Debates of 2 Jul 2013

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 11:45 a.m.
  • [No correction was made to the Votes and Proceedings of Friday, 28th June, 2013]
    • Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Hon Members, there is no Official Report today for correction. So, we move on to the Commencement of Public Business.
    Dr Benjamin B Kunbuor 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would like us to take item 4(i) to (iv).
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Very well. The following Papers to be presented by the Chairman of the Finance Committee -- Item 4(i).
    PAPERS 11:45 a.m.
    Dr Anthony A. Osei 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Chairman of the Finance Committee is not here so if the Vice Chairman wanted to lay it, it was all right but he had to crave the indulgence of the Speaker. I thought he was Hon James K Avedzi.
    Dr Kunbuor 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, he is a Member of the House and I believe that being an experienced Member, he would have sought Mr Speaker's indulgence before proceeding -- [Interruption]-- It is not all the time that the Leader should be the one to seek permission. If he were not a Member of the House, then that could have been done on his behalf. He has the permission.
    Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader is right. In the absence of the Chairman of the Committee, any Member could lay the document on behalf of the Committee; except in this case, the Speaker specifically mentioned the title “Chairman of the Committee”. Then from nowhere, my good Friend rose up and bowed.
    Mr Speaker, that amounts to serious impersonation -- [Laughter] -- and that is the serious leg of the matter. He should announce himself properly and then do the proper thing.
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Hon Member for Shama, are you the Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Essilfie 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, my Chairman has travelled. I am the Vice Chairman and I am standing in for my Chairman.
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    So, you are laying the Paper in your capacity as the Vice Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Essilfie 11:45 a.m.
    Yes, on behalf of the Committee as the Vice Chairman.
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Hon Dr Akoto Osei, is he the Vice Chairman?
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:45 a.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker. He is the Vice Chairman and a member of the Committee. So, I have no difficulty with him laying the Paper on behalf of the Committee.
    Vice Chairman of the Committee (Mr Gabriel Essilfie) (on behalf of the Chairman of the Committee) --
    Report of the Finance Committee on the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill 2013.
    Report of the Finance Committee on the Special Import Levy Bill, 2013.
    Report of the Finance Committee on the National Fiscal Stabilisation Levy Bill, 2013.
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, do we move on to item 5? Is the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice here?
    Dr Kunbuor 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want us to stand down item 5.
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Very well; So, which item are we taking?
    Dr Kunbuor 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I guess we can proceed with Motion 6.
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Very well. Have they distributed the Report?
    Dr Kunbour 11:45 a.m.
    That is so, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
    Very well.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, there is no Motion 6 on my Order Paper. There is item number 6.
    Dr Kunbour 11:45 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, Motion on item number 6.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to crave your indulgence to allow the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance to move the Motion on behalf of the Hon Minister who is out of the jurisdiction.
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Hon Minority Leader -- [Pause] -- There is an application for the Hon Deputy Minister to move the Motion on behalf of the Minister for Finance, who we are told, is out of the jurisdiction.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is in respect of item number 6 on the Order Paper.
    Well, Mr Speaker, sometimes the Hon Deputy Ministers come and when they are pushed to the wall, they begin to look over their shoulders and say that: “Well, the Hon Minister is not available, when he comes, I will consult him”. If the Hon Deputy Minister can speak to the issues, very well, we will not have anything against it. I would want to believe that they would demonstrate sufficient competence in this.
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Hon Deputy Minister, Hon Ato-Forson --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, but I know that -- I see the Hon Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration here. The Hon Minister for Finance is a Cabinet Minister and I know in his absence, a substantive Minister would be asked to hold the fort and hold that portfolio until the return of the Hon Minister. I would want to know who is holding the fort and --
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    I have not received any official communication on that.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is a serious Cabinet discussion that has affected us and produced these Bills before Parliament. So, the Hon Minister --
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, are you taking objection to the fact that the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance cannot move the Motion?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have not said what you are saying. I have not said so.
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    And I have called him to move the Motion.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Yes. Because it is a matter of profound importance to Government, Mr Speaker, I thought the scheduled Minister who would hold the portfolio of the Minister, in the absence of the substantive Minister, should be capacitated to shepherd the Bill in Parliament.
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Hon Member, since you are not raising an objection, I think I would call on the Hon Deputy Minister who is supposed to assist his Minister to move the Motion.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, with deference to the Chair, we know Hon Deputy Ministers do assist their Ministers. If an Hon Minister is out of the jurisdiction -- if an Hon Minister is not in office, there will not be anybody to assist. It is not for nothing that if the President travels outside, the Vice President is authorised under the Constitution to hold the fort.
    In this case, it is not. It is the Minister so designated and these are critical matters --
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, which part of the Constitution are you quoting? As for the Vice President's, I know the provision of the Constitution but for the Hon Minister, which portion of the Constitution are you quoting?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, what are you asking me to do? Which part of the Constitution --
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Where, when the Hon Minister is not there, another Minister should be designated to act in his absence?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, if you listened to me, I said as far as the President was concerned, there were clear provisions --
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Yes. And the rest of them, there is no clear provision --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Yes, that is what I have said. But the Hon Minister who takes the affairs of the Cabinet Minister who is not in the jurisdiction, which I think --
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, you know, I will call the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance to move the Motion.
    Hon Deputy Minister, move the Motion.
    Dr Kunbuor 11:55 a.m.
    I think we need to correct this impasse once and for all.
    I would like to draw Mr Speakers' attention to article 297 (i), and with Mr Speaker's permission, on implied powers of article 297 (i) --
    Mr Speaker, the article reads 11:55 a.m.
    “words directing or empowering a Minister of State to do an act or a thing, or otherwise applying to him by the designation of his office, include a person acting for him, or if the office is vacant, a person designated to act in that office by or under the authority of an Act of Parliament and also his successors in office and all his deputies or other assistants.”
    This is the constitutional basis on which the Hon Deputy Minister can move the Motion.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader has made the situation worse by what he has quoted. Mr Speaker, we are dealing with the status of a Minister as differentiated from the position of a Deputy Minister.
    Mr Speaker, it is clear-- and when you talk about Cabinet Ministers, they take the Cabinet Oath. A Deputy Minister has not taken a Cabinet Oath. The two are not the same and they cannot be the same. They cannot under any circumstances be the same in spite of what he has read. Mr Speaker, he makes his case worse.
    But Mr Speaker, I brought this matter up for serious consideration by this House. I mean, I know we have been indulging Hon Deputy Ministers doing this. I just wanted us to think through whether indeed, what we have been doing is right. But as to this justification, spirited justification by the Majority Leader, I totally disagree with it.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you.
    Dr Kunbuor 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is indeed, the case. When you are dealing with a technical matter like this, you do not just read exactly what (i) is -- Look at the side notes; it tells you that these are implied powers under the Constitution.
    “Implied powers” is a whole category of constitutional structuring. So, I am indicating to you that, what article 297(i) says, is the constitutional basis for a Deputy Minister. If you have a Ministry in which the Hon Minister is a Cabinet Minister, he performs Cabinet functions as well. Are you saying by these implied powers the deputy cannot assist him in the performance of those Cabinet powers? [Interruption] Wait! Excuse me.
    Why we are saying that is, as long as a Minister has constitutional functions and statutory functions to perform, he can be assisted by his deputy or deputies
    to perform them. This is what the “implied powers” here is saying unless you have a different understanding of “implied powers”. And I guess the lawyers here should assist the Hon Minority Leader to understand, particularly the former Attorney-General that “implied powers” is a legal constitutional category.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with respect to the Hon Majority Leader, I do not need the assistance of senior lawyers here at all. Mr Speaker, the words are clear and they should be clear to the Hon Majority Leader. By necessary implication of what he is saying, the President, in the absence of a Cabinet Minister, should invite the Deputy Minister to fill in. The President does not do that and that should suggest to him strongly that he is wrong in this way that he is going. He is totally wrong. I disagree with him.
    Dr Kunbuor 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, fortunately, the Speaker who is occupying the Chair is a trained lawyer. I would leave this matter for the Speaker to rule.
    Mr Speaker 12:05 p.m.
    Hon Members, I have over indulged the two Leaders. I asked a very simple question, whether the Hon Minority Leader is taking objection to the Deputy Minister moving the Motion. The answer was emphatic “No.” To that extent, I would call on the Hon Deputy Minister to move the Motion.
    MOTIONS 12:05 p.m.
    Minister for Finance) 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 80(1) which
    Mr Gabriel K. Essilfie 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Resolved accordingly.
    BILLS -- SECOND READING 12:05 p.m.
    Minister for Finance) 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that the Communication Service Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2013 be now read a Second time.
    Mr Speaker, the object of the Bill is to clarify the scope and the coverage of the tax and to explicitly include inter- connection services within the tax base.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
    Question proposed.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:05 p.m.
    Hon Members, I have said time and again that at Second Reading of a Bill, you need not second.
    No, you raised the issue whether he should second or support. So, he was right.
    Dr A. A. Osei 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I did not raise the issue. I got up.
    Mr Speaker 12:05 p.m.
    He was right.
    Mr Essilfie 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in doing so, I would like to present your Committee's Report.
    Introduction
    The Communications Service Tax (Amendment) Bill was presented to Parliament and read the First time by the Hon Minister for Finance on Friday, 28th June, 2013 and referred to the Finance Committee for consideration and report in accordance with article 174(1) of the 1992 Constitution and Order 169 of the Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana.
    The Rt Hon Speaker further directed the Committee to determine whether the Bill was of urgent nature to be taken through all the three stages of passage in a day in accordance with article 106 (13) of the Constitution and Order 119 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    Pursuant to the referral, the Committee met with the Hon Minister for Finance, Mr Seth E. Terkpeh, Deputy Ministers for Finance, Mr George Kweku Ricketts- Hagan and Mr Cassiel Ato Baah Forson and officials from the Ministry of Finance, Ghana Revenue Authority and Attorney- General's Department and deliberated on the referral.
    The Committee is grateful to the Hon Minister, Deputy Ministers and officials from the Ministry of Finance, Ghana Revenue Author ity and Attorney- General's Department for attending upon it.
    Reference
    The Committee referred to the following additional documents during its deliberations:
    The 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
    The Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana.
    Communications Service Tax Act, 2008 (Act 754).
    Background
    Parliament in 2008 passed the Communications Service Tax Act, 2008 (Act 754) to impose a six per cent (6%) charge on communications service usage. The tax was an excise tax intended to raise additional revenue from communication services, provided by mobile operators to their customers. The rate of 6 per cent was arrived at in order to remove the surging nature of the tax with regard to interconnection services.
    Some provisions in the Act however, create compliance challenges in the telecommunications companies in respect of the application of the tax to interconnection services. The proposed amendment therefore seeks to bring clarity to the various provisions to improve the administration of the tax.
    Purpose of the Bill
    The Bill seeks to amend some provi- sions in the Communications Service Tax Act, 2008 (Act 754) to clarify the scope and coverage of the tax and to include interconnection services within the tax base.
    Provisions of the Bill
    The Bill is divided into eight clauses.
    Clause 1 amends section 1 of the Communications Service Act, 2008 (Act 754) to impose a tax to be known as communications service tax. The tax is to be levied on electronic communications service providers.
    Clause 2 amends section 2 of Act 754 to provide for the tax to be paid together with the electronic communication service charge payable to the service provider by the user of the service. Where the service is received from a source outside Ghana the tax is to be paid by the user who received the service. The section also clarifies the period within which the tax becomes due.
    “Communications service provider” in section 2 is substituted for “service provider” in clause 3.
    Clause 4 amends section 8 of Act 754 to provide for the recovery as a tax from a person who issues a bill or invoice of amount shown as a tax.
    Clause 5 amends section 11 of the same Act 754 to provide for the application of some provision of the Value Added Tax Act, 1998 (Act 546) with the necessary modifications to the management of the tax.
    Clause 6 amends section 12 of Act 754 by restricting the provision to sections 54 and 55 of the Value Added Tax, 1998 (Act 546).
    Clause 7 amends section 14 by substitution for “communication service provider” of “service provider”.
    Clause 8 amends section 16, the interpretation section of the Act to provide for new definitions.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Hon Deputy Minister, I thought you would listen to him and do a winding up. But if you want to, we would make sure you --
    Mr Forson 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I come on a point of order.
    The Hon Ranking Member was not at the Committee. Indeed, we did provide the details of the taxes, the future generations to the Committee. So, I would suggest that he sits with his Hon Members and crosscheck as and when we did that. That is not correct, and it cannot be the right amount.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the information that the Hon Ranking Member is seeking, is relevant to this House, not only to the Committee. If he leaves it at the level of the Committee, then he might as well tell us that the Committee should grant him safe passage and then he would not even need to come to Parliament. It is relevant to this House; so, we need to know.
    He might have provided it. If he had provided it, where is it so that we would inform ourselves? This is because ultimately, it is for the plenary and not the Committee to grant him that smooth passage.
    Mr Speaker, that is all that I am looking for.
    Dr Kunbuor 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if I understand where we stand now, it is that, a Motion has been moved before the House and it is for its consideration.
    The Hon Ranking Member for the Committee is making his contribution as I understand, except I understand him to be raising a preliminary objection in relation to the substantive Motion. But if he is actually --
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, I think that is his contribution.
    Dr Kunbuor 12:15 p.m.
    That is so, Mr Speaker. So, if that is his contribution --
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    That is why I thought that, let us listen to him and at the end of the day, Hon Members would respond. So, let us listen to him.
    Dr Kunbuor 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is the context in which -- When the point of order --
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    That is his contribution.
    Dr Kunbuor 12:15 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker. When the point of order was raised, it was a legitimate procedure and then Mr Speaker would rule on it and he continues with his contribution. We were getting a bit sidetracked on this matter.
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    The point is that the Hon Deputy Minister is saying that he provided the information to the Committee. At the time we put the Question, we would find out whether the information has been provided or not. So, do not be worried. Let us continue.
    Hon Ranking Member.
    Dr A. A. Osei 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am glad you ruled that way. I thought the Hon Deputy Minister was going to say: “This is the number.” I am talking about a committee's report, not what he gave them. So, I thought he would help the House by saying: “The number is 20.”
    The point I am making is that, if you have an GH¢8 billion gap, as he says they do, and this is going to yield GH¢5 million, then why are we imposing such a burden on the people of Ghana? This is because GH¢5 million out of GH¢8 billion is nothing. So, the people of Ghana need to know how much this would bring, so that when we go out and we are asked, we can tell them. That is what he needs to be listening to, so that he can contribute.
    But Mr Speaker, going back to my issue of urgency. It would help this House if we are told what the urgency is about
    -- 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, this is a Committee's Report. Whether it is urgent or not, it is for the Committee to tell the House. This is an unanimous Report coming from the Committee, that they think it is an urgent Bill. The Committee, as a committee, said that it is urgent.
    Dr A. A. Osei 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not disagreeing with the statement here. What I am suggesting is that it will serve the House better if they went further and said it is urgent because of A, B, C, D. That is more compelling. I am not saying -- They have a right to decide that but if -- And the reason is that, I was told that it is because the Hon Minister has travelled. That cannot be urgent.
    Mr Speaker, if there has been revenue shortfalls as has been indicated by the Bank of Ghana and the Ministry and a certain Hon Deputy Minister on television, then that is the reason he should give, that there has been revenue shortfalls of ‘X' amount, so, we need resources to fill the gap. That would compel us to support the Motion. But if it is that the Hon Minister has travelled, that is why you have an Hon Deputy assisting the Hon Minister in this regard.
    So, I think that if they want us to support the Motion, they should be giving us more information. [Interruption.] That is the question I asked.
    I hope that at some point in time, somebody would indicate to us how much is going to be raised from this particular--
    Mr Speaker, there are several other issues that I wanted to raise but at this point, I would let my Hon Colleagues assist in that regard. There are some issues that are technical and are in the area of communication and my Colleague, Hon Frederick Opare-Ansah may be called to raise those issues.
    I thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Frederick Opare-Ansah (NPP -- Suhum) 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this Bill seeks to introduce a very dangerous situation.
    Mr Speaker, if you read the Committee's Report in paragraph 3.0, and in addition to that, the Memorandum to the Bill, they seek to indicate that the rate of six per cent which was arrived at was in respect of inter-connect charges. That is not so at all and our records in this House would show that the reason we used this rate was for the fact that, the providers were providing services which were not structured in a way that you could have the kind of flat rate that we sought to introduce at the time.
    You would once a while hear promo- tions of, if you sent a certain number to a code, you are able to make calls for say, 24 hours and they charge you a percentage. If we had stayed with that flat rate, it was going to be very difficult for the tax authorities to determine what taxes to charge for which services. That is why we arrived at the percentages instead of the flat rate. So, that assertion, is not right at all.
    Mr Speaker, I have seen the justifica- tion that is being provided for this amendment and also being used to support the urgency of the Bill. We are told in section 6.0 under “Observations”, that the Committee was informed that provisions in the Communications Service Tax Act, 2008 (Act 754) was not specific on the point at which the tax should be collected.
    Mr Speaker, the aforementioned Act was very explicit as to the nature of the tax. Indeed, that is what motivated the then Hon Minority Leader to call it the “Talk Tax”, because he was clear that it was a user tax. And the communications companies had no problem at all levying those taxes on the users and paying same to Government.
    It was the confusion by the tax authorities in trying to tax the inter- connect charges which a court of this land found to be inconsistent with the law. This
    Mr Frederick Opare-Ansah (NPP -- Suhum) 12:15 p.m.
    House was clear in its mind, that we were imposing a tax on the users and not the service providers. So, nobody should try to confuse this House now, that we made a law which is difficult to implement because there is some confusion. There was no confusion at all.
    Mr Speaker, why I said this is dangerous is that, that single revenue strip, when you make a call from one network ‘A' to network ‘B' and you are charged, say, GH¢0.08 pesewas for one minute, it is the same amount of money that the tax authority, by this Act, charges the six per cent on, and a portion of the money is then paid by network ‘A' to network ‘B' for terminating the call on that other network.
    So, if they now want to go into that inter-connect and tax it again, then indeed, it is double taxation because there is no other revenue that has been generated along the path of that call.
    Mr Speaker, the next issue I have with this Bill, is to be found in clause 1 (b) where the Bill seeks to impose a tax on the reception of international calls.
    Mr Speaker, let me read what that clause says. “Clause 1 (2) (b) -- charges payable on electronic communications service received by users from sources outside this country.”
    The tax shall be levied on charges payable on electronic communication services received by users from sources outside this country.
    Mr Speaker, in this country, in the telecommunications industry, no user is charged any fee for receiving any calls. So, why are we labouring to levy a charge on Ghanaians when they receive interna- tional calls? What sin did they commit?

    Mr Speaker, not only that. If you go down to clause 2 (2), in addition to levying these unusers of these telecommunication services in Ghana, we are not even asking them to pay the money to their service providers. We are asking them to go and pay the money to the Commissioner- General.

    So, if I live in Obuortumpan in Suhum and I receive a call from my uncle in New York, then at the end of the tax period, I am supposed to look for the Commis- sioner-General's Office and go and pay money to them. [Interruption.] That is the law you have brought to the Chamber of Parliament for us to approve. Let me read it to you.

    In the case of electronic communi- cations service received from a source --
    Mr Speaker 12:25 p.m.
    Which clause are you reading? Which page are you reading from?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 12:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 2 (2) on page 3.
    Mr Speaker 12:25 p.m.
    Very well.
    MrOpare-Ansah 12:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is under the heading: “Persons liable to pay the tax.” And the subclause (2) says:
    “In the case of electronic communi- cations service received from a source outside this country, the tax shall be paid to the Commissioner General by the user who received the service.”
    Mr Speaker 12:25 p.m.
    Hon Member, have you looked at the definition of “user” in the Bill, so that you take it on board in your submission?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on page 7, (vii);
    “User” means a customer or a subscriber of electronic commu- nications network or service or broadcasting service . . .”
    Mr Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Have you read all?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker:
    “ . . . And includes a customer that is operator or provider of electronic communications networks or service.”
    So, Mr Speaker, that subscriber who uses a mobile phone in Obuortumpan in the Suhum Constituency is a user per this Act and the definition here. Unfortunately, we do not have that representative in Obuortumpan, so, he has to now, after receiving an international call, which is not by any fault of his, it could even be a wrong number but at the end of the month, by receiving a wrong number call, he has to leave Obuortumpan, travel to Suhum and trek on the Nsawam road, which takes me some hours to trek on these days --
    Mr Speaker, it is a non-starter because clearly, the industry does not levy charges on users who receive calls. So, it is totally wrong to start with.
    Mr Speaker, if we go through this, even receiving emails and other things, we may now begin to possibly look at text messages and all those things. We will receive them from outside the country.
    Mr Speaker, it is my view that this Bill as currently structured, is not something this House should pass and I would urge the House to reconsider the decision we are about to take in respect of this Bill.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah (NPP -- Sekondi) 12:35 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this debate.
    Mr Speaker, the imposition of tax by our Constitution is reserved for the Executive arm of the State and it is for good reason. This is because it is the Executive arm that expenses the resources. That is why the proposal comes from the Executive to Parliament. Parliament itself does not make the proposal and that is as it should be.
    However, Parliament as a representative of the people, is given the opportunity to examine the tax, its effect on the people and whether or not even in arriving at a decision in respect of the Executive's proposal, there is the need to get views from a cross section of the population. However, where a Bill is of an urgent nature, Parliament does not have that opportunity because the Constitution requires that everything should be done in one day. So, urgent Bills are exceptional in nature and must be resorted to sparingly.
    Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, in this case, it seems, in my view, that this particular Bill should not have been introduced as an urgent Bill and the Committee has not helped this House by not indicating why it is of an urgent nature. I am saying that even the content of the Report itself means that the Bill is not of an urgent nature.
    Mr Speaker, I would refer the House to the “Background”. It says 12:35 p.m.
    “Parliament in 2008 passed the Communications Service Tax Act to impose a six per cent (6%) charge
    . . .”
    Then the last three lines, of that bullet point --
    “The proposed amendment there- fore seeks to bring clarity to the various provisions so as to improve the administration of the tax.”
    If it is to bring clarity, what is the urgency? It is because this Act has been in existence since 2008.

    How many years ago? We are talking about five good years. Mr Speaker, issues have been raised by the Hon Member for Suhum, and that is the more reason this Bill ought not to have been recommended to this House as a Bill of an urgent nature. Why is it of an urgent nature? Nothing is stated. I am submitting, Mr Speaker, that we should take our time and go through this Bill because the Report from the Committee does not help the House to arrive at such a decision.

    Mr Speaker, contrary to the purpose as stated in the Memorandum, the amendment is introducing a new tax; so, the Memorandum is misleading this House. Mr Speaker, if you look at the Report, “Provisions of the Bill” -- With your permission, I beg to quote from page 2, the third paragraph of the Report:

    “Clause 2 amends section 2 of Act 754 to provide for the tax to be paid together with the electronic communication service charge payable to the service provider by the user of the service. Where the service is received from a source outside Ghana, the tax is to be paid by the user who received the service. The section also clarifies the period within which the tax becomes due.”

    And if you go to page 3 of the Report -- “Observations”, “Reason/justification for the amendments”, it states:

    “The Committee was informed that provisions in the Communications Service Tax Act, 2008 (Act 775) was not specific on the point at which the tax should be collected. This situation, the Committee learnt, posed many implementation chal- lenges to the Ghana Revenue

    Authority and the communications service provider. The proposed amendments therefore, seek to bring clarity to aid smooth implemen- tation.”

    The Committee goes further to say:

    “The Committee advises the Ministry of Finance and the GRA to strengthen their monitoring activities to ensure that the revenue realised is fully accounted for and paid to the State.”

    Mr Speaker, if it is for clarity, why should we be talking about monitoring activities to ensure that the revenue realised from the imposition of this tax -- Mr Speaker, I believe that in this case, the House should not accept the Report of the Committee, but rather reject it and allow this Bill to go through the normal processes, so that if there are any amendments, if there are any considerations, the House can consider them carefully.

    It is not enough for this House just to approve the Bill. We must be able to defend it to the people of this country.

    Mr Speaker, when you look at the Interpretation, it is true that the interpretation of “user” says:

    “A customer includes a customer that is an operator.”

    Probably, if we want it to be paid by the operator or provider of electronic communications network or service, we should state it, but that would also be inconsistent with the principal enactment. This is because it is not paid by operators; it is paid by the users, hence this rather disingenuous interpretation being proffered in the interpretation section.

    Mr Speaker, I may not have any objection principally to the imposition of taxes, but where Parliament has been given the right by the Constitution to impose taxes, we should make sure that in doing that, we do it diligently. Not many of us have seen the Bill -- [Interruption.] Not many of us have seen the Bill until this morning. Not many of us even at the Committee, were able to attend because it was a Friday. I would encourage -- [Inter- ruption.]
    Mr David T. Assumeng 12:35 p.m.
    On a point of order.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to find out whether this Report is a one-sided one or it was a Report from both sides of the House? Is it a one-sided Report? Mr Speaker, I am saying so --
    Mr Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Member for Shai/ Osudoku, we are at the Second Reading of a Bill and we are debating the principles of it. You may not object to it but you can raise issues with one or two clauses and I think that is what they are doing. They said they were not objecting to the Bill in principle but there are some clauses that they are raising issues with. That is my understanding so far of the debate on the floor of the House.
    Mr Assumeng 12:35 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the education. However, I would wish to urge that we should not play to the gallery as far as the decision is concerned.
    Mr Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, you are out of order.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have a very thick skin but I am sure that most of the Hon Members of this House will agree with me, that I am one of the last persons who would attempt to play to the gallery when it comes to debate on the floor of the House. I hope the Hon Member --
    Mr Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, I have ruled him out. So, please, proceed and make your contribution.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would attempt to answer the Hon Member, however, I am disabled. This is because if you look at the Votes and Proceedings of Friday, you do not see that the Finance Committee met. But I am sure that at that meeting, majority of the members were not present, even though there could have been a quorum -- [Interruption.]
    Mr Gabriel K. Essilfie 12:35 p.m.
    On a point of order. Mr Speaker, my Hon Member for Sekondi is misleading the House.
    Mr Speaker, he was not there, but he cannot say majority of the members were not there because we formed a quorum. Indeed, we formed a quorum. When he said majority of the members were not there, the only people who were conspicuously absent were the Hon Ranking Member and he himself.
    But the Hon Deputy Ranking Member and all the other members of the Committee on their side were at the meeting.
    Dr A. A. Osei 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think the Hon Vice Chairman is misleading this House. Mr Speaker, in my earlier statement -- [Interruption] -- The Chairman of the Committee knew the day before that we were going to meet. I was not informed.
    When you have a death in your family, and you do not tell me, do you expect me to be there? So, the Hon Member should be careful. I am saying that even our normal processes were not obeyed. It is a serious thing that we are doing here.
    Mr Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Member for Old Tafo, the point is that you were not present and you declared it yourself at the time that you were making your
    Dr A. A. Osei 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am suggesting that I was not there because I was kept out deliberately. That is my point. Mr Speaker, on Thursday, my Chairman knew there was --[Interruption]-- So, I am raising another point.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, during these debates, when some of these issues are raised, we should not take them personal. Mr Speaker, I was just making the point; I have stated that even from the Report itself, there does not seem to be any justification for this Bill being considered an urgent Bill. That is the point I am making.
    Mr Mutala M. Ibrahim 12:45 p.m.
    On a point of order. Mr Speaker, the Hon Member is misleading the House.
    The Hon Member said that he was deliberately excluded from that meeting, which is not true. As a matter of fact, all the Hon Members of the Committee from the Minority side were present except he and the Hon Member who spoke. They were the only people who were not there and on that basis -- [Interruptions] -- You do not make a conclusive statement that you were then -- [Interruptions] -- He was there.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Hon Deputy Minister, take your seat.
    Hon Deputy Minister, are you a member of the Committee?
    Mr M. M. Ibrahim 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am a member of the Committee.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Did you attend the Committee meetings?
    Mr M. M. Ibrahim 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I attended -- [Interruptions].
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that when it comes to matters of this nature, it affects this House and how the House does its business. The urgency of a Bill is of a major constitutional import and unless, Mr Speaker, during the course of the debate, the urgency of this Bill can be demonstrated, I will find it extremely difficult to support this Report even though I am a member of the Finance Committee.
    I would urge this House, through the Leadership, to find a way of letting the Committee work further on this Bill. And Mr Speaker, I do not even think it is too late to ask the Communications Committee to join the Finance Committee to consider this matter. It is a matter that affects the communications industry and it raises major policy matters relating to the communications industry, so that in our effort to generate more revenue, we try and get the industry along with us because they have participated.
    I thank you Mr Speaker.
    Mr Joseph Y. Chireh (NDC -- Wa West) 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am very happy that you have allowed me to make a contribution.
    I support the Motion to adopt the Report and the reason is that and indeed, also the request for us to take it through the -- [Interruptions] -- the request by the Committee to take the whole Bill through all the stages today. The reason is simple. One of them -- [Interruption.]
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Hon Member for Manhyia South --
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member for Wa West rose to say he supports the Motion to adopt a report; there is no such thing as adopting a report.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    He said he supports the Second Reading --
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    No! Mr Speaker, he never said so -- [Laughter.]
    Mr Chireh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, he says there is no report -- [Interruptions.]
    Some Hon Members 12:45 p.m.
    He says there is no Motion.
    Mr Chireh 12:45 p.m.
    There is no Motion, but what are we debating? Why are you referring to the Report and I am making a specific statement, I am not talking about a report which is hanging. There is a report by the Committee, which considered this and that is the Report I am referring to and I am still debating the Second Reading?
    In any case, my point is that, as you would notice, this Bill, normally, in the past, would have come together with the Budget Statement and we would have sat here in the night to pass it, so that we can generate revenue upfront for the support of the Budget. You would also notice that when the Minister for Finance was here to present the Budget Statement, he indicated clearly that these Bills were to be introduced, so that we generate the necessary resources to support the Budget.
    It has come a few weeks too late but that is why as conscientious Members of Parliament, who want to raise revenue to support a Budget that has a funding gap, we should support it. Now, I also have to
    say that during the discussions, there is the issue of a court case which was introduced by the “Telecos” -- in case some people do not know what “Telecos” -- [Interruptions] -- Oh, why? I have decided it is “Telecos” -- [Laughter] . It is “Telecos” -- Sit down! They sent the Government or the GRA to court and as a result of this, they need to clarify this whole tax arrangement and the unfor- tunate thing is the fact that this has not been mentioned even in the Memorandum of the Bill.
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thought we were at a specific point where the urgency of the Bill -- our actions should be informed by how urgent this Bill is.
    Mr Speaker, when the Hon Member for Wa West said that part of the reason this Bill is coming is because of a court case by “Telecos”. It is wrong because no where in this Bill did the Minister for Finance say it is because of a court by “Telecos”. No, “Telco” -- Laughter]- - that this Bill has been brought.
    Obviously, Mr Speaker, the Hon Member for Wa West is allowed to contribute but he should make -- because of the urgency of this Bill, he should make specific reference to the Bill or to the Report and not to impugn that the Ministry of Finance is trying -- because they lost a court case, they are bringing a Bill to tax Ghanaians six per cent for Internet usage. No! That is not the purpose of the Bill.
    The purpose of the Bill is to clarify issues, not “Telecos”, sorry, “Telecos.”
    Thank you Mr Speaker.
    Mr Chireh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my point still is that; I know and one of my Colleagues opposite mentioned it in his contribution that when GRA was trying to apply the tax, there was a misunderstanding and he thought there was no need. If there was no need, a court should not have sat and ruled on it. And all I said was that, it is unfortunate this was not even mentioned in the Memorandum to the Bill and the reasons for curing the deficits that we found in the previous law. I am still arguing that, the Bill is one of the smallest.
    We can just sit here and consider all the concerns that have been raised and I believe that in the winding up of the Minister, he would re-assure everybody that the stakeholders were duly consulted and they agreed; there were issues that were raised before them --So, it is for us as a House to support this Second Reading of the Bill and adopt the Report with all the suggestions.
    I believe that we can even further resolve this problem when we come to the Consideration Stage.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity.
    Dr Kunbuor 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was signalling the Hon Minority Leader to see whether he would want to make a contribution before and the indication is that he would want to. So, I would yield to him to make his contributions, then I can--
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, do you want to make a contribution on the Bill? I want to have an idea, so that I will know what to do.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I may speak for a brief period but I noticed that the Bill has generated considerable excitement; all to further enrich what is

    before us. So, Mr Speaker, if you do not mind, I would plead that you allow maybe, a few more other voices to be heard before I come and the Majority Leader also winds up. The issues that are already coming up are germane to what is before us.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    I just would want to know whether you want to make a contribution, so that I will know how to manage the time of the debate.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    I definitely will.
    Mr Kwaku A. Kwarteng (NPP -- Obuasi West) 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am a member of the Finance Committee and I was at last Friday's meeting. This House is being invited to pass these amendments. I think the critical thing we would want to consider is the impact of the amendment. By impact, we are looking at how much revenue or even estimates of revenue we hope to get if we pass these amendments.
    Mr Speaker, this question was put at the Committee meeting, and the assurance given was that, it would be prepared by the technical people and made available to the Committee. That has not happened. And this morning, if it was contained in this Report, at least, the House could have considered it but it is not here. I find it surprising the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance said that information was provided for at the Committee meeting; it was not; that was incorrect.
    Mr Speaker, the second point I would want to make is in reference to the Report, page (2), under background and it says:
    “The proposed amendment there- fore seeks to bring clarity to the various provisions so as to improve the administration of the tax.”
    Mr Speaker, traditionally, we have known that the Communications Service Tax is a consumption tax. That is to say, it is the end users who pay. The service providers, in this sense, are tax collectors; they collect the taxes from consumers and they pass them on to the Government. What these amendments, especially the Report is introducing, is in clarity and I say that on the same page 2, item (5) -- “Provisions of the Bill”, it says:
    “Clause 1 amends section 1 of the Communications Service Tax Act 2008 (Act 754) to impose a tax to be known as Communications Service Tax. The tax is to be levied on electronic communications service providers.”
    Mr Speaker, this has even statutory implications because some of the providers by law are exempt from paying tax within the early stages of their operations. So, it is the amendments that are introducing these in clarity and confirm the points earlier Hon Members made on the floor of the House, that the Committee must be given the opportunity to look at these contradictions coming out of the amendments and to propose to this House a better way forward.

    Deputy Minister for Justice and Attorney-General (Dr Dominic A. Ayine)(MP): Mr Speaker, I have been following the debate with keen interest and it appears, in my view, that this House might be acting unconstitutionally-- [Eiiiiiiiii!] Yes. And I have the reason I am saying that. The reason is simply because Mr Speaker, if you refer to article 106 (13) of the Constitution, it says:

    “Where it is determined by a committee of Parliament appointed for the purpose that a particular bill is of an urgent nature, the provi- sions of the preceding clauses of this article, other than clause (1) and paragraph (a) of clause (2) shall not apply, and accordingly, the President shall give his assent to the bill on its presentation for assent.”
    Mr Speaker, I refer again to clause (6) of the same article which says 12:45 p.m.
    “The report of the committee, together with the explanatory memorandum to the bill, shall form the basis for a full debate on the bill for its passage, with or without amendments, or its rejection, by Parliament.”
    Now, what we are doing here is opening this urgent Bill which has been presented by the Committee to a full debate. Meanwhile, article 106, clause -- [Interruption] No! I am not confused at all. Listen to me-- [Interruptions.] Mr Speaker, this is a Bill that has been presented by the Committee as an urgent Bill -- by reason only of its presentation and its acceptance as an urgent Bill, it is the mandate of the Committee by the Constitution, to present it as an urgent Bill.
    So, the Committee has presented a Bill to this House that says that this is an urgent Bill, we cannot debate it -- [Interruptions.] You cannot -- Mr Speaker, by reason of the fact that clause (6) is one of the exceptions under clause 13; we cannot open this Bill to a full debate by reason of the fact that clause (6) is one of the exceptions under clause 13. If the conventions of Parliament have been such that these types of Bills have been debated, Parliament has been acting wrongfully and contrary to the Constitu- tion and cannot do it now.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Hon Members, I am not clothed with jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana. The relevant Standing Orders, as far as the issue of urgency of a Bill is concerned, is Standing Order 119, which says,
    “Where it is determined and certified by the appropriate Committee of the House appointed in that behalf that a particular Bill is of an urgent nature, that Bill may be introduced without publication. Copies of the Bill shall be distributed to Members and may be taken through all its stages in one day.”
    So, in my view, as the Speaker of this House, that is what I am called upon to interpret. Even though I must say that it derives its source from article 106 (13), which you have drawn the House's attention to, I interpret the Standing Orders but not the Constitution.
    Hon Members, I have been listening carefully to the issues raised by Members from both sides of the House and I do not intend to come in now. At the appropriate stage, if I have to give any direction, I will do so. But as has been suggested, let me take one or few comments from the floor, then if there is any direction, I will give.
    Hon Member from Manhyia South and after that Member for Nadowli-Kaleo.
    Dr Matthew O. Prempeh (NPP -- Manhyia South) 12:45 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Hon Vice Chairman, do you have a point of order?
    Mr Essilfie 12:45 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    What is your point of order? Is it against him quoting?
    Mr Essilfie 12:45 p.m.
    No! It is not against him but he made a statement that in suppor- ting the debate. You do not support debate on the floor of this House and I would want him to correct himself. [Hear! Hear!]
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in contributing to the debate and supporting the debate. Mr Speaker, column 1594 and I beg to read:
    “I would start from where my Hon Friend left off. Hon Opare- Hammond (Member for Adenta) says that the tax is justified because the communications sector is making super profits.That has never been a basis for taxation.”
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member who was speaking was called Mr J. D. Mahama, NDC Member of Parliament for Bole- Bamboi. And he said:
    “That never has been a basis for taxation. You cannot say that the financial sector is making super- profits and so you introduce a tax on loans and savings.”
    Mr Speaker, we should note 12:45 p.m.
    “If the people, due to competition and increasing efficiency, are making profits, why not? They have invested and so it should not form the basis for saying that once a particular sector is making good
    profit, then the Government must step in and tax them”.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member goes on to say 12:45 p.m.
    “Mr Speaker, what the Government continues to do day in, day out is to take the easy way out; that is, just continue to slap indirect taxes on the people . . .”
    That is the Hon Member for Bole- Bamboi at that time.
    The real challenge in raising revenue for this country is spreading the tax net, such that everybody pays a little tax on his income. That is, it would be truly a sustainable base for revenue mobilisation in this country. If you put 40 per cent tax on petrol, then you say that commu- nication is doing well and so, let us slap a one pesewa on every minute of airtime - - that sector is one of the most overtaxed sectors.
    The Hon Member for Bole-Bamboi, in his exposition, said the Communications Service Tax or the communication sector was the most over-taxed sector in the country at that time -- [Interrup-tions] -- The relevance, I will get there, Hon Minister for Roads and Highways.
    Mr Speaker, between 2008 and 2013 as we speak, the VAT rate has not gone down. The National Health Insurance Scheme rate he quoted has not gone down; the Communications Service Tax has not gone up. He is rather seeking to even deepen the taxation and at that time, he was the
    Hon Member for Bole-Bamboi, now, he is the President of the Republic. He who said that the communication sector was over-taxed, is seeking by this Bill to even tax the communication sector that is taxed even more. Mr Speaker, I will go on further
    -- 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Hon Member, you are allowed to quote and make the necessary inferences but you should not -- my attitude on this Chair is that where people are not there to defend themselves, there should be a limit at which we can go at those people.
    Hon Member, continue.
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you for your wise words, your pearls of wisdom.
    When the Communications Service Tax was introduced and it was being debated, the President of the Republic was not here. The President of the Republic, His Excellency John Agyekum Kufuor was not in the Chamber. It did not stop the Member for Bole-Bamboi at that time from making comments. It did not actually prevent the --
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    The Hansard that you are quoting, did they mention President Kufuor?
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Yes.
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, should I quote?
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Which column?
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, column 1594 and I am quoting.
    Mr Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Hon Member, there in lies the difference; that one refers to government, the other refers to an individual? So, you proceed.
    Dr Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Haruna Iddrisu, the immediate past Minister for Communi- cations and the current Minister for Trade and Industry, in quoting column 1573, Mr Speaker, this is what he said:
    “The Minority Members on this Committee actively participated in the consideration of the Bill. They however, expressed their opposition in principle to the imposition of communications service tax be- because of its impact on teledensity and mobile penetration.”
    If anything at all, history tells us that it has rather increased teledensity and mobile penetration.
    Mr Speaker, I move further to quote what the former Member for Bole-Bamboi continued to say. Mr Speaker, he said:
    “As a consumer of airtime taxes, I would like the worst case scenario. It says up to 8 per cent. I do not believe in the generosity --
    And this is what he said:
    He does not believe in the generosity of Government that it will put 8 per cent in the Bill and collect 2 per cent. Mr Speaker, I expect that they will collect the 8 per cent. I was talking about the National Youth Employment Programme (NYEP).
    We have the Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund); the GETFund is collected by the VAT Service. It collects the moneys and it lodges the moneys into what we call the GETFund and that money is used specifically for educational financing. We have the National Health Insurance levy.
    Mr Speaker, so, the point I was making is that, for these specific taxes, they are collected by the VAT Service. What we are saying is, if you say that the money is meant for National Youth Employment Programme (NYEP), in order to avoid the hazard that revenues like these continue to suffer in the Consolidated Fund, why do you not bring a Bill that sets up a Fund for the National Youth Employment Programme, so that we know these moneys are collected and are going to be lodged into the NYEP Fund?
    Mr Speaker, the essence of this extensive quote was that, not too long ago, Communications Service Tax under the 2008 Manifesto of the NDC, repeated in the 2012 Manifesto, it was said it would be dedicated to the National Youth Employment Programme.
    When the Hon Member for Bole/ Bamboi was talking extensively, his point, including the Hon Haruna Iddrisu, was that the Government should dedicate the Communications Service Tax into a -- National Youth Employment Fund. What has happened? This is the point we are talking about.
    It is not just collecting the tax and chopping, it is collecting the Fund and using it for the purpose for which you so desire -- [Interruption] -- The person who proposed the National Youth Employment --
    Mr Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, conclude. Hon Member, conclude.
    Dr Prempeh 1:15 p.m.
    In conclusion, Mr Speaker, the Hon Fuseini who proposed the National Youth Employment Fund at that time, happens to be the Hon Member for Tamale Central and he is around; we can see him, so that this amount of money -- [Interruption] -- He is a Cabinet Minister now; all right -- [Interruption.]
    Alhaji Inusah A. B. Fuseini 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you very much.
    The Hon Member has invited me to put him straight. I did suggest that. But you see, Mr Speaker, what he is presently doing, is seriously misleading the House and the Ghanaian public.
    Mr Speaker, the intendment of this Bill is not to further levy tax or increase the tax component -- [Interruption] -- Mr Speaker, what the Bill is seeking to do, is to bring within the ambit of the Service Tax, areas that were previously excluded and provide more clarity to the imposition of the tax.
    Mr Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Very well. You have made your point.
    Your last sentence?
    Dr Prempeh 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my last sentence, I am opposing the Communi- cations Service Tax (Amendment) Bill, in answering him and concluding. The Object of the Bill is to clarify the scope and coverage of the tax -- [Interruptions.]
    Mr Alban S. K. Bagbin (NDC -- Nadowli/Kaleo) 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I stand to contribute to the debate on the policies and principles of the Communications Service Tax (Amendment) Bill, which is now before the House.
    Mr Speaker, the Constitution, clearly, as my Colleague Hon Papa Owusu- Ankomah stated, gave the authority to the Executive to initiate the proposals for legislation in the imposition of tax and to present that to Parliament for consideration and passage or rejection.
    Mr Speaker, in doing so, the Constitution also empowers the Executive to give an indication whether they want that Bill to be handled by Parliament through the normal process of parliamentary practice or to rather give some urgency in the handling of the Bill. By so doing, they talk about the Committee of the House looking at those issues and then informing the House whether we should handle that Bill as an Urgent Bill.
    And that is why in clause 106(13) refers to the exceptions in clause 106(2)(a) and (b). That is the basis.
    So that when the Bill is of urgent nature, the gazette notification is not as demanded by the Constitution; that is at least, 14 days before the date of its introduction in Parliament. So, that indication is given by the Constitution and when the Executive is making the proposal, you can see that from the Bill. So, unless the Committee comes with very good reasons, this is what we are expected to follow.
    Minority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu) 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think in principle and ordinarily, one may not have anything against this admission of “My country is broke Bill”.
    Mr Speaker, clearly, this is an admission that there are funding gaps, there is nowhere to go and this is the area to go. This is an admission of “My country is broke Bill.” But Mr Speaker, I think the issue raised by the Hon Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice, unfortunately, I think he is not here or he is here present -- Mr Speaker, he drew attention to the Constitution, article 106(13) and seemed to suggest to this House that the House cannot debate.
    Mr Speaker, he is talking on the phone -- the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice and I guess he did not even hear what I said.
    Mr Speaker, I think it is a very dangerous proposition from the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice to this House. This is because he says to us that there is only an exception to clause 1 and paragraph (a) of clause 2. So, we should not debate.
    Mr Speaker, it would then mean, necessarily, by his argument, that we can close our eyes if an urgent Bill should come in respect of clause 106(3). Clause 106(3) tells us --
    “A Bill affecting the institution of chieftaincy shall not be introduced in Parliament without prior reference to the National House of Chiefs.”
    Now, he is saying that we should close our eyes on all the preceding clauses; that is what he said. So, if it comes as an urgent Bill, then we should not be bound by (5). He is totally wrong. I disagree with his interpretation of what he has told this House.
    Mr Speaker, but let me go on because I think it is a very dangerous proposition to this House. Fortunately -- [Interruption] -- Mr Speaker, but
    fortunately, he is an Hon Member of this House, he is a new Member of this House. I believe, together with us, I mean all of us, are still on the learning curve, so, we would all be learning; but it is a dangerous proposition from him.
    Mr Speaker, but to go on, many issues have been raised and it is important that the former Hon Minority Leader has drawn attention to his own contribution when he emphasised that what Bill was before us at the time was in respect of “Talk Tax”. It was a user tax.
    I think the Government is going on this same path and that is why I am saying that in principle, I cannot call myself against this. There are some details that we may have to address our minds to and if there are reasons to amend, we have to go on that path.
    But having said that Mr Speaker, the distinction between what the then Hon Minority Leader said and what our current President said, clearly, is crystal clear. What it means is that, what the then Hon Member for Bole/Bamboi said was a complete confusion of the issue before us.
    Mr Speaker, he told us 1:25 p.m.
    “We are taking 25 per cent”, and I am referring to column 1595 of the 12th March, 2008 Official Report. I am quoting paragraph (2) --
    “We are taking 25 per cent corporate income tax from them.”
    And today, we are still taking 25 per cent corporate income tax --
    “They are paying an additional 15 per cent for VAT and NHIS.”
    Today, we are still paying.
    Mr Speaker, he told us 1:25 p.m.


    “Now we are going to add one pesewa per minute which translates to about 8 per cent of the cost of airtime uses. That is abnormal taxation.”

    That was the then Hon Member for Bole-Bamboi. He completely misunder- stood the issues before us. He thought it was an additional burden on corporate bodies. I am happy the then Hon Minority Leader drew attention that we are talking about user tax, consumer tax, talk tax as he referred to it then.

    The unfortunate thing is that he did not succeed in bringing his, then Hon Member of Parliament to order, that he was confusing the issues. Mr Speaker, that was most unfortunate. [Interruption.] And he says to us that --

    “To make injury worse, instead of that revenue being ploughed back into the sector, Government is going to hold it and use it as it deems fit.”

    Mr Speaker, now, the man who uttered these words is the President, the head of Government. I would want to believe that he now understands the issues better than he did at the time.

    Mr Speaker, the then Hon Member for Lawra/Nandom -- [Laughter] -- The then Hon Member for Lawra/Nandom said that this matter about talk tax was not even necessary because it was an easy way of raising tax. We should look at other means to raise tax. Mr Speaker, but today, he finds himself in another world.

    Today, he is the Leader of Government Business -- [Interruption] -- Mr Speaker, I would want to listen to what he would say. Mr Speaker, when we contribute in this House, we should take what tomorrow may hold for us.
    Mr Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    Hon Member for Shai/ Osudoku --
    Mr David T. Assumeng 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, just to correct my name. My name is “Assumεng”, it is not “Assimeng”. [Interruption.]
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, so we should be consistent. But as I said, I think, yes, where we are, we know we need to rake inasmuch as possible to propel our national development. And to that extent, I think that beyond looking at the Bill, in a very scrutinuous and amending the relevant portions -- Mr Speaker, I would think that we would welcome this in principle.
    But the matter before us does not necessarily have to be finished within one day. Our Standing Orders are very clear on that. It only suggests that we may transact and conclude business on it in one day. Not necessarily push ourselves to do it and do a shoddy job out of this. As we have been told, there are revenue shortfalls; how much we are not even too sure of. How much is intended to be raked in by this proposal, this House has not been informed. Mr Speaker, we need to do this.
    Mr Speaker, the other matters relating to the definition of user and so on, I think we should be very clear on this. I notice that the Committee is proffering only two
    amendments and those amendments, in my view, relate to typographical errors; very inconsequential. The substance of the matter before us, they have not touched. So, I would think that much as in principle, I would not have anything against it. Let us be a bit slow on this, then we look at the areas that we need to streamline; if we can conclude it by tomorrow, it should be alright and then we move on.
    But I think we need to meet to take our foot off the accelerator for a while and have a second look at it and then we can continue tomorrow and possibly conclude tomorrow. This is because Mr Speaker, between today and tomorrow or perhaps, even between today and Friday, I do not know how much as a nation, we would lose.
    I would think and I would suggest strongly that let us step it down without concluding, and we can still continue with the debate. But after the event, we can then sit down as we usually do, listen to the Minister and officials and experts in this area, some of who are with us here in Parliament, and then move on and do what is expected of us. But let us assure ourselves that we have done what is right.
    Dr Benjamin B. Kunbuor 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, let me crave your indulgence before I make one or two remarks, that it is patently obvious in paragraph 5.0 of the Committee's Report that there is a typographical error and I would want the Committee Chairman to clarify that particular issue for us. This is because when, read together with the memorandum, you would see clearly that that second paragraph, the last sentence, is certainly an error. And I would want that clarified before I proceed with my contribution.
    Mr Gabriel Essilfie 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the last paragraph of clause (1) in the Report, page (2) should read:
    “The tax seeks to be levied on users of electronic communications service other than private electronic communications services.”
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, what amendment are you seeking to effect? On users of electronic communications service providers other than what?
    Mr Essilfie 1:35 p.m.
    Providers other than private electronic communication services, which is exactly in line with what the Bill has.
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Vice Chairman, if you think that that sentence as it stands now is incorrect, just delete it. It does not add or take away anything if you just delete it.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, they are two things. The Hon Member is further expending that one. He says the tax is to be levied on electronic communi- cations service providers; and he continues, other than -- Mr Speaker, if you listen to him and the direction that you are giving to him, the expanded version does not cure the issue that you are raising. So, let him come clear on that. What does he mean?
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Vice Chairman, why do you not just delete that sentence? Consideration Stage can cure whatever you want to do, at the end of the day what goes into the Bill, the final product?
    Mr Essilfie 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I wanted to change that because the way it stands, there was misleading. But I have taken a cue from your advice; it is deleted.
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    The Majority Leader raised the issue, listening to the debate on the floor, I realise also that there was a problem there. In fact, if he had not raised the issue, I was going to draw your attention to it to clarify that. Now, you want to expand it in a way that I do not understand. That is my confusion.
    So, for the avoidance of doubt, just delete it; when we reach the Consideration Stage, whatever amendment that you would effect, that would be what goes into the final Bill and then you can do that at that stage.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if the amendment the Vice Chairman is now proffering is reflective of the business that was transacted at the level of the Committee, Mr Speaker, how can we then say that he should rise up and amend it to suit some purposes? Let us hear from him; what went on before --
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Clearly, Hon Minority Leader, if there is a mistake, we all make mistakes. So, there is nothing wrong if there is an error on the face of the record. I do not see why -- [Interruption.] Hon Members, I am not talking about pink sheets. [Uproar!]
    Mr Essilfie 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have taken your advice; we would delete the second paragraph -- [Interruption.]
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    No! That sentence. There is a problem with that sentence.
    Mr Essilfie 1:35 p.m.
    We will delete that last sentence.
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Absolutely.
    Mr Essilfie 1:35 p.m.
    “The tax is to be levied on electronic communications service providers” should be deleted.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I needed that clarification from the Chairman of the Committee to enable me see my way clear on the rich debate that has taken place.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Member for Suhum, what is your point of order?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Bill is claiming to bring clarity and the confusion that seems to exist is whether the tax is to be levied on service providers inter-connect charges or on users. Now, you could see an attempt by the Committee in trying to capture that clarity by saying that the tax is to be levied on electronics communication --
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, he has deleted it.
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, but its place, he has now left us in doubt as to who the tax is to be levied on.
    Mr Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, we would get there; do not worry. Hon Majority Leader, you have the floor. I think we should not spend much time on this issue.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have had the opportunity to listen to the debate on this matter and I understand that we are actually at the Second Reading Stage of this Bill. And it is important that as a House of Parliament, fundamentals and principles are respected. Under Order 127, the most essential things at this stage in relation to a Bill at the Second Reading, is to do two things.
    One, to look at the principles of the Bill together with the Report of the Committee.
    We have listened to a number of engagements --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, having made this fundamental statement, which I agree with, because it means that we should be talking about the principles. Mr Speaker, is he saying to this House that he disagrees with the position taken by the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, that we should not even open it to debate? Is he saying he disagrees with him because that is very important to this House?
    Mr Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Hon Member, I have given a direction with regard to the provision of the Constitution, that the Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice has drawn our attention to. And I referred to Standing Order 119 and at the appropriate time, I would give directives on that matter.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I seek basically to make my modest contribution to this debate and I certainly will resist the temptation to be asked to run a commentary on what would have been said by an Hon Member. But Mr Speaker, in proceeding on the principles and the Committee's Report --
    Mr Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Sorry. Before you continue, I want to find out from Leadership whether they have made arrangements for an extended Sitting? That will guide the Chair to know -- Have you made provision for an external Sitting? -- [An Hon Member: No.] -- Very well.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:45 p.m.
    And I intend that; it is important for purposes of the record, Mr Speaker, that we address those preliminary matters just for the sake of the record in the future.
    Mr Speaker, the first issue that came up had to do with whether this Bill, at all, is urgent. And Hon Papa Owusu- Ankomah, together with other people, have drawn and introduced very, very interes-ting dimensions for assessing whether the Bill of this nature is urgent or not. Mr Speaker, whether a matter is
    urgent or not, is highly subjective. It just depends on where one is standing and that will indicate to you whether it is urgent or not. So, I agree entirely with those who are raising arguments that the matter might not be urgent. But I intend to indicate why I think this matter is urgent.
    Mr Speaker, you would realise that this Bill has come together with other Bills and the essence of all these Bills put together, is simply an implementation of an economic policy framework in the budget that was approved by this House. And by this House approving that economic framework, which included the Communi- cations Service Tax, one must bring the consequential legislation to actually implement it. That has always been the processes in this House.
    The budget cycle is half way down the year and I think, if for no other reason at all, that for almost all managers of an economy, would know that the matter has become urgent. And that in my view, is the first consideration why I think this matter should be looked at.
    The second issue, Mr Speaker, on article 106 (13), which has actually been reproduced in the Standing Orders, is to get the clear legal matter of the urgency or otherwise.
    It is not a substantive matter; it is a procedural matter. And the procedure is quite clear in the constitutional provision that it says, once the Committee has determined that this matter is urgent, and the Committee's Report is adopted, the essentials that go into determining whether it is urgent or not, have not been provided for in that particular Report, for in that particular article in the Standing Orders.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:45 p.m.
    On a point of order!
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader is misleading the House.
    Mr Speaker, he cannot say that as regard what is urgent, it is subjective. We have criteria. One may defer in terms of opinion but to stand on the floor of this House and tell this House and the people of this country, that as to what is urgent, is subjective, that cannot be correct.
    Mr Speaker, the dictionary says “urgent” is what is immediate; what requires immediate action. It does not mean that there is no objectivity. We may differ in terms of opinion. But to say that what is urgent is subjective, is totally incorrect.
    Mr Bagbin 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, just for purposes of clarification. In fact, Order 119 gives an indication as to what is urgent. And in my submission, I referred generally to those provisions. I did not specifically mention them because Order 119 says that:
    “Where it is determined and certified by the appropriate Committee of the House appointed in that behalf that a particular Bill is of an urgent nature, that Bill may be introduced without publication.”
    That is why I said “may”:
    “Copies of the Bill shall be distri- buted to Members and may be taken through all its stages in one day.”
    That is procedure. And I stated that if one goes through the Constitution, article 106 -- And if one goes to article 108, one would see how normal Bills are treated. There must be -- Gazette notification of not less than 14 days. So, when the Executive brings a Bill without that provision, it means they are expecting them to be treated urgently. That was my submission.
    When one looks at this Bill, it was gazetted on 25th June, 2013. So, it is not 14 days yet, which means, it is an indication. So, either we publish it -- This is because the word used is “may”. So, if it is not published, then clearly, it is urgent. But when it is given a publication, but without the 14 days' notification, it also gives an indication that they want it to be treated urgently.
    But some of these reasons have to be stated. And that is the only thing lacking.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the distinc- tion between being subjective and objective is not intended to mislead anybody in this country. When I say a matter is subjective, it simple means that from where I stand, see it as urgent. And from where another person stands, one sees it as not urgent.
    As the former Hon Majority Leader has indicated --
    Mr Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Hon Members, having regard to the state of Business in the House, I direct that Sitting be held outside the prescribed period to enable us determine this matter.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, so, I am indicating that if the essential ingredients of when a matter is urgent has been provided and those procedural require- ments are satisfied, that is when we would then proceed to where we are in adopting this Report. And after we have adopted it, the consequences will flow from there.
    Mr William O. Boafo 1:55 p.m.
    On a point of order.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader is trying to draw a distinction between subjectivity and objectivity. I do not know the criteria. But we all know that in our parlance, if one does that in terms of “subjectivity” one excludes review. And it is dangerous for us to adopt subjective attitude. That will mean exclusion of parliamentary review of a report of a Committee of this Parliament. Mr Speaker, we all know--
    Mr Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Exclusion of?
    Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
    Exclusion of parliamentary review of a report of a committee of this Parliament. That is very dangerous for us.
    Mr Speaker, we all know the history of how judicial review came about. It was this subjectivity which brought about the judicial review. And we want to insist that no matter the situation, as for parliamentary review, it must not be excluded. So, this question of subjectivity should not come in at all.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker. I did not know that I was opening a minefield. Perhaps, I should have indicated the context in which I am using the term. I definitely know there are legal criteria for subjectivity and objectivity. In fact, I even know there are philosophical categories of what is objective and what is subjective. [Laughter.]
    But I am simply using “subjective” here in the ordinary plain language as an Hon Member of Parliament. If that is creating some distortions in our own processes of looking at this, I would apologise for that. But I am using the term “subjective” here in its ordinary understanding; nothing very, very complicated in that regard.
    But having resolved --
    Dr Kunbuor 1:55 p.m.
    Hon Kyei-Mensah- Bonsu should let this thing proceed.
    Mr Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Let us listen to the Hon Majority Leader.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with respect, we would want to listen to him. But we all know that if we grant entry to the Hon Majority Leader into his unlimited status, this House would not adjourn.
    Mr Speaker, so, I am asking that you guide the transaction of Business in this House.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:55 p.m.
    Well, Mr Speaker, normally, I would take a cue from Mr Speaker. But since the matter is being routed through you, Mr Speaker, I can tell the Hon Minority Leader that I will be very, very brief on this one. This is because there is going to be enough time to address the substance of this Bill and all I am interested in is engaging the principles, but also clearing some debris of procedure that were introduced in relation to this procedure.
    Mr Speaker, the only reason I am making this contribution is that, I have seen a lack of distinction in the debate so far about telecommunication regulation and taxation. There is something about telecommunication regulation and taxation that if you conflict the two, you are going to get into the type of difficulty that we have. I am saying this in relation to the principles.
    This legislation in all essence is a tax legislation and not one regulating telecommunications. One of the essential principles, again, Mr Speaker, that we have been confusing are three essential tax legal categories. People are not making the distinction between the clauses that impose a tax, the clauses that charge a tax
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:55 p.m.
    On a point of order.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader, I know, is a tax expert. He has lectured in tax at the Ghana School of Law. However, he has been talking about us dealing with the principles, and now he is going clause by clause, and I know that he is also a member of the Finance Committee. I thought he would educate us at the Committee level, so that charging, imposition and base, would reflect in the Report. [Uproar.] He did not do it; it is not reflected in the Report.
    But really, this is not the time for him to educate us on these matters.
    Mr Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Hon Member for Sekondi, you and I were not there. [Laughter.]
    Dr Kunbuor 1:55 p.m.
    In fact, Mr Speaker, that is precisely what I am doing and these are the principles. The principles here in clause 1, are on imposition; I did not
    introduce it. It is in the Bill and that is a principle. You go to clause 2, it is dealing with liability to tax, which is the charge; I did not introduce it. You go to the subsequent one and it is because if you do not make this distinction, you are unlikely to see exactly what you want to charge and what you want to impose the tax on, then the base of that tax.
    So, when Hon Members were making the contribution, that it is supposed to expand and bring clarity, that is addressing the tax base. Then when you come to deal with the user of the service, that is the one that deals with the charge. And on what activity are you imposing the tax? That is the one in clause 1 that deals with electronic communications service other than private electronic services.
    Once these categories are clear in our minds, then we know how we are proceeding in terms of a tax legislation of this nature.
    Mr Speaker --
    rose
    An Hon Member 1:55 p.m.
    Hon Member for Old Tafo, sit down.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:55 p.m.
    Well, Mr Speaker, as Leader, once he has risen, I have to resume my seat. I will conclude very soon. But --
    Mr Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Hon Member for Old Tafo.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not sure where the Hon Majority Leader is leading us to.
    The parent Act dealt with users. This is dealing with users and providers. It is a major change. Those are the principles we were arguing about, not what he is talking about. That is the point we are
    making. They are making a major change. So, if he is talking about the principles, it is not clear here. That is the point we are making. So, this -- That is the issue.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, precisely. That is why I am saying that when you are dealing with a technical area -- In fact, that he is seeing as the expansion in the increase in newness, is simply an enlargement of the tax base. That is what it means, it is not that you are charging a different type of tax. [Interruption.] They should listen to me.
    I sometimes -- [Interruption.] Excuse me. They should let me conclude and we can take up this matter.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Hon Member, let him conclude, please.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am saying that if this Bill is really understood in its proper context, and the Bill is not confused with telecommunications regulations and inter-connectivity, we would have a very clear focals on the nature of this Bill, and that it is a pure fiscal Bill that is supposed to be implementing a budget that has been approved by this House. And we are saying that, better late than never.
    I can concede the fact that, it is a consequential legislation to the budget that has delayed in coming. But that does not mean one cannot bring that legislation to implement it. That is why I am saying, as a matter of importance, urgency. The essentials that are required; the Memoran-
    dum has set everything out clearly in terms of the direction of policy, the content of the legislation and its legal finesse.
    I know all these things had been adequately addressed and we would want that when we get into a subsequent stage of this Bill, we would engage the clauses and begin to deal with these specific issues that I have mentioned.
    Mr Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Members, that brings us to the end of the debate on the Motion.
    I believe that the determination of the urgency of a Bill by our Standing Orders has been vested in the Committee handling the Bill. If you look at our Standing Orders that I referred to, which the Hon Member for Nadowli/Kaleo also did referr to, it says: “Where it is determined and certified by the appro- priate Committee of the House . . .” So that determination is vested in the Committee handling the Bill.
    What the House can do, is when they believe that it is not an urgent Bill, is to exercise their power to say that the Bill should not be taken through all the stages and they can do that by saying that it should not pass through the Second Consideration Stage. That one is reserved for the House.
    Hon Members, what I intend doing, listening carefully to all of you, is to pose the Question. Yet if you look at the Standing Order, it did not say that we should take it through all the stages the same day. So, we will not take it through all the stages today. But I will put the Question on the current Motion before us. I think that it is in the interest of this House to look at some of the issues raised.
    Mr Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader --
    Dr Kunbuor 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we did stand down item number 5 on the Order Paper.
    Mr Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Members, this is just a presentation of the first Reading of the Bill.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:05 p.m.
    And I would want Mr Speaker's, indulgence to allow the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice to lay it on behalf of the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, hoping that my counterpart, the Hon Minority Leader would allow us to proceed because we have beaten that path before.
    Mr Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Very well.
    Hon Minority Leader, this is just the laying of the Bill, so, we can have it and have the House adjourned.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think, ordinarily, I should not be obstructing this Business especially since our Hon Colleague is a Member of the House.
    My little worry is that, the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice, on his feet in the House, some propositions that are coming up --
    Mr Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Member, we have finished with the Second Reading of the Bill.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, may I also say that I have observed that the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice has not found herself in this House before ever since she was confirmed as the Attorney-General. I have not seen her. So, just to let her know that we want to see her and listen to her. Per chance, she may hold contrary views to her Deputy in many, many regards. [Laughter.]
    Mr Speaker, I have no objection.
    Mr Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Deputy Minister, item number 5.
    BILLS -- FIRST READING 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, would you not think that it may be relevant to add the Committee on Defence and Interior in this matter? I am not too sure; I am just asking for your direction.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is a treaty item and even Foreign Affairs would be relevant in this matter. But I have no serious objection to a joint- committee.
    Mr Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Members, I have been advised that the main Bill that came to this House was handled by the Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee and on that basis, I want them to handle the amendment too.

    Hon Members, on that note, the House is adjourned till tomorrow at 10.00 o'clock in the forenoon.

    Hon Members, thank you very much.
    ADJOURNMENT 2:05 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2.12 p.m. till Wednesday, 3rd July, 2013 at 10.00 a.m.