Debates of 25 Nov 2010

MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:45 a.m.
ANNOUNCEMENTS 10:45 a.m.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE 10:45 a.m.
PRESIDENT 10:45 a.m.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Members, Communication from the President.
“25th November, 2010
THE RT HON SPEAKER 10:45 a.m.
OFFICE OF PARLIAMENT 10:45 a.m.
PARLIAMENT HOUSE 10:45 a.m.
ACCRA 10:45 a.m.
PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC 10:45 a.m.
OF GHANA 10:45 a.m.
Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:45 a.m.
Mr
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Minority Leader, is anybody in breach, at least, on this occasion?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thought that we should put this matter beyond doubt because on occasions, we have had to debate the purpose -- the import of the transmission, you remember, Mr Speaker? That is what I am pleading, that we advert our minds to, that this communication is meant for this House even though it comes through the Speaker.
The Hon Majority Leader is definitely agreeing with me, shouting “yes”. That is how it should be and it should continue ad infinitum. The sequence should not be broken when at times he will say that “Oh! it is meant for the Speaker's Office”. It cannot be; it is meant for this House.
Mr Cletus A. Avoka 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, I do not know what problem the Hon Minority Leader has. Mr Speaker has received the communication from His Excellency the President and has duly passed the message to us as the
Standing Orders and the Constitution require. So, I do not know where there is a breach or the course of action that he has this morning, because his complaint or his intervention is not based on any course of action or any friction of the laws of the country. And he mentioned my name as having nodded in approval; he puts words into my mouth. I did not nod with any approval; if anything at all, I nodded with disapproval by his approach.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I never said the Hon Majority Leader nodded, that is the problem with him. I said he said “yes” and that indeed, he said. [Laughter.]
Mr Speaker, I just brought this matter up for reasons of consistency and you recall what happened sometime ago, when people contrived to imply that the import of article 59 was that, the communication should be given to the Speaker, simpliciter. That is what I am referring to.
Mr Ambrose P. Dery 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to ask for your guidance where on the Order Paper, the Hon Deputy Majority Leader would give us an account of his visit to the holy land. I just wanted your guidance on that.
Mr Joseph Y. Chireh 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much. Article 59 of this Constitution -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:45 a.m.
I thought you were going to respond to the point raised by - anyway, I am listening to you. Hon Minister, go ahead.
Mr Chireh 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, before I come to him, I want to answer my Friend. He was the one who used to say that
this communication was for the Speaker [Interruptions.] Yes, when the world traveller was travelling - [Laughter.] So for him today to turn round to say we should stick strictly to this, then that is what you should do.
In any case, we have to be informed because sometimes, it requires us to swear- in the Speaker. That is why we must be informed, so that consistency must always be consistency. It cannot be consistent only when it is on our side; but he was asking the Deputy Majority Leader to give an account --
Mr Dery 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I did not ask the Hon Deputy Majority Leader to -- I was asking the guidance of the Speaker, when on the Order Paper that would be possible, finished. I did not ask him to give - I am not competent to ask -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
I will refer that one to the Business Committee. [Laughter.]
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the problem with the Hon Minister responsible for Local Government and Rural Development is that, when the debate ensued on this matter, he was not in the Chamber and so he jumps up and he is making some wrong attribution regarding consistency. Mr Speaker, when we were debating this, he was not here; let him be forgiven. But he talks about a “world traveller”.
Mr Speaker, I know the Hon Colleague pursued a course in mathematics; this is beyond arithmetic. He knows that the combined travels of the President and the Vice-President are more than what he is alleging. [Interruptions.] Two years, we all know, Mr Speaker, you know. In any event, Mr Speaker, for eight years,
Mr Chireh 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minority Leader is talking about the combined -- our President and the Vice- President, now equalling what one person did. So what is this? It just shows -- [Interruptions.]
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Members, let us make progress.
Votes and Proceedings and the Official Report.
Correction of Votes and Procedings of Wednesday, 24th November, 2010.
Page 1 . . . 2 -
Mr Inusah A. B. Fuseini 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I have seen my name recorded at page 3, number 118. Mr Speaker, three weeks ago, I had the occasion to seek your leave to undertake the pilgrimage to the Royal Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Mr Speaker, I have since returned.
Indeed, while in Saudi Arabia -
Mr Fuseini 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, while in Saudi Arabia -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Member, what are you correcting?
Mr Fuseini 10:55 a.m.
I am correcting my status. Mr Speaker, I have since acquired a new status -- [Laughter] -- and this status is consistent with the tradition that was set by Mansa Kanka Musa in the old Mali Empire when he undertook a pilgrimage to Mecca. He returned with a status.
Mr Speaker, while in Saudi Arabia, I met the Hon Deputy Majority Leader; we prayed for Parliament, we supplicated for God to give us the wisdom and lucidity to carry out the business of Government.
Mr Speaker, what I am asking is that,
the Hansard Department takes note of the new status that I have since acquired, and that -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Member, you are out of order; communicate your new title officially to the Clerk to Parliament and we shall effect it.
Mr Fuseini 10:55 a.m.
For the avoidance of doubt, my new title and that of the Hon Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo, is Alhaji. [Hear! Hear!]
Mr Dery 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, when I asked for your guidance, it was to forestall this kind of disorder. That is why I asked when we would allow the Deputy Majority Leader to give us an account of where they have been. I understand Hon Inusah Fuseini, he was not in at the time, but some of the Hon Members here thought I was out of place. I am happy he has come back as ‘Alhaji'; I will acknowledge that but I will just advise that he puts it in writing to the Clerk's Office; and it is only after that that he can then effect the correction here. I say he is out of order because he is seeking to effect the correction before he has formally communicated. That is what I meant by -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
In fact, that is why I ruled the Hon Member out of order. He should officially communicate his new title. Even though he took permission, we are not too sure whether he actually got to the place. Now that you are claiming that you actually got to the place, you should communicate it officially to the House.
Mr Fuseini 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I concede that I was out of order but I was not disorderly.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Members, page 4 . . . 12 - [Pause.]
Hon Members , the Votes and Proceedings of Wednesday, 24 th November, 2010 is hereby adopted as the true record of proceedings.
It is now Question time; we have in our midst the Hon Minister for Food and
Agriculture to respond to Questions from Hon Members.
Mr Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am sorry to draw your attention to the Votes and Proceedings, page 10, item 3, “In Attendance”, the “CEO” is labelled “CEO, Cocobod” and the rest of them are also “CEO Cocobod”. I think that there is something wrong there. So it should be very clear if they are not “CEO Cocobod”, then they should be “Cocobod”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
I thought it applied only to Cocobod. Well, I thought the subsequent ones -- whatever it is, Table Office should take note.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, is it not noticeable that immediately upon arrival from Mecca, the first intervention by my respectable Friend, now Alhaji Inusah Fuseini is ruled out of order and the first intervention by the Hon Deputy Majority Leader is also non-conformist. Mr Speaker, it is noticeable. [Laughter.]
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Members, we have the Hon Minister for Food and Agriculture in the House to respond to Questions from Hon Members.
Question number 538 stands in the name of the Hon Member for Techiman South.
ORAL ANSWERS TO 11:05 a.m.
QUESTIONS 11:05 a.m.
MINISTRY OF FOOD AND 11:05 a.m.
AGRICULTURE 11:05 a.m.
Mr Addai 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the beneficiaries were made to vacate their farmlands over three years ago. May I know the actual time they would have the opportunity of coming back to farm on the land?
Mr Ahwoi 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we are in contact with the contractor and as stated earlier, we have given him the time to complete the work that he is doing. It is programmed that all outstanding work would be finished during the coming dry season.
Mr Tanko Abdul-Rauf Ibrahim 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, from the answers that are being made available to the House by the Hon Minister for Food and Agriculture, the indication is that the contractor is expected to complete the project this dry season. He has not made available the contract period within which the contractor is supposed to complete the project. This is because when one is signing a contract, it is binding on -- [Interruptions.]
The question is, the Hon Minister has not given us the contract period within which the contractor is supposed
to complete the project. So he should be candid enough to tell us the contract period.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Ahwoi 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the contract was awarded in May 2007, and was supposed to have been completed by 2008.
Mr William O. Boafo 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the Hon Minister how he would reconcile these two statements on top of page 22. In one breath, the Hon Minister says,
“The contractor is presently on site with a bulldozer clearing the stumps and working on the fish ponds.”
In another breath, he is saying that
“ . . . due to the excessive rainfall and flooding of the project area, the contractor has suspended work temporarily.”
So which is which?
Mr Ahwoi 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the situation is exactly as has been described. The contractor was on site in terms of equipment and machinery that had to be used; they are on site, but had to stop work temporarily because of the flooding.
Mr Emmanuel A. Owusu-Ansah 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the Answer the Hon Minister gave to the House at page 22, he said “the contractor is presently on site with a bulldozer.” Then the second leg my Hon Colleague drew his attention to, that the contractor has suspended work. Now, the question was to ask him to reconcile and when he was reconciling, he said the “contractor was” and that is completely different from what he has told the House earlier. I want clarification from the Hon Minister.
Mr Ahwoi 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in terms of presence of the contractor on the project site, the answer is that he is on site. He has equipment on the ground but unfortunately, he cannot work because of the flooding and therefore, I am saying that temporarily, he is not working but equipment and his presence are on site.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe the Hon Minister may have to inform us properly the medium of communication. Mr Speaker, the Minister is telling us that “the contractor is presently on site.” And I know that in the Queen's English, when you say that “he is presently on site”, it means that “presently” means soon. I know that in American English, “presently” means at the moment. What is the medium of communication?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Minority Leader, ask another question. [Laughter.]
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if he cannot answer or if you are forbidding him to answer, it is all right.
Tanoso Dam (Non-operation)
Q. 359. Mr Simons Addai asked the Minister for Food and Agriculture why the Tanoso Dam was not operational.
Mr Kwesi Ahwoi 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Tanoso Irrigation Project was selected as one of the nine (9) out of 22 public irrigation schemes for rehabilitation under the Ministry of Food and Agriculture. The rehabilitation is funded by the World Bank and Government of Ghana and the beneficiaries are small-scale farmers in
Mr Kwesi Ahwoi 11:15 a.m.


from India. There were delays in shipment and delivery of the equipment to Ghana. The pumps had now been installed and electrical connection from the transformer to the pumps had been done by Kirloskar engineers and Northern Electrification Unit from Techiman. Engineers from Jain Irrigation Systems had also completed works on the lateral lines and sprinklers in the field.

Mr Speaker, the Tanoso Irrigation Project seems to be beset with one problem after the other. All works had been completed and the dam was ready for use but just before the test running of the pumps and inaugurating of the dam, the weir itself failed with water flowing out under the weir wall itself. Investigation indicated that crocodiles had burrowed under the concrete wall, allowing water to flow under the weir.

Mr Speaker, provision has been made in the 2011 Budget to rebuild the weir in the coming dry season, between January and March, 2011. This is because the construction of the weir can only be done in the dry season.
Mr Addai 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to know the assurance the Hon Minister has for the beneficiaries since they have been denied the usage of this land for the past five years.
Mr Ahwoi 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, that is precisely the reason I put in, that this particular Tanoso Irrigation Project seems to be beset with one problem after the other. Everything was ready for the go until we realized that the crocodiles whom we have not factored into the project have created this problem for us. We will need now to go and work on their weir before access can be given and made to the beneficiaries. Before then we may have to either kill all the crocodiles or transfer them to safer grounds elsewhere.
Mr Addai 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, somebody is suggesting that these crocodiles must
be killed. I want to find out whether the Ministry would consider doing that which is not in the best interest of the people.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:15 a.m.
The question again.
Mr Addai 11:15 a.m.
Somebody suggested that these crocodiles must be killed so that they do not disturb the dam. May I know from the Hon Minister if that would be the consideration, which is not in the best interest of the people?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Hon Member, you have answered the question. You are saying that the suggestion is not in the best interest of the people. So I do not know what question you want the Hon Minister to answer. So if you can rephrase the question.
Mr Addai 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, would the Hon Minister assure the people that the crocodiles would not be killed?
Mr Ahwoi 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I did give an alternative for solving the crocodiles' problem. Either we transfer them or transport them elsewhere for safe keeping, because if we attempt to kill them, we may face another problem from the environmentalists. Therefore, we are looking at the best way to handle this situation. We cannot leave them in the project area; they would do more damage. We would have to transfer them somewhere. So I will need to talk to the Department of Game and Wildlife and other environmental groups who may advise us as to exactly where to relocate these predators.
Mr Joseph B. Aidoo 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we have already heard about the Kaniago Irrigation Scheme, and now the Tanoso Irrigation Project, all in the Brong Ahafo Region. Mr Speaker, these infrastructural facilities were dead, but have been revived from 2005/06. Would the Hon Minister assure this House that now that they have been revived, they would speed up the final resuscitation of these facilities for
the benefit of the whole country?
Mr Ahwoi 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, when I came on the scene in 2009, the Tanoso Irrigation Project was virtually at a standstill. I had to put in a lot of pressure and effort to get the Indian companies and the Ghana Irrigation Development Authority to bring it to where I am reporting on today.
Remember in 2009, I was in this House to report on the Tanoso project and I did even assure the House at that time that we would finish before the end of 2009, which we almost did, but for the fact that this development has occurred. So the assurance be given to this House, that once I solved the problem with the crocodiles, this project would be available for use by the beneficiaries.
Mr Boafo 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the Hon Minister, what sort of engineering mechanism the contractor has put in place to ward off further or future burrowing by the crocodiles?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Your question again.
Mr Boafo 11:15 a.m.
I would like to find out from the Hon Minister, the type of engineering mechanisms which the contractor intends to put in place in the construction works to forestall future burrowing by the crocodiles.
Mr Ahwoi 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, this would require, and I have already consulted the Ghana Irrigation Development Authority (GIDA),to give us their technical expertise on how to resolve this particular problem and I think that in consultation with the contractor, GIDA will provide a solution to this problem.

Coupons for Subsidized Fertilizer (Issuance)

Q. 584. Mr Samuel Ayeh-Paye asked

the Minister for Food and Agriculture why fertilizer coupons were not yet ready for farmers to purchase subsidised fertilizers for the main farming season this year.
Mr Kwesi Ahwoi 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with all due respect, this Question seems to be a bit out of date, out of time in the sense that we have long started using the fertilizer and indeed, for the main cropping season, our fertilizer has already gone to the field.
Mr Speaker, in 2009, a total of 72,795 metric tonnes of fertilizers at the cost of GH¢34.4 million were subsidised using the coupon system.
For 2010 farming season, Government is subsidizing 100,000 metric tonnes of fertilizers at an estimated cost of GH¢32 million. The current cost is dictated by the fallen world price of fertilizer.
Mr Speaker, in view of the high administrative cost of printing the coupons and time spent by staff signing all the numerous coupons, as well as the associated abuse, the coupon system has been discontinued with effect from 22nd June, 2010.
A waybill - Receipt system is being employed for administering the fertilizer subsidy programme for 2010. Under this system, the fertilizer companies are to deliver fertilizer to all districts for sale to farmers at the recommended prices as follows, for this current year:
NPK -- GH¢27
SOA -- GH¢18
Urea -- GH¢25
Mr Speaker, our farmers can easily have access to fertilizers. They only have to walk into a shop which sells fertilizer and procure them at the subsidised price. They do not need any coupons to do so.
Mr Speaker, the recommended subsidy would be paid to the fertilizer
Mr Kwesi Ahwoi 11:25 a.m.


companies after sales, upon presentation and reconciliation of accounts with the Regional/District Directors of Agriculture. The details can be found in the MOFA 2010 Fertilizer Subsidy Programme Implementation Guidelines. (Copy attached.)

2010 Fetilizer Subsidy Programme

Implementation Guidelines

1. Background

The low application rate of fertilizer estimated at 8 kilogrammes/hectare in Ghana compared to an average of 20 kilogrammes/hectare in sub-Saharan Africa, 99 kilogrammes/hectare in Latin
SPACE FOR GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF 11:25 a.m.
Mr Ayeh-Paye 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, one
problem that the coupon system came to address, is the smuggling of fertilizer to nearby countries. I want to know from the Hon Minister what measures he has put in place to ensure that suppliers will not smuggle fertilizer to nearby countries like la Cote d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso and Togo.
Mr Ahwoi 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am not very sure that the coupon system addressed the smuggling of fertilizer out of the country. In fact, evidence has it that there was smuggling during that period, that was
SPACE FOR APPENDIX 1 -
PAGE 7 - 11.25 A.M.
SPACE FOR FERTILIZER 11:25 a.m.
SPACE FOR FERTILIZER 11:25 a.m.
Mr Ayeh-Paye 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, suppliers complain of late payment after they have filed their returns for payment. And this delays supply of fertilizer to farmers. With the new system, what measures is the Ministry putting in place to ensure that when farmers file their returns, they get paid on time to ensure regular and early supply of fertilizer to farmers so that they get fertilizer when they need it?
Mr Ahwoi 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it is not the farmers who have to file their returns. Rather it is the fertilizer dealers who have to file their returns through their agents and the suppliers who have to file their returns. The major suppliers have working relationship and ceilings with the subsidiary agents. So if an agent exceeds his credit ceiling, the major supplier will cut off supplies until they have reconciled their figures.
I do believe that with this first time
of introducing the new system, we will encounter a few such problems but we will address these as we go through the final reconciliation. As a matter of fact, there is regular interaction between the Ministry of Food and Agriculture and the major fertilizer distributors. We have brought to their attention the fact that they should not cut off the credit ceiling when their agents hit that level because it affects our farmers.
They have agreed to that but we have a responsibility to ensure that we pay the major distributors very promptly. Otherwise, when they lock up their capital, it creates a problem for them and there is a tendency that they may even withhold supplying any further fertilizer until they have paid for those that have already gone into the field.
Mr Maxwell K. Jumah 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to know from the Hon Minister if he is aware that fertilizer sent to the Kumasi Metropolitan Assembly (KMA) was diverted and if not, if he would institute an investigation to find out what happened.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:25 a.m.
This is strictly not supplementary but I will allow the Hon Minister to respond.
Mr Ahwoi 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am actually not aware of that. But I do know that the fertilizer buying agents take stock, take consignments from among themselves and therefore, fertilizer meant for Kumasi, Ashanti Region may, between a Northern Regional Agent and an Ashanti Regional Agent be moved to the Ashanti Region under their own special arrangement. Even though in practice, it is not supposed to be so because we have consigned the whole quantity to the Ashanti Region. But if it comes to our notice, we would definitely look into that.
We did look into the case of underweight of fertilizer by some of the companies and we have dealt appropriately with that. But this particular crossing of the border from Ashanti Region to elsewhere has not come to my notice - [Interruption] - within
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Yes, last question.
Hon Member for Akropong.
Mr Boafo 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to know from the Hon Minister, in view of the new system that has been introduced, where people can walk to the shops and access fertilizers, what steps he thinks are proper to take to prevent non-users of the fertilizers to have access more than the farmers -- since now the fertilizer is opened to both farmers and non-farmers.
Mr Ahwoi 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, administering subsidies of this nature can be quite problematic, in the sense that those who they are not intended for may take advantage as we saw under the coupon system. But we do believe that if we put this scheme on the open approach as we have done, it will minimize the tendency of non-beneficiaries going in for the produce that is not meant for them.
In the first instance, the original coupon
system was meant for only small-scale peasant farmers involved in food crop production. It excluded small-scale peasant farmers involved in non-food crop production like perennial crops, oil palm, coconut, coffee, cocoa; it excluded all of them. It also excluded medium and large-scale farmers and therefore, the tendency was very high for such excluded group to try and infiltrate into the scheme. What we have done now is to bring all of them on board and ensure that at least, everybody can go to the market to buy what they need. We believe this is a better system than the first one that we ran.
Upper East Region Dams (Rehabilitation)
Q. 596. Mr Leo Kabah Alowe asked the Minister for Food and Agriculture when all the dams in the Upper East Region would be dredged and rehabilitated to promote dry season irrigation farming in the region.
Mr Kwesi Ahwoi 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there are over two hundred (200) dams and dugouts located in various areas in the Upper East Region. To be specific, there are about 242 such dams and dugouts. The development of some of these facilities dated back to the forties (1940s). The lifespan of a small earth dam is usually between thirty and forty years. Accordingly, in the nineties, most of these dams required rehabilitation.
Rehabilitation of earth dams and dredging of the reservoirs have been a continuous activity. Between 1992 and 1997, the Government of Ghana and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) through the Ministry of Food and Agriculture rehabilitated over 44 dams in the Upper East Region under the Land Conservation and Small Holder Rehabilitation Project (LACOSREP I). Under LACOSREP II, twenty-nine (29) dams were also rehabilitated between 2000 and 2005.
The German Agency for Technical Co-operation (GTZ) under the Labour Intensive Public Works (LIPW) Project also rehabilitated nine (9) dams in the Upper East Region.
Mr Speaker, since 2008, about thirty- nine (39) dams destroyed by the 2007/2008 floods in the Upper East Region are under rehabilitation. Twenty-four have since been completed and the rest are at various stages of completion.
Mr Speaker, the World Bank is funding the Ghana Social Opportunity Project (GSOP) through the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD). The Ministry of Food and Agriculture is a collaborator. Under the programme, thirty (30) dams will be rehabilitated in the three northern regions, using labour intensive public works concept.
Mr Speaker, the Northern Rural Growth Programme (NRGP), funded by the African Development Bank (AfDB) and IFAD and being implemented under the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFA) has 65 per cent of its budget supporting irrigated agriculture.
Under the programme, more dams in the Upper East Region will be rehabilitated or built. Currently, a consultant has been contacted to identify possible areas for new dams construction and old dams for rehabilitation in the Upper East Region.
Mr Alowe 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister indicated in his Answer that 24 dams out of the 39 that were destroyed in the 2007/2008 floods have been completed. Could he kindly tell this House what the rehabilitation entailed?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
I cannot
get the end of your question.
Mr Alowe 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to find
out what the rehabilitation entailed; the 24 dams out of the 39 that were completed.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
You indicated that 24 dams have since been completed from the 2007/2008 floods. What does it entail?
Mr Ahwoi 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it means that
it is available for use and it is being used. That is what it means precisely, that 24 of these dams are currently in use.
Mr Alowe 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to find out from the Hon Minister whether he is aware that supervision for the said rehabilitation was either very minimal or non-existent as a lot of those dams, particularly those in my district, Kassena -Nankana West District were badly done. Sand was excavated and dumped just a hundred metres from the catchment area and with the rains, all these came back into the dams and have desilted them and the embankments have been destroyed with the floods. Is he aware and has he done anything about that?
Mr Ahwoi 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we are
aware of some of the cases where silt has reoccurred due to the debris being packed just on the banks of these dams. When that happens, the Irrigation Development Authority takes it up with the contractor, so long as it is within the contract handing- over period. If it is outside it, then we
would have to find new resources to go back and desilt these choked dams as it were. We will work on such cases as and when they are brought to our attention.
Mr Alowe 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon
Minister has indicated that more dams would be rehabilitated and constructed. May I find out from him whether the Ministry has any plans to provide some level of equipment and tools to these irrigation farmers to actually promote irrigation in the dry season?
Mr Ahwoi 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the programme of irrigation development, we do involve the farmers by way of water management committees and water management processes. In the actual construction, unless it is labour intensive, example in the case of GTZ, which involved communities to build the dams themselves or the wells themselves, contractors are contracted to handle these projects. But before completion, the communities are brought to understand the need for them to manage the water resource and maintain the dams themselves. This is because once the project is finished, they go off site and the project reverts to the community and that is what we have been doing.
Mr Alowe 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, can I kindly point out that -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
You have
exhausted your three supplementaries but I will allow you to ask one question.
Mr Alowe 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he has not
answered my question and that is why I am up on my feet again.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
He was
asking about tools.
Mr Alowe 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, yes, I asked whether the Ministry has any programme to provide tools and equipment to support the irrigation farmers.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
That is not strictly supplementary. Your question was about rehabilitation of dams but you are now talking about equipment and tools to the farmers. But if the Hon Minister wants to provide any information, he can do so.
Mr Ahwoi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it is not in our design now to supply tools for farmers to construct their own dams. We will keep that under contract but when it comes to the maintenance, as I said, we will involve and we have been involving the communities in that. If in that respect, the communities would need some kind of tools for maintenance purposes, it is possible to include that in the project design.

Pusiga Constituency Dams (Allocation)

Q. 597. Mr Simon Atingban Akunye asked the Minister for Food and Agriculture how many dams would be allocated to the Pusiga Constituency to boost the agricultural sector performance especially during the dry season.
Mr Kwesi Ahwoi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as hinted earlier, under the Ghana Social Opportunity Project (GSOP) being funded by the World Bank through the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD), with collaboration from the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA), thirty (30) dams have been earmarked for rehabilitation in the three northern regions.
T h e N o r t h e r n R u r a l G r o w t h Programme (NRGP) with funding from the African Development Bank (AfDB) and International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) has about 65 per cent of the total budget supporting irrigated agriculture. To date, consultants have been contracted to identify possible dams for rehabilitation/reconstruction and also areas for new dams construction in the northern parts of the country (that is, the three northern regions and northern parts of the Brong-Ahafo Region).
Mr Speaker, the number of dams to be allocated to each region/area will however, depend on the needs assessment and the selection criteria set by the two projects. Subsequently, the number of dams to be allocated to the Pusiga Constituency will be known after the selection exercises have been concluded.
Mr Akunye 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, may I know from the Hon Minister the selection criteria that are set by those two projects for the selection of the dams.
Mr Ahwoi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the areas with
high potential will be brought forth after the studies have been conducted -- is indicated when the selection exercise has been completed. It will form the basis for the selection exercise.
Mr Akunye 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, may I find
out from the Hon Minister, there is a lot of rumour about tractors that are yet to come to boost the agricultural sector. And we hear that they are on the high seas, in Italy and Germany. So did he -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon
Member, speak into your microphone.
Mr Akunye 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, may he help
to clear the air exactly what is happening to the tractors that they said they had imported?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
I did not
get the question.
Mr Akunye 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there is a
lot of rumour that MOFA has imported tractors to boost the agricultural sector in Ghana. And we hear that they are on the high seas coming. Some people say that they are yet to leave Italy and Brazil; in fact, we do not know what is happening. So may he clear the air? May he tell me exactly what is happening to the tractors they said they had imported?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon
Member, you know that is not a supplementary question. Your Question was about dams allocation in your constituency. Now, you are talking about tractors; you know that is not a supplementary question. However, if the Minister wants to provide any information about tractors that are being brought into the country, he may do so but that is not a supplementary question. Ask another question.
Mr Akunye 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it has
happened that most of the dams that are broken are being repaired. Most often than none, they do not keep long and you
see that they break down again. What measures is the Hon Minister putting in place to make sure that when they are re-repaired, they would not break down again?
Mr Ahwoi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe we
have to learn lessons from our mistakes in the past and therefore, I have charged the Ghana Irrigation Development Authority (GIDA), which is the authority for ensuring that dams are constructed properly according to laid down technical designs and engineering specifications -- I have charged them to ensure that from now on, any project that we will take over will meet these criteria. I believe that will be the only way out for us to ensure that contractors do the job for which they are paid to do.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Yes, last
question.
Dr Francis B. Dakura 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I just want to find out from the Hon Minister for Food and Agriculture whether local people will be consulted about their needs, in relation to the dams the consultants have been contracted to assess. Because it is very, very important that the local people are involved in the consultation process. Mr Speaker, I am even surprised to hear that there are consultants that have been assigned for that project.
Mr Ahwoi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it is very
necessary that this consultation does take place. Indeed, the needs assessment that I referred to involving the community. By community, you are talking about the leadership of the community and members, those who would use the facility. It is important that we get to know their views on what they want. At the end of the day, it is they who are going to use the facility and therefore, if you do not involve them, it will be like an imposition, and many such impositions have been rejected by the final beneficiaries. So, there is that involvement that takes place and we will keep doing that.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Minister, for attending upon the House to respond to Questions from Hon Members. You are discharged.
MOTIONS 11:45 a.m.
Majority Leader (Mr Cletus A. Avoka) (on behalf of Chairman of the Committee) 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Speaker who is the Chairman of the Committee of Selection, I wish to present this Report for and on behalf of the Committee.
Mr Speaker, in accordance with Standing Orders 151 and 152, the Selection Committee met and has made the following proposed changes to the Committees' composition with respect to Standing Committees and Select Committees.
Mr Speaker, what informed us into making this limited changes is that, during the course of this year or at the beginning of this year, there was a ministerial reshuffle that affected some key Members of this august House. In view of the fact that some of them cannot serve on certain committees by virtue of their positions in the Executive, it became necessary to make some changes.
Certainly, during the course of the year and last year, we unfortunately lost one or two of our Members of this august House and there is the need for us to fill those vacuums too. We also discovered that in some areas, out of inadvertence, some Members have not been able to serve on either the Standing Committee or Select Committee and this is contrary to the Standing Orders of the House and also article 103 of the Constitution. It is against
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Yes, he should delete who?
Mr Avoka 11:45 a.m.
Delete Hon John Tia and
replace with Hon Cassiel Ato Forson. If you look at page 12 -
Dr A. A. Osei 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I was just
trying to see if we had copies, it will be easier to be able to follow the Leader -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Copies
of these documents have been laid and distributed -
Dr A. A. Osei 11:55 a.m.
The last time - he is
filing amendments, most people do not have it - so it is difficult to help him.
Mr Avoka 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if he had his
copy that we had laid, he will just look at it and know that we are replacing one
person, that is, Finance Committee; we are taking out a Minister and putting in somebody else. That is all that we are doing. But for the avoidance of doubt and in order to curtail matters, Mr Speaker, I will make photocopies of this amendment and then circulate to Hon Members so that - I will make a copy available to the Hansard to capture the amended places and also make copies available to Hon Members so that we do not delay the proceedings in the House.
So Hon Members are invited and urged to note the amendments that we are going to distribute to them in due course -- today. We are also going to give a copy to the Hansard Department so that they will capture the amendments so that people will know. So from the Hansard, as well as the copy that we are going to circulate, Members will know those who have been replaced in one committee or another.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the principle is appreciated but I think we should be very firm in our minds of what we are doing. The Majority Leader is saying that as per the amendment, he was suggesting to us, that we should delete Hon John Tia and replace with somebody else. Mr Speaker, I do not think that we are deleting John Tia; if you are deleting the Hon John Tia's, then it is very serious - [Laughter] - Mr Speaker, that is very very serious. So he should inform us what exactly he is doing.
Mr Avoka 11:55 a.m.
Well, if, to the Minority
Leader, a human being can be deleted, so be it. But the thing is that we delete the name of Hon John Tia and replace it with Hon Cassiel A. Forson.
Thank you.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Yes, Hon
P. C. Appiah-Ofori, do you have a point of order?
SPACE FOR ATTACHMENT 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
SPACE FOR STANDING 11:55 a.m.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 11:55 a.m.
No, I thought he had finished, that is why I stood up.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
No, he has
not finished. Have you finished with the amendments -- the corrections?
Mr Avoka 11:55 a.m.
I had indicated that to
curtail time, we will rather circulate the list - we will make copies and give to every Member in the House and particularly the affected Members and then we will also invite the Hansard Department to capture it so that at the end of the day, people will know the amendments that we have made. Otherwise, if I have to read it, it will take me some five minutes and I thought that we should curtail this long list. But if it is the pleasure of Mr Speaker, I can just mention the names.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want him to mention the names because when the original documents came, my name was nowhere. I had not been given any Select Committee to serve on and therefore, I want him to come out to say whether the corrections he has made include my name.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
The amendments that he is making? Hon Majority Leader, I think Hon Appiah- Ofori has a point there. He says he was not serving on any Select Committee, meanwhile, you are saying that the mischief that you want to cure, one of them is to make sure that everybody served on a Standing Committee and a Select Committee.
Mr Avoka 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I know that
there are two sides of the caucus. I will invite the Hon Minority Leader to be able to allude to this. One of your august Members is saying that he does not serve on any Select Committee and this is within the preserve of the Minority Secretariat.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Majority Leader, yes, you are absolutely right because by practice, we know how the lists are compiled but you are presenting a Committee's Report. So before you present it, you have to satisfy yourself that the very mischief that you want to cure has been cured. So if it is not cured, then you draw your Minority Leader's attention to that matter.
Mr Avoka 11:55 a.m.
Exactly so, Mr Speaker.
I present the Report on behalf of the Committee based on information from both sides of the caucuses.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Minority Leader, the Hon. P. C. Appiah- Ofori is raising a point that in the list that has been circulated, he is not serving on any Select Committee.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as you do know, the practice of composing these committees normally is handled by the Chief Whips. I am not aware of this anomaly that he is alluding to. But if, indeed, that is the case, we may have to look at it.
Mr Speaker, let me also sound that we intend, into next year, to have a serious re-engineering of the committees in the House. I am aware though that some people are already threatening that they are not afraid of any reshuffle in the House but we will certainly pursue that agenda.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
But if the
point being raised by Hon Appiah-Ofori is true, then we have to defer the vote on the matter so that tomorrow morning, we can address his concern. I have not gone through all the list.
Mr Avoka 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I appreciate
that. We will agree and then defer this to tomorrow morning so that when we close at the end of the day, the Minority and I
will confer and see how we can rectify this. Let me also put it to Hon Colleagues that, if anybody after scrutinizing the document that we had laid earlier, has a similar case or has any other problem, he can draw our attention, so that tomorrow, we can take it holistically.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
I do not intend to derogate from what the Majority Leader has said. I think that by this exercise, we should also establish in very clear terms what we intend article l03 (4) of the Constitution to mean. Mr Speaker, I think we have been arguing and debating this matter for some time. In the Majority, for eight years, we thought that all Members of Parliament should belong to what we called Select Committees, which oversight the Executive. I think along the line, this matter came up that if you were part of the Executive, you could not oversight the Executives. So we had some insistence that Members of Parliament Ministers should not serve on any Select Committees.
Mr Speaker, some of us disagree because the language of the Constitution which refers to Standing Committees really, by application, refers to our Select Committees and since it is a prime duty of a Member of Parliament to oversight the Executive, whether or not you are a Minister, you should belong to a Select Committee. I think we adopted a practice of not putting Ministers in committees relating to their own sectors.
I think that we should establish this principle while we are doing this because I do not know whether the Majority has included in their list, Ministers and if we have not, then we should address this. In my view, every Member should belong to, at least, one Select Committee.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon
Member, the first principle which was established here was that Ministers
should not belong to Select Committees to oversight the Executive because they are part of the Executive, then it was changed that they should be members of the committees that they are Ministers. Otherwise, they will be oversighting their own Ministries and that is the principle now and I think that that is the point you are making and I think it is a good principle that we must uphold.
Mr Avoka 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I just want to confirm that as far as the Majority is concerned, we have made sure that no Minister serves on a committee for which he is a sector Minister. But they are also members of various Select Committees and sometimes, they bring their experience to bear on some of the work that we do. We make sure that there is no conflict of interest.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
I just came but I do not know whether the Hon Majority Leader has amended the list in any way.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Yes. He
has amended it.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:05 p.m.
In respect
of the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
He has made an amendment but he says it should be captured by the Hansard Department. But we have deferred the matter; we have deferred the consideration of the matter because a Member has raised an issue that he has not been put on any of the Select Committees. So, we want to scrutinise the whole list again, within the spirit that the Hon Minority Leader has stated, so that we can take the matter tomorrow morning.
Mr Avoka 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we discovered
that initially, the Hon Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice was a member of the Committee on Legal, Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs. We have accordingly removed him from

that Committee and replaced him with somebody else, in line with the principle that you cannot superintend over your own work.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon
Members, item 6 on the Order Paper - Petroleum Revenue Management Bill at the Consideration Stage.
BILLS - CONSIDERATION 12:05 p.m.
STAGE 12:05 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi) 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, subclause 1, line 3, delete “activity” and insert “operations”.
Mr Speaker, this amendment is proposed in order to have a better rendition than what we have here, where we are making reference to upstream and downstream petroleum operations.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr William O. Boafo 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
I beg to move, clause 1, subclause 2, paragraph (a), delete “Act or Regulations” and insert “enactment”.
Mr Speaker, the Act has been defined as an Act of Parliament and Regulations are part of statutory Instruments both in the Constitution and in the Interpretation Act; the definition of “Act” is Act of Parliament. It does not extend to the decrees and the laws of the Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC).
Mr Speaker, if you look at the definition of “enactment” under the Constitution, under article 295 (1), it reads as follows:
“Act of Parliament” means an Act enacted by Parliament and includes an Ordinance;”
But Mr Speaker, if you go further and you look for definition of enactments, it reads as follows:
“Enactment” means an Act of Parliament, a Decree, a Law or a constitutional instrument or a statutory instrument or any provision of an Act of Parliament, a Decree, a Law or of a constitutional or of a statutory instrument;”
So, Mr Speaker, I believe if you look at the intendment of clause 1, subclause 2, you could see that they want to cover a larger area and this is precisely the reason behind the proposed amendment. With regard to Regulations also, if you restrict yourself to Regulations, then it means you are also not covering the other aspects of the statutory instruments like the Executive Instrument or Constitutional Instrument, hence the deletion of “Act or “Regulations” and substitution of “enactment”, so that it will read as follows:
“Where there is a conflict between the provisions of this Act; and
(a) any other enactments. . .”
That will encompass Act of Parliament, Decrees, Laws, Statutory Instruments, Regulations, Executive Instruments and so forth.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Mr Avedzi 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to
move, clause 1 subclause 2, paragraph (b), delete “of” and insert “conditions and stipulations in”.
So that the clause will then read as follows:

“Where there is any conflict between the provisions of this Act and any other enactments, the terms, conditions and stipulations in the petroleum authorisation.”

Mr Speaker, this amendment is in the joint name of the Committee and Hon Boafo. The reason is that, in petroleum authorisation, it is not only the terms and conditions which can go against the provision of this Act but there could be other stipulations. So, it is just to expand it in order to cover any provision that will not go against the terms or conditions or stipulations in the petroleum authorisation.
Mr Boafo 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I rise
to support the amendment and in the explanation, the Chairman has said it all. What I would like to add is that, the expression “stipulation” has been added because there may be a warranty which is not a term or condition, that is why we added “stipulation” to take care of other directives and notices that one would find in petroleum authorisation.
Mr Clement K. Humado 12:05 p.m.
Mr
Speaker, while I support the amendment, it has also introduced a slight grammatical consideration. After the word “terms”, I think there should be a comma to separate it from “conditions” and “stipulations”; in that way, it will enhance the real meaning of the amendment.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
That is a drafting issue that should be taken on board.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Avedzi 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, subclause 2, the line after paragraph (b), delete “use” and insert “allocation”.
Mr Speaker, the purpose of this Bill is about revenue collection, allocation and management of petroleum revenue. So for the purposes of consistency, we need to use “allocation” instead of “use”. So it will now read:
“Where there is any conflict between the provisions of this Act and any enactments, or, terms, conditions and stipulations in petroleum authorisation on the collection, allocation and management of petroleum revenue.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 1 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 2 - Establishment of Petroleum Account.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
clause 2, we are to establish a petroleum account. Yesterday at the winnowing, I raised this matter and I believe that it is very fundamental to the establishment of the account which I believe, as per article 175 of our Constitution, if we have to be consistent, we should employ the terminology “Fund”. So first of all, I believe we have to amend the headnote, “Establishment of Petroleum Account”.
We delete the word “Account” and insert “Fund”-- “Establishment of Petroleum Fund” instead of “Petroleum Account”.
Mr Speaker, I say so because, if we
advert our minds to the provisions of article 175 of the Constitution, and Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I may want to quote:
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Hon Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, what exactly are you establishing? If you look at the provisions that the Hon Minority Leader referred to, then he is right. Are you just saying that the money will be lodged at Bank of Ghana? Is that what you are talking about? Let us get exactly what you are trying to say before I call the Hon Chairman of the Committee.
Mr Seth Terkpeh 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
we used the term “Petroleum Account” because at that point in time, it is a transitory account as defined by the Bill and it not only receives the petroleum revenues but indeed, incidences such as tax refunds can be made out of that account before their distribution into the Stabilisation Fund, the Heritage Fund and the Consolidated Fund through the Annual Budget Funding Accounts. Because of its transitory nature and also not want to confuse it with the actual funds, which are
not of an operational nature, that is why we use the term “Account”.
Mr Speaker, this is consistent with the Financial Administration Act, whereby after the Appropriation -- Indeed, it allows special accounts to be opened for each department within the Bank of Ghana. So, it will seem that any time there is an account of an operational nature, you could use the term “Account” instead of a “Fund” and so, this is the rational for using the term “Petroleum Account” for the transitory Account before the distribution into the three Funds which are in line with the Constitution.
Mr Avedzi 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, what we need to know about the purpose of this account is very important. The purpose of the account is to hold the petroleum revenue for a period and then transfer it into the various areas for which Parliament will approve the petroleum revenue to be used.
For instance, if every year, Parliament approves that 70 per cent of petroleum revenue should be used or be sent to the Budget, that is the portion that will leave the Petroleum Account into the Budget or the Consolidated Fund. Then, the remaining goes into the Stabilisation and Heritage Accounts. That is the purpose of that Account.
The purpose of the Stabilisation Fund is to play a role of checking the performance of the economy; not to throw the economy overboard. In other words, to stabilise the economy. The Heritage Fund is to hold that Fund for the future generation. So these are the purposes of these Funds. The Consolidated Fund is to take the money and use it for development.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Hon Members, look at the provision of article 175 of the Constitution. The question is that, is that account a public fund? If the answer is, yes, then the next question you have to ask is, is it being established by
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, you are right in that direction. In fact, we could have just used one of the Consolidated Fund accounts to receive it but because we are laying emphasis on the petroleum revenue, that is why we want to designate this account for it. So it might be the use of the word “establishment” that could confuse it. If article 175 of the Constitution is talking about the establishment of a fund, then we cannot use the words “establishment” here. We either open an account that will receive the money before it leaves that account into the Funds that this Act is going to create --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, the Constitution used the word “establish”; you have also used the word “establish” in the Bill. The Constitution used the words “public funds”. We all agree that this is also a public fund, and it says that it should be so done by an Act of Parliament. The process we are going through now is an

Act of Parliament. So, why are you not calling it a fund? That is the argument of the Hon Minority Leader. Then you do not create anything at all because this is not the first time this matter has come on the floor of the House.

I remember when the Women's Fund was created or some fund was created, we raised the issue that it should be created by an Act of Parliament and then we were told that it was just an account since it was not established specifically by an Act of Parliament. But now, if you do it by an Act of Parliament, then you must use the proper terminology provided in the Constitution. This is the point that they are making; then you do not create it at all; it becomes an administrative matter. But when you are establishing it by an Act of Parliament, then you have no choice but to use the terms of the Constitution, which is the fundamental law.
Prof. George Y. Gyan-Baffour 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister is talking about a transitory account. Nobody prevents him from doing that but then what is known to the law, Parliament, is a fund. Just like the Consolidated Fund, no Hon Member here knows whether there is a transitory account to the Consolidated Fund. But under the law, it should be a fund and maybe, you create a transitory account somewhere else. I do not think it prevents them from doing that, but before the law and in consonance with the Constitution, it should be a fund and not an account.
Mr Clement K. Humado 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, indeed, article 176 (2) (a) and (b) of the Constitution, I think, explains the point raised by the Hon Minority Leader, and I think that we should have a fund rather than an account, if we go by that article.
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in the Bill, we have both the Heritage Fund and the Stabilisation Fund that are being created
or established by this Act put together and called the “Ghana Petroleum Fund.” By changing to “Petroleum Fund”, it will have an effect on what we have -- the Stabilisation and the Heritage put together. But for us not to debate this further, we can first propose to delete the word “establish”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Hon Chairman, look at article 176 of the Constitution that the Hon Member for Anlo has referred us to, specifically clause 2. Clause 2 says:
“The revenues or other moneys referred to in clause (1) of this article shall not include revenues or other moneys -
(a) that are payable by or under an Act of Parliament into some other fund established for specific purposes.”
We are establishing for a specific purpose; that the petroleum revenue should go into a specific account, and the word they continue to use there is “fund”. That is the point that they are making.
Dr Anthony A. Osei 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think my Hon Chairman is having difficulty. He is thinking too far ahead in terms of operations. I know that if the word “fund” is changed here, other consequential clauses will have to be changed but that should not prevent us from doing the proper thing.
In fact, the main reason for not taking it into the Consolidated Fund is to have a special fund so that we can protect the oil revenue. So we do not have a choice but to call it a fund. If we want to, when we go up later and we want to call the rest “account”, I do not have a problem. But I agree with the Hon Minority Leader and my Senior Colleague by both articles 175 and 176 of the Constitution. We do not have a choice; it is not whether or not
it is temporal that matters. It is because we want to dedicate a special purpose fund which we can monitor properly and therefore, by both articles 175 and 176 of the Constitution, we should call it a “fund”.
If you want to call the Stabilisation Fund an account, fine; the Heritage Fund an account, that is fine. But right from day one -- Other than that, it will be going into the Consolidated Fund and we want to avoid that.
I recalled earlier that one of the mistakes we did with the Road Fund and Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund) is that they have to go first into the Consolidated Fund before they are transferred. We do not want to take a chance with this one. So right from the word go, it must be protected and it can only be a special purpose fund. Whether you want to call petroleum or --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Hon Chairman, like the Hon Ranking Member has just said, if you do not establish a fund, it will go into the Consolidated Fund. Do you want it to go into the Consolidated Fund?
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we do not want it to go into the Consolidated Fund. We want it to go into --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Then read article 176 (1) of the Constitution, which says:
“There shal l be paid into the Consolidated Fund, subject to the provisions of this article --
(a) all revenue or other moneys raised or received for the purposes of, or on behalf of, the Government; and
(b) any other moneys raised or received in trust for, or on behalf of the Government.”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.


So, if you do not establish that special fund, it will go into the Consolidated Fund.
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Very well, Mr Speaker. We want to propose an amendment to the name of the fund. We will call it -- so that it will not conflict with the Petroleum Fund that we have already in the Bill.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Do you have another Petroleum Fund?
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Yes, we have it in the Bill.
Dr A. A. Osei 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with respect, it is not proposing a new name. The Constitution is very clear. It has to be either Consolidated Fund or a special purpose fund; you cannot call it any other name.
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my Hon Ranking Member is running too much. He does not know even the name I want to propose. If we are creating a fund - [Interruption.]
Dr A. A. Osei 12:25 p.m.
He has not consulted me, then he says -
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if you want to create a fund -- [Interruption.]
Dr A. A. Osei 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, he has not consulted me and he says -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Hon Members, only one of you can be on his feet at a time.
Mr Avedzi 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the issue is whether it should be a fund or it should be an account, but we have agreed that it should be a fund, by the Constitution.
So, the name that the Minority Leader is proposing is a “Petroleum Fund”, and I am saying that it will conflict with the name which we already have in the Bill which is also “Petroleum Fund”. Therefore, we should change the name from “Petroleum Fund” as the Hon Minority Leader
proposed, to a “Petroleum Holding Fund”, so that we can differentiate them from each other. This is what I want to propose.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Then the two of you should put your heads together and move the amendment in that direction, if he has no objection to it. This is because that really, is a Holding Fund.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:35 p.m.
Mr
Speaker, I think that should be in order and maybe, if we had agreed yesterday at the winnowing, the Hon Chairman could even have carried this one. It was his insistence that, “No, no, it should not be a Fund,” but I believe that we are on the same wavelength now. We can accept that it should be called the “Petroleum Holding Fund”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, what has that got to do with the submission on the floor? Anyway, that is on the lighter side.
Yes, who is moving the amendment?
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the first amendment -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Do you have the unprinted amendment standing in the name of the Hon Minority Leader?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
You have a copy there?
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Very well.
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, before we
come to the clause, I want to amend the Headnotes.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Yes.
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, Headnotes, delete “Account” and insert “Holding Fund”. So the Headnotes would now read, “Establishment of Petroleum Holding Fund”.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think it is in order, so I urge the House to support the new rendition.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, subclause (1), after “Petroleum” delete “Account” and insert “Holding Fund”.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I will propose that consequentially, wherever we have “Petroleum Account”, it should now read: “Petroleum Holding Fund”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
So that it
becomes a consequential amendment, so that we do not move those amendments again.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu Absolutely, Mr Speaker.
Question put and amendment agreed
to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
So it
means that we are not going to move any individual amendments again for “Account”. Clause 2 -
Dr A. A. Osei 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we have other amendments that -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Hon Appiah-Ofori? Yes.
Mr P. C. Appiah-Ofori 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, now “Petroleum Account” becomes “Petroleum Holding Fund”; is it? “Petroleum Holding Fund. You see, “the” is a definite article and it is used when reference has already been made to something. If it is going to be made for the first time, we use the indefinite article. And therefore, “The Petroleum Holding Fund” should be “A Petroleum Holding Fund”. Subsequently, if the term comes again, then you use the word “the”. I want every Hon Member to support me.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, subclause 1, line 1, delete “The” and insert “A”.
Mr Humado 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to differ. The Headnotes which we have just amended - “Establishment of Petroleum Holding Fund”, has already stated that Fund. So subsequently, I think “The” is the more appropriate word to use and not “A”. This is my view.
Mr Emmanuel A. Owusu-Ansah 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the rendition made by Hon Appiah-Ofori is correct, perfectly correct. I do not agree with the last Hon Member who spoke. The heading has nothing to do with the narrative. It is the narrative that tells us what the Fund is, and it starts -- As he said, this is the first time that the establishment is being made, so it starts with “A Petroleum Holding Fund”, then the rest of the narrative follows. So, Hon Appiah-Ofori is perfectly correct.
Mr Alfred K. Agbesi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the account that has been established is specific: “Petroleum Holding Fund” has been established. So if -- [Interruption] -- By the heading. So if you read the heading and clause 2 (1), what has been established is what we are referring to and that is “The”, it is specific, it is not at large. So the amendment is
Mr Kwaku Agyeman-Manu 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is no law; this is pure English - [An Hon Member: Achimota English.] Not Achimota only but Dormaa Secondary School English as well. But definitely, not the Hon Member for Ashiaman's school's English.
Mr Speaker, the heading, apparently, says nothing. How does a heading establish an account? The heading only introduces what we are going to talk about. So, the first time we encountered “Petroleum Holding Fund”, is what subclause (1) tries to narrate and, therefore, the argument that Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori put up should be very correct and the article there should be “A” and not “The”.
Mr Speaker, if you want to doubt my English, we have an Emeritus Professor among us who is an English Professor and therefore, he can clarify the situation if you want to doubt my argument.
Mr Speaker, this is English; we do not need to argue over this; there is no point.
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Headnote is saying: “Establishment of Petroleum Holding Fund”. What is being established? “A Petroleum Holding Fund, so I agree with Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, subclause 1, line 2, delete “to receive and disburse” and insert “for” and in lines 3 and 4, delete all the words after “Republic”.
Mr Speaker, with that, the new rendition would read as follows 12:35 p.m.
“A Petroleum Holding Fund is hereby established as a designated Fund by the Bank of Ghana
for petroleum revenue due the Republic.”
Mr Speaker, all the words referring to upstream and midstream activities are not necessary because “petroleum revenue” has been defined in the Interpretation section to include “upstream and midstream activities”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Why are you removing the “receive” and “disburse”?
Mr Avedzi 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker “to receive and to disburse”? We all know that the purpose of that Fund or the account that would be created out of the Fund is to receive and disburse because it is a transitory account that would take the revenue and transfer the revenue. So knowing that -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Where is that? Where is it captured in the Bill, apart from the clause (1)? Where is the “receive and disburse”, captured in the Bill apart from that subclause?
Mr Avedzi 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if you go further to clause 3, where we have “Payment into Petroleum Account”, which would definitely also change to “Petroleum Holding Fund”, it is to receive payment into the account and in the same clause 3, it is receive and disburse into the Stabilisation Fund, into the Heritage Fund and into the Consolidated Fund. So, subsequent clauses explain the purpose of that Fund.
Mr Owusu-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the amendment proposed by the Committee is unnecessary. Clause 2 establishes for the first time the “Petroleum Holding Fund”. I think the clause also goes further to explain the work of the Fund and how funds are to be received
from upstream and mainstream activities. So, it is important that we retain the wording in clause 2, to tell us the role that the Fund has to play and where the Fund would generate its funds from. I think the wording in clause 2 is proper and we should retain it.
Mr Avedzi 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to differ from the Hon Member. “Petroleum revenue” has been defined in the Interpretation section to include “upstream and midstream operators”. And if we go to subclause 2, “petroleum revenue shall be deposited in the Petroleum Holding Fund for subsequent transfers”. We are proposing an amendment there by adding “as permitted under this Act”. So, Mr Speaker, the purpose of this Act has been defined. If you are bringing “derived from upstream and midstream”, it is a repetition of the “Petroleum revenue” already -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Mr Chairman, would it do any violence to the provision if you keep “to receive and disburse”? Would it cause any harm? This is because that is the first time that we are establishing it, so if it is clear that it is “to receive and disburse”. Would it cause any harm to the intendment of that provision?
Mr Avedzi 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if we maintain “to receive and disburse”, then subclause (2) would not be needed because it is talking about “receive and transfer”. If we maintain that one, then subclause (2) would not be needed. That is why we are taking it off.
Mr Boafo 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not seem to understand the Hon Chairman. What is being advocated is that to retain “receive and disburse” indicates the primary role of the Petroleum Holding Fund. But when you come to subclause (2), it only tells us where you have to deposit it after
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon Chairman, from the explanation, “midstream” activities and the others can go but you are not making a strong case for “receive and disburse”. For the “upstream and midstream” activities, because you say there is a definition somewhere, that takes care of it. But regarding “to receive and disburse”, I am not getting the submission you are making.
Mr Avedzi 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, let me refer you to subclause (2) which says
“The petroleum revenue shall be deposited in the Petroleum Holding Fund for subsequent transfers”,
which is the same as “receive and disburse” in subclause (1) That is why I said if we maintained the “receive and disburse” in subclause (1), then the subclause (2) becomes redundant.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
But the sub-clause (1) is describing the account. Sub-clause (1) is where the Fund is created, so it is describing the account there, to know what exactly it is supposed to do. Subclause (2) is - anyway, I do not know.
Hon Members, I do not know.
Dr Matthew O. Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, even right from “upstream and midstream activities” should not be deleted because it is specific. In the country, we have “downstream activities” which are also done and we do not intend, by this law, to take all those revenues from the downstream activities like Ghana Oil Company (GOIL) and others into this account. So, this account is being created specifically for certain funds to be put into that account. We cannot encapsulate everything that is done by the petroleum sector by deleting this.
So, I think if the Hon Chairman would advert his mind carefully to what we are saying, he should understand that this is a special account that is being created for
Mr Owusu-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the attempt by the Hon Chairman to remove subclause (2) should not be entertained. Subclause (2) gives the Government the authority to ask for transfers from the Petroleum Holding Fund to support the Budget. Without subclause (2), I do not see how the Government would have transfers from the Fund into the Budget. It is only when the Government has applied to the Fund that the moneys be transferred into the Budget. So, I think that subclause (2) must stand.
Dr A. A. Osei 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with respect, can we have some proper order here so that some of us who are slow can follow? We have not finished with the Hon Chairman's first amendment and we are going to subclause (2). Can we take a decision on subclause (1)? I just want to plead with my Hon Chairman that - [Interruption] - But he is going to subclause (2), we are not there yet.
Please, I want to plead with my Hon Chairman that since it will not materially affect the intent, if we can retain the wording there, I do not think it would harm anything. For the avoidance of doubt, we can accept what they are saying so that there is no doubt that it is supposed to “receive and disburse” and then if people do not know, the issue about the “midstream and upstream” -- I think if we accept it, it would not affect the original intent, so I plead that in order that we can move forward, we accept that and go on.
Mr Avedzi 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I need to amend my proposed amendment.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, subclause 1, delete all words after
“Republic”.
So the clause would now read:
“A Petroleum Holding Fund is hereby established as a designated fund at the Bank of Ghana to receive and disburse petroleum revenue due to the Republic.”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon
Chairman, the Hon Member for Manhyia made a point that we have “downstream, upstream, midstream”, and that it is not all petroleum activities in this country that would find their revenue into the Petroleum Holding Fund that we have just established. And therefore, for the avoidance of doubt, we must leave those words there so that we know that it is only revenue from the operations within the “midstream and upstream” that would go into the Petroleum Holding Account. That is the point that the Hon Member for Manhyia is making and on that basis, you should leave the clause as it is.
Mr Avedzi 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to differ with the Hon Member for Manhyia. The petroleum revenue that is mentioned in the clause is defined in the Interpretation column, pages 28 and 29.
In fact, there is a proposed amendment to add the petroleum derived from “upstream and midstream” there. So you will realize that the petroleum revenue is not coming from only the “upstream and midstream” but there are a lot of other items that are included in the definition of “petroleum revenue”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
He is arguing that the “petroleum revenue” has been defined, so he knows that kind of revenue that will go into it. That is the answer to the point that you are raising, Hon member for Manhyia.
Dr Prempeh 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is
neither here nor there. We just went through a proposal where we have retained “receive and disburse”. We want this to be explicit and that is why in the petroleum sector, there is “upstream downstream, sizestream”, everything. but we want only the “upstream and midstream”. Mr Speaker, I do not know why he is insisting on this but it should be specific and it should remain as it is, for clarity sake.
Dr A. A. Osei 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I want
to plead with my Hon Chairman again. I do not think including “upstream and midstream” will hurt anything here, so that right from the beginning, when we establish the Act, everybody knows we are talking about -- I agree that we are going to amend petroleum - [Interruption] -- We are but we are not yet there.
As it is, if you go to the original definition of “petroleum revenue”, unless you have been to the area, you would not know that it is automatically “midstream” or “upstream.” I think that is the difficulty we are having; because we know, we assume everybody knows. But I do not think it would hurt at the beginning to keep the “upstream and midstream” just so that Hon Members know where we are heading to so that it does not affect, materially, what is being proposed.
Mr Terkpeh 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 1, subclause (1) already states that,
“This Act shall regulate the c o l l e c t i o n , a l l o c a t i o n a n d management by government petroleum revenue derived from upstream and midstream petroleum operations.”
So we do have that clearly specified right at the start of the Bill. So there should be no doubt at all that it relates to only “upstream and midstream”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
That clarifies the position.
Dr A. A. Osei 12:55 p.m.
No, it does not.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
It does.
Mr Boafo 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is true that in clause 1 there is this mention of petroleum revenue derived from “upstream and midstream”. But here we are talking about the Petroleum Holding Fund and what should go into it. So it is necessary that we emphasize it under clause 2, for the avoidance of doubt and to confirm what is provided under clause 1.
Mr Speaker, if you go to clause 6 where petroleum account receipts are indicated, if you look at clause 6 (1) (e) we have another head of receipts which says:
“Any amount rece ived by Government directly or indirectly from petroleum resources not covered by paragraphs (a) to (d)
. . .”
1.00 p.m. -- MR SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr Boafo 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was referring
to clause 1 (1) which had already been referred to by the Hon Deputy Minister as a solution to the problem we are facing now. But my contention is that so far as clause 1 (1) is concerned, it is a general provision indicating where the petroleum revenue is derived from, but it does not go further to tell us where this revenue should be paid into and that is what is provided for under clause 2. Clause 2 goes further to say that these receipts which are derived from “upstream” and -
Mr Speaker, what I am saying is that, clause 2 (1) goes to tell us where these moneys should be lodged, so it is necessary to retain it as a complementary to clause 1 (1), and also for the avoidance of doubt, so far as the provisions of clause 6 (1) (e) are concerned, which refer to receipts by
Mr Avedzi 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I still beg to differ. We have already defined “petroleum revenue”, which includes the “upstream and the downstream activities”. Then, clause 1 (1) also says that --
“This Act shall regulate the c o l l e c t i o n , a l l o c a t i o n a n d management by Government of petroleum revenue derived from upstream and midstream petroleum operations”.
So, there is no need to repeat the same thing here -- “collection, allocation and management of petroleum . . . derived from upstream and midstream operations” and “petroleum revenue” has been defined. Why do we still have to bring “upstream and midstream” here? I do not think it is necessary to do that.
Dr Prempeh 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that we should look at it very well. Clause 2 is, for the first time, the one establishing the Petroleum Holding Account and everything we are doing in clause 2 should be explicit because there are “downstream activities” or even, by the time we finish with this Bill, Parliament can decide to open another account to channel only “midstream activities” into. So please, let us retain this so that we proceed from there because it does not change anything.
Actually, if we delete it, then it means somebody can even introduce another amendment very soon to tell us that we should take all “midstream” accounts to a particular petroleum something account.
Mr Speaker, if the Hon Chairman would really advert his mind to what we want to achieve and considering the number of amendments downstream in this Bill, he should allow this to stand so that we can proceed as quickly as possible.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
So Hon
Chairman, the original rendition is clear and explicit and for that matter, there is nothing like any mischief lingering round what we want to remove by tampering with it. So, why do we not make progress?
Dr A. A. Osei 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, there are about a hundred amendments that are being proposed and we should be -- the question is, what is simple for people to understand in the law? So, for some of us, that is the basic thing. As the Hon Minister said, clause 1, subclause (1) takes you to the fact that we are dealing with -
“for the collection of petroleum oil derived from upstream and midstream petroleum operations”.
So right ab initio, you have ruled out downstream. If you wanted downstream, it would have come in there. Henceforth, when you are talking about petroleum operations, it cannot be but for only upstream and midstream.
I hear some of my Hon Colleagues are saying that for the avoidance of doubt, but I think it becomes superfluous because if it were not, clause 1 (1) then, I can say -- So, I believe that we do not hang ourselves in this manner and move on and accept the amendment as it is. I believe that if we do not have clause 1 (1), then there can be some doubts. But once we have subclause 1 (1), then I believe it is redundant to have to repeat it in sub- clause (2) (1), and we can go ahead.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, when enacting a Bill, the less words the better. So if there is no doubt, you do not repeat things that are already in the Bill. I am urging my Hon Colleagues to accept the amendment. Because when you talk about Petroleum Revenue in this Bill, you look at clause 1 (1); what is petroleum revenue, derived from upstream and midstream petroleum activity, period! So, subsequently, you do not need to repeat “upstream and midstream”, it makes it clearer and simpler, the less words the
better.
So, I am urging my Colleague, the Hon Member for Akropong and his cohorts, [Interruptions.] I am urging my Colleague, the Member for Akropong and other like minded Colleagues to give in to this so that we make a lot of progress.
Mr Avedzi 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think you can now put the Question for the amendment.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the Hon Chairman at the very outset, maybe, would have done this House a better service if he had adverted the minds of Hon Members here to what obtains in clause 1 (1). I think that would have resolved the problem; I intended to get up to support this. Except that, further to that, we will then have, when we come to the interpretation clause, to then better interpret petroleum operations since we are going to end it there.
We then have to interpret better, what petroleum operations mean. It would mean “authorize upstream and midstream activities under a petroleum authorization.” I think that will then capture the sense in what we are doing. So, as I have indicated, I believe it will not take too much away from the Bill if we should go along with the proposal.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, will you now please, give us the rendition as it will stand after the amendment?
Mr Avedzi 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, subclause (1), lines 3 and 4, delete all the words after Republic. So the main rendition will now read as follows:
“A Petroleum Holding Fund is hereby established as a designated fund at the Bank of Ghana to receive and disburse Petroleum Revenue due to the Republic.”
Mr Joseph K. Adda 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I

have been listening to the Bill's renditions that are being proposed but the essence of this clause is that, there is a strong linkage between the upstream and midstream. Lots of times, when the exploration companies and the production companies take up their duties and we are getting to the midstream areas, they are often the companies that give us sub- contracts, so there are revenues to be derived out of that.

I think the clause as it is, is very good, it links up the upstream and the midstream and I think we should keep it as it is, Mr Speaker. If we try to amend it and delete the rest of it, we will be losing revenue from the midstream side. I think it should stay as it is.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I just want to urge my Hon Colleagues to look at subclause (1) (1), the same arguments we are raising. Otherwise, what we are saying, everywhere we see “activities”, we are going to have to put “upstream” and “downstream”. For the avoidance of doubt, the proposers of the Bill put it right at the beginning, so that you do not have any doubt in your mind. If they wanted to include “downstream” anywhere, it would have come there. So once you start reading, it is clear that it is only “upstream and midstream”. Henceforth, that is all you do. But trying to be too verbose, are confused people who are reading the Bill. So, at least, we have defined subclause (1) (1), let us move on and make progress. I beg you.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon Member for Navrongo (Mr Kofi Ada), then do not mind “upstream”, “midstream” being there, but that it is well captured as the essence of the whole exercise in clause 1 (1) for that matter, it needs not be repeated. That is the argument.
Hon Member, are you satisfied with that?
Mr Adda 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am afraid, not. Clause 1 (1) is talking about the general application. Clause 2 is now referring to the Petroleum Account. So I think here, we must be specific about
that. I think it should stay as it is.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Clause 2, there is another amendment, Hon Appiah-Ofori.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I
beg to move, clause 2, line 1, before “Petroleum revenue” insert “The” and in line 2, delete “to” and insert “into”.
It will be seen here that reference has already been made in the earlier clauses to petroleum revenue. So being mentioned the second time, I am of the opinion that we should say “the petroleum revenue”. And when transfers are made, they are made “into” either Consolidated Fund or various funds. So to say “transfers to the Ghana Petroleum Fund”, I am of the opinion that instead of “to”, it should be “into”, so that the language will be correct.
Mr Avedzi 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree with
the first amendment proposed by Hon Appiah-Ofori that in subclause (2), line 1, before “Petroleum revenue”, insert “The”. but I disagree with the second part that says delete “to” and insert “into”. Mr Speaker, deposits are made “in” and not “into”. The petroleum revenue shall be deposited “in” the Petroleum Holding Fund, not “into”.
Mr Adda 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I rise to support the amendment and to agree with the Hon Appiah-Ofori that when you are transferring moneys, it just comes naturally, transfer money “into” an account. We do not transfer money “in” account. So we transfer money into the Budget. So I think this will make it very clear. So I support the amendment, Mr Speaker.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Hon
Members, do we intend to start reading clause 2 (2) by saying “The petroleum Revenue shall. . .”. I find that a bit difficult. Shall we say it that way? “The” petroleum revenue - why not “petroleum revenue”?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
I believe we are mixing up two things. The first one that the Hon Colleague seeks to amend is with respect to the first word that he is introducing. The second one affects the clause 2 in line 2 and so it is not “into” the petroleum fund that the Chairman is referring to. It is the second line, transfers “into”. But before we get there, you have even proffered an amendment. So that will not even affect it. So let us not confuse ourselves. Mr Speaker, if you may put the Question on the first one first before we get to the second leg of this whole amendment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
So Hon
Members, shall we say “The petroleum Revenue “shall” or not? Should we say, “the cocoa revenue shall” or simply “petroleum revenue shall”? We are dealing with the two things, one after another. The first is, whether we should say “The” petroleum revenue shall” or simply “petroleum revenue shall”.
Mr Gbediame 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it should
be “petroleum revenue”, and not “The petroleum revenue”.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Petroleum revenue shall -
Dr Prempeh 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I thought
we were making headway with the Hon Minority Leader's request for the call of this one. But really, the reason for supporting Hon Appiah-Ofori's suggestion is that, petroleum revenue has been mentioned in clause 2 (1). The petroleum account is hereby established as a designated account at the Bank of Ghana holding fund to receive and to disburse petroleum revenue. So since that has been said, this clause 2 (2) is making reference
Dr A. A. Osei 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the logic
my junior Hon Colleague is putting is that, any time we mention “petroleum revenue”, then wherever we go, it has to be “the”. In subclause 1 (1), we mentioned “petroleum revenue”. When we went to subclause (2), we did not say “The petroleum revenue”. So that logic cannot be continued. No, I am pleading with Mr Appiah-Ofori to stop the amendment so that we move on.
Mr Speaker, “petroleum revenue shall be deposited”, is the proper way to put it. I plead with Hon Appiah-Ofori to step his amendment down so that we can move forward.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Apparently, Hon Appiah-Ofori is not insisting on the first leg of the amendment, so that we concentrate on the second leg.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am
not withdrawing it. If you put the Question and I lose, fine. Reference has been made to “petroleum revenue” in the earlier paragraphs. So having made reference to it, then you are now making it specific. “The petroleum revenue shall”-- If we are now mentioning it for the first time and since it is not countable, then you delete “a” -
Mr Avedzi 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, petroleum revenue that is to be deposited and transferred, in subclause (2) here has been made reference in subclause (1). That is why his amendment is valid. So the petroleum revenue which has been referred to in clause 1 shall be deposited into and then transferred. So that is the rendition.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
So we move to the second leg and Hon Appiah- Ofori, if you will make the justification. Delete “to” and insert “into”, why?
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:15 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker,
we make transfers “into”, we do not make transfers “to”. We make transfers “into” the Consolidated Fund; we make transfers “into” this fund; therefore, appropriately, it should be “into” instead of “to”.
Mr Avedzi 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if we are to
maintain all the words after the “to”, then his amendment would have been accepted but there is a proposed amendment by the Committee which should be taken alongside with his. So if you permit me, I will take that one so that his amendment will not hold again.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 2, subclause (2), in line 2, delete all the words after “transfers” and insert “as permitted under this Act”.
Mr Speaker, the actions that will be taken for the transfer of funds from the Petroleum Holding Fund is permitted under this Act. So we are just making reference to those provisions under this Act. We will not repeat or state into the Budget and the Ghana Petroleum Funds as we have in the Bill. So the new rendition will be:
“The Petroleum Revenue shall be deposited in the Petroleum Holding Fund for subsequent transfers as permitted under this Act.”
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Is it crystal clear where “as permitted under this Act” is, particularly, if it had already been referred to? If you make that clear, it will complete the argument. In other words, where is it so clearly stated so that
when we have adopted that rendition, there will be no ambiguity? Just refer it to us and we will know.
Mr Avedzi 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the subsequent
clause, that is clause 3, talked about payment into the Petroleum Holding Fund. So, it has been stated there and if you even go to clause 6, Petroleum Holding Fund Receipts and then if you go further, all the payments or the transfers that would be made into the Stabilisation Fund is under clause 10, the Heritage Fund under clause 11 and then clause 19, the Annual Budget Funding Amount. So, all these have been provided for in the Bill.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Mr
Speaker, I was minded to proffer an amendment to clause 2, subclause (2). But I think by the amendment being suggested by the Hon Chairman, I may have to stand that one down and not move it now. Except to say that, the better rendition of what he has proposed, that is the other leg, “as permitted under this Act”, will be “in accordance with the provision of this Act”. Mr Speaker, that is the standard rendition that we have been using, so that we will insert in place of “as permitted under this Act”, “in accordance with the provisions of this Act”.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the
first reference is being made to this; if in the subsequent provisions, we adopt what my Hon Leader is saying, it is all right. But it is being made for the first time in the law, so it is better we retain it and adopt my amendment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Hon
Members, the point is that the first reference should make clear where transfers should be made to without ambiguity and this can be later on amplified. But if we leave the first reference vague, only to say that this is taken care of by subsequent provisions, from what Hon Appiah-Ofori says, that
is a problematic way of facing the issue.
Why do we not make ourselves crystal clear ab initio and then we can dilate, lest, someday somebody else may say “the establishment” only speaks about transfers and then by inference and interpretation, then you are showing those ones? But nothing prevents you from adding other sources of transfer. So here, it is quite clear; transfers to the Budget and the Ghana Petroleum Fund.
Mr Terkpeh 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Order!
Order!
Mr Terkpeh 1:25 p.m.
My recollection is
that, there was a point made at the committee meeting that clause 25 also permits transfers for tax refunds before the revenues hit the Budget, as well as the fund being mentioned, and that was the reason for using the term “permitted under the Act”-- Clause 25 --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Hon
P. C. Appiah-Ofori, would the subsequent provision for payment of taxes into this account negate your proposal?
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, as I have said, we cannot go and make reference to clause 25 to enable us -- to understand this. As this one is appearing for the first time, let us make it clear, we should not make it ambiguous. Let anybody reading it understand it from the beginning, so as he progresses, then he will understand what is going on. You do not have to wait and go to clause 25 before you understand what you are talking about. So, I do not agree with him. Let us go by my amendment for the benefit of comprehension of this thing.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Mr Avedzi 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if we
maintain what we have in the Bill, it means that the only transfers that can be made from this fund will be into the Budget and the Ghana Petroleum Funds. That is it. But we are saying that clause 25 made provision for other transfers in addition to this. That is why we say “permitted under this Act” and that a new rendition is coming from the Hon Minority Leader that “in accordance with the provision of this Act”.
I think that should be the best rendition for us because it is not only transfer into the Budget and the Ghana Petroleum Funds that will be made in this particular funds but other transfers in terms of tax refunds that would be done there. So that is why we should not maintain what we have in the Bill and take the amendment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
But
if we say the petroleum revenue shall be deposited in that particular account and that is very clear, does it spoil anything when later on we say other monies shall also go to that account? The point being made by Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori is that from the word go, it is very clear that these monies should be paid into specific accounts.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
this is exactly what I am saying. If you are reading a piece of legislation, you do not have to finish reading before you understand what you have read earlier. So, right from day one, you should understand it - [Interruptions.] So, I am of the opinion that we should not change what I have proposed and I expect everybody to agree with me for the benefit of comprehension
of the law when it is enacted.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do
not know what Hon Appiah-Ofori had proposed except the word “into”. But the issue that is being raised - Until he has offered a better amendment, his case does not go straightforward. If they are arguing that it is not only into the Budget or the Ghana Petroleum Funds that transfers can be made, then the only reasonable proposition is that he should make an amendment to say “transfer for taxes, Budget, et cetera”, then I could live with it. Otherwise, there was a reason that because of clause 25, we did not want to make it there. But hearing from you, I want to offer a proposal --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
So,
Hon Dr Akoto Osei, shall we make it ominibus from the word go, so that we will know?
Dr A. A. Osei 1:25 p.m.
Yes. I was waiting for
that proposal. I have not heard it; that is why -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Would
you help us with an ominibus proposition that includes the clause 2, subclause (2) as well as the taxes element?
Dr A. A. Osei 1:25 p.m.
For tax refunds and the Budget - of course, the Hon Minority Leader is going to make an amendment if we keep this. So, we have to look at it.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Honestly, I am inclined to making ourselves clear from the word go rather than creating a vacuum and then trying to fill it as we go on.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it should read as follows:
“For subsequent transfers for tax refunds, the Budget and the Ghana
Petroleum Funds . . .”
If we want to take account of clause 25, the word “tax refunds” must come there.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe that if we have this construction, that is “in accordance with the provisions of this Act”, it will take care of everything.
Mr Speaker, the Chairman is even
referring to clause 25; we do not even have to travel that far to clause 25. Mr Speaker, he does not even have to travel that far to clause 25. If you look at clause 4 (3) --
“The allowable marketing cost shall be reimbursed to the National Oil Company as approved by the Minister and shall be a charge on the Petroleum Account.”
So that is also part of it, and if we just have this omnibus provision, it will take care of everything.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Very well, shall we construe the ominibus, then in a manner that it will really take care of all subsequent ones? Shall we have a rendition?
rose
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Hon
Chairman, are you venturing a rendition?
Mr Avedzi 1:35 p.m.
Yes.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Thank you very much.
Mr Avedzi 1:35 p.m.
The new rendition will be:
“The Petroleum revenue shall be deposited in Petroleum Holding Fund for subsequent transfers in accordance with the provisions of this Act.”
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe that is how it should go.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 2 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 3 - Payment into Petroleum Holding Fund.
Mr Avedzi 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (1), lines 1 and 2, delete
“Despite provisions to the contrary in any Act, Regulation or agreement in existence before the commencement of this Act.”
Mr Speaker, this is not necessary because in clause 1 (2), we have already made reference to conflicts that may arise between the provisions of this Act and any other enactment. So this particular one will not be needed; so the new rendition will be:
Mr Boafo 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to support the amendment proposed by the Hon Chairman.
Mr Speaker, as he rightly pointed out, under clause 1 (2), we have a provision which caters for what is intended by the opening sentence under clause 3 (1). So I think it is more consistent and it makes it clearer.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, just before you put the Question on this one, the debate on “The Petroleum revenue”, --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
At least, let us finish with that one.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:35 p.m.
The reason is that, it affects this and I want to draw attention to it, that if we are not careful, given that, then we are forced to say, “The Petroleum revenue” again here. And everywhere we go, we will be saying, “The Petroleum revenue”. So we need to address that earlier issue, otherwise, then everywhere we see “Petroleum revenue”, we are going to be forced to say, “The Petroleum revenue”, it will be a very funny way of legislation. I think we ought to -- The Hon Chairman and Hon Boafo's reasons for this amendment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Save that you are concerned about the expression “The Petroleum revenue” -
Dr A. A. Osei 1:35 p.m.
If that -- it will mean that it is logic, we have to be repeating ourselves, “The Petroleum revenue”, “The Petroleum revenue”, and I do not know -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Actually, which may really look strange; Hon Atta Akyea.
Mr Samuel A. Akyea 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think, for consistency sake, once that “petroleum revenue” has qualified, then we should not worry ourselves with the “The” repetition. Because it is clear from the onset that this is what is intended for. I have another issue with clause 3 (1) -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
So Hon Atta Kyea, you are moving that clause 3 (2) should read: “Petroleum revenue”, not “The Petroleum revenue”? And that it should be consequential wherever we have “The petroleum revenue”, just in case it should be simply “Petroleum revenue”, because you are clear about what you are talking about?
Mr Akyea 1:35 p.m.
That is precisely so, Mr Speaker, because it is in context; there is nothing outside the Bill than the “petroleum revenue”.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Please, go on.
Mr Akyea 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I have another issue as to when we say “revenue due to the Republic”. In proper forensic language, it should not be “revenue due to the Republic” but “revenue due the Republic”. Normally, when you say “due to” it connotes “because”. Amounts due and owing X, but when you say “due to”, then there is a connotation of “because”. So the proper forensic language is “revenue due the Republic” not “due to the Republic”, “due to” connotes “because”.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
So we have “revenue due the Republic” as the first amendment before we go to clause 3 (2) and we will take clause 3(1) first, that the amendment should be “revenue due the Republic”.
Mr Avedzi 1:35 p.m.
Exactly so, Mr Speaker, that is the amendment. “Petroleum due the Republic”.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
I will put the Question on that so that we move step by step.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I really do not have much against this, but the following provision is what I am worried about, if we should put the two together.
Mr Speaker, this first one that we are dealing with is saying that 1:45 p.m.
“Petroleum revenue due the Republic from whatever source derived in or outside the country shall be assessed, collected and counted for by the Ghana Revenue Authority.”
So the Ghana Revenue Authority is going to do the assessment, they are going to do the collection and they are going to account for it. Now, the following provision, then says:
“The petroleum revenue assessed as due shall be paid direct into the Fund by the entities themselves.”
I do not know whether it is financial language; but how do we say that the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) assess and collect and then in the following provision, it is saying that they assessed, but the entities liable should pay directly? That is my worry.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, GRA assesses and by mode of operations, it directs that transfers be made into that account; it is a mode of payment but they would do the assessment and tell the companies, “you pay me directly.”
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
So is the word “collected” a term of act, or it is really to be taken in its true and natural meaning? Do they really collect? In view of the explanation by Hon Dr Akoto Osei -- or it is simply a technical expression; when you direct you have collected. Let make ourselves clear.
Hon Dr Akoto Osei, I hope you are with me; we want to make your point clear and then I will -
Dr A. A. Osei 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that is why we have to look at the full definition of petroleum revenue. Part of it may be assessed and direct transfers made. But if you look at the definition, there is a lot of things we are talking about, page 28 [Interruptions.] For example, it is quite possible for revenue to be paid for GRA to receive crude oil in lieu of cash.
The question is, if it is oil, how do you collect that? So the term here, “collection” is only indicating that they are the recipients of it. So that is how we ought to look at it. Because GRA must account for it; so it is going to record in its account that X amount of crude oil equivalent was collected by it. So that it can account for it. So I do not see the harm that the “collection” there does at all; it does not mean anything.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Very well, Hon Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning.
Mr Terkpeh 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I wish to clarify that in relation to the point made by the Hon Minority Leader that the companies have an obligation under our laws to self- assess. So this is buttressing, in relation to assessment. It is buttressing their primary role to self-assess and pay whatever revenues are due. In the event that they do not do that, the law imposes on the GRA an obligation to assess and indeed, the GRA can increase or reduce that assessment. So the two responsibilities are just buttressing what is in our laws.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3 p.m.
Hon Members, having regard to the state of Business in the House and the time at the moment, I direct that Sitting be held outside the prescribed period.
So shall we stick to the first amendment so far as clause 3 (1) is concerned and say “revenue due the Republic”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3 p.m.
Then
3 (2).
Mr P. C. Appiah-Ofori 3 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (2), line 3, delete “liable” and insert “obliged”.
Mr Speaker, in place of “liable”, I propose the use of “obliged” so that it will read “entities obliged to make the payment”. It is a better rendition than making “liable”; it is not a liability, anyway.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3 p.m.
Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori proposes that it should read,
“. . . by the 15th day of the ensuing month by the entities obliged to make the payments”.
Shall we prefer “obliged” to “liable”?
Mr Humado 3 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I will beg to differ from the use of the word “obliged”. I think the context within which the word is used, “liability or liable” is more akin to the context. In fact, I have in my hand the Advanced Learner's Dictionary and ‘liable' is defined as “legally responsible for paying the cost of”. But when you go to “obliged”, it is usually used in a passive manner.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3 p.m.
Hon
Member, will you kindly read “required”?
Mr Humado 3 p.m.
“Required”?
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3 p.m.
Yes.
Liable sometimes connotes “culpability” and “oblige” looks too gentle.
Mr Humado 3 p.m.
Yes, exactly.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3 p.m.
But
required by law, the law that we are making could be better -- “as required by this law,” “as required by this law may” be a better -- so if you can read it.
Mr Humado 3 p.m.
Not usually used in the progressive tenses -- to need something; to depend on something. [Pause.] I am trying to look for the second meaning. It is not very clear here. Mr Speaker, it is not very clear.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3 p.m.
Very well. Hon Members, we have some words here. “Liable”, “obliged”, “required”, perhaps, it is open for -- Hon Dr Akoto Osei, you will address the Chair.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 3 p.m.
Mr Speaker, you
made a good suggestion but let us go down. Clause 3, “Where the liability...”. So if we are going to say -- I do not know what you are going to use in place of this. My
Mr J. B. Aidoo 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the
Google definition of liable is: “Legally obligated.” That means that it is even stronger than just being “obligation”. So I think the rendition as it stands should remain.
Mr Avedzi 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the rendition we have in the Bill should stay, in the sense that it is a liability for the entity to make that payment. That makes it more legal.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
So Chairman, you would like to withdraw the amendment?
Mr Avedzi 1:55 p.m.
So Hon Appiah-Ofori's amendment should be withdrawn.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:55 p.m.
When you talk about “liability”, it is liable to pay something, that is something he owes, so he must pay. Do they owe anything? They owe.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
“Liability”. It is a legal obligation.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:55 p.m.
All right, if they owe, let us go by it. But I would have preferred “obliged” and “obligation”, anyway.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
But you can see the consensus.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:55 p.m.
Well, they are saying what they like, but I also said what I wanted.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
You would withdraw that?
Mr Appiah-Ofori 1:55 p.m.
I will not withdraw it; they should put it to vote -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Hon Members, we have here “The petroleum revenue.”
Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I wanted to draw your attention to - [Interruption.] It has not been filed. Line (2) of 3 (2).
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Line (2) of 3 (2)?
Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Yes, go ahead.
Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I understand we are still on Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori's -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
But you can make your point.
Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am referring to the period within which -- after GRA has made its assessment, the entities are required to make deposits into the Petroleum Holding Fund. The subclause (2) indicates that this should be done by the 15th day of the ensuing month. Mr Speaker, I am at a loss why after GRA has done a thorough work and made the assessment, the money should continue to sit with the entity, depriving the Government of immediate assess to -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Hon Member, what do you suggest?
Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am suggesting that the direct transfer should be made immediately after the assessment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
How immediate is immediate?
Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
The money may change hands; before we realize, somebody has deposited, earned an interest on it and depriving the Government of immediate and direct assess.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
It should be paid immediately, not 15 days?
Mr Terkpeh 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, whereas I agree with the sentiments that businesses should not be allowed to use Government funds unduly, an assessment may also be the result of an audit and the taxpayer may object. So this allows for a period. The term “assessment” does not refer to only the original assessments, but may refer to an assessment after an audit by GRA or similar event. And the tax laws normally allow taxpayers the opportunity to appeal. I believe this clause is also consistent with the tax laws and it is for this reason that I would prevail on the House to retain the period.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
But Hon Minister, the appeal and so on may even go beyond the number of days. So that would be the exception rather than the usual case. Would we not want the law to take care of the usual, the often and say it should be paid immediately? If it is not because of some difficulties, that would take care of itself.
Mr Terkpeh 1:55 p.m.
I agree that it is the exception; it is normally not the rule, and in this regard, the earlier the funds are received, the better they are for Government.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
So they should be immediately paid? If there are some difficulties why they cannot, that can be seen to by some other means. Maybe, the people have gone to court or whatever, but immediately, they should be paid under normal circumstances; what they say onimus paribus - all things being equal.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I wanted to get some clarification from the Hon Minister. First, because we have done clause 1 (2) -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Order! Order!
Dr A. A. Osei 1:55 p.m.
We do not have to say it is consistent with the law, because we have already said if there is a conflict, then this law prevails. But I think I agree that on these matters, even though it is a legal obligation, it is important to give them some time to be able to make the payment. “Immediately”, is a bit harsh. There must be a reason the two-week period was put there, but I think immediately you impose an obligation, that would have severe consequences on the - [Interruption.]
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Unless there is some difficulty or some protest, it should be immediately paid. That is what it means.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:55 p.m.
“Immediately” is very harsh on such companies. You are talking about millions of dollars and so forth. You have to allow them a little time, in spite of the fact that, under normal circumstances, the Ministry may -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Very well. Shall we -- There are a number of issues we want to put the Question on. First, clause 3 (2), from what the Hon Atta Akyea has said, we should remove “The” and say: “petroleum revenue assessed.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Second,
the amendment to the effect that we should remove 15th day and say it should be paid “immediately”.
Mr Avedzi 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like
to beg that we step this one down as we do further consultation before we could take a decision because we want to find out from GRA what implication it would have on their operations if it should be immediately after the assessment has been done.
Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we are here to make laws for GRA and other institutions; it is not for them to tell us what to do here. Mr Speaker, we cannot rely on persons in the institutions for their convenience; we have to make the law so that the law itself would provide the checks and balances within the system and that is precisely what we are trying to do here.
We must bear in mind that it is not at all times - I said it at the winnowing. It is not at all times that we will have responsible and good elite people at the helm of affairs to administer this country. So, it is better we rely on the law to provide the checks and balances. Fifteen days, this money can be turned round by several people. One day's investment by somebody in a certain account can -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Oil money, if you get it, pay it immediately into the account. If there is any difficulty, the people will have to justify it.
Mr Avedzi 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to differ with the Hon Member -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, I will call you when I have received --
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, while I agree with the Hon Member for Akropong on the fact that well, 15 days, you can do a lot of things with whatever moneys assessed, he has not advanced any convincing reasons. Because this is an accounting system; it is a process. So at the end of the month, you are assessed - you have to be given a period of time
[Interruption] yes, to pay into it. It is normal. Normally, when you are assessed income tax, you are not even asked to pay immediately. So to say immediately, I do not know why. It is payable by a certain time. And this also says where the payment is not effected, you shall pay an additional five per cent of the amount.
We know accounting system, so it is not as if the proposers of the Bill are oblivious to the fact that people may deliberately delay. The fact is, if you delay, there are sanctions; there are penalties. So I recognize the Presbyterian in the Hon Member - discipline and everything - but I believe that in this case, he is too harsh. I would not go as far as to say that, that particular amendment may be unconscionable, but it is certainly harsh.
Mr Humado 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the rendition, the way it is, it is not as straightforward as one would have thought. First of all, at the end of the month, there needs to be an assessment, probably, by the GRA and after the assessment, then the oil company is obliged to pay. Now, what about if the GRA does not do the assessment as early as possible to enable the company to pay within fifteen days? That is why I am thinking that there needs to be a due date and that due date has to coincide with the date of assessment. But the way it is here, it is not very clear.
Dr A. A. Osei 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree with him. Maybe, that is what is not helping us but as it is, we understand that it is supposed to be done at the end of the month for payment - it is supposed to be. But the language here, supposing that they come first week of the month and do the assessment, what is going to happen is that, you will have more than fifteen days in the following month, so you could potentially - So if we could use the word as the Hon Deputy Minister may help us here and close the time of assessment, so that there is no ambiguity.
But Mr Speaker, as my Hon Senior Colleague said, Hon Boafo, when he is assessed, his income tax, international best practices allow him more than two weeks in some cases to pay. So, I am not sure the logic in him coming here and saying I am given these privileges but somebody else -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Dr Akoto Osei, we repeatedly heard you say in this House that oil money should be treated differently.
Dr A. A. Osei 2:05 p.m.
Yes; yes.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Now, oil matters are different from other matters -
Dr A. A. Osei 2:05 p.m.
But taxation should not be seen as punitive; that is the point here.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
So do not bring in the Hon Member's tax affairs.
Dr A. A. Osei 2:05 p.m.
The oil money is different, but it does not mean that people in the area should be seen as guilty until they prove themselves otherwise. These are - including the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC), which is going to be a big factor in there. I think we should allow the same rules of engagement for them. That is why as I said, if you fail to pay, it is not punitive but you are encouraged to do the right thing. But I think we should not leave room for any ambiguity -- that the assessment must be done by the end of the month, so there is no ambiguity.
Mr Avoka 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I just want to intervene and say that today is the beginning of the amendment stage; we still have days ahead of us. So it should be possible for us to defer this clause for the consultation that they are talking about.
Mr Avoka 2:05 p.m.


Mr Speaker, I think that we should make a living law. We should make a law that is practical and that can be implemented. I do not think that we are making a law that will punish some people. So, if it is that we need some consultation and guidance so that we can make the law implementable and effective, we should do so. We are going to continue with this amendment -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
So we should defer the matter of whether it should be immediate or fifteen days.
Mr Avoka 2:05 p.m.
Yes. We should defer it.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Thank you very much for that observation. Yes, Hon Minority Leader -
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not think there is any controversy in this at all. I believe that we can finish with it and take the vote on it. The Hon Member posed a question which is legitimate though, and it is in respect of putting some time lines on when the assessment could be done. And I felt that by this construction, it is inbuilt. The revenue is only due upon assessment. So if you are not assessed, you are not due for payment. I think that it is embedded in this construction.
But then, the Hon Minister related to something earlier which is where, perhaps, the confusion then will ensue, when he said that there is room for self- assessment. Are you saying that after the self-assessment, then you are obliged to pay? Within fifteen days if you do not pay then sanctions could apply? Or do we say that this is upon assessment by GRA?
Mr Speaker, the other thing is the issue that was raised by the Hon Member for Old Tafo. If assessment is made at the beginning of a month, then that entity will have a longer time, at least, one and a half
months, to pay. Whereas if an assessment is done close to the end of a month then that entity may have about two weeks, which is why the amendment moved by Hon W. O. Boafo then becomes relevant - that you are supposed to pay immediately after assessment. In any event, not more than two weeks after the assessment, so that we will all be at the same level.
I believe if we had that construction, then all of them would be operating from the same even playing field. Otherwise, it may appear discriminatory against those of them who are assessed at the end of the month and those of them who are assessed at the beginning of the month. Whereas one would have one and a half months, the other would have not more than two weeks. So, I guess we may have to look at that.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Minority Leader, for your contribution. But I think it goes to reinforce the Hon Majority Leader's point that there are more questions than answers and we may as well stand that down. But nevertheless, there is one aspect of that which we can conclude and that is whether we should have “liable” or “obliged” - Which means therefore that if you say “liable” then you do not support the amendment.
Question put and amendment negatived.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
The
proposed amendment is defeated. Very well, nevertheless, we shall revisit this clause to determine the matter of whether payment should be made within fifteen days immediately or otherwise. So part of that will still stand deferred. Clause 3, listed as xii - it is an amendment in the name of Hon W. O. Boafo and Chairman of the Committee.
Mr Boafo 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
clause 3, subclause (2), line 3, at end, add the following:
“and the entity shall notify the Ghana Revenue Authority”.
The purpose of this amendment is to make sure that the GRA which has been charged with assessment and collection and evaluation of the petroleum revenue is put in the proper perspective; they are fed with immediate information to update their records to enable them make proper reporting and respond to request from the authorities.
So the purpose of this amendment is that, as soon as the entities make the direct transfer, they should notify the GRA.
Mr Avedzi 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the amendment in that, since the entities are going to make direct transfers into the Petroleum Holding Fund, it is equally important that they notify GRA of such transfers. That is why this amendment is proposed.
Dr A. A. Osei 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I just need clarification from the Chairman and the Hon Boafo. What is the mode of notification? Is it by telephone call; by handwritten letter; email, text messages? If we want it in writing, we should do so, otherwise, we can leave room for people to write a letter, not mail it or send a text message to the wrong number -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
I prefer means of notification.
Mr Avedzi 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we thought that the mode of notification could be regulated by the regulation of this Act because we cannot put everything -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
For
the avoidance of doubt, shall we say in writing?
Mr Avedzi 2:15 p.m.
All right.
“And the entity shall notify the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) in writing.”
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
And by the law, if notice is by writing, the person who will be claiming any benefit under the notice, the obligation is on you now to show that you gave notice in writing.
Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think you can show payment by actually indicating that this is the receipt of payment and that is all. You will send the letter to them with the receipt of payment attached and that is how you actually notify this authority and that is how it is usually done. So I think it can be done that way.
Mr Avedzi 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with
technology transfers, direct payments can be made through the SWIFT system, so it will be difficult to show on the form; so it is better you write officially to the GRA that this payment has been done. If you instruct your banker to credit the account of Petroleum Holding Fund and that is done, how do you communicate that to the GRA?
Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:15 p.m.
If you authorize your bank, you just do not say the bank and leave it. There is a documentation to that effect and that can be attached to your letter to the GRA. That is all.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Hon Chairman, what do we render in terms of the state of affairs?
Mr Avedzi 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition will be --
“Petroleum revenue assessed as due in each month shall be paid by direct transfer into the Petroleum Holding Fund by the 15th day of the ensuing month, by the entities liable to make the payment and the entity shall notify the Ghana Revenue Authority in writing.”
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
The addition is “in writing” to the listed amendment. “An entity shall notify the Ghana Revenue Authority in writing.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (3), line 1, delete “liability” and insert “obligation” and in line 2, after “pay” insert “as a penalty” and also delete “five” and insert “ten”.
Mr Speaker, it must be punitive enough to scare people from acts or omissions that would impair the interest of the country. The 5 per cent is not sufficiently punitive. I am saying that it should be 10 per cent. If you agree with me, say, yes; if you do not agree, do whatever you like.
I am saying that the entity shall pay as a penalty an additional 10 per cent of the amount in default for each day of default or the default rate established under any law or whichever is higher. So instead of 5 per cent, I am proposing 10 per cent and I am also saying that it should be treated as a penalty, as punishment to scare people, to make people stop defrauding the State.
Mr Avedzi 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I oppose the proposed amendment; in fact, 5 per cent is punitive enough. For instance, if you are in default of paying a GH¢100 million, you will be paying GH¢5 million as penalty each day. So for every day, GH¢ 5 million; if you make it 10 per cent, it is going to GH¢10 million, which is too much, which means after 10 days, you will be paying double the amount. We think the 5 per cent is punitive enough to deter the entities from that. So the amendment should not be carried.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, why should joy be sympathetic to people who are doing acts which are detrimental to national interest; people doing something to harm Ghana and we say it is too much,
make it low, so that they can go ahead to do whatever they like to the detriment of the national economy? I do not understand what he is looking for.
I raised two issues; the 10 per cent and I also said that it should be put in as a penalty. He did not consider that. I do not know whether he supports that or not. I am of the opinion that we should accept what I have proposed, 10 per cent, whether the person will pay 10 million is neither here nor there. It will scare them and they will stop defrauding the State or doing acts that are detrimental to national interest.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Hon Members who are used to international financing may be able to help us a bit here because the deterrent should be such that it will not profit a person to keep the money and make some bigger profit elsewhere, which will be more than the penalty he will be paying.
Mr Emmanuel Owusu-Ansah 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the position taken by Hon P. C. Appiah-Ofori. Mr Speaker, the Chairman in his opposition to Hon Appiah-Ofori's amendment, quoted a figure of GH¢100 million to be the higher figure at which 5 per cent will be equally high. What about if the defaulting figure is GH¢100? Five per cent will be very small. It will be very minimal. Mr Speaker, that to make the punishment or penalty prohibitive enough so that nobody would accumulate money and use it for other purposes and enrich himself thereby, I think the 10 per cent proposed by Hon Appiah-Ofori is in order.
Mr Humado 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think my Hon Colleague did not look at the other terms. The 5 per cent is for each day of default and if you just go by percentage, that 5 per cent looks small, the amounts that are involved are huge and therefore,
5 per cent of those amounts can be very high. So I am of the view that we maintain the rendition as it is for 5 per cent. Let us leave it at 5 per cent for a start. We can always get back to it later.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Forgetting the amount, supposing the person will make 10 per cent and that l think is the real issue. Is it reasonably proximate? I think Hon Members may want to advise on this because if somebody will get 7 per cent, then he will not pay and he will keep the money.
Prof . Gyan-Baffour 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, there is nowhere on this earth that you can get 10 per cent a day. We are talking of one day, so that if your violation is about GH¢ 100 million, it means that if it is 10 per cent, within 10 days, you have to pay 100 million. Where on earth can you double money within 10 days? So it does not make any accounting sense. I think, what probably we need to do, maybe, we have to look at the daily rates that banks will charge and use that as the ceiling and maybe, bring it higher than that. For me, even 1 per cent is too high.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
So it can be safely kept at 5 per cent apparently.
Dr A. A. Osei 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think, just like the Majority Leader said, on these matters, we may on this one try to step it down and get the Minister to come back and assure us that what we are saying is true. I know it is true but I think if Hon Members are worried about anything, the Minister can come back and let us know that 5 per cent per day is about the highest in the world and it is no small matter.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
I do not think Hon Members are worried. Hon Members want to be sure of the situation.
Hon Appiah-Ofori, would you want to withdraw this or we vote on it?
Mr Appiah-Ofori 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am not ready to withdraw it; put the Question and if I lose, then posterity will judge all of us.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
I will
put the Question.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
since you said you were going to put the Question, I was only going to add that we should be mindful of the fact that this is a new area that we are charting and we should not put thorns and thistles in the way of investors. We should be mindful of the investor-friendly environment that we want to create, we should not over saddle investors. So on that note, even though I accept the principle in the advocacy by my Hon Colleague, that if a person commits an offence, we could be hard on that person. At this time, when we are about crawling, we must be extra cautious.
Mr Avoka 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in the light of these concerns, which I appreciate and the fact that if we impose heavy penalties and the rest of them, the tendency is to avoid ways and means of avoiding it. But if the penalty is moderate, they will be motivated to pay. With your permission, we can let the Deputy Minister still check with the IRS or the GRA and then confirm so that we will be realistic on this figure. So, we can also defer it for tomorrow or next tomorrow.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Very
well. We may as well defer -
Mr Avedzi 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we can defer
it to tomorrow.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
It is
accordingly deferred. There is a further amendment. Clause 3.
Mr Avedzi 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I have
to abandon a portion of the proposed amendment, that from line 1, delete “liability” and insert “obligation” and line 2 -- I have to abandon that portion.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, after “pay” insert “as a penalty” and line 3, before “amount” insert “original”.
So the rendition now will be:
“Where the liability of an entity to make a payment is not discharged on or before the due date, the entity shall pay as a penalty, an additional 5 per cent of the original amount in default for each day of default or the default rate established under any other law whichever is higher.”
Mr Avoka 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the issue of
5 per cent is also provided in that clause. In the light of our earlier decision, I am wondering whether it should not be part of the things for further investigation. Because of the 5 per cent, if we confirm it now, we take a decision now, then we are bound by 5 per cent and then tomorrow when they come to advise us, we will be stranded. So I do not know --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
But I think we can discuss, take a decision on the other aspects as moved by the Chairman and our decision will be that it is subject to the percentage we shall adopt. So, I think from what the Chairman said, we can progress. Any contributions on the essence of the amendment, apart from the 5 per cent element? Is the amendment acceptable minus a decision of the House on the 5 per cent?
I will put the Question.
Mr Avedzi 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 3, subclause (4), delete and insert the following:
“For the purposes of this Act, petroleum revenue paid into the Petroleum Account shall not be:
(a) treated as part of the normal tax revenue for purposes provided for in relevant laws; and
(b) used as the basis for the determination of any statutory earmarked funds.”
Mr Speaker, the purpose of this subclause is to make it clear that, treating the oil revenue as a special revenue, it should not be considered as a normal tax revenue so that it will form the basis for the determination of a statutory earmarked funds such as the District Assemblies Common Fund and the rest. So that is the purpose of this amendment.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I have formulated an amendment to this effect and I am happy that the Chairman has moved such an amendment. But two things, going down, the Chairman is proposing the deletion of “statutory earmark” and the insertion of “statutory earmarked” -- that is correct rendition. Why not include it here but then go down further to include that one to further amend the amendment that you are proposing now? That is number one.
Number two, since we are talking about foreign entities and local entities, I would further amend the amendment by the Chairman, that in line 2 (a) after “laws” and before “and” we insert “of the Republic”.
So that it will read --
“for the purposes of this Act, petroleum revenue paid into the petroleum”--
Of course, it is not going to be Petroleum Account any longer, the Holding Fund shall not be treated as part of the normal tax revenue for purposes provided for in relevant laws of the Republic.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, we add “of the Republic”.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:35 p.m.
That is so,
Mr Speaker.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
Apart
from that, you have no other objection?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker,
I suggested to him that consequentially, he would also have to amend the “statutory earmarked funds” so that we have “statutorily earmarked funds.”
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
That
one is quite clear. … “used as a basis for the determination of any statutorily earmarked funds. And then, “in relevant laws of the Republic”.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, you have any objection to these additions to your amendment?
Mr Avedzi 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, adding those
new additions will now make the new rendition read as follows:
“For the purposes of this Act, petroleum revenue paid into the Petroleum Holding Fund shall not be
(a) treated as part of the normal tax revenue for purposes provided for in relevant laws of the Republic, and
(b) used as the basis for the determination for any statutorily earmarked funds.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
Clause 3 -- There is a final amendment which stands in the name of Hon Appiah-Ofori.
Mr Appiah-Ofori 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it appears to me that it has been taken care of, so it may now be redundant. As I have already stated, “statutorily”, there is supposed to be used as an adverb to modify an adjective and for “earmark” to be an adjective, it should be in that past tense so that it becomes “statutorily earmarked funds”; “earmarked” becomes an adjective qualifying “funds” and “statutorily” being an adverb modifying earmarked. So since it has been corrected up there, it takes care of it at the same time. It is a consequential amendment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
But it is still there to be corrected, is that not so?
Mr Avedzi 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the
earlier amendment takes care of what Hon Appiah-Ofori has also proposed, so I support the amendment.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
We will
end here without putting the Question to the entire clause because we have deferred two items which will be dealt with later.
Mr Avoka 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yesterday,
the Winnowing Committee and the Joint Committee on Finance, Mines and Energy reached clause 3; we got to the end of clause 3. It is our determination to continue from clause 4 this afternoon. It is very important to do the winnowing because it tries to narrow the issues of controversy.
Mr Avoka 2:35 p.m.


So I will now propose that we adjourn proceedings for today and the Winnowing Committee will meet at 3.30 p.m. at the usual place. It is 2.40 p.m. now; we will have one hour break and the Winnowing Committee will meet so that we continue from clause 4 onwards.

Thank you.
Mr Boado 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I have the
permission of my Hon Leader to respond to the Majority Leader's concluding remarks.
We have no objection to the adjournment at this time and we have no objection to meet at the usual place. But I think, it should be at the instance of the usual motivation.
ADJOURNMENT 2:35 p.m.