Debates of 5 Nov 2010

MADAM SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:30 a.m.
Madam Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon Members, we will move to item 3 -- the Business Statement.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 10:30 a.m.
Mr Joseph Kofi Adda (Navrongo Central) 10:30 a.m.
To ask the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice what the outcome of the investigations by the United States Department of Justice is on the KOSMOS and EO Group's affair.
Questions --
*753. Mr George Kofi Arthur (Amenfi Central): To ask the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice when the “Justice for All System”, where members of
the Judiciary move to the prisons and try remand prisoners, will be encouraged or adopted in the country.
*660. Ms Beatrice Bernice Boateng (New Juaben South): To ask the Minister for Employment and Social Welfare what steps the Ministry is taking to assist in the provision of employment for the numerous youth in the New Juaben South Constituency.
*661. Mr Robert Sarfo-Mensah (Asunafo North): To ask the Minister for Employment and Social Welfare what steps the Ministry is taking to ensure that all public buildings and facilities are accessible to people with disability as stipulated in the “Persons With Disability Act, 2006 (Act 715)”, especially new structures which are coming up.
*662. Mr Richard Akuoko Adiyia (Ahafo-Ano North): To ask the Minister for Employment and Social Welfare the status of preparation towards implementing the new Public Sector Pay Policy, that is the Single Spine Pay Structure.
Statements
Laying of Papers --
Report of the joint Committee on Finance and Mines and Energy on the Petroleum Revenue Management Bill, 2010.
Committee sittings.

Questions --

*530. Mr Kwasi Ameyaw- Cheremeh (Sunyani East): To ask the Minister for Local Government and Rural Development what measures the Ministry is instituting to ensure that Assembly members who ended their term in August/ September 2010 are paid reasonable and acceptable end of service benefits.

*531. Mr John Agyabeng (Agona East): To ask the Minister for Local Government and Rural Development when the Ministry will implement the reduction of unit committees from 16,000 to 5,000 and the membership of each committee from 15 to 7.

*532. Mr John Agyabeng (Agona East): To ask the Minister for Local Government and Rural Development when the fiscal decentralisation agenda which obliges the District Assemblies to embark on decentralised budgeting within the medium-term will be operationalised.

*585. Nana Yaw Ofori-Kuragu (Bosome-Freho): To ask the Minister for Local Government and Rural Development when the newly created Bosome-Freho District Assembly will be provided with office accommodation.

*599. Mr Kwasi Ameyaw- Cheremeh (Sunyani East): To ask the Minister for Local Government and Rural Development what measures the Ministry is putting in place to ensure the restoration of ceded revenue items that were taken away due to provisions of the
Mr Joseph Kofi Adda (Navrongo Central) 10:30 a.m.
Internal Revenue (Registration of Business) Act, (Act 648).
Statements.
Motion --
Adoption of the Report of the Finance Committee on the Loan Facility between the Government of Ghana and the Government of Austria through Unicredit Bank AG (Bank Austria Creditanstalt AG) for an amount of €7,980,000.00 for the construction and equipping of 5 polyclinics in the Upper West Region.

Committee sittings.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 10:30 a.m.
Madam Speaker, it is a general observation.
Madam Speaker, when the Hon Majority Leader is presenting the Business Statement, he does so in his capacity as the Leader of the House. I have noted that in recent times, it seems as if the Leader of the House is reluctant to use the Dispatch Box.
Madam Speaker 10:30 a.m.
That is the first time I have smiled this morning. [Laughter.] And I agree with you.
Yes, Leader, he says you should have
moved to the Dispatch Box.
Mr Avoka 10:30 a.m.
Yes, I am certainly very grateful to the Hon Member for Sekondi that with the gallery full like this, it will be a pleasure for me to be identified, standing there alone and delivering the Business Statement of the week. I have not adverted my mind to that practice but if that is the convention, I will gleefully adopt it. Yes. [Laughter.]
Mr Osie Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:30 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I thank you very much, except to observe that indeed, when the Hon Majority Leader presents the Business Statement, the capacity for delivery is the Chairship of the Business Committee. It may in the circumstance, be analogous to that of the Leader of the House. But the real capacity or hat that he wears is the Chair of the Business Committee.
Madam Speaker, I believe one would also want to inquire into the hardness of the spine of the Hon Majority Leader. Perhaps, to all intents and purposes, it may be attributable to the fact that he could be counted among the timorous souls in the House.
Dr Anthony A. Osei 10:30 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I know I have been away from the House for a couple of days. I have tried to read the Votes and Proceedings of the days that I have not been here and I am missing some information. I need your direction in this respect.
I believe it was last week that your -- [Interruptions] -- goodself directed that a committee looks into a matter that was very grave. The reason for bringing this up is that, subsequent to that, it has been brought to my attention that it is not only the issue that was raised by my senior Colleague that has been changed but there are other issues that have been changed in the Act and I think that given the gravity of the matter, we need your further direction on this matter as soon as possible
I thank you.
Madam Speaker 10:30 a.m.
In which case, we add the other concerns to the first one raised and I ask that the Leaders and the Clerks -
Dr A. A. Osei 10:30 a.m.
Madam Speaker, my attention has been drawn to the fact that the number of persons on the University Council has been reduced by one against what we had proposed in this House and since I have not gone back to read the Hansard, it will be prudent if perhaps, the committee goes clause by clause to make sure that other issues are looked at.
Madam Speaker 10:30 a.m.
All right I think Leaders, this should be added to the first direction that it should be investigated and that if the Hon Member says clause by clause, well, that will be all right. Let us do that and if I have the report, then we will think of how we will go about it.
Mr Avoka 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the concern is noted. And let me also add that if there is any Hon Member who has detected any omissions or additions to the Act, he/she can draw the attention of myself or the Minority Leader so that we can take it on board when we are presenting the report to Madam Speaker.
Dr Matthew O. Prempeh 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, this is about the fifth time I am rising on this particular issue. The Leader of the House just informed us that the tempo of the Business of the House is going to increase from within a couple of weeks.
Madam Speaker, I note with glee how quickly the committee going to ECOWAs Parliament was reshuffled. Madam Speaker, the more important committees of this House that have not got chairpersons and members have delayed unnecessarily for too long. The Committee

on Health, a Bill has been referred to us and now we do not even know what to do about it.

Madam Speaker, your committees and the committees of this House are as important as those going to the ECOWAS Parliament and I want our Leaders, the Hon Majority and Hon Minority Leaders to put their heads together and report to this House as quickly as possible. It is not for nothing that Madam Speaker, your committees of the House are needed.
Mr Avoka 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I
appreciate the concern raised that the committees of this House are as important as the delegation going to ECOWAS. We appreciate that very much and to say that, we submitted the proposals to the Committee on Selection and I hope that sometime early next week, it will be on the Order Paper for you to look at and to agree on it.
Madam Speaker 10:40 a.m.
Thank you, Leader.

Yes, I take it that the Business Statement is adopted.
Mr Avoka 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I may be leaving the Chamber very soon for a meeting but I just want to draw the attention of Hon Colleagues to the fact that the Hon Minister for Roads and Highways, Mr Joe K. Gidisu, due to circumstances beyond his control, would not be able to attend to the Business of the House this morning to answer Questions. Indeed, Madam Speaker, as we all know, Cabinet meetings are on Thursdays, so we normally try to avoid putting some of the very difficult Questions or extensive work on Thursdays.
We put it for Friday, but unfortunately, the Cabinet meeting for Thursday was shifted at a late hour to Friday this morning and it is because of that shift that he is
Madam Speaker 10:40 a.m.
And so you are saying that we will not take Questions?
Mr Avoka 10:40 a.m.
We will defer today's Question time to early next week.
Mr Frederick Opare-Ansah -- rose
-- 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker 10:40 a.m.
We have adopted the Business Statement; is it on what the Leader said?
Mr Opare-Ansah 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, it is about the Hon Majority Leader's application and the absence of the Hon Minister.
Madam Speaker, if you look at the Questions, they are mostly constituency- specific Questions and I believe in the past, this House has not had any problems at all with Hon Deputy Ministers coming in to answer Questions in the stead of their substantive Ministers.
Does the Ministry not have a Deputy Minister or is he also unavailable due to reasons beyond his control? And in any case, Madam Speaker, it will be of interest to this House to know what the issues are that are beyond the control of the Hon Minister for which reason he cannot be in this House.
Mr Avoka 10:40 a.m.
I have already indicated that the Hon Minister has gone to emergency Cabinet meeting. The meeting was supposed to have been yesterday but
they shifted it to today. That is why the Hon Minister is there.
Indeed, the Hon Minister had earlier focused his attention to be here personally to answer these Questions; so the Deputy was not programmed under the circumstances. Normally, when the Hon Minister is not going to come and he knows about that, then the Deputy is groomed or briefed to be able to come and answer the Questions.
But if they all agree that the Hon Minister should come and last minute, there is a hitch and the Hon Minister could not come, it is difficult to rope in the Hon Deputy Minister. You will recall that last week or early part of this week, we programmed and the Hon Deputy Minister was here. This is why they are both unable to come and I promise that early next week the Hon Minister himself should be available to answer the Questions.
Mr Ambrose P. Dery 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I think that we agree with the position that the Hon Majority Leader and Leader of the House has taken on this matter. So we do agree that in this special circumstance, even the Hon Minister recognizes that the Hon Deputy Minister cannot stand in for him and we have agreed. And I want him to understand that when sometime we think, on our side of the House, that we demand the Hon Minister and not the Deputy, it will be taken in good faith as well - Just to put it on the record.
Mr Avoka 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, with due respect, I think the Hon Deputy Minority Leader got me wrong. I said that by agreement at the Ministry, the Hon Minister had decided to come personally to answer the Questions and therefore, he prepared himself to do that. He did not contemplate that the Deputy would come and answer the Questions.
The other week, he did not come
himself because he was outside Accra but he knew that he would be in Accra to come and answer the Questions. But because they shifted the Cabinet meeting from yesterday to today, that is why he cannot come. I do not intend and I did not say that the Deputy could not have stood in for the Hon Minister.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:40 a.m.
Madam Speaker, as has been already espoused by my Deputy, I think the point is well taken that if the Hon Minister is saying that he would want to personally be in the Chamber to respond to the Questions, that should be acceptable. But it is noteworthy that there have been two such incidents in the course of the week.
The other day, the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice was supposed to come and when we thought that in her absence, her Deputy could come and respond to the Questions, it was said that she had insisted that she wanted to come and answer the Questions herself.
The same thing is arising this morning, even though we thought that these were constituency-specific Questions and that any Deputy could have stood in. We recollect that in such instances, often times we have not even allowed any elaboration of supplementary questions. So I thought the Hon Deputy Minister could have come but now that the Hon Majority Leader is saying that he has word from them that he wants to come personally, that should be taken.
But the application being made by my Deputy is that, taking due cognizance of this, if at a future date, the person asking the Question should also insist that this particular Question should be answered by the Hon Minister, there should not be any prevarication because there are clear instances when Hon Deputy Ministers come and they are not able to really do
justice to Questions that are filed. But we have our own arrangements and maybe, we can look at that.
Having said that, Madam Speaker, I think we do recognize that next week may perhaps, be the penultimate week to the presentation of the Budget. The Hon Majority Leader has just read the Business Statement and giving some indication about Questions that will be, asked.
In the circumstance, I suggested to him yesterday - maybe, it was too late -- But if it is not too down the lane, he may engage the Table Office and also engage some of the Ministers to see whether we cannot bring more Questions to next week because in the week of the presentation of the Budget, we may not have time for that.
Mr Avoka 10:40 a.m.
We had earlier discussed that and I agreed to the principle.
Madam Speaker 10:40 a.m.
All right.
rose
Madam Speaker 10:40 a.m.
What is it on? Is it on this Business Statement again?
Some Hon Members 10:40 a.m.
Yes.
Madam Speaker 10:40 a.m.
We have adopted it. If it is on Questions, we are now on Questions.
Hon Leader, then we move on to item 2 - Correction of Votes and Proceedings and the Official Report.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Correction of Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 4th November, 2010.
Page 1…5 --
Mr Kofi Frimpong 10:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker,
Mr Kofi Frimpong 10:50 a.m.


on page 5, I have been marked as being “absent with permission.”
Madam Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Paragraph what?
Mr Frimpong 10:50 a.m.
Paragraph 3.
Madam Speaker, I was sent to Koforidua for a workshop and I do not think - [Interruptions.] Madam Speaker, I thought I would be marked as having a committee meeting under Committee Meetings. Otherwise, some people may think that, maybe, I was absent with permission to undertake my private and personal duties while that is not the case.
So, Madam Speaker, I think there must be a column for this; when people are out there, going about with committee meetings, parliamentary duties, I do not think they must be marked “absent with permission.” It looks a bit odd because people who go out on their personal missions, undertaking their private duties are also marked there as “absent with permission”, but here, I am still undertaking parliamentary duties.
I think that those who were there must be marked under a different column altogether to indicate that even though they were not in the Chamber, they were out there still doing parliamentary work.
Mr Inusah A. B. Fuseini 10:50 a.m.
Madam
Speaker, my Hon Colleague has said he was marked “absent with permission”. Madam Speaker, a great number of us who for three days, were working on a Bill, which you referred to the joint Committee on Finance, Mines and Energy were at Koforidua; most of us have been marked “absent”, simpliciter. Tuesday, Wednesday and yesterday, Thursday, we were in Koforidua, we simply have been marked “absent”, simpliciter. Madam Speaker, I thought if there could be any marking, we should be marked “absent from the House with permission”.
Mr Frimpong 10:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he is
probably saying the same thing as I have said. All that I am saying is that we have not been treated fairly. Now that we have a certain newspaper watching everybody - [Laughter] -- we must be seen to be doing parliamentary work when we are doing parliamentary work. We must be marked as doing that, so that when they do not see us here, they do not mark us “F” -- [Laughter.]
Mr Gershon K. B. Gbediame 10:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, this issue has come up time and again, and if my memory serves me right, you ruled that if any committee was outside the Chamber during parliament business, it was the Chairman of the committee who is to submit the list of members.
But that does not also stop them from taking or filling the leave of absence form so that it would be indicated that they have taken permission. And the Votes and Proceedings, the Clerk to the committee would also submit a report that this committee was outside Parliament doing committee work, and the list of Members present would be indicated. So, that can be catered for in the Votes and Proceedings. I do not think he has any problem.
Madam Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Well, he still has
a problem.
Hon Leader, we will come to you, so I would be grateful if you remain in the House for a few minutes. I want to hear from you on this matter. Suggestions have been made -- unless you want to go and decide it among yourselves -- a good suggestion that “absent” simpliciter, everybody who has permission to go to his constituency has permission to be absent. But there are certain categories of absence which go with work and that they should be indicated. I had wanted to hear from the Leaders.
Mr Avoka 10:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, as the
Hon Majority Chief Whip indicated, this matter came up again sometime last week, and I thought there was a decision taken on it, in one way or the other.
Madam Speaker, we agreed that, yes, if a committee is legitimately outside the Chamber, doing committee work, we cannot know whether all members of the committee are at that meeting or not. It is possible that out of 15 members, 10 of them would be there and five would not. So it is left with the Clerk to the committee or the Chairman of the committee to give us information which members are absent and attending a committee meeting.
Similarly, those Members who are attending a committee meeting outside the Chamber would also have to fill the leave of absence form and submit it to the Chief Whip so that the Leadership will know their movement. It is useful to do that so that Leadership will know the movement of Hon Members, so that if at the end of the day the Clerk does not perform that role, then at least, his absence is taken care of by the Chief Whip.
So in those two circumstances, we will take note of the fact that they are absent in the Chamber but they are available elsewhere doing committee work and therefore, they will be marked as “absent with permission”.
But those who do not take permission at all or who do not attend committee meetings are those we register as “absent”, simpliciter.
I thought we discussed this thing and then we agreed on the modality how they should notify the Chief Whips or the Clerk should inform the Table Office so that they will know those who are absent with permission and those who are not absent.
Madam Speaker 10:50 a.m.
I think this is an
internal matter which should be discussed because absence in this House means a lot more than just being absent. It disturbs work, it goes to quorum, it goes to voting. So shall I leave it to the Leaders because there are so many ideas we are having because the work here and presence here is important?
Hon Leaders?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:50 a.m.
Madam
Speaker, when Parliament meets in this Chamber to conduct business, it is described as “Parliament Sitting”. And by our rules of procedure, which we call Standing Orders, Sitting includes -
Madam Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Order number?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:50 a.m.
Madam Speaker, Order 7 and with your permission, I quote:
“‘Sit t ing” includes a period during which Parliament is sitting continuously without adjournment and a period during which it is in Committee;”
Madam Speaker, the same Order provides the meaning of “Committee” --
“Committee” means a Committee of the Whole, a Standing, Select, Special or Ad hoc Committe;
So, it means that if Parliament is Sitting either in plenary or at the committee level, it is to be deemed to be part of the Sitting of Parliament. However, for practical reasons, since it is difficult to know which of the members of various committees would be present, we need to devise some mechanism to know who was at the committee and that person would be caught as being part of the parliamentary Sitting.
We have not been able to effectively do that. So, I agree with Madam Speaker, that
Madam Speaker 10:50 a.m.
I think you are right
and it is a good suggestion, but do take into consideration also quorum. When you have more people doing committee work, it affects quorum, it affects voting. It is another matter, so consider that aspect too.
Mr Dery 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, that being
the case, I just wanted to correct part of what the Hon Leader of the House said.
It is not the case that when an Hon
Member is out on committee meetings, such an Hon Member must fill a form of leave of absence. Because then, he is not absent. So, that is completely out of the question. I agree with him that there should be a mechanism by which the Clerk of the committee will inform the House who are present there and that should be captured in the Votes and Proceedings.
But we cannot say that such Hon Members should fill a form of absence because they are, in fact, not absent by the definitions that have been alluded to.
Madam Speaker, that is the correction I wanted to make.
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
I thought all these
matters could be discussed at the meeting that we have suggested. Because if we are going to take it that by definition an Hon Member is doing committee work so he or she is permitted to go, what is the relation between that and quorum? Are we going to take it into account when we come to quorum and others? So, I am just drawing your attention. Do consider that.
Mr Joe Ghartey 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker,

while the debate is raging, for those of us who have been recorded on Tuesday and Wednesday as absent, we were not here to correct it in the Votes and Proceedings. And the record shows in that we were at the committee meeting.

We will be grateful, at least, if we could be upgraded to the “Absent with Permission” level while you debate on where to put us; either to put us at “Present” or leave us there. It is like, where we are, we are not even at economy class. We are not even on the plane. Please, upgrade us to “Absent with Permission” for Tuesday and Wednesday.

The Hon Chairman of the Committee himself is recorded as absent without permission. I am recorded as absent without permission on Tuesday and Wednesday, and luckily, on Thursday, by divine intervention, I was upgraded to absent with permission.

So, if the records could show, we will be very grateful.
Mr Avoka 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I pray that we curtail the discussion so that we can meet as a House, instead of in plenary, and then discuss the various scenarios and adopt something.
Mr Asamoah Ofosu 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I notice a very interesting mistake which perhaps, make the whole proceedings flawed.
Madam Speaker, my goodself and the Hon Majority Chief Whip (Hon G. K. B. Gbediame) were out at Tarkwa on a committee meeting with the Administrator of Stool Lands. I have been going through this and I see that on page 6, item 4, yesterday, number 35 of “Members Absent without Permission” is “Ofosu Asamoah, Hon Member of Parliament for Kade”. And in this same book, on page 3 of Hon Members who were present, number 96 is
Hon G. K. B. Member for Nkwanta South.
The two of us were in Tarkwa, and then he was present in this Chamber and I was absent without permission. In any case, when you called on him, he said that even if we were absent, should we be marked “Absent with Permission”? It is the duty of the Hon Chairman to inform the House. And he is the Hon Chairman. So, the Hon Chairman and the subjects were all out. But he was “present” and I was absent.
Madam Speaker, I see that the document is flawed and we have to take a look at the whole thing -- both present or absent with or without permission.
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
Well, I would take it that you are trying to correct that thing and leave it to the Clerks to correct.
Yes, Hon Gbediame, if he was with you, why should -
Mr Gbediame 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, what he said is true but the scenario is that we were not invited as a committee but we were invited individually as Hon Members of the committee and therefore, I could not have the list of those who were invited for me to submit that list to the Clerk's Table.
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
But he is asking for correction.
Mr Gbediame 11 a.m.
That is it.
Dr A. A. Osei 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I thought that when we work in committees, we do not work in our individual capacities. It cannot be. So, he cannot be invited as a person without being on the committee. It is a parliamentary committee, so it is a delegation of the committee going out there. So, he should look at it as a committee work not as Hon Gbediame.
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
But I think he has agreed that he also went there on committee business and that it would be corrected accordingly.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, this issue brings to the fore an issue I was actually waiting to raise and I think the timing is perfect to raise it now.
Madam Speaker, in your absence, when we had the Hon First Deputy Speaker presiding, we had an occasion to debate a little on whether we had an quorum or not. And this was occasioned by the seeming absence of majority of Hon Members from the Chamber.
Madam Speaker, if you look at the list of Hon Members present, you will notice that we had 173 having been in attendance. Now, if an Hon Member had an occasion to raise this issue of quorum or bring about debate on it in any way, it suggests that we did not have that many people in the Chamber at that time. So, the possibility then is that Hon Members came in, signed their names, and did other things. What I am doing is urging my Hon Colleagues and indeed, the Speaker, and the Whips to help her ensure that there is good attendance in the Chamber -
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
Well, that was why I said that even with this system of asking permission, we will take this into consideration. It should be discussed. Would you consider those who are on official duty as really, when it comes to quorum, as if they were there?
So, I throw it to the Committee which will look at this.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, if you look at the issue which Hon Asamoah Ofosu has just raised and the fact that we were debating this matter yesterday - 173 Hon Members out of which 91

majority Hon Members were supposed to be present. It means that people came in and left. In fact, Hon Ahi said that his Hon Colleagues were leaving to - “Was it to sabotage the work of Parliament”? he asked. He said his Hon Colleagues were leaving to sabotage the work of the House -
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
Well, I thought this had been withdrawn and we do not have to go back to it. Once something is withdrawn -
Mr Opare-Ansah 11 a.m.
Yes, he withdrew that. I am just recollecting -
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
No, do not recollect the withdrawn one; recollect the substituted ones.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11 a.m.
So, I want to urge my Hon Colleagues that if we come in and sign in our names, we should stay -- especially when we were dealing with a Bill --
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
Stay? When nature calls you, you stay still? [Laughter.] It would be impracticable, would it not?
Mr Opare-Ansah 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, we caught the Hon Minister for Youth and Sports in a similar situation. She had to dash out and come back in. I believe that the House allows for that kind of situation.
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
Well, then say so, rather than “stay” because then it would mean you do not move at all.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11 a.m.
We are only pleading that when Hon Members come to the House, they stay and see to the work of the House through till the end of proceedings.
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
All right.
Yes, Hon Members, can we move on.

Hon Members , the Votes and Proceedings of the Thursday, 4th November, 2010, as corrected, is adopted as the true record of proceedings.

Shall we move to the Official Report? Correction of the Official Report of Tuesday, 2nd November, 2010.

Hon Members, in the absence of any corrections, the Official Report of Tuesday, 2nd November, 2010 is adopted as the true record of proceedings.

The Hon Majority Leader is not here. Yes, Hon Gbediame?
Mr Gbediame 11 a.m.
Madam Speaker, we go to Motion number (9).
Madam Speaker 11 a.m.
All right, the next
item would be Motion number 9, and it would be continued by the First Deputy Speaker.
11.10 a.m -- MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
BILLS - CONSIDERATION 11 a.m.
STAGE 11 a.m.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Hon Majority Chief Whip, is it item (9) on the Order Paper?
Mr Gbediame 11 a.m.
Yes, item (9) on the
Order Paper.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Have you
Mr Gbediame 11 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that we need to complete the Consideration Stage of the Students Loan Trust Fund Bill.
Mr Dery 11 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think we are all committed to getting this Bill passed as soon as possible. But that should not blind us to certain very important considerations. The Hon Minister for Education is not here and I recognise that he might be at the Cabinet meeting. But I thought that at least, if the Hon Deputy Minister were here, that would help us -- [Interruption] - to see us through some of the outstanding issues and prospective and knotty areas or grey areas that would come up.
So I just wanted to draw attention that the situation as it stands now does not appear to favour a smooth and expeditious work on the Bill. But I know Mr Speaker is a very experienced Member of Parliament and you are in the best position to appreciate the impact of the present circumstances on the matter. But I would need your guidance, otherwise, I do not think we are poised to do serious Business on a Friday under these circumstances.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee?
Mr Mathias Puozaa 11 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the Hon Deputy Minister should be on his way coming. But as we are aware, the Hon Minister is at the Cabinet meeting. However, I think the only thorny issue here is over clause (8), where we have this statement implying that the Committee shall comply. That has been discussed with the Hon Member for Akropong, Mr W. O. Boafo. So I think there is no serious issue here that demands policy -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Are you informing the House that there is no contentious issues with regard to the amendments that you have put on the Order Paper?
Mr Puozaa 11 a.m.
I think so.
Mr Gbediame 11 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we are in touch with the Hon Deputy Minister and he is on his way coming. So we would kindly plead that we can start while we wait for him to join us. Whenever we come across any issue that has to do with policy, then we can -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Hon Majority Chief Whip, you said that we should take this Bill and see whether we can finish it today and that is why I want to find out from the Chairman of the Committee whether there are any contentious issues. If there are no contentious issues, then I would go through the Bill and then we can finish it. But if you yourself are not sure and you are saying that “if there is”, then you are not too sure.
So let us know what the true position is, then I can find my way clear. Some of these clauses have been deferred because there were some contentious issues with them. Have they been resolved?
Mr Puozaa 11 a.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker. The only contentious issue here is over clause 12, where it is being proposed that the “Board shall comply” should be deleted. Hon Boafo and I have met and have agreed that with another amendment that he has proposed, this one should stand. So that is the only contentious issue.
Mr William O. Boafo 11 a.m.
Mr Speaker, clause (8) which is on the Order Paper is a contentious matter, because yesterday we deferred it -- and clause 12. Mr
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Yes, I agree with you. This is a Bill coming from the Ministry of Education and ordinarily, we would expect, once the Hon Deputy Minister knows that the Minister would be going to Cabinet, the Deputy should be here to assist the House in performing its function, not that we should be waiting for the Minister or the Deputy Minister. It is not right, but Hon Members, let us start; if there are any controversial issues, then we adjourn the proceedings to Tuesday.
Mr Stephen K. Balado Manu 11 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as you rightly observed, this is Education Bill and we know the importance of education in the Ghanaian economy. And for the Chairman to say that some issues are not contentious, I want to draw attention that no issue is inherently contentious; no issue as you see it written is contentious until you
begin to hear arguments for and against the issue; that would draw attention that it is a contentious issue.
So for the Chairman to say he does not see the amendments to be contentious, by what criteria, by what measure is he saying the issues are not contentious? So I want to go with the idea that we wait - maybe, we can suspend for some minutes while waiting for the Minister -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Hon Member, today is Friday -
Mr Manu 11 a.m.
Today is Friday -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
I am saying that let us start and then when we get there and there is a problem, we adjourn the House. So let us start and then when we are having challenges, we adjourn the House.
Clause 8 -
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Mathias A. Puozaa) 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 8, add the following new subclause:
“(7) The proceedings of the Board shall not be invalidated by reason of vacancy among the members or defect in the appointment or qualification of a member.”
Mr Speaker, this was debated on at length yesterday and the Hon Minister and some other Colleagues were able to bring up examples of this same phrase which many people object to, which has appeared in several other laws. One of them was the Polytechnics Act; and the Ghana Education Service (GES) Act; these two Acts have this clause embedded in them and therefore, we see nothing wrong with repeating it in this form.
Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we spent some time on this particular clause, then to our amazement, the GES Act of 1995 was brought in, that had the same sort of formulation. I do not understand the logic. If that formulation is unacceptable now, what prevents us from making that point?
The point we are making simply is this, why do we not stop at “vacancy among the members” and delete “defect in the appointment or qualification of a member”? That is because, if that “defect” or terrible qualification is detected, that person's position can be considered vacant, and the first part of this clause takes care of that. That is because by this formulation, it means that well, appointments can be defective; qualifications may not be correct, but this is why it is important that due diligence is carried out when the nominations are made. So that is assumed.
So, if we stop at “vacancy”, that should be adequate for this clause. This is the point we kept making over and over again and the Chairman still does not appear to be agreeing with us.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, why are you adding “qualification” to that clause? For purposes of defect, somebody can go to court and challenge that the appointment is defective. So for that one, the court rules. But why “qualification”?
Before you appoint the person, you should have looked at his curriculum vitae (CV) and everything. That is the point that is being made. Why are you adding ‘qualification'? In any case, if we made a mistake in a previous legislation, do we repeat it now? Hon Chairman, convince us, convince the House about the “qualification” aspect.
Mr Puozaa 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the truth is
that, this same clause was deemed to be important and relevant enough for us to include it in the Polytechnics Act of 2007. [Interruptions.] Sorry, I do not have the copy here but it is there, that this same clause is deemed to be good enough to
be repeated in the 2007 Act. Therefore, unless the Hon Member can find a better reason to support this, I do not think -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon
Chairman, if you delete “qualification”, would it change the meaning of the -
Mr Dery 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity.
First of all, I think that the Hon Member on the other side of the House should know that this Parliament is not bound by preceding Parliaments and therefore, if they passed a law and made a mistake, we are not by that bound to make the same mistake. That is an argument that we should now pursue.
For instance, look at the construction, if this is the rendition in the previous laws and it reads as follows:
“the proceedings of the Board shall not be invalidated by reason of vacancy among the members . . .”
Instead of “in”-- So should we be bound because “among” was used even if we think that “in membership” or “member of . . .” is the right thing? Mr Speaker, I think that I am prepared to listen to the Chairman say that this is the right thing to do in the circumstances rather than want to say that because it was done before, then it is right to do so.
Otherwise, all we would have done is get some computer just to put similar renditions together and then the Bills need not come here at all. What is the important thing about “qualification”? Why is the “qualification” there? Why is it there? We should be making progress. We are consolidating our democracy and this Parliament should be an improvement on the previous one. So, why does he want us to be prisoners of bad precedent, so to speak?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon
Members , le t us make progress .
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.


Chairman, you have heard the Hon Deputy Minority Leader, will you do the necessary amendments and then we can put the Question?
Mr Puozaa 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do respect
the views being offered but I still think that since this law is being made for the same Ministry and for the same -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon
Chairman of the Committee, if we made a mistake in the last Parliament and we have seen it, can we not correct ourselves?
Mr Puozaa 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do agree
that --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
We should
be moving forward in the right direction. [Laughter.] Why? So listen to the Hon Deputy Minority Leader. “Vacancy in the membership” or “defect in the appointment” and delete “qualification”.
Mr Puozaa 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with the opinion of the House, I do agree; let it read as follows:
“The proceedings of the Board shall not be invalidated by reason of vacancy among the members.”
Will that be all right?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon
Members, “defect” is quite important there. The people making the appointment might think that, it is correct but somebody else can go to court to challenge that the appointment is defective. So “defect” - but it is the qualification that I think has a problem.
Mr Ghartey 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am appeased to understand the import of this entire proposed amendment. The reason being that I do not have the authority immediately here but the Supreme Court has decided that where an appointment or where somebody is occupying a
position and it is found out later that the appointment that was made or the position that he was occupying is defective or unlawful of some sort, it does not invalidate the proceedings that took place while he was occupying that position.
For example, if a person is appointed wrongly, and later on it is found out that that appointment is defective or the person did not have the qualification, what took place while the person was occupying that position is not invalidated by the subsequent events that have followed. If that is the case, then the clause which reads as follows:
“The proceedings of the Board shall not be invalidated by reason of vacancy among the members …”
My understanding is that, within the law, there is a provision for quorum. If you have not satisfied the quorum, then the Board is not properly constituted. But the point is that, if even there is a vacancy but there is sufficient number to satisfy the quorum, then any decision they take satisfies the provision of law. And the defect part or the absence of qualification has been decided by the Supreme Court.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon Joe
Ghartey, you have to read the quorum aspect of the Bill together with this provision to get the net effect of what the framers of the Bill intended.
My problem is the “qualification”. As for the “qualification”, before you appoint the person, you should know that this is the “qualification” they have. In the case of “defect”, it may arise as a result of somebody going to court to challenge the mode of appointment, and the court saying that the process leading to the appointment of the person was defective. So, that one does not necessarily reside in the appointing authority.
Mr Joe Ghartey 11:20 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with
respect -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
So, the intention is right as you captured it, so how do we get it?
Mr Ghartey 11:30 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as you have said, if somebody goes to court and says that the appointment of Mr ‘A' is defective, and the court agrees with the person and thereby says that Mr ‘A' no longer should be a member of the Board, it does not affect the proceedings. This clause is saying what has been decided. This clause is just repeating the legal position. It says that --
“the proceedings of the Board shall not be validated by reason of vacancy among the members or defect in the appointment or qualification.”
And I am saying that the Supreme Court says that when there is a defect in the appointment or lack of qualification, the proceedings of the Board -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon
Joe Ghartey, we are making laws for the ordinary people. Somebody can make a case that the one who had been appointed does not have the full complement. So it is just by way of emphasis. You are right that that should be the legal position but it is by way of emphasis.
Mr Dery 11:30 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think I agree
with Hon Joe Ghartey on the position of the law as espoused by the Supreme Court. But it is in a more concrete form in the Statute because the Supreme Court decision is a decision until it is changed by the Supreme Court. And if we capture it now, it means we agree and we are freezing it as far as this law is concerned. Therefore, it does not harm it on the contrary; it enhances the position.
I think it should be made clear because
Mrs Akosua F. Osei-Opare 11:30 a.m.
Mr
Speaker, I do not know whether I should make a complaint. But since you are in the Chair, maybe, I may be further sanctioned if I make a complaint.
However, my comment on the amendment is this -- if there is a “defect”, there is a defect and there must be some reasons espoused to show that there is a defect in the appointment of that Board member. Therefore, I see no reason to go beyond the “defect” to “qualification” and other reasons stated to show that somebody is qualified to serve on the Board, ranges from a number of criteria.
Therefore, if we are to say that the proceedings will not be invalidated, all we need to state is that, if there is a vacancy or if there is a defect in the appointment, period. And not necessarily “qualification” because the “defect”, if the person was not qualified, is it not a defect in the way that the appointment was made? It is a defect. Therefore, let us just stop at “defect” and whatever the defect is, at an appropriate time, it will be determined.
Thank you, Mr. speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon
Chairman, move the amendment, delete “defect” and let me put the Question. I think there is a consensus.
Mr Puozaa 11:30 a.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker. Thank you very much - [Interruptions.]
Mr Boafo 11:30 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we have to
be very careful because this is a saving provision in the Bill and if we do not take enough time to consider it, it may end up that we will be protecting illegalities.
Mr Speaker, secondly, if we retain “defect” simpliciter, the first approach is to put it in the ordinary way but I will like to see a situation where we qualify “effect” to arm any tribunal or court of competent jurisdiction to review whether diligent steps were taken to ensure that the “defect” did not take place. So Mr Speaker, that is my contention. That the result of the “defect” is inadvertent - inadvertent defect, not mere defect.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon Member for Akropong, I think you are carrying it a bit further.
Mr Manu 11:30 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not
understand why we want to remove the word “qualification”. “Qualification” is a defect all right; yes, but if you remove it and you leave “defect”, then you are calling for interpretation of what “defect” is, and if not having the requisite qualification, is a defect. I do not see the wrong that it makes.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon
Member, if you think “qualification” is a defect, and if you put “qualification”, why do you make it mutually exclusive? Then it means that “defect” is different from “qualification”. It will rather complicate the matters there if that is the basis of your submission. You are rather complicating the matter -
Mr Manu 11:30 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if I were
listened to, maybe, I would make sense at the end of the day. Because if you leave the “defect” to be interpreted, judges
may look at the defect from different perspectives and I feel that if we say “defect” and bring “qualification”, we would have even mentioned one of the defects which is “qualification”. So if a judge is going to look at what defects are, already “qualification” would have been settled upon and then we will be looking at other defects.
Mr Puozaa 11:30 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I will
beg Hon Members to agree with me that this amendment ends at “defects” in the appointment. If you mention “qualification”, you can keep on mentioning other defects. So “qualification” is only an example of a defect, therefore, you do not need to state it here, other than that, you need another page to list all the defects.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon Member, I will now put the Question?
Yes, Hon Minority Leader.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:30 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
we have travelled some distance on this and now that we have some consensus, I believe we can go on. Except to remind the Chairman who is so cocooned in the constructions of yester years that correct construction -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Cocooned
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:30 a.m.
Mr
Speaker, typically of l993, which is not a typical Parliament.
But the point I want to make is that, we may have to look at the construction again --
“The proceedings of the Board shall not be invalidated by reason of vacancy in the membership --”
not among the members or defects in the appointment.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 8 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Clause
12 -
Mr Boafo 11:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I wish to withdraw the -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon Member for Akropong, you have the floor -
Mr Boafo 11:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as I was saying, I wish to withdraw the proposed amendment under (ii).
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Very well. Amendment withdrawn accordingly. The next one is in your name -- Hon Member for Akropong.
Mr Boafo 11:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the purpose of the second amendment is to provide some checks and balances in our governance.
Mr Speaker, if you look at the original clause 12, you would see that it gives credence to Executive dictatorship and it reduces the Board members into robots. It is inherent in our democratic governance not only to strengthen the Executive but also to protect the institutions established by or under the Constitution to support the democratic principles.
So Mr Speaker, the proposed amendment seeks to promote the use of initiative by the Board members instead of curtailing initiative. That is an equal way of promoting development in our democracy.
So Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause
12, add the following new subclause:
“(2) Despite subsection (1), where the Board has any unjustifiable or reasonable observation or reservation on the policy directive, the Board may promptly make recommendation on the directive to the Minister.”
It is another saving provision for the Board.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon Member for Sekondi -
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 11:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, unfortunately, the Hon Member for Akropong did not advance arguments for this amendment. In my opinion, this amendment is a mere platitude. Can the Board not do what the amendment is seeking without it being in their law? He is saying that they may send recommendation, yes, but does it need to be in the enactment?
The Board can do so without it being specifically stated unless what he means is that the Board can disagree and refuse to comply, yes. But in actual practice, when a Ministerial directive is given to a Board, the Board would consider it; if the Board has reservations, it would communicate the reservations to the Hon Minister.
As a matter of course, does the member need to put this in the Act? I do not think so. I believe it is very superfluous. Unless of course, he wants it to be the position that the Board can decide not to comply but still give stated reasons. But that is not what he is seeking to do. So I am suggesting to him that probably, it is really surplusage and it needs not be part of the Act.
Mr Ghartey 11:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the amendment. I am asking the proposer to make a few changes. I think the purpose
Mr Dery 11:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to agree with Hon Joe Ghartey on this matter. When we talk of leadership, we have leadership at different levels and we have responsibility and accountability officers at various levels. And we do know that there is no vicarious liability on the part of Hon Ministers for the acts of Board members where the law prescribes what their liabilities are in certain circumstances. Therefore, we should also recognize that.
More so, we want to build, when we are delegating, we want to build good corporate governances as a reminder that it is not the top heavy, decentralized kind of leadership that is going to make this country move forward. We should know especially that we are now opening new frontiers about oil and whatever is going to come on board. We should go with the times.
I think that because the Minister does not have vicarious liability, we should allow this feedback system to be institutionalized and to be instituted in the law. So that we move away from the old system, what my Senior Hon Papa is talking about because that one is implied as a matter of practice. It is now time for us to elevate it to a level of a statutory provision so that we enhance good corporate governance.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, indeed, if we are introducing amendments, I agree that the amendments must be directed in a manner that will improve the Bill and sometimes too we must be guided by experience.
I have no problem with an amendment
which says that,
“The Minister may give general directives in writing to the Board on matters of policy.”
But to say that,
“and the Board shall comply”
and then you introduce an amendment which says that if the Board has reservations, the Board can write to the Hon Minister saying that we have reservations. So who takes responsibility for the decisions? If you want the Board
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
If you send your reservations then you shift the risk back to the Hon Minister who sends the policy.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 11:50 a.m.
No, Mr Speaker. But the fact is that --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
I think that so long as we have the law of causing financial loss to the State, this amendment is very important.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we should also not encourage a situation where Board members cannot take responsibility for decisions; that cannot be. Why are they there?
Mr Speaker, I will tell you; I have a personal experience. It can come to the highest level of government, highest level, highest advisory body where decisions that may even be contrary to enactments being advocated. If you are saying that, “Oh, well, then Pontius Pilate situation, then I will rub off my hands,” then why are you there as a Board member?
If the intention is to strengthen corporate governance, then the interest will better be served, if an amendment is introduced to delete --

That is the intention. If that is the intention of the amendment, the amendment does not go too far enough. It is a sub.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon Members, what happens to the other provisions where we have such clauses? In a lot of the laws that we have passed in this House, what happens - Because we cannot give a different standard to one public body and give another standard to another public body. There would be so much inconsistency and so much in the laws that we make in this House. I just want you to address that.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we have the opportunity; that is my point. We have the opportunity to correct ourselves and we will correct ourselves one at a time. If at a later date there is the need to amend the previous one, it should be done, because I also consider this a very dangerous directive.
The problem with our country is not so much the problem with institutional relations but the problem with individuals. This is because I would expect, where a directive is given to you, and you believe that the directive is wrong, it is not in the public interest -- I prefer public good and public interest to national interest because in this country, the national interest seems to be the same as interest of the government in power. Yes. That has been the - Yes.
When they talk about national security, it is regime security not national security. But this idea that people cannot take a principled position and resign should not be encouraged. This one is encouraging a situation where Board members will sit back, where they even think it is wrong and then say that “Ah, that is not me oo, it is the Minister, so somu gye wo krantie.” So if we really --
I also believe that, yes, Ministers give general policy directives but it is also important that in these matters, we encourage more of discussions so that you meet and discuss the merits and demerits, not that the Minister sits in the office and gives a general directive - “GETFund, use it to pay NYEP; GETFund, use it to pay NYEP employees.” Yes --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
But you know very well, the example you are giving - That example came here when you were Minister for Education. [Laughter.] The GETFund example you are giving came to the floor when you were Minister for Education. [Laughter.]
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I gave such a directive because in my interpretation of the GETFund Act, it was meant to promote education; the Fund was there to promote education and this directive was to ensure that children in the basic schools got teachers who could be paid.
So I am saying that I would prefer that we delete “and the Board shall comply”. It is a directive given to the Board for - It is contrary to all norms of good corporate governance for somebody to give a directive to a Board comprising people with diverse backgrounds and the Board must comply. I think that is really unacceptable.
So if the Hon Member for Akropong, the Hon Member, for Esikadu/Ketan and the Hon Deputy Minority Leader will agree with me, let us by consensus agree to the amendment so that we delete “and the Board shall comply” and then the amendments that are being introduced will be abandoned.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
That amendment has just been withdrawn by the leave of the House. It has been withdrawn. Anyway, let me hear from our Hon Member for Ayawaso West-Wuogon.
Mrs Osei-Opare 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, just a few months ago, this House approved the Savannah Accelerated Development Act and I would like us to borrow from that. Section 15 of that Act (SADA) said, and Mr Speaker, with your permission, I beg to quote:
“(1) The Minister may give directives in writing to the Board on the matters of policy and the Board shall comply.
(2) The directive shall be consistent with the Northern Savannah Development Strategy.”
So what we are saying is that in order to protect the integrity of the work of the Board, what we need to do is that if the Hon Minister is permitted to give directives and they shall comply, then there must be a caveat that “the directives must be consistent with the objectives of the Fund”. Otherwise, there is a problem. So this is what I propose as a solution to this problem.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
You are proposing. If you want to move an amendment, then move the amendment. Hon Member, do you want to move your amendment?
Mrs Osei-Opare 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 12 add the following subclauses:
“(1) the Board shall comply
“ (2 ) the d i r ec t ives sha l l be consistent with the objectives of the Students Loan Trust Fund.”
Mr Dery noon
Mr Speaker, I think that this whole amendment is necessary because we abandoned the proposed amendment under 9 (ii) on the Order Paper. If we delete “and the Board shall comply”, then we will not need this one.
What my Hon Sister is saying here is good but then it raises an issue of interpretation, that it shall comply, but that it must be within the whatever of the objectives - Who is to determine that? And it does not even tell us what the Board can do. But in this case, we are saying that if they shall comply, then there should be a provision for the Board to give a feedback when it disagrees with the directives. Otherwise, let us delete “shall comply” and we forget of this.
I would, with your leave, propose the amendment that Hon W. O. Boafo has abandoned - clause 12, line 2, which says: “. . . delete and the Board shall comply”. And I want to say that because when you say “shall comply”, we all know what “shall” means, it is mandatory. And Mr Speaker, we have all recognised that one; it is inimical for good corporate governance. Two, when it comes to liabilities as we have realised in recent times in Ghana, then you can have people at the Board level tried for decisions that are taken within the ambit of directives and they think that there is loss.
Of course, I have my own views about the financial loss to the State which I think should not be a law in the first place. But having said this, it is still a law. And so, we need to give some protection to this. So this “shall comply”, does not provide any immunity to the person taking the decision at that level.
So let us move forward; let us modernise the law and say: “The Minister shall give the general directive” and delete “and the Board shall comply”. Otherwise, what we are telling the whole world is that the Board has no discretion at all, and if the Board is going to be rubber-stamping, why are they there at all?
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
Hon Members, I have listened to both sides of the House; I have listened to everybody. I think that there is a case being made by
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon


both sides. I think the proper thing for us to do as a House, in view of the previous legislations that we have passed -- We have realised that there is something wrong with the previous ones and we want to improve upon it; I will defer this matter. Let us find a way so that we can pass a law that can withstand the test of time.

I think that that is the best thing to do because I have listened to the Member for Sekondi very, very well. I have listened to Hon Joe Ghartey. I have listened to Hon Deputy Minority Leader. I have listened to the Chairman of the Committee and I think that if we want to make a departure from previous legislations we have passed, let us agree among ourselves as a House to make a departure once and for all.

If we want to be of certain consistency, and as the Hon Member for Ayawaso West Wuogon has tried to do with the Savannah Accelerated Development Authority law that we passed here, let us know what we are doing, then we can take a decision that can withstand the test of time. Because there are very strong arguments by both sides of the House and I think that we must take it into account in making sure that we -
Mr Ghartey noon
Mr Speaker, I am a little worried. Because you said -- “I have listened to the Member for Sekondi very, very well”, then the rest of us, it was “well”. [Laughter.] So I do not know whether -
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
Very, very well.
Mr Ghartey noon
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
Hon
Members, let us see whether there is a problem with clause 22, otherwise, we may be thinking of adjourning the House. If there is no controversy with clause 22 - Chairman of the Committee?
Mr Puozaa noon
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 22, subclause (1), line 2, before “permanent” insert “total” and in line 3, delete “disability” and insert “incapacitation”.
The whole clause will read as follows: “The borrower of the Fund shall subscribe to a students' loan protection scheme payable by the borrower against death or total incapacitation.”
Mr Speaker, the truth is that you can have a disability, like you can lose a finger which is permanent, but that does not stop you from work. And for that matter, you are disabled but you are not incapacitated at such -- totally incapacitated. So, we feel that it is important to insert that word “total”, so that it will read “total incapacitation”.
You can have even not just a finger; you can be amputated; it is permanent but that does not stop you from working.
Mr Boafo noon
Mr Speaker, if we are too specific on the degree of permanence, we will take the discretion from the Board. I think if we leave it “permanent”, then each case would be determined on its own merit by the Board. Mr Speaker, the concept of liberalism which forms the basics of our Constitution, should prevail in the legislations that we make in this House. We must be liberal in all these cases; to make a provision in absolute terms deprives people of discretion and initiative.
Mr Dery noon
Mr Speaker, we do know
that in the application of a law of this nature, there is normally a determination by qualified medical officers. And when they determine the permanent disability, they will then tell you what the implications are. So when you want to say “total”, what do you mean by “total disability”? I do not know the concept. I think it is a political concept but in this one, we will be depending on medical experts to tell us.
When the medical off icer has determined that it is permanent disability affecting the capacity to earn, that is what the law is referring to. So, I think that we should allow it; the law is not to determine it; it is the provision that there is a permanent disability that makes it impossible for the person to earn. So let us leave it to the medical people to determine that.
Mr Ghartey noon
Mr Speaker, if the Chairman could assist us -- I know that for example, under the Civil Liabilities Act, the concept of permanent et cetera and the various levels of - are well determined by law. So it is not a concept that is unknown to us and so, if he could help me understand that, I will support him with all my legal acumen. I will be his lawyer if he can help me. He should instruct me properly, then I can be his lawyer.
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
Chairman, you have got the sentiment of the House.
Mr Puozaa noon
Mr Speaker, the offer is well taken, but it is too late. So I will want to step it down because I took it from the point of language and not law.
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
Is that the decision of the Committee? This amendment, is it the decision of the Committee because it raises certain issues which Members have rightly pointed out? You know that in this matter, they give a certain percentage, 75 per cent, 50 per cent
and that is why the lawyers are raising the red flag at this stage. You know where they are coming from?
Mr Puozaa noon
Mr Speaker, I do withdraw the amendment, because we are accepting it on the point of language and not the legal aspect.
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
Chairman of the Committee, the amendments are becoming more and more controversial and contentious. Let me give you the last chance. Let us move to the next one; if it is not, then I will adjourn. I want us to reduce the amendment as much as possible.
Clause 23 -
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
He says we should step it down because he could not defend it. I thought he had withdrawn
Mr Puozaa noon
I have withdrawn it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
Very well. I thought I heard him say that it should be deferred, stepped down or something. Chairman, you have withdrawn it? Are you sure?
Mr Puozaa noon
Very sure.
Mr First Deputy Speaker noon
I will now put the Question. I will put the Question on clause 22 -
Mrs Osei-Opare 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, one minute. I was really urging the Hon Chairman to step it down. I was trying to refer to the Persons with Disability Act and I think we might get some rendition to reflect what you really want to say. And I think there is a real case for not just saying somebody has a disability.
In fact, according to the Persons with
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Tuesday.
Mrs Osei-Opare 12:10 p.m.
We might have
another rendition that will reflect it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Members, the Hon Member on the floor, we must all admit is quite knowledge in that area, so we should defer to her and defer the amendment.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the intervention by my Hon Colleague, the Hon Member for Ayawaso West Wuogon is very timely. Being a former Hon Deputy Minister at the relevant Ministry, I think we should be amenable to her suggestion.
Mr Speaker, I think the practice that is afflicting this House must be well investigated. Mr Speaker, is it proper for an Hon Chairman of a committee, representing a position being advocated by a committee, to come to this House and upon listening to one or two persons, decide that he is dropping an amendment, that the person is ferrying to this Chamber for and on behalf of the committee? Mr Speaker, is it tenable?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Well, if he takes the sense of the House and knows that he is going to lose the amendment - [Laughter]-- But as much as possible, I agree with you that there should be a certain level of consultation in these matters.
Mr Puozaa 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think I did put up a strong fight. But being a wise Hon Chairman, I decided to listen to, at least, those who this House believes to be experts in the area. So, if they come up with their views, I think it is only right for us - and even all those who matter are

here, including the Hon Minister. Who am I to refuse - [Laughter] - So, I think it was in order.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Members, the amendment is accordingly deferred.
Clause 23?
Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I understood the Hon Chairman to mean that he had done some consultation. Certainly, I do not know whether those flanking him are all Hon Members of the Committee. I do not know that for a fact.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Especially, the Hon Member for Asawase.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
Especially, the Hon Member for Asawase. He is not a member of the Committee.
Indeed, Mr Speaker, consultation cannot be limited to one side of the Committee. Any decision that is arrived at the Committee is normally by consensus or by unanimous decision. So, if you consult one side, it cannot be representative of the entire Committee.
Mr Speaker, I think the principle -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
The man is saying that he is a wise Hon Chairman. He saw the signs. [Laughter.]
Mr Ghartey 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with respect, our Hon Leader is fretting in this direction. We are communicating seriously by signs and wonders and signals, winking and so on - [Laughter.]
In fact, Mr Speaker, even when we speak, we are giving cues. Like I said, “oh, help me to help you”. Then, he saw that he could not advance any argument, then he withdrew.
So, the Hon Leader should not worry. There is a lot happening around him that perhaps, he does not realise.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this indeed - the intervention by the Hon Member for Esikadu/Ketan is very serious. It is very pregnant with serious connotations.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
In fact, even a threat to your Leadership.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:10 p.m.
I think. - [Laughter] - Mr Speaker, it is a coup attempt - [Laughter.]
Mr Ghartey 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to assure him. He says that it is pregnant. I want to assure him that as far as politics is concerned, I have reached menopause, so I cannot be pregnant. [Laughter] I am on semi-retirement. Nothing will happen to him. He is the Leader for life.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Members, I think that at this point we should -
Hon Majority Chief Whip?
Mr Gershon K.B. Gbediame 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, today being Friday and cognisance of the fact that our Brothers and Sisters of the Islamic faith will be going to the mosque and other committee sittings -- I beg to humbly move, that this House do now adjourn and reconvene on Tuesday at ten o'clock in the forenoon.
Mr Ambrose P. Dery 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Members, before I put the Question, I want to urge the Hon Chairman of the Committee to do the necessary consultations with all the outstanding clauses so that next week we can - this Bill has been on the Order Paper for a rather long time. So that next week, we can just take some few minutes to close the chapter on it Bill.
Thank you very much for your support and co-operation.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT 12:10 p.m.