Debates of 4 Jul 2013

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 11:50 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon Members, Correc- tion of the Votes and Proceedings of Wednesday, 3rd July, 2013.
Page 1 …. 17 --
Mr Joseph B. A. Danquah 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I have been up since, trying to catch your eye.
Mr Speaker, from page 12, the amendment for the Schedule seems incomplete. I do not understand because there is a blank space on page 13, that is why. From page 12, page 13; is not there. So, the amendment proposed seems incomplete and especially the paragraph 6 coming downwards seems incomplete.
Mr Speaker 11:50 a.m.
You mean the arrange- ment?
Mr Danquah 11:50 a.m.
Yes. For the Schedule; from page 12, the page 13 is blank and they were paragraphs 6, 7, 8. So -- I think he has changed the --
Mr Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Are you alright now?
Mr Danquah 11:50 a.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Very well.

Hon Members the Votes and Proceed- ings of Wednesday, 3rd July, 2013 as corrected, are hereby adopted as the true record of the proceedings.
Mr Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon Members, we move to Commencement of Public Business:
Hon Majority Leader.
Dr Benjamin B. Kunbour 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if we could take item (4) on the Order Paper.
Mr Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Very well. Are you going to amend it?
Dr Kunbour 11:50 a.m.
That is so, Mr Speaker. There is an amendment which will be inserted.
MOTIONS 11:50 a.m.
Majority Leader (Dr Benjamin B. Kunbour) 11:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 80(1), which require that no Motion shall be debated until at least, forty-eight hours have elapsed between the date on which notice of the Motion is given and the date on which the Motion is moved, the Motion that this Honourable House constitutes an ad hoc committee to make recommendation for the adoption of a Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament may be moved today.
Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul noon
Mr Speaker, it is a consequential Motion, so I beg to second the Motion.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament -- Constitution of
Ad Hoc Committee
Majority Leader (Dr Benjamin B. Kunbour) noon
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this Honourable House constitutes an ad hoc committee composed of the following Hon Members to draft a Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament for implementation:
1. Hon Alban S. K. Bagbin -- Chairman
2. Hon Ahmed Ibrahim -- Vice Chairman
3. Hon. Laadi Ayii Ayamba (Ms) -- Member
4. Hon George Kofi Arthur -- Member
5. Hon Joe Ghartey -- Member
6. Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah -- Member
7. Hon Ignatius Baffour Awuah -- Member
Mr Speaker, following the fact that in almost all matured democracies, it has always been the practice and it is part of the parliamentary experience beyond setting up rules or privileges for Hon Members of the House, we also need to have some standards and code of conduct that should guide Hon Members.
Mr Speaker, over the years, we have been handling the affairs of Parliament without some minimum standards which will reinforce the privileges that Hon Members are entitled to. And there is a complementarity between the code of conduct and the privileges of Hon Members. So, this, in the main, is also to reinforce the privileges and how we expect the public to relate to Hon Members.
But more significantly, in an institution that has no rules to actually regulate our conduct when the House or Members of the House run into some challenges, it becomes difficult to measure the conduct in relation to known standards and we think it is about time, Mr Speaker, that we got this ad hoc committee, as a matter of urgency, to get us the best practices in terms of a code of conduct, so that this Honourable House can debate it thoroughly and adopt it as a guide to our activities.
Mr Speaker noon
Hon Majority Leader, before I call on the Hon Deputy Minority Leader to second the Motion, my understanding with regard to the consultation that I held with the Leadership is that, this is a bipartisan Committee and like we did in article 181, clause 5, the Vice Chairman was the Minority Leader and so, we depart from the normal rules where Chairman and Vice are from the Majority side and we get Ranking Member and deputy from the Minority side.
But this is a bipartisan Committee. So, why do you get -- and one of the reasons, if I may recall-- that is why we made Hon Bagbin a member because he is a former Leader. So, do you not get a former Leader to be the Vice Chairman?
Hon Member for Sekondi-- Do you have any objection to that?
Dr Kunhuor noon
No, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker noon
That will be consistent with what we did with article 181, clause
5.
Dr Kunbuor noon
Mr Speaker, actually, my attention was drawn to this matter by the Whip -- because the original agreement was that it should be structured in that way. But because Mr Speaker held us up, I did not even know it was on the Order Paper in this form till I was reading it. So, I will crave your indulgence to actually amend this and make the Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah, the Vice Chairman in that order.
Mr Speaker noon
Hon Members, the Motion is accordingly amended to reflect what the Hon Majority Leader has just said on the floor.
Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul (NPP -- Bimbilla) noon
Mr Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to second the Motion on the floor.
But Mr Speaker, let me just assure Hon Members that this ad hoc committee to make recommendation for the adoption of the code of conduct for Members of Parliament is not a new thing. It has been on the drawing board for a very long time, especially in the last Parliament.
It was there but the Hon Speaker and the Leadership felt that it is time for us to make these recommendations. There were no specific ingredients that generated or that engineered this particular matter and I would want to assure Hon Members that, nobody should think that some specific incidents or specific ingredients engineered this particular thing.
As Leadership and Members of Parliament, we thought that the code of conduct for Members of Parliament was overdue, especially after practising this Fourth Republican Constitution for twenty years and more. And we believe that it is
important to make regulations that will set standards to guide all of us.
But these standards that we are setting for ourselves, Mr Speaker, come with a lot of responsibilities-- Responsibilities that will make Members of Parliament be seen in the light as Hon Members and be able to live up to those standards.
We, as Members and Leaders in our various communities, should be the first to sacrifice and live in a certain way before we hold others accountable to the way they live. And that will include, Mr Speaker, issues to deal with our dressing, issues to do with the way we talk and the way we even do other things. And I believe that, Mr Speaker, as we do this, it will inure to the greater benefit of the Members of Parliament.
Mr Speaker, I know that the Standing Orders of Parliament give us a guide about the way Members of Parliament should conduct themselves, particularly in this House. But the work of a Member of Parliament goes beyond just what happens in the Chamber or within the precincts of Parliament and it is important to have this code of conduct to regulate us and make sure that we thrive as Members of Parliament and that we are able to exhibit the highest standards, standards that will cut across all spheres of life.
So, Mr Speaker, with these words, I beg to second the Motion and express hope that Hon Members will support it vigorously, so that it will pass -- and being a bipartisan Motion, we hope that the debate will not be too vigorous against it, so that we can have this thing passed and passed very well.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
Question proposed.
Mr Speaker noon
Hon Member for Akwapim North.
Hon Members, this is to compose the Committee and the names are from the Leadership of both sides; so, I would want to take one Member each from both sides. When the Report comes, then -- [Interruptions] No, no, no.
Hon Members, let us have this thing and when they come and somebody thinks that it is a breach of any law or any rule, at that stage, we will debate it.
Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Haruna Iddrisu)(MP) noon
Mr Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak in favour of the Motion ably moved by the Majority Leader -- and Mr Speaker, with emphasis to say that this is long overdue.
Indeed, if you go to Chapter 24, the code of conduct for public officers under article 284 of the 1992 Constitution, you would appreciate why this Committee ought to have been set up long ago, pursuant to this constitutional provision.
Mr Speaker, article 284 says and I beg to quote noon
“A public officer shall not put himself in a position where his personal interest conflicts or is likely to conflict with the performance of the functions of his office”.
But even what is more important, Mr Speaker, is article 286 (5) which says that
-- noon
Mr Kobina T. Hammond (NPP -- Adansi Asokwa) 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am also happy to make my voice heard on this subject.
Mr Speaker, I am extremely anxious by this Motion and the suggestion that we should support it massively.

Maj. (Dr) (Alhaji) Mustapha Ahmed (retd) -- rose --
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
My Hon Brother quoted from the Constitution and made the point about how we should behave ourselves; that regulation is already there --
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Member, are you on a point of order?
Maj. (Dr) (Alhaji) Mustapha Ahmed (retd): Mr Speaker, rightly so. The Hon Colleague is grossly misleading the House.

Mr Speaker, I say so because the essence of Parliament is to establish laws which are regulations. And therefore, if he is anti-regulation, Mr Speaker, I would wish to advise him that he should say so to his constituents, so that next time they do not return him here.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, normally, I would respond in my characteristic K. T. Hammond fashion; this one, I would prefer to not just ignore him but to leave it as it is.
Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague drew attention to where, in the Constitution, the regulation has already been made -- how Hon Members of Parliament should behave, or how we should comport ourselves as properly representing the Legislature of the Republic of Ghana. Why should we now form an ad hoc committee to now propose regulations to bind us on how to speak outside?
Is he suggesting that we do not know how to speak outside? Is he suggesting that we do not know when there is a conflict? Some of these things are even a matter of law -- when you are doing something, which conflicts with something you do not have to do, you know -- we do not need Parliament -- I will address the point that he made in a minute.
rose
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader --
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
The Supreme Court has already ruled in about three cases how the article 181 (1) up to (5) is to be applied. What is the need for all that?Is it because the Executive is not bringing us jobs to do, we are looking for jobs to do and we are going outside our remit, Mr Speaker, to find jobs to do? I do not understand.
Yes, the Hon Leader is on a point of order.
Dr Kunbuor 12:10 p.m.
Mr Spaeker, I guess that regrettably, my Hon Colleague is misleading the House.
In fact, the article 181 is a requirement that Parliament should make modification to adopt international, economic and business transactions along the lines of what applies to loans. And over the years, Parliament has been unable to come up with the modifications.
In fact, in a number of the Supreme Court rules, the Supreme Court has drawn attention to Parliament's own inertia in not coming out with those modifications, which have led to a proliferation of litigations on this matter. So, that is all that we are seeking to do. It is not that we are inventing something for ourselves; it is an imperative under the Constitution.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yes, he draws my attention to the article 181 point that I am making; yes, that is clear. Even if it were by inertia, to my own reading of the three cases that I have now come up -- the Faroe Atlantic, the Balkan Energy and the Waterville cases.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Member, you see, we have a particular Motion before us and the Motion is to compose a committee to do something.
Hon Members, are you aware that the Supreme Court has criticised Parliament, that they would not wait for us to wake up from our slumber and therefore, they
would go ahead and do certain things which the Constitution should do? Are you aware? There are several -- so, please, leave the article 181(5). We are waiting for the recommendation from the ad hoc committee. We are on code of conduct. I think that you have made your point.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker--
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Conclude, please.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
Well, I will conclude.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Please, conclude; your last sentence.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is the whole idea. We would have to adopt rules for filibustering in this House. Now, when we start talking and we would want to talk for 24 hours, you should allow us. That woman, Mr Speaker, spoke for how many hours? Twenty-nine or so hours in one of the legislatures of America. She spoke and spoke and spoke and spoke without drinking water, without drinking anything. We have to take notice of that. Mr Speaker--
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Member, you need to respect the Chair; I say conclude.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am about to conclude. The point I --
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Conclude.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
How do I conclude? By saying that “I conclude”?
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, your last sentence.
Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
Well, in that case, the Speaker says I should conclude, so, I conclude -- [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Deputy Majority Leader and then the Hon Member for Suhum --
Mr Alfred K. Agbesi (NDC -- Ashaiman) 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I rise to contribute to the debate on this Motion.
rose
Mr Agbesi 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is a fact that most of us are elected to come to Parliament and our constituents look up to us to behave this way or that way. But we do not have anything to guide us in the way we behave, in the way we talk and in the way we conduct our business. So, this Committee that is being set up to bring a code of conduct, Mr Speaker, is welcome.
Mr I. K. Asiamah 12:10 p.m.
Thank you. Mr Speaker.
I think this even exposes, if you like, the reason it is critical. The words he used -- “to control Hon Members of Parliament” -- coming from an Hon Deputy Leader, Mr Speaker, is so dangerous if the code of conduct is going to control Hon Members of Parliament --
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Members, why are you worried? At the end of the day, the recommendations -- that is why the Motion was amended. They are bringing recommendations to you and you will look at them. The parts that you do not like as a House, you vote against them; the parts that you like, you will adopt them.
Mr Agbesi 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the code of conduct that this Committee would come up with, is virtually going to regulate our conduct in doing our business.
Mr Speaker, as I have said, many of our constituents even do not know what we are supposed to do and they keep on telling us that as an Hon Member of Parliament, you are not supposed to do this or that. I welcome this Committee; I welcome the work they are going to do, so that at the end of the day, Mr Speaker, we would see our way clear how we should be seen to be behaving as Hon Members of Parliament.
Mr Speaker, the Constitution has been quoted in article 285, et cetera. But the issue is that, beyond the Constitution, what are we to do -- because we are leaders? I know as a matter of fact that even leaders in communities, when they are chosen or nominated or elected, they are taught, they are told what they are supposed to do.
A chief is confined and is told what to do and then he comes to rule his people in that way. We are Hon Members of Parliament but immediately we are elected, we come to Parliament without any guideline as to what we should do.
Mr Speaker, it is on this basis that I support the Motion and urge all Hon Members to support it.
Mr Frederick Opare-Ansah (NPP -- Suhum) 12:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I wish to add my voice in support of the Motion that was moved and seconded by the Hon Deputy Minority Leader.
Mr Speaker, just as you alluded to, indeed, if you go to several other jurisdictions, you would find that various Parliaments do have some modus by which they measure the conduct and guide also the conduct of Hon Members of Parliament and it is very important for several reasons that we try to have a similar thing here.
Mr Speaker, I would not even leave it only at the code of conduct for Hon Members of Parliament. Our country suffers a lot in terms of the perception of corruption index, precisely because we do not have some of these guides for us. And however we conduct ourselves, is perceived by others in ways that they deem fit to measure. Mr Speaker, I would give you an example.
If one goes to a country like the United States of America, there are people who are licensed to go and lobby Secretaries, Legislators and others for groups. And in dispensing these functions, they are paid for same. When it gets to elections, these same people who went to lobby, receive fat cheques in support of their campaign funds and there is nothing wrong with it because the processes by which these things occur are clearly guided by some code, by some pieces of legislation.
But Mr Speaker, let a group go to a brother of mine tomorrow to come and lobby me on some matter and let that
brother of mine receive some payments and during elections, let him use some of those funds to support my campaign, it will be recorded somewhere as corruption. And then it will create a very bad image for our country. In that respect, I think it is very important that we begin to guide ourselves on how we conduct ourselves, make it clear what is an acceptable practice and what is not.
Mr Patrick Y. Boamah 12:20 p.m.
On a point of order.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Haruna Iddrisu) referred to Chapter 24 of the Constitution --
Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
He is not on the floor.
Mr Boamah 12:20 p.m.
The Hon Minister for Trade and Industry and the Hon Member for Suhum (Mr Frederick Opare-Ansah) have all quoted Chapter 24 on Code of Conduct for Public Officers. Under article 288, a “public officer means a person who holds a public office”. And if one looks critically at article 287, the side notes, complaints of contravention and I beg to quote:
“An allegation that a public officer has contravened or has not complied with a provision of this Chapter shall be made to the Commissioner for Human Rights
and Administrative Justice and, in the case of the Commissioner for Human Rights and Administrative Justice, to the Chief Justice who shall, unless the person concerned makes a written admission of the contravention or non-compliance, cause the matter to be investi- gated.”
Mr Speaker, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) has a code of conduct for public officers and since we fall under the definition of “public officers” under article 190 and also under article 288, I do not think the setting up of this Committee will -- [Uproar] -- Mr Speaker, that is my view, honestly.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think, probably, that was a point of information to aid exactly the point I was making. This is because that was exactly the point I was alluding to, that there seems to be already in place a code of conduct as per this particular Chapter of the Constitution.
So, Parliament cannot be seen to be drafting another code of conduct for itself. But what we could do, is to have guidelines that would help us tow that fine line, which the code of conduct in the Constitution has specified.
Dr Kunbuor 12:20 p.m.
On point of order.
Mr Speaker, let us correct our records properly in relation to the statements that have been made by the two Hon Members.
The first situation is that, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice has not been given any constitutional mandate to draft a code of conduct for all public officers. In fact, if one sees the document that is now being
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the final point that I was making was that if we agreed and modified the name of what document the Ad Hoc Committee will be bringing to this House from the code of conduct to guidelines for code of conduct or something in that sense, then we can give effect to it by completing the long outstanding issue of the revision of our Standing Orders.
And I am sure that there are aspects of our conduct which, in modifying our Standing Orders, we can even address therein.
So, we should not just take the issue of drafting or preparing this code of conduct
in separation from the need for the Standing Order Committee to complete that long outstanding revision of our Standing Orders. It is very important that we do the two hand in hand and find the mechanism to give effect to whatever recommendation that will be contained in these guidelines for the code of conduct in the revised Standing Orders.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr William O. Boafo (NPP -- Akwapim North) 12:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I rise to contribute to the Motion on the floor of the House.
Mr Speaker, it is a welcome approach that we are appointing such an Ad Hoc Committee to formulate a code of conduct for the Hon Members of Parliament. And it is gratifying to note that the composition of the membership is a reflection of most experienced Hon Members in the House who have had a taste of parliamentary life for a long period and will be in a position to help us shape a code of conduct which will help us in this House.
Mr Speaker, the Chairperson is a former Hon Majority Leader and also a former Hon Minority Leader. The Vice Chairperson is a former Hon Majority Leader and a long-standing Hon Member of the House. Throughout the membership, one could see that all the Hon Members are very experienced persons in the House.
So, I am very hopeful that the assignment which has been given to them will be exercised to our complete satisfaction. And that having regard to the fact that they are all experienced Hon Members of the House, I have a strong belief that they will not formulate any code
of conduct which will conflict with what may be in existence in the Public Service.
Mr Speaker, the second point that I would want to touch upon is that, it is our expectation that the code of conduct that they will come out with will be something which will be tied to our cultural values and that it will not be something that we are going to import from elsewhere to impose on ourselves.
Thirdly, Mr Speaker, looking through the 1992 Constitution and the Standing Orders of this House, it appears that there are bits of criteria for performance or conduct which is expected of Hon Members of this House.
It is our expectation that this Committee would look through the 1992 Constitution as well as the Standing Orders and marry them together and at the end of the day, the code of conduct may even be an appendage to our Standings Orders in this House, so that it would receive an extended recognition from our 1992 Constitution. The 1992 Constitution recognises the Standing Orders and it would be an extended recognition from the Constitution.
Mr Speaker, the caution which I would want to give on this issue is that the code of conduct should refrain from interfering with our private lives. Whatever we do in private should not be transgressed upon at all. What should be the concern of the Committee is any conduct of ourselves which impact negatively on the performance and functions of Parliament. This is something that I will urge the Hon Chairman to take into account.
Mr Speaker, this particular code of conduct is very important for us because it will compel us to comport ourselves in such a way that the critics in our constituencies, at the end of four years, when they pick the code of conduct and, measuring our performance in this House, would not find us wanting.
So, it is very important that we have this code of conduct, which in four years' time, would serve as one of the yardsticks for us, whether you are going to be retained or sacked.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity.
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 12:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was going to ask my Hon Colleague on a point of order to elaborate further on what those private matters or private issues are.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon Members, I would take the last two.
Mrs Juliana Azumah-Mensah (NDC -- Agotime-Ziope) 12:30 p.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to contribute to the Motion on the floor on the composition of the Members of this Committee.
Just as we did a week or two ago, we had a composition of one of the committees where we argued that the women in the membership were not enough. I see that we have seven Hon Members who are men here and we have only one woman.
Mr Speaker, I believe, for the records, we still need to look at this critically. This is because, every time we have some kind of arbitration, we would say we would go to the old lady. I believe that women are very, very important to come up with the ideas. So, I am hoping that we would have another look at the membership.
rose
Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon Kofi Frimpong, is it a point of order?
Mr Frimpong 12:30 p.m.
Yes, please.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Member across the aisle is misleading the House. It is as if we are in the secondary school that our behaviours must be controlled.
Mr Speaker, I would want us all to know that our behaviours are controlled by the Standing Orders to the extent that we have the Marshall , who, when an Hon Member --
Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Are you raising a point of order?
Mr Frimpong 12:30 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
What is your point of order?
Mr Frimpong 12:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that is what I am raising.
Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
What Order has the Hon Member breached? Or what did she say that you think is in breach of the rules?
Mr Frimpong 12:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am just giving information to her. I am adding to what she is saying.
Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon Kofi Frimpong, please, sit down. You have made your point.
Hon Members, the point has been raised that we need to add one or two women. I would, at the appropriate time, ask Leadership to respond to that.
I think that when you are going to draft a code of conduct for the House to look at, the women must make an input. More women must make an input into it and I think that there is a point there. You may want to take a --
Mr Joe Ghartey (NPP -- Esikadu/ Ketan) 12:30 p.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity to share some words about this all important Ad Hoc Committee that has been established this morning.
Mr Speaker, to say that a code of conduct for our Parliament is long overdue, would be to under-emphasise the importance of the code of conduct. Indeed, in the continent of Africa, in South Africa, on Tanzania and in Sierra Leone, we have a code of conduct. I had the opportunity as a consultant to the Inter- Parliamentary Union (IPU) to draft the Code of Conduct for the Parliament of Sierra Leone --
Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
In fact, that is why they put you on the Committee.
Mr Ghartey 12:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, codes of conduct protect Hon Members of Parliament. They set out the limits of what can be done and what cannot be done. Indeed, they end up being our sword as well as our shield. This is Our sword, when we are attacked, because we can raise it up and say that the code of conduct allows us to do it, and our shield because we can use it to protect ourselves.
Indeed, it is so important that it is amazing that we have managed to survive effectively as a Parliament for over 20 years without having a code of conduct. That does not mean -- heaven forbid -- that we have not been conducting ourselves well. We have been conducting ourselves in accordance with the norms and practices of Hon Members but this is a step forward.
The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) has its guidelines. Indeed, in its guidelines, it suggests that other institutions should use it as a basis to establish their own code of conduct.
The reason we cannot adopt their code of conduct is very simple. For example, they say that public officers should not be involved in political activity. We are involved in politics. So, for us to adopt their code of conduct hook, line and sinker, immediately, we would be in conflict with CHRAJ's Code of Conduct.
Mr Speaker, you have formed an Ad Hoc Committee, and perhaps, I confess I should have mentioned this earlier. This is because I knew that this was going to be formed. But there are two committees in Parliament which perhaps, in future, when we are looking at such things, we may consider to involve. I happen to be on both Committees, so, I must straightaway plead the possibility of conflict.
But Mr Speaker, the first committee is the Committee on Parliamentary, Constitutional and Legal Affairs of which Hon Bagbin is the chairperson. I believe that the Committee on Parliamentary, Constitutional and Legal Affairs, to some extent, should be the Committee that should be looking at things concerning Parliament including the code of conduct.
But I am not saying that we should reverse the decision.
I am saying that going forward, when it comes to such things, we may decide to consider such a Committee.
There is also the House Committee; but this is so special that I support the Ad Hoc Committee. But also there is a committee on Members Holding Office of Profit and it is provided for under Standing Order 173.
Order 173 (2) (b) says that:
“It shall be the duty of the Committee to advise the Speaker on Members who wish to be permitted to hold offices of profit or emolu- ment, whether private or public and either directly or indirectly on the ground:
(b) that no conflict of interest arises as a result of the Member holding such office.”
Mr Speaker, your Committee has had seven meetings since this Session started and one of the things that we have started to do is that we have started to do draft guidelines for conflict of interest to guide ourselves which we also will be bringing to your attention.
I do not see any conflict between what that Committee is doing and the code of conduct, save that I will say whatever they do now, we shall submit it to your Committee, the Ad Hoc Committee for them to look at because conflict of interest is
Mr Ghartey 12:40 p.m.


an integral part of the code of conduct but it is not the whole of conduct. There are other things that we must look at. Indeed, the Committee on Members Holding Office of Profit decided to draft these guidelines to guide itself, so that they know under what circumstances they should permit people to work and not permit people to work in terms of advice.

Mr Speaker, I do not intend to give a whole lecture on code of conduct, suffice it to say that this Committee is long overdue. We are happy that it is here and we urge all Hon Members that as it works and we consult with you, get involved. The thing about not getting involved is that when the code of conduct comes out, it will bind us whether we agree or not.

So, I am sure the Hon Chairman will agree with me that we will be very interactive, we shall be consulting with Hon Members, taking Hon Boafo's concerns and other concerns into account so that when it comes out it binds all of us, it protects us. The code of conduct, as I said before, will be our shield as well as our sword.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon Members, that brings us to the end of the debate--
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I stepped out of the Chamber to do some other pertinent business. But I walked into the Chamber and heard an Hon Colleague, Hon Azumah-Mensah, Juliana making a point about inclusion of additional women on the Committee. I do not know whether you intend for us to factor that issue into this or perhaps, we would leave it at the level of co-option of the women into the Committee.
I thought that in constituting committees in Parliament, normally, we use shades of opinion in the House. I am informed that the number of women in the Chamber is about 30; and 30 is 14/15. That is even more serious because if it is 29 or 30, it is less than 1/7 of the entire membership of the House.
If we have a 7-member committee and a seventh is reserved for women, it represents adequately the shade of opinion that is constituted by the women in the Chamber -- adequately. But as I said, I am not then saying that we should leave it at that. If it is the opinion of the House that additional women should be included, then perhaps, either we do so now or we say to ourselves that the Committee reserves the right to co-opt additional women into their folds.
So save that I would want the Question to be put and then we agree on it.
Mr Speaker 12:40 p.m.
The issue was raised by the Hon Member for Agotime/Ziope. I also remember that in my discussion with Leadership, we also agreed that the Committee should be at liberty to co-opt as many experienced people on this matter as they so want. So, if they want to co- opt more women or other people from outside, who have the expertise in this field, they are at liberty to do so.
But it is for the House to decide whether to increase the number or to co- opt them. That is a decision for the House.
Mr Nitiwul 12:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, there is a little issue that escaped Leadership on this particular matter. It is a bi-partisan committee. But there is a little issue with protocol. Your deputy is a member of this Committee, so protocol-wise, either he is not there or he should chair the Committee because of the little problems there.
I think it escaped the Committee and the House needs to take a decision on this particular matter, so that if he is not there, we can co-opt him and put somebody else. If he has to be there, then maybe, we would have to relook at the Constitution of the chairmanship. That is the issue we need to clear before we can move on.
Dr Kunbuor 12:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am not too clear about our Standing Orders and the order or hierarchy and the protocol. But initially, the idea was that the Second Deputy Speaker has done a lot of extensive work in other jurisdictions on this matter.
So, the idea was that he could actually be very much like a consultant to the Committee. But views were expressed that why do we not let just him be a member of the Committee to make sure that he guides these deliberations that have gone. But we have not adverted our minds to protocol arrangements.
We were more interested in the substance and the outcome knowing very well that his singular role there was going to shape the way the code of conduct will come out. But we will leave that basically to Mr Speaker and your guidance on the matter will be taken.
Mr Ghartey 12:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was going to say that I have to walk out. The first rule of a code of conduct is that, you should not be present when you are being discussed. If I knew that these matters were going to be raised, I would have walked out. So, perhaps, if you are going to continue discussing this, then allow me to go out of sight and out of hearing -- [Laughter.]
Mr Speaker 12:50 p.m.
So, Hon Members, I do not know. If you want us to defer the matter for better consultations to be done, we can defer putting the Question, so that we can do further consultation. This is because as much as possible, we would want to be bi-partisan on this matter. So, I would not put the Question on this matter; we can do the consultation behind the scene and then we can come back.
We should not raise these matters on the floor of the House. I want Leadership to do further consultation, so that either in the course of the day or tomorrow, we can put the Question on the Motion.
Hon Members, that is my directive on the matter.
  • [Continuation of debate on column 1335]
    • Dr Kunbuor 12:50 p.m.
    That is so, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Deputy Minister for Finance?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker to take the Chair.
    BILLS -- SECOND READING 12:50 p.m.
    Minister for Finance) 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that the Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Bill, 2013 be now read a Second time.
    Mr Speaker, the purpose of the Bill is to amend the Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) Act, 1996, (Act 512) to impose import duties on telephone sets including mobile, cellular and satellite phones and to review the Environment Excise Tax on plastics and plastic products.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you very much.
    Question proposed.
    MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Vice Chairman of the Committee?
    Question proposed.
    Vice Chairman of the Committee (Mr Gabriel K. Essilfie)(on behalf of the
    Chairman of the Committee) 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I rise to support the Motion and to present your Committee's Report.
    Introduction
    The Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Bill, 2013 was presented to Parliament by the Hon Minister for Finance and read for the First time 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 House.
    The Committee was also to determine whether Bills of an urgent nature can be taken through all the stages in one 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, Hon George Kweku Ricketts- Hagan and Hon Cassiel Ato Forson, officials from the Ministry, the Attorney- General's Department and Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) and considered the referral.
    The Committee is grateful to the Hon Ministers and officials from the Ministry, A-G's Department and GRA for attending upon it.
    Reference
    The Committee referred to the following documents at its deliberations:
    The 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
    The Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana.
    Customs and Excise (Duties and Other Taxes) Act, 2012 (Act 840)
    The Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Act, 1996 (Act 512)
    The Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Bill.
    Background
    The Government, in a bid to reduce prices of telephone sets to encourage usage, removed the import duty on telephone sets. Unfortunately, the gesture has not yielded the desired results. Prices of telephone sets have actually increased over the period contrary to government's objective.
    There is, therefore, the need to rein- troduce import tax on telephone sets to generate revenue and also create an even playing field for locally manufactured telephone handsets to favourably compete with the imported ones.
    The Bill also reviews downwards import duty on plastic and plastic products from 15 per cent to 5 per cent on the ex-factory price to be computed on the CIF value of the goods to be paid at the point of entry. It also expands the tax base to include all plastic and plastic products.
    Purpose of the Bill
    The Bill seeks to amend the Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Act, 1996 (Act 512) to
    impose import duty on telephone sets including mobile, cellular and satellite phones and to review the environmental excise tax on plastic and plastic products. The Bill repeals Tariff No. 6 of the Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) Act, 2012 (Act 840).
    Provisions of the Bill
    The proposed Amendment to the Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Bill is divided into two clauses.
    Clause 1 amends schedule of Act 512 to re-impose a 20 per cent import duty on telephone sets and to review the duty on plastic and plastic products.
    Clause 2 repeals tariff No. 6 of the Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Act, 2012 (Act 840).
    Observations
    Urgency of the Bill
    The Committee, in its deliberations, considered the Bill to be of an urgent nature and must be taken through all the stages of passage in one day in accordance with article 106 (13) of the Constitution and Order 119 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    Possible effects of the proposed tax
    The Hon Minister indicated that the re-imposition of the tax will offer protection to local telephone sets manufacturers. This, in the view of the Hon Minister, will create employment and eventually increase government revenue.
    Plastic waste management
    The Committee observed that though the Bill also seeks to review the environmental excise tax on plastic and plastic products, no provision was made
    to allocate portion of the revenue to deal with the menace of plastic waste in the country. The Committee noted that since the tax is specifically on plastic and plastic products, a portion should be set aside to manage plastic waste in the country. The Hon Minister, however, stated that the tax system in the country is overburdened with earmarked funds.
    According to the Minister, about 88 per cent of revenues collected in the country are earmarked for various activities and sectors of the economy.
    The Hon Minister, however, proposed that the Ministries of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation and Local Government and Rural Development could develop a comprehensive sanita- tion management programme for consideration by Cabinet. The Committee, therefore, calls on the two Ministries to, as a matter of urgency, develop a compre- hensive sanitation management prog- ramme as proposed by the Minister for Finance.
    Expected revenue
    The estimated revenue expected from the imposition of the levy for the remaining half year of 2013 was given as follow:
    Handsets -- forty-nine million, eight hundred thousand Ghana cedis (GH¢49,800,000.00); and
    Plastic and Plastic products -- twenty- six million Ghana cedis (GH¢26,000,000.00.)
    Conclusion
    The Committee upon a thorough examination of the Bill, recommends to the House to adopt its Report and take the Customs and Excise (Duties and other Taxes) (Amendment) Bill through all the stages in one day in accordance with article 106 (13) of the Constitution and Order 119 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    Respectfully submitted.

    Ranking Member of the Committee (Dr Anthony A. Osei): Mr Speaker, I believe that all these Bills we are considering, we have been informed by the Hon Minister for Finance that there is an urgent need to fill a revenue gap and with that principle, I do not have any objection.

    But Mr Speaker, even if that is what we want to do, we have to be careful about the reasons that we adduce for doing that. Mr Speaker, if what we really want to do is to protect local manufacturers of telephones, we should say so upfront. But if you read the Committee's Report -- and I dare anybody to give us information to prove otherwise -- it says:

    “Prices of telephone sets have actually increased over the period…”

    The period we are talking about is 2008 till now, and somebody is telling us that prices of telephones have increased? That is far from the truth. Prices of telephone sets have gone down because of competition, so we cannot adduce that as a reason. The real reason, I think, is what is in paragraph 6.0. We want to help local manufacturers; let us say so. Let us not go through the backdoor and defeat the purpose of the Bill.

    Mr Speaker, the reason the duty was removed back in 2008 was that Government was not collecting money. Everybody travels and puts the phones in their briefcase, so nobody was paying taxes on telephones in 2008, and I am sure now, that is what is happening. I am even surprised that they said they would raise GH¢49 million. For the past four years, nobody is paying any taxes on telephones. We should be bold and admit that upfront.

    We would not raise GH¢49 million and that is why it was converted to a talk tax; bring more phones in free, but when you talk, you pay. That was the logic.

    Now, we are saying that prices of telephones have increased. Where is the evidence? If it is true, provide the evidence. Parliament cannot be asked to do work on the basis of somebody's whims. This is too serious a matter. I would have thought that what we want to say is that, we want to encourage local manufacturers. That is all. But in this case, how many local manufacturers are we talking about? [Interruption.] But if that is what we want to do, let us, as a Parliament, know that, so that we can look at the merits and demerits of it.

    But I am very disturbed that we are being asked to do this because prices of telephones have gone up. It is not the best.

    We should go back to the original reasons it was removed. Government cannot raise GH¢49.8 million. It is not true. So, let us not kill ourselves. The revenue we are expecting would not come.

    As I said, everybody going to Dubai or China puts it in their briefcase. We know that, including -- I will not mention anybody. These arguments were raised in 2008; if we go and read the Hansard, Hon Members of Parliament themselves said when they brought about five phones, they were in their briefcases, no taxes were being paid and those are facts.

    Hon Deputy Minister, if this is the reason, please, think twice because it cannot be. The evidence is not true that prices of telephones have increased; they have gone down. So, if we are to take decisions on the basis of this Memorandum, we would be misleading the whole country and I do not want to do that.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    All right. Hon Member, I think your point is well made. I would have preferred that in his winding up, he could address it but I think that it is so important that we should get some response immediately from them. If you have any more points, you can make them after that -- [Interruption] -- You do it in the winding up. Go ahead.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on the matter of the plastic products, the Hon Minister needs to look at it. It is not clear what we are doing. I think he wants to reduce the excise duty from 15 per cent to 5 per cent. But if you look at the Bill, it says rate of duty -- So, we are inclined to think that it is import duty but I think the real thing we want to do is to bring the excise duty down. But as I looked at the rate of duty I saw 5 per cent and I said, if the duty is 20 per cent, then why are we bringing it down to 5 per cent? But it is the excise duty.
    It is true that because they have broadened the base -- If I recall the last Bill, it only took a few items under 39. So, now, they have expanded 39 and included 63 but the documentation here is misleading. One would have thought that they wanted to reduce the import duty as opposed to the excise duty. So, the Chairman may want to look at it and I made it clearer, that it is the excise duty that is being brought to 5 per cent.
    Mr Speaker, since we are debating the principles, there is a minor issue that may be consequential from what we did yesterday and the Hon Chairman may want to look at it. On page 3 of the Schedule, clause 2 (b) where you have importation, I believe yesterday, we changed it and we
    may want to look at that at the point of importation. I believe we made an amendment yesterday that we may want to bring your mind to that also. Mr Speaker, as I said, in principle, the Government's objective of trying to find money, I do not argue with it but I think that the reasons we are given are not the best, and as we debate it, we should really look at it very closely.
    I thank you
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Thank you very much.
    Any more contributions?
    Mr Joseph B. A. Danquah (NPP -- Abuakwa North) 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as has been said, the principle by which or the reason by which we want to raise the revenues is in no doubt.
    Mr Speaker, I will like to proffer a little of advice to our Minister for Finance. Mr Speaker, it is good to raise revenue but we must also concentrate our efforts in terms of expenditure revenue, so that no matter how much revenue we raise, if your expenditure is still high, then we will never, never meet the gap.
    If we continue to spend lavishly and not wisely, no matter the revenue that we raise, we will not be able to meet the gap. So, our advice is that he should conduct a thorough expenditure review and look at areas where there is so much waste and cut down the waste, so that when he raises the revenue, value could be had for the revenue that he has raised.
    Mr Speaker, I do recall that during the meeting, we did talk about the issue of the duty on the handsets and we cautioned the Hon Minister concerning smuggling and an assurance was given that there will be compliance and vigilance. Mr Speaker, we will advise that that is taken into care because we need the vigilance and the compliance, otherwise, the 48 million thereabout that he is talking about will not be realised.
    With these few words, I support the Motion.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah (NPP -- Sekondi) 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, Government has a great appetite for cash. Governments all over the world have a great appetite for cash but in terms of generating revenue, there must be internal policy consistency. I refer, Mr Speaker, in particular, to the imposition of tax on telephone sets and we must also learn from history.
    I believe the Hon Ranking Member has stated -- We are talking about electronic communications service tax, that is, talk tax and so, when we expect Ghanaians to have access to sets, they will talk more and we will get more talk tax. Ghanaians must also have choice -- How many telephone set manufacturers are in this country? I do not know. Probably, the Hon Minister, in his winding up, will educate me. And what steps has Government taken to promote telephone set manufacturing in this country.
    So, we must have policy coherence -- We do not introduce a policy in isolation. What is the state of the telephone manufacturing industry in this country presently? When we talk about raising revenue, some of the reasons we give must be consistent. If we are raising revenue for imported handsets, fine; but we should not say that we are promoting local industry.
    What if our local industry also exports and because of the discriminatory tax, we have introduced those countries also, say that, yes, all telephone sets coming from Ghana must be taxed while those produced elsewhere and within their country should not be taxed? Of course, if we are promoting local industry, we also should promote local industry, so that they can be competitive outside Ghana.
    So, when we try and give certain reasons for imposing taxes, let us be
    careful. We must think through this. It should not be a stand-alone revenue generating policy from the Ministry of Finance; it must be part of an economic package and I expect the Hon Minister in conjunction with the Ministry for Communications to come and brief this House the steps that they are taking to promote local telephone manufacturing.
    We must be careful we should not by Government policy promote monopolies in this country. It is dangerous. And I am afraid we may be promoting a local monopoly; we are not promoting Ghanaian industry.
    We may be promoting somebody and that is why I would want to know the coherent policy by Government to promote local telephone manufacturing industry. That is the point. [Interruptions.] What are we talking about?
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Member, is it on a point of order?
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I need your guidance.
    The Hon Minister for Information and Media Relations is here and I would want your direction on whether or not he is properly dressed.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Please, let us have some order, I cannot hear him.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:10 p.m.
    I would want to find out if the Hon Minister for Information and Media Relations is properly attired for the House.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    All right.
    Now, Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah, you are on the floor, please, proceed.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I will urge Government, when it comes to --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, you would realise that I did not see him because he is not properly attired. So, let us go ahead. [Laughter.]
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am urging Government that when it comes to these things -- [Interruption.]
    Some Hon Members 1:10 p.m.
    Out, out. [Inter- ruptions.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Order! Order! Hon Members, order.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am sure there are some flying ties around -- [Interruptions.] Within the lobbies of the Chamber, I am sure there are a few flying ties around. I am sure we can avail ourselves of that.
    Mr Speaker, this is a very serious matter. Lack of policy coherency, it worries me and not necessarily to re-visit some issues I raised yesterday. It also has to do with earmarking a portion of the revenue from the tax on plastics and plastic products to manage plastic waste in the country. Mr Speaker, it is a matter of grave concern to Ghanaians.
    I am sure that is why at the Committee level, this matter was raised. This matter of a comprehensive sanitation manage- ment programme for constituency by Government, I do not know, we have been told this many years ago.
    In the previous Administration, there was a whole -- Was it a workshop or whatever -- organised on this, they said the programme would be put in place.
    We are in the Seventh month and we are now talking about developing compre- hensive sanitation management pro- gramme. I know that Government has been talking about this and almost
    invariably, one would find particularly Metropolitan Assemblies organise clean- up compaigns at least, once a month. We are talking about the menace of plastic waste; there have been advertisements and I know the President himself has commented on this on one occasion --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    The Hon Member is welcome back. [Laughter.]
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to place on record how flamboyant and elegant the Hon Minister for Information and Media Relations looks in his yellow tie with the Parliament logo; that is right -- [Interruptions.]
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Minister, are you up on a point of order?
    Mr Ayariga 1:10 p.m.
    That is so, Mr Speaker.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you so much for the opportunity [Laughter.] And I wish Hon Members to take note of, all that has been said, so that when it comes to the Consideration Stage, we will propose amendments that we believe would enrich this Bill when it is enacted into law.
    I thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, we will take two more contri- butions and then we will get the Hon Minister to wind up.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my concern is with the Environmental Excise Levy. Mr Speaker, in the 2013 Budget, read on the 5th of March, quoting from paragraph 190 to 194, the Hon Minister for Finance was in this House telling Hon Members of this House and Ghanaians that specifically, that the Environmental Tax on plastic would be introduced soon -- paragraph
    194.
    Mr Speaker, if the Minister, in those paragraphs, felt that waste management was a problem in this country and for that reason, specific tax regimes were going to be brought to help in the management of waste -- My only problem I had, Mr Speaker, is that when this Bill was introduced, at the Committee stage, the Ministry of Finance, including the Minister and his two Deputies and supporting staff, were adamant that this money should go into the general coffers of this country.
    Mr Speaker, Statutory Fund creation and ring-fencing in this country have a history and that history started from when our shares in AGC were sold at certain time and the following year, Ghanaians were told that it had been consumed by the general budget.
    That was when representatives of the people later realised that in essence, certain categories of taxes or levies should be ringfenced for a purpose and specific accounting done in this House, so that the representatives of the people can follow such monies collected.

    Mr Speaker, that was how come the GETFund came into being, National Health Insurance Levy came into being and that is the essence of the District Assembly Common Fund. It is not that those who disbursed those times were different; it had to do with the use of those funds. Earmarking or ring-fencing is another way that the representatives of the people would know that at least, that money that was collected on behalf of Environmental Excise Levy is truly being put to the use for which it was collected.

    Mr Speaker, some of us are very, very adamant, that the Ministry of Finance, in the era of yawning deficits, would want to collect moneys from all nooks and crannies, but as to what the monies would be used for, you and I next year , we cannot even find it in the budget.

    That is why for the environmental excise duty, some of us are of the opinion that if the issue is the management of plastic waste, which we all know, is a big issue, which no single Assembly can manage in this country -- then no matter how little the money you are supposedly collecting, come back to the people's representatives and let us know that you have collected GH¢1.00 and that GH¢1.00 has been put to the use for which that GH¢1.00 was collected.

    So, in that respect, Mr Speaker, I crave your indulgence that I support this Bill and hope that when we get to the Consideration Stage, the necessary amendments would be proffered for making the Bill a better one.
    Majority Leader (Dr Benjamin B. Kunbuor) 1:20 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to register one or two footnotes in relation to this Bill and the general discussion that has taken place.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to reiterate again that when we have a piece of tax legislation, the specific essentials of what is a good tax system and the purpose for which the tax is being introduced, should be kept in mind and should also guide the extent to which this debate goes. I am particularly happy that there is a shared sense by both sides of the House in relation to this need.
    I am also particularly happy that attention has been drawn to the environmental aspect that this Bill seeks to address.
    It certainly has come to my attention, Mr Speaker, that revenue generation will be a very significant focus of this Bill. But there are indications that they would want to see the environmental aspect reflected in relation to how this revenue would be spent. And I am sure, Mr Speaker, that at the appropriate time, some amendments on this matter would come.
    Mr Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Member, is it on a point of order?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not know whether the Hon Majority Leader, an expert on tax law is giving us a general lecture. But when it comes to this, yes, I agree, the reasons for imposing that levy is not deterrence; it has not been stated anywhere and that is my problem. It has not been stated anywhere. Probably, he being the Leader of Government Business has access to some
    information that we do not have, but on the face of all that has been disclosed today -- [Interruption.] No! I am not talking about “pink sheets”; we use white sheets, the Report. There is nothing to indicate that it is supposed to be punitive, it is all revenue generation. That is the singular purpose we have been told and that is why I was talking on policy and so forth.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, since Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah and I were not there, I was hoping that he will allow me the opportunity to show in my analysis that by implication, if you do not even have it expressed on the “pink sheet”, my analysis will show that where you are beginning to raise the tariff level in relation to a seemingly innocent customs and excise revenue measure, the implication for it is that you want to discourage the negative environmental aspects of that and that is the context in which --
    In fact, I was coming specifically to his policy coherence. And when you have this multiplicity that you want to raise revenue and you also want at the same time to achieve some consistency in policy -- I have said this on an occasion in this House when I was at the other side and I am not surprised because the memory of Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah, I have no doubt, is very accurate.
    So, when he started talking about the policy coherence, I knew that his mind went to the exchange that I had with the then Minister for Presidential Affairs on a similar issue like this.
    But the fact remains that while we are using revenue measures, we should align the policy. And I guess that Hon Members of the Committee and discussions we have had outside, have given very compelling reasons they think that while we pursue revenue generation, we should
    also realign it. Otherwise, you can have your revenue and use your revenue in other areas but more specifically, the offensive conduct and the type of havoc that plastic waste is creating in this country will continue. And in that context, I believe that we should also not shirk our responsibility, which is specific.
    There is a difference between putting the regulatory framework and Parliament's from oversight responsibility. And so, most of the concerns that are being raised, are about the oversight responsibilities, to make sure that we give some content and latitude to the bare bones of the legislation, to make sure that there is policy coherence. So, we, by our oversight activities, can also contribute in a great measure to policy coherence.
    With these few words, Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Thank you very much.
    That brings us to the end of the debate.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    The Customs and Excise (Duties and Other Taxes) (Amendment) Bill, 2013 accordingly read the Second time.
    Dr Kunbuor 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want us to move to item 7 and specifically, we can take (ii) first, while we get the Hon Member on the amendment on (i), just not to hold the House because we seem to have reached some consensus on (ii).
    BILLS -- CONSIDERATION STAGE 1:20 p.m.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    Without (i), the amendment in (ii) cannot be done; it makes reference to it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Is it possible to get somebody to stand in for him?
    Dr Kunbuor 1:30 p.m.
    That is so, Mr Speaker. But as we move through the clauses, we will sort that out --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    All right, So, we will deal with (i) -- Clause 1.
    Mr Essilfie 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I crave your indulgence to stand in for Hon Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka.
    Clause 1 --
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, paragraph (b), the table, under column on “Rate of Duty” delete “5%” and insert
    “10%”.
    Mr Speaker, the reason for that is, since the original Bill --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Member, since the Member proposing the amendment is here, can we leave the reasons to him? He would be in a better position to articulate the reasons.
    Mr Essilfie 1:30 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Muntaka?
    Alhaji Muhammed-Mubarak Muntaka 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am sorry, I was not in the Chamber when you started.
    Mr Speaker, the reason for this is that if you look at the Committee's Report, it is clear that, yes, we want to be able to raise some revenue but the issue of how to manage the waste itself is something that as a House, we need to be thinking about. And I am of the view that we need to make available some resources to be able to take care of that.
    But if we leave it at that 5 per cent and we say we want to use part of that 5 per cent to do that, we may end up having a challenge like the Finance Minister was saying that that money was not adequate.
    But Mr Speaker, I am reliably also informed that there are a lot of out- standing bills because waste management companies have not been paid. There are a lot of promissory notes that are waiting -- to the tune of about GH¢300 million.
    Mr Speaker, if these monies have to be paid and be paid in time, so that those companies can continue to provide the services, it is only important that we begin to dedicate some resources towards this, so that it would not be good for us as a country, to tell the people that we want to manage plastics and plastic products and because of that we are introducing a special levy; and we would not be moving the next step to pragmatically try to address the issue.
    We are all very conversant with the challenges with the budget and if we do not increase this amount, which was anyway 15 per cent and because we have broadened the base, we want to reduce the burden, I think that 10 per cent would be appropriate, so that we can use part of it to deal with the management of the plastics and plastic products would be more useful. That is why I am moving this amendment.
    We have had a lot of discussions with the Ministry of Finance, hoping that that would enable them put up a mechanism to manage the waste that comes out of plastics.
    So, Mr Speaker, I want to urge my Hon Colleagues to support this amendment, so that we can deal with the challenges that confront us.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, any more contributions?
    Dr Mark Assibey-Yeboah 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think the Majority Chief Whip is confusing the issues somewhat. Mr Speaker, the Government is going to raise GH¢26 million, after reducing the tax rate from 15 per cent to 5 per cent; it is still going to raise GH¢26 million. Previously, the tax covered a few plastics and plastic products.
    The current regime is going to be expanded to cover all plastics and plastic products; that was the sense in the Ministry reducing the tax rate from 15 per cent to 5 per cent because now, it covers all plastics and plastic products.
    So, even after correcting for the 10 per cent reduction, Government is going to raise GH¢26 million. So, I oppose the amendment. I think it should be left at the 5 per cent because there are too many taxes being imposed on the Ghanaian. So, I oppose the amendment in principle.
    Mr Essilfie 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the point raised by the Hon Member who just spoke, who is a member of the Finance Committee, that point falls short of the direction he wants to suggest. This is because the Motion moved by the Hon Muntaka was specific, that the 5 per cent additional was to cater for recycling. It was for a purpose. He said we should
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Alhaji Muntaka has not moved a Motion; he is offering an amendment. But my Vice Chairman said the reason for opposing the Motion --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    All right. The Table Office would take note of that.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Oh, you have not finished with your contribution? Go ahead.
    Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:30 p.m.
    He mentioned my name, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker, what I am opposing is not what the increment is going to be used for. I am opposing the increase from 5 per cent to 10 per cent. The 5 per cent Government suggests is going to rake in GH¢26 million. I think Government makes a lot of money around; they have made provision for the District Assemblies through the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development and so on.
    Now, why do we have to burden the plastic user again with this increment, which covers all plastics and plastic products? So, this is what I am opposing; this increase from 5 per cent to 10 per cent. To what use it is going to be put, we have not got to that yet, and at that stage, I can come in but the increment I am opposing in principle.
    Mr Joseph B.A. Danquah 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to support the increment from 5 per cent to 10 per cent rate of duty as proposed by our Majority Chief Whip.
    Mr Speaker, I think that during the meeting with the Finance Minister, this issue came up and he was of the view that the Ministry would need to have this 5 per cent for that gap that exists in its revenue coffers. However, if we require an additional revenue to help in environmental waste management, then it so calls as the Report describes, that there should be a programme of some sort to support the management of the environment.
    Therefore, we would need to have extra dedicated revenue to make it feasible. Although my Colleague said he is not talking about the reasons for the increment, the reasons are necessary, why we have to increase it from 5 per cent to 10 per cent; if the Ministry of Finance needs to plug the revenue gaps and we are so doing, giving him that opportunity, however, we need extra revenue to support the environmental management programme or the menace that is attacking us today; to the extent that if we move through the whole country, it is even affecting the digestive systems of our animal husbandry because plastics are everywhere.
    They are chewing the plastics and it is causing enormous deaths among our animal husbandry.
    So, on this basis, I believe the reasons being proffered for the increment are very necessary and with these few words, I would plead with the House to support the increment from 5 per cent to 10 per cent.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I had discussed with the Hon Chairman of the Committee and I was drawing the Hon Minister 's attention that in the sixth column, the rate of duty is not very clear. It could be interpreted to mean “import duty” but the appropriate word is “excise”; so if the Hon Minister may want to amend it, it will help us better.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    You can propose the amendment.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, in column 3, delete “rate of duty” and substitute with “excise duty”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Let us be clear about the rendition. Please, go over it again.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, column 3, delete “rate of” and substitute “excise”.
    Mr Essilfie 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I support the amendment.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Let us move on to clause 1 (ii) --
    Dr Prempeh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would take them one by one because there are some slight changes as we go down.
    I beg to move, clause 1, add the following new subclause.
    “(3) Not less than fifty per cent of the revenue accruing under para- graph (b) of subsection (2) shall be paid into an account designated as Plastic Waste Recycling Account”.
    Alhaji Muntaka 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I wanted to ask my Hon Colleague whether just “plastic waste recycling” could take care of plastic products. Or should it rather be “plastic and plastic product waste”?
    Dr Prempeh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not averse to adding “plastic products” but it is the same thing. My thoughts are that this 50 per cent, “not less than 50 per cent” should be into a dedicated account that Parliament can oversee specifically how monies coming there -- Mr Speaker, when the Bill, the levy was introduced, it was 5 per cent, that the Hon Minister for Finance wanted to take into the Consolidated Fund.
    Mr Speaker, we felt that a certain portion of this sum should be dedicated to plastic and plastic products recycling.
    Mr Speaker, the basis of our thoughts is founded on even the budget that was read by the Hon Minister for Finance himself on paragraph 194. It talked about a specific environmental plastic tax which he was going to bring. So, like it was discussed at the Consideration Stage, when you take all the money to the Consolidated Fund, there will be no -- you would not see how it is being accounted for, dedicated to plastic waste recycling.
    That is why we said, let us increase the Fund to 10 per cent, the Ministry will have its 50 per cent, which is the 5 per cent that it wanted. But the next 50 per cent that Parliament envisages that we increase the levy, be dedicated to a special account for which the use would be accounted for to Parliament every year for that purpose.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as the sponsor of the amendment is saying, the Ministry would get its 50 per cent. But if you read his amendment, he is looking for more than 50 per cent for the Fund. It said
    “not less than”. It means it could go higher than 50 per cent. So, he should make it just precisely -- 50 per cent; to make sure that the Ministry gets its 50 per cent. If he puts “not less than” there could be a temptation for it to go higher, then the Ministry cannot get its money. So, he should address his mind and make it exactly 50 per cent, then there is no issue at all.
    Mr Joeseph Osei-Owusu 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the intentions of my Hon Friend Member of Parliamnt for Manhyia South is noble. He intends that we dedicate some portions of the revenue accruing under this tax to dealing with our environmental challenges. But Mr Speaker, we have history to guide us. We have created Funds -- we have created the GETFund, we have created the Health Fund, we have created several Funds. As and when it pleases Government, it would take money from that Fund and use it for other purposes -- [Interruption]
    Mr Osei-Owusu 1:30 p.m.
    In my view, dealing with waste management is not an issue of creating Funds or reserving funds; it is an issue about Government being committed to doing and making it a priority in dealing with it -- [Interruption]
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    On a point of order.
    In his statement, he said history tells us that Government takes from one account to another. Mr Speaker, he should provide the evidence -- [Interruption] -- He should give us the evidence of Government taking from one Fund and putting it in another, then we can buy his argument. Hearsay is not acceptable in the House.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Member, do you have the evidence?
    Mr Osei-Owusu 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as we speak, the monies intended for the GET- Fund from the last budget have not been paid into it over six months after the --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    It is not the same thing -- [Interruption] -- It is not if it is in arrears; that is a different matter. But --
    Mr Osei-Owusu 1:30 p.m.
    Very well, Mr Speaker, what I intend to say is that those monies that are intended for those Funds, do not reach them. Therefore, the purpose for which the Funds have been set up are not realised --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Member, you do not have the evidence, just withdraw that and then continue.
    rose
    Mr Osei-Owusu 1:30 p.m.
    Very well. Mr Speaker, I have revised that.
    I thank you for the correction; I have revised that “taking from here to here”.
    But I am saying that Government takes the taxes, but the portions that are intended for Funds created, do not reach those Funds. In the end, if the Government intends that something be a priority, wherever the money is --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Member, I think he has addressed the point of order that you raised.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was just going to advert his mind that yesterday, he and I had a discussion that relates to the matter that he is talking about and I thought it was that example he was going to use. But it is alright.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member, please, proceed.
    Mr Osei-Owusu 1:50 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    So, Mr Speaker, what I am suggesting is that this amendment is not necessary. This creation of Funds is additional responsibility on the Funds anyway because you create the Fund, you create a secretariat, you create offices at additional cost -- the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development will have a dedicated office and dedicated persons managing that and that would be additional cost to the Government.
    If any Government wishes to make recycling its priority, it will find the money from the Consolidated Fund or it will use part of the resources available to do that.
    Mr Speaker, we are here, we know when Government intended to do certain things, they found the money. I am tempted to say certain things but I will not go there. But the important thing, Mr Speaker, is that this is additional money, additional tax burden we have agreed to put on the consumer in the end. How Government uses it -- the Executive, it is their responsibility.
    But we should charge the Executive to make sure that the menace that we are leaving with us as a country, the waste products that are engulfing us are dealt with as a Government, irrespective of which Fund or where the money would come from.
    The Consolidated Fund, wherever it is placed, is within Government's reach and it can use it to deal with the problem if it so wishes.
    Mr Speaker, I am opposed to the amendment proposed.
    Mr Agbesi 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I support the amendment.
    Mr Joe Ghartey 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am a little concerned about the business of generally creating Funds or accounts -- dedicated financing.
    Mr Speaker, what we are doing is that -- and I have just confirmed with my Hon Colleague who was with the Ministry of Finance, Hon Akoto Osei -- a little above 80 per cent of Government revenue is dedicated. So, every Government's hands are tied. Government is left about 10 per cent. If it is 88 per cent, one is left with about 10 per cent. About 90 per cent of what one gets out of the entire revenue generation is dedicated in one direction or the other.
    Mr Speaker, if we continue this way, we hit 100 per cent, we would not need the Ministry of Finance because when the money comes in, all we need is the controller. When the money comes in, this is going here, that is going there. The question that I ask myself is, do we not trust ourselves to be able to put our moneys where our mouths are?
    Do we not trust ourselves to be able to put our money where our priorities are? Why do we have to create law to compel us to do certain things? Is it because if there is no law, somehow or the other, the money will not reach that place? And if the money will not reach that place, is it not indiscipline? Why would it not reach that place?
    So, Mr Speaker, I would not support the proposed amendment because in my view, this whole business of dedicating over 80 per cent -- about 90 per cent to either “A” or “B” is worrying. I would not support anything more than 50 per cent
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    I would like the Hon Member for Manhyia South to respond to the issues raised and then we will see the way forward.
    Dr Prempeh 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, what my Hon Colleagues have said make very good sense. Mr Speaker, there is nothing wrong with it. Mr Speaker, their argument falls short of the history of this country, which we talked about during the Consideration Stage, which the Hon Majority Leader spoke about.
    Mr Ghartey 1:50 p.m.
    On a point of order.
    Mr Speaker, my Hon Friend, very wisely, sought to avoid me responding by saying “the person” because he knows that if he had mentioned my name, I would have a right of response. But Mr Speaker, I would want you to take parliamentary notice of the fact that what he referred to as “the person” can only be me. [Dr Prempeh: No!] Oh, to other people, then? [Dr Prempeh: Yes.] Then, can you please, mention names?
    Dr Prempeh 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, Parliament of Ghana, in its wisdom, created the GETFund for a specific purpose. The purpose was not extra revenue for Central Government. The purpose was for extra support to education. The Government of Ghana created the National Health Insurance Fund -- the purpose was not that Central Government will not be interested in the health of the nation but we needed extra funds into the plate. So, these are specific levies and taxes that were imposed.
    The Government or the Parliament of Ghana proposed the District Assemblies Common Fund. Mr Speaker, that does not mean the money is not going to the Consolidated Fund. They are funds that are specific for the purpose. Every money we collect goes to the Consolidated Fund. The District Assemblies Common Fund is a structure with specific money collected for specific purposes. That is why in this way, we are saying that this is not a Fund.
    This is an account we are creating, so that the accountability of the money going into the plastic waste recycling, we all can follow as a Parliament. I am creating a special Fund.
    In fact, Mr Speaker, in the 2013 Budget and I beg to quote paragraph 194 -- Environmental Tax on Plastics:
    “Mr Speaker, environmental taxes have been introduced on plastics at a rate of 15 per cent with exemptions for pharmaceuticals and agricultural sectors. Also plastics for water sachets were exempted. Mr Speaker, it is time for us as a nation to find a solution to the environmental hazards of water sachets. In this respect, the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and the GRA will later this year submit proposals for the review of the tax regime.”
    So, even in the budget, environmental issues on plastics and environmental taxes have already been raised and we are saying that we are coming. When one raises those issues specifically, it is not for general development purposes. That is why we are saying that the account we created in the Ministry of Finance, so that we know that that extra money says “collect”, if it is put to use, it can be accounted to Parliament.
    Mr Speaker, I am not against the Hon Second Deputy Speaker talking about ear- marking but that is a policy of govern- ment. I am not against the Hon Member for Bekwai saying “dedicated funds”, but I am sure when we go into the Hansard submissions by Hon Members would have attested to the fact that in certain situations, for accountancy and oversight responsibilities, we have to do ear- marking.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was just bringing our attention to the purported figure of 88 per cent. Remember, a figure of 88 per cent was used and I think it has to be put in proper context. That figure must necessarily include the wage bill. If it is not, then there is a problem. Just GETFund, NHIS, Road Fund by themselves, cannot be 88 per cent.
    But in a way, wages are a quasi- statutory Fund, so, I think that is where the number is coming from. Just so that people understand the context.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Hon Members, before we proceed, having regard to the time, I direct that proceed- ings go beyond the stipulated time as in Order 40(3) of the Standing Orders.
    We would take just one more and then we would put the Question. I think time is far spent.
    Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am opposed to this proposed amendment too. As it is stated in the Report, there is too much earmarking. Like he said, the Road Fund, District Assemblies Common Fund, GETFund, National Health Insurance. So, in essence, we are tying the Minister's hands. Why should money be sitting in a certain Fund when we have other needs elsewhere? So, I am opposed to this. If we are not careful, we create this bureau- cracy -- [Interruption]
    Dr Prempeh 1:50 p.m.
    On a point of order.
    Mr Speaker, Hon Members of Parliament should address things for what they are and not what they imagine. Where in this proposed amendment has anybody talked about a Fund creation? It is serious. To use a non-existence imaginary thought to oppose an argument that does not exist, Mr Speaker, is wrong.
    Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, here is an account being created. If we are not careful and it becomes another bureaucracy and then the Government says, “oh I have money in this Environ- ment Account”, then Government will dedicate only those funds to environmental issues, if we are not careful. So, I am opposed to the proposed amendment because even if
    -- 1:50 p.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Hon Member, you had earlier made this comment. I think that --
    Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that was on a different proposed amendment.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    No! I think you have made your point about this issue. I would like to put the Question.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that the amendment is a very useful one but I am still worried about the construction in this form - “not less than fifty per cent”.
    If we agree that the Hon Minister needs money for his own purpose, which is the stipulated five per cent -- if you want to add on another five per cent -- you are talking about exactly 50 per cent. But if you have a construction that says, “not less than fifty per cent”, there is a problem. So, simpliciter, let us state “Fifty per cent of the revenue accruing shall be paid into an account designated as Plastic Waste Recycling Account”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Well. As a further amendment to what Hon Dr Prempeh has proposed, do you agree?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am opposed to this amendment because it is not legally tenable. You do not by law create an account. What you do if you desire, is to create a Fund into which the sum of money is paid. You do not create an account by law. You create a Fund and the Fund is an account; so, you just say that you want by law to create a -- [Interruption.]
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Hon Member for Sekondi, I have not ceded the floor to -- Hon Member for Sekondi, you still have the floor. I do not know why you sat down.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am saying that you create a Fund and then out of the Fund, you create an account. You just do not create an account. That is the point I am making. So, if you want to create a Fund, you create by law a Fund and then that Fund, an account would be opened into which the sum would be deposited.
    He is talking about recycling account. [Interruption.] How? It should be a Fund. If it is a Fund -- That is why I am opposed to it.
    Mr J.B. A. Danquah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think my Hon Senior Colleague is seriously misleading the House. I say so because the money is going into a Consolidated Fund, so, there is a Fund already. So, we are putting an account with the Fund. [An Hon Member: How?] That is why we are calling it the “Plastic Products Recycling Account.” And even removing the “Waste” from there. So money is going into an already set up Fund.
    What the Hon Minister wanted it to remain in the account without any ring- fencing and we were saying that since it was set up for a purpose, then it must be ring-fenced.
    So, there is already a Fund there.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Thank you very much.
    At the appropriate time, if this amendment is carried, I would give directions to the draftpersons to use the right terminology or language or whatever to address it. So, I am going to put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    So, I direct that in crafting it, the draftperons should use the appropriate terminology to take care of the issue raised regarding “Fund” and “account”.
    Dr Prempeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, add a new subclause as follows:
    “(4) The revenues accruing under this subsection shall be dedi- cated to recycling of plastic waste and production of plastic waste and bins and bags and the promotion of the use of biodegradable plastics”.
    Dr Y. Alhassan 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I just wanted a small amendment to the amendment to say “the promotion of the production and use of biodegradable plastics”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Hon Prempeh, you are in agreement?
    Dr Prempeh 2 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    All right. So I will put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Hon Dr Prempeh, let us move on to paragraph (5).
    Dr Prempeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, add a new subclause as follows:
    “(5) The Minister responsible for Local Government and Rural Development shall, in consul- tation with the Ministers responsible for Finance and Environment, Science, Tech- nology and Innovation specify
    the use and modalities for the use of the moneys accruing under subsection(3)”.
    Mr J.B.A. Danquah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on the subclause (5), I wanted to ask if we could add “to Parliament”. If you come to subclause (6), he is asking that a report should be presented to Parliament; you cannot present a report to Parliament if you have not set the modalities how you are going to use the moneys to Parliament. So, that was why I wanted to add “to Parliament for the use of the money accruing under subsection” -- [Interruption.] That is what I wanted to add.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    All right. So, you are withdrawing your amend- ment?
    Mr J.B.A. Danquah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I so do.
    Mr Essilfie 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I seem to have a little question in my mind on subclause (5). This is because if he is saying that “The Minister responsible for Local Government and Rural Development shall in consultation with”, in my mind, it is presupposing that the Hon Minister for Local Government and Rural Development is going to be the custodian of the Fund or account that is supposed to have been set up.
    So, I would want to know whether he is trying to say that whatever we are trying to create here is automatically going under the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. That is what I would want to establish.
    Dr Prempeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, waste recycling and management of waste, even though, again, when you go into the budget, it says that the Central Government, through the Ministry of Finance, disburses loads of money for waste management especially under Accra

    Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) and KMA -- Kumasi Metropolitan Assembly and the municipalities, those moneys that are disbursed. And I use the words carefully, “those moneys that are disbursed” by the Hon Minister for Finance, are disbursed through the usage by the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Develop- ment. The Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, through the Assemblies, is the one that deals with waste management.

    So, for that matter, if you are talking about plastic waste, the Ministry of Finance is a service industry for the service sector Ministry for the various implementing agencies. That is why this has to do with the use and the modalities for the use. That is why the amendment brings the Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation together with the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development and the Ministry of Finance.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, I hope you are satisfied?
    Mr Essilfie 2 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Right. I will put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Prempeh, the last one, paragraph (6).
    Dr Prempeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1, add a new subclause as follows:
    “(6) The Minister responsible for Local Government and Rural Development shall, at the end of
    each year, submit to Parliament a report on the use of the use of the moneys”.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we are dealing with clause 1 and this (6) is coming under clause 1. Mr Speaker, I think we should put the issue of (6) beyond doubt. That is because if you say; “The Minister responsible for Local Govern- ment and Rural Development shall, at the end of each year, submit to Parliament a report on the use of the moneys” you are then referring to the entire quantum, that is the 10 per cent, because it flows from
    (1).
    So, we should then add “as under sub- section 3” otherwise, you will be accounting for the entire 10 per cent. But we are talking about the 5 per cent of the
    10.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Can you propose some further amendment to that one, so that we can take it up from there?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 1 subclause (6) should read: “The Minister responsible for Local Government and Rural Development shall, at the end of each year, submit to Parliament a report on the use of the moneys as specified in subsection 5.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    We take the further amendment together with the amendment.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Essilfie 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, under clause 1 (2), is an amendment that I would like to propose on 2 (b) to change “importation” to “entry” to conform -- 2 (b) would read as “paid at the point of entry” and not “at the point of importation”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    That brings us to the end of the Consideration Stage.
    BILLS -- THIRD READING 2:10 p.m.
  • [Resumption of debate from column 1296]
    • Dr Kunbuor 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker would remember that we stood down putting the Question on item 4 and I would crave your indulgence to revisit that matter, so that the Question may be put on the issue.
    Mr Speaker, Leadership has had some consultations and we think that we have reached some consensus in which we could let the matter be disposed of by putting the Question.
    Mr Speaker, it has been agreed that Hon Joe Ghartey will be replaced by Hon Isaac Osei and then the Hon Second Deputy Speaker would be appointed as a Consultant for this Ad Hoc Committee and given the hint that he is likely to preside at the time the debate on this matter will be coming on the floor; he would be flexible enough to be able to give the useful technical services support to the Committee.
    Mr Speaker, I have not indicated that we are going to make him a Consultant or anything. I said that there were indications that he is likely to preside over this matter. But we will take all the factors into consideration when we reach there.
    In the light of that, I would humbly crave your indulgence to put the Question, so that this rather urgent matter can be addressed and the Committee can begin to work.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Let me hear from the Minority Leader first.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe we have now got to some destination and I guess we can as a House, adopt this and allow the Committee to begin in earnest to work, so that possibly and hopefully, by the close of this Meeting, we could have recommendations from them for implementation, so that upon reconvening in October, possibly, we would be baptized into that new testament.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, the Motion as amended be adopted by this House.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Resolved accordingly.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if we could take item 11.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Hon Deputy Minister for Finance, please, go ahead.
    BILLS -- SECOND READING 2:20 p.m.
    Minister for Finance) 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2013 be now read a Second time.
    Chairman of the Committee) 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I rise to support the Motion, and in doing so, present the Committee's Report.
    Introduction
    The Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill was presented to Parliament by the Hon Minister for Finance and read for the First time on Friday, 28n June, 2013. Mr Speaker referred the Bill 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 Committee was also to determine whether the Bill is of an urgent nature to be taken through all the stages in one day in accordance with article 106 (13) of the Constitution and Order 119 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    The Committee was assisted in its deliberations by the Hon Minister for Finance, Mr Seth E. Terkpeh, Deputy Ministers for Finance, Hon Kweku Ricketts-Hagan and Hon Cassiel Ato Forson, officials from the Ministry of Finance, Attorney-General's Department and the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA).
    The Committee is grateful to the Hon Minister, Deputy Ministers and officials from the Ministry of Finance, Attorney- General's Department and the GRA 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.
    Value Added Tax Act, 1998 (Act 546)
    Background
    The Value Added Tax Act was amended to exclude the application of the tax to imported telephone handsets. Following the proposed imposition of a 20 per cent import duty on telephone handsets, it has become important to amend the Act to apply to mobile handsets imported into the country.
    Purpose of the Bill
    The Bill seeks to amend the Value Added Tax Act, 1998 (Act 546) to enable the Value Added Tax to cover the supply and import of telephone handsets.
    The Bill
    The Bill amends the first schedule to the Value Added Tax Act, 1998 (Act 546) by the deletion from the First Schedule of item number. 24 and its description.
    Observations
    Urgency of the Bill
    The Committee in its deliberations, considered the Bill to be of an urgent nature and must be taken through all the stages in one day in accordance with article 106 (13) of the Constitution and Order 119 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    Amendments proposed
    The Committee after its deliberations, proposes the following amendment: Long Title -- Amendment proposed -- line 3, delete “handset” and insert “handsets”
    Conclusion
    The Committee has thoroughly examined the Bill and recommends to the House to adopt its Report and take the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill through all the stages in accordance with article 106 (13) of the Constitution and Order 119 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    Respectfully submitted.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah (NPP -- Sekondi) 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have looked at the Report and the Bill, but I need some explanation. This is because if you look at the Long Title, it says:
    “To enable the Value Added Tax to cover the supply and import of telephone handsets.”
    I do not have any problem with that, but I would want to know what does the “supply” entail. Does it mean that you import, you pay Value Added Tax and when you come and you distribute and you pay? Does it mean that locally produced handsets are exempt from Value Added Tax? [Interruption.] Please, I am asking. Are our locally produced handsets exempt from Value Added Tax?
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, well, if we can get some clarifications from the Long Title as a technical item, you would see that “supply” can apply to both domestic
    and imported. But we have added “import” there to show that when there is importation, then the Value Added Tax will apply to it. So, both supply of domestic manufactured and foreign ones will attract the Value Added Tax and the importation of it will also attract the Value Added Tax.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    The Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2013 was accordingly read a Second time.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we could take item 12.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    All right.
    Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2013 at the Consideration Stage.
    BILLS -- CONSIDERATION STAGE 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Essilfie 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, Long Title, line 3, delete “handset” and insert “handsets”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    What is your reason?
    Mr Essilfie 2:20 p.m.
    This is because, Mr Speaker, when you say “handset” it is singular. We are saying all handsets, that is why we have changed it to “handsets”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    I think that in the Interpretations Act, this singular and plural have been made redundant.
    Mr Essilfie 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the point is that telephone handsets can take different forms. It does not necessarily mean it is one type of telephone handset.
    Mr Osei-Owusu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think you have rightly made the point. The Interpretations Act takes care of this thing, that the singular refers to the plural. So, I think this amendment is actually otiose.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Hon Vice Chairman, are you withdrawing your proposed amendment?
    Mr Essilfie 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I withdraw the amendment.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is worth this. I have not really scrutinised it, but when he got up, I thought if he was talking about the arrangement, then perhaps, what is of import is in line 2, I thought perhaps, he was going to refer to “to cover the import and supply of” because you import before you supply. I thought that arrangement was the one that is relevant.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I guess the difficulty is that once you are anticipating the domestic manufacturing that one does not have to be imported before it is supplied-- [Interruption.]. Well, we are saying that by the nature of the Long Title. But it would not harm; if you think that it would rhyme better to put it that way, I do not think it is -- [Interruption.]
    Dr Prempeh 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, what do they mean by “supply”? Yes, you might have finished, but what do you mean by “supply”? That is why I would want the proponents-- Ministry of Finance -- I have seen both Deputy Ministers here. When they say: “Value Added Tax to cover the supply”, Mr Speaker, what do they specifically mean by “supply”?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Hon Member, I believe that the Hon Majority Leader gave an explanation earlier . Unless of course, as at that time, you were out of the Chamber. He gave a very candid opinion about that.
    Dr Prempeh 2:20 p.m.
    I was here; it might have escaped my ears.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    I will put the Question on the Long Title.
    The Long Title ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    That brings us to the end of today's proceedings with regard to the Considerations of the Bill.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we can take item 13, which is --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Are you bringing some food and drinks?
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Yes. We should take both the Order Paper, item number 13 and the other item 13 that Hon Members are interested in. Immediately after the Order Paper, item number 13, we can take the other item 13.
    BILLS -- THIRD READING 2:20 p.m.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, item number 9 would be deferred to tomorrow for our last round of consultations and then we take it.
    Dr A. A. Osei 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would need guidance from the Leadership. I brought it up, I do not know if it was discussed.
    The Defence and Interior Committee was scheduled to be at Akosombo at 2.00 p.m. Some of us wanted to find out if that is still coming on because we could not be at Akosombo and here. I brought it up and I do not know it has been solved.
    Earlier, on the Business Statement, we were told that there would be a meeting of the joint Caucus. But as of today, I have not heard anything about that and I am wondering if -- And the week is coming tomorrow. So, if Leadership could apprise us of any new development, it would be useful.
    Dr Kunbuor 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker that matter would be taken up. It was extensively
    discussed at the Business Committee today and we were also expecting to get some further information on it. So, the Business Statement would draw attention to it. But the exact date for it to be fixed, in the course of the week, we would let you know.
    I think the Defence and Interior Committee can make their trip tomorrow, not today. I have asked that the Whip should have a discussion with the Committee Chairman, so that they facilitate how this can be done within the limited time.
    ADJOURNMENT 2:20 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2.35 p.m. till Friday, 5th July, 2013 at 10.00 a.m.