Debates of 11 Jun 2014

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:05 a.m.

ANNOUNCEMENTS 10:05 a.m.

OFFICE OF PARLIAMENT 10:05 a.m.

STATE HOUSE 10:05 a.m.

OSU-ACCRA 10:05 a.m.

PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC 10:05 a.m.

Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul 10:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am glad that, at least, I have heard the communication. But if my memory serves me right, over the last one

week, there have been so many names that have come up. I failed to understand why the names are flowing and being aired on air and the right place they used to come to, we do not have them. This is because we were in Parliament yesterday, we are in Parliament today, and Mr Speaker is communicating to us and mentioning just a single name, why?

The distance between the Flagstaff House and Parliament, how long is it that, that communication is hanging between the Flagstaff House and this time? For one week, the public is discussing it and Parliament that should be the first body to get it is not having it. I do not understand it. It is serious, I do not understand and somebody needs to explain it to us.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 10:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, following from what the Hon Deputy Minority Leader said, I believe that there is nothing wrong in the President announcing to Ghanaians, through a statement from his office that he is making appointments. However, when he fails to put Parliament in the loop, then the inference that one may draw is that, he does not consider the role of Parliament in respect of appointments to be urgent.
So, Parliament should never be stampeded into approving or considering the President's nominations, because the President does not consider it urgent.
Indeed, in my view, it is not a mark of good governance for this practice to continue. After all, if the President has considered it worthy to nominate people in the Media contemporaneously, he could just write to the Speaker. I just do not understand it. It means that the management of the President's Office itself is problematic, and some of these things must be said.
We have heard of reshuffles; it is Parliament that approves nominations for Ministers, Parliament deals with Ministers when reshuffles take place. Even though
constitutionally it is not required in the interest of good governance, I think the President ought to inform the House through the Speaker, so that we know when these reshuffles are to take effect.
I know that the Hon Minister for Local Government and Rural Development, the Hon Member for Amenfi East has now been moved to the Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation; when does it take place? Someone has been nominated into that position but we have not heard the name of that Minister yet. Does it mean that impliedly, he cannot exercise the duties of that office?
We have come a long way. Sometimes, Mr Speaker, I make this passionate statement because I believe that, it seems we are not learning any lessons in this country. It is important, Mr Speaker, particularly, when we have a Minister responsible for Government Business in this House, to convey these sentiments to His Excellency the President, more importantly when the President has been a Member of this House for 12 years. Sometimes, I do not know.
Dr Benjamin B. Kunbuor 10:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we do not need to belabour the point. The point is well made and I guess that I would endeavour as the Hon Member for Sekondi has said, to draw His Excellency's attention to the House's position on some of these lapses. There can be no excuse as a matter of governance practice, except to say that, well, because of the nature of our Constitution, it is when you get something on paper, that you tend to believe it. This is because the Media sometimes can speculate.
But that, certainly, is not an excuse. This is because, if the Media speculates and the Presidency thinks it is wrong, they would come out and say it is wrong.
So far, we have not heard any infor- mation contrary to what is in the Media. So I think it is a point well made and well taken.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Hon Members, the sentiments expressed on the floor of this House on this matter are very legitimate and I share these sentiments expressed by Hon Members.
Policies as much as possible must be announced on the floor of this House. Even when they decide to use the Media, we must be informed. I admit Questions and we must know which Ministers we are dealing with at any particular time. In my view, that is the gravamen of the issue. We must know when a particular Minister is no longer a Minister and when the new one takes office, so that Members would know which Ministers to deal with at any particular time.
These are legitimate concerns and I am very happy that the Hon Majority Leader who is also in charge of Government Business has assured the House that he would draw His Excellency the President's attention to the concerns expressed by Members on the floor of this House, so we leave it at that.
I must quickly add, that I received this Communication on the 15th of May. Yesterday, I could have announced it but I decided not to, hoping that the rest would come this morning so that I could combine all of them and announce on the floor of the House. I sat on it, but I cannot continue sitting on a Communication from the President. I can only announce what I have received and so I decided that this
Dr Kunbuor 10:15 a.m.
That is so, Mr Speaker.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:15 a.m.

Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Hon Member, correction of Votes and Proceedings of Tuesday, 10th June, 2014.
Mr Alfred K. Agbesi 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with your permission, let me take you back to page 7.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Which page, Hon Deputy Majority Leader?
Mr Agbesi 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I was anxiously looking at a name and I am sorry, Mr Speaker -- [Laughter.]
Page 6,7 --
Mr Agbesi 10:15 a.m.
Now, it is my turn, thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, page 7, number 101, Soditey Donald Dari has asked for permission and filled out the Absence Form but he has been marked absent. I would want to draw the attention of the -- [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Please, Hon Deputy Majority Leader, there are processes. These are not matters you just get up and raise on the floor of the House. You should find out whether it has gone to the Speaker and whether the Speaker has granted the permission.
So filling the form is one thing, and whether permission would be granted is another matter. You are in Leadership, so find out from the Table Office what the status is and when you are properly advised, then you would know what to do.
Mr Agbesi 10:15 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Page 8…24
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Hon Members, the Votes and Proceedings of Tuesday, 10th June, 2014, is hereby adopted as the true record of proceedings.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
We do not have any Official Report for today so we move on to Questions.
Do we have the Ministers in the House?
Dr Kunbuor 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing is out of the country, but I would like to ask for your indulgence for the Deputy Minister to take the Question.
Mr Nitiwul 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, fair enough. He is a Member of Parliament.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Very well. This morning, the Clerks-at-the-Table have showed me a Communication from the Ministry showing that the Minister is out of the jurisdiction.
We start with the Urgent Question in the name of the Hon Member for Offinso North.
URGENT QUESTION 10:15 a.m.

MINISTRY OF WATER 10:15 a.m.

RESOURCES, WORKS AND HOUSING 10:15 a.m.

Mr Augustine C. Ntim 10:15 a.m.
asked the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing what measures have been put in
place by the Ministry to ensure that the Tanoso Water Works which broke down as a result of vehicular accident is repaired and made functional?
Deputy Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing (Mr Vincent Opong- Asamoah)(on behalf of the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing): Mr Speaker, I stand here to apologise to my Hon Member for Offinso North for our inability to respond to his letter which was received on the 2nd of June.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Hon Member, are you answering the Question or you are --
Mr Opong-Asamoah 10:15 a.m.
So Mr Speaker, I am apologising to our Member of Parliament and the House that we would respond to the Question appropriately. We have already written to Parliament to that effect, that we were unable to get the response from our technical people so we would respond to it if Parliament would grant us two weeks. I would also want to let the House know that my Minister has travelled on an official duty and that is why we are unable -- [Interruption.]
An Hon Member -- rose --
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
Before I call you, I would want to get some clarification from the Hon Deputy Minister.
The letter to you dated 2nd June, 2014, was it about the Question or programming you to come and respond to the House?

They are two separate things; I would want to get that clarification. The letter of 2nd June, 2014, was that when you received the Question or the letter of 2nd June, 2014 was telling you to come to the House to answer the Question? They are two separate things; I would want to get that clarification.
Mr Oppong-Asamoah 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the letter came from the Parliamentary Service and was received in our office on the 4th of June 2014, asking us to respond to the issue that had been raised by our Hon Member for Offinso North.
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
Did you get the Question I posed to you? Normally, Questions are first sent to the Ministry, then subsequently you are programmed to come and answer the Question at a particular time. I would want to find out from you whether the letter from Parliament dated 2nd June, 2014 is the letter forwarding the Question to you or it is the letter programming you to come and answer the Question?
Mr Opong-Asamoah 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would like to read the letter that was sent to us.
“I am directed to inform you that the Business Committee has scheduled that you kindly attend upon the House on Wednesday, 4th June, 2014 to respond to the following Urgent Parliamentary Questions.
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
Please, read the whole communication.
Mr Opong-Asamoah 10:25 a.m.
You would also be respectfully required to respond to the following questions:
*81. Mr Augustine Collins Ntim (NPP -- Offinso North): To ask the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing what measures the Ministry has put in place to replace the overhead reservoir tank that has broken down for the past one year at Nkenkaasu in the Offinso North District.
It would be appreciated if answers to the Questions are forwarded to this office by Monday, 10th June, 2014 for pro- cessing.”
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
I have a copy. I have informed the House that there was a communication -- [Pause.]
Mr Vincent Opong-Asamoah 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not have the information off hand. [Uproar.]
rose
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
Hon Member for Subin?
Mr Isaac Osei 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am amazed. I do not understand why the Minister came here today at all. If he has been programmed and he does not have an answer, he should have informed us before. But he cannot come here to tell us that he does not have answers. I think Ministers should stop treating us sloppily. This is not good enough.
rose
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
Yes?
Alhaji Muntaka 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I understand the frustration of my Colleague, but I think that he was so harsh. Because it was an Urgent Question, it is both. But Mr Speaker -- [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
Hon Member, as for the Urgent Question -- I am satisfied with what he is saying. But not with regard to the whole Question which was transmitted to the Ministry long ago. Not that one, that is why I shifted to that one.
Alhaji Muntaka 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the indication from the Ministry is that the information from the technical people from that district had not come. Even that one -- [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
That is the Urgent Question.
Alhaji Muntaka 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, not only -- [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
With regard to the Urgent Question, that answer is reasonable to the Chair, but not with regards to Question number 81 on the Order Paper. That is the point.
Alhaji Muntaka 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, that is rightly so. But the challenge is that, they have still not received answers from the technical people from the district, not only for the Urgent Question but for the substantive Question as well. So Mr Speaker, that is why we are pleading for another opportunity for this Question to be answered.
rose
Mr Speaker 10:25 a.m.
Hon Member from Sekondi, then the Hon Majority Leader.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, for my information, the other Questions were transmitted to the Ministry over six weeks ago. So if the Hon Majority Chief Whip says he has still not received the answers from the District, then there is something wrong with the Ministry -- [Interruption] -- At best that is what I can say. Somebody must take respon- sibility and ultimate responsibility rests with the Minister.

Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I must express my personal appreciation for the way the Hon Majority Leader has been facilitating business in this House. Knowing him, I am sure he would transmit to the Minister our dissatisfaction of some of these things.

Hon Majority Chief Whip, if the Minister says he has not received it, you should even be telling him that is not enough. That is all.
Dr Kunbuor 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, this is House of records, and things that are wrong are wrong.
Mr Speaker, we do not ask a District Chief Executive or District Agency to come to this House to answer Questions, we ask of a Minister of State. The mechanics that the Minister would use to bring the answer to this House are not of relevance to Members in this House. So, Mr Speaker, I would crave your indulgence that I would have no objection whatsoever to whatever consequential directions and orders you would make on this matter.
Mr Nitiwul 10:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, let me remind Ministers that we have what we call Standing Orders of Parliament. Standing Order 60(3), and with your permission, let me read:
“A Minister shall not take more than three weeks to respond to a question from the House.”
Both Questions had been transmitted to the Ministry over three months or two months.
Mr Speaker, particularly the Question numbered 81, there is no excuse whatsoever for the Ministry to even come to the Table to say that their Answers are not ready. This should be the first time that this has ever happened in this House. It is unprecedented that the Minister who is to answer a Question would walk up to this place and tell us that he has not got the answer from technical people. Why are the technical people still at post?
Alhaji Muntaka 10:25 a.m.
-- rose --
Mr Nitiwul 10:35 a.m.
Hon Majority Chief Whip, you should be telling the Ministers that they are making your work very difficult. Today the Speaker has given you an order to answer a Question. That is all that the Speaker said. We are looking for the Answer. That is all that we are looking for. If the Answers are not ready, you should be telling the President that you cannot do the work that he gave to you.
This House must be respected. Yesterday, we had cause to raise an issue to say that the Hon Minister should attend upon the House to do; business that they are supposed to do and today it looks like you have decided to test the pulse of Parliament and see whether Parliament is weak or Parliament is strong.

I am sorry, but this cannot, especially the fact that three of our Ministers are Members of Parliament.

Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
The last comment on this matter.
Alhaji Muntaka 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as my earlier senior Colleague rightly mentioned, this cannot be explained. But I must say, Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect to the Chair and to the Deputy Minority Leader, it is not fair for him to say that this is the first time this is happening. Mr Speaker, if we had followed our procedure very well, they brought a letter that reached Parliament yesterday which meant that this has happened a thousand and one times where Ministers will write that we cannot come to the floor to answer Questions.
This Question would not have been on the Order Paper if we had followed our principle; but because of the seriousness of it, it has found its way there. So, to say that this is the first time it is happening, my brother it is not right. But we all condemn the attitude because we think that after about six weeks the Question should have been answered. But to say that it is the first time it is happening, I do not agree with you.
We must all make sure that this must be stopped by all Ministers and that I agree. I would also want to agree with the Majority Leader that whatever direction the Speaker gives, we would ensure that it is complied with. It is not the first time, so do not create the impression, and do not give wrong impression about what has happened before in this House.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Hon Members, I would want to come in at this point. Hon Members, I would want to refer you to Standing Order 28 and I would want to read:
“An act or omission which obstructs or impedes Parliament in the performance of its functions or
which obstructs or impedes a Member or officer of Parliament in the discharge of his duties or affronts the dignity of Parliament or which tends either directly or indirectly to produce such a result shall be contempt of Parliament.”
Hon Members, this is the last chance I am giving to Ministers. After today I would apply the Standing Orders of the House to Ministers that we programme to come and do business, who have Deputy Ministers, who cannot prepare their Deputy Ministers when the substantive Ministers are not there to come and respond to the Questions. I would have no alternative but to refer them to the appropriate Committee of the House for investigation and report.
Hon Members, that is the only way the Parliament of Ghana can be relevant to the aspirations of the people of Ghana -- [Hear! Hear!] There cannot be any alternative, I think that we have tolerated these issues for far too long. If we continue this way, there is no way we can get the Business of this House completed at any particular time.
Deputy Ministers are there to assist their Ministers; and for this House to approve somebody as a Deputy Minister it means that person has the capacity to assist his Minister and should be ready and prepared to come and step into the shoes of his Minister, where the substantive Minister is not there.
Secondly, the Business Committee must programme the Ministry to come and answer this Question before the end of this week. They should find space to get their answers to come and respond to these Questions before the end of this week. We have tomorrow and Friday for them to come and do exactly that.
Dr Kunbuor 10:35 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, your points and directives are well taken. We will draw the Ministry's attention to the concerns that have been expressed.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Hon Members, that brings us to the end of Question time.
Dr Kunbuor 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if you could discharge the Hon Deputy Minister?
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Yes, he is discharged.
Hon Members, Question number 80 is for a Written Answer. I have cross checked from the Table Office this morning and I have asked them to produce the original form that the Member filled, and he has marked ‘written' for a Written Answer. So, it is marked as ‘written' that is why they did not put asterisk against Question No 80, I have checked against his own Question form that he had filled.
Hon Members, that brings us to the end of Question time.
ANNOUNCEMENTS 10:35 a.m.

Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Hon Members, I have the pleasure to introduce to you a delegation from the Committee of equal opportunities of the Parliament of Uganda who are on a four-day official visit to Ghana.
Hon Members, let us have order in the House --
They are here, among others, to share in our experiences on issues of equity and equal opportunities for disabled and disadvantaged persons that are consi- dered in passing legislations. The visit is also intended to create the platform to deepen the already cordial relations between the two legislatures.
The Delegation comprises the following:
Hon Wilberforce Yeguma -- Chairman
Hon Beatrice Anywah -- Vice Chairman
Hon Anifa Kawooya -- Member
Hon Aboud Kitata -- Member
Hon Peter Okeyoh -- Member
Hon Hellen Asamo -- Member
Hon Tophas Kahwah -- Member
Victor Manzi -- Clerk
Hon Members, on your behalf, I wish them a pleasant stay in the country and fruitful deleberations.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Hon Members, I have admitted one Statement for today. The Statement stands in the name of the Hon Member for Weija-Gbawe.
Hon Member, you have the floor.
Ms Rosemund Abrah 10:45 a.m.
Hon Muntala, I am not your grandma. -- [Laughter.]
STATEMENTS 10:45 a.m.

Ms Rosemund C. Abrah (NPP-- Weija/Gbawe) 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, Weija/Gbawe constituency is one of the 45 newly created constituencies in the Ga South Municipality in the Greater Accra Region. Weija/Gbawe is hemmed in between Anyaa/Sowutuom Municipal and Bortianor/
Ms Rosemund C. Abrah (NPP-- Weija/Gbawe) 10:45 a.m.
Ngleshie Amanfrom Constituency. It is also a new sprawling enclave with a fast growing population.
The constituency is without much commercial activities and hence many people living in the constituency need to travel to Accra Central or elsewhere in order to make their livelihood.
Mr Speaker, this lengthy introduction is to give an overview of the socio- economic status of the people in the Weija/Gbawe Constituency. The consti- tuency is thus mostly inhabited by low- income groups with isolated middle income dwellers. Located at the lower delta of the Densu River; the area is synonymously being identified with flooding. Being at the lowest end of the Densu River, however, is not the major issue.
The major causal factor for the flooding of the constituency is the Weija Dam. During the rainy season when the Densu River overflows its banks and hence the Dam bursts out, the management of the dam are compelled to open the dam to forestall the forceful collapse of the dam, in which case, the flooding would be more devastating.
Flooding at Mallam Junction
By a letter dated November 19, 2010 from the Ministry of Energy and signed by its Acting Director (named withheld) and addressed to the Chief Directors of the Ministries of Water Resources, Works and Housing, Accra and the Ministry of Roads and Highways, the petitioners attributed the cause of flooding to the wrong siting of a Total filling station at Mallam junction.

A report on stakeholders' meeting which included the Environmental Protection Agency, Total Petroleum Ghana Limited, Hydrological Services Department and Mallam Residents Association confirmed the cause of flooding as indicated above. Mr Speaker let me quickly add here that, in recent years, developments by big Chinese companies and others which had put up industrial/commercial buildings at the swampy areas of the Mallam junction by filling their sites with sand have aggravated the matter.

My concern, with the said report is what has come out as regards the solutions proposed in the report.

(i) Has there been the redesigning of the horizontal alignment of the drainage system at Mallam junction?

(ii) There was a proposal to fix six bigger culverts upstream.

(iii)That a big underground drain would be constructed across the Total Fuel Station.

Mr Speaker what has been the outcome of this report since November 2010?
GICEL SCC 10:45 a.m.

Mr Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Member, we have rules for Statements; you read what has been approved by me --
Ms Abrah 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
May be in the near future. I am appealing to the Government to consider settling the people of Wiaboman elsewhere.
Mr Murtala M. Ibrahim (NDC-- Nanton) 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I rise to support the Statement ably made by the Hon Member.
Mr Speaker, this is also to say that the issue of flooding has become perennial, the extent to which we have commented on these issues every day, every year and any time it does happen.
I think that the challenge has to do with the way our cities are planned. It is obvious that the Town and Country Planning Department in most of these District, Municipal and Metropolitan Assemblies have most often not seen as part and parcel of policy interventions and decision-making at their Assemblies. There are many Assemblies you go to and you would find the Town and Planning Department Offices completely insulated
from any structure of the Assembly and even on paper, they do not take decisions in consultation with this important state institution that has a responsibility to help plan our cities and towns.
It is also important for us to begin looking at ways where traditional authorities who have the authority to sell lands to those who develop them, to do that in consultation with the authorities at either the District, Municipal or Metropolitan Assemblies.
Most of the communities we live in, when they plan those communities, they would identify areas that people can put up structures, areas for social centres, and even areas for schools and places of convenience. Within the next one or two years, those same areas which were identified for certain important structures would be sold to people who would want to develop them.
The Hon Member in her Statement did indicate, the siting of a fuel station at a particular place which ought not to have been accepted. The consequence of this is not only to even aggravate the flooding situation but it is also dangerous for the life of people who live around those areas.
Mr Speaker, it is common to walk in town, you would find it extremely strange why people would allow fuel stations to be located in places where indeed people live, and that is extremely dangerous. I think that the earlier we did something about it the better.
The strange thing in this country sadly is that, we most often implement before we plan. When you implement before you plan, the consequences would be enormous for you to contain, and I think that has been the challenge.
It is not an issue of every year the National Disaster Management
Organisation (NADMO) rushes in to assist victims of flood. I believe that if we put the necessary mechanism in place to ensure that even structures that ought not to be where they have to, are removed, I think it would help us. I realise that most often, when those structures are being demolished we are concerned. This is because people indeed would have put up those structures by their life savings.
I believe that if we prevented those structures being put there, we would not have these problems of people rushing in to either take advantage of it. It can be political, social, or even moral.
I believe that if we begin to plan our cities well, respect the Regulations governing the way our cities are built, I think we would be able to avoid some of these challenges we have.
With these few words, I associate myself with the Statement ably made by the Hon Member.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Members, that brings us to the end of Statements.

The Excise Duty Bill at the consideration stage.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 10:55 a.m.

STAGE 10:55 a.m.

Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee, have you resolved the issue of clause 3 or we should defer it and proceed?
Mr William O. Boafo 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with regard to Clause 4, we have not placed any advertised proposed amendment but on Clause 4, Subclause 1, line 2; there is a reference to ‘recorded inventory' and I would want to find out from the Chairman, at what point in time this recording is made?
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee
Mr Avedzi 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Committee did not see the need for any amendment to Clause 4 and that if the Hon Member thinks that there is the need for Clause 4, I need your guidance; should he not have come in the form of an amendment proposal?
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Members, at the Consideration stage that is where the rules are relaxed. He cannot raise it now but he is asking you, at what point in time do we take the recordings, that is all he is asking. Maybe based on your explanation, he might decide to drop his amendment or to proceed to move his amendment.
Mr Avedzi 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would need some time to go through and then come back.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon W. O. Boafo.
Mr Boafo 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if only he would come back. If it is not a means of killing what we are about to extract from him.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Boafo, you know the rules are very clear. Once there is no amendment moved, I am supposed to put
the Question. So I will put the Question and at the appropriate time, during the process, if you want to move an amendment at the Second Consideration Stage you can do so.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 5 -- Quantity and Value of Excisable Goods.
Mr Avedzi 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 5, subclause (2), paragraph (a), sub- paragraph (i), line 2, delete “Customs Act 2013, (Act …..)” and insert “Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (Management) Act, 1993 (P.N.D.C.L. 330)” and do same wherever “Customs Act 2013, (Act …..)” appears in the Bill.
Mr Speaker, the Customs Act, 2013 is now a Bill; it is not yet passed therefore we cannot refer to it. So we are referring to the existing Act as we have in our law.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Member this is a straight forward amendment. I will put the Question.
Question put and amendment agreed to
Clause 5 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 6 -- Time for payment of Excise duty.
Mr Joseph Yieleh Chireh 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am sorry to raise this issue on Clause 6 but if you look at the paragraph (c), and if you look at what the purpose of this
whole provision is; “Time for payment of Excise duty”: - Particularly (c);
“Excise duty becomes due and it is payable to the Commissioner- General
(c) Where goods are manufac- tured in the country without the relevant registration,
(i) by the person who manufactured the goods; and
(ii) at the time the goods were manufactured.”
Mr Speaker, unless it is a technical explanation, I thought that whole sentence should be together just like the 6(a) so that it will read something like;
“Where goods are manufactured in a country without the relevant registration by the person who manufactured the goods at the time the goods were manufactured.”
The first one, under that, is not indicating time. It is the second one. So, if you would want to combine to make it one then it means yes but if you separate it, that one does not indicate time. So it should be combined.
Mr Avedzi 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the amendment proposed by the Hon Member is in order. That the proposed amendment is to delete ; ‘and' and ‘sub- paragraph (i)' so that the new rendition would be;
“Where goods are manufactured in a country without the relevant registration by the person who manufactured the goods at the time the goods were manufactured.”
Mr Boafo 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker this is one of the proposed amendment which has not been advertised. I respect your discretion but I am wondering why this has not been
-- 10:55 a.m.

Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
My ruling is that you do not need to file amendment but you can move amendment on the floor of the House; that was my ruling. Hon W.O Boafo -- or you are pointing to the Chairman who tried to raise the issue that you did not file the amendment?
Mr Boafo 10:55 a.m.
Well, as a whole Mr Speaker; I am just tackling the matter as a whole.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Yes, but the point is that at the Consideration Stage you can move amendment on the floor of the House. [Pause.]
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 6 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill
Clause 7 -- Payment of Excise duty by manufacturers.
Mr Avedzi 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 7, subclause (1), paragraph (b), line 1, delete “approved” and insert “unapproved”.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition will be 11:05 a.m.
“in relation to excisable goods manufactured in an unapproved warehouse, the excise duty shall be paid to the Commissioner-General when the goods are manufactured.”

Mr Speaker, the intention is “unapproved warehouse”, therefore I move the amendment to correct it.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Before I put the question, I want clarification.
Hon Chairman, what happened to the “approved warehouse”?
Mr Avedzi 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the warehouse where you manufacture must first be approved by the Commissioner-General and that will form the record of the Commissioner-General. But this is a warehouse approved by the Commissioner-General for you to manufacture excisable goods. Therefore Clause 7 is talking about the payment of excise duty by manufacturers. And it says, “where excise duty is payable by a manufacturer”
a) in relation to a sizeable goods entered for home use, from a warehouse by a manufacturer during a calendar month. The excise duty shall be paid to the Commissioner-General on or before the 21 st day of the following calendar month and
b) in relation to excisable goods manufactured, in an unapproved warehouse, the excise duty shall be paid to the Commissioner- General when the goods are manufactured.”
Mr Chireh 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not see why the word ‘approved' is appearing here. This is because if you look at the (a) there is no issue of approval there and the contrast he wants to draw is that one is unapproved. Why will you have goods produced in an unapproved place? Where is the condition that the thing -- In fact, if you see -- you should even leave out the issue of approval altogether if you
want to delete it. But if you are talking, it means that the first one too, you must put there ‘approved'. But you are not talking about it and you are contrasting the two.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, are you getting the point? He is trying to explain that you have to get an approval. But if you look at sub- section (a); there is nowhere that distinction has been made. So when you use the word “unapproved”, then there should be a clause dealing with “approved warehouse” but when you leave it, the essence is that you pay whether it is in an approved or unapproved warehouse, you must pay your excise duty.
Yes, Hon Majority Leader. Then --
Dr Benjamin B. Kunbuor 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there seems to be a wider dimension to it because if you take a closer look at the shops and factories Act, you would see that you cannot be permitted to manufacture goods in an unapproved premises. So, if you were to put this there, it means you are technically legalizing what is illegal just for the purpose of excise duty, you are asking that you would exact money from production that has been done in accordance with law.
Mr Speaker would know that on collecting tax from illegal activities, there is a distinction that you make and once the word ‘unapproved' has been used, it means it is not a legitimate activity from which tax is excisable.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Oh sorry, Hon Member, then Hon Member --
Mr Kwasi Amoako-Attah 11:05 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, I wanted to associate myself with the opinion expressed by Hon Yieleh Chireh to the effect that “approved” or “unapproved” should be eliminated completely. This is because this Bill, Mr Speaker, those with even goods which are meant for re-export and some of them usually are kept in a bonded warehouse. And a bonded warehouse would have even received a prior approval from the Commissioner-General; so whether it is “approved” or “unapproved”, I do not think it is the issue here. So, for the sake of consistency, I think we should eliminate that description completely.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Member for Old Tafo, are you following the discussion?
Dr Anthony Akoto Osei 11:05 a.m.
Yes Mr Speaker, I was going to suggest that we drop it down and come back later because I do not have my original notes here. I do not recall the reason why we changed this but --
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Member for Secondi.
Papa Owusu Ankomah 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I was also trying to locate my notes, if the matter could be deferred while we consult among ourselves and come back later.
Dr Kunbuor 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there are points of law and I do not think any factual situation can change it. And there are authorities on that, if you take Linda Sinclair which is the authority on this type of illegal activities for which --
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Yes, I know that in tax law it is not concerned about the legality or illegality of it. They are interested in the tax; that is the basic principle underlying tax law.
Dr Kunbuor 11:05 a.m.
Yes, that is true Mr Speaker.
But this is the only exception. This is the exception to that general rule that there is no issue of justice and equity in tax matters of that nature but this authority, specifically, they were dealing with the issue of prostitution and they are saying that if the activity itself, is an illegal activity, you cannot collect tax. In another authority, somebody has stolen a broker's document for manufacturing wine and used that to actually manufacture wine and sold it. Tax was asked to be taken on it.
The ruling of the House of Lords on that matter is that, breaking into a place amounts to burglary. So, if you break into a place and this type of revenue comes out of it, you cannot tax it but if it is a moral question, that is what the tax position will not take, Mr Speaker, if they are interested, we can make those available. It is just because it is a matter of law that is why I am raising that.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Let me hear from the Deputy Minister then, Hon - oh Hon Ayariga, sorry.
Mr Mahama Ayariga 11:05 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
I think reading clause 7, there is a very conscious effort to distinguish between collecting tax from perfectly legitimate manufacturing activity or manufacturing activity taking place at a site that has been approved for manufacturing activity and manufacturing activity taking place at a site that has not been approved, nevertheless, manufacturing has taken place there and there is an attempt to penalize those who are manufacturing at a site that has not been approved for carrying out manufacturing by creating differential arrangements for the collection of tax or the payment of excise duty.
In the case of approved, you are given up to the 21st day of the following month --
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
But why has it not been qualified?
The one that you said is approved, why has it not been qualified but you have approved them; that is Clause 7, 1 (a), why have you not qualified it?
Mr Ayariga 11:05 a.m.
And that is why I would want to agree with Hon Yieleh Chireh's proposal and your proposal, Mr Speaker, that since we are making a conscious distinction, then we should add approved in Clause 7 (1) (a). “For home use from an approved warehouse”, if we amend Clause 7 (1) (a), to add “approved warehouse”, and then in (b), we then say “unapproved warehouse”, then the distinction becomes very clear.
I think that resolves the issue.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Majority Leader.
Dr Kunbuor 11:05 a.m.
All that we are saying is that, if you remove the word “approval”, the word “approval” is a precondition. You will still go and collect your tax, but you are now not collecting the tax based on a distinction of an approved place and a non-approved place. The essence of this is to make sure that you collect your tax.
So, without that distinction when, you are collecting the tax, it is a question of burden of proof. If somebody were to litigate on this, you say look, I am not aware that this is not an unapproved place. But if you put the “approval” as a precondition, then it means you consciously --
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
The Hon Minister for Information and Media Relations is trying to draw a very nice distinction that, the consequences in (A) seems to be different from B.
If it is only a matter of collecting tax, then we have to collapse one of the clauses completely and then our emphasis would then be on “manufacturing” and “warehouse” and then “approval” and “unapproval” does not crop up at all. That is the argument Hon Mahama Ayariga is making. This is because once there is no distinction then why do we have two clauses of: A and B. That is the point he is making. I think that it is a very interesting experience.
Mr Kunbuor 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do appreciate what he is saying in relation to that but all that we are saying is that, if you think that it is a penal provision, it is not. This is a civil matter of collecting tax.
A penal tax provision is rendered differently. I agree with him to the extent that; just remove all those things and let them go and collect the tax, but if you say that it being used as a deterrent, that is not the --
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Then in that case we have only one clause then.
Yes, Hon W.O. Boafo, let me hear you on this matter and then --
Mr Boafo 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think to be consistent in that particular clause, the suggestion by Hon Joseph Yieleh Chireh should be considered seriously, because under sub-clause 3 and 4, they qualify the warehouses with “approved” warehouse. It is not only in the sub-clause 2 that we find “unapproved” warehouse, but in sub- clause 3 and 4 they used “approved” warehouses and so if we are consistent with the language then the suggestion by Hon Yieleh Chireh should be taken into account.
Mr Amoako-Attah -- rose —
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Yes.
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the whole clause has a problem, apart from whether we should remove or retain the word “approved”.
Mr Speaker, the way the clause is packed, I find it difficult to reconcile even the words “warehouse” and “manu- facturing”. In strict sense, no manu- facturing takes place in a warehouse. If we talk of manufacturing, it means that you are bringing together raw materials to be transformed into a finished product; something else and it is done in a factory.
Perhaps the impression being created here is that, in a warehouse, finished products could undergo some processes, either through repackaging or something; and to create the impression that manufacturing per se, takes place in the warehouse, is out of place.
I would want to know the real intention of this clause because no manufacturing, so to speak, can take place in a warehouse and so the whole clause has a problem.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Hon Member, did you look at the definition of warehouse in the Bill?
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:15 a.m.
Yes Mr Speaker, but because it is a Bill being discussed, I am trying to draw --
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Try to draw the dis- tinction between ‘warehouse' and ‘manufacturing'. That is why I am asking you whether you have looked at the definition of ‘warehouse' in the Bill, but the definition there seems to have addressed the concerns that you have raised.
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:15 a.m.
All right Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Hon Yieleh Chireh?
Mr Chireh 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I raised the issue about the “approval” and if you look at (A), even though it is not mentioned, it should also have been mentioned. it is also talking about “approved” there, so that if you mention “approved”, then we are talking about the time of the payment of the thing, but if it is “unapproved”, then it means the day they get you to produce it, you should pay immediately.
We are not giving any time to do it. In any case, the Commissioner General was not aware of your existence and so you could not have known when to pay. I still think that because you want to draw the distinction, the (A) must have “approved”, this is because I have seen “approved” in the various clauses— [Interruption]— So my point is that, if we think we are going to use this, then the definition that we are referring to, talks about the Commissioner General doing this.
We know that the person can make or distill “akpeteshie”from any corner and in that case he has no —
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
If you look at the interpretation of ‘warehouse' again, where it is not qualified with “approved” then it means the one approved by the Commissioner-General, where it is not qualified, then it is “approved” but I think the problem is with the nature of the drafting and the interpretation. Where they use “warehouse” in simplicity, then it means it is the one that has been approved.
Mr Ayariga 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, you are perfectly right, because the interpretation section defines “warehouse” and in the
definition, the approval of the Com- missioner-General is specifically stated and so we do not need to add “approved” warehouse and I think that the amendment should stand that the second subclause distinguishes between “warehouse” and “unapproved warehouse” I think that the amendment that the Hon Chairman is proposing should stand.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Let me find out from the Chairman before I put the Question. In terms of sub-clause (3) of clause 7, the “approved warehouse” there, is it also going to be consequential or you are going to keep it there, because you have not filed any amendment to it. Look at subclause (3) of clause 7, the Committee has not filed any amendment.
Mr Avedzi 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in line with the debate, I think that it is consequential that wherever we see “approved warehouse”, we delete “approved”.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Yes Hon Anthony Akoto Osei?
Dr A. A. Osei 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the Minister for Information and Media Relations is right. The amendment the Chairman is putting is correct but the Committee failed to amend subclauses (3) and (4). We are trying to make a distinction between “warehouse” and “unapproved”. We forgot about the subclause (3) and (4) and you may allow the Hon Chairman to make those amendments on the floor of the House when we get to sub-clause (3) and (4).
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
All right.
Mr Mahama Ayariga 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it would depend. When they use “approved warehouse” in clause 7 (1) and later on they also use “approved warehouse” in --
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
There is no “approved warehouse” in 7 (G).
Mr Ayariga 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, 7 (1)b — they used “an approved warehouse” and we are amending it to read “unapproved” and so my question is, when we go to subclause (3) and there is an “approved warehouse”, do we amend it to also read “unapproved”? Precisely, that is the point. What type of warehouse are we dealing with?
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
I have to be clear before I put the question.
Mr Ayariga 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we need to be very clear whether in all the cases where we have “an approved warehouse” the intention now is that it should read, “un approved warehouse”? Or is the amendment “unapproved warehouse” only restricted to clause 7(1)(b) and then the rest we will delete “an approved warehouse” so that it will remain at “warehouse”, this is because, there are two different types of warehouses we are dealing with here. We need to be clear on those ones.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he is complicating the issues. We are saying that in some of the clauses we have “approved warehouse” but we agreed that the definition of a “warehouse” takes into account the process of approval. So, if we want to leave the unapproved one, we leave it, but wherever it has occurred as approved warehouses should be deleted., otherwise, you are creating three categories of ‘warehouses' --
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
How would you know that the other “approved warehouse” is different from the first “approved warehouse”? That is what I want you to explain to me before I put the Question.
The first one in clause 7(1)(b) we are changing it to “unapproved warehouse”.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
Yes.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
I asked the Hon Chairman of the Committee -- he is saying that wherever we see “approved warehouse” it should be “unapproved warehouse”. Yes, that is why he said that it should be consequential. You are saying that the “approved warehouse” there should relate to the definition of ‘warehouse' therefore we should just delete the “approved”. How would you know, because those of you who investigated the Bill must guide the House.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, my point is that, if you define a “warehouse” to be “approved warehouse”--
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Yieleh Chireh, if you used your argument, then it means that even the clause 7(1)(b) we cannot put the “approved warehouse” this is because they have defined the “warehouse” to mean “approved warehouse”.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
No. I am saying that if because it is unapproved, if we go along with the proposed amendment, it means that anywhere it is not a warehouse so defined we must put “unapproved”.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Very well.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
Therefore the amendment here will be correct.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
That is why I am asking whether the “unapproved warehouse” in clause 7(1)(b) is the same as in sub-clauses (3) and (4) because they have not filed any amendment in those areas.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
We shall now, by your direction, say that they should not put “approved warehouse” anywhere except where --
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
The intention relates to clause 7(1)(b).
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
No, I am saying that when you say a “warehouse” we all understand it to be the approved one. But anytime you say “unapproved warehouse” you are definitely saying that it is not one defined in the --
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Yieleh Chireh, it is the Committee that is introducing the “unapproved warehouse”.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
And I agree with them.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
So, if you agree with them now, then it means that wherever we see “approved warehouse” it should be “unapproved warehouse” or we delete it.
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
No.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Why?
Mr Chireh 11:25 a.m.
Because the definition says that it is approved.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
But if you use that your argument there is no need to file an amendment to clause 7(1)(b). That is the point I am making.
Mr Avedzi 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the amendment in 1(b) is important. We want to differentiate between a warehouse which is the “approved warehouse” but based on the definition, wherever we see “warehouse” in sub-clause 1(a), it is the “approved warehouse” and the terms of payment of duty is 21 days. And when you go to sub-clause 1(b), we want to differentiate it from warehouse which is not approved. So, it is relevant that we maintain the amendment in subclause 1(a).
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Yes, I agree with you.
Mr Avedzi 11:25 a.m.
Now, when you go to sub- clause (3) and (4), the context under clause (7) we need to delete the “approved” there. So, whenever we see “an approved warehouse” we delete the “approved” in clause 7, but it will not apply to the entire Bill. So, let us limit that directive to the clause 7.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
I will put the Question on what has been advertised first, then we would take the rest.
Question put and --
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, I think we would be making a grievous mistake if we have to use the words either “approved” or “unapproved”. Mr Speaker, what is the subject matter here? The subject matter is the collection of excise duty. And excise duty can only be collected from a bonded warehouse. A bonded warehouse means that it has already received a pre-approval.
Even the definition of a warehouse, as your good-self stated it, is already defined that a “warehouse” is approved by the Commissioner-General and no excise duty can be collected on goods by any Custom Officer unless the goods are in a bonded warehouse and a bonded warehouse is always already approved.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Member, I thought we have made progress. You are taking us back. We may need to defer it because you are taking us back. You know they try to draw a distinction between the one that has been approved and one that has not been approved. Otherwise, if we are just interested in the collection of the excise duty, then there is no need to draw a distinction between “approved” and “unapproved”. But If you look at it, as the Hon Minister for Information and Media Relations said, there is a conscious effort as it were.
My challenge now is whether the “approved” in sub-clauses (3) and (4) should be “unapproved warehouse” or it should be “warehouse” simplicita as defined in the Interpretation column of the Bill. That is what I want to resolve. And we can only do that when we get the proper context. That is why I want to defer it. Let us defer it and go back and look at the proper context of the use of the “approval” in subclauses (3) and (4), then we can take the proposed amendment. That is what I am suggesting.
We need to look at the context critically to find out whether it relates to the warehouse as defined or we are talking about the “unapproved warehouse” then we know exactly what we are doing.
Mr Ayariga 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I perfectly agree with you that if you look at even subclausses (3) and (4) there are still penal consequences, this is because there is a requirement of entering into bonds and making security arrangement et cetera. So it is still not clear to me whether it is still part of the effort to deal with situations in unapprovd werehouses or in ordinary warehouses. That is why I think that your guidance that we should step this matter down and interrogate it and understand the context --
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Akoto Osei and Hon Member for Sekondi, you should bring your notes ooh do not behave like the Hon Deputy Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing. -- [Laughter] You should bring your notes tomorrow, do not behave like the Hon Deputy Minister who kept his answers somewhere.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 11:25 a.m.
Note is taken, Mr Speaker, and we shall comply.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
So, we are deferring clause 7.
Dr Kunbuor 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want you to go and look at clause 26 ahead of time. That would assist you to see why this notion of “approval” and “non- approval” becomes problematic. They have already put administrative penalty on anybody who manufactures outside an approved warehouse. So, you are criminalising it, but you are going to collect the money at the same time.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Members, clause 7 accordingly deferred.
Clauses 8 and 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 10 -- Credit and refund for excise duty paid on raw materials.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Clause 10, Hon W. O. Boafo?
Mr Boafo 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move Clause 10, Sub-clause 4, Line 2, there is a reference to “registered manufacturer”. Mr Speaker, this equally poses the question regarding a warehouse, because in the interpretation column the manufacturer is defined among other things to include one who is registered. So the expression “registered” is a substitute here. Clause 10 subclause 4, line 2.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee, do you get the point he is making? Somewhere you referred as ‘manufacturer', now you are qualifying the ‘manufacturer' as registered so --
Mr Avedzi 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think I agree with the Hon Member, but if you read the definition of manufacturer, it means the person who manufactures excisable goods or causes them to be manufactured in the
Mr Avedzi 11:35 a.m.


country and is registered under this Act. Because of that definition, the clause 10 (4), line 2, we have to delete “registered” so that it would read “the manufacturer is entitled to a refund of that amount”. So, I agree with the Hon Member.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon W. O. Boafo, is that the only place where we have used “registered manufacturer” in the Bill?
Mr Boafo 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, so far that is where I have identified one, but if I subsequently identify any other place where --
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
I wonder whether it has been put there for a certain purpose. So, we need to look at it before we amend it. Maybe, somewhere along the line, we might see it and we might run into difficulties. Well, let us take the amendment -- Deputy Minister for Finance.
Mr Mahama Ayariga 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he was seriously distracted by that Hon Member who has crossed carpet so, if you can repeat what you said.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
No, Hon Boafo made a very important point that the challenge that we had with the ‘warehouse' issue, we may be having it with regard to the “approved” and “unapproved ware- house”, we may be having it with “registered manufacturer” because they used the word “manufacturer” simpliciter and then they have added -- [Interruption.]
Hon Members, let us have order in the House. Then we have “registered manufacturer” so, why “registered manufacturer”? You introduced the Bill in the House and I want to --
Mr Forson 11:35 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, as the Hon Chairman said, we strongly agree with Hon W. O. Boafo on that.
Thank you.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Then move the amendment and let me put the Question. Hon Chairman, who is moving the amendment? Hon W. O. Boafo, move your amendment.
Mr Boafo 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move clause 10, sub-clause 4, line 2, the word “registered” before “manufacturer” should be deleted.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 10 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Clause 11, First Deputy Speaker to take the Chair.
Dr A. A. Osei 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the Interpretation section, there is a definition for “registered manufacturer”, so why are we deleting it?
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Members, you know you need to guide the Chair, especially the Committee Members who have studied this Bill carefully. This is because they have “unregistered manufacturer” where we tried to delete the “unregistered”. I have also seen “unregistered person who manufactures” somewhere in the Bill.
So, I will put the Question, but we should flag it so that at the Second Consideration Stage, we would take a closer look at it.
Hon Minority Leader, you told me you were going for party meeting but I saw you -- [Laughter.] I saw you on television yesterday. You gave me prior notice that you were going for a party meeting and I know party meetings are not held on the streets.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
Thank you very much Mr Speaker for your “I care for you” sentiment. [Laughter] But indeed I sounded it to you that I was going to be absent yesterday and among others, I
cited a party meeting. So, there are a whole lot of other activities and you know, the concern of Ghanaians should be my concern.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
And your concern should be my concern. [Laughter.]
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
So, you should have been there.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
First Deputy Speaker to take the Chair.
FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:42 a.m.
Hon Members, Clause 11.
Clause 11 -- Refund of Excise Duty paid on imported excisable goods.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:42 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee?
Mr Avedzi 11:42 a.m.
I beg to move, clause 11 head note, delete “imported”.
Mr Speaker, the intention of this clause is the refund of Excise Duty not only on imported and excisable goods, but all excisable goods, so we are deleting the “imported” there.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:42 a.m.
Hon Members, I think it is a straight forward one. I will put the Question.
Question put amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:42 a.m.
Hon W. O. Boafo.
Mr Boafo 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 11 (3) gives a time within which an application for refund could be made and it limits it to goods manufactured for export. But under clause 11 (1), the refund could equally be made to goods imported but no time within which the application for such imported goods have been provided.
I do not know whether the Chairman has a special reason for this because he only confines himself to goods manufactured for export.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee.
Mr Avedzi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, Excise Duty is paid on goods that are imported into this country or manufactured in this country for consumption and not for export. That is why if there is the need for a refund on excisable goods, that refund could either be for goods imported and entered for home use or goods that are manufactured and entered for home use.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Boafo, are you all right with his explanation?
Mr Boafo 11:45 a.m.
Mr Chairman, if I really understand subclause 2, a person entitled to a refund of Excise Duty paid on manufactured Excisable Goods entered for home use and subsequently exported, if the Commissioner-General is satisfied that the goods were exported from the country in the state in which they were entered for home use --
Mr Speaker, if you go to sub-clause 3, the time for application which is 12 months is reckoned in respect of goods meant for export from the date the goods are exported or put on board the ship or
Mr Boafo 11:45 a.m.


aircraft in which they are exported. My question to the Chairman is, this period of 12 months within which the application for refund could be made, what about goods which have been imported in the country for consumption?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Yes, Hon Chairman and after him Hon Yieleh Chireh.
Mr Avedzi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 11, sub- clause 1, dealt with imported excisable goods. So if you read subclause 1, it says:
“A person is entitled to a refund of excise duty paid on imported excisable goods entered for home use if the goods are in compliance with the conditions for drawback of import duty under the customs Acts 2013 (Acts…)
Now we have changed it to PNDC Law
330.
So, the imported ones, it is covered under subclause (1). Then excisable goods manufactured are covered under subclause (2).
Now, the subclause (3), talks about the application for a refund under this section which shall be made within 12 months from the date on which the goods are exported or put on board in a ship or aircraft in which they are exported.
So, I do not get clearly the concern of Hon Boafo.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Chairman, it would appear as if sub-clause (3), deals with those items to be exported and the time frame within which you can ask for a refund. But I think Hon Boafo wants clarification as to subclauses (1) and (2). Let us hear from Hon Yieleh Chireh.
Mr Chireh 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the way we are deleting from the headnotes should be a substitution, because you can only make a refund when you are re-exporting. If you do not re-export, you cannot make a refund. Why would you make a refund? First and foremost, if you take the Excise Duty on something that is manufactured and for home use, that is when you pay the duty, that is tax.
If nothing happens and you are saying ‘imported', it is rather ‘exported'. When you first need to use it at home, but for one reason or the other you are re- exporting it, then if the person had paid excise duty, then you would make a refund to that person. So, the whole thing is about refund when —
Otherwise the word ‘drawback' in the first one —
These are tax issues but you cannot make a refund after somebody had paid Excise Duty for something that they had consumed. What would be the basis? If he brings it for exhibition, if it is manufactured and re-exported elsewhere as a raw material, that is the only time that you can talk about refund because you would have paid a toll.
This one, it does not make sense to me at all. The thing we should be talking about is ‘export' not ‘import'. If you do not export you cannot get the refund. I pay a refund for distilling akpeteshie and it is consumed here and can I go to the Commissioner-General for a refund. Why? It is not right.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Honourable Member for Old Tafo.
Dr A. A. Osei 11:45 a.m.
Mr Chairman, Hon Yieleh Chireh should read clause 11 (1) carefully. If he has any doubts she should go to the conditions for the drawback under the Customs Act and his question
would be answered. There are conditions from this category and that is why a distinction is being made between clause 11 (1) and 1(2).
But having said that, Mr Speaker, I think if the Customs Act has been amended in an earlier clause, then we should also amend it to read PNDCL 330. Wherever it is, it is consequential.
Dr Donkor 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if you look at clause 11 (3), the Chairman, in his response drew my attention to the elimination of possible export by road in terms of refund. It is only limited to ships and aircrafts and I think if we want to promote regional integration and intra- regional trade, and the bulk of Intra- regional trade takes place by road. Could we look at that?
Mr Avedzi 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the concern of the Hon Member has been taken care of. If you read line 2 of the subclause (3), it says -- Let me read from line 1:
“An application for a refund under this section shall be made within twelve months from the date on which the goods are exported.”
The goods that are exported could be by land, by sea, or by whatever or put on board a ship or aircraft in which they are exported. So, the first export means that land export is covered.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Chairman, we are all right with that one but what about the issue raised by Hon Boafo? How do you address that?
Mr Boafo 11:45 a.m.
Mr Chairman, Hon Yieleh Chireh made a point that the section should concern itself with only goods made for re-export. But we have a second Schedule under which certain items have
been specified as subject to exemption. So, if the Commissioner-General wrongly accepts these items as dutiable and later realises that these are entitled to exemptions, they are not meant for re- export but they are entitled to exemptions.
I do not think what he said with regard to the fact that it is only goods which are meant for export and if duty is paid on them could be refunded.
Mr Speaker, I still stand by what I said because I do not see where the Chairman is coming from. The misunderstanding -- These are two categories of items which are subject to refund. You have provided time within which an application should be made for one set of items and you have not provided time within which an application should be made for the imported one.
That is all I am asking. If you have any good reason why the time for application for refund is restricted to manufactured goods which are meant for export, then I am all right.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
I hope the Chairman is following the argument he is making.
Mr Avedzi 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the conditions
-- 11:55 a.m.

Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
You have three different categories and you are making provision with regard to time frame, and a particular one of the three categories. What about the others? Is there the need for a time frame or is it necessary for us to make this time frame omnibus?
Mr Avedzi 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, my understanding is that, the three talk about all categories of the refund because subclause (3) says “an application for a refund under this section shall be made within twelve months” --
Mr Avedzi 11:55 a.m.
“…under this twelve months from the date on which the goods are exported or put on board a ship or aircraft on which they are exported”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
You see, that qualification there is what he is talking about.
Mr Avedzi 11:55 a.m.
It means that, the one for home consumption had been taken off this.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Dr Osei --
Dr A. A. Osei 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it looks like the answer to my senior Colleague is embedded in the PNDCL 330 and that if we go there, we would find the time limit. That is why it says under the Act, so it would be found there.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Very well, to make assurance double sure, could we just defer this one, do the cross referencing and be sure that we are on the right track before we can put the Question.
Do you follow me? Hon Chairman, we need to take our time, take a look at the PNDC law being referred to and find out whether it addresses the issue as raised by Hon W. O. Boafo. So we could defer this one, if you agree with me. Yes, let me hear from you.
Mr Avedzi 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, before we defer it, I just want to bring some dimension to it and see if that solves the problem. If you read subclause (2), which talks about the manufactured excise goods, that the person is entitled to a refund of Excise Duty paid on manu- factured excisable goods entered for home
use and subsequently exported. So in this case, it is not home use for consumption but it is entered as home use and subsequently exported. That means that, we do not have any goods that are entered for consumption here because subclause (2), says that: “it is entered as home use but subsequently exported”. That is the point. So, if Hon Boafo could take that on board and see if that solves the problem.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Let me ask one question. It says:
“ a person is entitled to a refund of the excise duty paid on manu- factured excisable goods entered for home use and subsequently exported”.
So, what happens to that which is made for home use and not subsequently exported? What happens to that?
Mr Avedzi 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we have to look at the definition of “entered for home use” in the definition column. If you go to pages 18 and 19, “entered for home use” means:
“(a)in relation to excisable goods imported into the country;
It is not that one so, let us go to page 19 (b):
(b) in relation to excisable goods manufactured in the country, the first removal, other than a removal of those goods from a warehouse.”
So, if you remove the goods from the warehouse, that means you have entered for home use but in relation to subclause 11(2), you remove it from the warehouse which means, entered for home use and subsequently you export it, you qualify for refund.
Dr A. A. Osei 11:55 a.m.
I believe Hon W. O Boafo's question was simply, why was the time limit given under subclause (3) and
the answer is that, for the home one in clause 11 (i), it is described under PNDCL 330 so it does not need to be repeated here. It is placed somewhere not here; that is the answer. Refund, yes --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
I understand you. I have not taken a close look at that provision. If we had a copy here, we would look at it and get that over and done with. But for the avoidance of doubt, and to be on the side of caution, we should just defer it, look at it and get back to the Chamber and then, we would know that, we are on safe grounds.
Hon Chairman, I believe we could defer the Consideration of this one until after we have done the cross referencing then we get back and we would be on safe grounds. We would have to then defer clause 11 and move on to clause 12.
Yes, Hon Majority Chief Whip.
Alhaji Muntaka 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we would crave your indulgence and that of the House to end proceedings now because, we have advertised some Committee works and a lot of people have been invited from outside and it is to inform our work from tomorrow.
So, we would be grateful if we would end proceedings now, to enable those Committees to go and finish up so that tomorrow, we would have Business to carry on in the Chamber. I want to crave your indulgence, if it is in the will of the Chair and Members to end proceedings now.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Very well, in that case, I would require of you to move a particular Motion so that -- But before then, it would then bring us to the end of the Consideration Stage for today.
Having brought Consideration proceedings to a close, I would call on the Majority Chief Whip.
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this House should stand adjourned until tomorrow 10:00 o'clock before noon.
Thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Any seconder?
Mr Augustine Collins Ntim 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I second the Motion for adjournment.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Members, it has been moved and seconded, that this House stands adjourned to tomorrow at 10.00 in the forenoon.
Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, when I entered the Chamber, I was greeted by the Speaker with some words, the import of which was that, I was away from the Chamber yesterday.
Demonstrably, the voice vote shows that, we are prepared to work -- Hear! Hear! May I submit an application that, you really judge or rule by what you heard.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Majority Chief Whip.
Alhaji Muntaka 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I heard the Minority Leader say that, they are ready to work. In fact, we are going to continue working so, they should take the energy to the Committee so that we continue working there.
Thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, the impression I have been given is the fact that, there is some work to be done at Committee level and there is some urgency about the work that has to be done and that is why there is the need for this adjournment at this point in time.
It is not as if this House is being adjourned for Hon Members to go back home. Some Members are going for Committee meetings, which have been advertised in the Order Paper. So, I believe this is the way I want us to look at it.
Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, one of the Clerks -at -the-Table came to explain to me, notwithstanding, you subjected it to an acid test. Mr
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, my problem is to do with the fact that it is this Finance Committee which is spearheading this particular Bill, which would have to be at a Committee meeting. If it were not for that case, I would have succumbed to the voice vote. But as matters stand now, I am in a fix because the Finance Committee needs to meet, deliberate upon certain issues and get back to us tomorrow.
So, having been given this back- ground, Hon Members, I would put the Question again.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT 12:05 p.m.