Debates of 27 May 2010

MADAM SPEAKER
PRAYERS 11:10 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon Members, Correction of Votes and Proceedings of Wednesday, 26th May, 2010.
Pages 1 … 7 --
Mr Emmanuel A. Owusu-Ansah 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I think that “of” is missing in paragraph 7 of page 7 -- “The Rt Hon Speaker recognized the presence in the House a Nine-Member . . .” I think “of” is missing.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Yes “of”. I thank
you; it is so.
Pages 8 . . . 11 --
Ms Cecilia A. Dapaah 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I just noticed on page 9 -- sorry to take us back. The list of Hon Members who were present at the committee meeting of Works and Housing, Number (xii), my name is “Ms Cecilia Abena Dapaah”, not “Mrs Cecilia Abena Dapaah”
-- 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Thank you -- [Pause.]

Hon Members, the Votes and Proceedings of Wednesday, 26th May, 2010 as corrected is adopted as the true record of proceedings.
rose
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon Member, were you taking us back?
Page what?
Mr David Oppon-Kusi 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I thought we had finished with the Correction of the Votes and Proceedings. I wanted to touch on something else.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Something else? All right.
Mr Oppon-Kusi 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker, yesterday, on the Provisional Order Paper, a Question I was to ask the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice was listed. Today, it is not present here and it is not even listed on the Provisional Order Paper.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon Majority Leader, I also noticed the Question; it was not --
Mr Cletus A. Avoka 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker, we will re-schedule it. [Laughter.] In fact, the learned Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice came to my office with certain issues. The document is before me and I am actually going to discuss this issue with him before we re- programme it. So that is the outstanding work. It is an oversight on my part.
Thank you.
Mr Oppon-Kusi 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I had to stop all that I was doing and rush through traffic because of this Question. At least, I could have been informed. [Interruptions.] Madam Speaker, at least, I could have been informed. My
Question was advertised yesterday, so I had prepared myself to ask it.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
But what could you have been doing which is more important than coming to Parliament?
Mr Oppon-Kusi 11:10 a.m.
I would have been at a committee meeting. [Laughter.] Madam Speaker, more seriously, I should have been informed.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Well, I do not know
the nature of the matter to discuss with him, but if you would bear with us and see the Hon Majority Leader -- if you are not satisfied, then we will take it up again.
I thank you very much.
Hon Members, we move straight to
Commencement of Public Business. Laying of Papers -- 4.
PAPERS 11:10 a.m.
Madam Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Item 5, the Minister
at the Office of the President, can you move the motion?
MOTIONS 11:20 a.m.
Mr David T. Assumeng 11:20 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS -- SECOND READING 11:20 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr David T. Assumeng) 11:20 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I beg to support the Motion on the floor and also to present the Report of the Joint Committee on Mines and Energy and Works and Housing.
1.0 Introduction
The Public Utilities Regulatory Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2010 was presented to Parliament and read the First time by the Minister of State at the Office of the President, Hon Kwajo Tawiah Likpalimor on Tuesday, 4th May, 2010. Madam Speaker referred the Bill to a Joint Committee of Mines and Energy and Works and Housing for consideration and report pursuant to Orders 180 and 188 of the Standing Orders of the House.
Madam Speaker also directed the Committee to determine whether or not the Bill was of an urgent nature to be taken through all the stages of passage in one day in accordance with Order 119.
The Committee, after discussions with the Hon Minister, officials of the PURC and the Energy Commission, held the view that the Bill is of an urgent nature and therefore, should be taken through the stages of passage in one day in accordance with Order 119.
The Committee met with the Hon Minister of State at the Office of the President, Hon Kwajo Tawiah Likpalimor, and officials from the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission, Energy Commission, Volta River Authority, Ghana Grid Company Limited and Electricity Company of Ghana and
considered the Bill.
2.0 Reference
The Committee made reference to the following documents during the deliberations:
i. The 1992 Constitution of Ghana
i i . T h e S t a n d i n g O r d e r s o f the Parliament of Ghana
iii. Public Utilities Regulatory Com- mission Act, 1997 (Act 538).
3.0 Background
The Public Utilities Regulatory Commission was established by an Act of Parliament in 1997 and has since relied on government subvention to finance its operations. The situation has resulted in budget constraint which makes it difficult for the Commission to fund its operations.
Persistent calls from the public for an improved service quality by the utility companies require a very strong independent regulator (PURC and Energy Commission) with the needed financial, technical and human resources to effectively and efficiently monitor the activities of the utility companies.
The Bill is, therefore, intended to impose a levy on electricity transmitted by Ghana Grid Company Limited and on natural gas transmitted by a transmission utility as well as such utilities that may be licensed from time to time.
Government is, therefore, seeking through this Bill, to adequately resource PURC and the Energy Commission to effectively regulate the utility companies to ensure an effective and efficient service delivery.
4.0 Purpose of the Bill
The Bill seeks to amend the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission Act, 1997 (Act 538) to impose a levy on electricity and natural gas transmission services among others. The levy will serve as an additional source of funding for the PURC and Energy Commission. The Bill will also ensure that only those who benefit directly from the services of the regulated utility companies pay for the associated cost.
5.0 Observations
The Committee was informed that the PURC and the Energy Commission had challenges in monitoring the performance of the utility companies as a result of inadequate funding. Officials of PURC and Energy Commission indicated that the two institutions do not have the requisite equipment to monitor standards set for the utilities by the regulators.
The resul t i s that the Energy Commission for instance, is unable to enforce standards set out in twelve (12) Legislative Instruments. Coupled with this is high staff attrition in the two institutions as a result of poor remuneration. The passage of the Bill will provide the two entities a more reliable source of funding for monitoring and exacting compliance with standards by the utilities.
Market Deregulation
It was also noted that the market of the utilities was being deregulated with the introduction of private sector operators. It was, therefore, important that the PURC and the Energy Commission are empowered financially, to enable them effectively monitor the performance of the independent utilities and ensure that they comply with industry standards.
Decentralization by PURC
19 PURC (Amendment) Bill -- 27 May,, 2010 Second Reading
The Committee further observed that as part of its mandate, the PURC is to receive complaints from the general public and ensure that these concerns are addressed by the Commission or the Utilities. Unfortunately, the PURC currently has offices in only four (4) out of the ten (10) regions due to financial constraints. In order that the PURC meets this mandate, it is important that it establishes its presence in all regional and district capitals.
Impact on Consumers
The Committee noted that the impact of the levy on consumers will be very minimal. The Committee was informed that consumers who consume between 0 and 50 kWh per month (Lifeline Consumers) will pay only 0.05 pesewas. An average household that consumes about 200 kWh per month or GH¢30 per month will pay 0.25 pesewas.
Amendment
The Committee, noting the importance of the Bill, proposes the following amendments to enrich the text of the Bill:
Clause 1, paragraph (b), delete and insert the following:
“(2) moneys received by or on behalf of the Commission shall be deposited to the credit of the Commission in a bank approved by the Minister responsible for Finance and Economic Planning.
Reasons:
The intendment of clause 1, paragraph (b) of the Bill is for the Commission to seek approval of the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning in opening a bank account to receive moneys for the
Madam Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Thank you, Hon
Member. It is time for debate on the explanatory memorandum and the Report.
Ms Cecilia A. Dapaah (NPP -- Bantama) 11:30 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Committee's Report, and I want to first of all, go straight to the conclusion read out by the Chairman of the Committee. I believe in the earlier statement, he had stated that we should take this Bill through all the stages in a day. So, I believe that the “conclusion” here is a bit misleading.
Madam Speaker, we all know the importance or the potential of these two bodies -- the PURC and the Energy Commission. They have great potential to make sure that the public, meaning all of us, are served well by the utilities -- companies.
Madam Speaker, if we look at the 13 years of the existence of the PURC, we will know that they have performed below average due to the constraints they have encountered with regard to funding. So, it is in order that this has been done through this Report for all of us to know what they are going through.
Madam Speaker, but I want to touch on this level of funding that they will be having. It is stated in the Report, and they gave an input that it will be adequate for them to carry out all their services. I believe we should hold them to their word and make sure that the necessary monitoring and interaction are done so that they can give of their best to the public.
We all know about the purposes of the Bill, so I want to touch on the impact on consumers. We are all very concerned about the fact that consumers will have to
be levied of some amounts. Happily for us, if one looks at the lifeline consumers, they have been left out. And for those who even consume above GH¢30, it will be 0.25; this is welcome.
I also want to touch on the fact that offices will be opened in all the districts and regional capitals. I will even entreat them to even decentralize more so that the public can have easy access to their offices to lodge their complaints and be served well.
Madam Speaker, I want to urge the PURC with these concluding comments that they should be energized by the funding that they are getting. They should be proactive and very reactive to complaints of members of the public so that the utilities can give us good service for our money.
Mr Moses A. Asaga (NDC --
Nabdam): Madam Speaker, I rise to support the Report by the Joint Committee.
M a d a m S p e a k e r, t h e E n e rg y Commission and the PURC are very important bodies and therefore, they need the support that we are going to give them in any way of approving levies for them. The PURC is staffed with technical experts and as a result of that, we need to empower them to be able to retain them.
As already mentioned, there has been a high turnover of the technical staff in PURC because of the low remuneration that they have. They believe that this levy will be able to enhance the productivity of PURC and Energy Commission.
Madam Speaker, we also know that PURC has other assignments like supervising compliance, and they are supposed to be running regional offices in all the regions. But as a result of the inadequacy in their budgets, they are not able to maintain the offices in the regions.
Dr Anthony A. Osei (NPP -- Old Tafo) 11:30 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I rise to support the Motion.
Madam Speaker, I want to commend the Minister of State whose schedule is the PURC, for having brought this matter readily to the House. Madam Speaker, in other countries, when you hear of regulatory agencies such as the PURC, you will shiver. They are one of the most powerful agencies that elsewhere, we see. Unfortunately, in our country, we have left them to be beggars. Most of the agencies they supervise have personnel who earn almost three, four times their salaries, and we expect them to be able to regulate them.
Madam Speaker, so I am very thankful to the Hon Minister that this matter has come before this House, particularly, not even the PURC but also the Energy Commission. I think that even though it is a PURC Act, we should not forget that
the Energy Commission has an equally important task.
With this new source of funding, we are expecting that they will be able to live up to their task. In particular, I have seen them lose a lot of the staff that they have trained to other more powerful agencies. So, this, I hope will fill the gap.
Madam Speaker, my only surprise was that the Chairman of the Committee, in his conclusion, said that we should take it through the Second stage. I thought he was going to ask us to adopt the Report. But taking us through the Second stage when the Hon Minister said we should take it through all the stages -- I am not sure.
So I hope the Chairman will amend his conclusion and recommend that we adopt the Report unanimously. That is what he should be asking us to do, not to take it through the Second stage.
Madam Speaker, with those few words, I hope that the Chairman will do justice to amend his conclusion so that we can see our way clear to unanimously adopt the Report so that the PURC and the Energy Commission can now be in a position to do their work properly.
Madam Speaker, with those few words, I support the motion.
Madam Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon Member, yes, your conclusion, that we should take it through the Second Reading, can we take all the stages today?
Mr Assumeng 11:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I think I have been misled and so I withdraw that statement and recommend that we take it through the whole process.
Madam Speaker 11:40 a.m.
But let us get
it down if you are amending your recommendation. So what are you going to do with (9), your “Conclusion”? What do you say?
Mr Assumeng 11:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I have withdrawn that aspect.
Madam Speaker 11:40 a.m.
What aspect? Amend it that you are taking it through all its stages rather than just ending with the Second stage. I think that is what they are asking for.
Mr Assumeng 11:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, exactly so. The “Conclusion” is now amended that we are adopting the whole report as expected.
Madam Speaker 11:40 a.m.
I have still not got mine down; “as expected”, what is expected? [Laughter.] I think you just have to say that instead of taking it through the Second stage, put all the other stages, then we will have a comprehensive and correct Report. That is all they are asking for, is it not? Look at (9) -- “Conclusion”.
Mr Assumeng 11:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the “Conclusion” is withdrawn and replaced with,
“That I urge the House to take the Bill through the whole process as said earlier”.
Madam Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Well, all right, I think that speaks a lot.
Alhaj i Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC -- Asawase): Madam Speaker, I rise to support the Motion before us and in doing so, I just want to draw some attention to the heading. It is not properly labelled, the paragraph that reads, “Impact on Consumers”. The impression created in that paragraph is not very accurate. To have said that the impact on the poor or the impact on

consumers will not be too much on the needy simply because those who consume between 0 and 50 kilowatts per hour per month, lifeline consumers will pay only 0.5 pesewas.

In most of our homes, the poor live in compound houses and unfortunately, for a very long time now, we have been pushing the Electricity Company of Ghana to get them individual meters, but this has not been done, making the poor pay more for the little that they consume. This is because one meter is providing for a whole compound house and each room consumes little but when we put them together, it pushes on the average each and everyone of them above the lifeline.

So I would want to urge, in approving this, that the PURC and the Energy Commission will move a step further to ensure that Electricity Company of Ghana provides the poor who are living in compound houses with meters that will enable them not to feel the impact of this levy. If that is not done, in the long run, the poor may be paying far more than the rich, simply because of the nature of the compound houses that they live in.

The second thing that I will draw attention to is that, in this country, we have a lot of commissions. And many times, the moment we approve some of this financing for them, we do not see them when it is budget time. A typical example is the AIDS Commission. You will see that its budget is embedded in the Government machinery and because of the bulkiness of Government machinery, the impact and the analysis that need to be done with the AIDS Commission's budget are missing. It is the same with the PURC; it is under Government machinery.

Yes, with the Energy Commission, because of the Ministry of Energy, they come here and they are scrutinized on what
Mr Justice J. Appiah (NPP - Ablekuma North) 11:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I rise to support the Motion. I had expected that the fees charged by the PURC will be commensurate with the quality of service. But I am appalled by the poor services given to consumers. Regular power outages have become the order of the day with certain areas experiencing ten interruptions in a day.
If PURC is bent on updating its tariffs for funds, it must arrange to replace the obsolete, outmoded transformers and give us better services than before. During the last Government's -- our Hon Friends at the opposite side were saying Kufuor
Madam Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Order!
Mr Appiah 11:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, these water-borne diseases are also causing millions deaths in this country. We have to promote integrated water resource management in this country and PURC is tasked for this job. It is not only -- let me read from here:
“The Public Utilities Regulatory Commission was established by an Act of Parliament in 1997 and has since relied on government subvention . . .”
Madam Speaker, I think PURC is a commission that can be creative. They do not have to rely on government subvention. If PURC is creative and has good leadership, I think they have to generate their own funds because they are working for Ghana Water Company Limited, they are working for Electricity Company of Ghana and this is what we want leadership in this country to exhibit. The PURC has to be concerned about the plight of Ghanaians who are really suffering from power interruptions and water shortages.
I thank you for this opportunity.
Ms Beatrice B. Boateng (NPP - New Juaben South) 11:50 a.m.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to add my voice to the discussion on the floor.
Mine stems from page 3 of the Report which says, “Impact on Consumers”. We are here as representatives of our
various constituents. We are supposed to understand and explain issues to them. It has been stated here that:
“ . . . the impact of the levy on consumers will be very minimal…”
How minimal, Madam Speaker? We should be able to tell our people what that means.
Again, we are concerned about the sort of services that are given to us by PURC, Electricity Company of Ghana and the like. For instance, there is somebody in my constituency who has taken pains to count the number of power outages that we suffer within this time. Last week when he called one of the radio stations and they asked, “How many have you counted?” It was about six hundred and eighty-seven within a short period.
Now, if I am to explain this concept as very minimal to them, I should be able to do it well for them to accept what they are supposed to pay. Again, I had my bill for water and it was about GH¢73.00 for just two months.
My concern is, is this minimal levy going to add up to what is coming this time or it is going to start all afresh so that we are sure of what the minimal means? I think if we are able to understand this better then we would be in a position to explain it to our constituents for them to accept this proposal and do what is expected of them.
Thank you so much, Madam Speaker.
Minority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu ) 11:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I also rise to support the Motion on the floor. Madam Speaker, a few quick obser- vations, though.
I think the Hon Chairman, in owning up

to the correction said that he was misled to write what he wrote there. Madam Speaker, I think this House should be interested to know who misled him. That information would be of great importance to us as a House. Madam Speaker, so I am standing by to listen to the Hon Chairman.

Madam Speaker, the second method that I want to advert our minds to, is in respect of the position of Hon Kwajo T. Likpalimor. I do not recollect that any Minister has come to this House with a Bill bearing the initials of that person. We should know who that person is and the full compliment of the name -- I do know, is Hon Kwajo Tawiah Likpalimor. Madam Speaker, I expect that in future the Minister will let us have the full compliment of his name so that we will know he is in-charge of this schedule at the Presidency so that there is no ambiguity.

Madam Speaker, I say so because yesterday when we had Hon Minister (Mr Alhassan Azong) present to this House the Bill on Savanna Accelerated Development Authority, he signed as Minister of State responsible for Public Sector Reform. Madam Speaker, that designation is unknown to this House. He is a Minister of State at the Presidency; he signs to this Bill as Minister of State for Public Sector Reform. That designation is alien to this House and he will come to explain at the appropriate time. Madam Speaker, we will come to that. But for the moment, we expect that Hon Tawiah Likpalimor would give us the full complement of his name in the Act.

M a d a m S p e a k e r , a s p e r t h e Interpretation Act, the memorandum of any Bill is to be considered as part of the Act and I thought that if we discovered mistakes in the Memorandum, the Committee, whether joint or single, and the Minister responsible would effect those corrections before they came to the House, particularly at the Second Reading.
Minority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu ) 11:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the second paragraph in the Memorandum which was copiously read by the Minister provides,
“The proposal, therefore, is that in tandem with what pertains in other jurisdictions, a levy on electricity transmitted by the Ghana GRID Company Limited (GRIDCo) and natural gas transmitted by the National Transmission Utility as well as other utilities that may be licensed from time to time” --
not “from time.
-- and the Minister went ahead and read this copiously to the House.
It is supposed to be considered as part of interpretating this Act, once we approve of it. And the Minister, Hon Likpalimor - He is my Friend, but I believe next time he will do better to effect corrections before he brings them to this House.
Madam Speaker, the Hon Member for Asawase raised a matter which is really germane, that is, with respect to the effect of upping the levels of the rates on the very poor in society. I think that it is pursuant to arresting that that ECG introduced the pre- paid meters which meant that households within the compound house would be appropriately identified and be kept at the level where they are so that they are not imperilled. Unfortunately, I believe the Electricity Company of Ghana does not have enough resources to saturate the terrain with pre-paid meters. So we are back to square one.
But I think it is a matter that the Electricity Company of Ghana will have to consider so that the circumstances of the very poor in society is not still further down-graded. I think it is a very useful point and the Minister in-charge may transmit the concerns as noted by the Hon Member for Asawase to the appropriate autho-rities.

Madam Speaker, with that I want to restate the position in supporting the Bill before us.

I thank you.
Mr Ambrose P. Dery 11:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I just wanted some guidance from you because the Hon Minority Leader, in his submission, made an allegation that the Bill for Savanna Accelerated Development Authority was laid yesterday. I am not sure it was because it is not reflected. I just wanted the correction made. It was not laid. The Votes and Proceedings did not indicate that it was laid. So, probably, this is time for whatever changes that are necessary to be effected.
Madam Speaker, I just wanted to correct that.
Madam Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Thank you for the correction.
Mr Avoka 11:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, indeed, I want to support the Hon Deputy Minority Leader. The Bill on the Savanna Accelerated Development Authority was not laid. It has not yet been laid and was not laid yesterday.
Thank you.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I am grateful for the correction. It was slated and I thought that it had been done - [Interruptions.] But now that it has not been done, the Hon Minister will take a cue and not come to this House with that designation.
Madam Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Yes, thank you Hon Member.
Any other contribution before we close the debate?
Question put and motion agreed to.
The Public Utilities Regulatory Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2010
was accordingly read a Second time.
MOTIONS noon
Minister of State at the Office of the President (Mr Kwajo T. Likpalimor) noon
Madam Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 128 (1) which require that when a Bill has been read a Second time, it shall pass through a Consideration Stage which shall not be taken until at least forty-eight hours have elapsed, the Consi-deration Stage of the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2010 may be taken today.
Mr David T. Assumeng noon
Madam Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION noon
STAGE noon
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu noon
Madam Speaker, would the Hon Chairman care to justify why he is proffering that amend- ment?
Mr Assumeng noon
Madam Speaker, we want the Hon Minister to direct that any money collected -- I mean it is obvious that monies collected should be deposited in the account of the Commission. So that any monies collected are paid into the account of the Commission.
Dr A. A. Osei noon
The Minority Leader asked for a justification for the amend- ment. The Hon Chairman needs to look at the existing language, so that he can tell us why -- because the existing language has a similar rendition except it reads so badly. I suspect that it is the reason he wants to amend it, but he has not provided a justification yet. He needs to convince us because the current reading says almost the same thing. Perhaps, there is a reason.
Mr Assumeng noon
Madam Speaker, the reason is for the Commission to seek the approval of the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning on opening a bank account to receive monies for the Commission. And the amendment proposed makes it clear in that direction.
Dr A. A. Osei noon
Madam Speaker, the old rendition is as follows:
“moneys received by or on behalf of the Commission shall with the approval of the Minister for Finance be deposited in an account to the credit of the Commission in a bank approved by the Commission.”
That is the old rendition; so I was seeking an explanation how the new rendition is different from the old one because the approval is by the Minister.
Madam Speaker noon
In other words, you
Mr Assumeng noon
Madam Speaker, I think the initial rendition is saying that the approval should be by the Commission. But we are now saying that it should be by the Minister.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu noon
Madam Speaker, I think that is a better justification than what he attempted to do earlier. But Madam Speaker, under the Financial Administration Act, creation of accounts is at the instance of the Controller and Accountant-General not the Minister. I know the Controller and Accountant- General responds to the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, so by extension, one may say that what we have here is correct. But in the Act, it is the Controller and Accountant-General. So why are we saying that it should be the Minister?
Can the Chairman, explain further?
Dr A. A. Osei noon
Madam Speaker, with the permission of the Chairman, I want to offer an amendment so that -- to be consistent with the Financial Administration Act, it would be important that we use the words “Controller and Accountant-General” because that is the Act we have passed.
So if the Chairman will accede to the amendment, it will be consistent with the Financial Administration Regulation (FAR). So that we do not have one place where it is “the Minister” and another place where it is “the Controller”.
So with the Hon Chairman's permission, I want to amend his amendment.
Madam Speaker noon
Yes, Mr Chairman, he wants to amend the words “Minister responsible for Finance” to “Controller and Accountant-General”.
Mr Assumeng noon
Madam Speaker, this issue was discussed extensively; we brought in the draftsmen as well and they thought that the Minister should be

responsible for that aspect.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Dr A. A. Osei noon
Just for consistency. In the FAR, you have made a law that states that the Controller and Accountant- General is the one that you seek permission from. It is true that he reports to the Minister, but the Act states explicitly that it is the Controller and Accountant- General that must give permission for the opening of the account. So I think that it will be consistent that we go with the Act since we passed this Act not too long ago.
Mr Ambrose P. Dery noon
Madam Speaker, I think that this should not be a problem that should hold us up because at the end of the day, the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning is responsible (ultimate responsibility), but we cannot be passing Acts that are inconsistent, or sometimes contradictory. Once we have the Controller and Accountant- General, it necessarily includes the overall responsibility of the Minister. So I do not think it is fatal to state the Controller and Accountant-General since it is more consistent to state the Controller and Accountant-General.
So I think that rather than waste our time on this matter, we should let it be amended to reflect the Controller and Accountant-General, even though we know in practice that the ultimate responsibility is with the Minister.
Mr Assumeng noon
Madam Speaker, since we are talking of consistency, his amendment is taken, so we can go by that.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker noon
So instead of “by the Minister responsible for Finance”, we put “by the Controller and Accountant- General”?
Mr Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo 12:10 p.m.
Madam
Speaker, here we are talking about “approval”. Approval on policy issues is by the Hon Minister and not -- the Bill itself --
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Is the bank not approved by somebody?
Dr A. A. Osei 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I was going to seek your indulgence to move on and ask the Clerk to get the Financial Administration Regulation (FAR) Act so that we can be sure, because there is an issue as to “approval” and “who opens” so that we can confirm if the Act is brought to us.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
So should we move on to the next suggested amendment? Let us move to clause 2 then.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, with respect, before we proceed to clause 2, that is, while we are at clause 1 (b), the Hon Chairman may also consider why the departure from the original construction of --
“depositing it in account to the credit of the Commission”.
that obtains in the original Act and even in the memorandum, paragraph 3 of page two, they have stressed --
“. . . opening of bank accounts into which moneys received by the Commission are to be paid”.
But then in the amendment, they have just said that we should deposit it in an account to the credit of the Commission. So while we are at it, we may consider that leg as well.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Yes, so we stand this down Hon Member.
Mr William O. Boafo 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, while we are on clause 1 (b), we have in the principal enactment, a section dealing with the source of funds. And if we are going to have a new clause 2, then the existing section must be re-designated as section 35 (1).
Madam Speaker, that is consequential
to the amendment we have now. If we are going to have section 35 (2), then the existing section 35 which deals with the sources of funds must be re-designated as sub- section (1) of section 35.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Do we have the Act 538 here?
Mr Boafo 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I have it here.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
And you are saying there is no sub section (2) in the Act?
Mr Boafo 12:10 p.m.
We have only one section.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Not subsection 2 which is a new introduction that is 2 here? Is that what you are saying?
Mr Boafo 12:10 p.m.
That is subsection (2) which has been stood down here as a new section, so the existing section must be re-designated as subsection (1).
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
So does this become subsection (2)?
Mr Boafo 12:10 p.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Then I think we would deal with the whole matter when it comes up because it was only subsection (2) of the new amendment that we are dealing with. So if you couch it in a proper form, it would read as follows -- shall we stand it down then while we work on it and move on to clause 2? Clerk, we are now on clause 2.
Mr Assumeng 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, item (1), column 2, I am amending “after and” --
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
We have not finished with clause 2, have we? [Pause.]
Hon Akoto, are we clear now so that we can go on?
Dr A. A. Osei 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, Hon Akoto is not in the House at the moment.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Anthony Akoto, then.
Dr Osei 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, we asked that it be stood down and the Clerks have brought the FAR approval which should be given by the Hon Minister. So the Chairman's amendment is in order, not the “Controller”. Definitely, we will bring that to the floor.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
All right, so we can deal with it now. The wording of the proposed amendment is correct so I will put the Question on the old proposed amendment now -- we have finished the debate on it.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker, I think we have settled on the first leg. The other one which I intimated, is for us to look at the construction which has “account” deleted. That is, depositing the money in an “account”. I believe that at some moment the Chairman may take it on board, so we have the construction which would include “depositing in an account to the credit of the Commission”.
If the Chairman would agree with me, maybe, the draftpersons would take it on board and we move on.
Madam Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Chairman, your proposed amendment says “Commission shall be deposited to the credit” -- a suggestion is that we add “in the account to the credit”.
Mr Assumeng 12:10 p.m.
Very well, Madam Speaker.
Mr Boafo 12:10 p.m.
Madam Speaker, this is in relation to the construction. The proposed amendment under clause 1 (a). After paragraph (b), that is, if I may read,
“The Public Utilities Regulatory Commission Act, 1997 (Act 538) referred to in this Act as the principal enactment is amended in section 35 by the insertion --
(a) after paragraph (d) of paragraph (e).”
Madam Speaker, for the purpose of the construction, if it could rather be reversed, to read as follows:
“by the insertion . . .
paragraph (e) after paragraph (d)”
That is all, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker 12:20 p.m.
What about “(e) moneys from levy imposed under section 35 (a)”, immediately following the (a) that you were talking about?
In any case, the wording is changed in the proposed amendment. Has it not? So it reads as follows:
“(2) moneys received by or on behalf of the Commission shall be deposited to the account . . .”
Let us get the wording correctly before we --
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I think the rendition would be:
“moneys received by or on behalf of the Commission shall be deposited in an account to the credit of the Commission in a bank approved by the Minister responsible for Finance and Economic Planning.”
Madam Speaker 12:20 p.m.
That is a new rendition, do you agree?
Hon Members, so we have clause 1, amended as follows --
Paragraph (b), delete and insert the following --
“ (2 ) moneys r ece ived by o r o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n s h a l l b e deposited in an account to the credit of the Commission in a bank approved by the Minister responsible for Finance and Economic Planning.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 1 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
First Schedule ordered to stand part of Bill.
Second Schedule -- Application of Levy Section 35A (4).
Mr Assumeng 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I beg to move, Second Schedule, item 1, under “Levy”, line 2, before “natural” insert “standard cubic feet of”.
Madam Speaker, we are adding this because the unit of measure is for both electricity and gas. We have the one for electricity but we do not have the one for gas, so we want to insert this to include the one for gas as well.
Prof. Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, why have we not gone metric in this instance?
Mr Moses A. Asaga 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, the Association of Petroleum Engineers standard measurement is still in the imperial system. So it is the best practice.
Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I want a reference to this because we know that gases are even measured in litres and so on. So can he provide me with the source of this information?
Mr Asaga 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, the source is the Association of Petroleum Engineer Journal Review, No. 25, 2010. He can find it there. He should write the reference.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Assumeng 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I beg to move, Second Schedule, item 2, under “Levy”, line 2, before “natural” insert “standard cubic feet of”.
Mr Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I am tempted to think that it is still important even though it could be a standard of measurement for them. Is it not important that in our particular case, because we are not too used to this situation now, that we put into bracket, the measure we are familiar with so that people will understand exactly what it is?
We have forgotten about metric, feet, cubic and all these things, so we should put it into bracket, the unit of measurement which is peculiar with our present circumstance.
Mr Assumeng 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, this time round, I am not misled. I think that what the technical men are saying is that this is the standard measurement that is used internationally. And so, I think we still stand by that.
Mr Asaga 12:20 p.m.
Madam Speaker, there are certain standard measurements that depend on the countries and it is accepted worldwide. For example, we measure the energy in British thermal unit; an American man will not get up and say why are you calling it “British thermal unit” for energy for example. So these are standards that are accepted in the industry.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Assumeng 12:30 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I beg to move, Second Schedule, item 3, under “Levy”, line 2, before “natural” insert “standard cubic feet of”.
Madam Speaker, just as we said, this is an international practice, so we would go by that.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Assumeng 12:30 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I beg to move, Second Schedule, item 4, under “Levy”, line 2, before “natural” insert “standard cubic feet of”.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
The Second Schedule as variously amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The Long Title ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Madam Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon Members, we have come to the end of the Consideration Stage of the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2010 -- [Pause.]
Hon Members, we now move to Motion number 9.
Hon Minister of State, can you move the procedural motion?
Suspension of Standing Order 131 (1)
Minister of State at the Office of the
President (Mr Kwajo T. Likpalimor): Madam Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standard Order 131 (1) and (4) which require that when a Bill has passed through the Consideration Stage, the Third Reading thereof shall not be taken until at least twenty-four hours have elapsed, and that the Third Reading of a Bill shall not be made on the same day as the Second Reading, except urgent Bills, the Motion for the Third Reading of the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2010 may be moved today.
Mr David T. Assumeng 12:30 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
BILLS -- THIRD READING 12:30 p.m.
MR SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon
Members, Plants Bill, 2009 at the Consideration Stage -- [Pause.] It appears we reached clause 49.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 12:40 p.m.
STAGE 12:40 p.m.
  • [Continuation of Debate from 23-3- 2010]
    • Chairman of the Committee (Dr Ahmed Yakubu Alhassan) 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 49, subclause (11), I am stepping down the amendment in favour of the amendment proposed by Hon Ambrose Dery in clause 49, subclause (11)
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Dery, can you please indicate the relevant amendment that the Chairman of the Committee is conceding to, apparently, and which stands for you? The Chairman of the Committee has made an indication.
    Hon Chairman of the Committee, if you may please, make your point.
    Dr Alhassan 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am saying that clause 49 has two amendments proposed, one by myself and the other by Hon Ambrose Dery and I am saying that I am stepping down mine in favour of his proposal.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Dery, if you will kindly move your amendment.
    Mr Dery 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I want to first observe that my name has been wrongly spelt as “Mr Abrose”. It should be
    “Ambrose”.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, I beg to move, clause 49, subclause (11), delete and insert the following:
    “Seeds which are confiscated shall be disposed of in accordance with the directives of the court”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Dr Alhassan 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 49, subclause (12), delete and insert the following:
    “An aggrieved person may within fourteen days lodge a complaint with the Minister in case of misconduct of an inspector including the abuse of the inspector's power under subsections (4) and (6).”
    Mr Speaker, in the original rendition of 49 (12), no time limit was imposed within which a person could make a complaint against a seed inspector. So the amendment seeks to put a time limit within which such a report can be given.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Members, apparently, as per the Votes and Proceedings, the House deliberated upon this up to clause 59 and we are therefore to start from clause 60 and not as advertised by the Order Paper today.
    Hon Majority and Hon Minority Leaders, if I may catch your attention in this connection, so that we can deliberate on this. From the Votes and Proceedings, it appears you have different advice as per
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Of clause what?
    Mr Boafo 12:40 p.m.
    Of section 1.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Of what section?
    Mr Boafo 12:40 p.m.
    Of this section.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Very well.
    Mr Boafo 12:40 p.m.
    So you have to add “of this section”.
    Mr Dery 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it might be neater to add “subsections (4) and (6) herein”. I think “herein” will satisfy it; it means this particular section.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Boafo, I hope you are agreeable?
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, “herein” may refer to this Act. But if you are specific that this section, “subsections (4) and (6) of this section”, “herein” may refer to the whole Act.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Chairman of the Committee, I am sure you are agreeable?
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am tempted
    to accept Hon Boafo's amendment.
    Mr Dery 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I agree that we go with Hon Boafo.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    It should read:
    “An aggrieved person may within 14 days lodge a complaint with the
    “62. There is established the Technical and Variety Release Committee of the Council whose functions are to:
    a. sdvise the council on
    i. the procedures for regis- tration of cultivars;
    ii. the prescribed standards for seeds and procedures for the certification of seeds;
    iii. the publication annually in the commercial and indus- trial bulletin of a list of varieties of crops grown in the country;
    iv. the fees for the certification and testing of seeds; and
    b. recommend for the approval of the Council, crop varieties to be released or withdrawn from the register, as well as crop species to be included;
    c. recommend var ie t ies for withdrawal where the maintainer does not have seed variety available or the seed does not represent its original variety;
    d. create and update the national variety register; and
    e. any other technical matters requested by the Council”.
    Mr Speaker, what the Committee proposes is to merge the two committees into one so that the clause will now establish a Technical and Variety Release committee of the Council and that will affect the subsequent activities of the committee. So, that is what the amendment seeks to do, to merge the two committees and fashion out its activities as in the
    Mr Dery 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that clause 49 (11) was deferred -- [Pause.]
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Can you make appropriate consultations and then you advise accordingly?
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the clause 49 (11) was what was deferred but the rest of the clause was dealt with. We have just finished with it. So the Question could now be put on the entire clause for us to make progress.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    But apart from clause 49 (11), what else did we not tackle? Which clauses did we complete because of the advice I am being given?
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    We are going to clause 62. Clause 62 will be the next.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Clause
    59?
    Mr Dery 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we are getting to clause 59 which was agreed to. So it means that after we have dealt with the clause 49 (11), we will then be permitted to go to clause 60.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Very well.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Boafo.
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, before you put the Question on clause 49 (12) --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    You want to propose a further amendment?
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Clause 49 (12), the amendment proposed by the Chairman, Mr

    Minister in case of misconduct of an inspector including the abuse of the inspector's power under subsections (4) and (6) of this section.”

    Question put and amendment agreed to.

    Clause 49 as amended ordered to stand

    part of the Bill.

    Clause 60 - Committee of the Council.
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, the head note add “s” to “Committee” to read - “Committees of the Council”.
    If we come to the body of clause 60,
    we have reference to committees. So if we can change the expression “Committee” to “Committees of the Council.”
    That is consistency of language.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    “Committees of the Council” rather than “Committee of the Council”. For consistency?
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is acceptable. I agree with that.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 60 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 61 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 62 - Technical Committee.
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 62, delete and insert the following:
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the original draft said “Variety Release and Registration”. So “Registration” is part of the activities of the “Technical and Variety Release”, that is why it has not been repeated in the head notes. I am also duly informed that we are advised to deal with the substance of the clauses and leave the head notes for the drafters who have been advised to make the appropriate changes to reflect the mergers and the changes that we have done.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Nevertheless , nothing s tops this Honourable House from proceeding.
    So the head notes are to read: “Technical and Variety Release Com-mittee” and also (e) to read “advise on any other technical matters requested by the Council”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 62 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 63 -- Composition of the Technical Committee.
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 63, head notes, after “Technical” insert “and Variety Release Committee”.
    Mr Speaker, the proposed amendment
    is consequential to the combination of the Technical Committee and the Variety Release and Registration Committees.
    1 : 0 0 p . m
    .
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the new clause 63 is a merger of the two committees - membership of the two
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    For the sake of consistency, I will put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 63 as amended ordered to stand
    part of the Bill.
    Clause 64 -- National Variety Release and Registration Committee.
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 64, delete.
    That is the proposal because it is no more standing as a committee.
    Mr Dery 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that is very well because most aspects of that have been incorporated in what we have already dealt with, so it would be repetitive and has a danger of being contradictory sometimes; so delete.
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    will the Chairman indicate or confirm whether we have the Genetics Centre or Institute, because in the original Bill, we have “The Director of the Plant Genetics Resources Centre”; in the amended version, we have “an Institute”. Which one exists?
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    It is an institute.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon
    Member, any further query? Hon Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi, any further query on that?
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    no.
    Mr Dery 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want your guidance. It has not been advertised here but I thought that we were deleting consequentially clause 64 because it had been taken care of.
    amendment.
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with regard to the proposed amendment, that is reference to paragraph (e), if we read it from the beginning, it says:
    “There is established the Technical and Variety Release Committee of the Council whose functions are to” --
    Then if we go to (a), it reads this way --
    “whose functions are to any other technical matters requested by the Council.”
    There is something missing. Mr Speaker, I believe, if we insert the words:-
    “advise on any other technical matters requested by the Council.”
    If we accept the proposed amendment, it would read as follows:
    “There is established the Technical and Variety Release Committee of the Council whose functions are to
    (e) advise on any other technical mat ters reques ted by the Council.”
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I respectfully accept the amendment.
    Mr Boafo 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the head notes of clause 62. It is “Technical Committee” but now we have “Technical and Variety Release Committee”. Mr Speaker, the head notes of clause 62 should also be amended. We now have “Technical and Variety Release Committee” instead of the original “Technical Committee”. There has been a combination, so the head notes should also be amended.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    And
    committees merged into one so that we can have -- since it is now one committee, we would now have one group of people constituting the members of the committee. So we should take out clause 63 and then replace it with this newly composed committee.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Dr Alhassan 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 63, line 1, after “Technical” insert “and Variety Release Committee”.
    Mr Speaker, it is about the head notes -- composition of the Technical and Variety Release Committee, and I think that has been well articulated by Hon W. O. Boafo.
    Mr Dery 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am in favour of the amendment proposed by the Chairman. But Mr Speaker, if you look at the composition of clause 63, it reads “the Technical and Release Committee.” There is an omission of “Variety”, so I would ask that we add “Variety” to that and then it becomes part of the amendment that the Chairman has proposed.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    There
    is a further amendment to clause 63, in the name of Hon W. O. Boafo.
    Mr Dery 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 63, line 1 after “Technical” insert “and Variety Release Committee”. Mr Speaker, it seems to me that it is consequential. If you look at it, it is exactly part of what was done under (v). Otherwise, it is consequential and should not engage our attention any further. It is just to bring it in conformity with the rest of the section.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Very
    well. Chairman of the Committee, I am sure you are agreeable?
    Mr Clement K. Humado 12:50 p.m.
    Mr
    Speaker, I think that we can substitute “activity” with “seed industry.” Will that be satisfactory to him?
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    activities may be related to some other activities or to an industry. But you as a person has no relation with that activity or the industry. I hope you get it?
    Dr Alhassan 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have a further amendment that may perhaps, improve the construction.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    You
    want to propose something that will solve the problem?
    Dr Alhassan 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, yes. Mr Speaker, “any other experts in the seed industry recommended by the Council”. [Pause.] The Hon Member is not making a proposal to cure the defect, so we have a difficulty -- [Interruption.]
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    The
    Chairman of the Committee is making a recommendation to cure whatever defects there may be by proposing “any other experts in the seed industry”.
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    it is close to the rendition that I had. I think that will be more acceptable. “Any other person whose activities are related to the seed industry -- [Interruption] -- It is the activity of the person rather than the person -- [Interruption.]
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    I think it is well taken, that is why he is giving that rendition. So, let us go forward.
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    if the Chairman can read to me again.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    He said:
    “any other expert in the seed industry
    interpretation. When we want to talk about seed activity for those who may not understand exactly what it is -- it is A, B, C, D, so that we get it right. Other than that, seed activity is all right for me. I think it is all right.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Very
    well. I think this is also one thing that can be left to the draftsmen in terms of presentation. So, if we can make progress.
    Yes, Hon Member --
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, a final comment before you send it to the draftsmen. Mr Speaker, I think “the industry” is more omnibus, covering the activities and whoever is taking care of -- so that is acceptable.
    But I think as a compromise to the Chairman's rendition, we should have “any other person whose expertise is in the seed industry”. I think that rendition will capture it. But “the industry” certainly, is more appropriate than “the activity” in this sense.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Yes,
    Hon Member.
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I
    would just like to say that so long as a person is recommended by a council, it implies that they might have probably undertaken due diligence. So whether the person is an expert or had an expertise or not, it is not for us to decide, but rather for the Council to decide.
    So, I would suggest that: “any other person engaged in the seed activity recommended by the Council”. So long as the person is recommended by the Council, he is taken for granted that, yes, he might have satisfied themselves as to
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Is it proposed to delete the whole of clause 64?
    Mr Dery 1:10 p.m.
    Yes, clause 64 in the original text.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Very
    well.
    Mr Dery 1:10 p.m.
    And I think clause 65
    as well. Mr Speaker, I think clause 65 is also part of that, so consequentially, the original clauses 64 and 65 are to be deleted.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clauses 64 deleted from the Bill.
    Clause 65 -- Functions of the National Variety Release and Registration Committee.
    Dr Alhassan 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 65, delete. Mr Speaker, this is consequential to clause 64.
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have a little problem with this construction -- “Any other person related to seed activity”, What kind of English is this? How can a person be related to seed activity? [Pause.]
    Mr Speaker, sorry, I am a bit slow but I was looking at the composition and there is this last one in clause 63 -- [Interruption] -- We have finished but the English is not correct.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon
    Member, you may please go back. We are at the Consideration Stage, we can be flexible.
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 1:10 p.m.
    So why are
    you stopping me?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Please,
    continue.
    Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    the English does not sink well in my head. Clause 63 (o), “any other person related to seed activity.” --
    recommended by the Council and approved by the Minister.”.
    Mr Dery 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that
    we should analyse further this proposed solution. Is it to suggest that a person who is related to the seed industry, but is not an expert, is excluded by that rendition? Because you could well be related to the seed industry without being an expert, so to speak.
    Mr Speaker, the other thing we should remember is that “person” in law does not necessarily mean human person, it could also mean a legal person. And so, we should be careful that in trying to make the section look, as it were, very gentle on our ears, and have sweet language, that in doing so, we do not throw away the baby and the bath water. So, I think we should be careful about this.
    Mr Speaker, having said that, let us now have a rendition that will not lose the meaning that essentially, this seeks to portray.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, is it possible to say that somebody has been related to the banking industry for 30 years; will that not be clear? This is a person who has been related to the banking industry for 30 years, will that be bad expression?
    Mr Pelpuo 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have no
    objection if the rendition is captured as “seed industry”. But it is meant to be a “seed activity” which is much more meaningful than seed industry. Seed industry, to my thinking, is a little more technical, but seed activity is about the planting, it is about the harvesting, it is about the storage, it is about every other thing that is related to it. And I think it is properly couched.
    What you would do, if you want it explained, perhaps, is to go to the “Interpretation” and then give it an
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Thank
    you very much. We will come to that in a moment.
    Hon Chairman of the Committee.
    Clause 67 Funds of the Council.
    Dr Alhassan 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 67, delete and insert the following:
    “67. Meetings of the Technical a n d Va r i e t y R e l e a s e Committee.
    1. The Committee shall meet as and when necessary for the dispatch of business at the times and places determined by the chairperson.
    2. The chairperson shall request for a meeting in writing of not less than one-third of the membership of the Committee at a place and time determined by the chairperson.
    3. The quorum at a meeting of the Committee shall be five members or a greater number determined by the Council in respect of an important matter.
    4. The chairperson shall preside at meetings of the Committee and in the absence of the chairperson, a member of the Committee elected by the members present from among their number shall preside.
    5. Matters before the Committee shall be decided by a majority of the members present and voting and in the event of an equality of votes, the person presiding shall
    Dr Alhassan 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the confusion stems from the proposals by Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori, which have to deal with funds. So, I think we would have a new clause 67 inserted and then we will deal with the amendment in the original when we come to that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    If that is going to be a new clause, then shall we so indicate and it will be the last item so that the drafters will know where to put it.
    Dr Alhassan 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, very well.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    In the circumstances, if the clause will be admitted as a new clause and for the drafters to place it accordingly, though the substance is accepted. Is that so?
    Mr Dery 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think I find that approach more acceptable. As I said, the content of what the Chairman is proposing is all right but it is just the -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Very well, it will be dealt with at the end of the process.
    Mr Dery 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thought we were going to agree to it to be a new clause so that subsequently the drafters would deal with it.
    Mr Boafo -- rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Boafo.
    Mr Boafo 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in paragraph 8 of clause 67 of the new clause, there is a slight amendment which I wanted to make. That is to substitute the last word “members” with “meetings” so that it will read:
    “8. Subject to this section, the Committee may determine pro- cedures for its meetings.”
    Not its members.
    the expert knowledge of that person --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    “Any other person engaged in --
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:20 p.m.
    “In seed activity
    recommended by the Council”.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Yes,
    Hon Dery.
    Mr Dery 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that
    we can actually have a person related to seed industry or seed activity, and we should leave it that way -- simpliciter. When we begin to introduce experts, then we are introducing another technicality that seems to narrow the scope of the people who can be -- I think the most important, as my Hon Colleague has said, is “recommended by the Council”.
    You need not be an expert. And for a person being related to an activity, I think that is common knowledge, and there should not be any problem about it.
    Mr Speaker, we are drafting for the ordinary man. It might not meet the professorial requirements of individuals, but it should make meaning to the ordinary person. And “person related to the activity”, in my opinion is -- you can be related to an activity.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Very
    well. We will make progress. There are further amendments to clause 67 in the name of Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori.
    Mr P. C. Appiah-Ofori 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    the Bill we are discussing today, initially - [Interruption] -- What is that?
    Mr Dery 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we have not
    dealt with “meetings of the Technical and Variety Release Committee”. The amendment by Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori
    have a casting vote.
    6. The Committee may co-opt a person to attend a Committee meeting but a co-opted person shall not vote on a matter for decision at the meeting.
    7. The proceedings of the Committee shall not be invalidated by reason of a vacancy among the members or a defect in the appointment or qualification of a member.
    8. Subject to this section, the Committee may determine procedures for its members.”
    Mr Speaker, simply put, it is a measure of activities or meeting schedules of the Technical and Variety Release and Regulatory Committee as it was in the original draft.
    Mr Dery 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that I
    have no problem with the substance of the amendments, except to ask for your guidance, because in the original Bill, we have 67 as Funds of the Council. Has it been taken care of somewhere else? But if you say delete, actually, what you want to see is that, we are not going to have any provision on funds, but it seems to me that you are talking about the re-designation of the sections. Because when we go to the original Bill, clause 64 is, Funds of the Council.
    So, if you say delete then it means it is ceases to be part of the Bill to be considered later. That is where I do have difficulties. If it means that you now want to add a new clause 67, then we can have that, but if you say delete, then it means the original clause 67 on the Bill should go.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon
    Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it does not happen anywhere under the sun that in one particular Bill, we have various provisions on financial matters. We have been passing Bills here and it is not so. Are you saying that we have different accounts for seeds, different accounts for fertilizer, and different accounts for this? If that is so, then there is no need for us to merge the three Bills into one.
    So, at the committee level, I explained it to them and everybody understood that in the circumstance, we have to have only one account to be audited by the Auditor- General. And so, the question of having one for seed, one for this and that does not arise. But if the Chairman says no, then -- and the House agrees, I have no objection.
    But in this case, it may not be necessary to move subsequent amendments I have made because they are all related to the same financial issues; separate,
    Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:20 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 67 deleted from the Bill.
    Mr Dery 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thought Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori said it should be deleted and that he will bring a new clause to deal with that but if we just say “deleted”, I do not know if our Votes and Proceedings will reflect that we have to bring a new clause. Does it capture that? I do not know.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    The Question that was put was that a new clause will be introduced to take care of all financial arrangements, so if that will be well captured.
    Mr Dery 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, when it came to the Votes, you said all those should be deleted completely. I did not hear the addition and I am happy it is there.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Very well. That was the Question that was put but just for the sake of avoidance of doubt, that clause should be deleted and that the clause as it stands and all other financial provisions will be put in one clause at the end of the Bill. So, if it may well be captured appropriately by the Hansard.

    Clause 68 -- Accounts and audit.
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 68, delete and insert the following:
    “68 . The Commit tee may establish sub-committees
    Mr Dery 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is a
    typographical error.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Chairman of the Committee, agreeable? For that matter, subsection 8 will read:
    “Subject to this section, the Committee may determine pro- cedures for its meetings.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr P. C. Appiah-Ofori 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker I beg to move, clause 67, delete.
    Mr Speaker, this Bill originally was made up of three separate Bills. One on fertilizer, one on plant and even one on seeds. The Committee felt that it was better to merge all these together to be one Bill with the name, the Plants Bill, 2009. In each of the original Bill, there were provisions on financial matters. The Auditor-General will audit their accounts, the financial -- all. So, because we have decided to have only one Bill, then all provisions scattered in the Bill on financial matters must be removed and then a new chapter created for this.
    It is against this background that this amendment is being proposed to delete it; in all other provisions wherever the accounts matter, I recommended deletion and at the tail end of it, a new proposal is coming out for the establishment of the financial issues so that we have only one instead of scattered financial provisions. So, that is the reason for this amendment.
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have a slight difficulty with the amendment because it looks like it is premature. It is true that in principle we agreed to
    independent of others but I am saying that once we are merging this into one account, one law, we should have one chapter dealing with the financial matters, not various chapters here and there. It is not done anywhere in this world.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Essentially, one clause to deal with all financial matters --
    Mr Clement K. Humado 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think I am swayed by the argument of Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori because early on, even at the Plant Protection side, we deleted the funds specific to the Plant Protection Council. So, I think that in order to harmonize the funding aspect of the Bill, we need to create only one fund that will take care of the three components of the Bill. So, I am convinced that that is the way to go.
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I step down my proposition and go with Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    You are inclined to accept?
    Ofori, may please, formulate his amendment clearly so that we now
    Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, at the tail end of it, a proposal comes, so all matters relating to funds scattered in it, I have proposed a complete deletion. And I have come with a complete amendment that will set up all the funds. It is there, so I will move that amendment.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    So, at this stage, it is safe to simply delete it?
    Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, Mr. Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    And at the end, we bring all the relevant provisions for financial matters?

    of the Chairman of the Committee and as stands in the name of Hon Appiah-Ofori?
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Rightly so, Mr Speaker. It will be the same situation there. So clauses 67, 68 and 69 have a common situation.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Very well.
    Mr Dery 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think I even want to put what the Chairman is saying in further context. What happened in the past was that we had actually deleted other provisions for funds in earlier discussions and pursuant to an amendment moved by Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori, we had deleted clause 68 and with the caveat that there will be a new provision at the end.
    So all the Chairman is moving now is for a new clause 68 in these terms. If you look at, early on, section 27, Plant Protection Fund, Section 28, Sources of Fund and Section 29, Management of the Fund, on 22nd March, we deleted all that. So that is what Hon P. C. Appiah- Ofori will be dealing with later. I think we should consider what the Chairman is now moving to be a new clause 68 because clause 68 has already been deleted. It is a new paragraph but I do not know if it is any problem if he calls it clause 68.
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    As a matter of fact, Mr
    Speaker, if you look at page 14 of the Committee's Report, the proposal was to delete clauses 67, 68 and 69 and replace them with the new clauses 67, 68, and 69 so that we can move on.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon
    Chairman, can we take these clauses together?
    Dr. Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, we can do that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Yes,
    move them. It will be more tidy.
    Mr Rashid Pelpuo 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is
    very important if you look at the fact that earlier clauses in part one, just let us take note that the Bill is taking care of two major issues, plants and seeds and when you come to the seeds, all the issues that we are talking about and are deleting were also captured there and will be affected or are already affected.
    The counterpart of the seed which is in the plant and also dealing with the accounts will now have to be fused together; and how it will be fused and placed is going to be a very technical issue. Is it going to be placed under plant? Is it going to be placed under seed?
    So it means that we now have to couch something different and that is where I go to support the last Hon Member, that we leave it to the draftspersons to find some place for it.
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the issue of using the numbering is just for our guidance. We have actually deleted clauses earlier in the Bill and could not take them along. So that is why we are doing this to guide the drafters and then when they come to put everything together, certainly, they will be the people to appropriately place new clauses where they should belong.
    But for purposes of our guidance, the only clauses that made us change our minds from the original draft was the clauses as they were numbered in the draft, and that is what we are replacing, and that is why we have to mention the number, if we are doing something to replace it. Nonetheless, we know that the drafters will change the order at the end of the day.
    In response to the Deputy Majority Leader's point, the placement of the draft on finance will be done under miscel-
    consisting of members of the Committee or non-members or both to perform certain functions, except that a sub- committee consisting entirely of non- members may only advise the Committee.”
    Mr Speaker, the reasons adduced that affected the deletion of clause 67, affect clause 68 except that in this particular case, we will do a further amendment to say that we are introducing a new clause which is what has been published.
    Mr Boafo 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we are having the same problem as we had with clause 67. It should be an additional new clause or a new paragraph because clause 68, we have the original Bill in relation to finances. That is the area where Hon P. C. Appiah Ofori will be coming up with an amendment. So what the Chairman has put down for clause 68 should rather be treated like how we did to clause 67 - a new clause.
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is
    exactly the explanation I gave before I sat down. I said that the circumstances that affected clause 67 that made us do a further amendment to introduce it as a new clause, is exactly what affects clause 68. At the committee level, we thought that because we were deleting those clauses and reconstructing them, we could just replace them in terms of numbering. But that is not supposed to be determined by us. So it is a new clause but clause 68 is deleted, and to be looked after in the omnibus construction that will come up in the miscellaneous.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Chairman of the Committee, so will this affect further amendment in the name of Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori as in (xi) and also clause 69 as in (xii), as stands in the name
    Mr Dery 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that we
    should accept the proposal made by the Chairman of the Committee to deal with a new clause 68, because if we move to clause 69, you will be getting into the territory that has already been covered by Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori, that has already been deleted. But we are talking about a proposed new clause 68 which I think is fine with what the Chairman has stated.
    What Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori will bring later will come at the end and the numbering will then be accordingly dealt with. But for now, this is a proposed new clause 68, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon
    standing
    Mr Boafo 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we should rather refrain from numbering the new paragraphs or clauses which are being inserted by the Chairman and leave them with the draftsmen to make appropriate placement. So instead of the new sections being classified as clause 68, we should rather say that it is a new insertion, then the draftspersons will place it at the appropriate place.
    We have already deleted clauses 64 and 65. So the re-numbering will change -- [Interruptions.] We cannot substitute this for clause 68. It is a new paragraph. We must be consistent with this legislation. It is a new paragraph. This should have appeared at the end.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Definite-ly, if you propose a new clause, you do not decide where it should be placed and that becomes a drafting arrangement, particularly as we move forward to deleting some of them which are negatived and so on. So I do not think we should worry about the numbering, but rather the substance and then proceed.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Clause 68 -- further amendment in the name of Hon Appiah-Ofori. Yes, that is consequen- tial to our further -- so it is negatived.

    Clause 68 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.

    Clause 69 -- Annual and other reports.
    Dr Alhassan 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 69 -- delete and insert the following:
    “69. Allowances
    Members of the Committee shall be paid allowances approved by the Minister in consultation with the Minister responsible for Finance.”
    Mr Dery 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is a technical issue that I want your guidance on.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Please, proceed.
    Mr Dery 1:30 p.m.
    Clause 69 as it stands now is “Annual and other reports”. It does not seem to me that it is purely financial; if it is financial, then I would agree that in consonance with the Motion that Hon Appiah-Ofori has moved, it should also stand completely deleted. But if that is not the case as I fear, it might well be that it also includes other reports that are not financial. I do not know whether we are not going to lose the non-financial aspect of section 69.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Humado 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 71, subclause (4), paragraph (a), delete “other than a partnership”.
    Mr Boafo 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is in order because under subclause (4) (b), we have a provision covering partnerships. Subclause (4) (b) says --
    “In the case of a partnership, each partner is liable for the offence”.
    So the earlier reference to “other than a partnership” is superfluous.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Humado 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 71, subclause (4), paragraph (b), delete “is liable for the”.
    Mr Boafo 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe the expression “is liable for the” offence is referable to the persons named in (a) and (b) and is not only referable to the partnership or each partner. So it should have been removed and placed under (b) so that it is clearer that “is liable for the” offence is referable to body corporates and partnerships.
    Dr Alhassan 1:50 p.m.
    The amendment is exactly what Hon Boafo has stated. So it becomes much clearer when we come to clause 71 (4) (b).
    Mr Dery 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think we should ignore the proposed amendment. You will realize that in the case of a
    laneous. There is apart of the Bill which is miscellaneous and that is where the omnibus clauses will be put to take care of the three different parts of the Bill.
    It is a complicated Bill because they are all supposed to stand out as different laws, but they have been merged into one and so definitely, we would have this back and forth debate.
    Mr Dery 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I agree with the Chairman of the Committee. If we joke, we are going to have a mess of the work we are doing now. As points of reference, we are being guided by the sections under the draft Bill, and as he said, we have deleted certain portions.
    So it means that at the end, when we are dealing with the substance under the various sections, the drafters can re- number the sections that we have. But for now, as he has stated, we have come with the move to delete clauses 67, 68 and 69 and to replace or substitute certain new sections. So let us deal with those substances using the existing numbering and then at the end of it all, we would then leave it to the drafters to appro-priately re-number.
    But should we begin to ignore these sections and continue to say a new section, in the end, there would be such a jumble that we would not have any point of reference. So let us take it as he has rightly said and deal with the substance, and then leave the re-numbering.
    As for the funding, I think that we have agreed that it will come at the end and there will be an omnibus provision for all the funds of the various sections and laws that have been brought together.
    Mr Speaker, with this one, I will crave your indulgence that we deal with the
    So, I would ask for further elaboration by the Hon Chairman of the Committee. This is “Annual and other reports”, I do not know if it is purely financial; but if it is not purely financial, then we might be losing something by deleting it completely, except that we are going to save some aspect of it somewhere else outside the financial.
    Mr Speaker, that is the kind of elaboration that I want to crave your indulgence to ask the Chairman of the Committee to give us.
    Dr Alhassan 1:40 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker, we also found it absurd that the technical and financial reports were being merged into one. So in the omnibus provisions, we tried to separate the two. Even though the technical report would normally come with the financial report, the audit report coming along will even be more confusing. So we tried to make the separation in the omnibus provisions that will come under miscellaneous.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Clause 69 -- further amendment by Hon Appiah- Ofori, I take it that it has been taken care of; it does not arise any more.

    Clause 69 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.

    Clause 70 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

    Clause 71 -- Penalties.

    Mr Clement K. Humado (on behalf of
    Dr Alhassan) 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 71, subclause (3), delete “Ministry” and insert “Minister”.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Chair- man of the Committee, do you want to withdraw the amendment?
    Dr Alhassan 1:40 p.m.
    Well, yes. Because my legal fellows who were with me, are not here to join me in the discussion. So I rather accept the Deputy Minority Leader's position.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Clause 71, there is further amendment in the name of the Chairman of the Committee.
    Mr Pelpuo 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am getting worried that the (b) is much more explicit than the (a). What happens in the case of (a) -- “In the case of a body corporate other than a partnership, each director or secretary of that body” -- what is the meaning of that?
    In the (b), there is “is liable for the” offence. In the (a), there is no “liable
    for the” offence; you just mention them and leave them hanging. So what is the implication? We could say, bring “liable for the offence” earlier so that these others listed would all be affected. But if one is affected and the other is not affected, I do not know how it would appear.
    Mr Boafo 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that was what I was referring to early on, that the expression “is liable” is referable to both the director and the secretary as well as to each partner. Instead of “is liable” being inserted under 4 (a), we just drop it under 4 (b) so that it is referable to offenders under 4 (a) and (b). So, if as it has been proposed, it stays, there is nothing wrong with it because by way of interpretation, it could mean that --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    In that case, should we not need the conjunctive “and”? “In the case of a body corporate other than partnership, a director or secretary of that body”; and “(b) in the case of a partnership, each partner. . .” then we shall know “is liable for the offence”, without the conjunctive “and”. Hon Member, do you not think there could be some difficulties?
    Mr Boafo 1:40 p.m.
    That is precisely so. With that expression, we are covered.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    So we
    can have the conjunctive “and”?.
    Mr Boafo 1:40 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Dr Alhassan 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 71, subclause (5), delete (4) and insert 41(a)”.
    be held outside the prescribed period in accordance with Order 40 (3) of the Standing Orders.
    Mr Dery 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we actually wanted to indicate that we thought we could cut off at 2:00 p.m. and continue tomorrow, that is what I --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Well,
    even if it goes a minute past 2.00 p.m., we would have done that, so let us have the saving provision and then we see what to do. Is there anything further --
    Mr Pelpuo 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I just have a feeling that clause 5 has a watering down effect on the Bill itself and the offences and the need for liability. We all know that when an offence is committed, whether it is an offence or not, will be determined by the court, it will not be determined by the Bill.
    So why do we have to put the 5 there? That is telling to what extent somebody can be guilty and when he cannot be guilty. Is it necessary? Can we just not strike it out and leave it with the Judge to determine? Because, this is a clause that can let people escape by claiming innocence of the offence but which is also very contrary to the very spirit of our laws, that if you do not know about a law and you commit a crime, it cannot be excused at all. So I think that clause, we may take it out.
    Mr Dery 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that the Hon Deputy Majority Leader is probably trying to, by his intervention, change the laws of Ghana, which I do not think is right. What section (5) does, is to make sure that only those who have committed an offence are penalised and that is the principle.
    Mr Speaker, you would have realised that what this law is trying to do, in many other cases, is not necessary.
    Mr Speaker, that is because the reference is more to the individuals rather than the corporate bodies as it is in 4 (b).
    Mr Dery 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman of the Committee is a great person. But in this case, why would we restrict it to 4 (a)? In the first place, if you are talking of liability, now we have brought in a conjunction, and all of them are liable. So all you have stated under 4 are liable. And 5 is saying that despite 4,
    “a person shall not be convicted of an offence if the person proves that the offence was committed without the person's knowledge or consent, or that the person took the necessary steps having regard to the circumstances, to prevent the commission of that offence.”
    That defence should be available to all those who are liable and now the liability applies to both (a) and (b) by the amendment. So in 4 (a), this amendment then becomes irrelevant. Mr Speaker, that is the way I would see it, because the liability now applies to both 4 (a) and (b), and this should be a defence available to all those who are held liable if they can show that it is without their knowledge or they took the necessary steps to implement it. So I think that 4 (a) then becomes opposed and we should leave the 4 as it is now.
    That is my humble proposal, Mr Speaker.
    Dr Alhassan 2 p.m.
    I am convinced, Mr. Speaker, so I drop the amendment. It should be 4 instead of 4 (a).
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    It relates to the entire 4, not only 4 (a).
    Hon Members, considering the state of business in the House, I direct that Sitting
    Mr Dery 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not want us to go too much into criminal jurisprudence --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Excuse me, Hon Dery --
    Mr Dery 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, he is responding to me, so I should be given the chance to respond to his submission. And I just want to say that I do not want us to get into matters of actus reus and mens rea because offence here in reply refers to criminal offence and there is no way you can change the basic criminal jurispru- dence, that there should be actus and there should be mens rea.
    But that is not where we are going; so where he is going, he is going against the fundamentals of the law and he should not be allowed. It is not strict liability; it is something that you need to prove.
    Mr Boafo 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, just as the Hon Deputy Minority Leader has said, we were discussing it. And I think that it is not a question of ignorance of the law, it is rather providing the basics to negate mens rea as a requirement of criminal liability.
    What should have happened is that we should have left it for existing laws to determine it. But once this Act goes out to specifically specify that the secretary and the director, regardless of, as it were, what the provisions of the Companies Act are, would be liable; it is necessary to add this caveat that when you can show that it is without your knowledge or indeed, you have taken the necessary steps to prevent that, it should not be liable.
    I do not see anything wrong with that. Especially, in the case of partnership, most of the time, the partners themselves are not part of the business and so you cannot just hold a partner liable just because he is a partner, if the person can show that it is without his knowledge.
    Mr Speaker, what the Hon Deputy Majority Leader was talking about was ignorance of law, is not what section 5 here seeks to provide for. It is talking about not being liable for an act committed; it is not ignorance of law but ignorance of the Act which has breached the law, is what they are talking about.
    So Mr Speaker, I think that it should be left there, and I do share the conviction of the Hon Deputy Majority Leader that people should be dealt with when they know that they are wrong. But section 5 is also making sure that those who are not wrong or liable should not be punished.
    Mr Pelpuo 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do under- stand what the Hon Deputy Minority is talking about, but just imagine that somebody has committed an offence, and he does not know that he has committed an offence, and he can always tell people that he does not know that he has committed an offence even though he has committed the offence and then he can escape. So I think that it is a very dangerous clause.
    If we delete these preferences and we go by the rule of interpretation that inclusio inius est exclusio alterius, then it means we are making it a strict liability issue.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Very well. Now, there is no more substitution of 4 (a), it affects the whole of 4.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 71 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 72 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Leadership, any indication at this stage? I am not calling for a Motion but just --
    Mr Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that if you look at the House, you will find that it is seriously depleted, and it shows that a lot of people are exhausted. And I would want to suggest that we adjourn at this very moment.
    Mr Ambrose P. Dery 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as it is past two o'clock, we cannot move a motion. But I agree that we could continue tomorrow. Some of us were not aware of the extended Sitting and therefore, the other commitments, committee meetings, et cetera. We will continue tomorrow.
    ADJOURNMENT 2 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2:07 p.m. till Friday, 28th May, 2010 at 10:00 a.m.
  • [MR J. B. AIDOO