Debates of 29 Feb 2012

MADAM SPEAKER
PRAYERS
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT
Madam Speaker
Hon Members, I have admitted a Statement from the Hon Alhaji Muhammed Mumuni, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration.
Hon Minister, you may deliver your Statement.
STATEMENTS
Madam Speaker
I thank you.
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC - Asawase)
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to also support the Statement ably made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration and to congratulate us for the opportunity to open a diplomatic Mission inAnkara, Turkey.
Madam Speaker, it is very important that we take this exercise that is being taken by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration very seriously, in the sense that if you look at the amount of trade that exists between us and the bilateral relation that has existed between Turkey and Ghana all these years, this is long overdue, just like my Hon Colleague rightly indicated.

Madam Speaker, one important thing that we must take serious note of, is the willingness of Turkey to open an honorary Consulate in Kumasi. Madam Speaker, I believe there are many Embassies and diplomatic Missions which have been in Ghana for a long time and we have been doing a lot of transactions and businesses with them, yet they are all concentrated in Accra. Our people all over the country always have to travel wherever they find themselves to Accra, if they have to do business with these diplomatic Missions.

This move by the Turkish Government to op en an honorary Consulate in Kumasi, I hope the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration will encourage other diplomatic Missions to do same to ease trade relationship between us and the various diplomatic Missions we find in our country.

Madam Speaker, there is one thing that I cannot but mention, that is, the many diplomatic Missions that we have across the world. Madam Speaker, it is sad to note that sometimes when we visit those countries and we go to those Missions, the level of support that is even given to us, even as Members of Parliament, leaves so much to be desired. One can imagine what goes on with the ordinary citizen.

Madam Speaker, I remember sometime in 2002, the company I was working with, which was a cocoa buying company, wanted to get some weighing scale. We went on the internet and tried to find an address in China. Madam Speaker, with just the address in China and sending a mail, within 24 hours, someone at the diplomatic Mission in Accra had already got- the information from this company in China to link them up with us. And immediately, within three days, after
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC - Asawase)
speaking to me -- and I really showed the quantities that were likely to be purchased -- someone within the diplomatic Mission in the China Mission based in Accra moved to Kumasi to meet the company.
It tells one, regardless of the quantum one wants to do business with, they have people who are ready to always move to make sure that so much business goes to their country. But in our case, Madam Speaker, maybe, the former Ambassador who happens to be the Member of Parliament (MP) for Subin, when he was contributing, said the budget that is given to our Missions, is most of the time, inadequate.
But I think that we need to look at it because if it is just sending our peers or fellow Ghanaians to diplomatic Missions abroad, only to warm seats, Madam Speaker, I am sorry to say, it does not inure to the benefit of the ordinary Ghanaian.
Maybe, we need to find a way, especially with the trade desk; if even we could generate a system, like we do -I have seen many that have come to this House, where we allow some percentage of internally generated funds (IGFs) - we need to do it, so that these desks become active. They should be very active and proactive too, to the benefit of the ordinary Ghanaian.
If We open this diplomatic Mission in Ankara, Turkey and all it goes to do - They may say it is bilateral but the business ends up being one. They take advantage of what they can do in our country to their benefit and we do not take advantage of what we can, to also benefit by way of the bilateral relations. If so, then I am sorry to say that the opening of the diplomatic Mission in Ankara will be business as usual and I do not think business as usual will inure to anybody's benefit.

Madam Speaker, with a target of US$50 billion by the Turkish Government -- and already the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration, in his Statement, said that it is anticipated that by 2015, which is just three years from now, the business relationship between us and them is likely to go up to US$1billion. That means, we should position ourselves, so that we do not allow them to say that they are positioning to do business to the tune of US$50 billion with Africa, when we will not go Strategic and we will just go and open a mission without any strategic plan.

I would want to urge the Hon Minister,-- liaise with the Hon Minister for Trade and Industry, so that we can also develop a strategy that, with this engagement -- What are we going to do at the economic front? I know on the diplomatic front, there are so many things happening. But we must also take advantage of the economic and bilateral relationships that we are striking with them and to ensure that in the long run, it creates jobs in our country, provides comfort for our people and it does-not only inure to the benefit of the Turkish.

I also must add that, I think we the Members of Parliament have a role to play. Inmost of these diplomatic Missions and the countries, there are other legislative members and in Ghana, I believe many of us must begin to look at the possibility of also having exchanges with those in the various diplomatic Missions, especially in Turkey.

"I am being whispered to by my Hon Colleague seated behind me that we currently even have that Ghana-Turkey Parliamentarians relationship.‘ I believe that with the opening of a diplomatic Mission in Ankara, it i_s further going to strengthen the relationship between us.
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC - Asawase)
Following the decision of the Ghana Government to recognise Kosovo, the Serbian authorities have asked Ghana's Ambassador in Belgrade to return home and consult with the Ghana Government to reverse the recognition. Moreover, the Serbian Government has requested its honorary Consulate in Accra to be closed down. The reaction of the Serbian Government to Ghana's recognition of Kosovo leaves us with no other better choice than to order the complete closure of our Mission in Belgrade.
Madam Speaker, Cabinet has also approved the establishment of a Consulate- General in Guangzhou, the provincial capital of Guangdong, China. This has become imperative due to the following:
The presence of a large Ghanaian "community.
The inability of the Ghana Mission in Beijing to cover effectively Guangzhou as a result of the distance between the two cities and the cost involved.
The inability to establish an honorary Consulate in the Province because of the Chinese Government's policy of not allowing honorary Consulates in mainland China.
South China's Guangdong Province has achieved remarkable success in the economic development of China since the implementation of the reforms and opening up policies in the late 1970s. Guangdong Province, which borders the Hong Kong and Macao Special Adnnnistrative regions, was China's pilot region of reform, and has now become one of China's economic power houses, with GDP accounting for more than l0 per cent of China's total in recent years. Guangdong is the richest Province in China and is informally known as the "world's factory" because of its manufacturing strength.

The Embassy of Ghana in the People's Republic of China is located in Beijing, in the northern part of China. The city of Guangzhou, ' in the Guangdong Province, however, is located in the southern part of China, about two thousand kilometres from Beijing. Considering the distance between the two cities, the travel cost and the duration, that is between 20 and 30 hours by train, is quite burdensome for the numerous Ghanaians living in Guangzhou and others who_go there to trade, to avail themselves of the services of the Embassy in Beijing.

As a result of the stringent Chinese laws of immigration, most of the consular requests that our Mission in Beijing receives are very urgent and require immediate attention. Chinese visas are granted for only one month, thus, should any Ghanaian face any consular challenges during this short period , it becomes very frustrating. In such instances, they are forced to embark on a 20-30 hour train journey to Beijing.

Another compelling factor for the establishment of a Consulate-General is the language barrier that confronts Ghanaians in their dealings with their Chinese business partners. A Consulate- General in Guangzhou would enhance the opportunities of Ghanaian business people.

It may be noted that almost all the Western countries have op ened Consulates-General in Guangzhou, as Well as seven African countries namely, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, Libya, Angola and South Africa.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, for your kind indulgence and attention.
Madam Speaker
We thank you, Hon Minister. .
Yes, the floor is open. Let us have one from each side by way of comments and then we go to the Leadership. If they have -
Mr Isaac Osei (NPP --Subin)
Madam Speaker, I thank you for this opportunity to support the Statement which has just been made by the Hon Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration. I support the Statement for a number of reasons.
First, I believe that this new Mission which we are opening in Ankara is long overdue. It is overdue because Turkey is such a strategic country, straddling both Asia and Europe at the same time and her position lends her to a lot of other relationships.
The Hon Minister rightly pointed out that We have more than doubled our trade since 2009 with Turkey, moving from US$175 million to US$440 million in 2011. So at the heart of this decision to open a new Mission, is the concept of economic diplomacy, which I believe, should drive this whole relationship.
We should look at this, not only in terms of the foreign direct investment that we can attract from Turkey but also the possibility of developing our local private sector, in such a manner that they can also take advantage of the Turkish market.
Turkey has decided that she would be a strategic partner of African countries and this, I believe, led to the Istanbul Declaration for which an implementation plan was put in place and this is what has resulted in the explosion of trade between our country and Turkey.
Madam Speaker, looking at the Bilateral Air Services Agreement which Ghana signed with Turkey, as a result of which we now have Turkish Airlines flying in here, perhaps, the time has come for us to revisit the whole Ghana Airways. This is the situation because if it is a bilateral agreement, then we also should be going to Turkey.

Madam Speaker, I also recall that we received the Turkish President in this Chamber; he spoke right from the podium there. We remember some of the things he said. But his key emphasis was that the relationship should not only be political but it should be economic and I believe that that is the path which Government has chosen.

Madam Speaker, I was very pleased to hear from the Hon Minister that Ghana is now going to open a Consulate-General in Guangdong Province. As all of us know, many of the Ghanaian traders go to Guangdong and do not have access to consular support. So I believe that this is a positive thing and all of us should support it.

Madam Speaker, I was a little worried when I heard that the Mission in Belgrade was closing down. But I can understand the political reasons for doing so. It is clear that Yugoslavia or Serbia, at the moment, does not really want us if we are now recognising Kosovo; I think that is the political reason.

But it is sad that such a situation has arisen, considering the strong bonds of historical friendship between Ghana and the former Yugoslavia, given the axis formed with Josip Bronz Tito and Kwame Nkrumah. So one would have thought that we would be found to continue to hold that Mission in Belgrade. However, if the level of trade does not support it, then perhaps, we should close it.

Madam Speaker, as a general comment, I would like to say it is important, if we are looking at economic diplomacy, to consider what we do with our trade missions in the various countries Where
rose
Madam Speaker
I did say I would take one from each side and then throw it to the Hon Leaders. Do they have some statements or comments to make? Otherwise, I give it to both sides.
Hon Minority Leader, do you have comments to make on this?
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Madam Speaker, I have just a few observations. But with respect, maybe, if a little space could be granted to my Hon Colleague, the Hon Member for New Juaben North, himself, a former Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration.
Madam Speaker
Hon Minority Leader, Wé have an agenda for today. We have to finish with it. The Standing Order says this must be within one hour and we had already decided we will take one from each side and then the Leadership. So, unless you want to pass your slot to somebody --But if you are speaking, this is your turn. I Want to moderate the business, so that We can have a lot done.
Minority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei Mensah-Bonsu)
Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity.

Madam Speaker, the Statement made by the Hon Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration should be appreciated and considered by all of us; we need to change with contemporaneous events.

Madam Speaker, we do recognise that Turkey, as a nation, is a watershed country between the Islamic world and the Christian world. And how we position ourselves with Turkey, itself, an emerging light in Europe, I believe, would define strongly how we maintain a tight balance between the Christian world and the Islamic world. That in itself, Madam Speaker, I believe, is quite significant.

It is also revealing that the Hon Minister tells us that Turkey is positioning herself to allocate in the region of US$50 billion towards African countries - 53/ 54 of us. On the average, one nation may be having about US$l billion. That is significant, in my view, given what the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) has been able to do for us on the Tetteh- Quarshie/ Mallam Road, which was inaugurated just two weeks back by His Excellency the President.

Madam Speaker, the issue relating to how many in the diplomatic Missions perceive themselves, that is, as existing to offer services primarily to the Executive, has already been alluded to by the Hon Member for Asawase. So I am not going to go on that line again.

But I think we should register this strongly; we in this House should register this strongly to the Hon Minister responsible for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration. Oftentimes, when we have travelled on delegations to foreign countries, the third citizen in this country, Madam Speaker, and the rest of us, Hon Members of Parliament, Leadership of Parliament have suffered some indignities. And it is not correct that these things should happen to us.
Minority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei Mensah-Bonsu)
Madam Speaker, the Hon Minister informs us about the closure of our Embassy in Serbia. I think it is a very delicate matter. I do not know if the current managers of our Black Stars were aware of this situation when they most recently confirmed the coach to continue with his engagement with our Black Stars.' The repercussions could be a bit bizarre for us.
So, perhaps, the Hon Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration, without attempting to interfere in the affairs of the Ghana Football Association (GPA), should find space and time to engage our Football Association in this matter because it could be very embarrassing diplomatically to us.
Madam Speaker, the Hon Minister tells us that the driving force of the Ministry's policy is, indeed, economic diplomacy. Madam Speaker, that being the case, I find something a bit incongruous. We have given recognition to the Saharawi Arab Republic. At the same time, we are close associates with Algeria and Morocco. How do we balance this out? I know that it has a history; the recognition of Saharawi Arab Republic has a history. But in the unfolding events and given the current circumstances, where do we put our best foot?
Madam Speaker, while we are at this, I think events unfolding in Mali could be tragic. And I would want to take advantage of the presence of the Hon Minister in the House to inquire if the Ministry has started any moves by way of assisting our compatriots in Mali in the case of any cataclysmic events unfolding.
Madam Speaker, I thank you.

AIhaji Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo (NDC- Wa Central): Madam Speaker, l also rise to contribute to the Statement ably presented by the Hon Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration on the new foreign policy initiatives and the need for us to take these initiatives to the frontiers of our foreign policy developments, so that in the future we can have Ghana, not just being a nation that reacts to international affairs but one that is actively involved in initiating policies that eventually will have a total effect in the World.

Madam Speaker, what the Hon Minister has done here is important and I would want to thank him first of all, for that. This is because it is important Parliament is abreast of our foreign policy direction. It is also important that we give blessing to this foreign policy direction because in the end, we want to see the people -of Ghana carried along the path on which Ghana is moving and to ensure, as we move along, the people who are the beneficiaries, know exactly where we are going.

Madam Speaker, let me start by the policy to open a Mission in Ankara. The Mission in Ankara is long overdue because of the strategic position of Turkey in the world and in the Middle East as well as in Asia

Madam Speaker, right now, as we speak, Turkey is the fastest-growing economy in Europe. And is the choicest tourism destination in the world. So, with an economy growing fastest in Europe and with its huge tourism potential, it is only logical that we should want to emulate them and to work along with them to ensure we get the benefits of co- operation and understanding between the two countries. Turkey is one country, historically, that has always played a major role in world affairs.

With the new alliance and re-alliance of the world bodies and the fact that international relations are taking new shape and the need for Ghana to strategically place herself in world affairs, it is important that we do not waste time at all and establish this Embassy in Turkey.

So what the Hon Minister has announced, is a very important decision taken by Cabinet and I will encourage them to strengthen it and ensure that that relationship stands and _is strengthened Even though it app ears, m my view, that the initial decision to have Ghana relate with them at that high level, may have been taken by Turkey because of the initial visit of the Turkish President, Abdullah Gul to Ghana and subsequently, the visit of many of their businessmen to Ghana -

Quite recently, just about a week and a half or two weeks ago, we had some Turkish businessmen who visited Ghana and had to meet Members of Parliament. This is because of our relations with the Turkish Parliament and the meeting was, I understand, very fruitful. So there had been a consistent effort by Turkey herself to have us as friends and to have a Mission opened here. So what we have done as a response, is good. But in future, it is important that we take note of these signs and take the early initiative even before these countries take the initiative.

But there is a strong initiative we have taken" in Guangzhou in China; that is a financial hub in China; a place where the world's factories are, where all the major, major factories exist in China and where business revolves round.

So the need for us to have a Consulate there is crucial and we appreciate what the Hon Minister has -done and we can only thank him for taking that initiative and bringing it to Cabinet for approval.

Madam Speaker, the last point I would want to raise is our relationship with Serbia. The fact that we recognise Kosovo and that has resulted in. Serbia severing her relations with us, is something that we have to show a lot of concern about. Ghana has always demonstrated that we would support the weaker side in international relations. We have been a champion in colonial tight; we have always been a champion in supporting weaker States to stand on their own. We have recognised Palestine and we have recognised Saharawi Arab Republic. All these have their attending consequences.

So our recognition of Serbia and the attendant consequence is not something new to Ghana and I will urge the Hon Minister to stand strong on that and work hard to ensure that we will gain twice- We will not "disrecognise" - if there is any word like that - Kosovo, but we will ensure that we go on to have friendship with Serbia as well.

Madam Speaker, with these few words, I would want to thank the Hon Minister again and urge Government to continue with these kinds of proactive foreign policy directives and initiatives to ensure that we are the best beneficiaries in our relations with other countries.
Madam Speaker
Thank you, Hon Deputy Majority Leader.
Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
Mr Cletus A.Avoka
Madam Speaker, I thought the Hon Minister Wanted your indulgence to just add to one or two things?
Madam Speaker
He wants to add something?
Mr Avoka
It is a statement. Hon Members have raised is sues and he wants to allay their fears.
Madam Speaker
He has given us the Statement and we commented on it and there is no rule that he can add something. So let us move on to the next item.
Thank you, Hon Minister, and I thank the Hon Members who contributed. Things are clearer now to all of us.
Hon Leader, the next item should be item (4). I wanted to start with item (4). But from here, the First Deputy Speaker will take over from me.
Mr First Deputy Speaker, it is your turn now to take over. [Pause] .
rose
Madam Speaker
Were you catching my eye?
Mr Avoka
No, Madam Speaker. I know you are to leave, and the First Deputy Speaker will take over. Sorry, Madam Speaker, we braced to take item number (5) on page (2) -
Madam. Speaker
From here, you can wait for the First Deputy Speaker. [ Pause. ]
MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr Avoka
Mr Speaker, we will take item number (5), the Motion dealing with the Off-taker Agreement at page (2) of the Order Paper, after that, we will take item numbers (7) and (8) and then come back to item number (4) later in the day.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, item number (5) on the Order Paper - Motion.
MOTIONS
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
Mr Speaker, I beg to

move, that this Honourable House adopts the Report of the joint Committee on Finance and Mines and Energy on the Oftaker Agreement between Ghana National Petroleum Corporation and the UNIPEC Asia Company Limited under the Master Facility Agreement between the Republic of Ghana and the China Development Bank Corporation.

Mr Speaker, in doing so, I present the Committee's Report.

1.0 Introduction

The Off-taker Agreement between the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) (as Seller) and UNIPEC Asia Company Limited (as Buyer) was presented to the House on Friday, 3" February, 2012 and referred to a Joint Committee on Finance and Mines and Energy for consideration and report in accordance with Standing Order 171 and 188 of the House_

Pursuant to the referral, the Committee met with the Hon Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, Dr Kwabena Duffour, Hon Deputy Ministers for Finance and Economic Planning and Energy, Mr Seth Terkpeh and Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah respectively and considered the referral.

Present at the meeting were the Chief Executives of Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) and Ghana National Gas Company (GNGC), Nana Asafu- Adjaye and Dr. George Sipa Yankey respectively, officials of the two companies; Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP) and that of the GhanaAir Force.

The Committee is grateful to the Minister, the Deputy Ministers, officials from the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, GNGC, GNPC and the Ghana Air Force for attending upon the Committee.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
2.0 References
In considering the Off-taker Agreement, the Committee made reference to and was guided by the following documents:
l. The 19_92 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana;
2. The Standing Orders of Parliament.
3. The Master Facility Agreement between the Republic of Ghana and China Development Bank Corporation (CDB).
4. The executed version of the Agreement signed by the Government of Ghana and China Development Bank Corporation.
3.0 Background
The Government of the Republic of Ghana represented by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning entered into a Master Facility Agreement (MFA) with the China Development Bank Corporation for an amount of US$3,000,000_,OO0.00 to undertake various infrastructure projects in the country.
The Agreement was approved by Parliament on 26th August, 2011 and was signed on _16th December, 2011 and an Addendum to the MFA was also approved on 215‘ February, 2012 by the House.
The MFA requires that the Government of Ghana enters into separate subsidiary agreements with CDB in respect of each project to be implemented under the US$3,000,000,000.00 facility. Further, Parliament in giving approval to the MFA, directed the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning to present each Subsidiary Agreement to the House for approval in accordance with article 181 of the Constitution and section 4 of the Loans Act, 1970, Act 335.

The first Subsidiary Agreement for the financing of the Western Corridor Gas Infrastructure Project in the sum of US$850,000,000.00 was therefore presented to the House.

As part of the requirements for the draw down on the facility, GNPC is to enter into an Off-taker Agreement with UNIPEC Asia Company Limited for the sale and purchase of Jubilee Crude Oil and part of the proceeds paid into a special account at the Bank of Ghana for the purposes of servicing the facility.

Subsequently, a Five Party Agreement was entered into among the China Development Bank Corporation, the Republic of Ghana represented by the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, the Bank of Ghana, Ghana National Petroleum Corporation, and UNIPEC Asia Company Limited.

4.0 Terms and conditions of the Agreement

4.1 Tenure of the Agreement

The tenure of the Agreement is 15.5 years but shall terminate automatically if

a. at any time prior to the expiration of the MFA, all amounts outstanding under the MFA are irrevocably repaid in full and any outstanding commitments to provide financial accommodation are cancelled; or

b. at any time during the term of the MFA, amounts outstanding under the facility are irrevocably repaid in full and any outstanding commitments to provide financial accommodation thereunder are cancelled; or

c. seller has discharged in full‘ its obligation in respect of the agreed volumes to be delivered under the Off-taker Agreement.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
4.2 Quantity and quality of crude to be supplied
The Agreement provides for GNPC to deliver to UNIPEC Asia and for UNIPEC Asia, to purchase and lift from the GNPC, 13,000 barrels per day of Jubilee Crude Oil (i.e. 5 cargoes per calendar year) at a standard cargo size of 950,000 net U.S. barrels.
The quality of crude to be delivered is the normal export quality grade of Jubilee Crude Oil as available at the time of lifting at the Jubilee Terminal.
4.3 Delivery
The Off-taker Agreement provides for the Seller to deliver Jubilee Crude Oil to the Buyer in bulk FOB at the Jubilee Terminal onto a vessel provided by the Buyer.
4.4 Pricing of crude
The pricing for crude oil purchased under the Off-taker Agreement is to be made on commercial basis and to be determined as follows:
a. The US$ FOB price per (net bill of lading) shall have the following components unless the parties agree otherwise;
i. a dated Brent component; and
ii. a differential -
And shall be calculated in accordance with the following formula:
The U.S. dollar FOB Price = Dated Brent + Differential.
4.5 Taxes
The Agreement provides for all taxes, duties, imposts, fees, charges (including,

without limitation, pilotage, mooring and towage expenses) and dues (including, without limitation, quay dues) in respect of the vessel incurred at the loading terminal shall be for the Buyer's account including a margin of 8 US cents for any pricing option chosen by the Buyer.

The amount of any taxes, duties, imposts, fees, charges and dues of every description imposed or levied by any governmental, local or port authority on the Jubilee Crude Oil supplied hereunder, or on its export, delivery, transportation, ownership, sale or use, in respect of any stage prior to title and risk in such Jubilee Crude Oil passing to the Buyer shall be for the Seller's account.

The Buyer shall be the importer of record and shall be responsible for complying with customs and excise entry procedures at the discharge port and duties and taxes that arise in respect of such customs and excise entry shall be for the Buyer's account.

4.6 Payment for crude

Payment for all crude oil sales under the Agreement shall be made into the Petroleum Holding Fund inUS dollars, in full without discount, withholding setoff or counterclaim (but subject always to and pursuant to the terms of the Master Facility Agreement and the Five Party Agreement), within thirty (3,0) calendar days after the Bill of Lading date.

5.0 Observations and recommendation

5.1 Termination of the Off-taker Agreement and the supply of crude oil. -

The Committee observed that the obligation on GNPC to supply Jubilee Crude Oil to UNIPEC Asia terminates whenever the Off-taker Agreement
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
between Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) and UNIPEC Asia Company Limited is terminated. Also, GNPC is under no further obligation to sell Jubilee Crude Oil to UNIPEC Asia in excess of the agreed 13,000 barrels a day. Any crude produced in Ghana outside the Jubilee Field is also precluded from the terms of this Agreement. These limitations give GNPC the option to sell to other buyers.
5.2 Dispute resolution under the Off-taker Agreement
The Committee again observed that there are detailed provisions for the resolution of disputes arising out of this Agreement. It provides that, any "dispute, controversy or claim arising out of, relating to, or in connection with the Off-taker Agreement that is not resolved by the parties shall be referred and finally resolved by arbitration under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce to be held in London, England.
The arbitration panel members shall be three; one nominated by the claimant, one nominated by the respondent and the last one jointly nominated by the two arbitrators so appointed and in default, to be appointed by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The resulting arbitral award shall be final and binding without right of appeal and judgment may be entered in any Court, having jurisdiction in respect of the Agreement.
5.3 Use of Jubilee Crude for Loan Repayment
The Committee observed that per the Off-taker Agreement, 13,000 barrels of oil a day or five cargoes per calendar year (950,000 net US barrels per standard

cargo) is to be supplied by GNPC to UNIPEC Asia. The Committee was also informed that the average Government share of crude oil from the current production at the Jubilee Field is about 133000 barrels per day.

Based on the above, some members of the Committee expressed concern that the Agreement implies that Government was using the State's entire share of oil from the Jubilee Field to support the loan facility under the MFA.

Officials of MoFEP and GNPC in response to the concern indicated that the proceeds from the sale of the crude were to be paid into the Petroleum Holding Fund in accordance with section 3(1) of the Petroleum Revenue Management Act, 2011, Act 815. The officials indicated that it is only the debt servicing amount from the Annual Budget Funding Amount (ABFA), as approved by Parliament that would be paid into a Collection Account for the repayment of the loan.

The Committee was informed that in developing the cash flow statement, the Ministry and GNPC assumed a price of US$85 per barrel of Jubilee Crude for years 1 to 5; US$90 per barrel of Jubilee Crude for years 6 to 10; and US$95 per barrel of Jubilee Crude for years 11 to 15. The officials stated that based on the above price assumptions and the 13,000 barrels per day as contained in the Agreement, the total amount payable to the Government by UNIPEC Asia over the 1 O years period of the Subsidiary Agreement is US$4,157,875,000

This figure is in excess -of the loan amount of US$30 billion. GNPC further stated that the average price achieved for the Jubilee Crude over the past six months is in excess of US$100 per barrel.
Mr Joe Ghartey (NPP - Essikadu/ Ketan)
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Joe Ghartey, where is the Hon Ranking Member? ,
Mr Ghartey
The Hon Ranking Member for Energy is Hon Joseph Kofi Adda, Member for Navrongo Central who is attending --
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Very well. Proceed.
Mr Ghartey
Mr Speaker, I am a member of the Energy Committee.
Mr Speaker, in seconding the Motion, I crave your indulgence to raise a few issues arising out of the Report and a few issues arising out of how the entire Master Facility Agreement, of which this is an integral part, has been handled.
Mr Speaker, I raise these matters, not in criticism, but in the hope or belief that we are all Working towards ensuring that Ghana becomes a better place to be. Mr Speaker, I did not say "better Ghana". I said "Ghana becomes a better place".
Mr Speaker, having said that, this Off-taker Agreement was supposed to be a condition precedent of the Master Facility Agreement. Mr Speaker, as you will recall, Parliament approved a Master Facility Agreement and made the point that any Agreement subsequent to the Master Facility Agreement must come before this House.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, address the Chair.
Mr Ghartey
Mr Speaker, I was doing a little housekeeping.
I understand that it is important that- some of these things are done because in the nature of governance, we must all understand that we are seeking to act in the best interest of the country.
Mr Speaker, those of us in the Mines and Energy Committee have been told, for example, that the build-up of gas in our oil wealth is such that if we do not act timeously, it may even affect the production of oil. It is in that spirit that we all contribute and we all seek to move this process forward very quickly.
Indeed, that is why, for example, when the Subsidiary Agreement that came before this Offtaker Agreement, we did not raise a hue and cry. We understood that it is important that our oil production is not compromised in any way. The oil production is for all of us Ghanaians, especially those of us in the Western Region, I can say so without any objection from the other side or from my side.
But Mr Speaker, one of the things I must comment on, if you would give me the opportunity, is that, even before the Agreements were signed, even before the Offtaker, the Chinese company that was responsible for developing our gas fields had started developing the gas fields.
Mr Speaker, I remember that the question was raised at our Committee that if the Agreement had not come to

Parliament, why were they developing the fields and we were told, and Mr Speaker, I agree, that if they do not start working at a certain time, it will compromise our oil flow. That is what governance is about.

Mr Speaker, after those general comments, talking about the Report itself, the Report states on page 3, paragraph 4.1 that -

"the tenure of the Agreement is fifteen and a half years but shall terminate automatically if. . . "

And it continues -- "certain things happen".

Mr Speaker, I appreciate the fact that this is not a court of law; I appreciate the fact that Mr Speaker cannot be invited to give a judgment so to speak. But I have been a little concerned about a provision in the Petroleum Revenue Management Act, which seems to suggest that, - perhaps, we can run into problems when we look at that term.

Mr Speaker, I refer to the Petroleum Revenue Management Act 2001, Act 815 and I refer to section 18 (7) and that deals with the Annual Budget Funding Amount. It says that -

"The Annual Budget Funding Amount may be used as collateral for debts and other liabilities of - Government for a period of not more than 10 years after the commencement of this Act."

Mr Speaker, I am not a judge. I am not here to interpret the law. But what I see here on page 3 is 15.5 years. While seconding the Motion, I would want to draw our minds to that fact and see how we can reconcile what we ourselves passed as the l0 years and What appears in the Agreement represented by the Report as 15.5 years.
Mr Ghartey
Mr Speaker, you would recollect that even whether we should use our oil for this kind of activity that is envisaged by the Off-taker Agreement, was a matter of much debate. The original Bill that came before Parliament suggested that we were not going to collateralise our oil.
But subsequently, it came; there was a lot of debate and then we agreed as a House to use it for 10 years. What We see in this Agreement is 15.5 years and I am sure that as we all speak to it and as we all seek to approve this Motion, we shall bear in mind the fact that there seems to be a contradiction between the law that we passed and the Offtaker Agreement.
Mr Speaker, the second point that I would want to raise is a matter of the flow metre. This transaction is for the delivery of certain barrels of oil per day. If you look at 4.2, for example, it talks about quantity of crude oil to be supplied. It is important that at all times, the quantity that is being supplied is known in terms of transparency to everybody. I am not even talking about government. I am talking about the ordinary people, so that the proper thing is not done but also be seen to have been done.
So while commenting on this, I would urge that it is a little unacceptable if the flow metre from time to time gets spoilt and then the quantity of oil that is leaving the field, it is difficult to determine. S0 while supporting this Motion, I also flag the flow metre.
Mr Speaker, I will not go too much to town but I will just comment also on paragraph 5 .2 which can be found on page 5. Paragraph 5.2 which can be found on page 5 talks about the dispute resolution procedure and it seems to set out the procedure for the appointment of

arbitrators but comes to the conclusion that, if the parties are default, if they cannot agree to set up the arbitration process by the appointment of arbitrators, the body which will appoint the arbitrators for them is the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Mr Speaker, this is economic business transaction. This is within the area of law that we define as civil law.

I wonder why we have chosen the International Criminal Court instead of, for example, the International Chamber of Commerce, which is what is usually used in the Agreement. Whether there is any --- unless of course, it is the printer's devil, it was supposed to be "International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)" that it has been written as "International Criminal Court". We have not even started the Agreement and we are envisaging criminality. So we need to run to the International Criminal Court--
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Chairman, the paragraph that the Hon Member is referring to, somewhere in that paragraph, you referred to "International ‘Chamber of Commerce" but down the line, you also referred to "International Criminal Court". Are they two separate things or you are referring to the same thing?
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker, I would want to go through the document. But I think it is "International Chamber of Commerce". But I will confirm that before we -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
In fact, you mentioned "International Chamber of Commerce" in that same paragraph, then down the line, you changed it to "International Criminal Court". It is a matter of record. So it is important for us to know exactly what it is. If it is an error, then you amend it, so that we do not repeat that line of argument. If it is an error, correct-it, so that we do not repeat that. This is because others would like to pass comments on the issue. It is a very serious matter.
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker, give me a minute to refer before I effect the correction.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Very Well.
Hon Member, you know that the International Criminal Court cannot have jurisdiction over this matter. So clearly, it is an error. This is because if you look at it, they referred to "International Chamber of Commerce" first as you rightly indicated and then when they came back and talked about "International Criminal Court", it does not do arbitration. They do not have jurisdiction to do arbitration.
Anyway, continue and let him check his record and let us see.
Mr Ghartey
Mr Speaker, when you look at the Report, the International Criminal Court is not going to undertake arbitration. It is going to appoint the arbitrators. In a Dispute Resolution Court, with the greatest of respect, when the parties are unable to arrive at an agreement to appoint an arbitrator, it is usually in the Agreement that a third party appoints the arbitrator. I raised it as you said because it is a matter of record, so that if it is an error, then we change it.
Mr Speaker, I will conclude by saying that this Agreement is between GNPC and UNIPEC. We used to operate with GNPC as the leading light in the oil and gas sector. When we undertook extensive review of our laws, sometime last two years, one of the things that we did was that, we raised the Petroleum Commission to some level of prominence.
Some people even said that the GNPC should be restricted to a national oil company that it should go commercial. Some people were even saying that GNPC should be incorporated as a limited liability company, et cetera.

Mr Speaker, I wonder whether this Agreement that was - and if I can call the period before the review of our petroleum laws, the old testament -- I wonder if this Agreement was not done in the spirit of the old testament, not taking, into account that we have a new regime which with respect, I will describe as the new testament. This is because the question that arises is that - what is the position of the Petroleum Commission in all of this? Could the Petroleum Commission be a party‘? Could the Petroleum Commission be a signatory?

For example, when you take the Ghana Highway Authority Act, it states there quite clearly that Agreements involving road contracts in Ghana should be signed by the Chief Executive of the Ghana Highways Authority. The reason some of these things are done is because the person has certain expertise.

So while I second the Motion, I am just saying that perhaps, we should start looking at the role the Petroleum Commission in some of these Agreements, whether for example, they must be signatories to these Agreements, having regard to their constitutional role.

So Mr Speaker, I second the Motion with the caveat or respectfully, the concern, that it seems to me on the face of it that this Agreement is in violent violation of section 18 (7) of the Petroleum Revenue Management Act, 2010 (Act 815), which says that the Annual Budgeting Funding Amount may be used as collateral for debt and other liabilities of Government for a period of not more than 10 years after the commencement of this Act.

I thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker,I would want to correct the mistake in the Report, that the Agreement is talking about
Mr Ghartey
Mr Speaker, with respect, I wonder whether there is anything like "International Chamber of Commerce Court". Why do we not just say "International Chamber of Commerce"? I wonder whether there is a court. Yes, we have it in the Agreement. It is a court of arbitration. We have it in the Agreement but the reason we are debating it is that we can point out some of these things. As I said in the beginning, the aim is not to scuttle, the aim is to support it, it is to improve it so that we can all come out with something that can stand the test of time.
Question proposed.
11.55 am ,
Minister for Employment and Social Welfare (Mr Moses Asaga) (MP)
Mr Speaker, as a member of the Committee and the outgoing Chairman of the Energy Committee, I rise to support the Motion seeking this Honourable House to adopt the Report of the joint Committee on Finance and Mines and Energy on the Off-taker Agreement between GNPC and UNIPEC Asia Company Limited.
First of all, I would want to commend the House and the Committee for the hard work that they have put into the Master Facility Agreement and the painstaking periods that we have sacrificed in improving certain sections of the Master Facility Agreement.
We know that on the 26 August, 2011, Parliament approved the Master Facility Agreement. Following that, there was the Addendum that came to Parliament as a

result of the effectiveness of the Master Facility Agreement, Parliament was again called to look at certain new clauses that were introduced in the MFA which included the expunction IMF concern and the definition of the business deal to include Hong Kong. All these prove to the fact that Parliament has been working diligently, very thorough and detailed.

I Wish to also acknowledge the Hon Ranking Member of the Finance Committee for all his input and then the advice he has always given us to make sure that we get a 100 per cent proof document.
Dr A. A- Osei
On- a point of order.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister who is outgoing Ranking Member of Committee on Energy - he-is a senior member of the Committee [Interruption] - he is the Chairman -- the Off-taker is not consequential. It is a condition precedent to the Subsidiary Agreement; it cannot be said to be consequential. Conditions precedent is different from consequential. As the Hon Chairman of the Committee, I thought he would educate us properly -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
He used the word "complement".
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr "Speaker, it is not even a "complement".
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Yes, but the word he used is not "consequential" but "complement". I am just telling you. I am not saying that it is right or Wrong.
Mr Asaga
Mr Speaker, the authority is well known because if you have an Off-taker Agreement and you do not have a Subsidiary Agreement, it will not fly. If you have a Subsidiary Agreement and you do n0'! have an Off-taker Agreement, it will not fly. So, the two complement each other. As I said, in the Agreement, Ghana Government and GNPC are supposed -- [Interruption] When you were talking, I did not get up.
Mr Joe Ghartey
On a point of order.
MT Speaker, a complement can be made akin _'t_o a husband and a wife but a condition precedent is a mother and a daughter or son. There has to be the mother before the son. So, this is mother and son or mother and daughter; it is not husband and wife.
Mr Asaga
Mr Speaker, so father and son affair? Thank you, very much.
The Off-taker Agreement is also like a sales agreement for 13,000 barrels per day of crude oil to UNIPEC and the part of the receipts of the 13,000 barrels would be used to service part of the debt relating to Government's obligation of 15 per cent of the loan.
The transaction is a commercial one and the price at which the sales would be made would be spot market price on a daily basis and I think that we need to support this Offtaker Agreement. I urge all Hon Members to support it, so that GNPC and UNIPEC would have the needed comfort to-effect the Off-taker Agreement.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Dr Anthony A. Osei (NPP - Old Tafo)I Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me an opportunity to contribute to the Motion on the floor right now. Since we have been talking about this US$3 billion loan, we have been trying to caution our Colleagues on the other side about the haste with which we are doing something, that could potentially come to haunt us. By fate of coincidence or luck,

I do not know what it is - you happen to be in the Chair every time that weighty issues on this matter come up. I am going to raise one of them. We are looking at the Off-taker Agreement and with your kind permission, I would want to read -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, we have a lot of Agreements, so when dealing with this matter, refer to the particular Agreement that you are talking about.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, I said the "Off-taker Agreement", the recital part-
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Page?
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, page 1 of 28. I do not know Whether you have it or not.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Please, continue.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, before I do that, I would want to refer you to Schedule 1.3 of the MFA and with your kind permission, I want to read:
"Evidence that the Borrower has approved the terms of and the transactions contemplated by the Finance Documents."
With your kind permission, I would want to define "Finance Documents". In the MFA, which has been executed, "Finance Documents" means this Agreement, each Subsidiary Agreement, the Five Party Agreement, et cetera and any other documents designated as such by the Lender and the Borrower.
Mr Speaker, if you go to page 8, it talks about relevant documents and here, "relevant documents" means the Off-taker Agreement --the Framework Agreement.
Dr A. A. Osei


Mr Speaker,when we were .debating this matter, we brought it to your attention -that no=one in this--House had seen a relevant document called the "Framework Agreement";As of date, this House has .not.seen that document. If you go to the recital and with your permission, I would want to read:

"On or about the date of this Agreement,a Five Party Agreement was entered into."

A Five-Party Agreement which is a Finance Document, which this House .-must approve, was, entered into. As far as I-know and I.stand corrected, this House, as of today, has not approved any Five'P-arty Agreement document and it is in the recital of the Off-taker Agreement that we are debating now. Why are we rushing when we have not done our homework?

Mr Speaker, as we speak, because our Ambassador ;in ‘-China signed the Agreement on December l6th, Government is obligated to pay not only the US$30 million commitment fee but also the 3 .75 which is 50 per cent of the upfront fees. Mr Speaker, but this House has not even approved the Five Party Agreement, neither have we even seen the Framework Agreement which is considered a relevant document;

Mr Speaker, -we are on very dangerous ground. -When we started;we said "look, all the ‘relevant things, then when we approve it you can begin to access these loans?"

Mr Speaker, I can assure you, if we have -not approved the Five Party Agreement, this House will be called'._back to approve it before they-" can sever access ‘the loan.

This is because it is a condition.So why are we spending time doing things in pieces ‘when we"-have not finished with our homework? It is not I who signed the Agreement - it is here --- who goes to. sign an agreement, -for which we have a condition precedent that ‘Parliament-must -not--just see it but must approve of it in the conditions precedent, then we are here thinking that our approval of it will take us anywhere. It will not.
Mr Speaker, do you want-to ask all of .u_s .when<We
leave to come back and sit down and approve of the Five‘ Party Agreement because somebody is rushing‘? Mr Speaker, it is costly to the nation and we should not be taking decisions that way. This is a very serious House--* we have kept -pointing this out. The MFA came back with corrections and homework not properly done. Mr Speaker, how long-are we-going to keep going. and coming? Mr Speaker, -we should learn our experiences from STX. Mr Speaker, let us be very clear - all of us are in support -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, let us have some order in the House and listen to the Ranking Member on the Finance Committee.
Dr A.A. Osei
Mr Speaker, all of us are in support of any action but it must be done properly. Mr -Speaker, as I said, I do not know how it turns up - but every time you happen to be in the Chair and I have sympathy for you. Why because I know you are a lawyer, I know you are a Speaker, I know you have been here for a long-time-and you know what this means. The -Framework ‘Agreement dated September, 2010, you have not seen it. I a have not seen it;it is a relevant document.
Mr Speaker,.should we wait till when they go to
China and they tell them "go ‘back to‘Parliament" because it is there in the condition precedent. It says we.must approve of it and the recital has talked
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Joe Ghartey, do you have a point of order.
Mr Ghartey
This is a very serious point of order:
If Hon Osei Akoto is thinking of retiring, he should not add some of us. Mr Speaker, for example, I can see two or three Members in this House who I am sure will be here in 15 years time. If you

will give me permission to say, I think that the Speaker will be here in 15 years time - - [Laughter] - Hon Papa Owusu- Ankomah will be here in 15 years time; and Hon E.T. Mensah will be here in 15 years time. These are three Hon Members who will be here in 15 years time -- [ Laughter. ]
Dr A. A. Osei
l\/Ir Speaker, on a lighter 110116, my Colleague was talking about "Hon OseiAkoto". There is no "Hon Osei Akoto" in this House. We have Dr Akoto and Dr Akoto Osei, I do not know who he 18 talking about.
Mr Speaker, coming back to the point, if the lifespan of the Jubilee is 20 years, we are getting ready to commit the nation, not part, all of our share of our Jubilee oil to one Chinese company for 15.6 years, not even 15 years. Mr Speaker, this is a very weighty decision and we should be careful -'
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Is it 15.5 or
15.6?
DrA. A. Osei
It is 15.5. Mr Speaker, thank you. Fifteen years and six months, 5 is six months but that is the truth.
Mr_ Speaker, the value of that Commitment is not 3 billion, let nobody fool themselves. The value is not the same as the loan we are wishing to contract. It is two times - over USS6 billion for the next 15 years to one Chinese company. Why? Mr Speaker, if we want to sell to the Chinese, I do not have any difficulty but why pick one Chinese company and sell all, not even part
Mr E. T. Mensah
MrSpeaker,my very good_ Friend Dr Osei is misleading this House - [Interruption]
Some Hon Members
How, how?
Mr E.'I‘. Mensah
He says the Jubilee is going to be sold to one Chinese company for 15 years. We are not giving the money to the Chinese company to pocket it. It is going to use it to build infrastructure. The money will be translated into physical assets for this country -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, it is not a point of order.
Dr A.A. Osei
Mr Speaker, I wonder if my good Friend has read the Agreement - - [Interruptions] - Mr Speaker, I do not know if my good Friend has a copy of the Agreement that he is about - the Off-taker. Mr Speaker, subject to the Master Facility Agreement, the term of this Agreement shall be 15 .5 years from the effective date - [Interruptions]
Mr Speaker, let me go on. Mr Speaker, depending on which price you use, .you could conceivably - when I said US$6 billion, it is about US$6.41 billion - [Interruption] Is it a point of order?
Mr Buah
That is what I expect my Hon Colleague to say.
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker,I have a point of order. The issue that the Hon ranking Member -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
_At the current levels, is the statement right or wrong? At the current levels.
Mr Buah
At the current levels, 13,000 barrels, yes. But We are expected to produce 120,000. [Interruptions] I am trying to correct you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, at times when a point of order is raised, I invite others to guide me to rule on the matter. But this is not one, Where I can call on more people to come and contribute on the matter. Let us listen to him. When it gets to our turn, Whatever you Want to clarify from his contribution, you can do so.
Hon Dr Osei, continue.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, I would Want to repeat, the fact that the Agreement currently we have, ‘is selling al of our crude oil to the Chinese for 1.5 years one company only -- UNIPEC. [Interruptions.That is what We are being told.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Chairman of the Finance committee, do you have a point of order?
Mr James K. Avedzi
Mr Speaker, on a point of order:
Mr Speaker, the issue that the Hon Ranking Member is raising about selling all our share to one company, the Report made it known that it is going to be based on commercial basis. e are selling at market value -- [Interruptions] So Mr Speaker, if you have a product and there is a ready market for it, would you have a problem with that? [Interruptions]
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, if the Chairman would take his time and have patience -- I have not talked about the market values yet. I will come to that. I have not talked about the pricing yet. So this thing about commercial, I will come to that. He should take his time. He had his chance to read the Committee's Report; let me educate him on it, please.
Mr Speaker, the value, if you use the US$85 assumption per barrel, is what will translate to US$85 for the first five years, US$90 for the next five years and US$95 for the next five years, would translate to about US$6.4 billion in value.

Mr Speaker, the Chairman is talking about pricing and I will deal with it. Mr Speaker, page 9 of 28 talks about the pricing.

M1" Speaker, the pricing, in simple terms, is the following and with your permission, I beg to read:

"The pricing shall be:

(a) a dated Brent component;

(b) a differential.

Mr Speaker, we asked the technical people -- is this normal? And the answer we got did not help some of us. Why do I say that? Mr Speaker, they themselves

told us that the quality of the Jubilee oil is better than the Brent. [Interruptions] They told us, I do not know. But if it is true, it means like our cocoa, there is premium on the Jubilee oil. So if you fixed yourself on dated Brent oil you are losing the premium for 15 years. Why?
Mr Asaga
Mr Speaker, on a point of order.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Ranking Member is misleading the House and probably, needs to also understand the oil trading industry. You cannot start with a new product and already you are going to brand and date it. It is not true; it needs -- [Interruptions] In your initial productions, you are trying to promote it, so you could not immediately be branding it.
So he is misleading the House and that is why the GNPC who are the experts told the Committee that it is only into the future that we would be able to brand our crude oil
He was also talking of a premium, the quality of our oil is a light crude oil, that is accepted but that does not mean that we have reached the stage where we can say- it is the best crude in the oil. So he should not be misleading the House [Interruption] -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, please, the Hon Member raised the issue of premium and he is trying to make the point with regard to premium. That is why I allowed him to make the point.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, with respect, that is not what I said. Mr Speaker, I even went further and said they told us that in about one and a half to two years -, the point is that the Hon Member is not listening, so his getting up is of no value. Mr Speaker, please, let him follow and if he has a point of order; I do not have a problem.
Mr Speaker, the point is the following
if it is going to be in one and a half years and I said "wait till two years, then you use the benchmark". Here, we have made it "dated Brent for 15 years". Why do you not say after two years we will change? [Interruptions.] Mr Speaker, that is the point I am making.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Akoto Osei, continue.
DrA.-A. Osei
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, and then again, it says "a differential". Mr Speaker, how do they define the "differential"? [ Interruptions.]
rose
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, my Hon Friend got up to talk -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Minister, you know that we have rules -- [Interruptions] Hon Members, we have rules in this House in keeping order, if Members do not want to co-operate with the Chair, I will invoke the rules. Hon Member, continue.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, I do not know why the new Minister for Employment and Social Welfare is getting so excited. Mr Speaker, if he would listen, so that improvement can be made to the Agreement, we would be moving forward. They are asking us to approve an Agreement, for which the Five Party Agreement, we have not even seen it, we have not approved it and we are sitting here saying that it is good.
Mr Speaker, the differentials, it says
"the differential shall be the average of the differentials realised from all the Jubilee crude oil lifting in the month of lifting; this will be reviewed at the month of every year".
What does it mean? Mr Speaker, "of all the jubilee crude oil", it means crude oil by Tullow and who ever is a partner in there, not just the one by Ghana selling to UNIPEC but all of them.
So the question that was asked them was, "what has been the record of this average" and in the answer they said sometimes we are above, "sometimes we are below". Mr Speaker, what type of guess work is this? There is historical record: why do they not want to provide the specific numbers, so that we will see whether this is the right way or not?
Mr Speaker, we have talked to some experts in the area and they have assured us that this type of pricing, we are going to lose a lot of our -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, kindly wind up.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, there are issues with the Agreement that we need to --
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, you are not the only Member speaking for your side; others will be speaking. So please, there is no Parliament where one person will say all the things he wants to say in the world.
Dr A. -A. Osei
Mr Speaker, I am not.
Mr Speaker, so there is an issue with the pricing. And then again, there is this last part which says: "the Buyer shall pay a margin of US$8 cent per barrel for exercising any price option".
Dr A. -A. Osei
Mr Speaker, if you go into the details, there are four pricing options. The question was, do they attach the same risk to each of the four pricing options? And their answer was, "yes". So we have agreed to accept US$8 cent irrespective of the risk of each pricing option because that is what we think is the best. Mr Speaker, the people I talked to told me emphatically that it is not the best. We should not be careful especially since this contract is for 15.5 years.
Mr Speaker, as you said, there are other people who want to talk about it. But I have raised these issues because I think that we are moving fast. But there are some things that we ourselves have not done and if we do not do them, we would be putting the nation into trouble. We are already obligated to the tune of US$33 .75 million; we will not get a dime until the Five Party Agreement is approved by us. As of today, there is no Resolution for approval; it is going to come back and I do not want to say, I told you so.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning (Mr Seth Terkpeh): Mr Speaker, I thank you for I the opportunity to contribute to the debate. In so doing, I wish to state that the Master Facility Agreement and the Subsidiary Agreements that were presented to this House have policy and strategic issues behind them.

I wish to state on record that the use of commodities to either guarantee or secure a facility is not beginning with the country's crude oil. I wish to state that once upon a time, the primary commodities

that we had in this country were gold and cocoa, and this Honourable House has already set the precedence of using the country's vital commodity in the form of cocoa to secure and back a loan Agreement that came to this House.

Specifically, we are talking about a facility that this House approved for the Bui Dam which also has a repayment period stretching into 10 years.

It is, therefore, very important that as we inform the general public, we do not create the impression that the current Government is doing something that is unprecedented.

Mr Speaker, indeed, our cocoa also has -- Most of the provisions that we find in the Off-taker Agreement pertain to the Agreement we had on cocoa. The cocoa is sold on a projected price - [Interruption] -
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, do you have a point of order?
Mr Agyeman-Manu
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
What is your point of order?
Mr Agyeman-Mann
Mr Speaker, the Hon Deputy Finance and Economic Planning Minister is misleading this House.
He mentioned a precedence in this House where a vital commodity, cocoa, has been used to mortgage against the Bui Dam facility. Mr Speaker, he has refused to tell this country what portion of that commodity that Ghana has, was used in that facility. That does not compare with a whole 100 per cent of our 13,000 barrels a day to go and support this facility. So I would want to demand that he tells us what proportion of our cocoa was used.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Deputy Minister, continue.
Mr Terkpeh
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
I think in my contribution, I made it quite clear that I was addressing an issue of principle and that the principle of using a commodity to secure a facility has precedence in this House. That is the point, which I sought to make. As we speak now, we continue to sell cocoa to secure the Bui Dam facility.
I was also pointing out the fact that most of the principles that were addressed in the Offtaker Agreement can be seen as exhibited clearly in the Agreement, that binds the sale of cocoa to the Chinese company. In that instance, the sale is made to only one Chinese company. So again, there is precedence. It is not always the case that when we enter into this Agreement, we look for multiple companies in entering into the Agreement.
Mr Speaker, I also wish to state that the cocoa is based on a projected price and an adjustment is made, which is the principle which We are using in the Off-taker in the case of the Master Facility Agreement.
Let me also say on this particular point that our cocoa also has a premium and indeed, when the Agreement was entered into the very elements that We are talking about with respect to oil and gas, existed at the time of entering into the Cocoa Agreement, which has informed the way we negotiated the Agreement.
But let me make a difference. In the _case of cocoa, the entire revenue is paid into an escrow account offshore. In the case of the Master Facility Agreement, I wish to place on record that the entire revenue is going to flow, first, _in consonance with the Petroleum Revenue Management Act, into the Petroleum

Holding Account and the Bank of Ghana will disburse the funds accordingly into the Stabilisation Fund, the Heritage Fund and it is only the portion that goes into the ABFA that would be used to secure the facility.

Indeed, Mr Speaker, because of this insistence by the Ghanaian Government, that the entire revenue should flow into the Bank of Ghana account, which we call the "Ghana Model" in comparison to what the Chinese call the "Angolan Model" which is similar to the Cocoa Agreement. The Chinese insisted that we should therefore, secure the facility more or less before- This is because we have the revenue with the Bank of Ghana Standby Letters of Credit. This explains how come the Standby Letters of Credit came in.

- Mr Kofi Frimpong - rose -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Kofi Frimpong, do you have a point of order?
Mr Frimpong
Yes, sir.
‘Mr Speaker, the Hon Deputy Minister should put the principle of using our raw materials to collate rise loans in the right perspective.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, proceed.
- Mr Frimpong" Mr Speaker, he is misleading the House - _
A Mr First Deputy Speaker: Hon Kofi Frimpong, that is not a point of order.
Mr Frimpong
Mr Speaker, Iam coming under Standing Order number 40 - 92. [Interruption] Mr Speaker, I am going
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Deputy Minister, are you willing to yield to Hon Kofi Frimpong?
Mr Frimpong
Mr Speaker, yes. He is my good Friend.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Deputy Minister, are you Willing? He says he is coming under Order 92 (1) (b). Are you willing to yield to him?
Mr Terkpeh
Mr Speaker, I do not wish to yield at this stage.
Mr Frimpong
Mr Speaker, I would Want to put the matter -across. He is misleading the whole country.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Kofi Frimpong, sit down. Hon Kofi Frimpong, take your seat. Please, take your seat.
Mr Frimpong
Mr Speaker, you have allowed so many points of order without Hon Members quoting from the Standing Orders.
Mr FirstDeputy Speaker
Please take your seat. Please!
Mr Terkpeh
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
I was on a point that therefore if you compare the two modes of Agreements - we have a superior mode in which in the end, the amounts that are paid into the Consolidated Fund - and since the Petroleum Revenue Account is a Consolidated Fund, in essence, the arrangement that we have is not different from the debt servicing of any loan that we would have taken because we would have been servicing this loan essentially from the Consolidated Fund.

Mr Speaker, let me turn to the investment strategy. When this House passed the Petroleum Revenue Management Bill, it specified and really represented in the budget that the Annual Budget Funding Amount should be spent in three sectors. if we were to go by the principle that we would use only the amount that accrues to the Annual Budget Funding Amount and the proportion Which this House approved, on an annual incremental basis to invest in the oil facilities, it might take us up to five or six years to have the oil pipelines as well as the phase one gas processing plants in form.

Mr Speaker, in consonance-with the Government's policy of ensuring that each major project that is started is funded, in order that we do not have the spectre of projects being started and not being completed on time, we came to this House and indicated that a portion "of the money of the Annual Budget Funding Amount should be earned at amortised and used to pay for facilities that will be used to pay for critical infrastructure projects under the Ghana SHEP Growth and Development Agenda.

Mr Speaker, it is in this context that the Ministry of Food and Agriculture must beware that we have in essence secured a facility that would ensure that we will complete the oil processes facilities. Unlike the experience with gold, cocoa and other minerals, Mr Speaker, what we intend to do in terms of value addition is that, within a period of 18 to 24 months, the facility would add value - one; in the form of making sure that other oil fields that have the potential of contributing to this economy, would be fed through the pipeline and processed for purposes of generating power.

Mr Speaker, therefore, I think that when we look at the l5 years in which this
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, I want to take one Hon Member from each side of the House and then call on the Leaders of the House.
If the Hon Leaders of the House decide to yield to any of their side of the House however, we will still have the two, two. I am taking two Members each from each side of the House including the Leaders.
Hon Members, even the list I collected from the Hon Minority Leader, talks about

Hon Members,_three Members have spoken from the Majority side of the House and Hon Joe Ghartey and Hon Dr Akoto Osei have spoken from the Minority side of the House. On the Majority side, how many people have spoken?
Some Hon Members
Three.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Does it include the Chairman?
"Some Hon Members: But he is a Member!
Papa OWusu-Ankomah
Hon Joe Ghartey seconded it, you counted him; so you count the Chairman too.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Yes. So what I will do is that, I will take one Member from the Minority side of the House and then call on the Leaders.
Hon Nitiwul. After him, if the Leaders want to yield, then we get up to the four Members.
Yes, Hon Nitiwul, you have the floor.
Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul (NPP -- Bimbilla)
Mr Speaker, I rise to contribute to the Motion on the floor of the House.
Mr Speaker, this House passed the Petroleum Management Revenue Act (PMRA) and as the former Attorney- General and Minister for Justice, Hon Joe Ghartey said, clause 18 (7) is very clear that:
"the Annual Budgeting Funding Amount may not be used as collateral for debts and other
Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul (NPP -- Bimbilla)
liabilities of Government for a period of not more than 10 years after the commencement of the Act."

Mr Speaker, I am not commenting on it, and I will not comment on it. Mr Speaker, it is in that light that I will comment on the tenure of the Agreement.
Mr Speaker and I beg to quote
"the Committee observed that Whereas the term of the Subsidiary Agreement was 10 years, that of the Off-taker was 15 and a half years"
Mr Asaga
On a point of order:
Mr First Deputy Speaker
What order has the Hon Member breached?
Mr Asaga
Mr Speaker, he is misleading the House by saying that a citizen had taken the matter to court. And we have been told that we must always prove, which citizen had taken the matter to court.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, that is not a point of order.
Mr Nitiwu1
_ Mr Speaker, this House must reconcile itself and I need your direction on this.

We signed an MFA that has tranche A going for 15 years and tranche B for l0 years. We passed the law here that limited the use of oil for collateral on the Annual Budget Funding Amount for 10 years.

Mr Speaker, if you have a Master Facility in which you draw Off-takers and SubsidiaryAgreement from it, is it possible to have an Agreement that supersedes the number of years the Master Facility has agreed on? This is because, in the matter in which we are dealing With, Mr Speaker, the Off-taker is being pegged at 15 and a half years and not 15 years.

The MFA limited us to l5 years, that is tranche A, that is the largest or the longest - the tranche B is 10 years. But the Off-taker which I hold in my hand is telling us that the term is 15 and a half years.

Mr Speaker, six months is a long time in the life of anybody; six months is a long time in the life of producing oil like Hon Akoto Osei said; if you calculate the volume, it is a lot.

So Mr Speaker, this House needs to give itself some direction, whether what we are doing here, the law permits it. That is the first thing because the Off-taker is the son and the others that follow are the Grandchildren. We are saying that the father is l5 years and the son is 1-5 and a half years. I have a difficulty with that and Mr Speaker, we should look at it and look at it very well. [Interruptions.] The Grandfather is 10 years.

Mr Speaker, Hon Dr Akoto Osei said-- so that is the first point I would want us to look at the tenure of the Agreement. Fifteen and a-half years for the Off-taker, Statutory Agreement, is ten years, the Master Facility its elf tranche "A" is fifteen years and tranche"B" is ten years. V We really need to reconcile these years and then come to a conclusion before we pass a Vote here.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Chairman, do you have a point of order?
Mr Avedzi
Exactly so.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Member made a statement which I would want to correct. He said 13,000 barrels are being given to the Chinese. Mr Speaker, "are being sold to the Chinese." That should be captured by the Hansard.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon t Member, continue.
Mr Nitiwul
Mr Speaker, I say on the average, if our oil were selling for a US$100 over the ten-year period, the 13,000 barrels per day would fetch us approximately US$4.l billion. With the law, US$29 billion would be transferred into the Annual Budget Finding Amount. We are being told that the Five" Party tells us that, that same amount would be transferred into a point called the "Collection Point".
Mr Speaker, we are also being told, which we did not site in the Five-Party Agreement, that there would be another account called "Debt Service Account and Owners Contribution Account". Mr Speaker, it is incumbent on this particular House to see the Five-Party Agreement and what is contained in it.
In fact, it is incumbent on this House to approve that Five-PartyAgreement We will do this House injustice, we will do this country injustice and we will do the people of Ghana injustice if We do not approve that Five-PartyAgreement before we approve this Off-taker Agreement. I say so because it is the one that really gives the Government of Ghana the power to deal with UNlPEC China and this House has not had the opportunity to see that Five-Party Agreement and approve it.
Mr Asaga
On point of order.
Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague is constantly saying that he has not seen the document and meanwhile, constantly, he is referring to that same document. So where did he get the document from?
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, there are two things that he is talking about. He is talking about seeing the document and approving the
Mr Nitiwul
Mr Speaker, article 21 of the Petroleum Revenue Management Act, 2011, section 3, gives us a long list ‘of areas the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning should bring to the House, so that our oil resources could be spent on, including people who are physically handicapped, persons with disability and mental disorder and disadvantaged citizens.
Mr Speaker, it also includes organisations that _ deal in good governance. Mr Speaker, it includes environmental protection and section 6 tells us that the programme that the Minister brings every year will be reviewed every three years. This Act and 2011, 2012 and 2014.
Mr Speaker, the production levels of 80,000 barrels per day with our own allocation of 13,000 barrels are being sold to the Chinese and the Annual Budgeting Amount of 70 per cent is transferred into that Collection Account to be used to pay for that single loan.
Mr Speaker, are We not violating the Act that we set for ourselves? Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister, in section (5) and with your permission, let me read - I want people to pay critical attention to this:
"In order to maximise the impact on ' the use of petroleum revenue the Minister shall prioritise not more than four areas specified in section
(3)37-

Section (3), has a long list of almost 15 areas. When submitting a programme of activities for the use of the petroleum revenue, Mr Speaker, when this revenue of 13,000 barrels that accrue to us are sold to the Chinese and tied to specific projects, does it meet the conditions of this Act? .

Mr Speaker, I think Parliament should take a decision also on it; it is very important. [Interruption] lam surprised.

Mr Speaker, the oil of e_Ve1'y country has an identity. Jubilee oil should and must have an identity. When we decide as a country, to sell off our oil to the Chinese for fifteen and a half years and we say that the pricing would be based on dated Brent plus the differential and the differential is fixed. I think it is very problematic.

This is because we are being told that if today, we cannot get an identity in the next: one or two years, we will have an identity. -

Mr Speaker, I think that enslaving the people of Ghana by this document through that particular period, is not good enough. If Parliament approves this document now, Where our oil is tied to UNIPEC and the Chinese for fifteen and a half years, with this pricing formula, Ghana in the final round, will be the loser and will lose big time.

Mr Speaker, we all know that the Nigerian, Venezuelan and Saudi Arabian oil all have identities. Our oil is so sweet that the price, the light crude is so sweet Mr Speaker, will automatically be higher. -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, conclude.
Mr Nitiwul
Mr Speaker, our oil is so sweet that the price -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, conclude, please.
Mr Nitiwul
Mr Speaker, I have just really begun. Mr Speaker, I have just really begun.
Mr Speaker, for national interest, there are certain things we need to point out, that our oil is so sweet that the price will be much, much higher than any dated Brent any day. And for that matter, we need not to approve a formula that has dated Brent I think I will concur and I will second the Ranking Member that we should substitute the word "dated Brent" and use "Jubilee Crude" --
. Mr First Deputy Speaker: Hon Member, conclude.
12.55 pm .
Mr Nitiwul Mr Speaker, in conclusion, the Off-taker has pricing formulae that states and I beg to quote:
"The Buyer shall have the option to choose one of the following: Dated Brent component pricing formula as the applicable pricing method for the sale of Jubilee oil. The Seller shall be notified by the Buyer's chosen option not later than six days prior to the first day of the scheduled lifting."
Mr Speaker, if we leave it at six days, Ghana will be short-changed. It must be six working days and I pointed this out - and we pointed this out. We are sure that if this is not changed and is left to remain at six days, somebody can take advantage of Saturday and Sunday, when, perhaps, the world oil market does not give prices and cheat this country -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Thank you, very much.
Hon Member, you have made your point.
Hon Minority Leader?
Minority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu)
Mr Speaker, thank you- for the opportunity to speak to the Report before us.
Mr Speaker, I think it is very imperative to at the very outset, indicate when the Hon Deputy Minister informed that the principle of collateralization exists in the sale of cocoa, so we could have the same in the sale of petroleum. I think that that is not entirely correct. Mr Speaker, not unless we had the Petroleum Revenue Management Act in place, one could not just extend that reasoning that it exists here. So it must necessarily have application in this other field.
I mean, one cannot just make that comparism. We have a specific law relating to the use of petroleum revenue management.
So, I think that if one cites that because of this Act, we can go on this path, I would agree with him. But to start all by -saying that yes, cocoa is used as a mortgaged facility or to collateralize, so by extension of reasoning, we will be on the smooth path if we did that for oil, I think it will be most unfortunate. We are only doing that because we have the Petroleum Revenue Management Act, which now allows Government to so proceed.
In any event, Mr Speaker, we cannot compare cocoa with petroleum. This is because indeed, we will be comparing apples with oranges if we did. Mr Speaker, one is replenishable, the other is not. One is renewable, the other is not. So, to use it, Mr Speaker, really, I did not see the point the Hon Deputy Minister was making at all.
Minority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu)
But, I think we have some fundamental differences. The point has been made -about section 18 (7) which provides - This is because the Hon Deputy Minister insists that we are on -course. and that we are conforming to the Petroleum Revenue 'ManagementAct. Mr Speaker, I strongly -disagree with the Hon Deputy Minister because the words of. section l8 (7) are unambiguous and unequivocal. We did not need any interpretation on this.
It provides succinctly that the Annual Budget Funding Amount may be used as collateral for debts and other liabilities of government for a period of not more than ten years after the commencement of this Act. A period of not more than ten years. So, if one is pursuing this path, for 15 and a half years, I think one cannot convince and persuade .me-that we are within ‘the remit of this law.
But Mr Speaker, it is not surprising. It is not surprising because while section 11 (2) of the Petroleum Revenue ManagementAct provides that the Ghana Petroleum Funds shall both receive from the Petroleum Holding Funds petroleum revenue in excess -of the Annual Budget Funding Amount.
The language is clear. And whereas there is this explicit provision in the Petroleum Revenue Management Act, last year when we had excess revenue they came and hinged a supplementary budget on that,in obvious breach of this, as if this law-was made just for the sake of it. This same -thing affects the Off-taker Agreement.
Mr.Speaker, so, we should be careful of where we are treading, so that the day after today, -nobody will come and take us on that We have "fashioned out a law and we are breaching with impunity, the law that .'We ourselves have fashioned.

Mr Speaker, let me now deal with the provisions Jot the Agreement. The Committee is telling us and I am quoting from the Committee's Report -- Mr Speaker,the Report provides and I am quoting 4.2 on page 3 of the Report:

The Agreement provides for GNPC to deliver to UNIPEC_Asia, and for UNIPEC 13,000 barrels per day of Jubilee Crude Oil that is five cargoes per calendar year at a standard cargo size of950;o00 net US barrels."

Mr Speaker,there are 365 days in a calendar year. If we produce .13,00O, we will end up producing-4,745,000 barrels. That translates into 945,000 per lifting and not 950,000"; How did you get this mathematics wrong? In fact,this is not mathematics, arithmetic:-How did you get this wrong? Mr Speaker,and.5,000 per five liftings translate to'25,00O barrels.

How does one account for that shortfall? And you are bringing this to Parliament for us to approve. It passes through the Finance Committee; the Hon Chairman is so agitated throwing up his hands in the How do you explain this? -- [Laughter] _
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Chairman of the Committee?
Mr Avedzi
On a point of -order:
Mr Speaker, I do not think that the Hon Minority Leader is a mathematician. But I would want to assure Him that I am an Accountant a qualified Accountant. [Hear!Hear!] Mr Speaker, whenever one is making an estimation,one gives an allowance,So,if one calculate 13 times 364,365 or whatever and one divides by five and it gives one nine hundred and forty something, it is not up to 950;that is allowable. It is allowable.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, the danger though, what the Hon Chairman is saying he is even making it worse. The calculation used, the number should have been 12,666. So, an allowance has already been made.
Mr Speaker, the 13,000 has already been put out from 12,666. So, if one makes more allowance, there is room for somebody to steal money. It is here, 12,666.
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, if there is room to over-achieve, let us go beyond 13,000 and indeed, -- [Interruptions]
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Order! Order!
Mr Kyei-Mensa-B0nsu
And you say to yourself that you are averaging 13,000, that could be acceptable? But not when you know in reality that the production level gives you 12,666 and you adjust upwards to 13,000; in the 13,000, there is a shortfall of another 5,000 per cargo. And you are telling me that it is normal and that you are an accountant? What did you account? What did you account to get this figure?
Mr Speaker, I do not see the accounting logic; there is no accounting logic behind what he is saying at all and I would want to believe that he is not -- [Interruptions.] -
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, I am not going to allow the debate to be an exchange between the Minority Leader and the Chairman of the Finance Committee. We should not turn this debate into an exchange between the Minority Leader and the Chairman of the Finance Committee.

But I will allow you.
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker, I strongly take objection to the position taken by the Minority Leader.
Mr Speaker, he was not the examiner who examined me when I was writing my examination - [Interruptions] But for him to challenge my integrity as Where did I do my accounting - [Interruptions] - - is something that he must withdraw. I take objection to that. I am a qualified Accountant and a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of good standing.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Chairman, that was not what the Hon Minority Leader said. Hon Minority Leader, I did not hear you say that. But what did you say?
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
MrSpeaker, you are right; he was listening to something else. I never said those words that he is attributing to me; I never said so- Can he please, listen to me when I speak before he interjects. [Interruption]
Mr Avedzi
He said, where didl do my accounting? That was what he said.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
He said, "how did you account?"
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu
He told me that I am not a mathematician, he is an Accountant. So after I raised the issue, I asked, "what did you account?" That was a simple question that I posed.
"What did you account to arrive at the 13,000?" That is what I asked. He was clearly not listening to me and he jumped into the saddle - clearly he was not listening.
But Mr Speaker, I will go because clearly -- the Speaker bears witness that I did not say so. He was not listening well. [Laughter] Please, he should listen before he interjects.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Minority Leader, would you say something to the Chairman of the Committee?
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, what do I say -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
What you can tell him to be happy. .
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
I did not say what he is attributing to me. And you yourself bear witness that I did not say so. What do I say to him?
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Continue.
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, let him rest assured that his integrity is intact. I never questioned where he trained. I just asked, how did they account for this‘? Yes; "did you account for the 13,000‘? That was the issue that I raised. I am surprised he is so agitated by this.
But Mr Speaker, that was the issue that I raised; we have a problem there.
Mr Speaker, "this Off-taker Agreement provides for the seller to deliver Jubilee crude oil to the buyer in bulk, feight on board (FOB) at the Jubilee terminal on the vessel provided by the buyer". Mr Speaker, I have a problem with this construction. We have just told ourselves that this year, there may be some problem in the production levels.
We could have a situation where maybe, we could make further Cl.lSCOV6I'l6S outside the Jubilee Fields. Are We being told that if there is a problem with the Jubilee Fields but we make further discoveries elsewhere, we cannot use the discoveries elsewhere to pay back this commitment and that it should definitely

be the Jubilee crude oil - that one and that one alone?

Mr Speaker, that is why I am saying that, again, there is a problem. So we need to have some of these matters addressed.

The Hon Moses Asaga is telling me that we have made an attempt to correct them. You have made an attempt to correct some but not all and it is interesting to know that when these ones came up for discussion in this House, there was intense resistance to even the issues that you raised. Fortunately, some have been addressed. But why can we not go over the whole lot and address all the things before we move on?

Mr Speaker, We have been told about the pricing - this matter has been over- flogged. I would not go into detail on that -- It depends so much on the Brent component. Mr Speaker, at least, up to now, we have sold for over one year, so We know the quality of oil from the Jubilee Fields. If we cannot use it now, because as you said, it has not been benchmarked, why can we not allow ourselves some space in the Agreement, to say that, into two years, this could be altered? That is, if we benchmarked our products.

Now, it is stiff, there is no room for alteration and the arrangement is that, you have surrendered your birthright into the hands of the buyer, when the buyer avails himself of all the options -- [Inter- ruptions] -- That is in determining the deferential and yet the deferential is kept at the level of eight cents per barrel. Mr Speaker, that is, with respect, ridiculous; it is a very ridiculous arrangement that we are cocooning ourselves in. [ Interruptions. ]
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, the value for the products that will ultimately go to China, we have discussed that. Mr Speaker, if there is. any way of ensuring that the country is not shortchanged, can we look at it; 6.4 billion that we ultimately have to release in respect of three billion?
Mr Speaker, we ought to be careful; we ought to be cautious about this - or the equivalent of about 75 million barrels, it is something that should touch the heart of every Member of Parliament. And if there is anything that we can do to improve on this Agreement, Mr Speaker, the better it would be for us as a nation.

Mr Speaker, the Chairman is asking What it is. He is a "James": he is a Saint- - [Interruption] -- "He who has ears - he who has ears, let him listen. The one who has eyes, let him see through what we are saying and do the proper thing".

Mr Speaker, I thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Majority Leader -
Mr Avoka
Mr Speaker, I am giving my turn to the Hon Deputy Minister for Energy, Hon Armah-Kofi Buah. Thank you.
Deputy Minister for Energy (Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah) (MP): Mr Speaker, I rise to address two critical issues that have been raised. One has to do with the issue of pricing -- whether or not the Jubilee‘s crude quality was taken into account in the negotiation.
Mr Speaker, as it was stated clearly in the Committees Report, it says -

"The pricing for crude oil purchased under the Off-taker Agreement is to be made on commercial basis and to be determined as follows:

(a) The US$ FOB price shall have the following components unless the parties agree otherwise;

(i) A dated Brent component; and

(ii) A differential." Mr Speaker, the differential focuses on the premium and the quality of the Jubilee crude, so that every point is addressed.

Mr Speaker, the other point that was made had to do with whether or not the amount of 950,000 was going to be over the number of lifting. Mr Speaker, let me quote clause 3(1) and it reads:

- "F or the avoidance of doubt, the Sellers obligation -"
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, you see, nobody is saying that there is no attempt to address it. The issue is, we are applying the same factor in all the four options available in determining the differential which is cast in stone - 8 cents, for 15 years. So how does it address it?
Mr Buah
Mr Speaker, the only important point I would want to make sure is very clear, is that, as is stated in clause 3(3), each cargo would have a volume tolerance of plus minus five per cent (+/-5 per cent) at the Buyer's option, subject to terminal acceptance. But in any event, the minimum quantity requirement set out in the Jubilee crude. The point here is that, the obligation is cumulative and it also depends on the standard cargo size and those are all going to be determined at a period where reconciliation of all the liftings are done.
rose
Mr Buah
Now, that is exactly why we put this thing there. So Mr Speaker, this project will feed this country. We would not only have a simple gas infrastructure project, but we are going to see this country - have real value addition, address our - [Interruption ]_
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Minority Chief Whip?
Mr Opare-Ansah
Mr Speaker, various points have been made by various Hon Members who contributed to the debate and the Hon Deputy Minister, in winding up, will do us all good in addressing his comments to the issues that have been raised.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Every Member of the House knows how he should debate a Motion. Every Hon Member has his own style of debating a Motion; so he is Within the rules.
Mr Opare-Ansah
Mr Speaker, I am urging him to help us because he is coming from the Ministry. Unless he is telling us that he is not capable of addressing the issues that have been raised. [Interruption.] I have not just come; I have been here for- it is Alhaji who just came.
Mr Buah
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
I realise my Hon Colleague just walked in, so he is really confused about what we have been talking about.
Mr Opare-Ansah
Mr Speaker, the Hon Deputy Minister must correct his facts. I did not just walk in. Mr Speaker, I was here at the commencement of this debate - [Interruption] - I have not gone -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Chief Whip, you see, the problem is that you do not also tell an Hon Member who is contributing to a debate that because he did not meet your expectation, he is not capable. You see, you are telling the Hon Member that because he did not debate in a particular form, he is not capable. I think that provoked him also to pass that comment
Mr Opare-Ansah
Mr Speaker, I was only urging him and appealing to him to help us better. We have raised very, very cogent issues and he would help the House by addressing those matters. Unless he is telling us that he is not capable of doing so.
Mr Buah
Mr Speaker, let me thank Hon Members for this debate. But Mr Speaker, let me make one point clear. This project - [Interruption]
rose
Mr Buah
This project as has been indicated to the Committee, would pay for itself --- [ Interruption. ]
Papa Owusu-Ankomah
On a point of orde/1
Mr Speaker, the Hon Deputy Minister is misleading the House. This is an Agreement for the sale of Oil between GNPC and UNIPEC; it is not a project This is a commercial Agreement; it is not a project
Mr Buah
Mr Speaker, thank you for the correction.
Mr Speaker, this Off-taker Agreement that we are approving is obviously going to be used to facilitate the gas infrastiucture project. This project is going to pay for itself and it is so important and I would want to urge all Hon Members here to vote massively for it
Thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Chairman, do you want to wind up? Hon Members, he moved the Motion.
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker, I would want to -thank Hon Members for the debate and urge that all of us vote massively for this Agreement.

Question put and Motion agreed to.
Mr Opare-Ansah
Mr Speaker,just to say that we Want it on record that ---
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, I have given him the floor. Let us listen to him. I can only rule on whatever he says after listening to him.
Mr Opare-Ansah
Why is there so much anxiety? I am only congratulating the House on having gone through such a beautiful debate and notwithstanding

the apparent number, having managed to secure the necessary numbers to be able to take a decision on the Motion.

Mr Speaker, it is important to note that this side raised all the objections that we wanted to raise. But in the end, we did not put any impediments as it is quite obvious, in the way of the process. This is because we all believe that this is something that would ultimately benefit Ghanaians. But it is simply the fact that We had major objections to some of the specific details and we will still urge our Hon Colleagues in the Majority that, if there is still the opportunity, they should find ways of making sure that those issues we have raised are rectified.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Majority Leader, I think the point being made by the Hon Minority Chief Whip must be taken in good faith. Certain issues have been raised by both sides of the House. They have stated their concerns and as the Leader of Government Business, I strongly urge you to take them on board.
Hon Members, let us move to the next item. _
Mr Avoka
Mr Speaker, I would want to respectfully apply to you to respectfully- permit the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning to take the Resolution.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Minority Leader --
Mr Avoka
Mr Speaker, I was respectfully applying to you to permit the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, Hon Seth Terkpeh to move the Resolution under item number 6 on page 2.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Very well.
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, I think the Resolution captured as item number 6 does not end on page 2. It ends on page 3, unless maybe, the Majority Leader wants us to stop at page 2.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
You are absolutely right.
RESOLUTION
THIS HONOURABLE HOUSE
HEREBY RESOLVES AS
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, I notice the strenuous efforts of the Majority Chief Whip. Let him spare his breath. We all know the challenges he is facing but let him spare his breath. Nobody raised anything at all. Nobody will raise anything at all. So let us go on.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Mr Avoka
Mr Speaker, we will take Motion number 7 at page 3 of the Order Paper.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, item number 7 on the Order Paper.
Government of Ghana/China , Development Bank Corporation Subsidiary Facility Agreement to Finance the ICT-enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Facility
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this Honourable House adopts the Report of the joint Committee on Finance and Defence and Interior on the
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
Subsidiary Agreement between the Republic of Ghana and the China Development Bank Corporation for an amount ofUS$l50,000,000.00 to finance the ICT-enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Facilities for the Oil and Gas Enclave Project under the Master Facility Agreement between the Republic of Ghana and the China Development Bank Corporation.
Mr Speaker, in doing so, I present your Committee's Report.
1.0 Introduction
The Subsidiary Agreement between the Republic of Ghana and the China Development Bank Corporation for an amount of one hundred and fifty million United States dollars (US$15 0,000,000.00) to finance the ICT-enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Facilities for the Oil and Gas Enclave Project under the Master Facility Agreement between the Republic of Ghana and the China Development Bank Corporation was laid in the House on Friday, 3"‘ February, 2012 and referred to a joint Committee on Finance and Defence and Interior for consideration and report in accordance with article 181 of the Constitution and the Standing Orders of the House.
The Committee met and considered the Agreement with the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, Hon Dr Kwabena Duffuor and his Deputy Hon Seth Terkpeh, Minister for Communications, Hon (Alhaji) Haruna Iddrisu, Deputy Minister for Energy, Hon Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, and technical teams from the Ministries of Finance and Economic Planning, Communications and Energy as well as National Security officials and hereby presents this Report to the House pursuant to Order 161(1) of the Standing Orders of the House.

2.0 Background

His Excellency President John Evans Atta Mills visited the People's Republic of China in September, 2010 at the invitation of His Excellency President Hu Jintao. During the said visit, a framework agreement for China Development Bank's Comprehensive Project Finance Facility for Ghana was signed to extend the coverage of bilateral economic co- operation to the mobilisation of financing for Ghana's development agenda.

In April, 2011, following two previous rounds of discussions with CDB in Beijing, China (January, 2011) andAccra (February, 2011), the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP) and CDB signed an agreed "Indicative Term Sheet" subject to necessary internal approvals. This formed the substantive basis for the Master Facility Agreement. Cabinet approved the draft Term Sheet to facilitate the negotiations with CDB in April, 2011. "

Another discussion with CDB was on a special line of credit for the development of African SMEs. With the successful negotiation and initialling in June/July 2011 of the draft Master FacilityAgreement on the approved financing terms, the Agreement was presented to the House for consideration and approval.

The Master Facility involves the financing and construction, primarily of infrastructure expansion and development projects in priority sectors under the Ghana Shared Growth and Development Agenda (GSGDA).

Hon Members would recall that Parliament on 26th August, 201 1 approved the US$3.0 billion Master Facility Agreement (MFA) between the Government of Ghana and the China
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
Development Bank. This Master Facility Agreement was signed by Ghana's Ambassador to the People's Republic of China with a Power of Attorney, in compliance with the provisions of section 4 of the Loans Act, 1970 (Act 335).
The executed Master Facility Agreement necessitated some amendments in the form of an "Addendum" which was approved by the House on 21*‘ February, 2012.
3 .0Purpose of the Agreement
The purpose of the Master Facility Agreement is to obtain funds in the sum ofUS$3 .0 billion from China Development Bank (CDB) to undertake infrastructural development projects in Ghana pursuant Agreement to the Ghana Shared Growth and Development Agenda (GSGDA).
The objective of this Subsidiary Agreement is to draw-down an amount of US$150 million from the Master Facility to implement the ICT-enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Facilities for the Oil and Gas Enclave Project.
4.0Terms of the facility - .
The US$150 million facility for the ICT- enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Facilities Project is under Tranche B of the Master Facility Agreement as already approved by Parliament with the following terms:
Total Master Facility Amount -US$3,000,000,000.00
Tranche B - US$1,500,000,000.00
Facility amount -US$1 50,000,000.00
Grace period - Up to 5 years

Tenure - 10 years

Interest rate -- 6 months Libor + 2.85 per cent

Upfront fees - 0.25 per cent flat

Commitment fees 1.00 per cent per - annum (on undrawn balance)

5.0 Observations

The Committee observed that one of the conditions of the Master Facility Agreement was that each of the emanating Subsidiary Agreements should be presented to Parliament for consideration and approval.

It was noted that the US$3.0 billion Master Facility Agreement approved by the House would be disbursed through two windows (i.e. Tranche A and Tranche B) and that specific disbursements under each of the Tranches would be determined project-by-project as would be spelt out in separate Subsidiary Agreements, the second of which is currently before the House.

The Committee also noted that the US$150 million Subsidiary Agreement currently under consideration is a Tranche B facility.

Projects proposed to be financed under Tranche B (further sub-divided into Bl and B2) Of the Master Facility are as follows:

Tranche B1: Oil and Gas Sector Infrastructure Development

(a) Western Corridor Gas Infrastructure Project - Offshore Gathering Pipeline, Early Phase Gas Processing Plant, Onshore Trunk Pipeline including gas dispatch facility; retrofit of Tema Oil Refinery
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
(TOR) to enable processing of natural gas liquids (NGLs); and deployment of helicopter fleet for enhanced surveillance of facilities.
Project Developer is the newly- created Ghana National Gas Company Limited, and project implementation is under _ performance-based design-build- maintain contracts (Estimated Amount of US$ 850 million).
(b) Phase 1 of the Takoradi Petroleum A Terminal Project - to be sited at Pumpuni_
Project Developer is the Bulk Oil Storage and Transportation Company Limited, with project implementation under performance- based design-build-maintain contract (Estimated Amount of US$200 million).
(a) Western Corridor "Oil Enclave" Toll‘ Road Redevelopment Project.
Project Developer is the Ghana Highway Authority. Project implementation is under a design- build-maintain contract (Estimated Amount of US$15 0 million).
Tranche B2: Special Projects
(a) Deployment of an ICT-based integrated communications platform to enhance security and surveillance of all infrastructure and facilities in the Western Corridor "oil Enclave".
Project Developer is the National Security Council. Project - implementation is under a

performance-based design-build- maintain contract .(Estimated Amount of US$150 million).

Benefits of the ICT-enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Project include improvement in the national security and government functionality in order to keep up with the development of Ghana's economy. It will also enhance the ability of the Security Agencies to undertake surveillance and monitoring of oil and gas installations in the "oil and gas enclave" in particular and in the country as a whole.

Components of the ICT-enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Facilities for the Oil and Gas Enclave Project include: National Security Communication Platform which consists of E2E basic structure and National Security Command Centre, security network enabled with encrypted PTT dispatching system, high speed mobile internet access, intranet VPN dedicated service, national mobile video surveillance and emergency control and command services to Government agencies.

Oil and Gas Enclave Surveillance . and Monitoring Platform which realises reasonable monitoring and management over the oil exploitation and transferring in the south as well as the downstream oil and gas transfer pipes, so as to improve security, efficiency and reliability. The system is composed of the upstream, midstream and downstream control system, which conducts data acquisition and monitoring over the sea area, VISAT and wireless technology. All these services would enable the Government to reduce the
Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi)
communication budget and duplicated investments on ICT.
IOT System and Service which consist of _ customised and interconnection interfaces between
a) The security communication platform;
b) The oil enclave surveillance and monitoring platform; and
c) A 3rd Party SCADA systems.
Training and capacity building which will train and establish capacity for the managers and staff of different levels on how to use, operate and maintain the deployed end-to-end system.
Another critical complementary project involves the deployment of helicopter fleet for aerial surveillance and monitoring of the gas infrastructure/facilities.
The Committee noted that even though the Subsidiary Agreement is in the amount ofUS$l50,000,000.00, the total project cost is estimated at US$176,500,000.00. It was explained to the Committee in this regard that the Government of Ghana is expected to provide counterpart funding to ensure a debt/equity ratio of 85:15.
The Committee observed that as part of the repayment arrangement of the facility, a separate Off-taker Agreement would be entered into between the Republic of Ghana, represented by the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) and an Off-taker (UNIPEC Asia Company Limited) nominated by the Lender for the sale and purchase of Ghana's Crude oil.
Whether the project would not create a "big brother" to intrude in- the privacy of Ghanaians, the National Security Co- ordinator, Lt. Col. Larry Gbevlo Lartey

informed the Committee that the purpose of the project is not to trample on the fundamental human rights of citizens but to ensure the safety and security of all.

It was noted that the National Information Technology Agency (N ITA) which is legally mandated to oversee all ICT projects of Government would work together with the National Security Secretariat to implement the project.

As to who the contractors of the project were, the Committee was informed that the project would be implemented by Huawei Technologies Company Limited of China, a company which has previously executed high technology projects for the country successfully.

The Committee noted that Finance Documents which are part of the "conditions precedent" to the first Subsidiary Agreement include the Off-taker Agreement, the Security Document being the Charge over Accounts Agreement, the Accounts Agreement and the Five Party Agreement. These documents were made available to the Committee and immensely assisted Members in the consideration of the Subsidiary Agreement.

The Committee noted the need for Government to implement appropriate measures to ensure the safety and security of the oil and gas infrastnicture and other facilities being put in place at tremendous cost to the nation. The Committee therefore urges the Ministry of Communications, the National Security and all other relevant stakeholders to expedite action on the implementation of the project.

6.0 Conclusion

The Committee, after critical examination, respectfully recommends to the House to approve by Resolution, the Subsidiary Agreement between the
Mr William O. Boafo (NPP -- Akropong)
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Mr Speaker, the ICT- enhanced Surveillance and Monitoring Facility - we felt that it is very useful for us in the country for several reasons. Basically, it is useful, in the sense that it is going to assist us in oil and gas platform and there is also the need for the objective of expansion of the initial installation.
We are assured by the National Security Co-ordinator that this facility will also be used to provide surveillance for our traffic violations to ensure sanity on our roads. We were also given the assurance that it would help us control and monitor the movement of gun running or the smuggling of small arms and ammunition across our borders.
MI Speaker, We also realised that some of the items were very expensive and the Committee cautioned the implementers of the project to ensure that they adopt some cost control over the purchases.

Mr Speaker, it was also realised that in the project implementation agreement, we have a ceiling of US$150 million but the contract price is estimated to cost US$176 million. Mr Speaker, the Committee felt that the implementers' attention should be drawn to this anomaly, so that there is a correction to the ceiling provided under the project implementation agreement.

Mr Speaker, we also realised that so far as the project implementation agreement is concerned, we did not see any provision for contingency but in the project implementation agreement, there 1s a provision which enables the employer to advise the contractor to undertake additional works in the course of the implementation. So the implementers were equally advised to ensure that they make allocations for contingencies.

Mr Speaker, we realised that the project is something which will assist us, not only on the gas eld but in other areas of our security operation in the country and we felt that it is something which we should support.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Question proposed.
Alhaji Sumani Abukari (NDC- Tamale North)
Mr Speaker, I rise to support the Motion on the floor of the House.
Mr Speaker, as my Colleague on the other side has indicated, we thought that this is a very important inclusion into the US$3 billion facility that this country has, by the grace of God, been blessed with.
We think that apart from the oil and gas, the ICT-enhanced surveillance and monitoring facilities will not only protect our oil and gas fields but they will also help in securing our borders on the coast lines.
Mr Speaker, I hesitate to say certain things here because the security of our sea or maritime borders will be enhanced by this surveillance facility. We need this security because we know that, at least,
' 5
Mr Samuel Atta Akyea (NPP- Akim Abuakwa South)
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to the Motion on the floor, that we should adopt the Motion of the joint Committee on Finance and Defence and Interior concerning the US$ 150 million to finance the ICT-enhanced surveillance and monitoring facilities.

Mr Speaker, the benefit and advantage of what we are about to procure cannot be over-emphasised. This is because we are developing an oil industry and every safeguard that we need to protect, what the President calls "the bounty of nature" should be put in place. So I do not see how anybody can seriously quarrel with this business we are trying to do and to promote our oil industry. But I have a little concern, which I believe is very fundamental to what we are doing.

My fear is that, this whole contract that we signed previously, the Master Facility contract might tie our hands, in the sense that even if there is the necessity to find cheaper ways of doing things, by reason of the Master Facility Agreement, we will not do what is right. I am tempted to believe that nobody has shown us that this is the best price we can get for the same facilities. Mr Speaker, in fact, it is very worrying. You will enter into a contract in which by reason of the contract, anything is thrown in. . There is no evidence to show that this is the best price that Ghana can get for this thing that we are doing.
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker, on a point of order.
Mr Speaker, in terms of the quality and the price, the oil company is the company that has been working with Ghana for a
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, that is not a point of order. He is expressing his opinion on the matter and it remains his opinion and he is entitled to do so.
Mr Akyea
Mr Speaker, I thank you, that you are seeing through his tactic to distract me and I will not be distracted.
Mr Speaker, we have laws governing this country and it seems to me that we are doing sole-sourcing in this case. If we have due regard to the Public Procurement Act, 2003, Act 663, there are strict conditions for going sole-sourcing. But I do not think that this is the only source that we can get the equipment that we are about to take. I believe there are several sources and we should have looked at those sources and not just be bound by the Master Facility Agreement.
This is because what I am trying to say is that, if we are not careful in the name of the Master Facility Agreement, anything which they Want to bring in our way, we will take it and even violate our own laws, especially the procurement laws. This is very dangerous for this country.
I am afraid, they have not given us anything to compare. Nobody has

brought anything to show that there were cheaper ways of getting it but in terms of some other considerations, this is the best deal we can get.

We have not seen any value for money that we are trying to do and Mr Speaker, we should be careful. This is because we are a developing country and we do not‘ have the financial muscle of China. But even in the boxing ring, they always win the people before they start the fight. If we are not careful, in the name of the largesse from China, this nation would be short-changed and whatever thing we are procuring, would not be value for money.

That is my little contribution to the Motion on the floor.
Mr Haruna H. Bayirga (PNC - Sissala West)
Mr Speaker, about some two years ago, when you talked about piracy, you thought of it a far way off but as we speak now, it is at the threshold of our shores. Yes, in glancing through today's Daily Graphic, Mr Speaker, page 2, it is there "Piracy threatens West Africa Oil expansion?' and this came from ---
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, having regard to the state of business, I direct that we Sit outside the prescribed period, in line with Standing Order 40 (3) of the House.
Mr Bayirga
Mr Speaker, this came from Mr Abdel-Fatau Musah, Director of Political Affairs, ECOWAS, and he stated that, for the last two years, there had been 21 piracy attacks off the coast of Benin, 14 attacks off the coast of Nigeria, seven attacks off the coast of Togo, and two attacks off the coast of Ghana and one off the coast of la Cote d'Ivoire.
MI Speaker, with this information, it is very, very frightening "and this loan is coming to address some of the situations that we need to protect our oil enclave
Mr Stephen K.Balado Manu (NPP- Ahafo Ano South)
Mr Speaker, I would also like to add my voice to the Motion on floor.
Mr Speaker, there is no doubt that oil is a blessing to a nation if it is well managed. And on the other hand, it becomes a curse if not well managed. God has looked at Ghana and has sent some blessing upon us by giving us oil. But this oil, if we are not careful with its management, would bring us nothing virtually.
We have been told about how pirates and others are trying to come in and feed on the oil that we have. There are nations which have had oil long before us and they are well experienced in how to steal oil and how to benefit Whether positively or negatively through all_means possible. So if we are not careful, we would be like the proverbial rich man whose sister will only have the accolade of a rich man's

sister but who would have nothing in her kitty. The Akans will say, Osikani nua baa.

So in this connection, I see this loan as well-timed to_help us get the equipment and other facilities that would help us secure our oil.

But I am a bit worried, just as opined by a Colleague before me. We have entrusted everything to the Chinese without showingthis country that we have worked other alternatives and this is the best we have got for Ghana We could have tried other com anies. The Hon Chairman told us that the company has worked on fibre optics. Are we saying that fibre optics are the same as oil? Oil is different; the expertise in oil is not the same as that in fibre optics. So if they do well in fibre optics, it does not mean that they would o well in oil.

So Mr Speaker, if the Hon Chairman does not know_much about oil, he should better keep quiet and listen because he is an Accountant, o'r is he an Accounts Clerk? [Interruption] -
Mr Avedzi
On a point of order.
Mr Speaker, this facility is an ICT facility; it is not_about oil. is is an ICT platform that will provide a surveillance and monitoring of the oil wells but not the oil drilling. It is about ICT; he should speak to it. It is not about drilling oil.
Mr Manu
So what does he think he has done, Mr Speaker? [Laughter]
Mr Speaker, what I am saying is this
that it is true we need to secure our oil but the way the Hon Chairman talked about fibre o tics is not the way to go. He should have told us that comparing this company with the Chinese company, we found the Chinese to be of superior capacity to help us secure our oil the better.
rose.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Members, I want to end the debate here - Very well, I will take one from each side. If the Hon Leaders want to contribute, let me hear from them.
Hon Members, I listened to all of you. When you speak, I listen and that informs me how the debate should proceed.
One, one. Yes, Hon Member; after that, the Hon Member.
Mr Samuel A. Jabanyite (NDC -- Chereponi)
MrSpeaker, before I proceed in supporting or urging the House to approve this loan facility, I would like to correct an erroneous impression.
From all the discussions, it looks like something is missing out. That particular Chinese company by name, I think Huawei or so, is believed to be doing a very good job in the country.
This is a loan facility that seeks to put up ICT connectivity to connect the oil enclave and other security agencies. This particular company has cell sites all over the country. So it becomes cheaper if this same company is contracted to deliver such a facility. So it is against this background that this particular company has been selected. Cost-wise, it becomes cheaper.

Mr Speaker, for once, in this country, we are going to have all the security agencies hooked up to a particular network. This, in my opinion, is going to enhance and facilitate tracking, in the oil enclave, on our highways and also other security related matters. So I think it is very important that once we can have one umbrella that would be doing all these co- ordinations, it will bring about security in the country.

Against this background, I Wish to urge all Hon Members to approve this facility.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Kwame S. Acheampong (NPP-- Mpraeso)
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to support the Agreement before us, in approving of the contract between Huawei from China and the Ghana Government.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker
HonAkoto Osei, do you have a point of order?
Dr A.A. Osei
Mr Speaker--
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Against who?
Dr A. A.Osei; Mr Speaker, it is sperm; of elucidation for all Hon Members of the House; it is important.
Mr Speaker, the Resolution talks about US$150 million but in principle, we are approving a contract of US$l76.5 million. I think Hon Members need to understand that. There is a Resolution for US$150 million but there is an implementation agreement for which there is even an error that must be corrected, so that we know
Mr Acheampong
Mr Speaker, on page 7 of 8, the last paragraph, it is indicated, and with your kind permission, I beg to read:
"The-Committee noted that finance documents which are part of the conditions precedent to the Subsidiary Agreement include the Off-taker Agreement, the security document being the Charge Over Account Agreement, the Account Agreement and the Five-.Party' Agreement. These documents were made available to the Committee and immensely assisted Hon Members in the consideration of the Subsidiary Agreement."
Mr Speaker, as a member of both Committees, I agree that earlier, those documents were offered to us prior to the execution of the MFA. However, in considering this, after we had executed, we did not consider them in this Report. I Want this House to take note of some of these things because we .- an Addendum Was laid before us. We need to ensure that what we approved are efficiently and effectively so?--
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, that was why the Addendum was brought and we approved it in the House. So the understanding and the assumption is that those changes were the ones that

were brought to us. So if it turned out that there were other changes, which were not brought to the House, then those who did that, would answer for it one day. That is not for the House.
Mr Acheampong
It is all right, Mr Speaker. My concerns are that as captured in your Committee's Report, it is said that we considered it as part of our Subsidiary Agreements that we undertook in the Committee and that is why I am raising this matter -
Mr First Deputy Speaker
The comment there is that these documents were made available to the Committee. It did not indicate at what point in time that they were made available. The Report did not tell us at what point in time the documents were made available. But you are telling us that they were made available when you were considering the first Master Facility Agreement. So you put that point on record.
So continue.

_ Mr'Terkpeh: Mr Speaker, to set the records straight, the documents were brought along With the General Subsidiary Agreement at the time the Cabinet Memorandum was submitted on the Subsidiary, not before the MFA. It was the first memorandum that was brought to the House by my Minister with respect to the Subsidiary Agreement.
Dr A. A. Osei
Mr Speaker, the point is being lost. You brought a General Subsidiary Agreement; the condition precedent says you must approve the Five Party Agreement. That is his point, which this House, as of today, has not. Bringing a General Subsidiary Agreement is neither here nor there. The condition precedent - [Interrruption.]
Mr Avedzi
Mr Speaker-
Mr First Deputy Speaker
I have not given you the floor.
Hon Member, continue.
Mr Acheampong
Mr Speaker, these are conditions precedent to this Agreement and I agree very well with the Report. The Committee's Report is very emphatic about the equity in the approval of the contract because - [Interruption ]
Mr Asaga
On a point of order.
Mr. Speaker, it is not just meant for interruption, but because we are saying that we should capture everything properly.
In the Hon Member's submission, he said the loan Agreement or whatever subsidiary is between the Republic of Ghana and Huawei and I thought that he could rather change it to the "Republic of Ghana and China Development Bank" for the official record.
I do not mean Hon Akoto; I mean my Hon Colleague.
Mr Acheampong
Thank you very much.
Mr Speaker, we have two issues here, this Motion is on the contract between -- on the Order Paper, Motion number
7 _
"That this Honourable House adopts the Report of the joint Committee on Finance and Defence and Interior on the Subsidiary Agreement between the Republic of Ghana and the China Development Bank Corporation for an amount of
USS)150',OO0,000". -

Mr Speaker, again, I would want all of us to addess our minds and I would want us to be very concerned here. .

Looking at the contract before us, I would want to find out if approval has been sought from the Public Procurement

Authority for sole sourcing. The Committee rather did not cite it in the Agreement.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah
Mr Speaker, just on a point of information, and it is very important in the light of what my Hon Colleague has been referring to as the contract between the Government of Ghana and Huawei, That is not what we are approving now.
However, there is a contract, the Project Implementation Agreement, which I hold in my hands, between the National Security Council and Huawei Technologist, which is an international Agreement in respect of the ICT Project for which this loan may finance a substantial part.
I would want to draw the attention of Government to this. You will recall sometime last week, I contributed and referred to it, that this thing is lost to Government and I know this because of the proceedings at the Committee.
So let us not think that by approving this Agreement, we have approved the contract between the Government of Ghana, acting through the National Security Council and Huawei.
This also ought to be brought to this House for approval. But I know that even as of now, Huawei is in preparatory stages. Please,Mr Speaker, the Majority Leader should take notice of this.
Mr Acheampong
Mr. Speaker, I equally want us to look at the contract Agreement, the memorandum which was submitted before the Committee.
Mr Speaker, as the Report explains, the National Security is going to put up a command centre, which may not only help us police our oil and gas infrastructure
Mr First Deputy Speaker
What document are you referring to?
Mr Acheampong
Mr. Speaker, I am referring to the Project Execution Strategy and Budget document submitted to the Committee by the Ministry of Communications and the National Security outfit.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
It was a document made available to the Committee? Clarify that position, so that it Will be properly captured in the records. So in the course of your deliberation, that document was made available to the Committee?
So continue. -
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, I believe this Agreement was given to the Committee members to facilitate their understanding. But it is not the Committee that is going to approve of this at plenary. It is the entirety of the House. So it is important that all Hon Members are availed copies of this Agreement.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah
Strenuously.
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
That members of the Committee - This is because when it comes to consideration and approval of parties - He has shown his mind; I do not want to believe that.

Mr Speaker, the point being made is that, it is important that all Hon Members of Parliament are served with copies of such documents.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, the only reason I want that position to be clarified with regard to a document he was referring to, is to draw a distinction between documents that have been laid on the floor of the House and documents that have not been laid in the House. That was why I asked for that clarification. Otherwise, it might not be properly captured in our records for the future.
As for that issue, yes, I cannot object to your request.
Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
Mr Speaker, the point being made is that, all Hon Members of Parliament should be given copies; it is not that you can object to my request. I would Want you to direct that all Hon Members be given copies.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, kindly conclude.
Mr Acheampong
Mr Speaker, in conclusion, as directed by you, I, indeed, would want all Hon Members to support this contract Agreement. The reason being the recent spate of accidents that we have had on our roads. If the National Security outfit is resourced with such infrastructure, I believe it will help us in the delivery of surveillance on our roads, in the delivery of surveillance of criminal activities in the country.
Mr Speaker, elsewhere, such enhancement in infrastructure has helped security operatives combat crime, combat terrorism and combat even aggression from neighbouring countries. And as we all know, we have a boundary issue with our next door neighbours, la Cote d'lvoire. It is very, very important that we have this facility for our national security
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Member, I said you should conclude.
Mr Acheampong
For the border surveillance that the Ghana Immigration Service is going to embark upon, they need huge logistics to be able to patrol our borders effectively and efficiently. However, in conclusion Mr Speaker, I would want to place on record that considering what we witnessed after the execution of the contract, we must ensure that we do all our things right and not that after execution, we come to lay addendums; it smacks of spending much time on so many things we do in this House.
With these few words, Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
RESOLUTIONS
THIS HONOURABLE HOUSE
Mr K. Avedzi
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Mr Kyei Mensah-B0nsu
Mr Speaker, I would want you to sound Colleagues to lift up their heads, so that they would be recognised.
Question put and Motion -
DrA. A. Osei
I think the Hon Deputy Minster has no Vole. He can participate in the debate but he cannot Vote.
_Mr First Deputy Speaker: Hon Members, I will put the Question again.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Mr Second Deputy Speaker to take the Chair.
Mr Avoka
Mr Speaker, we will come back to item number 4. [Interruption.] I know,I know - [Pause]
Papa Owusu-Ankomah
Mr Speaker, I do not want a repeat of the situation where, I think, either in the First or Second Parliaments, one of the Deputy Speakers, without formally suspending Sitting, just ran out of the House. [ Uproar. ]
Mr First Deputy Speaker
And that Deputy Speaker was from your region.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah
The way I see the Hon Deputy Speaker, I believe there is a limit to human endurance and probably, it will assist all of us if he could suspend Sitting for about 15 to 20 minutes, so that he will restore himself to his personal comfort.
Mr Avoka
Mr Speaker, I thought the Hon Second Deputy Speaker was easily available to take over. "
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Majority Leader, what item do you want us to take‘? Are we going for the amendment at the Consideration Stage or we are going to take the debate?
Mr Avoka
We are going to take the debate. Yesterday we did not take the debate at all; we took some Bills.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Hon Majority Leader, why do you not take the amendments, so that tomorrow, we will start with the debate?
Mr Avoka
Very well. I have no objection. Tomorrow, we can even take more than the usual three or four. We can take five or six from each side.
Mr First Deputy Speaker
Yes. So tomorrow, we can take a lot for the debate, starting from the morning.
Mr Avoka
Very well. So we will take the Mental Health Bill. Hon Members, please, stay in the Chamber and take this Bill because it is so important. Nobody should go out.
BILLS - CONSIDERATION STAGE
  • [Resumption of debate from 28-02"- 2012]
    • Mr First Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman of the Committee, have you resolved the issues pertaining to clauses 14 and 15?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Rightly so, Mr Speaker. The Committee met the gentleman that was objecting and we agreed to drop our amendment; so that was why we were thinking that we could take it now.
    Clause 14 -
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, we are dropping the proposed amendment , -so that we will leave the rendition as it is on the original Bill.
    Mr Speaker, the reason is that after a careful deliberation, it was realised that most of the Regional Directors of Health and many of the institutions that we have, are usually appointed by the Board and since the Board itself is appointed by the President, it presupposes that they are doing those appointments on behalf of the President.
    Therefore, if we go to state it categorically, it may create operational difficulties. So we should rather leave it, so that the Board will always do it on behalf of the President as it pertains in many institutions in the country.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker
    Hon Minority Leader, I want to have your views vis-a-vis the previous laws that we have passed in this House.
    Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
    Mr Speaker, I must say that I have not followed that path very well; so I do not want to commit myself.
    2.25 p.m_
    Mr First Deputy Speaker
    They are trying to drop article 195. They want to drop the involvement of the President in the appointment. If you look at article 195, clause 1 of the Constitution, it reads:
    "Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the power to appoint persons to hold or to act in an office in the public services shall vest in the President acting in accordance with the advice of the governing council of the service concerned given in consultation with the Public Sen/ices Commission."
    Then article 195(2) says he may delegate that function.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, I think the withdrawal of this amendment is in order.
    Even if we leave it at the Board, it is still a delegated function through the Board. And as they indicated, the Ghana Health Service Council is the one which appoints the other persons on behalf of the President, promotes them and all that. So, this Board and many other public boards and corporations have been vested with this delegated power through legislation, and I think that it is better we leave it as it is in the Bill and not the amendment. So, the withdrawal of the
    Mr First Deputy Speaker
    Is the Ghana Health Service the same as the Health Service under article 190 of the Constitution?
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, it is not the equivalent. I am just talking about the fact that once you have a public board, normally, the board is appointed by the President and they have the authority to do that, to even select and all that. But I am saying that in the particular case that we are talking "about, it will be better to still have it as a delegated function. The board then is acting on behalf of the President, still in line with article 195.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker
    Yes, it must come out as a delegated function. So, we cannot legislate to undermine the Constitution. [Pause.] Yes, Hon Deputy Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing, let me hear from you
    Maj. (Dr) (Alhaji) Mustapha Ahmed (retd): Mr Speaker, I believe that the clause as it is --
  • [MR SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER IN Tl-IE CHAIR]
    • Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, what is your inclination?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, before you just took over, the debate was on clause 14 where we stood it down, simply because the Committee was proposing to amendment to Board appointing the Hospital Director to the President as per article 195 . But upon further consultation with the gentleman who raised the objection, when we got there that day, we realised that, yes, the Board itself was appointed by the President and we had so many examples -- like the Ghana Health Service appointing the Regional Directors of Health, the District Directors of Health--
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    I have a difficulty when you start talking about the "gentleman" who raised the objection.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Oh, the Hon Member for Asante Akim North was the one who raised the objection.
    Upon further consultation, we agreed that his objection was stronger, so we should leave it as it in the Bill, being the Board. And we cited several examples about Ghana Health Service Council that appoints the Regional and District Directors of Health on behalf of the President
    Therefore, we should leave the Hospital Director to be appointed by the Board, that is, doing it on behalf of the President.
    So, we were dropping the amendment when you came in, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So, the amendment is being withdrawn?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    It is being Withdrawn.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Yes, Hon Minority Leader, I see you are inclined to --
    Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
    Mr Speaker, I agree with the Committee in their proposal to us to withdraw the amendment.
    Mr Speaker, I think if one reads article 195(1) in context, the understanding is that public servants hold their positions on the authority of the President. It may mean that the most junior public servant holds office on the authority of the President but it is not the President who employs them directly. And I think that should be the general understanding because the Constitution, by article 57(1) makes the President not only the head of Government but the Head of State;
    everybody works to the President That is the meaning of article 195(1). All public servants. It does not mean that stenographers, typists, ushers, secretaries must be directly appointed by the President. It does not mean that at all. So, I think we should understand it in that context and if we do, then if it is, the Board that has to appoint them, of course, given the fact that the President appoints the Board, then the President has that authority through the Board in appointing those people down there. That should be the understanding. Otherwise, We will say that if we want to employ even sweepers and cleaners in oft-ices, it is the President who should do that. And I tm it will be over-stretching the matter.
    So, I agree entirely with the Committee in proposing to us to withdraw this amendment.

    Clause l4 ordered to stand part of the Bill. .
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Clause
    15?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, it is the same here too. It was talking about the Clinical Co-ordinator and there too, the effort of the Committee was to use the President. And with this understanding, we are equally dropping the proposed amendment to clause 1.5.

    Clause 15 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I thought we were moving to clause 54.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Clause 54, debate to continue-
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, if you look at today's Votes and Proceedings, page 8, item number 8, we clearly worked on this. It just happens to have appeared here again. So, the Question was put yesterday.
    235 p.m.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    The Question was definitely put and we would make progress and we are not going back. Yes, let us all just know where we would make progress and proceed.
    Chairman of the Committee, so the amendment listed (iii) on clause 54 should not have appeared on the Order Paper. And Chairman, by your guidance, we did not finish with clause 55 and so on. Yes, we are now on clause 58, clauses 55, 56, 57 were all dealt With.
    Item iv, clause 5 8.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I would be very grateful if you could permit me to take item (vii). This is because yesterday, why we stood this down was that we needed this clause to start before we start talking about the

    others. Unfortunately, when they were arranging it, they still brought those ones. So I would be very grateful if, with your indulgence and that of my Hon Colleagues, I would move item (vii) first;

    and if we agree, the others could follows.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Definitely, at the Consideration Stage -- Clause 58 -
    Alhaji Muntaka
    So Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 5 8, add the following new sub-clause:
    "Tranquillisers or sedatives may be p used only Where - -
    (a) there are reasonable grounds for believing that the person presents a significant danger to himself or herself or others;
    (b) it is in the interest of the person to receive a tranquilliser or a sedative urgently."
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, the Whole of clause 58 is about seclusion and restraint. What has that got to do with tranquillisers? Mr Speaker, it seems we are in a haste to move and we have just to think through things carefully. --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Dr Prempeh, no one is in a haste to move anywhere. You may make your contribution; do not say the Hon Chairman is in a haste to move it, please.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, thank you and Well noted.
    Mr Speaker, if in the opinion of a psychiatrist, or a doctor working on a patient who is even agitated, even an ordinary W8I(l., it is about the ability of the doctor to administer a treatment. Why are we being so - Mr Speaker, I just do not understand why we are being so prescriptive. Unless we want to get to a
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Have you finished?
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker-
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    I would be grateful if you would address the Chair and then you do not have a problem.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, maybe, because I am a doctor, I am on the other side. But do we put in the law how a lawyer should go about advising the clients? We do not put that in the law. Speaker, that is why I am saying that it seems as if we are in a rush.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Dr Prempeh, I really take objection about the "rush". .
    Dr Prernpeh
    Oh, I am sorry, Mr Speaker. I withdraw it and apologise profusely.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Just make your point. Nobody is in a rush here.
    Dr Prernpeh
    Mr Speaker, I will give you examples why I am saying that.
    Yesterday, when we talk about the freedoms of the mentally impaired, Mr Speaker, little did I know that the justification for that clause being put in the Bill by the old technical expert is for voting -- by the technical expert- It was because of voting that they have put equal fundamental rights whether the Constitution was against it and it was discriminating. We were not patient.
    But Mr Speaker, again, a doctor, a psychiatrist does need the permission of a law to tranquillise or sedate a patient who is agitated. If we want to put it under the standard of treatment, I can accept. But for "seclusion and restraint', I do not think it is the right place.
    Dr Richard W. Anane
    Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the submission by the Hon Dr Prempeh. Mr Speaker, yes, we may want to make sure We put things right. But Mr Speaker, we cannot legislate practice and we have to be very clear about such things. Therefore, Mr Speaker, I do not think I have to argue even anymore. I think the Hon Chairman also has --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    We need not legislate bad practice and ---
    Dr Anane
    Mr Speaker, because that is learnt in school.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    And you are supportive of the point made by Hon Dr Prempeh?
    Dr, Anane
    Yes, Mr Speaker. Therefore, I think the Chairman also appreciates that and therefore, there is no need arguing over them, Mr Speaker.
    Alhaji Pelpuo
    Mr Speaker, yesterday I argued alongside my Hon Friend, Dr Prempeh and I still stand by that, that we do not have to legislate and tell the doctor what to do.
    But if you look at the use of "minimal mechanical force", it is not prescribing what kind of mechanical force. So if we want to say, "with some drugs"- we should not specify what kind of drugs. So we can say, "use minimal mechanical force or the use of drugs", so that we know that in the two cases, in order to restrain him, they either have to use force. If there is the need for some further use of another power, then they can use some kind of drug without specifying the drug. So if that would satisfy us, we would say the "mechanical force or the use of drugs" without specifying "sedative" or "tranquillisers" or whatever.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Does any Hon Member want to support the amendment?
    The Hon Chairman wants to react, then we may know what to do._
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, it was more about history, the frequent abuse. But from hindsight and further discussion and the contribution of Hon Members, we propose to drop the whole of the amendments to clause 58.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    The entire amendment? '
    Alhaji Muntaka
    The entire amendment because all of the clause 58, what we tried to do, the whole of that place has to do with the tranquillisers and sedatives.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    In fact, so you do not legislate "practice"? So the amendments to clause 58 are accordingly withdrawn.
    Amendment withdrawn by leave of the House.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members, once they have been withdrawn, on that note, let us make progress.
    Clause 58 ordered to stand part of the Bill
    Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
    Mr Speaker, if my memory serves me right, I think we raised some_ issue about clause 57 - the use of "intrusive and irreversible treatment?' and_-Was it clause 55 as well?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Minority Leader, we have already crossed those bridges. In -fact,we are.
    now on Clause 63.
    Hon Chairman, if I am right, clauses 59, 60, 61 and 62 have been dealt with?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, yesterday we stood down some of the clauses. We really got to clause 80 but we stood down some of them and we have had some background discussion and I felt we could carry on with those we stood down. So in other words, we are just to go to clause 63,,then clause 76, then we would hit clause 80 where we got to yesterday.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Yes. If there are other matters, they may be listed at the Second Consideration Stage. This is really where we got to. We have finished; we are only having those ones that we stood down, and - we are continuing from clause 80.
    Hon Frema Osei-Opare, I see you --
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Mr Speaker, please, I need your guidance. There are some amendments advertised under clause 58. They are being withdrawn without debate. I think that having read them, there are some issues that need to be addressed
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Any further amendments to clause 58? Since we are in the Consideration Stage and I intend to be flexible. Any further amendment relating to clause 58?
    _ Mr Manu: Mr Speaker, mine is not an amendment; I would want your guidance.
    I know that in the House, we have the Minority side and the Majority side. I see Hon Anane, who belongs to the Minority side now speaking from the Majority side. I would want to know, if procedurally, this is -- [Interruption] - No, I just want to know. You know, I am about to leave this House and if somebody should ask me that question, I must be able to answer it. I would want to know if that is in order.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    An Hon Member can move from here to there; when he reaches the middle, he bows and he may want to consult with an Hon Colleague. An Hon Member, particularly, at Consideration Stage, where rules are relaxed, may sit anywhere he or she thinks may maximise his participation by appropriate consultations -
    I have ruled. So that is the end of that matter.
    Mr Manu
    I understand.
    Thank you for your ruling.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Frema Osei-Opare, your amendment, please.
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Mr Speaker, if you so permit, I will "let Hon Dr Matthew Prempeh do the first one and I will join him at the right moment.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    I do not get it. That is not a very reasonable procedure --
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    We are also consulting like Hon Anane -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Frema Osei-Opare, you say you have some amendments? Please proceed. Hon Matthew Prempeh will have appropriate chance accordingly.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
    Mr Speaker, with respect to the Chair, because this is a very serious matter, Hon Members, as you indicated, may cross the aisle, bow and go and engage in consultation from either side. But Mr Speaker, where a person speaks from, really matters. Where a person speaks from, in any Parliament, really matters.
    I know you will want to relax the rules for consultations and so on - a person could even go down, sit down and put heads together and consult. But if a person has to speak, it must be from the side that the person represents. But it is not intended to challenge your ruling in any way.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    At the Consideration Stage, Hon Members, where the rules are relaxed, an Hon
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Mr Speaker, my counter amendment to clause 58 is to delete -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    I do not understand "counter amendment".
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Because there were amendments advertised. [Interruption]
    All right. Then I am-
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Frema Osei-Opare, as of now, there is no amendment standing before this Honourable House. If you want to make an amendment, in fact, you will normally have to advertise it. But We are agreeing that let us make progress; please, make progress.
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Yes, I take note of the relaxed rules, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, I am making an amendment to clause 5 8, that we delete subclauses (1) to (4) and retain sub-clause (5). Mr Speaker, the reason is, a qualified doctor ‘knows what to do and there are practices that are acceptable. As sub-clause (5) says,
    "The seclusion or restraint shall be practised under strict institutional guidelines and shall not be used as punishment or for the convenience of staff."
    The important thing about this seclusion and restraint is that if you look at clause 4, it is doing the work of a doctor and I do not even know that even when one has malaria, it is for the doctor to

    determine whether at that stage, they should give the person a drip immediately, put the person on the side ward for one hour or two hours or confine him or her for two or three days. This is normal practice and it is for the doctor to look at the situation and determine. For instance," if you look at sub-clause (4) -

    ' "The seclusion or restraint shall not be for more than four hours in a twenty-four hour period and the patient shall be reviewed every fifteen minutes with personal contact by a member of staff."

    I find this an impossibility. I think in all medical practices, there are standard procedures that they follow when they have a patient. When they have a patient, depending on the severity of the condition, there are certain steps that they take. -

    But this prescription --- where are we going to get the doctors to do so every 15 minutes if there are 10 such patients? Where are they in Ghana here and even Wherever they have abundance of medical personnel? I think these are suggestions or guidelines they can give in a manual or in the training of doctors but not certainly as a law.

    I ._ find subclauses (1) to (4),

    "prescriptive, intrusive" -- all of us then can become doctors. No! Let those who have studied be given the credit to do the right thing. That is why they are called "doctors".

    2.55 p.m. .
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, in drafting a law, there must he some flow of ideas and proper procedures to be followed. At this stage of this law when We had already approved certain portions'- Now, if you look at the words "a person", they did not say "a doctor". They said "a person" and all categories of people will be dealing with these people. From subclauses (1) to (5), what do they say?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members, there will be other opportunities for contributions, so let one person speak at a time. Let us not tell others to read as if they do not know they should read it. I prefer debate to be done that way.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, what I am also saying is that -
    Mr First Deputy Speaker
    If there is a point of order.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu
    Mr Speaker, a point of order --
    I am not opposed to what the Hon Colleague is saying. But he makes it appear as if the person mentioned in clause 5 8 is the medical officer or whoever, the health personnel; he is not. That "person" there is the patient or the person suffering from the mental disorder.
    Indeed, listening to Hon Frema, she insisted that the care should be provided by a doctor. It is not necessarily by a doctor. Clause 58 (4) says a member of staff. That is the health person. But the "person" there does not refer to -
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, I take note of his correction. But what I was driving at was in this same clause; no mention is made of any doctor. It says a person may be placed on by somebody. It is a Mental Health Bill which is for those who have mental disorders, those who are mentally ill. Therefore, most of the provisions are targeted at providing them with some rights, some respect.
    Now, when we talk about professionals not being regulated, I have never seen such a thing. If a doctor can at his will decide that I should be secluded and restrained, what will be the rule? Any doctor can just meet one when one reports and say "go inside"- That is why these minimal laws are there for him" or her to be

    able to look at the law and say, "If I do this, this law is against ...." They are talking about lawyers not being taught what to do. There is no profession in this country that has not got rules and regulations guiding them, particularly in the main laws that establish the professions.

    Now, what I am saying is that this law is basically for mental health patients, in fact, to guide other people to ensure their security, dignity and respect. Therefore, when we are looking at it, we should not look at it as if it is a general practice in a hospital where strong people walk there and -- We are talking about the decision to separate people. And if we talk about freedom of movement, freedom of expression, freedom of everything + and the freedom of a human being not to be restricted, not to be sent to a police station or jail, is very important, let alone somebody who is a patient.

    Therefore, these things should not be taken out of context; otherwise, at the end of the day, we would be making a good law. But we would have in the heat of this argument where the things are not advertised and for the consultation to be done with the promoters of the Bill, we can distort a whole legislation. Mr Speaker, I will ask that we will be cautious about this. But I oppose the proposal he is making.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I wish we had time to go through the clauses. The most relevant clauses in this Bill are sub-clause (2) that tells you that even every seclusion or restraint shall be authorised by the head of the facility. So the whole of clause 58, everything that we can do depends on the permission of the head of the facility.
    But Mr Speaker, if we advert our minds to sub-clause (5), which I believe is the only relevant one in all the five clauses; it says,
    Dr Prempeh
    "The seclusion or restraint shall be practised under strict institutional guidelines and shall not be used as ' punishment or for the convenience of staff." ' -
    Mr Speaker, this is what should come in the law and ask the heads of facilities, the psychiatrists, or the mental health authority to prescribe those guidelines.
    In mental health facilities, we have the one for secure mental facilities We have one for mental health disorder facilities. We have even one for some seriously aggressive or patients who have been committed to prison for serious offences and confined to mental health institutions.
    They are not all the same and that is one of my fears.
    We are being too prescriptive because if we take only sub-clause (5) and delete subclauses (1) to (4) - I support Hon Frema Opare's. With subclauses (2 ) and (5), everything that we want to do, is well captured.
    Sub-clause ( 1) talks about being placed in involuntary seclusion or minimal medical restraint only when there is imminent danger. But they cannot even do that unless the head of facility has given them that permission to do so in that facility. We are not talking about right of patients. It says:
    "A person may be placed in involuntary seclusion or minimal mechanical restraint only when there is imminent danger to the patient or others and tranquillisation is not - appropriate or not readily available".

    When we come to sub-clause (2), it says the seclusion or restraint shall be authorised. So before they can even do that,,the head of the facility should authorise sub-clause (1), which is what they would be doing as a staff.‘

    When we come to sub-clause(3), it sag/s documentation should immediately e placed in clinical notes. What about if the head of the facility is not there? He cannot place it immediately; he has to be present. .

    Mr Speaker, like mg Hon Colleague from Ayawaso said, w en we say, "not more than four hours in twenty-four hours", it is practically not implementable in law because some aggressive patients, they may want to restrain them or more than four hours. But again, the head of the facility should be involved. That is why in the law, I would have suggested that we only keep sub-clause (5), which says, ,

    "The seclusion or restraint shall be practised under strict institutional guidelines and shall not be used as punishment or for the convenience of staff "

    So we should give the heads of the facilities the leverage to print out these guidelines and then let the person work in a better way.

    . Mr Second Deputy Speaker: And in these matters, we ask ourselves, what harm can possibly occur by inclusion of these?

    Maybe, Dr Prempeh, you may want to help us.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, by and large, from clauses 1 to 5, l will single out clause 4 where we prescribe that seclusion should not be used for more than four hours. So even the head of the facility cannot in this law authorise for more than twelve hours in the twenty-four hour period. That is too restrictive because all mental disorders are not just the same.
    There was a documentary just recently in. the United Kingdom about using restraint and they have even come out with guidelines about a few months ago on mechanical restraint for psychiatic patients. So we must be careful.
    That is all I will say.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Just a moment, Hon Chairman.
    Assuming seclusion or restraint is deemed necessary for more than four hours in a 24-hour period, what happens?
    A1l1aji Muntaka: Mr Speaker, before I attempt to answer the question, I would Want all of us to pay attention to the fact that this law is not being made for only the orthodox facilities that we have. In this country, as much as 70 per cent of mental disorder is treated by the traditional faith based institutions and this law seeks to protect the right of these individuals. We assume all those who are treating people with mental disorder are people who are specially trained.
    Mr Speaker, let me add this. In dealing with this Bill, I had the privilege, together with the Hon Ranking Member, to visit the United Kingdom. Mr Speaker, we saw their law. It is even more detailed than this. This is because they say it is a new area, an area where abuse is very high. And because of the right of the individual, they want to legislate almost everything.
    As we talk now, that law is under review and they want to provide more details. That is their argument, that the right of the individual should not --- So we should have that at the back of our minds in making all the arguments that we want to make.
    I will want to agree, for example, with (4), that if we talk about the 24 hours and the four hours, why can we not put that in regulation, so that it becomes easier if We Want to change it. But Mr Speaker, it is important that these details are provided. This is because it is an area where abuse is very high and also, the area is such that it is not only done by specialists; it is an area in our country and Africa -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, that is in the very interest of the patients that the law seeks to protect, which we agree with in principle; what about if it is found necessary to restrain the patient for more than forty hours in a period of 24 hours - This is because it is mandatory provided for here that it shall not be more than four hours within a 24 - hour period.
    Now, if they find that it is necessary to even restrain for a longer period, what do we do? I can assure -you that the succeeding works and the patients being reviewed every 15 minutes, does not affect the prior. What do we do?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, the signal I am getting - even though I want to be guided by yesterday's comment by my Hon Colleague - is that, the technical people are supposed to just guide us but not to dictate to us what to do -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    They are very useful 4-
    Alhaji Muntaka
    They say even in mental health treatment, if there is anything that they need to do to a patient that will restrain him for more than four hours, it will retard his own development. They say so, that they do not need that medication they use as specialists -- They say if within 24 hours, they need to do anything to a patient for more than four hours, it will retard the person's own health.That is What they say. That is why they think it must be there to protect -
    I thought it should go into a regulation so that in regulation, when you want to amend, it will be easy. But. the signal they are giving will help all of us take the decision, so that we know, even though they are saying this, We want it this way. They are just providing that information, that it must be in the law just to protect and prevent abuse. This is because
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Deputy Majority Leader, I will come to you.
    Mrs Gifty Eugenia Kusi
    Mr Speaker, we understand what the Hon Chairman is saying and how he wants this law we are making, to look like. But Mr Speaker, we are in Ghana, we are in Africa. So if he is comparing What he went to see in Britain and thinks that we should import some of those things here, we are going to run into problems. The facilities in Britain and the personnel, the doctors, the number of doctors that we have there, and whatever they are doing there, Mr Speaker, if We want to apply those laws here, most things that happen in our health institutions, most people will be jailed. We cannot do that here.
    So Mr Speaker, let us do this per the African way of doing things, not the bad way. But we should look at our statistics and know the number of personnel we have, the sort of equipment we have and the quantum of resources that are available to us and pass this law.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    I thought you had to be guided by best global practices?
    Alhaji Pelpuo
    Mr Speaker, I am looking at clause 58 from the perspective of the memorandum that was presented to us. We are making a law to ensure that mental health patients -also have rights and so, if we say they have rights, it

    should be all the rights that we enjoy. It is also possible that one can restrain them unless there is a reason for that. So clause 58 deals with the reason for which one can do it. It should not be looked _at as if to suggest that any time they have a mental patient with them, then seclude him or her and then they have to do all the things that are prescribed in clause 58.

    These are cases that might come to them as a result of sub-clause (1), where the person might be a danger to himself or to another person, then they will have to use minimal restraint or minimal mechanical restraint. In that sense, Mr Speaker, it means, these are isolated cases where somebody has to be restrained.

    Even in that restraint, We need to be careful that they need to enjoy their rights.

    So I think that clause 58 is very important. Again, the fact that clause 4 prescribes these things, I thought it was not necessary to talk" about four hours and 24 hours. But if it is Within the rules of treatment of mental, disordered patients, that within four hours, they should be able to deal with him or her, then it is in order. _ Other than that, there are specific cases where people might still be hysterical or might still be dangerous even after four hours. In that sense, We will say that clause has to be worked on. - -

    Otherwise, Mr Speaker, I think the clause is necessary and We keep it only to do some work on clause 4. In that sense, I would want to suggest that where we come to clause 4 and we say four hours in 24 hours, we will add "at the instruction of the head of facility" -- [Interruption]-

    - Yes, here, we do not talk about four hours but if it is instructed, yes. He might instruct; otherwise, - It is 24 hours or "as instructed by the head of facility" so that we do not have these problems of four hours and a few personnel to deal with it.
    Mrs Frema Osei-Opare
    Mr Speaker, I heard the Hon Chairman of the Committee explaining that, this is to take care of patients who are not in hospitals and could be in camps and so on. In fact, if he says that, then I think clause 58 needs more work. This is because the point is, who is the head of the facility in the witch doctor's place? The man in the raffia and Whisk, is he the head of the facility? [Laughter] Who is the equivalent of a senior nurse‘? I am very concerned about some of the practices that take place in certain places like camps, whether it is a traditional camp or a religious camp.
    We have seen that there are things that go on that are not good. Let us then openly address that without ambiguity. But how we have put it, definitely, it is looking at the orthodox facility and that is where we are saying that these are people trained with certificates that is what allows one to practise as an accountant or whatever. There are guidelines that the person should be able to follow because in the medical field, one cannot just do anything when there are ethics and certain practices.
    When one is sued, one has to show that in this case, these are the steps one took and that one is justified and the court will judge whether one was justified or not.
    But to insist that this is going to be just for all the situations, I think we should go back to the drawing board and let us have clauses that are specific to the situations that we are talking about, that happen in camps, whether religious or traditional. This is because there is no senior nurse or head of facility.
    Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu
    Mr Speaker, I think clause 5 8 is something that we have to have a second look at. I was beginning to understand the position of Dr Matthew Prempeh and in particular, relating to sub-

    sections (3) and (4). I thought we could re-locate those into the institutional guidelines or the Instruments that may come there after. Mr Speaker, beyond that, you posed a relevant question that if there are any breaches, what happens? I listened to the Hon Chairman and I thought the Hon Chairman would throw some light on that.

    It does not appear to be any sanction regime for that; he rather went to clause 88, which captures offences, but it does not cover breaches in clause 58 at all; it does not. So we may have to have a second look at it - clause 88 is talking about anybody who deliberately neglects a person with mental dis order or subjects a person with mental disorder to discrimination under section 54, not section 58. .

    So we need, if we want to insist that they should be there, to fashion out a sanction regime in respect of clause 58. But I think there are a couple of them in clause 58 that we could re-locate to the guidelines. The Hon Chairman, however, has indicated to us that there is a strong opinion that would provide better details than even captured here. That is something else. But if he insists, then of course, we need to create a sanction regime for clause 58 to cover for any breaches.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members, one may be inclined, when it comes to human rights, to be a bit more detailed than normal. I believe the world is coming to accept that more, that lawmakers want to ensure that the object of their legislation is actually protected. So we may not worry too much about those subclauses (1), (2) and (3), but it would look to my mind that if we do not take care, we would rather be doing harm to the very person we are seeking to protect by the way sub-clause (4) is.
    Dr Anane
    Mr Speaker, I think this particular section has been flogged well- enough. There were so many things I should have said but I think it is not necessary. We may want to just look at sub-clause (4). Mr Speaker, I think as I mentioned earlier, we do not legislate practice. I would want to say that in the same vein, sub-clause (4) is legislating practice.
    Mr Speaker, I was only looking at it from another angle; the angle was, this law‘ is not just about orthodox practice; it is also about traditional medical practice and other practices and we know that there have been quite a lot of, so to speak, manhandling of patients in other practices and this clause was so much as constraining those who were there to realise the need for referral to those with the requisite facilities to be doing what they ought to be doing.
    But Mr Speaker, I still think that that notwithstanding, we can still take this particular sub-clause, put in the L.I. to ensure that it is also practised. Mr Speaker, yes, I appreciate what has been submitted;

    there is the need for learning from other jurisdictions; it is necessary, but we must customise what we learned.

    I have looked at all of them and I think in consideration, we believe that if we looked at sub-clause (4), take it out and put it under Regulations, it would help. But we may have to retain all the other subclauses.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, in that sense, I beg to move, that clause 58 (4) be deleted.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 58 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Chairman of the Committee, clause 63 -- debate to continue.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, yesterday, we had to stand down this because of the confusion with regard to "may advise" and "may assist". I have tried talking at the background with many of my Colleagues and the proposed amendment is that, we should use "may assist". So the rendition or the amendment will now read as follows - we had this and we had a lot of controversies, that is Why we stood it down.
    So clause 63(2) will now read as follows -- We are changing it because, yesterday, there was an issue of "suspect". So we are changing it to read as follows and Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I beg to read:
    "Where a worker is suffering from mental disorder, severe enough to affect the work output of the worker, the employer may assist the Worker to seek medical advice in accordance with "the prescribed procedure."

    This was done behind the scenes to be able to get this rendition. S0 Mr Speaker, if I could take it again, that clause 63 (2) should now read as follows -- Mr Speaker, when we used "employee", it was realised that we had to change the whole rendition by changing "worker" to "employer". But We wanted to maintain the "worker" so that we do not have to be changing -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Very well.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    S0 it will read as follows:
    "Where a worker is suffering from mental disorder, severe enough to affect the work output of the worker, the employer may assist the worker to seek medical advice in accordance with the prescribed procedure."
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members, the proposed amendment is for the consideration of the House. I understand there is a consensus on this. So I will put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    3.25 p.m. .
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, this one, again, upon consultation, it was decided that it should go to the new clauses. This is because, if you look at the tail end, we have a new clause, about voting rights.
    So we wanted to take this one to the new clauses where it will come under "Other rights" so that this one. would be added. So, with your indulgence, Mr Speaker, we would take this clause out of this place and rather put it when we. get to new clauses-
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So for the moment?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, for the time being, clause 63, the second one is abandoned; the (ix) is abandoned.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Abandoned at this stage?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, at this stage. _
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Thank you very much.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I would like to advert the Hon Chan-man's mind to some we have skipped; I am trying to locate it. We said that wherever there is the word "suspect", we should change it to something more amenable. This is because the House was not happy with the Word "suspect". We have gone through it and we have not revisited it.
    So we will have to come to it. _
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Rightly so, Mr Speaker. That was why in the consultation in the morning, many Hon Members agreed that we should just take away the word "suspect" and try to reconstruct the sentence without it. So I think he is right that wherever we find the Word "suspect", we need to look at it.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    And replace it with what?
    Dr Prempeh
    MI Speaker, let me help. I thought his -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    It is quite clear -
    Dr Prempeh
    Yes. I thought the current amendment was going to - So I was looking through- I think some of us have different versions of the Mental
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members, are we in a position to complete with clause 63 and then we make other progress?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I am saying that he should look at clause 63 (2), he would see the word "suspect" there; it is there. So that was what we had tried to re-engineer into "where a worker is suffering from" and I think Mr Speaker has already put the Question on that.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, what the Hon Member for Manhyia is saying is that, it appeared yesterday that we wanted to substitute another for . "suspect", wherever it occurs in the Bill. But we must be cautious about it, because this one is contextual. - So, maybe, in certain provisions in the Bill, if you change the word "suspect", it may not bring out the meaning.
    We will have to leave it entirely to the discretion of the draftspersons to select which areas that the rationale behind the substitution of "suspect" with a more befitting word will fit in.
    Mr Mann
    I remember, Mr Speaker, yesterday I said, for this particular one, instead of "suspect", we could say "where the employer has reasonable cause to believe that" then we continued, instead of "suspect" which is more derogatory and can be abused. This is because when you say he has "cause to believe", then the person can challenge him that, "prove", and then he will now have to prove the cause that he has to believe that the person has had that ailment.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    "Reasonable cause to believe" -
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I remember this argument yesterday about the use of the "reasonable cause" and in that case, with your indulgence,I would want to further propose an amendment to clause 63 (2).
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 63, sub-clause (2), line l, delete "suspects a Worker to be" and insert "has reasonable cause to believe that a worker is." So the sub-clause would now read:
    "Where an employer has a reasonable cause to believe that a worker is suffering from mental disorder, severe enough to affect the work output of the worker, the employer may assist the worker to seek medical advice in accordance with the prescribed procedure."
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, if you will kindly repeat what this new rendition will help us to achieve, maybe, your Hon Friend on the other side Would appreciate what you want to arrive at. .
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I agree that there was an agreement behind the scenes to a construction which we did and I put forward earlier. But the concern raised by some of our Hon Colleagues on the floor is what is warranting the further amendment.
    So the simple reason is that, when you say "where a worker is suffering", they are asking, "How do you know that the person is suffering?" That is why we needed to bring back the issue of "Where there is reasonable cause to believe." So that it is not about suspicion but that there will be something that is leading you into thinking that the person is suffering.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, this is but a tiny amendment if the Hon Chairman would address his mind to it. When you go to subclauses 2 and 3, we are envisaging that a Colleague notices something bad is happening and he is advising you or the employer is advising you to seek help -- I would have ended it there because when you go from "seek medical advice in-accordance with the prescribed procedure," I thought it was redundant.
    So that if he looks at it, "seek medical advice." Which procedure does the employer know? But it "does not matter; we can take the vote on that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    If it does not matter, we will proceed.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, it has to do with the labour laws and other relevant -- So that is the procedure that we are talking of. _
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 63 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 76 - Offender with Mental disorder.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, with a lot of difficulty, I am to move this amendment again. This is because we were still divided even at the background. People were thinking that we should -- but there is a proposal that we can all look at, which majority at the background discussion agreed to that: "A court may authorise for psychiatric assessment on a person who attempts suicide," to replace what we have as a compromise to still capture within the Bill, the issue of psychiatric assessment on people who attempt suicide.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 76, sub-clause (10), delete and insert
    "A court may authorise for psychiatric assessment on a person who attempts suicide."
    This is a compromise to still capture the issue of psychiatric assessment on people Who attempt suicide the Bill.
    Mr Manu
    Mr Speaker, I think I can go with that amendment, because in that case, the person has attempted to commit suicide and we are interested in finding out why he made that attempt. So the court, in its own wisdom, refers the person to a psychiatrist. In that case, I do not have any problem In yesterday's case -
    _ Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Very well. So you do not have any problem.
    Let us make progress. Let us leave yesterday to yesterday. Hon Frema Opare
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Mr Speaker, Irise to support the amendment that the Chairman has proposed even though the exact words we agreed to have been amended. It is also to ‘establish the fact that our law says attempted suicide is a criminal act and, therefore, it is for the court to decide. And we think this rendition reflects things better.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.

    Clause 76 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.

    Clause 80 - Financing of mental healthcare.

    Alhaji Muntaka; Mr Speaker, there was a proposal that because this House is privileged to have the National Health Insurance Act (NHIA) currently in the House and in the Committee, why are we not rather going to put this in that law rather than to put it here? So there was this background discussion that, if you place it here, are we going to still repeat it in the Act, which is already in hand?

    The understanding was that we should drop this amendment, so that we will all take note and when the National Health Insurance Act, which is currently before the Committee, is at the Consideration Stage ,we will make room for it. This is a very, very important omission when Act 650 was being promulgated. It was not deliberate, but with the practice of National Health Insurance currently and the advantage that it has given to many facilities Within the Ghana Health Service and even the private sector

    So we would want I to drop this amendment and take it when we get to the National Health Insurance Act.
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Mr Speaker, I do not want to be difficult. But we know a Bill is an intent, it has not been passed. ‘We have a National Health Insurance Act and we are saying, let them be entitled. That is all. So nothing stops us from agreeing that they should be entitled. ‘When we get to the National Health Insurance Act, then we will put it there because it is already approved. We do have a viable National Health Insurance Act; we cannot look at an intent, which is the Bill that is there, which we have not tackled. So I do not see why we should

    not make this an important clause part of this Act. So we should make it.
    Alhaji Fuseini
    Mr Speaker, I rise to support the Hon Member who made the last statement.
    Indeed, the opening sentence in clause 80 (1) "in addition to provisions under the National Health Insurance Act". So this law recognises that there is a law that recognises a category of people who benefit under a law. This provision is seeking to add to the list. So we cannot delete it; it must be part of the law.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, do you lose anything in having this retained and we make progress?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, since it is not illegal to keep them in both, it may have been better --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    It is quite common; a right may derive from three or four laws; it does not spoil anything.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    All right Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 80, sub-clause (1), delete and insert the following: »
    "In patients and out-patients with mental dis order are entitled to health care benefits as specified under the National Health Insurance Scheme."
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Why do you want to use "as specified" and why not "have more benefits under the National Health Insurance Scheme"? [Pause]
    Mrs Kusi
    None

    and Dr Prempeh ---rose--
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members on their feet will continue to be on their feet and when they are called, then they may make their submissions.
    Hon Minority Chief Whip?
    Mrs Kusi
    Mr Speaker, I think under the National Health Insurance, people are paying premium and we are advocating for free mental healthcare in this country. So if one says that it is a minimum health benefit, will they pay something? This is because they are not there under exemptions in the National Health Insurance. So let us do it properly; we are advocating for free mental healthcare. If the Hon Minister will help us.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    I was going to call Hon Dr Prempeh, but do not start making your submission until you are called.
    Hon Osei-Opare.
    Mrs Osei-Opare
    Mr Speaker, we should not assume that anybody who has a mental problem is in the category of indigene. It is not so. If you are an indigene, whether it is mental health or it is malaria, you will be treated. So frankly, I do not see why we should complicate the matter at all. It should be that mental health should be part and parcel of the National Health Insurance Scheme.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I beg to say that my Hon Colleagues are confused. In this country of ours -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Everybody is confused except your good- self? Hon Dr Prempeh, you will withdraw that. You do not need that preamble to be able to make a good contribution. Please!
    Dr Premepeh
    Mr Speaker, I withdraw ‘E at. Current Government Policy is that, all those with mental disorders have free mental healthcare. It has not changed. That is the current government policy; so we do not need to legislate. I agree -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Government may change its policy but that right under this law will remain a legal right.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I have not finished.
    In the National Health Insurance Law, the payment of mental health is not part of the basket of cases. So, the best place, even when we do, like the Chairman has advocated, that:
    "In-patients and out-patients with. metal disorder are entitled to health- care benefits as specified under the National Health Insurance Scheme".
    Go and look at Act 650; there is nothing like that in there.
    If it is a mental disorder, they have not provided for under the NHIS law. That is my problem, that, even if We put here that they should go under the NI-HS, We are short-hanging them. This is because the policy is that they enjoy free healthcare and if they go -- Unless Government Withdraws that policy and says that from now on, mental health patients should also pay premiums.
    The treatment for mental healthcare is free in this country. So if the Government is announcing to Ghanaians, that from now, if you go for mental health treatment, you have to go for insurance before. you are treated, let the Government come out and let us debate that policy publicly. This is because mental healthcare treatment is free in the country and anybody who is going under National Health Insurance, apart from the exempt group, which is for treatment of medical conditions, not for mental health.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, I think when you say as specified in the Act, whether it is there or not, the Act is the one which is to provide what he is talking about When he says the thing is flee as a policy, indeed, it also has a complication.The complication is that, those who have mental disorders or mental patients, when they are treated for malaria or any other ailment, they are made to pay or they do not even get the treatment. So in the current law that we are making, the thing has to be -- they should benefit as under the Insurance Scheme.
    The way it is provided, I think must - the amendment that has been made, I think that a policy, when translated into a legislation, makes it much more obligatory than just making it a policy. It can be withdrawn anytime and even currently, the confusion is when to treat this person for another ailment when he is treated for the mental ailment itself.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker! If you are fighting for a person's right, you prefer a law to a policy. If we are to make progress, let Hon Members help us to translate the rights under a policy into a concrete law and I think we would have been doing a better service in the interest of those persons. But one thing is, let us not shy away from legislation because of some existing policy; as for policy, it cannot be the same as a right that accrues from a legislation by Parliament.
    Mr Manu
    Mr Speaker, mental health and mental disorder is a special case that is being legislated for. It does not even have to be a government policy. If the

    Parliament of Ghana believes that people with mental disorder should have free treatment, we can make, the law. Government would have to abide by it. One does not have to be an indigene before he can benefit from mental health treatment freely. He can be the millionaire of Ghana but if he has mental disorder, the law is that he should have it flee. We in this House have every capacity to make that law.

    So let us put it in the law that mental patients should be given flee treatment and it would be law. This would rather drive the policy of Government.If it is law, then Government policy Will have to fulfil this law rather than the reverse -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, if you look at the amendment there and if we were to say in-patients and out-patients with mental disorders are entitled to free healthcare and we stop there, do you not think it will be in the interest of mental health patients?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, you would be right. Currently, it is flee but the challenge is that -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    It is free by dint of any operation of law. No. A1haji Muntaka: Currently, there is an existing policy that says that -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    We want to migrate from policy into law?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, the challenge is that if it is not under the National Health Insurance Scheme, there would be no claims to the reimbursement .
    But we all know in this country, and I can say, with the few years that I have spent on the Health Committee, each time there are budget consideration and poor releases, it is the facility that suffers. the
    Alhaji Fuseini
    Yes, it may be an endless case of using money to treat people who are mentally challenged. It may be a daunting task' for Ghana to deal with people who have mental problems. But clearly, it is the responsibility of this country and all of us, to treat and deal with our fellow brothers and sisters who have mental conditions. So, vie should not run away from it.
    In fact,just take a Walk along the streets of Accra or Tamale Central, all the people that one sees who have mental challenges are out-patients. Do we not have a responsibility to deal with them? We do. Yes, so it must be in and out-patients. So that we can deal holistically with the menace.
    But, Mr Speaker, your amendment is what I have risen up to support and that is -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    The Speaker does not make amendments - [Laughter]
    Alhaji Fuseini
    Mr Speaker, the suggested amendment to this provision, clearly, is coming from Wise -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Is a recommendation for the consideration of the Hon Chairman.
    Alhaji Fuseini
    Mr Speaker, it is coming from wise counsel and I think that if we go along that path, it could help us to lift up a policy decision into law and make it binding on any authority that will be charged with the responsibility of administrating this Act.
    ' Mr Second Deputy Speaker: I would take the last contribution, then the Hon Chairman. I have heard everybody else.
    Dr Asare
    Mr Speaker, reading this clause 80, I am under the impression that we are not talking about treatment of mental illness. The treatment of mental illness is free. And there should be no attempt to --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Member, it is free by dint of what? Is there a law that mandates it to be free or it is a policy that accommodates it to be free?
    Dr Asare
    Mr Speaker, we need to put in a law then. But this clause 80 is talking about other medical conditions suffered by people with mental illness having other medical conditions.
    We have a minimum healthcare package in this country and that does not include mental health. So, it is talking about those people with mental illness who come down with other medical conditions and that is what this clause 80 is talking about.
    So, if we need to put in another clause to talk about making it free, then we have to do it. But to my understanding, this is not talking about the treatment of mental illness. It is talking about treatment of those with mental illness who come down with other medical conditions.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, the suggestion is that we just stand it down." Before we get to the end, the Hon Ranking Member could keep some consultation and let us see whether we could get a compromised position, so that we come back to it. When we get to the end, which is about clause 90, or is it clause 91 -
    Mr Second.Deputy Speaker
    So, Hon Chairman, where are we now‘?
    Alhaji Mnntaka
    Mr Speaker, We Want to stand it down and move .on to clause 81, so that we will come back to it, with your indulgence. .
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Clause 80 stood down accordingly.
    Clauses 81 and 82 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 83 -Accounts and audit
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 83, sub-clause (2), line l, delete "A" and insert "The".
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 83 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clauses 84 and 85 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 86 - Limitation on contractual liability
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 86 -- delete.
    At the Committee's deliberation, it was found that it was not very relevant to be here.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 86 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    - Clause 87 - Court referrals.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 87 - delete.
    It is also not very relevant to this Act. Question put and clause deleted.
    Clause 88 - Offences.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 88 - Add the following sub-clause:
    "Anybody who deliberately says or does anything that stigmatises any person with a present or past mental disorder, commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than one hundred penalty units or to a term of imprisonment of not more than three months or to both the fine and imprisonment."
    Mr Speaker, We want to divide clause 88 into (a) and (b). So, We are introducing a new sub-clause.
    Alhaji Fuseini
    Mr Speaker, I rise to oppose the amendment. I am opposing the amendment because this is a provision that cannot be enforced. It says:
    "Anybody who deliberately says .. ."» and there is a musician called ‘Abodam'. If I say "Abodam" or does anything - If a mad man is approaching my house and I lock the door - These are verbs and they must be translated in their ordinary meaning. So Mr Speaker, if you put these in a law, then all of us are at risk. It cannot be enforced. Mr Speaker, once again:
    "Anybody who deliberately says or does anything that stigmatises any person with a present or past mental disorder commits an offence . . ."
    ‘Says' is by altering anything by words and in local parlances, there are many things that We say that clearly show that somebody has the ‘faculties' mixed up. Does that stigmatise that person? So Mr Speaker, this is not good law.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, supposed somebody, acting in good faith - as a referee, someone wants to go and take a job in the security forces and you may have to write a confidential repo-it on your knowledge about the mental state of that person. The moment that person says: " I feel stigmatised", then you are in trouble.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    No, Mr Speaker, it is made to look so simple. Mr Speaker, I just want to draw the attention of all of us -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    The mischief would be that, because of that people would not tell the truth and then the gun is put in that person's hands and he goes to do some more havoc. How would you feel, Mr Chairman?
    Alhaji _Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, the qualifying Word here is "deliberate". The reason is that, like in the convention for the rights of persons with "disability, it is stated that, especially in Africa, stigmatisation is one of the main causes of advanced mental disorder. This is because when it starts at the early stages, because of stigmatisation, people even hide till it gets to a stage that managing it becomes difficult.
    If you can take away stigmatisation, people could get early treatment so that you Will not get many aggravated situations. That is why an effort is made and it is being qualified by "deliberate".
    If you deliberately - [Interruption] It is "deliberate", it is there. Anybody who deliberately - it is Deliberately", the Word there is "deliberately" You deliberately try to stigmatise the person; I mean you reduce the person's human feeling.
    The person feels like he is not a human being. When you are deliberately doing it; in fact, during the discussion in the early stages, when we were looking at this Bill-
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, the problem here is that, we are creating an offence without taking our time to define the criminal act. What is provided here is very big. If the Chairman would go back and then define what constitutes stigmatisation, that will help. This is because in criminal matters, when you are accused of stealing, the "stealing" is defined; when you are accused of murder, "murder". is defined.
    But here, somebody is being accused of stigmatisation without the definition of what constitutes "stigmatisation". I think that will help to solve the problem posed by the Hon Deputy Minister for Energy.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, I think we will stand down this for you to do some -
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Alright, Mr Speaker. No objection;
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members, there is no listed amendment for clause 89 for consideration of the House.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, in clause 89, it is not advertised by the health institution and facility, the number is now known; it is 829.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So you would make an amendment by adding that?
    Clause 89 -Application of Act.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 89, sub-clause (1), line (4), after "Act" insert "829, 2011."
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Alhaji Muutaka
    Mr Speaker, I would want to further amend clause 89. We do not currently have the traditional and Alternative Medicine Act- it is currently

    before this House; it is not yet passed. I would Want to propose that after the ‘end ' we should delete everything and rather put "other laws" so that line (4), delete "from the" to the end and in its place insert "other laws."

    Mr Speaker, I beg to move.

    Question put and Amendment agreed to.

    Clause 89 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.

    Clause 90 - Regulations .
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 90, sub-clause (1), lines l and 2, delete "Chief Executive of the Mental Health Service in consultation with the Board".
    The new rendition would be:
    "The Minister may, by Legislative Instrument, make regulation to (a) Question put and amendment agreed to. _
    Alhaj Muntaka:Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that clause 90, sub-clause (1), paragraph (j), delete and insert the following:
    "provide for further matters in. respect of the Tribunal."
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, I would want to find out from the Chairman why he is not being specific about "further matters" in respect of the the tribunal, We can only think of two matters - composition and jurisdiction. I do not know whether he has any other further matter.
    Mr Chireh
    The other matters include the guidelines as to how they should operate. There are so many things to be detailed out. We debated it quite a lot about this.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, I think that the Hon Member is not understanding what I am saying. I am saying that with tribunal, we have only two matters which can be dealt-with, that is, composition of the tribunal and the jurisdiction. So why do you make it vague, not being specific?
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, we are making it broad. If we say "to provide for the tribunal" then it means that in this, you have composition, you also sometimes have the procedure and guidelines for their operation.
    People are worried about how these would be operated. That is why it is much better to leave it open-ended, to include other things rather than specify on the composition and the jurisdiction. If you do that, then the other things cannot come in easily.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    And of course, it does not spoil anything; if there is a need, you use it. It is a window of opportunity and if you do not need it, you do not use it.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 90, sub-clause (1), paragraph (k), delete and insert the following:
    "provide for further matters in respect of Visiting Committees".
    Alhaji Fuseini
    Indeed Mr Speaker, I looked at the amendment and I think that there is a fundamental problem here. It says: "to provide for further matters". The introductory sentence in clause 90 (I) --
    "The Minister, on the advice of the Chief Executive of the Mental Health Service and in consultation with the Board may, by legislative instrument, make Regulations to.

    "(k) provide for visiting committees."

    Does it mean that there are already some regulations placed somewhere, so that the Minister is by legislative instrument, making for further - That is my difficulty. "Further" means additional.

    So you do not need further in that sentence if there is not in place regulations regulating the visiting committees. So it ought to read --

    "The Minister, may by legislative instrument, make Regulations to provide for matters" --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, are you with him? Are you with the Hon Deputy Minister? Please, be with him.
    Yes, Hon Deputy Minister, go on.
    Alhaji Fuseini
    It should be: "The Minister may by legislative instrument, make Regulations to provide for matters in respect of visiting committees".
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I see that.
    It would cure the same problem if we just say, "make Regulations to provide for matters in respect to the visiting committees". I think it would give us the same - All right, with your permission, let me hear from the former Minister.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, it is because many of us, sometimes, were not in when We were debating this Bill. If you look at the provisions under the existing ones, there are extensive provisions there. And if you just mention the "Visiting Committees", then you say what you are saying. But if you look at the detailed provisions there, we are further providing for because it has been very extensively provided for in terms of the law itself. That is why the "further" is important.
    Alhaji Fuseini
    Mr Speaker, I agree that there is a provision and that is at clause 35 running to 38; I agree. But these provisions are not by Regulation. There is the substantive law; these are the substantive provisions of the Bill. But what I am saying is that if you look at the amendment, the Regulations in clause 90 (1) cover all matters thereafter. So we are saying that the Minister, may, by legislative instrument, make Regulations to provide for further matters.
    So all matters that are regulated by Regulations, new Regulations must be made for these matters. That is what I understand the provision to mean.. And since we do not already have a place, Regulations regulating visiting committees, we cannot make further Regulations for them.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, I tend to side with the Hon Member for Wa West, Hon Joseph Yieleh Chireh.
    Mr Speaker, it is this principal enactment which is giving‘ the power for the elaborate provisions to be made. With regard to the tribunal, I have just realised that there are extensive provisions regulating the provisions, the functions and all other issues. So if we are empowering the Minister to do anything, he is only to add to it. And it is the principal Act which is enabling the Minister to do it
    So there is nothing wrong with that. And that is what has been fashioned in most of instruments which have come before the House.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Yieleh Chireh, the rendition therefore, would be -
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, he is saying we should drop "further"; but I am saying, that given the extensive nature of" the provisions we made in the main law -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So that the Chairman's original -
    Mr Chireh_
    Yes -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, for the avoidance of doubt, would you please, repeat it?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, the further proposal was that we should abandon the earlier amendment and - or maybe, the proposal is that between "the" and "tribunal" or between "for" and "visiting" we should put "matters for the". So that it would read: "provide for matters for the visiting committee".
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, if you look in the law, we have provided for a lot of matters concerning the visiting committee and the tribunal. But there may be other matters that we have not been able to consider as part of the parent law and those matters, We have to give the Minister the opportunity, by legislation -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    We have got the principle; now the rendition.
    Dr Prempeh
    But Mr Speaker, what is on the Order Paper is just right. And I would want you to put the matter on hold.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, would you then please, for the avoidance of doubt, repeat what you want - "Provide for further matters in respect of the tribunal"?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    That is what we have here. What do you want us to have?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, let us just keep it as proposed on the Bill,"in respect of the visiting committee".
    Mr Speaker, for example, clause 90 (1) paragraph (k), we are deleting and inserting the following:
    "provide for further matters in respect of visiting committees".
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, this is something I need your advice on. Throughout the Bill, there is only one part we talked about offences. -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Dr Prempeh, does it affect clause 90?
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, yes, in clause 90 (2), that is why I am drawing your attention to it. _
    Offences are catered for in clause 88 and the only offence listed in clause 88 is breaches of section 54.- Now, it is only clause 54 and others that We have agreed on. But when you come to clause 90 (2):
    "A person who commits an offence under the Regulations is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than five thousand penalty units".
    In the parent law itself, it is up to five hundred - ". . . of not more than five hundred penalty units". So the regulations cannot have offences with a higher penalty units than the main law.
    So I think we should probably interchange them if you will agree.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I think my Hon Colleague is perfectly right. It has just escaped us because we have always tried to get this consistency, that in the main Act, the penalty there should be harsher than in the Regulation. So I

    would want to move an amendment to clause 88, that lines 4 and 5 - Mr Speaker, clause 88 has been stood down, so I can just amend clause 90 (2), so that when we are reconsidering clause 88, we can take care of it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker
    So What will be your rendition?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    My rendition should read as follows: clause 90, sub-clause (2) after "fine" "of not more than five hundred penalty units".
    Alhaji Pelpuo
    Mr Speaker, I think that some of the offences under the Regulations might be so severe that if we prescribe five hundred, it is almost as if you are encouraging people to commit the crime. So I think we have to either take our time to know What are the offences under the Regulations, so that we can level the right kind of penalties because five hundred is almost like nothing compared to five thousand originally. Maybe, if we could say three thousand or
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker,I would Want to agree with --- I am Sony, I seem to be agreeing with everybody. But I think it is important that at least, the one in the parent Act should be higher than the five thousand. We could give a range but under the Regulation, it should not be that five hundred. So Mr Speaker, I would want to abandon the amendment that I proposed, that we keep the five thousand here; when we come to the parent Act, we will amend the five hundred to either higher or maintain the same five thousand. So I would want to abandon it.
    Mr Ben A. Banda
    Mr Speaker, for all the offences or punishments' we have done so far, they either attract a fine or a custodial sentence or so. But with respect to. clause 90 (2), I have realised that the offence here attracts only a fine but there is no custodial sentence. I think for consistency sake, we have to add a custodial sentence.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, we will leave that to the draftsperson because in almost all that we have done, it is only not the penalty units, it has always been "or" or "both". So we will leave that to the draftsperson for" the appropriate "custodial sentence".
    - Mr Second Deputy Speaker: So you would want -them to put in the corresponding "custodial sentence" that will match the five thousand?
    I so direct that the draftspersons should put in the corresponding "custodial sentence".
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 90 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 91 - Interpretation.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 91 -- Interpretation of "service user", delete and insert the following:
    "Service user" means a person who - has received or is receiving mental healthcare".
    " Mr Speaker, I am further amending What has been advertised. So I am taking "or is receiving".
    So that it reads:
    "Service user means a person who has received mental healthcare".
    So I take it again, Mr Speaker, with your indulgence. Clause 91 - Interpretation of "service user", delete and insert the following.

    "Service user means a person who has received mental healthcare".
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I do not know why the Chairman has taken out "the person who is currently receiving" because he rather, like just the ordinary meaning of "service user" is the one who is receiving healthcare. So I do not know why you want to classify somebody who is no longer receiving mental healthcare as a service user.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, the one receiving is a patient. _
    Mr Speaker, if you will remember that when we were constituting the tribunal and the visiting committees, there was an issue with regard to the convention and the need for them to have a representative.
    There, we used the "service user" and all of ‘us agreed that when We get to interpretation, we would define it appropriately to mean a person who- has served on those committees, which is going to include somebody who is a patient and that is going to create confusion or complications for us.
    That was why when We were dealing with tribunal and visiting committees, we agreed that the service user should be someone who has received and the one who is receiving, should be classified as patient. .
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Pelpuo; Mr Speaker, I just Wanted to find out whether it is inpatient or in- patient. Because if you put a hyphen there, it would read in-patient. So that this one cannot be read as inpatient.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    The Hon Deputy Minority Leader is saying that between "in" and "patient" there should be a hyphen.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, un- fortunately, that is not what we are dealing with the second amendment, which is talking about the "service user". The Hon Chairman skipped the first amendment; he should have raised it. So the Question you are about to put is correct.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So, should we come back Hon Deputy Majority Leader?
    _ Mr Pelpuo:Yes. -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, you are with me.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Now, the amendment under (xx).
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, the Interpretation, add the following new provision:
    Clause 91 -- Interpretation, add the following new provision:
    "In patient care' includes provision of quality housing, sanitation, food, lighting, beds, mosquito nets and essential medicine."
    Mr Speaker, we are putting a hyphen between the "in" and "patient" so that it will remain as one word.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    "in- patient", one word. Hon Members, the proposed amendment is for the consideration of the House.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 9l as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clauses 92.--- 94 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    New clause -- Establishment of the Mental Health Fund.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, add the following new clauses: New Clause - Add the following new clauses:
    "Establishment of the Mental Health Fund
    1.There is established by this Act a Mental Health Fund:
    Object of the Fund (1) The object of the Fund is to provide financial resources for the care and management of persons suffering from mental disorders.
    (2) To achieve its object, moneys of the Fund shall be applied as follows:
    (a) towards the basic material support of persons suffering from mental dis orders;
    (b) for the skills training of persons with mental disorders;
    (c) for any matter connected with the res cue, rehabilitation and
    Alhaji Muntaka
    reintegration of persons with mental disorders;
    (d) towards the construction of facilities for persons with mental disorders;
    (e) for training, capacity building and research. - Sources of money for the Fund
    3. The moneys for the Fund include: -(a) voluntary contributions‘ to the- Fund from individuals, organisations and the private sector;
    (b) the amount of money that Parliament may approve for payment into the Fund;
    (c) grants from bilateral and multilateral sources;
    (d) donations and gifts; and
    (e) money from any other source approved by the Minister responsible for Finance. Bank Accounts for the Fund
    4. The moneys for the Fund shall be paid into bank accounts opened for the Fund with the approval of the Controller and Accountant-General.
    Management of the Fund
    5. The Fund shall be managed by the Board of the Mental Health Authority which shall for this purpose include a representative of the Controller and Accountant- General.

    Functions of the Board with respect to the Fund

    6. The Board shall:

    (a) make recommendations to the Minister on mental health matters;

    (b) pursue policies to ensure the achievement of the object of the . Fund;

    (c) liaise with Government agencies and organisations to promote the rehabilitation and reintegration of persons suffering from mental dis orders;

    (d)prepare guidelines and procedures for the management and disbursements from the Fund;

    (e) conduct research on inter- national and _ regional developments and standards on mental health matters; and (ii) deal with any matter concerned " with mental health.

    Tax Exemption

    " The Fund is exempt from payment of tax .

    Accounts and Audit and Annual Reports of the Fund

    8. The provisions on accounts and audit and submission of annual reports to Parliament in sections 83 and 84 of this Act apply to the Fund."
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker I rise to support the inclusion of these new clauses in the parent Bill. But Mr Speaker, I thought we had agreed with the Chairman
    Dr Prempeh
    that for the management of the Fund, the only external person who was coming in to manage the Fund was the representative of the Controller and Accountant-General. I thought that, we should make that person the Chairman.

    If the reason we are establishing the Fund and bringing the Controller and Accountant-General's representative on board, is for management of the Fund. Because we know it is about money, and he probably may be the only person with the requisite knowledge about accountancy, even on the Board. So for transparency we should say that he is the Chairman and not an ordinary member. Otherwise, all the other members will call for meetings and even neglect him and he will become a non-functioning member of the Board.
    Alhaji Pelpuo
    Mr Speaker, I was looking at the sources of money of the Fund and I am wondering - I would want to find out fi‘0m the Chairman whether there is no possibility that this facility may be able to generate funds, and cannot such funds be ploughed into the Fund. If it is possible, can we take care of that, so that if there is an internal generated find (IGF), which can be put in the Fund, even though it belongs to them, whether it is not possible to put that money into the Find?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, firstly, with the suggestion by my Hon Colleague,
    Hon Dr Prempeh, yes, he is right. But my fear is that the representative from the Controller and Accountant-General, if we are not careful, if he is not too keen about mental health, could create serious impediments in their operations. But I think that if you look at the rendition, Mr Speaker, it says that "which shall for this purpose".
    It makes it mandatory that anytime they are holding that meeting that has to do with the Fund, that person is -- unless otherwise, he wants us to put other things that could, may be explicitly state that they will not hold meetings of the Fund without the representative from Controller and Accountant-General.
    But even that, Mr Speaker, my fear is that, then if the person does not take the issues of mental health seriously, they could forever not be able to meet and he would continue to frustrate them. So we need to be able to create a balance. I agree with him, because the Board already exists; they could always go and they would form a quorum and they would hold, a meeting without the person. But if you are not careful and you want to give that person a mandatory presence, so many things may go wrong. But I agree that if we could find a middle person -
    The second one has to do with what the Hon Deputy Majority Leader said, I think I agree with him. We should maybe, be able to -- if he can generate a rendition that would mean they can also invest some of the resources.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Work out a rendition?
    Alhaji (Dr) Ahmed Yakubu Alhassan
    Mr Speaker, I would have thought that in the case of managing funds, such as this, it must be a group of stakeholders who should be managing the funds. In the absence of that, it becomes an internal administrative management system, and that is why I think that the only person coming from outside the service should be the person chairing it.
    I would have gone further to say that, it must be the Controller and Accountant- General himself or his representative and not just a representative coming from the Controller and Accountant-General's Department.
    I so submit.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, before I proffer a suggestion, it is very important, like my Hon Colleague from Mion (Dr Ahmed Alhassan) just said. The reason I am proffering that is that, this is a management of a Fund that has been established separately from the management of the Mental Health Authority.
    But now, we find all those members of the Mental Health Authority being members for managing the Fund. So we do not know, there is a huge conflict of interest. But the only external person we have put on this Fund is the Controller and Accountant-General. So it is note taking that he chairs.
    The treason my Hon Colleague for Asawase gave, that he would be an impediment, everybody can be an -impediment. But when we are talking about quorum for meetings, it has got nothing to with the management of the Fund. This, you have institutionalised now, they have to call a meeting to take decisions. Who is going to call the meeting? We have not established who is even going to chair before We talk about how many times they would meet.

    If we look at the National Health Insurance Authority where probably these clauses were lifted, we have met as places at committee to try and even insulate it from the Board or the Authority itself. So we have a real problem especially if the Fund starts getting a lot of money, which I hope they do, then it would become -- We are taking the money from here to here and who is really going to control it?

    So either we bring a different set of people to manage the Fund as we have done in the National Health Management Authority and we have put it under somebody. Or the only external person coming should really chair and make sure that the right thing is done. And I support my Hon Colleague who has made further reference to that that we should put the Controller and Accountant-General or his personal representative on the chair.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, can we put these things together and make one proposed amendment?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Rightly so, Mr Speaker. I thought that Hon Yieleh Chireh was bringing a proposed rendition or amendment that may take care of these concerns.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, in the management of the Fund, number 5, "the Fund shall be managed by the Board of the Mental Health Authority which shall for this purpose include the Controller and Accountant-General or his representative who shall be chairperson"-
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, "the Board" here refers to the Board of the Mental Health Authority and the chairperson should be appointed by the President and not by statutory prescription. The chairperson of statutory Boards and other members are appointed by the President-
    Dr Alhassan
    Mr Speaker, my understanding is that, the Board of the Mental Health Authority has a Chairman in there and I consider this Fund Management Committee to be a sub- committee of that Board; that is my understanding. Except that an external person would be invited and we are ensuring that because it is an internal committee and the Board is running the entire service, is also managing the Fund. For purposes of security We are saying that this external person only should Chair it
    Otherwise, it would become people who are generating the money, managing the money and spending the money at the same time. There must be some flesh air from outside to help in the regulation.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So would the law say clearly that it is the subcommittee? Shall we say that for the avoidance of doubt?
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, I, therefore, further move, that the Management Committee of the Fund should be Members of the Board - In fact, I think we should even limit the number of Members on the Board. We have stood down a number of things but this one is a particular thing which I wanted us to be very clear on.
    The point my Hon Colleague made is very important because what we have done is, we have lifted this from the Anti- Human Trafficking Law and in that law made the Board to be responsible so there is a deep problem about operationalising

    that law, I happen to know that. Therefore, we should set up the Management Committee of the Fund. The Board would still have the overall responsibility, so instead of saying that the Board should be the one, the same Board has this same function, we should make it read, "a management committee or a smaller body which would be a committee "with the Controller and Accountant-General Chairing it"- Now, I cannot readily provide that amendment but I think that it should not be the same Board.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    That is to capture the idea that it is the sub- committee of the Board?
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, the sub- committee of the Board under the Chairmanship of the Controller and Accountant-General.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I want to bring this proposal for consideration: ‘The Fund shall be managed by a sub- committee of the Board of the Mental Health Authority which shall, for this purpose, not exceed five members including the Controller and Accountant- General as \Chairperson or his personal representative
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I totally agree with the composition. [Interruptions]
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Order! Order! Hon Dr Prempeh, please, proceed.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I totally agree with the Chairman of the Committee.
    This should be a five member subcommittee, it should have a Chairperson who shall be the Controller and Accountant-General or his representative. The four other members should be appointed from the Board.
    Dr Prempeh


    Mr Speaker, what I am trying to say is that, I agree with the Chairman of the Committee, this should be a five member subcommittee of the Board, the Chairman of that Committee should be the Controller and Accountant-General or his representative which we have agreed on.

    The four other members should be nominated by the Board - [Interruptions] - they are dominated by the Board so the Board can co¢opt its members or take part of its members or bring in from other side. We are not restricting them but that five member committee is the subcommittee of the Board and everyone has the power in the law to co-opt members from outside. So it should be "five member committee chaired by the Controller and Accountant-General with four other persons".

    4.55 p_.m

    Alhaji Muntaka; Mr Speaker, I would want the Hon Ranking Member to come in.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    With the final solution.
    Dr Anane
    Hopefully,MrSpeaker. We do appreciate that there is the need for a subcommittee.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Yes.
    Dr Anane
    We do appreciate that it should not be more than the five as proposed But, Mr Speaker, the difficulty

    is about putting the Controller and Accountant-General as the Chairman. We would wish that a Member of the Board could be the Chairman of that sub- committee. But the Board must have the discretion to nominate other people with specialised knowledge who would come in to manage this Fund. Because this Fund must be made to grow and must be managed in such a way that, at the end of the day, it benefits the system.

    So yes, there should be a sub- committee, yes, that subcommittee should not be more than five and yes, the Chairman should be a member of the Board but then the Board should have that discretion to nominate other people who maybe of specialised backgrounds to help to manage the Fund.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    I think this is clear, it accommodates essentially the various views expressed. I will put the Question. And if you are in any difficulty with the provision, that the draftspersons should clean up this -- The idea has been well captured and we would leave the rest to the draftspersons. Before we even put the Question, it will help to make up your minds.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, ‘Object of the Fund' - I wanted to bring in a sub- clause. - [Interruption] Oh no, because he is going to put the Question on the whole of that item (xxi) that is why lam saying that Mr Speaker, (1), we should add a new sub-clause to the 2 (2).
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, you must be very clear in your mind. I_t_may be item (t).
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,"towards basic or specialised psychiatric care in Ghana for patients who qualify". As one of the objects of the Fund, and (2), Mr Speaker, the "Exemption." We want it to read "Exemptions" not "Tax exemption" so that the actual 7 will then read: "The Fund is exempt from payment of tax and levies".
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    And all these, we will make it subject to the draftsperson's putting them at their appropriate --
    Dr Asare
    Mr Speaker, the "Object of the Fund", 2 (2) (e) "for training, capacity building and research". Mr Speaker, I suppose this is for the health care givers and I thought it is not very clear. [Interruption] Pardon? "(b) for the skills training of persons with mental disorders". This is not clear, especially "research". I think it should be "research in mental disorders or mental illness", but not leave it as "research". It should be "in mental illness".
    I think we should quality the "training"--
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    "... research in mental illness"? Well taken.
    Dr Asare
    Then "for the training and capacity building of mental health workers".
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I do not know why we Want to be specific here, because this is a Fund that might want to sponsor somebody for a training that may not be related to mental health but have an impact on mental health [interruption.] Wait, no, it is not in mental health, maybe on social services. But they are coming to augment re-integration of people with mental disability into the system.
    They are not mental health, they are social care, and it is going to help people with mental disabilities to be re-introduced into the communities and there is nobody like that. So I would -
    Once we have a management or a sub- committee of the Board, we should give them that space to do things in the interest of the Mental Health Authority and not tie their hands very much here. That is my view on this, because everything else has been said.
    Dr Kofi Asare
    Mr Speaker, if that person works in the Mental Health Authority, he is a mental health worker. He may be a sociologist, he may be whatever, but he works with the Service and he becomes a member of the - I do not think - The fact that _he holds a degree in sociology denies him of benefiting from that, and begin a worker in that Service.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Shall we make it as broad as possible?
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, I think he did not get the import of what he is saying.
    He is saying that somebody else could be doing research which could have an impact on mental health care, meanwhile the person does not work in the Health Authority; he is -not a staff there but his work is such that he can be sponsored.
    He may be a lecturer in the university, has very little to do with the mental health institutions but his work there impacts on it- social work you do. That is why we want to leave it as broad as we can to cover everybody rather than specifying what it should be
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So let us keep it broad.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, we should leave it as it is.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Let us keep it broad, yes, so that there would be room to manoeuvre.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, we adopted the proposal by the Hon Ranking Member on the composition of the Fund Management Committee and directed that the draftsman should take care of it. But I think we should not stop there. The draftsman should be directed to consider quorum and the meeting procedures.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Very well, the draftsperson should put in - including quorum.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, and the meeting procedures which we left for the Management Committee to determine.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Including quorum and meeting procedures.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, secondly, looking at the functions of the Board critically, it appears there are references to functions which are not related to Fund Management at all. I do not know whether the Hon Chairman has any explanation. It appears that they are being given powers as if they are the Board of the Authority.
    They are supposed to manage funds, Now, they are being asked to conduct researches on international and regional developments and standards. They are being asked to liaise with Government agencies and other organisations to promote the rehabilitation and integration of persons suffering from mental disorders. Has this got anything to do with the management of funds?
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, it is because during the Consideration Stage of this Bill, we changed the thing to a management committee. If you look at it, it was the Board itself so as you directed, these functions - These are going to be recommendations to the Board for their adoption in the final analysis. But where it is not necessary to put any of these functions as he is saying, then we do not do it
    This was done because the Board by itself was supposed to be doing some of the things that we are doing, but because we have made a subcommittee, most of these things should be recommendations to the Board itself to now adopt. So if the further directions should be to that effect, it would be better.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, because of that, we would want to amend sub- clause (6) that is "the function of the Board" with respect to the Fund. "The subcommittee of the Board". "The sub- committee of the Board": shall; (a) "make recommendation to the Board". This is because now, it is not the Board any longer. It is the subcommittee of the "Board". So, they should make recommendations to the Board.
    Dr Prempeh
    ' Mr Speaker, that is a bit superfluous because every subcommittee of a Board would make recommendation of the Board because now they are managing the Fund. So that management would make a recommendation to the Board
    This is because we have defined that Management as the subcommittee of the Board. So if we say ‘a subcommittee would only make recommendation to the Board'. But the "Management of the Fund" so that the distinction is a bit clearer.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, if you look at the functions of the Board with respect to the Fund, which we are changing to read; "Functions of the Sub- committee of the Board with respect to the Fund", it will mean that anything that we are saying under this, is referring to the Committee with respect to the Fund. This is because they may choose to give it a name at the Board level unless otherwise, we want to give the name now.
    Mr Chireh
    Mr Speaker, what the Hon Chairman is saying is the correct thing. We are saying; "the Management Committee of the Fund", but we know from the discussion, that it will be "a committee of the -Board". So we should be consistent with the words we use. It should be the "Management Committee of the Fund" but we understand it to be a subcommittee.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    "The Management Committee of the Fund" should be our applicable rendition?
    Mr Chireh
    Yes.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Knowing that it is a subcommittee of the Board and all these to be appropriately put by the draftspersons, and I hope the Clerk-at- the-Table is taking note of that.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, I would like to draw your attention to paragraph (4) "Bank account for the Fund".
    Mr Speaker, the Constitution provides that the Minister for Finance and Economic Planning shall establish the Consolidated Fund and any other Fund.
    Under the Financial Administration Act, no one can open an account without the approval of the Controller and Accountant-General.
    So Mr Speaker, I find this provision otiose.
    AlhajiMuntaka
    Mr Speaker. If it is saying so that is it. .It came from the Draftpersons when we asked. But Mr Speaker we want to further amend the 6.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Nevertheless, we have established such Fund.s with the authority of the Hon Minister for Finance and Economic Planning. We have made some provision. In other Words you do it subject to the approval of or whatever.
    I believe Hon Boafo himself can help us in that direction.
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, I am saying that, the provision here is superfluous because it is already in the Constitution

    and it is also provided in the Financial Administration Act. So there is no need for us to repeat it.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    In other words, what is being done here, if it is in line with the Financial Administration Act, then there is nothing wrong with repeating it under the law.
    - Mr Boafo: Very well, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Yes. So it can stay.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, the reason why it should even stay is that we have a lot of state-owned organisations which have gone ahead and opened bank accounts without resorting to the Controller and Accountant-General. So it should stay. The Ministry of Health will tell you that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Chairman, let us conclude this.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, we are saying that clauses 4 to 6 are staying, as we just agreed. Because now it is no longer the Board, it is a subcommittee of the Board. The functions that we had given it we needed to take (c) off, and we needed to take (f) off. This is because honestly the management committee of the Fund will not need to perform those functions. It is the function of the Board. [Interruptions] No, it is already at the Board. If you look at the main Act, it is already a function of the Board.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Members, I am sure we are all appreciative of that-
    Mr Boafo
    Mr Speaker, the Chairman in considering paragraph 7 added "levies"- In other words the Chairman was trying to be specific, but he forgot to
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    So we should make it "taxes, levies and duties"?
    Mr Boafo
    Yes, Mr Speaker. If we stop there then the wisdom generis will apply.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, I agree with him and this is going to bring a big relief to the mental health institutions. Even currently, we have that challenge when they bring things, they have to go through a long process to get exemptions, so we are adding "duties".
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Levies.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Taxes, levies and duties. This is because it is a new clause. We believe that the Draftsperson will look for the appropriate place for it, but we are suspecting that it is likely or it has to go with clause 80.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Let us leave that to the Draftspersons. In fact, the Draftspersons to tidy up and also place at the appropriate end. So I will put the Question as the New Clause.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    New Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    And the Draftspersons to clean up and place accordingly. -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    New Clause number
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, we want to change the heading from the Right to Vote to other rights. Mr Speaker, I beg to ‘move New Clause -- add the following new clauses:

    "The Right to Vote

    Prior or current residency in a psychiatric facility does not constitute evidence that the person is not of sound mind with respect to voting, standing for political office, or otherwise, participating in the political process."

    Mr Speaker, we want it to be 1 (a) and (b) or (1) and (2). So what we wanted to do earlier, (ix) which we agreed that we make it as new clause, should also come here so that we would look at them together.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Very well.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    So the other rights;
    "(a) the provisions of the Persons with DisabilityAct, 2006 (Act 715) shall apply with respect to the education and training of persons with mental disorder and a person with mental disorder shall be provided with all facilities that are necessary for that person's complete education or training for that person's gainful employment".
    Mr Speaker and then the two, the second one which is (2) will read
    "prior or current residency in a psychiatric facility does not constitute evidence that the person is not of sound mind with respect to voting, standing for political office, or otherwise participating in the political process".
    Dr Prempeh
    _Mr Speaker, the Chairman of the Committee in the name of the Committee is doing some serious engineering. Now, he wants to include the definition of somebody with a mental disorder and extend that definition to include every person as a person with disability. Mr Speaker, it is a very, very
    Dr Prempeh
    serious extension of the definition of somebody with a mental dis order.
    Mr Speaker, it is dangerous if we are going to extend and in that extension, extend the frontier to include that now, it is incumbent upon Government to fight even somebody who has suffered from mental disorder gainful employment. Not even that, to make sure they complete, that is the word, complete training and find gainful employment. People in the School of the Blind at Aburi, with visual impairment, we are not able to afford that, Mr Speaker.
    We know that the rate of mental dis order is so huge that anybody suffering from depression is captured under this definition. And now we have given the obligation to Government for somebody with simple depression, not serious depression, to also go and say that because I am suffering from a form of depression, it is incumbent upon the Government to pay my school fees to complete my University, Mr Speaker, I know that the Chairman wants to help, but please, let us drop this and go and consider it very, Very well.
    Mr Speaker, I come to the second one, the right to vote. Mr Speaker, that has been the underlying thought, mind and intention of the Discrimination Act that the Chairman was proposing in that earlier clause of the Bill. This is Because I went to the Chairman and I looked at his justification for that inclusion. It was Written so that they be given Vote.
    Mr Speaker, the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana is a very clear subject I told the Chairman, but I do not know why he did not confer with the expert, is that, if they want a leeway in the Constitution, then the psychiatrist must give somebody who has completed training and with a sound mind a certificate

    of soundness. Yes, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. If the psychiatrist tells us that the person is of sound mind, then the person qualifies. But we should not use this mathematical engineering.

    We are not going to allow priests - I know that is what you believe in, orthodox medicine but that is not the purpose of this Bill. -Chairman, drop both amendments and let us make a headway.
    Alhaji Pelpuo
    Mr Speaker, I think that in accordance with the explanations, and the fact that the Constitution has already made it very explicit about who is qualified to vote, who is qualified to contest elections, you cannot have a person in an in-house in a psychiatric hospital; meaning he is not still fit to be a normal person and going about. You are asking him to come and select a leader for us or become a leader.This is because this law is- in direct contravention of the Constitution and should not-stand.
    So, this provision Mr Speaker, must just be given up, it cannot stand. If you are still an in-house patient in a psychiatric facility you cannot be presumed to be normal and voting.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    The Hon Chairman, will well advise to abandon this and let us -
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Hon Majority Leader is on his feet.
    Mr Avoka
    Mr Speaker, as Leader of the House, I have had the opportunity of listening to all sides of the argument and I am persuaded by those who think that this amendment must be dropped. -- [Laughter] _
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Very well
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, giving the mood of the House, I know that if we are going to put into vote, it is going to
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Chairman of the Committee, anything further?
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, we stood down clause 80. Let us look at it. If it is going to - we just leave it and maybe consider it -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Very well, if you are not too certain, I think we can end it here.
    .Alhaji Muntaka: MrSpeaker, we are saying that in addition to the National Health Insurance Fund and the Mental Health Fund, a person with mental disorder shall be entitled to health care benefits under the National Health Insurance Scheme.
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, I hope that he makes it more explicit, that is all my hope- My hope is that -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Shall he read it all over again?
    Dr Prempeh
    Yes, because he is talking about other medical conditions.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    May you read it again, Hon Chairman, please.
    Alhaji Muntaka
    Mr Speaker, "In addition to the National Health Insurance Fund and the Mental Health Fund, a person with mental disorder shall be entitled to health care benefit under the National Health Insurance Scheme";
    Dr Prempeh
    Mr Speaker, that was my problem, that has not still been addressed.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Very well. Since the problem persists the

    problem will be tackled tomorrow. We will ave to adjourn at this stage, except the Hon Majority Leader has something to say.
    Mr Avoka
    If I have to say anything at all Mr Speaker, it is to commend you highly and the rest of Hon Members and the staff who have been here this time. It is past five o_'clock Mr Speaker, and this is a great achievement for this august House and this country. So, I am particularly grateful to you -in particular and then to all other Hon Members who have been here since the whole day and the Clerk and his staff.
    I thank ;you very much, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Thank you very much. Any word from the Minority Leadership?
    Mrs Kusi
    Mr Speaker, I just want to add my voice in seconding the Motion to what t e Hon Majority Leader said -
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker
    Just say what you want to say;
    Mrs Kusi
    I want to commend you for your patience and your.tolerance and I just want to urge my Colleagues that tomorrow We finish this Bill for e benefit of Ghanaians.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    ‘Mr Second Deputy Speaker: If the appropriate listings would e made for the various stages we could have a law on it tomorrow.
    That brings use to the end of the Consideration Stage.
    Hon Members, the House will stand adjourned till tomorrow at 10 o'clock in the forenoon.
    Thank you very much.
    ADJOURNMENT
  • The House was adjourned at 5.25 p.m. till Thursday, J" March, 2012 at 10.00 p. m.