clause 21 and the amendment is, delete all the words after registers and insert
    “which shall be conclusive evidence of title or interest in a land of a proprietor”.
    Question put and amendment negati- ved.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:40 a.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, just a small correction of what we have voted on. Clause 21 (d). We are talking about land registers. It is a plural -- “that contains records” -- and so it should rather reflect the word “contain” and not “contains”.
    Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
    That is a grammatical mistake. It will be corrected, I think. Thanks. Clause 27 -- Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:40 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 27, subclause (2), line (1)
    delete “directly”. We debated this issue yesterday and Mr. Speaker, we are deleting it because of the new clause which we are bringing on board which will come subsequently.
    Question put and amendment agreed to
    Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
    Clause 32 -- Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:40 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I crave your indulgence that clause 32 which appears in today's Order Paper, that is (v) and (vi) should be stepped down for the Second Consideration Stage. We were expecting it at the Second Consideration Stage.
    Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
    Second Consideration Stage but not at this stage?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:40 a.m.
    No, Mr. Speaker. We will do further consultations on it.
    Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
    We have to take a decision.
    Mr. Aidooh 11:40 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the point is that these clauses have already been considered irregularly and these are amendments that cannot be taken at this stage. That is the position.
    Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
    That is all right. We have two clauses left -- clause 5 and the new clause. Then come back to clause 5. Chairman of the Committee, the new clause?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:40 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, before I take it I will crave the indulgence of the House and your indulgence to do some correction. That is what has been indicated in clause 11, after “shall” delete the words “have not more than two” so that the rendition reads:
    “The Commission shall have deputy Executive Secretaries appointed by the President in accordance with article 195 of the Constitution.”
    Mr. Speaker 11:40 a.m.
    So we are cancelling “two”?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:40 a.m.
    Yes, Mr. Speaker. We are deleting the words “not more than two”. So Mr. Speaker, I will take the amendment. Your Committee proposes that a new clause should be added as follows:
    “(1) The Commission shall have deputy Executive Secretaries appointed by the President in accordance with article 195 of the Constitution”.
    And then two,
    “The deputy Executive Secretaries shall perform such functions as may be assigned by the Commission”.
    And we are also craving the indulgence of the House to delete (3). It should not come.
    Dr. A. A. Osei 11:40 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I want to crave the indulgence of the Chairman of the Committee if he will accept a slight amendment to the one that he just read for clause 1. Mr. Speaker, the reason is that on page 13 we are doing something similar and I think the rendition there may be a bit better than - We already know that appointments must be done with the President.
    That is not an issue. Mr. Speaker, if we choose the language that we have on page 13 - “that the Commission shall have deputy Executive Secretaries as are necessary for the performance of the functions of the Commission.” I think it might read better than the one that the Chairman read out. If the Chairman can accept that, I just want to offer a slight amendment so that at least, the House will be showing some consistency in terms of language we have chosen.
    So if I may read it out again - “The Commission shall have Deputy Executive Secretaries as are necessary for the performance of the functions of the Commission”. Because we know that the
    appointment is by the President. That is not in doubt, for the sake of consistency and better rendition I just like to offer that if the Chairman will accept that.
    Mr. Mahama Ayariga 11:40 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I think that one of our objectives has been to be very careful about the size of government institutions. Mr. Speaker, to leave it open in such a way as to allow the President to appoint as many people as he or she deems necessary would be very dangerous. Mr. Speaker, remember that this Bill is attempting to collapse a number of institutions into one body and we have tried to contain the possible crises that could be generated by having directors head the various divisions.
    These directors by themselves are already major players within this set up and we now have the Executive Secretary. To now leave it open to the President to appoint as many Deputy Executive Secretaries as he deems fit, I am at pains to understand the basis of this proposals.
    Mr. Speaker, ordinarily, we should have just one Deputy Executive Secretary but to be generous to whoever is the appointing authority, we are proposing two Deputy Executive Secretaries. If you look at the structure of this body, we already have a Commission which has a large membership, then we have an Executive Secretary then we have as many Deputy Executive Secretaries as the President may deem fit.
    So that if I am a friend of the President and I am looking for a job, he could point me in the direction of the Commission and go and be one of the Deputy Executive Secretaries. “As many Deputy Executive Secretaries as the president pleases - this is a bit far-fetched. Let us have a limited number, and let us know that this is the number of Deputy Executive Secretaries that the President can appoint and at the
    most, two should be all right.
    Dr. A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the presumption is that we know that the job requires only two deputies. Mr. Speaker, there is a Commission, there is a Board, there is consultation with the Public Services Commission. That is their expertise, we ought to leave them room to determine when it is due, how many are needed. Mr. Speaker, because there is consultation and because -- I hope that we know that any President of this country exercises good judgement, I think we should leave it to their discretion. Mr. Speaker, on this particular one we can easily make a case for three deputies.
    Why do I say that? The expanded nature of the Commission requires that we have a competent person for operations. The financial matters there for the Commissions are so big, you may need a deputy and then you may need somebody for administration. Very often we combine the position of finance and administration as if the skills needed for both are the same.
    Mr. Speaker, all I am saying is that we have a process where the President consults with the Commission, the Board there and the Public Services Commission which has more expertise than us here. I am saying that let us allow them to think through it and come properly to appoint the deputies that are necessary. Supposing they meet and in their judgement require one, then we give it to them.

    It could be that and in this particular case, they may determine that the expanding nature of the work may require three but we would have constrained them and the job will not be done. So I am saying we have a process that deals with this sufficiently; let us not legislate numbers in the House. We will not only be constraining the President but we would appear to be doing the work of the Public Services Commission, the Board and the Commission.

    Mr. Speaker, our expertise is different from theirs. So please, let us allow that and then you see that we are already moving in that direction on page 13 which seems more reasonable under the next section we are going to. I think it is a better way of addressing the problem than insisting that there must be two. I think it is a bit too much.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:50 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I am inclined to go along with the proposal made by the hon. Member for Bawku Central (Mr. Ayariga). Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I proposed that we have a two-member Deputy Secretaries.
    Mr. Speaker, I would want to go along on that line, even though for different reasons as espoused by my Colleague. As for what the hon. Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning is saying, that we should not legislate numbers, I disagree with him. The membership itself that we are formulating here is about numbers of the Commission.
    Mr. Speaker, it is about numbers and we do not want to expand the bureaucracy; we want everybody to be pinpoint on the job assigned to that person. And I believe that if we have two persons as Deputy Executive Secretaries, it will be in order.
    As for ensuring that jobs are specific,
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Chairman, what do you say to that?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:50 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, your Committee is very flexible; very, very flexible. Indeed, the position of the Committee right from the onset was that the Commission was to have two deputies; that not more than two deputies. And
    we had a very good cause for saying so because some aspects of the Commission's work were going to be technical and therefore you need a deputy who would be in charge of operations.
    Then also we have the adminis-trative work and finance. But of course, when you look at the Bill, clause 25, there is a unit for finance which means that certainly there will be somebody in charge of finance. So if you have a deputy who is in charge of administration, he will of course have a responsibility over all those units that have been provided there.
    So Mr. Speaker, the position of the Committee originally was that there should be two deputies but then because of the challenge that was posed in the House, we consulted and then said well, for the sake of flexibility, let us delete the two. So if now Members are urging us to go back to take the two, Mr. Speaker, we go back to our original position on this matter.
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    So your amendment is that “The Commission shall have two Deputy Executive Secretaries appointed by the President in accordance with …” And then the other clause is that “The Deputy Executive Secretaries shall perform such functions as may be assigned by the Commission”.
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:50 a.m.
    Rightly so, Mr. Speaker.
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    This is the amendment.
    Dr. A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I think
    my senior Colleague was trying to make an argument as to why two should be the optimum number. He has not convinced me why two. But Mr. Speaker, the point I was trying to make was that I have noticed from working with several people
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Minister, please, let us
    get your amendment so that we can vote on it. What is your amendment, please?
    Dr. A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Yes, I am making a case as to why the Chairman should go back to his -- he was flexible to accept my language but it seems like my senior Colleague is trying to persuade him to go the other direction. I want to crave his indulgence that in this -- particularly in the area that we are going to, the Lands Commission, we all know all the problems that were there.
    We have just now expanded the Commission. As it is, the problems we are having with the Commission is because of exactly what we are talking about. So we need to allow the group to come back to us through the proper channels and examine what ought to be the number.
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Minister of State,
    please, your amendment so that we can vote.
    Dr. A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    My amendment is, I am craving the indulgence of the Chairman to go back to -
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    What is your amendment, please?
    Dr. A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    The Chairman is the one -
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Minister of State, please, they are talking about two deputies, what is your amendment?
    Dr. A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, let me offer it:
    “The Commission shall have Deputy Executive Secretaries as are necessary for the performance of the functions of the Commission.”
    Question put and amendment negatived.
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    We go back to clause 5. Have you put your heads together on this clause 5?
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo 11:50 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, not yet.
    Mr. Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    We have to finish it today.
    I do not think there is much problem about this. It is only rendition.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:50 a.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I believe the construction as offered by the hon. Member for Tamale South is better than what obtains in the original one and so we should support the amendment offered by hon. Haruna Iddrisu which says paragraph (j) “ensure that through sound, sustainable land use, planning, socio-economic activities are consistent with long-term national development goals.”
    Mr. Speaker, I think that that is a better rendition.
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo noon
    Mr. Speaker, I could see the gestures of the hon. Deputy Majority Leader. If you read it carefully -- because we are saying that ensure, ensure - so when you collapse the words that are following and then you go on to say “ensure socio-economic activities” - The Commission cannot ensure - even if you say “ensure that through sound sustainable land use planning, socio- economic activities are consistent” still you are placing the responsibility of
    ensuring socio-economic activities in the country at the doorsteps of the Lands Commission which will be a very difficult task.
    That was why we said that the function of the Commission should be to ensure sound, sustainable land use, land utilization and planning are consistent. So the Commission's job is to ensure that there is sound, sustainable land use, land utilization and planning which will then be consistent with the socio-economic development goals of the country. This is the new position of your Committee.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Speaker noon
    Item 13 -- National
    Communications Authority Bill - Consideration Stage.
    National Communications Authority Bill
    Mr. Speaker noon
    Clause 2. Object of the Authority.
    Mr. Kojo Armah noon
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, delete “telecom- munications” and substitute “communi- cations”.
    Mr. Speaker, this will be done
    consequentially throughout.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 2 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr. Speaker noon
    Clause 3 -- Functions of the Authority.
    Mr. Kojo Armah noon
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (1), paragraph (b), delete “to achieve its object”.
    Mr. J. B. Aidoo noon
    Mr. Speaker, the heading of the clause “Functions of the Authority” that “For the purpose of achieving its object, the Authority shall ….. The “to achieve its objects” sounds a bit of an overdrive. So we are deleting that one. So the clause will remain at “formulate a strategic plan”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Speaker noon
    Clause 3, subclause (1)?
    Mr. Kojo. Armah noon
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (1), insert a new paragraph as follows:
    “(c) grant communication licence”
    The new rendition will then read:
    “Functions of the Authority” “For the purpose of achieving this object, the Authority shall
    (c) grant communication licence, regulate and monitor licensees, holders of frequency authori- zations in consultation with the National Media Commission where appropriate.”
    Mr. Yaw Baah noon
    Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this rendition being proposed because if you look at the (c), it talks of regulating and monitoring licences. But there is no paragraph which is capturing the granting of these said licences before regulating and monitoring could come in. So it is necessary for us to get a paragraph that grants this communication licences - so that the (c) becomes the (d), it could prescribe regulation and monitoring.
    Mr. Armah noon
    Mr. Speaker, the intention is not to monitor the licences but to monitor the licencees. The activities of the licencees. So you grant the licence and monitor the licencees.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu noon
    Mr. Speaker, I get the -
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Speaker noon
    Clause 3, subclause (1) paragraph (e)
    Mr. Kojo. Armah noon
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (1), paragraph (e), delete “as follows” and substitute “to include”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Kojo. Armah noon
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (1), paragraph (e), item (iv), delete “by publication” and substitute “and published”.
    So that the new rendition would read as follows:
    For the purpose of achieving its objects the Authority shall classify……any other service designed by the Minister and published in the Gazette.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Speaker noon
    Clause 3, subclause (1) paragraph (u)?
    Mr. Kojo Armah noon
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (1), paragraph (u), before “corporate” insert “good”.
    So that the rendition would become “ensure that principles of good corporate governance are complied with at all times”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (2), insert head notes as “Powers of the Authority”.
    Mr. Speaker, it is a head note.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 3 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 4 -- Regulatory and best practice of the Authority.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 4, paragraph (c), line 4, delete “price”.
    So the rendition would be
    “the protection of the interests o f c o n s u m e r s o r u s e r s o f telecom-munications networks or telecom-munications services and in particular to the interest of consumers' choice, quality of service and value for money.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg
    to move, clause 4, paragraph (g), line 2, delete “women” and substitute “the vulnerable”.

    So the new rendition would be

    “the needs and interests of persons with disability, the elderly, low income earners and the vulnerable.”

    Question put and amendment agreed to.

    Clause 4 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the hon. Chairman led us through (vii) and attention was just drawn to it and I think it is wrong, what amendment the hon. Chairman proposed?
    Mr. Speaker, we do not have head notes for subclauses, so I thought the proper thing to do then was to have gone to clause 3 to amend the head notes there - Functions of the Authority. So maybe, we could say “Functions and powers of the Authority”. But for a subclause you do not need any head note there.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, while I agree with the hon. Deputy Majority Leader on the structure, that is, a subclause should not have a head note, we are separating that clause into two. Actually, the word “to” should not be there; it should be deleted so that that clause becomes “The powers of the Authority.” We are establishing the powers of the Authority and we want to separate that one from the functions. So there should be a renumbering of the clauses.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    You resolve this with the draftsperson and you may come back again later.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    That is so, Mr. Speaker.
    Amendment deferred.
    Clause 5 -- governing body of the Authority.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 5, subclause (1), paragraph (c), item (iii), after “Communications” insert “not below the rank of a Director”.
    Mr. Speaker, that relates to the governing body of the Authority. So on that subclause 1(c) (iii) we are saying that
    “The governing body of the Authority is a Board consisting of the chairperson …. (c) one representative of the (iii)
    Ministry of Communications not below the rank of a Director.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 5 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clauses 6 to 12 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 13 -- Ministerial responsibility and directives.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    There is an amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Wa West. [Pause.] Abandoned?
    Mr. Aidooh 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, it should be deferred.
    Amendment deferred by leave of the House.
    Clause 14 -- Divisions of the Authority.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, we want to
    seek leave to introduce a new clause 14.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    We do not have it formulated here, is it? Anyway, go ahead.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, clause 15
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    You are dealing with clause 14.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, clause 15 seeks to make provision for a Director- general but it has not been established. The office has not been established.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    Which one are you referring to? Clause 14?
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, we are inserting a new clause 14. Clause 15 is talking about the Director-general -
    “The President shall, in accordance with article 195 of the Constitution, appoint the Director-general of the Authority.”
    We are saying that that office has not been established yet so we are seeking leave to insert a new clause before clause 15.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    So what is the new clause?
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, in fact, it was not advertised, that is why we are seeking your leave to but at the committee level we proposed it.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    So we should defer clause 14? You do not have the amendment, do you?
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, that is what I am seeking your leave to bring in now because it should have been advertised. Unfortunately, it was not advertised but at the committee level we decided on it. It was not advertised so it did not appear on the Order Paper.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    Then let us have it.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, add a new clause before clause 15 to read as follows:
    “Establishment of the Office of the Director-general and Deputy Director-general -
    (1) The Authority shall have a Director-general who shall be the chief executive of the Authority.
    (2) The Authority shall have Deputy Director-generals as are necessary for the performance of the functions of the Authority.”
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    I advise you to formulate this for our consideration. So which clause should we deal with? Hon. Chairman, so we are deferring clauses 14 and 15?
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, we will, in that case, defer clauses 14 and 15 and then go on.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    What about clause 16? Can we take it or we should defer that?
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I propose that we delete the whole of “The Divisions of the Authority,” that is clauses 14 to 16 and we take them en bloc.
    Mr. Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    I do not get you.
    Mr. Armah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the office we are establishing deals with the Director- general and because we have to redo a rendition of that one and a renumbering, I propose that we defer clauses 14, 15 and 16.
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Clauses 14, 15 and 16 deferred.

    Clauses 17 and 18 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

    Clause 19 - Funds of the Authority.
    Mr. Armah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, insert a new subclause as follows:
    “(2) The sums received by or on
    behalf of the Authority shall be paid into a bank account of the Authority opened by the Board with the approval of the Controller and Accountant- general”.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, if the Chairman of the Committee could make it neater. Either there is an omission there or maybe, the word “by” in the fourth line does not fit. Is it the prior approval of another person by the Controller and Accountant-general or we are talking about the approval of the Controller and Accountant-general?
    Mr. W. O. Boafo 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether this provision is even necessary because moneys received at all cost are going to be paid into an account, and we have a provision under the Financial Administration Act which requires that such accounts should be authorized by the Accountant-general. I do not see the need for a repetition of the Financial Administration Act provision in this particular Bill.
    Dr. A. A. Osei 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, even though I agree with my hon. Colleague, I think that for the avoidance of doubt having this in the Act reassures that the proper thing is done. It does not cause any harm to remind the Board that they need prior approval.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    There is a further amendment to clause 19 and it is in the name of the hon. Member for Wa West. Should we defer it? Hon. Member for Wa West, I refer to the Order Paper, page 11.
    Mr. J. Y. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, insert a new subclause as follows:
    “(2) The funds or moneys received by or on behalf of the Authority shall

    be paid into a bank account of the Authority opened by the Board with the prior approval by the Controller and Accountant-general”.
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Chairman of the Committee we now have two amendments, which one did you take?
    Mr. Armah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I do not really see what critical change this amendment seeks to make. Like we are saying, we do not have any problem with “funds or moneys”. I do not know whether the Minister for Finance - [Interruption.]
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Unfortunately, hon. Member for Wa West, we voted on this; I thought this was a different clause.
    Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, in fact, mine should have been voted on first because I am trying to further amend -
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Unfortunately, you were not here.
    Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
    What you have now is also not the proper thing because we are talking about sums. Sums of what?
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Hon. Member, we would come back later. Now that you are on your feet, would you be kind enough to deal with the top? Clause 13 was deferred because you were absent. [Pause.] If you need more time, we would go on and come back to you.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, since he does not have a copy of it, can we, with respect, vote on clause 19 and perhaps, go back? You have not put the Question on 19.
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    The problem is that we have already voted on that; that is why we might have to come back later.
    Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 13, subclause (1), delete.
    Mr. Speaker, my amendment is to the effect that they tried to define “Minister” and so I said that we should delete only that subclause and subsequently put it in the interpretation to mean “the Minister responsible for Communications”. That was what I thought -- because the rendition in this present form is not the best. We are talking about Minister for Communications or a Minister designated or something which is most appropriate. It is just a deletion of it and under clause 30, it is now defined which is the normal practice of this House.
    Mr. Armah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I think you should reject the proposed amendment because it is important for us to locate authority somewhere and if the “Minister responsible for Communications” or any other Minister designated by the President for such a responsibility shall demand anything, he should be able to do it. I do not think his amendment is very necessary. So I propose that we reject the amendment.
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    So you are opposing his amendment?
    Mr. Armah 12:20 p.m.
    Yes, we are opposing his amendment.
    Mr. W. O. Boafo 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I think the amendment is necessary for the purposes of elegance in the drafting. This section 13, with your permission, if I may read --
    “The Minister responsible for Communications or any other Minister designated shall have ministerial responsibility for the Authority”.
    Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the Chairman of the Committee
    is opposing this amendment. In all our enactments, we would normally refer to the Minister and then define the Minister. But if this particular provision is defining a Minister in the middle -- That is why I am saying that if there are some activities there they are always undertaken by the Minister.
    The responsibilities are spread throughout the Bill and therefore, the normal thing is that even if he has a specific thing there, you should say “the Minister” and when you look at “the Minister”, you would know that it is the Minister responsible for Communications.
    We also gave a special meaning for that which means that any time you see “Minister responsible for . . .” it means that it cannot be just a name but the person who holds the responsibility for it. Therefore, I thought that it is better for us to define the Minister at the end which takes account of what is in clause 13. So I do not see why it should be opposed.
    Mr. Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Chairman, you oppose it?
    Mr. Armah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I also do not see the direction of my hon. Colleague's argument.
    Mr. Speaker, the Minister responsible for Communications is being given this authority to be responsible for the National Communications Authority (NCA) as it is being established.

    But the caveat there is that it is the Minister or any other Minister so designated to have responsibility for the Authority. I do not see the problem of my hon. Colleague; whether it is put at the end or it is put in the middle, the value
    Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    We would still defer it
    and come back to it.
    Clause 20 - Expenses of the Authority.
    Mr. Armah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 20, subclause (3), delete.
    Mr. Speaker, that has been taken care of by the earlier amendment of clause 19.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 20 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 21 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 22 - Annual report and other reports.
    Mr. Chireh 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 22, subclause (4), delete and insert the following:
    “The Board shall also submit in writing to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may require.”
    Mr. Speaker, if you look at the clause, it says that the
    “The Board shall also submit to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may require in writing.”
    Mr. Speaker, if you look at it, you would not know what the writing is qualifying. So my amendment is to the effect that:
    “The Board shall also submit in writing to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may require”
    So that the Minister must not necessarily write; rather, it is the report that must be

    written. That is why I think that it would be more elegant to put it in this form.
    Mr. Armah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, this use of
    the English language is becoming a little difficult to understand.
    Mr. Speaker, subclause (4) says very simply;
    “The Board shall also submit to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may require in writing.”
    The amendment seeks to bring in writing somewhere by stating that “The Board shall also submit in writing to the Minister any other reports.…” I do not see what change the hon. Member intends to make and whether it is for the elegance of the English language or what. But the intention is that a report ought to be submitted to the Minister if it is required and it should be in writing. So Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the amendment.
    Mr. Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    Chairman of the
    Committee, one of the two is more elegant.
    Mr. Aidooh 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the
    difference in the two formulations is clear. The one in the Bill requires that the Minister must request in writing - Is that what we want, that the Minister must request in writing? The hon. Member's amendment which I support means that the report to the Minister must be written, that is the difference.
    Mr. Speaker, the first one says the Minister must require in writing - the report can be oral -- [Interruption]-- The one in the Bill means that the request of the Minister must be in writing. That is how I understand it. But it could also mean that the report itself needs not be in writing. But I think what the hon. Member wants is that the report from the Authority to the Minister must be written and I support that amendment.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I believe that it depends on how one reads subclause (4). Mr. Speaker, the construction here says that:
    “The Board shall submit to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may require in writing.”
    If you read it that way, the effect is the same as what hon. Chireh is saying. If you read it flatly as follows: “The Board shall submit to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may require in writing”, then it means that it is the Minister who is doing the writing.
    So either way, it depends on how it is read. But I think that what we intend to achieve is for the Board to submit to the Minister in writing any other reports that the Minister may want. So in that case, what hon. Chireh is suggesting is better captured for the avoidance of doubt, Otherwise, grammatically, there is nothing wrong with subclause (4). It achieves the same purpose anyway, but it depends on how it is read.
    Mr. Yaw Baah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, in
    reading the two, I do not see much difference. The most important thing is that the report that is going to the Minister must be in writing. Whether initially the proposal from the Minister to the Board is verbal or not when it is coming to his end, it should be in writing so that anybody could have access to it.
    The proposal from hon. Chireh is saying that the proposal by the Minister to the Board should be in writing. [Interruptions.] Mr. Speaker, what is important here is that the reports to the Minister from the Board should be in writing. The original proposal in the Bill says:
    “The Board shall also submit to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may require in writing.”
    That means that the Minister verbally may request from the Board but when they are responding, it should be in writing.
    Mr. Speaker, the proposal by hon. Chireh is saying that “The Board shall also submit in writing to the Minister any other reports which the Minister may request”; that is whether verbal or by writing, and I do not see much difference. The most important aspect is that at the tail end, whatever is coming to the Minister from the Board must be in writing, as simple as that. I think the rendition which is captured in the Bill is the best.
    Mr. Felix Twumasi-Appiah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the difference is clear here. I think I would like to go with the hon. Majority Leader that we can have a legislation here which interpretation would be subject to ambiguities. The hon. Deputy Majority Leader said that it depends on how you read it. If you read it straight, you would get a different meaning; if you want to pause or break in the middle you would get a different meaning.
    Mr. Speaker, why do we not formulate it in such a way that the onus of writing is not being put on the shoulder of the Minister but rather the Board.? I think that is the point the hon. Colleague here is making.
    Mr. Armah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, subclause
    (4) should be read in tandem with the whole clause. There are two activities there: the audit report that mandatorily must be submitted to the Minister and the Minister on his own also requests for other reports outside the audit report that would be written. And we are saying that that request ought to be done in writing for record purposes. So I think we would want to retain subclause (4) as it is.
    Mr. Chireh 12:30 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, to what
    the hon. Deputy Majority said, if the law we are making is to be read over radio for the judges to take a decision, that is all right. But when you draft a law and there is ambiguity as to which one the word qualifies - also my hon. Colleague who was in the drafting class with me is saying something today that is funny. We know that the nearer the word to what it qualifies the better it is.
    What I am talking about is that we can put it there and if we read it in any way it would mean everything. In law, we do not do that, you make sure you qualify what you want it to qualify.
    The point I am making is that where they have put it, means that the Minister is obliged to write, meanwhile, it is the report that is obliged to be submitted in writing. That is why I think that we should remove the “in writing” to the point that it should be qualifying the reports and not the Minister's request. Mr. Speaker, my point is that this is a better rendition. But if they want it to be ambiguous and anybody can decide it either way, that is fine, that is the decision of Parliament.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, maybe, we are talking about doing the right thing. The Minister cannot also require a report from the Board maybe verbally, he must write to make the request and the Board must also in fulfilling that request submit in writing. So the writing should be done by both the Minister and the Board.
    But Mr. Speaker, that is why I said that even if we want it to be later, maybe, we could restrict ourselves to the amendment proposed by hon. Chireh, except that if we want to do a more thorough job then the Minister's own request should also come by writing, and the response should be by writing.

    But having said that, Mr. Speaker, if you look at clause 22 (1) which is the first thing that the Board is required to do. They shall within one month after the receipt of the audit report submit an annual report. How do they do that? We have no qualification whether it should be verbal or oral. But we take it for granted that these things the normal procedure would follow and so they do it by writing. But if you want to put it beyond doubt and are insisting that the Board ought to do that, fulfil that request by writing or in writing then the Minister's own request should also be in writing.

    Mr. Speaker, he cannot communicatie to them by cell-phone and expect that in fulfilling their part they should come by writing. So in that case, it should apply to both; the request should be in writing and in fulfilling the request, it should also be by writing. But if you read it in tandem with clause 22 (1), I do not think that we need to go on the path of insisting it should be by writing. I think it is well understood.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon. Members, I am putting the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 22 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 23 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 24 - Tax exemption.
    Mr. J. Y. Chireh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg
    to move, clause 24, delete.
    Mr. Speaker, this is because Parliament is the one that should decide on these things. I remember that many times we have had institutions bring to us tax

    waivers. So if we now say that in this Bill, anybody can bring in things or do things without paying tax, or earn something, we should realise that this is not also something that is going to earn income. Therefore, if we say this, we are signing off our right as it is under the Consti- tution; it is only Parliament that can either tax or remove taxes for people. So that is why I think we should delete the clause, it is not necessary.
    Mr. Armah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, we do not have any objection with that amendment.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 25 - Procedure for decision making by the Authority.
    Mr. Chireh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 25, subclause (2), paragraph (b), item (ii), delete “and” and insert “or”.
    Mr. Speaker, if you look at clause 25 (2) (b) (ii) we have 12:40 p.m.
    “(b) grant a person who is or is likely to be affected by a decision of the Board, an opportunity
    (i) to make a submission to the Board,
    (ii) to be heard by the Board, and
    (iii) to consult with the Board in good faith.”
    You can do either of these and I thought that the better thing should be “or” instead of “and”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Chireh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 25, subclause (4), paragraph (a) delete.
    Mr. Speaker, the clause says 12:40 p.m.
    “For purposes of this section,
    Mr. Armah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the Elec- tronics Communications Bill is before this House and that is the next thing we would be dealing with. So I believe what we are doing is only a presumptive act that once it is passed the necessary drafting would be done. In that case, I think the amendment is not very relevant.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon. Member for Wa West, are you abandoning this amendment then?
    Mr. Chireh 12:40 p.m.
    Yes, Mr. Speaker.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    All right, abandoned.
    Amendment by leave withdrawn.
    Clause 25 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 26 - Register of interests.
    Mr. Armah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 26, subclause (3), line 3, delete “Minister” and substitute” Authority”.
    Mr. Aidooh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I was going to support the amendment but he withdrew it without sufficient notice to us. Mr. Speaker, if you look at clause 22, it appears that the Board can modify this Act - Clause 25 (4) -
    “For purposes of this section,

    ‘ s igni f icant , subs tant ive or procedural decisions' include a decision of the Board to adopt or modify

    (a) the Electronic Communi- cations Act, 2008. . .”

    Mr. Speaker, how can that be done? And so I was waiting to support him and he said he has abandoned the amendment.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    No, hon. Member, you cannot take us back. But which clause are you referring to?
    Mr. Chireh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, this is an error but because the Chairman is not supporting my amendment, I was afraid to push this point. But the point is really that you cannot have a Board modifying an Act or any aspect of the Act. That is not proper, it is only the Supreme Court that can say that the Act you have passed - So what I am saying is that we should leave out that completely where, you were saying that the Board can modify significantly or some other way. You cannot as a Board modify an Act. That is an affront on the Parliament, it is only the Supreme Court that can do so.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Anyway, we would see what happens, but let us tackle clause 27, we may come back.
    Clauses 27 to 29 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 30 - Interpretation.
    Mr. Chireh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 30, insert “Minister” means the Minister responsible for Communi- cations”.
    Mr. Speaker, the definition of “Minister” in most of the Bills we always have at the end the definition of a Minister. So I propose that we put the definition there, the “Minister” to mean “the Minister responsible for Communi-cations”.
    Mr. Armah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, we do not have any objection to that.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Armah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 30, under “Operator” substitute “Telecommunications Act, 2008” with “Electronic Communications Act, 2008”.
    Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, we have coming before us the Electronic Communications Act. So we propose to amend under “Operator” to substitute “Telecommunications Act, 2008 with “Electronic Communications Act, 2008”.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Chairman of the Committee, where is “operator?” I do not see it.
    Mr. Armah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the Telecom- munications Act, under “Interpretations, page 15 of the original Act, we have “Telecommunications Operator” means a person authorised or licensed under this Act to operate a telecommunications network. But because of the new Act coming, we want to substitute “Telecom- munications Act, 2008” with “Electronic Communications Act, 2008”.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, the “Operator” is under “Board”.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    But we have “Telecom- munications Operator”. Yes, we do not have “Operator”.
    Mr. Armah 12:40 p.m.
    It is in the Bill.
    Mr. Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Yes, I have seen it.
    Do you want to retain “Telecommuni- cations”?
    Mr. Armah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, conse- quently, we are amending all the “telecommunications” to read “communi- cations”.
    Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    That is what you should
    have written.
    Mr. Chireh 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I do not
    understand what is going on. If earlier on they said that “telecommunications” should be replaced completely with “communications” and now they are introducing “electronic communications do they want it to be “electronic communications” or just “communi- cations”?
    Mr. Twumasi-Appiah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, if
    I understand the hon. Chairman properly, what he intends doing is giving the appropriate designation to the Act. In fact, here it is Electronic Communications Act, and if one looks at the Bill as it stands now, it says “Telecommunications Act, 2008”. And I think what he wants to do is substitute the “Telecommunications Act, 2008” with the “Electronic Communi- cations Act, 2008”, if I got the hon. Chairman right.
    Mr. Armah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, that is
    what we are trying to do. To substitute the Electronic Communications Act for Telecommunications Act.
    But in relation to the question posed
    by the hon. Member for Wa West (Mr. Chireh), in dealing with the National Communicat ions Author i ty Bi l l , we are saying that all references to telecommuni-cations will be substituted with communication services. Then, we will have an Electronic Communications Act that will deal with the different aspects of the industry altogether. So when we come to that one, I believe we will see the difference.
    Question put and motion agreed to.
    Clause 30 as amended ordered to stand
    part of the Bill.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, what we just did -
    Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Which clause are you
    referring to?
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    given
    the definition of “operator” which the hon. Chairman drew our attention to now. Mr. Speaker, what happens to the interpre-tation given “telecommunications network” that has also been defined under Interpretations as well as “Telecommuni- cations Operator?” Because what he said refers to “operator” under ‘Board'. So for those areas, what are they saying about them? That is the fifth definition - “Telecommunications network” means a telecommunications -
    Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon. Deputy Majority
    Leader, I would suggest that we go through it; we will come back to it. Please flag it.
    Clause 32 - Repeal and savings.
    Mr. Armah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 32, subclause (2), line 1, after “any” insert “licences frequency authoriza-tions”.
    Mr. Speaker, the new rendition of the
    clause will read:
    “Despite the repeal of Act 524, any licences, frequency authorisations, Regulations, notices, orders, directions, appointments or any other Act lawfully made or done under the repealed enactment and in force immediately before the commencement of this Act shall be

    considered to have been made or done under this Act…”

    So just after the word “any” we are

    adding the words “licences, frequency authorisations.”

    Question put and amendment agreed

    to.
    Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon. Chairman of the
    Committee, there is a further amendment.
    Mr. Armah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 32, subclauses, (3) and (4), delete.
    Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Do you have any reason
    for that?
    Mr. Armah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, we think
    that those two clauses will come under subclause (2) of clause 32.
    Mr. Chireh 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I do not see
    how it will take account of it. This one is a command to do something.
    “A pe r son who be fo re the commencement of this Act held a valid licence or frequency authorisation shall within two weeks of the commencement of this Act, notify the Board.”
    They are just to notify them so that the Board will know. I think that we do not need to delete such a thing, it should be there. The fact that the first one is put there means that it will be valid. But the point I am making is that they should still notify them for the Authority to know who has already got the authorisation.
    Mr. Armah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I believe we
    are talking about the same language when
    we say anybody who held those licences or frequency authorisation, et cetera in force immediately before the commence- ment of this Act shall be considered to have been made or done under this Act. going forward thereafter to give notices, I believe, is not very necessary, and that is why we are proposing that for economy of words, we delete subclauses 3 and 4 of clause 32.
    Question put and amendment agreed
    to.
    Clause 32 as amended ordered to stand
    part of the Bill.
    Schedule - Form and Content of
    Annual Report
    Mr. Chireh 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to
    move, schedule
    8.11 - insert “of” after “summary”
    15.2 - delete “fand” and insert “and”
    20.2 - delete “Board” and insert “Authority”.
    21 - line 2, delete “dwh” and insert “with”.
    Mr. Speaker, if you look at the Schedule
    on page 19, we have in it 8.11 which reads: “Summary resource tables by outcomes…” I do not know what that means. So I am proposing that we insert “of” to read “summary of resources table by outcomes….” I f one also looks at 15.2, I do not know the word “fand” there but I think it should read “senior management committees and their roles.” Again, 20.2 on page 20, it reads “For all contracts, indications of how the provisions of the Procurement Board…” the “Board” should read “Authority” as we now refer to it as “Authority” and not “Board”. It thought it will make it clear. Finally, under 21, line 2, the word “dwh” in the sentence should be “with”. It will
    Mr. Armah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, we shall take all on board.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    The Schedule as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr. Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon. Chairman of the Committee, item (xxv) - new clause.
    Mr. Armah 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, happily, this was the amendment we were referring to when we got to clause 14; I did not know it had already been advertised here at this tail end; thus the new clause after clause 14, add the new clause as follows:
    “Establishment of the Office of the Director-general and Deputy Director-general
    (1) The Authority shall have a Director-general who shall be the Chief Executive of the Authority
    (2) The Authority shall have Deputy Directors-general as are necessary for the performance of the functions of the Authority.”
    Mr. Chireh 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, whilst agreeing in principle with the provision, I think that this mandatory language we are always using is not correct. There may be occasions where we do not need to have Deputy Directors-general and so most of the time when we are adding we should have the permissive; instead of “shall”, it should be “may”, so that when there is no
    need, you do not have to.
    But if some-body who is ambitious wants to be a deputy director-general, he would say that they are breaching the Act because it says “shall”. If he would not mind, I would further amend it by making it “may”.
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    Chairman, instead of
    “shall”, it is being suggested that it be “may”. Do you agree?
    Mr. Armah 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with my friend. I think it should be “The Authority shall have a director- general who shall be the Chief Executive” and “The Authority shall have deputy directors-general. . .”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    New clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Long Title
    Mr. Armah 1 p.m.
    As we said earlier, we proposed an amendment to the word “telecommunications” to simply read “communications”. And this is what we want to reflect in the Long Title. So instead of:
    “An Act to establish the National Communications Authority as a central body licence and regulate telecommuni-cations activities …”
    we are saying it should be “regulate communications activities and services in the country.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    The Long Title as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    Deputy Majority
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, it is in respect of the amendments which the Chairman proposed, that is, for “Operator”, and says “Operator” means a person licensed under Electronic Communications Act. Before then he has said that “telecommunications” should read “communications” and I want to draw his attention to the definition and the interpretation for “telecommunications network”. “Telecommunications network means telecommunications network used to provide a telecommunication service.”
    Since the emphasis is on communi- cations now, I was wondering whether we would also look at that. And then “telecommunications operator”; so I am adverting his attention to those interpretations.
    Mr. Armah 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I thought the consequential amendment also meant that all references to “telecommunications” in the Bill will now become “communi- cations”; so we have “communications network”, “communications operator” and “communications services.”
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    Chairman, we did stand down clauses 14, 15 and 16; in view of this new clause, what is your position?
    Mr. Armah 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I think they will fall in line.
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    Leadership, do you have any outstanding matters on this National Communications Authority Bill, or we have dealt with it at the Consi-deration Stage?
    Mr. Kenneth Dzirasah 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I was outside the House when clause 5 was passed. But there is a difficulty there which I would like to draw the House's attention to; that is -
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    Is it clause 5, page 10?
    Mr. Dzirasah 1 p.m.
    Page 7.
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    Which one are you referring to, Lands Commission?
    Mr. Dzirasah 1 p.m.
    No, Mr. Speaker. The National Communications Authority Bill; that is what we have been looking at now.
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    No! It is not page 7; it starts with page 9.
    Mr. Dzirasah 1 p.m.
    The Bill - governing body of the Authority. Clause 5, subclause (4), it says and with your permission I quote:
    “The Board shall perform the functions and exercise the powers of the Authority.”
    Mr. Speaker, my understanding of that subclause is that the Board is being equated to the Authority and it means then that we are developing a situation where there may be an executive chairman who would be conducting the day-to-day activities of the Authority. I do not think that is the internment of the provision. So if we could just leave it to the Draftsperson to remodel it and maybe, at the Second Consideration Stage, the matter can be raised and dealt with, that would be most appropriate.
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    Thank you for that. We can always have a Second Consideration Stage.
    Mr. Chireh 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, if you look at what we are doing, the Board is the one that actually exercises the powers of the Authority and Authority is the legal person, whereas the Board is the one that executes whatever the Authority is done in it.

    There would not be any conflict because the Board consists of the chairman and other members. Now, the conflict normally is between board and director- general or executive secretary or somebody who has day-to-day adminis-tration of the institution. But because we are creating these authorities and making the Boards really the ones implementing and doing everything, there should always be that link where the Board is the one exercising the powers of the authority which is a legal person. We cannot do anything; it is just a legal person we have created.

    So the Board is the one that should do the things and therefore, there cannot be any conflict between the Authority and the Board.
    Mr. Dzirasah 1 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, clearly, there would be a conflict between the board chairman and the Director-general if they are performing the same functions.
    In fact, if the Board is intended to be a permanent structure on salary, they are in full time employment, then the spirit behind it is all right, but that is not the intention; the intention here is that they shall stay outside and occasionally meet to deliberate on activities relating to the Authority. If I am right, then to assign such responsibilities as have been provided for in clause 5 (4) will be giving the Board the functions of the Authority.
    Mr. Speaker 1 p.m.
    At the appropriate time we will deal with that.
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Leadership, we have come to the end of the Consideration Stage of the National Communications Authority Bill -
    Mr. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether we considered clause 13
    (1).
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon. Member for Wa
    West, we deferred clause 13 (1). That is the only outstanding matter.
    Mr. Chireh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, because
    of the definition that has also been voted on, there is no need for this clause 13 (1).
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    So you are abandoning
    it?
    Mr. Chireh 1:10 p.m.
    Yes, but the drafters
    should still take note because of the fact that we have always said “a Minister responsible for”. They should eliminate those other words where it is not necessary.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, we have just finished with two pieces of legislation. The National Pension Reform Bill and clause 15 of this Bill merely talks about ministerial directives. “The Minister may give directives to the Board on matters of policy.” I believe the proposal from my hon. Colleague is in line with this one, that is why he says that we should delete clause 13 (1). But then if we look at the Lands Commission Bill, Mr. Speaker, clause 3 - “Ministerial responsibility”, it is about the same thing as has been captured here in clause 13(1) -
    “The Minister responsible for Lands has ministerial responsibility for Lands Commission and may give general directions in writing to the Commission.”
    That one also falls in tandem with this one. So well, we may decide whether to delete it or retain it because we have deleted it in the National Pension Reform Bill, in the Lands Commission Bill it has been retained.
    Mr. Chireh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I am
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, if you would recall -
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Let him finish.
    Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, I just wanted to remind him that when we got there, the Majority Leader signalled that because the proposer was not in the Chamber we should stand it down. So we did not vote on it.
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    We have not dealt with
    that.
    Mr. Chireh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, so I am
    saying that now that we have dealt with clause 30, where the Minister is defined, we do not need to have it there. So I will still urge that we delete it. And for the ministerial directives we have been talking about, that are just positive directives which are completely different from the responsibility.
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon. Member, you are
    insisting on this amendment?
    Mr. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I am
    inclined to accept his position that once we define the Minister in clause 30, this one becomes redundant so we should have it deleted.
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Chairman, are you
    agreeable?
    Mr. Armah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, since there
    are a few things that we need to look at with the draftsperson, we will look at it together with this one and then when we come back --
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    You agree?
    Mr. Armah 1:10 p.m.
    Yes.
    Question put and amendment agreed
    to.
    Clause 13 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr. Armah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, with the greatest respect, what I was saying is that since some matters are being referred for further consideration we will take this one alongside those ones and when we come back -
    Mr. Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    There is no matter
    referred. We have dealt with all. We do not have any matter outstanding now.
    Leadership, what is the situation now. But is the Minister responsible for this Ministry in the House?
    Mr. Armah 1:10 p.m.
    No, he is not in the
    House.
    Mr. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I do not
    know what your pleasure is but we can adjourn at this stage.
    So I move that we adjourn proceedings
    and reconvene at 10.00 a.m. tomorrow.
    Mr. Felix Twumasi-Appiah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr.
    Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
    Question put and motion agreed to.
    ADJOURNMENT 1:10 p.m.
  • [MR. KYEI-MENSAH-