Debates of 5 Nov 2013

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:40 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:40 a.m.
  • [No correction was made to the Votes and Proceedings of Friday, 1st November, 2013]
    • Mr Speaker 10:40 a.m.
    We also have the Official Report of Thursday, 31st October, 2013 for correction.
    Any correction?
    Mr Emmanuel K. Agyarko 10:40 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, for the records, column 66, the last paragraph. Hon Esther O. Dappah said:
    “Mr Speaker, one worrying thing I learnt when I was researching into breast cancer was the cause of breast cancer -- this is caused by a virus called human papilloma.”
    Indeed, I think she was referring to cervical cancer. Mr Speaker, if you read further, the reference is essentially to cer- vical cancer -- this is a scientific fact and I would want to -- Because this is a House of records, I think it is necessary to --
    Mr Speaker 10:40 a.m.
    Hon Member, it is not whether it is a scientific fact; it is about what transpired on the floor of the House.
    Mr Agyarko 10:40 a.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 10:40 a.m.
    This is a verbatim re- port of what transpired on the floor of the House. But let me find out from her, what she said. I would get back to you. Column 66, the last paragraph --
    Ms Esther O. Dappah 10:40 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was referring to cervical cancer; so, it was a slip.
    Mr Speaker 10:40 a.m.
    Very well.
    Mr Agyarko 10:40 a.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Theophilus T. Chaie 10:40 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to refer you to column 75, the third paragraph, the last line where you have--
    “Yes, the breast is a way of enhanc- ing your beauty as a women;”
    It should be “as a woman”. So, I would want that to be corrected.
    Mr Speaker 10:40 a.m.
    Very well.

    Hon Members, in the absence of any further correction, the Official Report of Thursday, 31st October, 2013 as correct- ed, is hereby adopted as a true record of proceedings.

    Item number 3 on the Order Paper.

    Hon Members, we have in our midst the Hon Minister for Health to respond to Questions by Hon Members.

    Hon Minister --

    The first Question stands in the name of the Hon Member for Ho West --
    Mr Simon Edem Asimah 10:40 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, the Hon Member for Ho West, Hon E. K. Bedzrah has travelled, and he has asked me to ask the Question on his behalf. I would want to seek your indulgence to do so.
    Mr Speaker 10:40 a.m.
    Very well. Permission granted.
    Mr Asimah 10:40 a.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    ORAL ANSWERS TO QUES- 10:50 a.m.
    TIONS 10:50 a.m.
    MINISTRY OF HEALTH 10:50 a.m.
    Minister for Health (Ms Han- ny-Sherry Ayittey) 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Health has finished a proposal for the funding and development of a teaching hospital to be sited at Ho. The final report has been submitted to the Ministry of Finance.
    Mr Asimah 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, in the Hon Minister's Answer, she said the proposal had been submitted for funding of the hospital.
    My question is, what would be the likely cost of the project proposal that has been submitted to the Ministry of Finance?
    Ms Ayittey 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I may not be able to give him the exact cost because the Ministry of Finance is mandated by the Constitution to go into financial discus- sions, appraisals and approvals with the financial proposal. We do the technical aspect, then submit it to the Ministry of Finance to finalise the financial aspect of the proposal.
    Mr Asimah 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to find out from the Hon Minister, what is the source of funding for this pro- ject. Is it Government of Ghana funding or it is from external sources?
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    Are you talking about the sources of funding in the proposal?
    Mr Asimah 10:50 a.m.
    Exactly so, Mr Speaker.
    Ms Ayittey 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Ministry is looking at both private Government of Ghana (GoG) or a turnkey funding.
    Mr Asimah 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to find out from the Hon Minister, how soon would this proposal be submit- ted to this august House for consideration.
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    Hon Member, the Hon Minister indicated that the proposal had been sent to the Ministry of Finance; they are responsible under the Loans Act and all those things. So, you may rephrase the question.
    Mr Asimah 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the infor- mation I am trying seek from the Hon Minister is the estimated time for the implementation plan. If they submit a pro- posal, they need to come out, that by this time, this activity would be carried out, et cetera. From her own estimation, what time would this proposal be submitted?
    Ms Ayittey 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, maybe, I would like to let the Hon Member of Parliament know the procedure for the execution of such programmes.
    First, we do the feasibility study and then we submit it to the Ministry of Fi- nance. After the Ministry of Finance has examined the proposal and accepted that it is within the concessionary facilities, it approves it before it goes to Cabinet.
    After Cabinet's approval, it comes to this august House for parliamentary approval and then it goes back to the Ministry of Finance for the loan agreement to be signed.
    Mr Speaker, at this moment, I would not like to commit myself to any timetable; the process is ongoing.
    Mr James K. Avedzi 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister said the Ministry of Health had finished with the proposal for funding. Can she tell us the amount contained in
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    Your question again?
    Mr Avedzi 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I said the Ministry of Health had finished with the proposal for funding. I would want to know how much is contained in that pro- posal for which funding is being sought.
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    I thought she answered that question, that she could not mention the figure offhand?
    Mr Avedzi 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, a proposal has been completed and funding is being sought; there is an amount contained in that proposal while you are looking for funding. Can we know that amount?
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    Well, it depends on what is in the proposal.
    Hon Minister?
    Ms Ayittey 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, assuming the Ministry gives a ceiling of US$250 million, then after examination and doing the value for money assessment, it comes down to about US$150 million. I do not have control over that; it is the experts -- That is why I am saying that we have submitted our proposals, so, we would want the Ministry of Finance to do the value for money assessment and then the other technical assessments.
    They would agree whether the US$250 we are asking for is too much or maybe, we need to reduce the project size. So, that is what project funding is all about.
    Mr Asamoah Ofosu 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to know from the Hon Minister whether the University of Health and Allied Sciences is offering teaching courses in medicine. If yes, how are they managing teaching in the absence of the teaching hospital in Ho?
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    That is not a sup- ple-mentary question; that is a major Question.
    Mr Benjamin K. Kpodo 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I would want to clarify two issues. One --
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    Ask your question.
    Mr Kpodo 10:50 a.m.
    The question is, the Hon Minister was requested to answer how the Ho Regional Hospital is to be converted into a teaching hospital. But in her re- sponse, she said there was a proposal for funding and development of a teaching hospital to be sited in Ho. Is it in response to this Question or it is another hospital --
    Mr Speaker 10:50 a.m.
    Hon Member for Ho Central, that is why we have supple- men-tary questions, so that when you are not satisfied, you follow up and interrogate the issue with further questions. So, ask your question.
    Mr Kpodo 10:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the Hon Minister whether she is referring to the Volta Regional Hos- pital in her proposal.
    Secondly, I am informed that under Act 526 of 1996, that is the Ghana Health Service and Teaching Hospital Act, legal processes need to be --
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Hon Member, Questions shall not be argumentative. Please, there are rules governing Questions.
    Mr Kpodo 11 a.m.
    I would like to know what legal processes are being followed to es- tablish the teaching hospital in Ho.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Hon Member for Ho Central, can you ask your question again?
    Mr Kpodo 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I sked the Hon

    Minister what the status of the legal pro- cesses that would convert the Ho Regional Hospital into a teaching hospital was.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Hon Member, that is not a supplementary question because if the legal processes are a matter of law, then they are in official publications that any- body can read. You do not ask questions which you can find in official publications. If there is any legal process known to the law, it should be found in the law.
    Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, just by way of assisting the Hon Member for Ho Central -- I think he wants to enquire whether the hospital or the proposed facility that the Hon Minister is talking about is different from the Ho Regional Hospital. That is the first ques- tion he asked.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    I was going to allow that question before he added more -- [Laughter.]
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, so, if he can reposition that question for the Hon Minister to answer.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Hon Minister, you have got the question now?
    Ms Ayittey 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is not dif- ferent; it is the same hospital.
    Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have listened to the Hon Min- ister and I have a quick question.
    Mr Speaker, more often, we tend to say that proposals have been submitted, and they end there. We do not hear anything about them again. I would want to ask, respectfully, the Hon Minister, when did the Ministry realise the need to convert the Ho Regional Hospital to a teaching hospital and when they submitted the proposal. This is because I am worried to
    hear that the proposal has been submitted and we have not heard anything again.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Hon Minister, when did you submit the proposal? That is the question. [Pause]
    Actually, on that question, she had made that information available to the Table Office.
    Ms Ayittey 11 a.m.
    So, I can speak a local language. Mr Speaker, am I supposed to answer in Ga?
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Hon Minister, you do not
    have immediate --
    Ms Ayittey 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the proposal was submitted on 8th July, 2013 to the Ministry of Finance.
    Mr Theophilus T. Chaie 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, in the Hon Minister's Answer, she said the Ministry had submitted their proposal to the Ministry of Finance -- I would want to know whether she did it in collaboration with the Ministry of Education, since the facility will actually affect their work as well.
    Ms Ayittey 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, before the proposal was submitted to the Ministry of Finance, there was a team -- a team was set up, comprising the Ministry of Edu- cation, the District Assembly, the Ghana Health Service and the Project Manage- ment Unit of the Ministry of Health and the District and Municipal Assemblies.
    So, they worked on it for about six weeks and submitted the final report. There was also a stakeholders' meeting in the region.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Last question -- who do I take, the Hon Deputy Minority Leader, the Hon Minority Leader or both?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, the question that my Hon Colleague intended to ask has been partly answered
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11 a.m.


    by the Hon Minister. Fortunately, I believe, he is not minded to pursue it.

    But the Hon Minister indicated in her

    Answer, that they had finished with the proposal for funding and development. She has indicated to us that, the funding would be done by the Ministry responsi- ble for Finance. So, their own involve- ment would be for the development of a teaching hospital to be sited at Ho. Since the proposals have been concluded, Mr Speaker, may we know what is contained in that development proposal?
    Ms Ayittey 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I may not be able to provide that. This is because it is a very comprehensive technical data. We would have a theatre, a gynaecological ward, children's ward, out-patient ward and laundry. We would have a 240-bed hospital, a theatre for teaching and adjoin- ing hospitals to be used to supplement the teaching hospitals. There would also be bungalows for doctors and nurses.
    There would be a trauma centre to look at accident cases, including eye and ear centres and of course, children's ward. So, there are quite a lot of things that we have expanded into the teaching to support the good quality health delivery we want in the region.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I should think that the Hon Minister would have done some costing of the project before submission to the Ministry of Fi- nance. What is the consideration?
    Ms Ayittey 11 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have an- swered this question. I do not have the final cost here. I can tell the Hon Minority Leader that it is between US$120 million and US$150 million. That is the estimated cost. That is what I can tell him. I am not sure of the final cost. So, it is between US$120 million and US$150 million.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Hon Members, we move to the next Question standing in the name of Hon Amoah.
    Mr Samuel A. Amoah 11 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I represent the people of Twifo Atti Morkwa.
    Mr Speaker 11 a.m.
    Are you the Hon Member for Parliament?
    Very well. You have the floor.
    MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
    Hon Members, before the Question is read out, I would like to crave your indulgence to introduce some visitors we have in our midst.
    ANNOUNCEMENTS 11:10 a.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
    Hon Mem- bers, I have the pleasure to introduce to you a delegation from the Parliamentary Service Commission of the Parliament of Sierra Leone, who are on a four-day official visit to Ghana.
    They are here, among others, to share in our best practices in parliamentary service administration and setting of strategic directions for the Parliamentary Service. Their visit is also intended to create the platform to deepen the already cordial relations between the two legislatures.
    The delegation comprises the follow- ing:
    Hon Ibrahim Bundu -- Member of Parliament
    Hon Ansumana J. Kaikai -- Mem- ber of Parliament
    Hon Hassan Sheriff -- Member of Parliament
    Hon Claude D. M. Kamanda -- Member of Parliament
    Hon Gladys G. Brima -- Member of Parliament
    Mr Ibrahim S. Sesay -- Clerk to Parliament
    Mrs Finda F. Frazer -- Head, Co-or- dination Office.
    Hon Members, on your behalf, I wish to express our gratitude to them and wish them a pleasant stay in the country for them to have fruitful deliberations.
    Hon Member, you can now go ahead with the Question to the Hon Minister for Health.
    ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 11:10 a.m.
    MINISTRY OF HEALTH 11:10 a.m.
    Minister for Health Ms Hanny-Sher- ry Ayittey 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the new 60-bed district hospital at Twifo Praso is one of the projects under the Ghana 8 No. Hos- pitals Project being executed by Euroget De-Invest SA of Egypt. Prepara-tory work was completed in terms of architectural drawings, documentation for sub-con- tracting and eventual mobilisation to site for commencement.
    Twifo Praso was part of phase I along- side Wa, Salaga and Nkawkaw. Unfortu- nately, the proposed site for the hospital was not conducive. Subsequently, the decision on the new site took a long while before a new site was settled on. This has accounted for the delay in starting the construction of the hospital at Twifo Praso.
    Mr S. A. Amoah 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Hon Minister when -- that is, the main thing they now call “the new site for the project”. When is that project going to --
    Ms Ayittey 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, because of land litigation, the Ministry has now de- veloped a new policy. Before a construc- tion project commences, we would like that the land is transferred in the name of the Ministry of Health. So, we have written to the District Assembly to ensure that the title of the land was vested in the Ministry of Health before we started construction.
    So, I would appeal to the Hon Member of Parliament to assist the District Assem- bly to facilitate this.
    Mr S. A. Amoah 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would also like to know from the Hon Minister, is it by land litigation or the preparation work that has not been -- This is because according to the Answer, it is almost com- pleted. So, that is contradictory. If she could clarify the position for me.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
    I would have thought that the thing is almost through, but at the same time, they are waiting for this transfer of title. But I would let the Hon Minister herself give

    an answer.
    Ms Ayittey 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, we are wait- ing for evidence of the title submitted to the Ministry of Health.
    Mr S. A. Amoah 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would also like to ask the Hon Minister when it would be completed within the space of time and when would it start?
    Ms Ayittey 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would liaise with the District Assembly. Immediately the title is submitted to the Ministry, we would allow them to move to site. Mr Speaker, we have had several problems where hospitals have been built and new families are contesting the ownership of the land.
    We had a problem in Cape Coast. We either move the hospital or we vacate. We have a problem in Ada. We have problems in Brong Ahafo and Kumasi. So, we believe that this time, as our new policy, the title must be vested in the name of the Ministry before we put any concrete structure on the land.
    Ms Adwoa S. Safo 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, from the Hon Minister's Answer, it is clear that an earlier site was spotted and later, it was realised that it was not conducive. I would want to ask her, the last line of her Answer states,
    “This has accounted for a delay in starting the construction of the hospital at Twifo Praso.”
    I would want to ask whether the delay is coming with an extra cost to the Min- istry and for that matter, to the people of Ghana, since the contract has already been awarded and that due to the uncomfortable nature or the unconducive nature of the earlier sites, the work has not started. Is it coming at an extra cost? I really want to find out.
    Ms Ayittey 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, when it comes to such instances, we have to look at the terms and the variations of the con- tract. If there is going to be an extra cost, then the whole contract would have to be renegotiated by the Ministry of Finance.
    Mr Emmanuel K. Agyarko 11:10 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, in the past few months, we have heard that Euroget De-Invest SA of Egypt had had some problems and they attributed the problems to political instability that had brought Egypt -- I would want to find out whether they are in the position -- They said they had problems putting together the funds. I would want to find out from the Hon Minister whether the funding arrangement is intact for them to begin work.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
    Hon Member, I do not see how related this question is to the major Question.
    Mr Agyarko 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is be- cause of the delay. In this particular case, they attribute the delay to some land litigation. But following on this, I am certain that in the past few months, there had been some problems. It is just some clarification I am seeking; and I seek your guidance in this matter. Mr Speaker, if you think that it is completely unrelated, I would so withdraw it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
    All right. Hon Minister, please, assist us. Hon Minis- ter, I believe you heard the Hon Member's question? Can you be of any assistance?
    Ms Ayittey 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is a question that I would have to go to my projects unit and find out exactly what is happening to Euroget De-Invest SA of Egypt. I believe this programme started in the year 2007 and I think it was under the administration of the New Patriotic Party; so, I would like to be fair.
    I would like to find out or study the
    project and look at the financial -- and then, maybe, I may also have to find out from the Ministry of Finance. This is because an agreement was signed. So, let us find out what pertains to the terms of the agreement.
    Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I would really want some clarification. I think my Hon Colleague attempted to ask that same question and I would ask same again. The Hon Minister's Answer clearly shows that there was a proposed site and it was not conducive. My understanding is that, there was land litigation, so, they had to move away from there.
    They went for a new site. What really is the problem with the new site? Is it that they are waiting for the title, that is why they are not commencing the project, or is there litigation on the new site as well?
    Ms Ayittey 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would not like to say that there is litigation on the new site. At the Ministry of Health, we are asking the district to submit to us a title deed showing that the land is vested in the name of the Ministry of Health. I have also explained that we have had several problems where hospitals had been built and new landowners are making claims for the sites.
    So, we have come out with a policy, that before we commence any project, the land must be vested in the name of the Ministry or in the name of the District Assembly. I think that is the security that we need before we make any investment.
    Mr Nitiwul 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is getting interesting. My understanding is that the Hon Minister is not really saying now that the new site has problems, she wants the security of the site by having the title. For how long has this directive gone from her Ministry to the Assembly?
    Ms Ayittey 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the project
    unit has been working on this, that is why we are able to bring you this information that we have a problem with the initial site.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
    Hon Min- ister, the Hon Member wanted to find out from you how long that demand for the vesting of title in the Ministry of Health went out to the Assembly.
    Ms Ayittey 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, on that, I cannot answer him. I cannot tell him how long. I have indicated that this programme started in 2007, so, there had been generic problems. If the Hon Member wants to know, I can write to the Assembly and they would indicate how soon they can finish with that. [Interruption.] This is because as I stand here, I cannot give him a definite answer.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
    Hon Minister, he is asking for the point in time when you wrote to them to demand the title.
    Ms Ayittey 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have not written to them. We have developed with the Ghana Health Service a new policy. This is because of the several litigations we have had over land. So, we are asking that for all lands belonging to hospitals, polyclinics in the districts, the title must be vested either in the Assembly or in the name of the Ministry of Health to enable us -- So, all we need to do is to facilitate this and then the Member of Parliament must also assist us to facilitate -- So, that is what we are going to do.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:20 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, when the Hon Minister, in her Answer, alluded to a fact that “the proposed site for the hospital was not conducive” I thought, really, she was referring to matters other than the title deed to the land. But she has been emphasising on litigation. I thought when she said the site was not conducive
    -- 11:20 a.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
    Hon Mi- nority Leader, I hope you are not speculat- ing? Let her answer the question without these asides.
    Ms Ayittey 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the ques- tion posed to me is about how soon I can commence a project. If the Hon Minority Leader wants a comprehensive status of Euroget De-Invest SA of Egypt, I would provide it. But I have not gone through to find out why it entered this country in 2007 and negotiated with the then Government and now I have to talk about their financial status.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Members, I think what the Hon Minister is saying is that, she needs notice to be able to respond. That is it. [Interruption.] Any
    more questions?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, with respect to the Chair, the position of the Chair is to listen to us and not enter into this debate, I thought. But Mr Speak- er, I am related to that because of what the Hon Minister herself has provided to us, that the delay in the starting with the construction of the hospital is attributable to just the relocation of the site. That is why I am asking whether she is aware of this because it is all over. That is why I am asking whether she is aware of it.
    Ms Ayittey 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not aware that Euroget De-Invest SA of Egypt is in financial crises.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:30 a.m.
    Could the Minister tell this House --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I have never said that Euroget De-In- vest SA of Egypt is in financial crisis. I have not said so. I was talking about mobilisation of funds, the difficulty they have; I am not saying that they themselves are in financial crisis. They are two differ- ent statements altogether.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Well, I believe this is not a question -- her an- swer clearly shows as I said earlier, that she needs notice. If you give her notice regarding this particular company, she would come and give you appropriate answers. I am not jumping into the arena of debate, but I think that in fairness, if you have something to say, you may go ahead.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:30 a.m.
    Would the Hon Min- ister tell this House if she is aware of any project that Euroget De-Invest SA of Egypt has completed in Ghana.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Member, I think this question is com- pletely unrelated to the major Question. If you want to ask something in that direction, I think you can give her notice,
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the reason I am asking the question, and you can guide me, is, she is saying in her Answer, that it is this company that is working on this project. So, my obvious question is, have they completed any project -- for you to hire them? You must have some knowl- edge about their work, if she is aware or not, it is alright.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Very well, Hon Minister.
    Ms Ayittey 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am aware that they have not completed anything neither have they commenced anything.
    Thank you.
    Mr Justice Joe Appiah 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not comfortable with the answer the Minister is giving us. Mr Speaker, they always say “we will consult”, “we will consult” but the consultation will not come. So, as a sector Minister, she has to have an idea --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Mem- ber, you have to ask a question.
    Mr J. J. Appiah 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the question is that, she should be able to tell us exactly when the project would start and when the project would be completed.Why am I saying that?They always come here to say “we will consult”, “we will consult” but the consultation would not come. So, I am asking the sector Minister, exactly what time will the project come on.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Minister 11:30 a.m.
    Is it on a point of order?
    MrAgbesi 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Mem- ber who just spoke should be specific, so that the Minister's answer also goes to the point. If he is not comfortable with the facts the Hon Minister has raised, they are facts which do not need him being comfortable.
    Mr J. J. Appiah 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not agree with my senior Member. What I am saying is that, the phrase “we are con- sulting”, ‘we are consulting', must stop. She has to be precise and tell us what she knows as a sector Minister. She must at least, have an idea of it and not “we are consulting”. We are very serious in this House. This is an august House, so we need to do very serious business.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Mem- ber, I do not think the Hon Minister has spoken about “consulting”, “consulting”. She has given the reason for the delay. She has also indicated what steps they had taken to get the title to the land vested in either the Assembly or the Ministry of Health. So, talking about the time-frame would be a little difficult. I think she has made it very clear.
    Are there any more questions?
    Mr Kwame Govers Agbodza 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would also want to thank the Hon Minister for coming to throw more light on the various interventions that they are making in healthcare delivery in this country. Just before I ask my question, I have noticed a lot of district hospitals which are being built these days and are well equipped. I know of Tarkwa, which would be completed shortly--
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Mem- ber, can you go straight to your question?
    Mr Agbodza 11:30 a.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker. I would go straight to the point.
    I noticed that some of the district hos- pitals have 120 beds but the particular one in question has 60 beds. What makes one hospital have 120 beds and this particular one have 60 beds?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Member, I do not know whether you are charting the right path.There is a differ- ence between a teaching hospital and a
    Mr Agbodza 11:30 a.m.
    This particular one is Twifo Praso Hospital with 60 beds. That is exactly what I am talking about.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Very well, Hon Minister, can you respond to the question?
    Ms Ayittey 11:30 a.m.
    Thank you very much.
    I am very happy that the Hon Member is appreciating that we are building district hospitals. We are also building teaching hospitals. [Interruptions.] We are building polyclinics, we are building Community Health (Based) Planning Services (CHPS) compounds -- [Interruptions.] We are doing a lot.
    We are building one at Dodowa; we are building one at Sekondi; we are building a 600- bed university teaching hospital in Legon. We are also building one in the Northern Region.
    We have CHPS compounds. We are doing a lot for the medical sector. Mr Speaker, the design was made in 2007 for a 60-bed hospital. So, this is what the Ministry took over and I am going to implement--
    An Hon Member 11:30 a.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    The contract had already been awarded; I would want to know, from the contract document, when were they supposed to have started and ended this project.
    Ms Ayittey 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, since work has not commenced, it means we have to go back to the contract to see the terms of the contract, whether it has elapsed and maybe, we would have to renew it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Mem- bers, we would take the last supplementary question.
    Mr Solomon Namliit Boar 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister said they were building a lot of hospitals. I would want to know whether they are building one in Bunkpurugu-Yunyoo District.
    Ms Ayittey 11:30 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, while I am here, that would be on consideration for the district.
    Thank you.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
    Hon Min- ister, we want to thank you for attending upon this House. We are grateful.
    You are discharged.
    PAPERS 11:30 a.m.
    BILLS -- FIRST READING 11:35 a.m.
    MOTIONS 11:35 a.m.
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr Herod Cobbina) 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this Honourable House adopts the Report of the joint Committee on Communications and Defence and Interi- or on the Supply Contract for Dedicated Security Information System between the Government of the Republic of Ghana and ZTE Corporation of China.
    Mr Speaker, I present the Committee's Report 11:35 a.m.
    Introduction
    The Supply Contract for Dedicated Security Information System between the Government of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Communications) and ZTE Corporation, China was laid in the House on Thursday, 19th September, 2013 and referred to the joint Committee on Com- munications and Defence and Interior for consideration and report, in pursuance of Standing Orders 158 and 182.
    The Committee met with the Minister for Communications, Hon Edward K. Omane Boamah and a combined technical team from the Ministry and the National Security outfit to consider the terms of the Contract.
    The Committee reports as follows:
    Reference documents
    The Committee referred to the follow- ing documents during its delibera-tions:
    1. The 1992 Constitution
    2. The Standing Orders of the House
    3. The Contract (including nineteen (19) attachments and appen-dic- es).
    Background to the Contract
    This contract is to source the neces- sary funds for the Global Open Trunking Architecture (GOTA) project which was commenced in 2007 for the nation's Public Services.
    The GOTA system is a trunking system
    based on Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) 2000 technology. The system provides high speed wireless data service, in compliance with the International Tel- ecommunications Union (ITU) standard
    (ITU M.2014).
    The GOTA solution can accommodate many applications, a feature that cannot be achieved by other systems, including visible dispatching, Chip Scan, Finger Scan, GPS, mobile office or Two-dimen- sional Code Scan. These applica-tions can be used by the Ghana Police Service, the Ghana Army and related institutions to co-ordinate security issues during big events like festivals and sports. As a lead- ing trunking technology, GOTA supports smooth evolution to Long Term Evolution
    (LTE).
    The first phase (Phase One), deployed in 2007, is said to be running well and serving the southern sector of Ghana (Greater Accra, Central, Western, Eastern, Volta and Ashanti Regions). The second phase (Phase Two), which is an expansion of the project, will cover the northern part of Ghana (Upper East, Upper West, Brong Ahafo and Northern Regions). In addition, Phase One will be expanded.
    Phase one provided a capacity of fifty thousand (50,000) lines with seventy- two (72) Base Transceiver Stations (BTS) while phase two is to increase capacity to two hundred thousand (200,000) with a system that can serve up to three million (3,000,000) users.
    This project is expected to be com-
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I know the Chairman of the Communications Com- mittee was not there when this Paper was -- this Report is not to source for funds. He has not seen the Report but the Chair- man is telling us that it is to source for funds; that is not what we are being asked to do. This House has already approved the funding, so, I do not know which report he is reading.
    This Committee's Report is not to source for funds at all. It is to approve the Supply's Contract. So, I do not know which report he is reading. He was not there. So, somebody else should be doing it. This is because it does not reflect what the Committee did.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
    Hon Mem- ber, look at item (3.0), the first sentence.
    “This contract is to source the nec- essary funds…” --
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:35 a.m.
    That is precisely the point I am raising. As the Chairman of the Committee, he should know better and correct it. This House has already approved that loan, so we are not sourcing for anything. This House cannot be asked to approve another loan; we have already approved it. So, there is a deficiency in the Report.
    As Chairman of the Committee, he
    should do the corrections before he reads it, otherwise, it would appear the Commit- tee members do not know what they are talking about.
    Mr Cobbina 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe Hon Anthony Osei has answered the question himself and in subsequent ap- provals, I would have to go to the Supply Contract --
    ii. Providing a common communi- ca-tion platform for all MDAs down to the District Level
    iii. The system will dramatically enhance a country-wide reaction time to emergencies
    iv. The cost of Government com- mu-nication will be considerably reduced.
    The Contract
    The scope of the Contract shall include the supply, delivery, installation and com- missioning of the Equipment and services to be undertaken by the Contractor (ZTE) and accepted by the Purchaser (Govern- ment of Ghana) of the Dedicated Security Information network (GOTA System) in accordance with terms and conditions of the contract.
    ZTE and the Government of Ghana signed a contract dated 5th November, 2006 to supply equipment and install a Dedicated National Security Information System for Ghana. The total cost for this project was US$ 60,047,075.00.
    The Project
    The project was split into two (2) phases, Phase 1 and Phase 2. Phase 1 of the project which cost US$30,014,325.00 has been deployed and operational since 2007 while Phase 2, which is estimated at US$30,032,750.00, is outstanding. The Government of Ghana in 2011 tasked
    ZTE to provide a solution to cater for the outstanding part of the project and the cost provided by ZTE for this new solution was
    US$129,904,498.00.
    Network equipment
    The cost of main equipment excluding terminals changed from US$15,219,922.00 to US$62,833,723.00, more than double the original price. The reasons include:
    i. The old design included 70 base stations equipment to cover the northern parts of the country. In implementation, this number

    is woefully inadequate if the system is to attain total national coverage as projected. 270 BTS equipment (around four times of the old design) are thus provided for, in the new design to enable us get close to achieving the na- tional coverage objective.

    ii. The base station equipment pro- posed in the new solution are different from that stated in the old design; because these are state-of-the-art, more advanced, efficient, future oriented and therefore come at a higher cost.

    iii. To guarantee the security, relia- bility and performance of the net-

    work, total network redun-dancy has been employed in the core network. This means the same equipment have been deployed in Accra, Kumasi and Tamale switch centres and inter-linked so that should one switch center fail, the other takes over full control of the whole network.

    This was non-existent in the old design as no core network equipment was included in the phase 2 cost. These additional equipment which amount to more than doubling the core network, have also contributed to the price diffe-rence.

    iv. The old design catered for only
    SPACE FOR TABLE - PAGE 11:35 a.m.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was inviting the Hon Chairman to amend the Report he is reading because we are supposed to adopt it. If it is incorrect, we cannot adopt it; he should amend it properly; there is a way of amending it;
    not skiping it over.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
    Hon Member, I thought you would help him out, by proposing something for him to adopt?
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I cannot help him out. I was bringing his mind to a deficiency in the Report that he wants us to adopt. We cannot do so with such deficiencies.
    Mr Haruna Iddrisu 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe and will indulge my Hon Col- league on the other side of the House, Hon Anthony Akoto Osei to allow the Hon Chairman of the Committee to submit the Report accordingly.
    But Mr Speaker, with your leadership, permit that there are fundamental errors with the Report, so that subsequent to the presentation, we will accommodate some of the corrections that he and other Members may recommend.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
    I think that is in order.
    Hon Members, let the Hon Chairman present the Report and when it is opened for debate, then some amendments could be proposed, which would be taken on board.
    Mr Herod Cobbina 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I continue.
    ii. Indemnification by purchaser
    Except to the extent that the contractor indemnifies purchaser pursuant to clause 34.1 of the contract, and except for claims which arise from contractor's negligence or wilful misconduct, the purchaser agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the con- tractor from any losses from claims of per- sonal injury arising from purchasers' sale and distribution of the product, or from its breach of representations, warranties or covenants contained in this Contract; if the
    Purchaser receives prompt written notice of and has sole control over the defence and settlement of the claims and actions.
    The purchaser shall pay all the costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees in- curred by the contractor in connection with any such defence, unless the contractor chooses to defend himself. This indemnity does not expire upon termination of this Contract, but shall remain in force and effect thereafter.
    Financial provisions
    The purchase and installation of the system will be financed by a Preferential Buyer's Credit from the Government of the People's Republic of China through the EXIM Bank of China. This is a con- cessional loan with the following terms:
    i. Loan amount -- US$123,409,273.10
    ii. Down payment -- US $6,495,224.90
    iii. Interest rate -- 2 per cent per annum
    vi. Repayment period -- 20 years
    v. Grace period -- 5 years from the effective date of the loan
    vi. Management fee -- 1 per cent
    vii. Commitment fee -- 0.75 per cent per annum
    Observations and recommendations
    The Committee, during its delibera- tions made the following observations and recommend as follows:
    Training
    The Contractor is (according to the dictates of the Contract) to design the nec- essary training programmes asso- ciated with the project. The Committee however
    recommends that the designing itself must be a collaborated effort between both the purchaser and contractor.
    This, the Committee believes, will ensure that the nation gets the full benefits of the training, as it deems fit, to sustain the smooth running of the project. Indeed, the Committee recommends strongly that Ghanaian experts must be the full benefi- ciaries of this training.
    Indemnification
    The Committee observed that the in- demnification by Purchaser as per article 37(2) of the Contract does not, in any way, favour the purchaser (Government of Ghana) but is fully skewed to favour only the contractor. The purchaser shall pay all the costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the contractor in connection with any defence, unless the contractor chooses to defend itself. The recommendation, therefore, is that it must either be modified accordingly or deleted altogether.
    Contractor obligations
    The Committee also observed that there is no particular article or clause that clearly states the obligations of the contractor to- wards the purchaser. This, therefore, gives room for the former to deny any particular obligation as and when the issue may arise.
    Conclusion
    In conclusion, the Committee affirms the need for this Contract which will reg- ulate the loan agreement for the GOTA project. The Committee, therefore, re- quests that this august House approves the Supply Contract for Dedicated Security Information System between the Govern- ment of Ghana (represented by Ministry of Communications) and ZTE Corporation, taking into consideration, the Commit- tee's reservations.
    Mr Speaker, I have taken the advice of the Hon Minister and I hope the House
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
    Hon Mi- nority Leader, I saw you rise?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I rose to ask the Chairman of the Committee who just read the Report to us-- He has indicated to us the meaning of some of the alphabets, except “ZTE”. What is “ZTE”?
    Mr Cobbina 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is the company's name. [Laughter.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
    I believe the Report has been submitted?
    If we can get any seconder.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
    Mr Speak- er, this is very serious. We should know what “ZTE” stands for. He just cannot say it is a contract between the Republic of Ghana and “ZTE” and yet we do not know what “ZTE” stands for. Mr Speaker, can he tell us?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Hon Mi- nority Leader, I thought he told us that, it is a name, ZTE Corporation of China. That is the name of the company. So, let us get somebody to second the presentation of the Report, then we look at it. When we subject it to debate, these matters could be addressed.

    Ranking Member of the Committee (Mr Kennedy O. Agyapong): Mr Speak- er, I beg to second the Motion but with reservations. Why I have a reservation is because when you look at the Report, page 7, paragraph 7.2 “Indemnification” “Indemnification”

    “The Committee observed that the

    indemnification by Purchaser as per article 37(2) of the Contract does not, in any way, favuor the Purchaser (Government of Ghana) but is fully skewed to favour only the Contractor. The Purchaser shall pay all the costs, expenses and rea- sonable attorneys' fees incurred by the Contractor in connection with any defence, unless the Contractor chooses to defend itself. The rec- ommendation, therefore, is that it must either be modified accordingly or deleted altogether.”

    Mr Speaker, we do not have any docu- ment here indicating that they have deleted that and it is very serious.

    So, I would recommend or ask permis- sion from the Hon Minister to explain to us if this has been captured. Indeed, if it has been captured, it is not before the House and we do not have any information on that. Secondly, we are seeking the interest of Government, so, we would want the Hon Minister to give us explanation, if indeed, they have captured it.

    I would want to be on record, that we are Members of Parliament, representing the interest of this country. Therefore, I would plead with the Hon Minister to do his due diligence better. This is because, we do not want any excuses whatsoever. I am saying that because this particular company has a bad record. I have to speak the truth.

    If you go to Philippines, a contract that was US$120 million was increased to US$330 million; and because of that, as I speak, the President's wife is under house arrest. When you go to Mongolia, a simi- lar thing happened. Africa, that is Kenya, this same company had a problem there. And in Lusaka, Members of Parliament

    voted against whatever loan agreement they were signing.

    So, I am cautioning the Hon Minister, with all due respect, to do his due diligence well. He should check his facts, so that next time, he does not come to tell us that, he has a problem with the company.

    With these reservations made, I beg to second the Motion.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    All right. Hon Member, the point is well made.
    Hon Minister, can we hear from you?
    Minister for Communications (Dr Omane Boamah) 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the issue about the indemnity came up during the Committee sitting. You would recall that, even when the loan agreement came to Parliament -- as a result of the Supreme Court judgement, this is the first time that we are bringing a Supply Contract of this nature after the approval of a loan agree- ment, to the best of my knowledge. Sub- sequently, within 24 hours, we produced the Supply Contract.
    At the Committee level, the issue about the indemnity being reciprocal was raised and we have captured that. Prior to this approval, we have engaged them and they had no problem with that. So, once this is approved, I would want to assure the House that, that would be captured.
    Let me also take this opportunity to assure Hon Members that issues relating to judicious use of the facility would be taken care of because we embedded in this project, value for money audit as one and the services of an independent engineer as another. Also, warranties and bank guaranties would be taken care of.
    I would want to assure the Hon Mem- ber that on the issue of reciprocity, when it comes to the indemnity as was raised at the Committee level, has been taken care of.
    Minister for Communications (Dr Omane Boamah) 11:50 a.m.


    Thank you.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    All right.
    Hon Minister, thank you but we take your word for it and it has been captured in the Hansard.
    Mr Justice J. Apppiah 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, it looks as if the Hon Minister has not given us the actual answer. He has not given us the answer at all. Hon Agyapong is telling the House that the people are corrupt, they are not good. So, the Hon Minister should tell us that due diligence would be done to ascertain all the facts. He must give us the answer right now.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    I think the Hon Minister, inasfar as the reciprocity issue is concerned, has addressed it and the due diligence issue has to do with exactly what they are doing. So, at the end of the day -- That is why I am saying that we are taking his word for it. The Hansard has captured it and at any point in time, we can call him to come and answer questions on the issue raised.
    Mr Isaac K. Asiamah 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, on a point of emphasis and affirmation here. I would want the Hon Minister to tell the House whether indeed, whatever Hon Kennedy Agyapong has said is true about that company. Key -- very important in this House, this is a Ranking Member of the Committee on Communications, he has heard a lot about the company, so, we would want the Hon Minister to say, yes or no, to what Hon Kennedy Agyapong has said.
    Mr Haruna Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am sure I would want an opportunity to seek your indulgence to do some further correction and improvement to the Com- mittee's Report.
    Mr Speaker, I know that my Col- leagues who spoke before Hon Isaac
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Hon Min- ister, may I just get you to put it on hold in the meantime. The Motion was moved, it has been seconded by a member of the Committee. We would have to take the next step before we commenced with this debate. It is only because of the issue he raised, that we thought we needed the response of the Hon Minister for Com- munications.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, in the under normal circumstances, on matters of national security, we act on political basis. The Hon Minister is my good Friend so, I have no difficulty with the assurance he has given.
    Hon Minister, this is so important because if you read the language that was captured in the Report, he would under-
    stand why it is important that we see it. With your permission, let me read:
    “This indemnity does not expire upon termination of this contract but shall remain in force and effected after.”
    This is the type of language they put in that Supply Contract. So, an assurance without seeing it, I have a difficulty. This is a strange language. [Interruption.] He wants me to repeat it? That is why —
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Hon Member, when we get to the bridge, we would cross it.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am saying that —
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    We will get there.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, his answer —
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Listen, he has given some answer.
    Dr A. A. Osei 11:50 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, we need to see it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Hon Members might not be that satisfied. We can give directives what he should do after all of this, so that as a Parliament, we get the feedback exactly what is being done by way of due diligence and so on. But in the meantime, the Motion has been moved, it has been seconded, I will put the Question, and then we open it for debate and thereafter we put the Question.
    So, Hon Members, it is open for debate now, and I would like to ask for contri- butions.
    Question proposed
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
    Hon Papa Owusu Ankomah -- sorry, Hon Iddrisu was on the floor, let him conclude his presentation.
    Mr Haruna Iddrisu noon
    Mr Speaker, may I refer you to paragraph 5.3 “Service Cost”. “The cost of services including planning, supervision, installation and com- missioning have also increased from original, evidently due to —
    You see the “due” there Mr Speaker? I think that correction must be made to it. “. . . due to . . .” there is something wrong with the construction.
    Mr Speaker, paragraph 5.2, ‘Other Equipments'. If you read the first and second paragraphs, I stand corrected -- second paragraph of 5.2, “remote motoring…” Are you saying “remote monitoring” or “remote motoring”? The Committee must take a look at it because if you go to the third line, you see “monitor” which I believe is the appropriate word they want to use.
    Mr Speaker, if you go to paragraph 1 of 5.2, “high speed date”, I am sure they are referring to “high speed data,” not “date”. Mr Speaker, that one too must be corrected. Mr Speaker, that is why I said that the Committee should have done a more elegant job.
    Mr Speaker, if you come to the con- struction at “Taxes” noon
    “ZTE shall undertake to pay the taxes, customs duties, harbour charges, and other expenses related to this Contract inside the mainland of China ….”
    We have the nomenclature here. If we are granting tax exemption, let the Committee say so and make appropriate recommendations to this august House.
    Mr Speaker, if you come to even para noon
    None

    “Other solutions with requirements from Ghana Government, such as LBS, Encryption system, multime- dia message system, network tools at the cost of US$5,875,012 has also been introduced to perform more functions and increase the safety for Ghana and society.”

    What kind of construction is that Mr Speaker? It must also be looked at and improved.

    Mr Speaker, now, my comments on the Motion -- Mr Speaker, there are two major respected information and com- munication technology entities in China known as HUAWEI and the ZTE Corpo- ration, which are largely responsible for software- related applications across the globe and ZTE is certainly one of those entities.

    But Mr Speaker, I agree with my Colleagues, that what are we indemni- fy-ing? We cannot indemnify to perpetuity. Therefore, we must seek as the purchaser to expunge it.

    Mr Speaker, in respect of value for money, I share the position of the Commit- tee, that much more due diligence should be done in terms of value for money. My own personal experience at the Ministry of Communications, in one transaction, which was approved, we made savings of up to US$10 million, if not over, in terms of a transaction which came to the Min- istry and following up using independent engineers, we did valuation for it.

    Mr Speaker, the other principle is, giv-

    en the state of terrorism in the world, we need to equip our national security in order that they can have an emergency response. This is intended to deploy infrastructure across the country, not just a section of the country -- to cover Upper East, Upper
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah (NPP -- Sekondi) noon
    Mr Speaker, in contributing to this debate, I would wish to make a general observation in respect of reports by committees to this House. Indeed, reports must recommend to the House to do something definite.
    So, if committees in their reports raise issues with the subject matter, which gives rise to uncertainty in certain provisions, then the committee has not really helped this House. And it is with this general ob- servation that I premise my contribution.
    Mr Speaker, if you look at page 7 of the Report, paragraph 7.2, the last sentence. It says,
    “The recommendation therefore, is that it must either be modified accordingly or deleted altogether”.
    This is in respect of indemnification. That is what the Committee is recommending to this House, that the clause should either be modified or deleted. What does that mean?
    The Committee ought to have proposed definitely whatever it considered to be the modification, if not, then what the Committee is saying to this House is that, the House should approve the Report and thereby the Contract, subject to this par- ticular clause, being deleted.
    Furthermore, the last point I wish to
    make, paragraph 7.3:
    “The Committee also observed that there is no particular article or clause that clearly states the obli- gations of the Contractor towards the Purchaser. This therefore, gives room for the former to deny any particular obligation as and when the issue may arise.”
    So, the Committee is asking this House to approve of this Contract, despite that worry? Please, I believe what the Com- mittee ought to have done, was to take a definite position and then advise the Hon Minister, that in the light of this observa- tion, this House would not approve the Contract unless and until we make these modifications. This is because what is going to happen is that despite these major issues raised, with this Report, we approve the Contract, then it binds the Government.
    I wish at this stage, to refer this House to Article 181 (1), (2) and (5) of the 1992 Constitution and with your permission, Mr Speaker, I beg to read it in extensor. Article 181(1) says:
    “Parliament may, by a resolution supported by the votes of a majority of all the members of Parliament, authorise the Govern-ment to enter into an agreement for the granting of a loan out of any public fund or public account. (2) An agreement entered into under
    clause (1) of this article shall be laid before Parliament and shall not come into operation unless it is approved by a resolution of Parliament.
    And then 5 says -
    rose
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:10 p.m.
    So, what it means is that, unless and until this House approves this international business or economic transaction, it shall not come into operation. So, Mr Speaker --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    Hon K. T. Hammond, are you on a point of order?
    Mr Hammond 12:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on a point of order.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Owusu-Ankomah --
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, fortunately for this House, the meaning of the words in this Article have been clearly determined by the Supreme Court in three cases. Mr Speaker, the Balcon case, the Woyome case, et cetera -- [Interruption]
    So Mr Speaker, I am saying that we should bear this in mind as a House, so that when committees are considering Agreements that have been laid before this House, they should know that it is not as a matter of course but it has constitutional consequences and never to think that if we feel strongly about something, we cannot
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:10 p.m.
    let the Executive do what we consider to be right.
    Mr Speaker, the history behind this Ar- ticle, if we care to know, makes this House the only institution that oversees loans and international Agreements in this country. People have talked about international agreements not having anticipated. There used to be a Public Agreement Board under the Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC), set up by statute which vetted all international contracts before they went to Cabinet.

    I am going to propose, Mr Speaker, that in the light of this Report and the points made in clause 7 (2) and (3), probably, this House do es not take a decision on this, to give the Executive and the Com- mittee time to reconcile their positions, so that when we come, we know precisely what we are approving. Other than that, with these concerns raised, I do not see how this House, in the exercise of its constitutional duty, can approve this Agreement.

    And Mr Speaker, the last point --

    “In conclusion, the Committee affirms the need for this contract which will regulate the loan”.

    No! It is not this contract which is regulating the loan. The contract regulates the project and its implementation.

    I thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr George K. Arthur (NDC -- Amenfi Central) 12:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to support the Motion for the approval of this contract.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member, are you on a point of order?
    Dr A. A. Osei 12:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I hate to bring the attention of the Chairman of the Committee on such matters; we would like to go home today. This is a new contract -- [Interruption] -- Mr Speaker, he is the Chairman of the Committee and he should represent us properly. Yes, this is a new contract.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member, you have the floor.
    Mr Arthur 12:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this contract was started by ZTE Corporation, which has been given the same contract. And the contract was in two phases. The first phase was completed; the second phase was not completed. It is the second phase which is being continued. So, I do not know where he is coming from -- [Inter- ruption] -- it was split into two; this is a continuation of the second phase. This is not a new contract; I do not know where he is coming from.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    All right. Hon Member, can you continue with your submission?
    Mr Arthur 12:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this contract,
    rose
    Mr Arthur 12:10 p.m.
    The document is here. When you go to the last page, the contract was signed in Beijing, China. Mr Speaker, it was signed on the 5th November, 2006 in Beijing, China and the one who signed it was Nana Addo Dankwah Akuffo-Addo -- [Interruption] -- This is the document
    -- 12:10 p.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member -
    Mr Agyapong 12:10 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker --
    Mr Speaker, I really wanted to help my Hon Chairman. It is not a point of order but in reaction to what Hon Owusu- Ankomah said.
    In fact, the Committee did its job. We actually pointed it out to the Ministry and they assured us -- The lawyer said he was coming back. That is why I am raising reservations and not that the Committee was not firm on its decision. We did and they assured us they would come back.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Joseph Osei-Owusu (NPP --
    Bekwai): Mr Speaker, I am glad to learn that there was a lawyer involved. I would have thought that on a matter like this, the Attorney-General's Report would reflect that these matters had been brought to their attention and that the Attorney-General was there. If he thinks that, as he has assured us they would come back, then we need not proceed further.
    But in response to the Hon Chairman of the Committee that this is the same Agreement, then if an Agreement has been approved and it is being implement- ed, why are we here? This is a new one. In 2007, Mr Speaker, I was not an Hon Member of Parliament. This is the Fifth Parliament. Even 2009 to 2012, Parlia- ment is lapsed.
    This is a new Parliament before which a new Agreement has been placed, and we are enjoined by law to scrutinise and ensure that we do represent the people of Ghana appropriately.
    Mr Speaker, the issues that have been raised before us here are grave and those same matters have been discussed in judg- ments, which in fact, Parliament has been indicted. We should not be seen to ignore the comments that have been made by the law lords who have been called upon to discuss some of these matters early on. I do not think that, as suggested, the lawyers saw it fit to ask to come back.
    We should wish to stampede the pro- gramme when they themselves recognise that there is a challenge.
    Mr Speaker, I suggest that we stand this Report down, have the corrections that have been pointed out made and then we would seem to have been doing our oversight work as a Legislature.
    I thank you, Mr Speaker, for the op- portunity.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Hon Mem- bers, at this point, I want to hear from the Hon Minister for Communications with regard to the issues raised.
    Hon Minister, with regard to the issues

    raised, how do you respond?
    Dr Boamah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with regard to the issue of -- [Interruption]
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Are you up on a point of order?
    Mr Nitiwul 12:20 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.

    We are debating a Report and he is talking about Nana Akufo-Addo; what has Akufo-Addo got to do with this? [Interruption]. So, Mr Speaker, this is a Committee's Report; he is the Chairman, he is seeking consensus for us to debate and accept it. But if he decides to play politics with this, how does he expect us on this side, especially when the Ranking Member said that the lawyers said they were going to come back?

    He has gone to put there that the Committee says that it should either be modified or deleted, and he expects us to vote for that Report. Instead of seeking consensus, he is bringing Nana Akufo- Addo's name in. He should not play politics, otherwise, he would embarrass himself.
    Mr Agbesi 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, a Committee has submitted its Report to the House; it becomes the property of the House for debate. The Hon Member for Sekondi has made a very good suggestion that when committees are submitting their reports to the House, they should carry the import of whatever they have discussed to the House, so that the House can be well ad- vised. A piece of good advice to the House.
    Mr Speaker, Members of the House have found things in the Report and they are debating them. I wish that we con-
    tinue this debate and the statement that the Chairman is playing politics with the Report is a very good statement made and we shall take that on board as we go ahead.
    I would want to plead -- [Interrup- tion.] Yes, we shall take it on board, and urge Hon Members to debate the Report and then all the suggestions that are being made would be taken on board. If they are approved -- all the suggestions that are made -- the Hon Minister is here, we shall go on.
    Mr Speaker, that is the view of --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Hon Min- ister, I get back to you. Please, respond to the issues raised. When it comes to the issue of politics, I would address it later. Let us hear the Hon Minister first, and then we would come out with a proposal that might satisfy both sides of the House. [Interruption.]
    Order! Order!
    Hon Minister, you have the floor, please, go ahead.
    Dr Boamah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as I indi- cated early on, this is the first time, to the best of my knowledge, that we are having a Supply Contract submitted to this august House, post the Supreme Court judgement. This is a clear manifestation of Government's commitment to open gov- ernance and transparency. For instance, as far back as -- [Interruption.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Order! Order!
    Hon Minister, you have the floor.
    Dr Boamah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with respect to ensuring that we have value for money, I am happy to announce that as far back as August 6, 2013, the Ministry wrote to the Ministry of Finance for that to be commenced once we got the approval from Parliament. The evidence is here with me -- the letter from the Ministry to -- [Interruption.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Order!

    order!

    Hon Minister, can you make it available to the Table Office?
    Dr Boamah 12:20 p.m.
    Sure, I can make it available.
    The next issue has to do with what the Committee has captured in the Report. Without doing the work of the Committee, let me indicate here that when I said early on that the Committee recommended to us that we should either scrap the indemnity clause or we should adopt reciprocity, I was referring to the exact submission that Hon Member for Akwapim North, Mr W. O. Boafo made at the Committee's sitting.
    So, that assurance was given, that once it is approved, we would ensure that whatever Parliament decides, that either we should scrap the indemnity clause or we should ensure reciprocity. When it comes to the indemnity clause, that would be done.
    I would want to assure you that when that is also done, just as we submitted the supplier's contract within 24 hours to Parliament, we can give you a one-week notice and submit proof of that also to you. Let me also indicate, as a way of ensuring that Government of Ghana derives the best from this. The former Minister for Communications, Hon Haruna Iddrisu was right, when he indicated that value for money audit was conducted on a project within the Ministry. That project was be- ing executed by Huawei, another Chinese company. And so, this is to demonstrate the Ministry's and Government's com- mitment towards ensuring that value for money audits are always done.
    In fact, at the Committee's sitting, we even had a discussion which bordered on -- Why should it be that when it comes to value for money audit? It is almost as if it is only one outfit that can conduct value for money audit for Ghana. And so, we even said that we had diversified the sources of conducting value for money in
    this country, so that even in the conduct for value for money, we can also ensure value for money.
    Beyond the value for money, which we wrote to the Hon Minister for Finance for execution once this loan Agreement, which has been approved and the Suppli- er's Contract is also approved, we have also indicated in the Supplier's Contract that we would engage the services of an independent engineer to be able to ensure that whatever money that we are spending in this direction, would be used judiciously.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Hon Members, if I may, it looks like this debate is dragging on and on. But I would like to find out from the Hon Minister, if for example, we should give him about a week to address these issues or concerns which have been raised by Hon Members, so that he gets back to us, for us to see the final position before we take any action, would that be alright with you?
    Dr Boamah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, our con- duct with regard to this financing facility has demonstrated that when even the Supplier's Contract was requested for by Parliament, within 24 hours -- and the records are very clear, the loan Agreement was approved -- Parliament requested that we submitted the Supplier's Contract within 24 hours and that was done. Even before that time, we also had written to the Ministry of Finance for the value for money audit to be done.
    If you would permit me, let me rather suggest that Parliament can approve this as it was discussed at the Committee and then within one week -- [Interruption]. -- We shall submit to you the outcome of what we would have approved. So, we have no difficulty if this becomes a conditional approval, subject to the reciprocity being captured, that is very fine with us.
    Dr Anthony Akoto Osei 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    I would want to crave the indulgence of the Hon Minister.
    He is aware that all Members of Par- liament have been given copies of the GOTA. This very serious matter, it would help Members of Parliament if we do what the Speaker is directing, so that we are not perceived for being in conflict of interest.
    Every Hon Member, after the Commit- tee's work was given a copy of this GOTA system. How do you expect us to rush this through when we have reservations? Please, let us step it down.
    The reason it was not brought back is because, Mr Speaker, the lawyer requested us to provide language, then we said we are not lawyers, so he should go and bring the language. That was the directive; he never came back. But I think in the light of the fact that this matter concerns something that Members of Parliament are benefiting, it is only prudent that he takes the week, address this matter and comes back.
    Let us not be perceived as if we are beneficiaries of equipment and therefore, we are rushing. It is not correct.
    Dr Boamah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am even surprised that my senior Brother, Hon Akoto Osei wants to inoculate this House with the fact that Hon Members of Parlia- ment have been given pieces of the GOTA phones. That is a fact. The Ministry of Communications made them available. But I do not think that is the exact reason we are here.
    The purpose -- And let me indicate -- I remember Hon W. O. Boafo raised this issue about the indemnity and it was communicated to us, that that has to be done. At no point in time were we told that
    that has to be corrected and resubmitted to Parliament for Parliament to consider that before the Agreement.
    What was communicated to us, was the conditional approval, that it will be approved subject to the reciprocity being adopted or the entire indemnity being cancelled.
    So, I urge Parliament to just go ahead and do as it was suggested at the Com- mittee level.
    Our conduct has clearly demonstrated that in terms of providing Parliament with appropriate information, we have not reneged. The Supply Contract was de- manded and in 24 hours, it was provided and that is why we are here today.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    Hon Mem- bers, in the light of the concerns raised with the indemnity clause and with other issues -- and as far as the Report itself, especially, if one looks at the conclusion -- it says:
    “In conclusion, the Committee affirms the need for this contract which will regulate the Loan Agree- ment for the GOTA project. The Committee therefore, requests that this august House approves the Sup- ply Contract for Dedicated Security Information System between the Government of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Communications) and ZTE Cor-poration, taking into consideration the Committee's res- ervations.”
    So, if we have to take into conside- ra-tion the Committee's reservations, then we want to assist the Committee to clear those reservations and then we would feel very much at home to go ahead.
    So, Hon Members, I direct that this matter be stood down or deferred for about a week, so that the Committee, together
    with the Ministry, sort out the details.
    Mr Boafo 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was trying to catch your eye. Only two areas have been mentioned as having been improperly dealt with. Mr Speaker, there were other areas and I would want to bring them to the attention of the House, so that we do not come back again and then raise the same issues for the matter to be referred again to the Committee for further review. So, with your permission, if I may just mention these areas --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    Go ahead.
    Mr Boafo 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in the first place, we advocated that since this is a matter of Information Technology (IT), there is bound in the improvement in the technology. So, there must be a clause in the Supply Contract, that if there is any im- provement in the technology which affects the smooth use of the pieces that would be distributed, the contractor will take steps to upgrade the equipment. That is one.
    Number 2 -- Mr Speaker, there is a Steering Committee and significantly, the Ministry of Defence is excluded from the membership of that Committee. So, we drew the attention of the Ministry to that fact.
    Mr Speaker, the other issue is about force majeure -- That area must also be looked at, so that there will be some reciprocity so far as force majeure is concerned.
    Mr Speaker, the last issue is that the payment for the supplies are to be made in tranches and these are all provided against certain securities. But we observed that with regard to the second tranche, the contractor will be entitled to be paid if he provides the bill of lading to indicate that he has supplied.
    We found out that, that is not sufficient. What we need is an inspection report, as provided for in the contract to accompany, the supply for the payment of the second tranche. So, these are four areas, which I recollect we touched on, and I would like to bring them to the attention of the House.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    Hon Mem- bers, I have deferred debate on this matter, so I do not think we need to go on and on.
    As directed, I want to be even more specific -- I am not leaving it at just one week. Latest by next Tuesday, 12th Novem- ber, 2013, the Committee should have met with the Hon Minister and his team to sort out these thorny areas to be able to come with something definite to this House, for us to finally take a decision. I think that is only fair.
    So, we defer debate on the matter until next Tuesday.
    Dr Boamah 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I respect the position that you have taken. Let me indicate that in order that we may not come back here and still have other issues emerging, if there can be a way that we can receive some specific instructions from Parliament, so that we know we are working within a certain scope, otherwise, it becomes “do this, it is done” and then we may come here and that may also be altered.
    So, I would propose, if it suits you,to kindly assist us in this direction.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Committee has the remit to deal with the issue that will ensue from the approval process that we are supposed to grant and so many of them have already been raised. It is unfortunate the Hon Minister is not an Hon Member of Parliament. I believe if he was an Hon Member of Parliament, we would not even raise these matters, we
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    In any case, I would like to advise the Hon Min- ister to get a copy of the Hansard for today and he would have all the issues that have been raised, recorded therein, so that it will help him in carrying out the exercise.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    Yes, do you have any more to say?
    Dr Boamah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we would definitely secure a copy of the Hansard today and capture what has been raised. I would also ensure that we engage the Committee. If it is possible, we can even engage them this afternoon or tomorrow, so that that can be done. Since this is a novelty, ever since that Supreme Court judgments came into being, this is the first time that we have a Supply Contract
    submitted to Parliament.
    In order that others may learn from the steep slope, it may be better if some of these things are communicated clearly to Ministries, so that they can be captured adequately in the subsequent documents that would be submitted. It is only a pro- posal that I am putting before you.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Thank you very much; point well taken.
    Hon Deputy Majority Leader --
    Mr Agbesi 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, at this stage, we would want to take item 9, the Value Added Tax Bill, 2013.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, when you offered the ruling, I thought the Hon Minister was going to take a cue and yet he went on and on and on. May I advise the Hon Minister, that we have somebody here in this House called “Lead- er of Government Business in Parliament. It is for the Ministers to deal with that person and the Leadership of the Majority in this House. Mr Speaker, it is for him to listen and take a cue.
    It is not for nothing that we have a Leader of Government Business in this House, he should deal with him. He should deal with the Leadership of his party in this House, otherwise, waxing lyricals as he was doing, is rather prodigal misuse of our time, with respect.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Mem- bers, the Value Added Tax Bill, 2013, at the Consideration Stage.
    Hon Chairman of the Finance Commit- tee, I want to draw your attention to the fact that we were at clause 10 at the last Sitting, so, we continue from there.
    BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 12:40 p.m.
    STAGE 12:40 p.m.
  • [Resumption of Debate from 1-11- 2013]
    • Chairman of the Committee (Mr James K. Avedzi) 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 10 -- delete and insert the following: “Supply of goods or services”.
    Mr Speaker, the heading in the Bill is “Supply of goods and services”. We are changing it to “or” so that if you supply goods ,you are covered under the law and also if you supply only services, you are also under the law but not both together.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    I think it is straightforward.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 10, just like the clause 6 that we did last week, has been broken down into a number of subheadings; so, I am going to follow the same procedure. I would make ref- erence to the Bill and what has been put together under the new subheading. So, the first one:
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    Supply of goods or services
    10. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this Act and the Regulations,
    (a) “supply of goods” means an arrangement under which the owner of goods parts with possession of the goods by way of sale, barter, lease, transfer, ex- change, gift or similar disposition;
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, before you move on.

    Looking at your original, you appear to be deleting but not including “a supply of money”. Are you deleting that one?
    Mr Avedzi 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is now under subclause 2. For the purposes of subsection 1 (a), supply of goods does not include the supply of money; so, it has been taken care of.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    All right. But let us move the subclauses, one after the other.
    MrAvedzi 12:40 p.m.
    (b) “supply of services” means supply which is not a supply of goods or money, and in the nature of -- (i) the performance of services
    for another person;
    (ii) the making available of a facility or advantage; or
    (iii) tolerating a situation or refraining from doing an activity.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, just a piece of amendment of the amendment proposed by the Chairman.
    I do not know why he has included the two words “way of” in (1) (a). It should just be --
    “supply of goods” means an ar- rangement under which the owner of goods parts with possession of the goods by sale, barter, lease, transfer, exchange, gift or similar disposition.”
    I think the addition of the two words “way of” in line three of subclause (1) (a) is really superfluous.
    Mr Seth Terkpeh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, actual- ly, what happened there is, in the original, “including” was deleted and replaced
    Mr Seth Terkpeh 12:40 p.m.


    with “by way of”. But the essence of the “including” as in many tax provisions, is to make it non-exhaustive in the event that another form of exchange is embarked upon by a taxpayer or where a taxpayer disputes that the method of transfer they are applying does not include any of this similar -- I do understand similar disposition but similar to what has been specified, but not necessarily similar to what has been specified.

    I am making the point because if you have followed VAT for many years, tech- nology for example, has given rise to new forms of supply that were not envisaged at the time VAT was basically dealing with tangible supplies.We do have electronic forms of doing things which were latter developments from the 1980s and 1990s. The only way countries could have en- forced some of these; as I do understand, could be, if the legal mind says “similar disposition” covers it, that is alright. But saying we are sure that it would cover any type of or any method, then we are dealing with a method of --

    But if it is the wisdom of the drafts- persons that “similar disposition” would cover it, then that would be alright.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Mi- nority Leader, what do you say?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, the Long Title of this Bill provides:
    “AN ACT to revise and consolidate the law relating to the imposition of the value added tax and to provide for related matters”.
    In other instances, we have said: “to provide for connected matters”. It is of same application when we say that it should relate to transactions of similar disposition -- “related” -- “connected”.
    Mr Speaker, so, I think it should take care of it.
    All that I was saying was that, the words “way of”, as far as I am concerned, really do not matter and if we deleted them, it would not detract from the con- struction. That was what I was saying.
    Mr Chireh 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the way the draftspersons have put it, it is better. This is because if they have renamed the word “including” -- In fact, the first part where they had “including” and at the same time “similar disposition”, it was superfluous. But this one, it is specifically “by way of” and in this case, “similar disposition” would extend it to related ways of dis- posal. So, the way it is captured now is better than any other way that it should be.
    So, for the issue of “related matters” or “connected matters”, this is not the kind of thing we are talking about. In law- making, when you mention specific items and then you add the last part “similar disposition” or “similar item”, it would.be apparent.
    For instance, if you say chairs or tables then you cannot go and add a goat. It does not work like that. It must be related to furniture. So, the disposition must be by a similar method and I think that, this is a better way rather than “related”. The word “related” that he is talking about, is general and so, this one is better. I think we should accept this.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Members, may I suggest that in the cir- cumstances, we leave it as it stands but give the draftspersons the chance if they think that there is a more elegant way of presenting it, then they can go ahead and do it, so that we make some progress.
    In that case, can I put the Question?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I guess we can leave this to the draft- spersons. But I would suggest to the Hon Member for Wa West -- [Interruption.]
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member for Wa West seems to be suggesting to us that “way of” means in the context “including”. It cannot be.
    Mr Speaker, “way of” is just by sale. It is just saying to us that you are proposing that you have deleted “including” and “way of” fills in. In other words, by his own understanding “way of” means “in- cluding” but this, it cannot be.
    Mr Speaker, I would suggest that we leave this to the draftspersons to propose
    -- 12:50 p.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    That is exactly what I directed. So, let us leave it as that to the draftspersons to handle.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, (2) for purposes of subsection (1) (a), supply of goods does not include the supply of money.
    Mr Speaker, this is just to break the early one to make it clearer.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Avedzi: Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    (3) the disposal of
    (a) a taxable activity, or
    (b) part of a taxable activity that is capable of being operated separately as a going concern, is a supply of goods made in the course or furtherance of the taxable activity.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    (4) For the purposes of subsection (3), a taxable activity or part of a taxa- ble activity that is capable of being operated separately is disposed of as a going concern where --
    (a) the goods or services neces- sary for the continued oper- ation of that taxable activity or that part of the taxable activity are supplied to the transferee; and
    (b) the transferor carries on, or is carrying on that taxable ac- tivity or that part of a taxable activity up to the time of its transfer to the transferee.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speak-
    er, would the Chairman agree with me that in line 1 of clause 4(a), the word “and” should be deleted and replaced with -- and we said “or”?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    It would appear so in the light of the amendments you carried on with the sub-title of clause
    10.
    Hon Chairman, do you remember?
    Mr Avedzi 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is conse- quential. So, I agree that we change the word “and” to “or”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Thank you very much.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    (5) A supply of goods for goods or services is a supply of goods.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I have not been with the House for a few days. But going back, we have defined what we mean by “supply of goods”. In clause 10(1)(a), we are saying:
    “supply of goods” means an ar- rangement under which the owner of the goods parts with posses-sion
    . . .”
    Then supply of services, we said:
    “supply of services” is a supply which is not a supply of goods…”
    Then we come back to say that:
    “A supply of goods for goods or services is a supply of goods”.
    How do we reconcile that? Mr Speaker, as I said, I have not been following. Can you reconcile that for us?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, can you give us some expla- nation?
    Mr Avedzi 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if you read clause 10 (1) (a), it defines the “supply of goods” to mean the parting of possession of the owner by way of sale, barter, lease, et cetera. When it comes to the supply of services, it means a supply which is not the supply of goods or money. If you come to the subclause (5), it said supply of goods for goods and the difference here is, you are supplying goods for goods or goods for services.
    In that case, the definition is that it is a supply of goods. That is the definition by law. But if you are supplying goods for goods or for service, it is a supply of goods. This is just to make it more clearer,
    so that one does not outwit the law and cheat by supplying goods or services and you are not -- This is because it does not fall critically under supply of goods as defined by law or supply of services. That is why this is being brought here.
    Mr Chireh 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, unless it is a term of art, this clause is unnecessary. This is because you have defined servic- es and also goods; then you are saying that where you have services, it is goods. How? [Interruptions] -- Please, get my point -- those VAT area and I think this is a way to put it; in order to capture it, you can convince me. But you cannot define it separately and at the same time, say they are the same; there is no need for this definition in any case. But if it must be defined in order to justify a term of art in that industry, then that is alright.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Hon Members, unfortunately, the Question has already been put and the majority vote has been carried. So, I thought the Minority Leader had something to say. We are be- ing taken back but the Question has been put and vote has been taken. So, can we move on?
    Mr Avedzi 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 10 (6) which is just following the earlier one, supply of services for goods is a supply of services. So, it is a term that we are using and the Hon Member should follow and appreciate what we are doing.
    Mr William O. Boafo 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to find out from the Chairman why he dropped under (6) -- supply of services. Let me read from the original -- the original version says that, “a supply of services for goods or services is a supply of services” and I would want to find out why in this case he has emitted services and retained only goods.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if it should be taken as a term of art, then one would see that the subclause (6) does
    not sit with the subclause (5). The (6) merely says that “supply of services for goods is a supply of services”. Then in that case, the (5) should read “a supply of goods for services is the supply of goods” instead of the confusion that is injected in the addition of “goods or” in the subclause (5).
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Can we get some explanation, Hon Minister for Finance?
    Why this time are you leaving one of the alternatives out?
    Mr Terkpeh 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the issue here again, as has been alluded to, is a technical one and the aim is to afford a catch-all phrase. These two clauses have to do with related supplies. There are in- stances where a supply is made in relation to goods where -- I think somewhere in the Act, one would see that the primary supply is goods, but there is a related sup- ply and in other instances, it is a supply of services but there are related goods.
    So, the emphasis here is on -- in the first instance, if it is goods, then even though there is a related supply, the trans- action shall be construed to be a supply of goods. And in the second instance, if there is a supply of services, the related supply being secondary and not primary, does not make it a separate supply for which we would have to issue another VAT invoice or --
    So, this is just meant to make sure that there is a catch or in the event of a related transaction, to distinguish between a pri- mary supply because somewhere in the Act, we have mixed supplies and related supplies. There are instances in which two supplies can be separated as supply of goods and supply of services.
    In other instances, the supply of ser- vices is only secondary to a supply of goods and therefore, it can be construed that the entire transaction is for the supply

    of goods and vice versa. So, in that in- stance, the deletion of the service should be reconsidered because it shows that the other is just secondary.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Yes, I think we are alright.
    Mr Avedzi 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the subclause (6) should be amended by inserting after subclause (4) “service or.”So, the new ren- dition would be “a supply of services for service or goods is a supply of services.”
    I beg to move.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, just for the avoidance of doubt, is it supply of services? He said “services for service”, but it should be “services for services” for consistency. Therefore it would be supply of services for services or goods.
    Mr Avedzi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 10, subclause (7) -- subject to sections 14 and 15, the application by a taxable person of goods or services acquired for use in a taxable activity to a different use, which includes the provision of goods or services to an employee for personal use, is a supply of those goods or services by the taxable person in the course or furtherance of that taxable activity.”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Not only “person”, but from what I heard from you -- I heard you right -- in the course of a taxable activity. Very well.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the new sub- heading, which is clause 11 is “Re- posses-sion of goods as supply of goods”. That can be found in clause 10, subclause (7) of the Bill. Mr Speaker, it should ac- tually be 11. So, the subclause (1) should be deleted.
    Mr Avedzi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move,
    “Repossession of goods as supply of goods
    11. Where goods are repossessed under a credit agreement, the repossession is a supply of the goods by the debtor under the credit agreement to the person exercising the right of repos- ses-sion and, where the debtor is a registered person, the supply is made in the course or furtherance of the taxable activity of the debt- or, unless the goods did not form part of the assets held or used by the debtor in connection with that taxable activity.”
    Mr Boafo 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want
    to suggest that the last line before “activ- ity”, for consistency purposes, we insert “taxable”. This is because earlier, refer- ence has been made to “taxable activity”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Chairman, how do you respond to that?
    Mr Avedzi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have no objection.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Very well.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to ask the Hon Chairman -- I thought we had a special subheading of “special supply” -- Has it been thrown out? The original Bill does not but on the re-classification, he said this subsection area should be “special supply”; he did not mention it.
    Mr Avedzi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is an omis- sion; it is there. So, it should be captured “special supply”.
    Mr Speaker, I am coming back to the 11 again. The proposed amendment by
    Hon William O. Boafo that we should add “taxable” to make it consistent with the previous one -- activity being referred to is the activity of “repossession of goods” not activity in terms of “supply of taxable goods”.
    So, we should look at it again and maintain what we have on the Order Paper. That activity is referring to “repossession”, not supply of taxable activity. So, we should not insert any taxable there.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Well, we have already put the Question but it is useful for us to take a second look if it becomes necessary and take steps.
    Hon William Boafo, how do you re- spond to the Hon Chairman's submission?
    Mr Boafo 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think the reference to the activity is more to the taxable activity of the debtor rather than the repossession.
    If you look at the three lines from the bottom, where there is a reference to --
    “. . . or furtherance of the taxable ac- tivity of the debtor, unless the goods did not form part of the assets held or used by the debtor in connection with that taxable activity”.
    That is my understanding, but if --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Boafo, I agree with you. Looking at three lines above, that you see the use of the expression “taxable activity” in reference to the debtor and I believe it should flow.
    Mr Chireh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, just adding the “taxable activity”, does not detract from anything. In fact, it is the description of that “taxable activity”, that is why they said “that activity”, to specify.
    So, let us ignore the confusion the Hon Chairman of the Committee is bringing.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    All right.
    The Question has already been put and it has been carried.
    So, shall we move on, Hon Chairman?
    Mr Avedzi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I move to the next one but before then, I am not bringing any confusion.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    “Lay-away agreement and betting as supply of services
    12. (1) Where a lay-away agreement terminates or is cancelled and seller retains an amount paid by the purchaser or recovers an amount the purchaser owes under the agreement, the cancellation or termination is a supply of services by the seller in respect of the agreement.
    (2) The placing of a bet by a person with another person operating a game of chance is a supply of services by that other person operating the game of chance to the person.”
    Mr Speaker, this is found in clause 10 subclauses (8) and (9) of the Bill.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    “Separate supply
    13. Where a supply of goods or services consists of both a sup- ply that is charged with tax at a positive rate and --
    (a) a supply of goods with tax at a zero rate; or
    (b) an exempt supply, each part of the supply of goods or ser- vices is treated as a separate supply of goods or services if each part is reasonably capable of being supplied separately.”
    Mr Speaker, this is clause 10 (10) of the Bill.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, something has just escaped me, but I was looking at an omission -- that there appears to be an omission somewhere and I was asking my Hon Colleague and then the opening clause, “Where a supply of goods or services consist or both on supply that is charged with tax at a …” -- All right. That is clear to me.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    After Hon Joseph Chireh, Hon Boafo. [Pause.]
    All right Hon Boafo, you have the floor.
    Mr Boafo 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, a “lay-away agreement” cannot terminate by itself. The first line of the proposed amendment reads as follows -- “Where a lay-away agreement terminates or is --”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    We are dealing with 13.
    Mr Boafo 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with your usual flexibility -- [Laughter] -- I just wanted to find out whether it is not better to render it the same way as we have done it for -- “where a lay-away agreement is terminated”.
    Mr Speaker, I am craving your indul- gence.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Well, Hon Chairman, I believe it is “terminated” or “cancelled”. So, let us go back to it.
    Mr Chireh 1:10 p.m.
    You have been going
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    So, that gives us a new way.
    Mr Chireh 1:20 p.m.
    So I will beg that you would be flexible a bit.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    All right. So let us look at Hon Boafo's proposal, Hon Chairman.
    Mr Avedzi 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 12(1) delete “terminates” and insert “is terminated”.
    Mr Speaker, it will now read 1:20 p.m.
    “Where a lay-away agreement is terminated or is cancelled ….”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    All right. Thank you.
    So, we will go back to put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    So, now we move to clause 13 subclause (1).
    Mr Avedzi 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move that
    “Separate supply
    13. (1) where a supply of goods or services consists of both a sup- ply that is charged with tax at a positive rate and
    (a) A supply of goods with tax
    at a zero rate or
    (b) An exempt supply, each part of the supply of goods or services is treated as a separate supply of goods or services if each part is reasonably capable of be- ing supplied sepa-rately.”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, I want to draw your attention to the earlier deletion you proposed of 13(1), deleting the (1). Is that right?
    Mr Avedzi 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, accordingly.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am just wondering why the need for the inclusion for the word “reasonably”. It makes it very subjective. The thing is, is a part capable of being supplied separately? If it is, yes. To say that it is reasonably capable, one makes it very subjective and we should delete the word “reasonable” if each part is capable of being supplied separately. Simplicita.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon W. O. Boafo.
    Mr Boafo 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, unless there is some other ground for challenging the use of the expression “reasonably” because it is subjective, then I will accept the con- tention by the Minority Leader.
    But reasonably as most of us under- stand, is an objective text, that is, the man in the street, whether if he is around and you ask him, he will say it is reasonable. It is not subjective. The text for reasonabilty is not subjective, it is always objective.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Very well. Unless you have some —
    Dr Matthew O. Prempeh 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, from what Hon Boafo is saying, then reasonably is just being used in its own English meaning but in the English meaning of the word “reasonable” is very
    subjective. Yes, the English meaning, un- less you are defining “reasonable” here to mean an objective criteria. The ordinary meaning of the word “reasonable” is very subjective. Who decides my friend from Wa is reasonable —
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Dr Matthew Prempeh, he has given the legal position and that is why I think I side with him.
    Mr Chireh 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, apart from that, in law interpretation and making, you must give the ordinary dictionary meaning and if it makes sense, that is alright; if it does not, then you look for other meanings including term of art and the industry term and other terms.
    So, this “reasonably” here, is alright. This is because somebody can argue, when you go and say these supplies are not capable of separately being supplied -- You are saying so, but the person can argue that, no. So, the reasonableness then comes in. Is it reasonable to sepa- rately supply? If it is not -- it may be capable of separate supply but it may not be reasonable to do so. That is why the reasonable one is correct.
    Mr William A. Quaittoo 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, subclause (13), if you look at the (a) and (b), since they are still part of that sentence, do we have to start it with capital letters?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    They should be in small letters. So, the correc- tion should be effected.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Boafo 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to find out, when this question was raised about the subheading “Special Supply”
    -- where does it end? Is it up to the end of clause 10? I just wanted to find out, so that we are guided. It is a division; it is not a headnote.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, how do you respond to that?
    Mr Avedzi 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this “Special Supply” has been carried from 11 to 20.
    Mr Chireh 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the way we are considering the Bill -- if you look at the original one, the “Special Supply” is gathering a number of clauses that are related. But we have now reclassified these as clauses; so, the question he is raising is, wherever it stopped, we are only rearranging. This is because if you look at the clause 10, under it, many of the subclauses were there and we are now making some of them substantive clauses.
    So, the class of clauses that we are deal- ing with would end where it used to be. We are just rearranging and making them substantive clauses instead of subclauses of a main clause. So, it would end at the same place. We have a problem with the Bill because I am saying that, clause 10 has up to 22 subclauses. Now, we are begin- ning to make each of them or a group of them separate clauses in the amendments and therefore, it will be the series of the related clauses.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Boafo, I believe that, it will end at the original clause 10, with these new intro- ductions.
    Mr Boafo 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, before we started with clause 10, we have “Supply of Goods and Services”, that is the gen- eral provision. So, I am just calling the attention of the draftsperson to where he will insert it properly. This is because this special supply comes not as a start of a new clause but between subclauses

    and it is not the sidenote or headnote. It is actually a division of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Min- ister, can you help us out?
    Mr Terkpeh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the is- sue that came up at the Committee was whether clause 10 was not too long and therefore, whether for the purposes of the taxpayer — was there a way in which, even technically speaking, we could di- vide them?
    The answer was that, the first part of clause 10 dealt with just goods and ser- vices. So, you could see up to the point where we have the special supplies, that it was dealing with a general description of goods and services relating to supply.
    Subsequent to that, the unique thing is that, the special supplies relate to specific transactions, or specific activities, which are a further elaboration of goods and services. So, “lay-away” is basically the supply of goods and services but in a certain form.
    But by nature, the “lay-away” require certain conventions or procedures, which need to be stated explicitly. And usually, in discussions of VAT, some laws separate these two for the general provision. Some laws go as far as including some of what we are discussing now, even in regulations to further elaborate.
    So, the answer, in my view, is what the Chairman of the Committee has indi- cated, that it should end at the end of that clause. This is because we would go into taxable supply which is based on supply, it is now distinguishing the two and we are beginning the distinction between taxable, exempt and zero rated supplies. But prior to this, we were dealing generally with supplies.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    All right.
    Shall we start with Hon Boafo, the Hon Yieleh Chireh and then Dr Matthew Prempeh.
    Mr Boafo 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was on my feet to catch your eye to stop the Hon Minister from further explanation because I have understood him.
    Dr Prempeh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister's answer was rather convoluted; so, I was losing the trail and wanted him to be very straight, so that I can follow it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Other Members heard him and they understood him.
    Dr Prempeh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, now, I have heard.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Very well.
    Hon Chairman, where were we before we were referred to this special supply thing?
    Mr Avedzi 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we were going to move to 14 on page 5 of the Order Paper. Mr Speaker, 14 is 10, 11 and 12 of the Bill.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    “Activities that do not constitute supply of goods or services
    14 (1) A supply of services by an em- ployee to an employer by reason of that employee's employment is not a supply of services for Value Added Tax purposes.
    (2) The transfer of goods to a person acting in a representative capaci- ty to the transferor is not a supply of goods.”
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speak-
    er, just a little amendment to what the
    Chairman has moved in respect of 14 (1) 1:30 p.m.
    “A supply of services by an employ- ee to an employer by reason of the employment of that employee is not a supply of services for Value Added Tax purposes.”
    Instead of what is contained there, “that employee's employment.” We should have this new construction “of the em- ployment of that employee is not a supply of services.”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, how do you respond?
    Mr Avedzi 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is a matter of drafting. So, if that correction is made, the new rendition would be:
    “A supply of services by an employ- ee to an employer by reason of the employment of that employee is not a supply of services for Value Added Tax purposes.”
    So Mr Speaker, in line (2), delete af- ter “of” “that employee's employment,” and substitute “the employment of that employee is not a supply of services for Value Added Tax purposes.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Dr Prempeh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if with all your concentration, you have to say “those in favour of the amendment” twice, then it means there is lethargy. There is seri- ous lethargy and maybe, we can continue tomorrow, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Chairman, please, let us move on.
    Mr Chireh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have asked my side to shout louder when they hear me shouting.
    Mr Avedzi 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    “Effect of denial of input tax
    15. Except otherwise provided in this Act, where a taxable person supplies goods or services and a deduction for input tax paid on the acquisition of the goods or services was denied, the supply of the goods or services by the taxable person is a supply of goods or services otherwise than in the course or furtherance of a taxable activity.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I was just wondering whether the “otherwise” in the last but one line should not read “other”. The first one is correct, but the last but one line the “otherwise” should read “other”.
    Mr Chireh 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is other- wise. You see, if you look at it -- Except otherwise provided in this Act, where a taxable person supplies goods or services and a deduction for input tax paid on the acquisition of the goods or services was denied, the supply of the goods or services by the taxable person is a supply of goods or services otherwise -- No! It does not sound well. Let us cancel the “wise”; we do not want the “wise”; We have three wise men already. [Laughter.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    All right. Hon Chairman, are you in agreement with the proposed further amendment?
    Mr W. O. Boafo 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the last word on line 3, let me seek the aid of the Hon Minority Leader. I do not know whether the expression “was” is
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, it is in reference to a deed; that is, the acquisition of either or -- So, the “was” is appropriate.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is clause 10, subclauses 14 -16 of the Bill. I beg to move,
    “Payment of deposit and receipt of
    claim as supply of goods or services
    16. (1) The payment of a sum of money as a deposit, other than on a returnable container, is treated as a supply when the deposit is forfeited.
    (2) For the purposes of sections 10 to 20, a deposit is an amount of money or property received from a prospective purchaser to secure performance of the agreement that is the subject of the deposit, to be applied to the purchase price or returned if the depositor performs, and ordinar- ily is forfeited if the purchaser defaults.
    (3) Where a taxable person re- ceives a payment of a claim or is otherwise indemnified under a non-life insurance contract for a loss incurred in connection with the conduct of a taxable activity, the receipt of the payment or indemnity is a supply of servic- es by the taxable person in the course or furtherance of a taxable activity, but only if the supply of that non-life insurance contract
    was taxable under section 1, other than a supply charged to the tax at a zero rate under sub- section (3).”
    Mr Chireh 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, before you put the Question. The way we have changed the Bill by subclauses, the draft- sperson should take note of the cross-ref- erences of clause 10 to 20; it would have to change.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    We early on gave that directive.
    Dr Prempeh 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that di- rective you gave was in relation to this cross-referencing. Mr Speaker, I would want to put it on record that when we have finished with the Consideration Stage, the whole Bill should be put on the Order Paper, so that we know that really, it conforms. This is because, Mr Speaker, sometimes it is not just a matter of drafting and this particular Bill is having particular problems. This is because if you look at what we are doing now and what was brought, they are totally different.
    I would plead that it is not normally done but for the Second Consideration Stage, when we get there -- This is because there are other amendments we would want to proffer, the whole Bill should be printed out, so that we know, which is which. I agree with you; you know we always agree.
    Mr Avedzi 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is why we are leaving it to the draftsperson to do the cross-referencing and the Table Office is also taking note of that. So, I believe strongly that it would be difficult for us to do these kinds of cross-referencing, but they would easily do it because that is their job. So, they would definitely do the right thing; I am sure.
    Dr Prempeh 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is where the Hon Member is getting me wrong. They would do what they are sup-
    posed to do, but the House has to know the final version that is leaving here, is what is intended by the amendments we did. That is why I am saying that when we are com- ing back for the Second Con-sideration, instead of having a white Bill and a yellow Order Paper, the entire amendments that we have agreed upon should be printed once on the Order Paper, so that we know that everything is in sync. That is what I am cautioning.
    Mr Chireh 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, what he is saying is very useful but I would want him to move a substantive Motion and outline what we should do. This is because our Standing Orders are very clear what we should do.
    The Constitution knows who should do what. If there have been errors in the past in one or two Bills, that is just like any human activity, you would always make mistakes. But what the Hon Member is saying is very useful; we must have a gate keeper system to ensure that what leaves here is what we intend.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Hon Prem- peh, I think he is right. The proposal is very useful, but come by way of a Motion. We are still at the Consideration Stage, so it should not be too difficult for a Motion like that to be taken.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I would want to be very sure about what is being done in clause (3), but first of all, in clause 16 (2), it should read --
    “For the purposes of clause 10 to 20”
    That is a minor thing. And I thought that we should also relate the last but one line where the comma is, is very important, otherwise, it distorts the meaning of the entire construction in respect of clause 16(2). I think the comma should not come after “performs” but rather after “and” and another one after “ordinarily”. That is in
    respect of (2).
    Then clause 16 (3), Mr Speaker, I would want to know which section we are referring to? The last but one line under (3) --
    “Under section 1”
    Is it section 1 of this Act or are we talk- ing about subsection (1) -- [Interruption] -- Subsection 1 supra; the section 1 of the main Act. All right. That is why I am say- ing I would want us to be very sure of it. That one is section 1 of the Bill? All right.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Avedzi 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is on clause 10, subclause 17 of the Bill. I beg to move,
    “Supply of power and others as sup- ply of goods
    17. The supply of any form of power, heat, refrigeration or ventilation is a supply of goods.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, a minor thing. Maybe, the Hon Minis- ter would be in a better position to explain to me because -- [Interruption] -- All right, I see “refrigeration” because he was talking about the supply of heat and I thought the converse should hold, but I see “refrigeration”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    We have already put the Question. Now, Hon Chairman, move on.
    Mr Avedzi 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the next one is clause 10, subclasues 18 and 19 of the
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, could the Hon Chairman explain to me the reason for the deletion of the original (a) under clause (18), because that appears to be conspicuously missing?
    Mr Chireh 1:50 p.m.
    It is an omission. It should be re-inserted. [Interruption.] Why? He is asking for the reason; you are sitting down.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, do you have any reason for the omission?
    Dr A. A. Osei 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if you go to the old clause 10, subclause (2) (a) and, (b) in the old Bill, it is already there. That is the same information that has been provided; it has already been given.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Hon Mi- nority Leader, are you satisfied with the information?
    Mr Chireh 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I stand by my original position. Unless the proposers of this Bill have a good reason, it was a typographical error and they should re-in- sert it. This is because this is talking about disposition and he is talking about supply; they are not related.
    Dr Prempeh 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as I said, the clause10 (2) we are making reference to, has already been deleted.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Hon Members, do we defer this one for the Committee to take a second look at it, so that we do not commit any serious error? Table Office, please, take note; we are deferring the consideration of clause 18 (1) and (2).
    So, shall we move on, Hon Chairman, to the next item?
    Mr Avedzi 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the next one is clause 19. But Mr Speaker, I would plead the indulgence of the House and seek your permission to move forward the clause 20, which would take the place of the clause19. This is because the clause 19 refers to Regulation and the clause 20 refers to Supply. So, I would want to make those changes.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Very well.
    Mr Avedzi 1:50 p.m.
    So, I would pick the clause 20 and that would then read clause 20, which is clause 10 (22) of the Bill:
    “Phone cards and prepayment as supply of services
    20. The issuance of a phone card, pre- payment on a cellular phone, or sim- ilar scheme of advance payment for the supply of goods or the rendering of services is a supply of services for Value Added Tax purposes.”
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, the original clause provided that the issuance of a phone card, prepayment on a cellular phone, or similar scheme of advance payment for the supply of goods or the rendering of services is a supply for Value Added Tax purposes. Now, the new construction makes it more specific. It says that it is a supply of services.
    I would want him to provide further and better particulars on why it should be “supply of services”. I thought that when it is terminated at the word “supply”, it could be construed to be a supply of goods or services. And he said it should just be a supply of services.
    Mr Avedzi 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that the reason the amendment is qualifying that supply is to make it clearer, that that Act is the supply of services but not supply of goods. [Interruption.] Yes, the issuance of a phone card --
    Dr Prempeh 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, let us all think about it; what is a phone card? It is a service component, the airtime --
    Mr Avedzi 1:50 p.m.
    It is not the physical phone card they supply; it is the airtime which is put on the card. Therefore, it is a service that they supply, not goods that they sup- ply; this is because they just supply the airtime on a phone card.
    Dr Prempeh 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, let us think about it. When we go and buy a scratch card that has a number to activate the airtime, that is what we call -- But what do we mean by “phone card”? We have to define it. This is because, Mr Speaker, we have passed laws here and mobile phone companies have found ways because of the wording -- So, if we are going to define “phone card”, let us define it such that they would not say that we do not know what we are talking about.
    I do not actually know what we mean by phone card. Sealed card or scratch card or what is it? That card itself is not airtime. So, we have to define it well, so that we know that anything to activate airtime -- This is because that card is not airtime.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Hon Mem- bers, just for purposes of concluding this debate, I would direct that we Sit beyond the stipulated time for just a few minutes, so that we conclude this debate.
    Dr Ahmed Y. Alhassan 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was just trying to suggest whether if we qualify the “phone card” with “phone ser- vice card”. That would help the situation.
    Mr Terkpeh 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the clause appears to have started with a phone card and prepayment on a cellular phone or a similar scheme of advance payment. At that point, it appears to have been general. This is because advance payment for the supply of goods or rendering of services, which widens the -- Since we then refer to other schemes that could involve goods at the point in time, not only services.
    In that respect, if the reference is now to goods and services, then it is important that we retain the original, which is a “supply for VAT purposes” so that at any point in time, it is just for VAT purposes if the advance payment were of a similar scheme, but for goods other than services.
    Dr Prempeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not have a problem. The words “phone card” -- there are companies that would sell it for one to pay for charges. Like I use a landline, I owe Vodafone and they have called me that I owe GH¢200, so, I should go and buy a particular card and pay. So, if we take out the words “phone card”, whatever we are trying to construct, the meaning is still retained.
    We want prepayment and if we do it generally, it affects everything than -- That is why I am saying only the words “phone card” -- either we take it out, because it would still remain relevant or we define what we mean by “phone card”.
    Mr Avedzi 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think this issue came up strongly at the Committee level and we debated it at length. We are saying that the supply of that service comes in different forms. The service of providing air-time comes in different forms. This is because I can buy my air-time even by texting and my bank account would be reduced and the airtime is loaded. It is also one form of supply. Or I go to the vendor and buy the card and scratch and load the airtime as another form of supply.
    So, we include all of them. If it is phone card one buys from the vendor, it is a supply of that service. If it is any form of prepayment or advance payment, like my bank account being deducted and I get the air-time and use, it is also a supply of that service -- “and a similar scheme of advance payment”. So, it encompasses everything; it covers everything. So, that is why we want to put everything.
    Dr Prempeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in all this, the issue is air-time. So, we have to say that any form of prepayment for air-time
    services is subject to VAT. I do not have a problem. But if we use “phone-card” and “phone-card” is not defined or “prepay- ment of cellular phone” -- Mr Speaker, I am particular about this because now, I can go and buy a phone-card that is not for prepayment service -- [Hon Member: Then, it is not qualified] -- No, wait. It is the comma.
    So, if we are talking about prepayment for air-time services, let us put in a phra- seology that would capture any form of prepayment mechanism for air-time and not use a word that can be ill-defined by the service provider.
    Mr Chireh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the way he is reading the provision, that is why he is creating the problem. We are talking about prepayment, which is separate from the issuing of the card. One is buying the card, so one goes and pays money and they take it -- [Interruption] -- Why are they interrupting me when I am explaining the thing to them? If one says air-time, it could be air-time on the radio station or televi- sion station. That one, one is introducing a whole mix.
    Mr Terkpeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would recommend to the House that we retain the “phone-card” because when we come to “time of supply”, under the original section, clause 19(13), it forms part of a certain -- “to the extent that the issu- ance of a token, voucher, gift certificate or stamp referred to in section 10(21) is a supply. The supply occurs when the token, voucher, gift certificate or stamp is issued.”
    So, in this case, that was the original form of topping up. Later on, it became electronic and now, we have various forms, but it still persists. So, I would prevail on the House, for the avoidance of doubt, and for the subsequent time of supply routes, that we retain it as it is.
    Baba J. M. Ahmed: Mr Speaker, thank you very much for finally turning this way to see us here.
    I would want to allay the fears of my brother. When one talks about “phone- card”, anything that is used that involves using the card has an “air implication” in it, unless it is out of it. So, when we say “phone card”, it captures everything. I think that is the best word we should use.
    For example, if we buy electricity voucher, can we call it “phone card”? We cannot say that. So, when we say “phone card” everything that has to do -- whether it is texting, messages, bank -- it has that “air implication” in there. So, the best word to use is the “phone card”. And I do not think that we are out of it at all. So, that is it.
    Mr Boafo 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the penulti- mate and the last lines, instead of the ex- pression “for Value Added Tax purposes”, why do we not say “under this Act”. I do not know whether we are achieving the same aim because this is the Value Added Tax Bill that we are considering.
    Mr Chireh 2 p.m.
    I think this is more specific. If one says “under this Act”, there are so many provisions under the Act. Unless one says “for the purposes under this Act” -- The Bill, when it becomes Act, will have so many provisions. But one is going to tax something and it is Value Added Tax one is going to pay and it is specific. That
    is why we are defining all the types of services and goods that are taxable.
    Therefore, if one comes to this activity or supply, one needs to specify that it is Value Added Tax taxable.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think we are prolonging this because we want to get it right.
    First, do the mobile phone service op- erators understand “phone card” to mean what we are talking about? Will “phone card”, for instance, mean the “sim-card”? Will it mean that or the scratch card? When we talk about prepayment on a cellular phone, what exactly do we mean? Is it the acquisition of the cellular phone -- pre- payment of it or we are talking about the air-time that is afforded, the prepayment related to that?
    So, we just want to be very sure and concise in the construction. That is all that I would want us to understand and appreciate.
    Mr Terkpeh 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the essence is the supply that is being made, which is the units, which is the subject of tax. Yes, the essence of this is that even when one buys the card and misplaces it, the supply has taken place. It is at the time of buying that the supply becomes very important.
    But one is deemed to have made the supply and therefore, the phone card company, which is an agent and is selling, they must account for the input VAT and the output VAT. One cannot argue that one bought the card and did not use it. We can envisage a corporate organisation that may pre-pay or buy these; and these things are becoming increasingly important because at the moment, we can prepay for electric- ity and water, unlike the previous times when one waits and gets the bill.
    So, this is where the similar schemes
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, we have had enough debate on this issue.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Hon Members, we have this last one before we close that chapter, if we could just take that and then --
    Mr Avedzi 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the next one is the original clause 19 which is now clause 20 “Regulations to prescribe for the supply of goods and supply of services” which was originally clause 10 (20) and (21) of the Bill.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    “Regulations to prescribe for the supply of goods and supply of services
    19. (1) For purposes of this section, the Minister may by legislative instru- ment, make Regulations to prescribe rules to determine whether a transaction constitutes
    (a) a supply of goods; or
    (b) a supply of services.
    Mr Speaker, I am just looking at clause 19 (2) and wonder if it should not stand as a separate heading because it does not fit under the clause 19.
    (2) Subject to section 20, where a right to receive goods or servic- es for a monetary value stated on a token, voucher, gift cer- tificate, or stamp, other than a postage stamp authorised under the Postal and Courier Service Regulatory Commission Act, 2001 (Act 649) is granted for a consideration in money, issue of the token, voucher, gift cer- tificate, or stamp is not supply, except to the extent, if any, that the consideration exceeds that monetary value.”
    I wonder if this should not stand alone because it does not fit well under clause 19.
    Mr Terkpeh 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Minister, I think it should stand alone because in the orig- inal, it is subclause 21 separated from subclause 20, and subclause 20 is general in terms of further regulations that may be made with respect to all that we have been considering. So, the original clause 21 could therefore, be moved as we move the other one.
    It is also a form of prepayment. So, it could fit under what we have been dis- cussing which head is, “Phone cards and prepayments as supply of services”. This is because in this instance, it deals with vouchers and gift certificates but unlike the phone card, it is only when one ex- changes it in a supermarket or some other place that the supply takes place and that is why it says in itself that it is not a supply, so it should follow immediately after the one we just did, maybe, a sub item under clause 19, so that it would be (1) and (2).
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    But I believe clause 19 has now become clause 20. Is that right?
    Mr Avedzi 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 19 is now clause 20. The original clause 20
    is now clause 19. So, this clause 19 (2) on the Order Paper should be part of the clause 20 and clause 20 would be (1) and this will be (2) but the new number would be clause 19, then the original clause 19 would become clause 20.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    All right. Once we are ad idem, I can put the Ques- tion.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speak-
    er, I would want to be very sure in my mind. The Postal and Courier Service Regulatory Commission Act, Act 649, was it enacted in 2009 or 2003? This is because in the original, it is 2003 and here, it is 2001. I want to be very sure. In the amendment that the Hon Chairman proposed, he said it is 2001.
    Mr Avedzi 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in the Bill, it is 2003. So, I think it is a typographical error. So, we should change it to 2003 but we would leave it for the draftsperson to look at.
    Mr Boafo 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, ordinarily,
    I believe this new clause 20, its place should not be here, it should be some- where towards the end of the Bill, that is, “Regulations”. I do not know if we can follow the usual format, because looking through the Bill itself, I do not see any provision at all relating to “Regulations” apart from this one. If you look at the contents, there is nothing showing that the Minister is being empowered to make regulations for such tax.
    Mr Chireh 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I hold the same opinion that there is no provision for “Regulations” and we wondered whether it should be there. But in some cases, because of the technical nature of this law, we must make this close to the provision as much as possible. This is a directive, so that the implementors will
    take notice immediately they are preparing the Regulations.
    But of course, there should be a provi- sion allowing the Hon Minister to make “Regulations” just like almost all the Bills that we have. But this one, I think we should leave it where it is. This is because it gives notice immediately to who wants to implement the Bill that it is a difficult area and they need to make Regulations for it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Is it also possible for us to ask the draftsperson to advise us on where it should appear? We have dealt with it alright, but which portion of the final document this should appear, probably, we can give them that discretion. I do not know.
    Mr Terkpeh 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I agree that the draftsperson could look at the question as a technical matter. But I think the other point that was raised is also very important. A general provision for “Regulations”, because the VAT Bill will definitely be followed by elaborate Regulations to further explain and I think that is also something that is required if there is an omission with respect to that.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, I cannot put the Question on clause 10 variously because we deferred the consideration of a certain portion of it. My attention has been drawn to the fact that it has been taken care of, but time is far spent. We can break off now and possibly tomorrow, we can look at the deferred portion together with considering all the various amendments to clause 10.
    Mr Chireh 2:10 p.m.
    On behalf of the Majority empty desk, I thank Hon Members very
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    I wonder if Hon Yieleh Chireh has been given the mandate by the Majority to speak on its behalf.
    Mr Boafo 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not know whether I heard him well, because the language he used is unparliamentary, that, “empty Majority...” is unparliamentary.
    Mr Chireh 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have with- drawn it. I am sitting here.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speak- er, I recognise two people at the front bench of the Majority. After he made that statement and he said he had withdrawn it because he recognises himself that he is sitting there, it means the other person there is empty. [Laughter.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, I direct that we bring proceed- ings to a close and that the House stands adjourned till tomorrow at 10 o'clock in the forenoon.
    Thank you very much for your indul- gence.
    ADJOURNMENT 2:10 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2.15 p.m. till Wednesday, 6th November, 2013 at 10.00 a.m.
    • SPACE FOR APPENDIX - 2:15 p.m.
    SPACE FOR TABLE - PAGE 2:15 p.m.
    SPACE FOR TABLE - PAGE 2:15 p.m.
    SPACE FOR APPENDIX - 2:15 p.m.