Debates of 5 Nov 2015

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 12:10 p.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Members, Correction of Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 4th November, 2015.

Hon Members, we do not have any Official Report for correction today, so, we move on to Commencement of Public Business.

Item number 4 on the OrderPaper -- Presentation of Papers.

Hon Majority Chief Whip?
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the House Committee is currently having a meeting on the amendment to the Ghana Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) Commission's Bill. I would want to crave your indulgence and that of the House for a member of the Committee to lay this Paper on behalf of the Chairman.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Who is that Hon Member?
Alhaji Muntaka 12:10 p.m.
Hon Saaka Akati, Member of Parliament for Bole.
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 2:36 p.m.
OFFICIAL REPORT 2:36 p.m.
CONTENTS 2:36 p.m.
PAPERS -- 2:36 p.m.
CONSIDERATION STAGE OF BILLS -- 2:36 p.m.
MOTIONS -- 2:36 p.m.
RESOLUTIONS -- 2:36 p.m.
THE 2:36 p.m.
PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC 2:36 p.m.
OF GHANA 2:36 p.m.
MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 12:10 p.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Members, Correction of Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 4th November, 2015.

Hon Members, we do not have any Official Report for correction today, so, we move on to Commencement of Public Business.

Item number 4 on the OrderPaper -- Presentation of Papers.

Hon Majority Chief Whip?
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the House Committee is currently having a meeting on the amendment to the Ghana Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) Commission's Bill. I would want to crave your indulgence and that of the House for a member of the Committee to lay this Paper on behalf of the Chairman.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Who is that Hon Member?
Alhaji Muntaka 12:10 p.m.
Hon Saaka Akati, Member of Parliament for Bole.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
On behalf of the Chairman of the Committee on Health; Hon Member for Bole?
PAPERS 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Hon Majority Chief Whip, are we taking item number 5?
Alhaji Muntaka 12:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, unfortunately, the Hon Minister and her deputies were here yesterday and they pleaded that this should be taken tomorrow because they would not be around today, they would be out of Accra today.
Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, if we could move straight to item number 11 on the OrderPaper, we would be grateful because most of the Papers are not ready.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Members, Immigration Service Bill, 2015 at the Consideration Stage.
Hon Members, I have been briefed this morning in my lobby by the Leadership with regard to clause 4 of the Bill and the amendments filed in that respect. I have decided to defer the item for further consultation, so that we can take this item as soon as the consultation, is concluded. That is the outcome of the consultation that I did with the Leadership of both sides of the House this morning.
So, Hon Members, we defer clause 4 and move on to the next clause.

Vice Chairman; what is the next clause, please?
Mr Ernest Kofi Yakah 12:10 p.m.
Clause 11, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Very well.
Take your seat and let me be sure.
Have they put the Question on all the clauses between 4 and 10, that is, clauses 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10? Have they already put the Question on those clauses?
Mr Yakah 12:10 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 12:10 p.m.
Very well.
So, Hon Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration do you want to say something -- [Pause] --
Very well.
Hon Members, clause 11.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker to take the Chair.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 12:20 p.m.
STAGE 12:20 p.m.
  • [Resumption of debate from 4/11/ 2015.]
    • Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Hon Members, I have mentioned 11 and if I cannot get anybody on his feet, I will put the Question. That is what the rule says.

    Yes, Hon Member for Wa West?
    Mr Joseph Yileh Chireh 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this morning, the Winnowing Committee agreed that they should withdraw this proposed amendment. This is because what is in the Bill itself is talking about other functions that would be given by the Council or the Comptroller-General.
    They wanted to delete the “Comptroller-General” but we do not think that is appropriate, because these are other functions that the two bodies, either the Council or the Comptroller- General -- So, they should not move the Motion. They should seek leave and withdraw it.
    Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Minister for Employment and Labour Relations.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Sorry. After that, I will come to you, please.
    Mr I. K. Asiamah 12:20 p.m.
    All right. It is just that --
    Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Please, Hon Asiamah, I have called somebody, so wait. I will call you after him.
    Hon Minister?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker to take the Chair.
    Mr Haruna Iddrisu 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
    I believe that clause 11 is about the Council having a Secretary and the Secretary being a person at the rank of an Assistant Commissioner of the Service.
    Mr Speaker, what would be the functions of the Secretary, I do not think it should be accompanying. Just create the Office of a Secretary to the Council and define who qualifies to be Secretary to the Council but not to add in respect of 3 (a) and (b).
    I would think that they should stand down those ones and probably, delete 3 (a) and (b), so that we just create the Office of a Secretary to the Council, who shall by definition, be a person not below the rank of an Assistant Commissioner.
    Thank you.
    Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Hon Minister, the Bill is creating the Office of the Secretary to the Council and once you are creating a statutory office, you must go further to define what it is supposed to do.
    If the Council is the governing board,
    -- 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Agalga 12:20 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    The Council is the governing board. It is.
    Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Very well.
    I am raising this point because of the point raised by the Hon Member for Wa West. Do we agree that we defer this matter for the Committee to come and withdraw it or we should go ahead and take a decision on it?
    I believe that if he is Secretary to the Council, he should take a decision from the Council. That is the best corporate practice.
    Mr Agalga 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we have deliberated upon the issue extensively and I think that given the fact that the Immigration Service itself is a disciplined Service, and also, in view of the fact that the Secretary shall come from within the Service; it would not be out of place to also say that the Secretary would take directives or instructions from the Council as well as the Comptroller-General.
    Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Well, let me hear the Hon Member for Sekondi.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
    Mr Speaker, I do not really appreciate opposition to this amendment. The amendment seeks to delete “or Comptroller- General”.
    If the Comptroller-General is the Chief Executive (CEO) of the Service and we have a Secretary, the Secretary is Secretary to the Council and not Secretary to the Comptroller-General.
    The fact that he is a member of the Service does not mean that he is not subject to directions from the Comptroller- General. But as Secretary, he is not subject to the directions of the Comptroller- General. He is only subject to the directions of the Council.
    He may be an officer with another schedule relating to his Service. With that -- automatically and of course, the Bill itself says ‘‘all Service personnel are subject to the authority of the Comptroller- General.''

    No! I am saying that if we do not delete “Comptroller-General”, we would be having conflicts. What if the Council gives a directive relating to its functions or its decisions and the Comptroller-General decides that this is against his interest and he gives a contrary decision to the Secretary, what should the Secretary do?

    The Council says, “ write this letter” and the Comptroller-General says after that -- Yes, it is a disciplined Service -- “Secretary do not write this letter.”
    Mr Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    There are two options. Once you create the Office of the Secretary in the Bill, the best practice is what the Hon Member for Sekondi is talking about.
    The other way is that, you do not create the office at all. But then, they nominate somebody to perform that function and they can change them as and when they so want. But when you create the Office for the Council, he takes instructions from the Council and not from any other person.
    Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, because you have spoken, sometimes you disable us [Laughter.]
    Mr Speaker, if you look at clause 5, you would have the Chairperson and the Comptroller-General. The Chairperson is obviously not the Comptroller-General. The opposite is also true that you may have a Chairperson colluding with the Secretary, knowing very well that he does not take any instruction from the Comptroller-General.
    This is because it is a disciplined society; it is not like the ordinary boards where -- if it is a disciplined society, you may have problems because he is directly an officer under the Comptroller- General.
    Now, we are going to have a Secretary who takes no instruction from the Comptroller-General in his duties. [Interruption]-- Yes, I know.
    In his function as his Secretary, -- if you have a Chairperson of the Board who has a very close working relationship with the Comptroller-General, you would give him problems.
    Mr Speaker, an example is what happened at the National Health Insurance Authority. It was a similar problem that created the problem that we have.
    So, if we have the Board Chairman and the Secretary, who have no relationship in terms of authority with the Comptroller- General, would it create problems for him? That is the other side of it.
    Now, they are a disciplined society; how then do we control it? We may assume that there would not be problems. But if --
    Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    Hon Deputy Minority Leader, the way to cure the argument you are making is not to locate it here. If he is a member of the Service, he is subject to
    other rules of the Service in terms of command and control. But as far as the Secretary to a Council is concerned, I do not see why the --
    Hon Member for Nkoranza North? Then I will come to the Hon Avoka.

    Maj. Derek Oduro (retd): Mr Speaker, this ding dong battle would not help us. Yesterday, we deferred this same clause. We went on and considered it. The same thing happened and we said we would consider it in the Chamber. Though reluctantly, we said we should let the word “comptroller” stand. I think we all agreed that one cannot have a Secretary to the Council who would at the same time perform the functions of a Comptroller- General.

    The Comptroller-General is a member of the Council. Therefore, whatever decision the Council takes binds him. So, if later, we should leave this as it is now and the Comptroller-General gives contrary instructions to the Secretary and the Secretary complies, it would undermine the Council. So, I think that we should delete the “Comptroller-General ”, to stand as ‘‘any other function by the Council.''
    Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    Before I call the Hon Deputy Minister for the Interior, let me hear from the Hon Avoka.
    Mr Cletus A. Avoka 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that the amendment is relevant and appropriate, and the Hon Member for Sekondi has said it all. The Secretary is responsible to the Council. The Comptroller-General has its own secretariat that serves him. So, I think the Secretary of the Council should not also be responsible to the Comptroller- General. Otherwise, there would be

    conflict who he is responsible to -- the Council or the Comptroller General who is superior? So the amendment is appropriate and must stand.
    Mr Agalga 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to associate myself with the views expressed by the Hon Avoka and Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah. The amendment as proposed should stand.
    Mr Speaker, the fact even remains that the Comptroller-General is a member of the Council, and when the Council directs collectively, he is part and parcel of it. So, there would be no problem.
    Mr Speaker 12:30 p.m.
    The last comment before I put the Question.
    Mr Chireh 12:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
    If you look at the operating words in subclause 11(3) (b), it says:
    “Perform any other function that the Council or the Comptroller-General may direct”.
    The emphasis is on “any other function”, and not the function as a Secretary per se, and that accords with what the argument that is outside the function as a Secretary -- the Comptroller-General can direct him to do some other things because he is a member of the Council.
    However, I am saying that if one does not put the emphasis on “any other function” but just leave it as “function of the Secretary”. This is where the deletion would be necessary. But once one says “any other function”, it means that outside the function as a Secretary, one can direct the Secretary to do any other thing. That is the emphasis I would want to make.
  • [MR SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER IN THE CHAIR.]
    • Mr H. Iddrisu 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to seek your leave and it is for the purpose of consistency to amend it to read:
    “The Minister may give policy directives to the Council and the Council shall comply”
    Against what we have here which reads:
    “The Minister may give directives to the Council on matters of policy and the Council shall comply”.
    Mr Speaker, it is just that the drafts- persons should look through and see how we have always got this particular aspect of a Bill done, so that when the Minister is giving directives, as we are aware, it must be a matter of policy, in order not to have Ministers interfering with the day- to-day activities and actions of the Service.
    Mr Speaker, can we improve the rendition in respect of that?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Yieleh Chireh?
    Mr Chireh 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I support the amendment. This is because, in most of our laws, we always put “policy directives”, but we do not leave it as “directives”. Otherwise, there would be interference. But a policy, which is Government policy directive would guide all the operations. So, the word “policy” should be added.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    So, what are you suggesting? What is the new rendition you are suggesting?
    Mr Chireh 12:35 p.m.
    I am suggesting:
    “The Minister may give policy directives to the Council on matters
    …”
    No! It is already there. There is no need. The matter of policy is already there.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Avoka?
    Mr Avoka 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is a drafting matter and I think that the issue has been captured succinctly in the Bill --
    “The Minister may give directives to the Council on matters of policy and the Council shall comply.”
    I do not see any mischief in this. So, I think what is already in the Bill should be retained. The amendment proposed does not cure any defect in the substance of the Bill. I think that it should be retained as such.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Iddrisu, I do not know whether I should put the Question on your amendment because you do not seem to be gaining any support.
    Mr H. Iddrisu 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have heard the former Minister for the Interior retort that it is unnecessary. I am saying we are creating and establishing a Service.
    We know that Hon Ministers are responsible for policies. Therefore, any directives that are given must relate to policy. I thought that qualifying the word “directives” earlier-- The Minister may give policy directives. That is why I said “for the purpose of consistency”. In other legislations, we can draft --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon H. Iddrisu, this is not --
    Mr Chireh 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am pleading with the Hon Member to withdraw whatever he attempted to amend. This is , because the issue is that the “policy” at the end qualifies it. Whether you place it before or at the end, the effect is the same.
    Now, I do not think that we need to tamper what has been provided. So, I would beg him to withdraw his amendment.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Now, I will put the Question on Hon Iddrisu's proposed amendment.
    Question put and amendment negatived.
    Clause 13 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    I believe that this is not the first time we are doing this policy directive clause. It is in almost every law, which is in the Public Service. So, perhaps, the draftsperson, for consistency, would do it according to the way we have done it in other laws.
    Clause 14 -- The Comptroller-General
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 14 (1) is a matter of drafting but there should be in line 1, a comma after “shall” and in line 2, and another comma after “Constitution”.
    Mr E. K. Yakah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 16, Headnote, delete “Comptroller” and insert “Comptroller”
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Both are the same. Or there is a difference? [Pause]
    It is not the Chairman's fault. It should not have been advertised.
    Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, he is the acting Chairman. But I do not understand this amendment -- delete “Comptroller' and insert “Comptroller'”. What does it mean? Unless it is a mistake.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    It is a mistake.
    Mr Agalga 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is a mistake. If you look at clause 16 as it appears on the Bill, the heading is “Deputy Comptroller- General”. What the amendment seeks to do is to add an “s” so that it reads: “Deputy Comptrollers-General”.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, even this amendment is unnecessary. The position is “Deputy Comptroller-General”;
    except that there would be three persons of the same rank. So, we refer to them as “Deputy Comptrollers-General” but the office or position is “Deputy Comptroller- General” just like the Office of the Deputy Speakers. It is First Deputy Speaker but they are two. So, it is plural.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Haruna Iddrisu, then the Minority Leader.
    Mr H. Iddrisu 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I take it from the Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah but I would suggest that we take clauses 16 and 17 together. And to appreciate it better, it is argued further in clause 17 or provided that:
    ”There shall be a Deputy Comptroller-General for Finance and Administration; Command Post and Operations; Legal Research and Monitoring”.
    So Mr Speaker, I think that even in clause 16, we should collapse clause 17, to say that we are creating Deputy Comptroller-General for Finance and Administration for Command Post and Operations and Legal Research and Monitoring, so that we could do it under one clause.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would beg to disagree with my Hon Colleague, the Hon Member for Sekondi and even the Hon Member for Tamale South on this.
    Mr Speaker, I believe it is for the avoidance of doubt, so that nobody comes and collapses all these offices into one, to say that he or she is appointing one Deputy Comptroller-General. It is for such a purpose that we have this provision.
    Mr Speaker, I would also point out to my Hon Colleague, the Member for Sekondi that the example that he even gave rather strengthens the case against his own argument. This is because in the Constitution, article 96 provides for Deputy Speakers and not a Deputy Speaker. So, I would think that just for the avoidance of doubt, we add the “s”.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, I was just wondering the first leg of your suggestion, that somebody could collapse the office into one. When you look at the text itself, it says that:
    “The President in accordance with article 195 of the Constitution appoint three Deputy Comptrollers- General.”
    The number is stated in the body. So, you cannot use the headnote to collapse the thing into one, especially having regard to the Temptation Act, 2009, Act 792, section 15, which reads: “The Effect of Headnotes. Headnotes or headings as against the text. So, you cannot say that because the heading is “Comptroller- General” without an “s”, in spite of the fact that the body says it should be three, you are using the headnote or the heading to interpret the body.
    You divided your point into two. If I was ruling, I would have ruled against you in respect of the first one but the second one is alright. So, it is a draw. Your arguments have drawn one-one. This is because Deputy Speakers, of course -- The Constitution says “Deputy Speakers”. I agree with you.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:40 p.m.
    Absolutely. Mr Speaker, you are indicating to me that one limp of the argument is strong and
    the other limp is wobbling. So, is it limping or wobbling? I think we equalise and get to ground zero [Laughter] -- But the example the Hon Member for Sekondi gave does not sit. So, I am using the weakness of his argument to justify my own -- [Laughter.]
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    You are using the weakness of his case to strengthen your case? [Laughter.]
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    Absolutely, Mr Speaker.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:50 p.m.
    When he has no case at all.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    I have a case -- [Laughter] -- His own argument is flawed.
    General
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    So, we should not add the “s” or we should?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think it does not cause any damage.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    If we add it or do not add it?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:50 p.m.
    If we delete the “s”.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    I will put the Question. The amendment as advertised does not change anything. The Hon Member proposed that we add an “s”. So, I will put a Question on proposition.
    The Question is “Deputy Comptroller- General” should read “Deputy Comptrollers- General”.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Is it the strength of the “Noes” or the number of people who shout “No”? This is not a headcount. So, I am listening. If I listened well, then the “Noes” were stronger than the “Ayes”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 16 as amended stands part of the Bill.
    Clause 17 -- Functions of a Deputy Comptroller-General
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Yes?
    Mr Yakah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 17, subclause (1), paragraph (a), at end, add “or”.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Where should we add the “or”? I will make this point with respect to the Leadership. I do not know who controls -- that this “or”, “are” and commas. Should it be --
    Hon Kobina T. Hammond, I thought you wanted to --
    Mr Kobina T. Hammond 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am sorry. I was trying to draw the attention of the Clerk to an important issue.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    I do not know your view, whether we should --
    Hon Minority Leader “or” “are” and commas. Are they words we should be amending?
    Yes, Hon Ahmed Ibrahim?
    Mr Ahmed Ibrahim 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, yesterday, you mandated us to go for winnowing on clause 17 and we had a different view. It was that we should do
    away with this. However, the Hon Yieleh Chireh has a further amendment , which he will propose on clause 17. That was the view of the Committee.
    So, the Chairman should do away with that for the Hon Yieleh Chireh to give the current rendition by the Committee.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, amendments deal with substance. These are drafting matters, whether there should be “or” or “are” or whatever. So, for us to come and debate on whether after a “semi colon”, there should be “or”. I do not think they should be a subject matter of a debate. It is drafting; it does not change the meaning -- [Interruption] -- No! I am talking about the amendment proposed.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Yieleh Chireh?
    Mr Chireh 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, when we looked at clause 17 during winnowing, if you look at it, really, we are creating directorates and not functions.
    Therefore, I had made an earlier written amendment to the Committee, which was not considered. Unfortunately, I do not have the text now. What we agreed on was that, we stand down the whole of clause 17 for the proper thing to be done. This is because in that one, we would create three directorates. After the creation of the directorates, the subclause would appoint the Deputy Comptrollers- General to fill these positions.
    If you look at the headnote, it talks about functions of the Deputy Com- ptroller-General. That is not the purpose here. The purpose is to create directorates. I believe that we should stand it down and get the proper thing done.
    The amendment which was earlier proposed by the Hon Member -- as the Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah said, these are directives that we should give to the draftspersons.What we agreed on again this morning was that we should not even put the “or” anywhere again until paragraph (c). After paragraph (c), we either say “or” or “and”.
    It should not be the case that after every -- What they are saying is that, for example, “Command Posts and Operations or “Legal, Research…”
    No! The “or” is the last thing. Really, this is a really directive to the drafts- persons should not stand as substantive provisions.
    Earlier, what I said was that, we need to have the directorates created, then the appointments made under a subclause.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah and then Hon Haurna Iddrisu?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am involving you in the debate. But you despite the fact that these Bills are supposed to be drafted by the Attorney- General's Office --
    We have been talking about Winno- wing Committee -- I do not know. I do not see the draftsperson's representative here. Is she here?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Yes.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:50 p.m.
    I do not know whether she attends the Winnowing Committee meetings or whatever. It is important.
    The Winnowing Committee is a practice of the House and it helps particularly, where we have many
    amendments. But it seems as if when we seem not to have an agreement, then we say “winnowing committee.”
    There are prospective amendments that the Hon Member for Wa West said he was proposing. It is a substantial amendment, in the sense that it also deals with whether it is the policy rationale to create directorates. So, I understand that. The Hon Deputy Minister is here, if he can help us, that will be fine.
    If despite his explanation, the House believes that, we should create directorates by statute, we can also deal with that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Haruna Iddrisu?
    Mr H. Iddrisu 12:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, probably, if the Hon Yieleh Chireh had listened to my earlier argument, we would have come to the same conclusion.
    Mr Speaker, with all due respect, we cannot take clause 16 away from clause
    17.
    For instance, headnote -- functions of Deputy Comptroller-General. Mr Speaker, we are not talking about functions, we are talking about responsibility. We are talking about the fact that we want Deputy Comptrollers- General in charge of Finance and Administration, Command Post and Operations and Legal and Research and Monitoring.
    Mr Speaker, with respect, l beg to read clause 17 (2) 12:50 p.m.
    “A Deputy Comptroller-General appointed for purposes of paragraph (c)…
    That refers to the one responsible for legal, research and monitoring; he shall have a legal background.
    Mr Speaker, with respect, l beg to read clause 17 (2) 12:50 p.m.


    If I may ask, what about Finance and Administration? What background must he have? Are we not to define that he must have a requisite qualification in finance and accounting? This is precisely the reason I said that, maybe, Mr Speaker, you should direct that the draftspersons should look at clauses 16 and 17 after you have put the Question.

    The intendment is that we want to create three Deputy Director- General portfolios. One will be responsible for Finance and Administration; if we want to define the qualification, we could do so.

    Mr Speaker, in your ruling, when you referred to the matter of Hon Mr Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu and Papa Owusu- Ankomah, there is a recent Supreme Court ruling that says headnotes are guide to interpretation. Therefore, even this debate, I recall one Hon Member mentioned it here. Parliamentary debates have also become a guide to interpre- tation.

    Therefore, as we debate now, whatever we are saying today, will guide any Judge in determining what the wisdom and intention of Parliament was when it created that particular position.

    I would maintain that clauses 16 and 17 be collapsed into one; we should get the policy intention as the Hon Member said. What are we creating? A Deputy Comptroller-General in charge of Finance and Administration. What qualification does it require?

    Mr Speaker, otherwise, tomorrow, we might have a Comptroller-General who chooses to just take away the person responsible for Finance, throw him at Command Post and take the one at Command Post and send him to the other position. No! We should define them and all of these must come with the specific qualification to which the person must

    have to occupy any of these three portfolios.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    I would want to ask Hon Haruna Iddrisu about the Supreme Court decision that he talked about -- You said there was a recent Supreme Court's decision? Can he assist us with the title?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not trying to contest your directives but it would seem as if your question may be quite oppressive -- [Laughter.] You may direct the Clerk-at-the-Table to ask him to come and lay it at a later date, that is, if there was really a judgement like that. It may have been an obiter of something or whatever.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Hon Owusu-Ankomah, I asked this question because I was told that there was this lawyer who would say that ‘‘there is a recent Supreme Court decision'' and because of his stature, when he says it, nobody challenges him until one day he was asked what this recent Supreme Court decision was and he was all over the place.
    I am not challenging. I know Hon Haruna Iddrisu is a man of honour and integrity. So, I am asking him what the recent Supreme Court decision is. The Hon Minority Leader would want to know, so that he can use it.
    Hon Iddrisu, it is all right.
    Please, what Hon Haruna Iddrisu is said is worth thinking of. I am minded to defer clause 17 for two reasons. If I may just give two suggestions.
    First of all, I wonder why nobody talked about the five years at the Bar. We all know that seniority at the Bar is 10 years; I do not know whether you would
    Mr Agalga 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we pray that we take the Question and after that, we refer the matter to the draftsperson to tidy it up for us.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    The draftsperson cannot insert a qualification for the Director of Finance. Tidying up cannot be as to substance, unless of course, you disagree with Hon Haruna Iddrisu. However, the question whether there should be a clause that the Director of Finance should also have the requisite experience, cannot be done by the draftsperson.
    Mr Agalga 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in practice, there is no way the appointing authority will appoint somebody without any background in Finance to occupy the position of Deputy Comptroller-General in- charge of Finance and Administration.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Why do we have the law then? Why do we have a whole subclause on a lawyer. Is it because it was drafted by lawyers? Why? In practice, by the same token, nobody will
    appoint a Deputy Comptroller-General for Legal who is not a lawyer. So, why do we have clause 17 (2)?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that in clause 17, the proposal by Hon Yieleh Chireh really is a policy matter. So, the Hon Deputy Minister may help us, whether his Ministry agrees with that position.
    I do not think that we should create a directorate for those three positions. We could simply say that a Deputy Comptroller- General shall be appointed to be incharge for each of the portfolios and then we can go on. However, to encumber ourselves by saying that we would have to create a directorate, that will be a policy decision and that advice should come from the Ministry.
    I am aware that on occasions when policies have been brought to this House, for convenience and whatever reasons, we have engineered to have an Hon Member move a Motion to even upset the policy direction contained in the Memorandum that had come from the Ministry to this House. However, we should be cautious.
    I have always argued about that. If it is a matter of policy, the direction should come from the Ministry and not from the House. Mr Speaker, that has always been my consistent opinion. I think that we do not need to create directorates; we can have a formulation to encompass the principle being espoused by Hon Yieleh Chireh.
    Mr Avoka 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, more specifically on this issue, I wanted to make an intervention in respect of clause 17 (1) (d) since we are on clause 17 now.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Before you come in, Hon Patrick Boamah?
    Mr Patrick Y. Boamah 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I tend to agree with the Hon Minority Leader's position. Mr Speaker, even if you go into our Constitution, for the appointment of Ministers, there are certain portfolios which are specifically mentioned in the Constitution. But when it comes to others, the Constitution is silent on them. It is reserved to the President to do so. So if the President appoints the three deputies without specific portfolios mentioned, I believe that is the way to go.
    Secondly, on Hon Haruna Iddrisu's suggestion that we collapse clauses 16 and 17, I beg to disagree. If you look at clauses 14 and 15, the office of the Comptroller-General is created; his functions are also spelt out under clause 15. If you go to clause 16, the appointing procedure is what is set out and their functions are set out under clause 17.
    So, if you would want us to collapse and merge those two clauses, there will be a problem. How are we going to infuse the appointing procedure as set out under article 195 and also add the functions of those officers? In my view, we have to take a look at it and also let it stand.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    I will put the Question. I am just a servant of the House and the sense I get is that, the majority are eager for the Question to be put.
    Mr Ahmed Ibrahim 1 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was going to buy into the proposal of the Hon Minority Leader. However, Hon Yieleh Chireh has a very crucial issue in reference to that. So, if you will give him the chance to contribute.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
    Hon Yieleh Chireh has expressed his views. He said that we should defer, so that he brings his paper. Not one Hon Member
    supported him; he seems to be the lone voice crying in the wilderness. Hon Yieleh Chireh, let us see if you will get anybody to support you.
    Mr Chireh 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 20 has already created a directorate. The ambiguity is about the appointment in clause 17. If we say that “Each Deputy Comptroller-General appointed in accordance with section 16 is responsible for …” What is he responsible for? Invariably, we are talking about each Deputy Comptroller-General.
    Clause 20 already creates the division and the directorates. So, we should specify that clauses 16 and 17 which are going to be collapsed are about the appointment. In that case, you say that the Deputy Comptroller-General for Finance and Administration -- one for this specifically.
    As it is now, there is an ambiguity.The policy decision has already been made and in clause 20, where the Directorate of the Service consists of the Comptroller- General and the three Deputy Comptroller- Generals.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Yieleh Chireh, this is like the Speaker -- Speakership discussion. The Speaker is one. He and his two deputies have been described collectively as the Speakership. Is that the word Leader and Leadership?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was just going to make the same point and to emphasise that, even the clause 20 is absolutely unnecessary. It is like creating Speakership; what is Speaker- ship? Directorate of the Service? It is most unnecessary.
    I just realised that this is coming from the Chairman, that we delete clause 20. That labour was in vain.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Cletus Avoka and then Hon Atta Akyea? --[Interruption.]
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it appears to me that clause 17 (1) (d) has administrative and policy challenges as it is contained in the Bill. Mr Speaker, with your kind permission, I beg to read:
    “Any other function that Comp- troller-General, in consultation with the Council, may assign”.
    Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, these are deputies under the Comptroller- General. He does need to consult the Board before he assigns them certain responsibilities or assignments. He does not need to consult the Board because they work under him and at any material time, if it is expedient for him to do so, he would invite any one of them and give him assignments to do.
    Certainly, the Board should also have authority, without passing through the Comptroller-General, to give assignment to the deputies depending on the exigencies of the situation.
    In my humble view, Mr Speaker, the rendition could read as follows:
    “Any other functions that the Comptroller-General or the Board may assign to them.”

    No! “Any other function that the Comptroller-General in consultation with the Council.” It is the “consultation” that I am talking about. The “consultation” should not come in.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    You have proposed two things?
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    The first one is that --
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    The Comptroller-General does not need to consult the Board or the Council before he assigns to his deputies certain responsibilities.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Yes, this is because he works with them --
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    They are working under him.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    The Council meets every three months --
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    That is the first proposal.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    And the second one is that --
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    The Board or the Council should be able to give them certain directives or certain assignments without necessarily passing it through the Comptroller-General.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Would that not undermine --
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    If the Comptroller-General is the subject matter of the discussion, they do not need to pass the issue through him to the deputies.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Will that undermine the whole governance structure if the Board is to give directions to the deputies?
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    We know that the Council members are experienced, knowledgeable people and they would not just by-pass the Comptroller-General and give assignments. However, there are some peculiar situations where it may be expedient to deal with a deputy rather than pass through the Comptroller-General if he is the subject matter of a particular issue.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    If he is the subject matter, since he has been appointed by the President, it is the President who would remove him. I said, clause 16 gives the President the power to appoint.
    I think there is a saying that the person who has the power to appoint, has the power to remove. Therefore, if it is something concerning the Comptroller- General -- Sorry, it is not clause 16; it is clause 14. It gives the President the power to appoint the Comptroller-General.
    If the issue involves the President, it is the President who would act, not his deputies.
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    Not the issue concerning the President. I am talking about the Comptroller-General or --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Any other thing. No problem.
    Hon Atta Akyea?
    Mr Samuel Atta Akyea 1:10 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    I would wish to depart from the position of my good Hon Colleague and then address the qualification of the deputy Comptroller-General.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    There are so many proposed amendments.
    Let me start taking the proposed amendments one by one, then I will come to you. That was why they asked which Question I was going put? This is because there are a multitude of -- I will come back to you.
    Mr Atta Akyea 1:10 p.m.
    Very well.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    Hon Avoka, in the first amendment, you suggested that we should delete “in consultation with the Council” in clause 17 (1) (d), so that it reads,
    “Any other function that the Comptroller-General may assign”.
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    Yes, he does not need to consult the Board before he assigns his deputies --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    That is the first amendment that you are proposing.
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    That is the first proposal.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    All right. That is the proposal that we are discussing now. I just want to know whether everybody is on the same page as he is. Hon Avoka is saying that in clause 17 (1) (d), which states:
    “Any other function that the Comptroller-General, in consulta- tion with Council may assign . . .”
    Should now read:
    “Any other function that the Comptroller-General may assign”.
    We should delete “in consultation with the Council”
    Do we want to take them together or we should take them one after the other? Let us organise this; the first one he is proposing is that, we take out “in consultation with”.
    The second one he is proposing is that, the Council too can give the main directions without reference to the Comptroller-General. So, let us take the first one, then we take the second one. This is because the second one is “Any other function that the Comptroller- General may be assigned by the Council.” “Any other function that the Council may assign.”
    We are dealing with the Deputy Comptroller-Generals. So, (d) is, “any other function that the Comptroller- General may assign.” Then there will be (e), “any other function that the Council may assign.”
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I get the impression that the difficulty of -- I do not know whether he is “available Chairman” -- [Laughter].
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the difficulty of Hon Avoka is with the phrase “in consultation with”. So, he says that we should delete “in consultation with” and in its place, substitute ‘or'. So, it would read: “Any other function that the Comptroller-General or the Council may assign.” I think that is what he is saying?
    I am saying that in effect, your amendment is to delete the words “in consultation with” and in their place, we insert “or” so that, the new rendition would be “Any other function that the Comptroller-General or the Council may assign.” That is what you are saying?
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    I entirely agree with you. I think it makes sense.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:10 p.m.
    This labyrin- thine kind of argument, I could not understand.
    Mr Avoka 1:10 p.m.
    I think that is quite perfect. I entirely agree with you.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    So, I will put the Question on that proposed amendment.
    Question put and amendment agreed.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
    This is one occasion I wish I was voting. This is because with the Council assigning straight to Deputy Comptroller-General - I do not know. You have agreed; I am just a servant of the House doing your bidding.
    I thought that every time, it should pass through the Comptroller-General. He is the boss.
    Anyway, let us proceed.
    Yes, Hon Atta Akyea, do you have another proposal?
    The new rendition of (d) is “Any other function that the Comptroller-General or the Council may assign.”
    Mr Atta Akyea 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I wish to propose an amendment, that given the positions -- Finance and Administration, Command Post Operations, Legal, Research and Monitoring -- those who qualify should be seniors at the Bar.
    Mr Atta Akyea 1:20 p.m.
    It is like the person might be a bit inexperienced for such a high office of a Deputy Comptroller- General.
    Mr Speaker, I propose that the Deputy Comptroller-General appointed for purposes of paragraph (c), of subsection (c), shall be “a Legal Practitioner who is of at least, 10 years standing at the Bar.”
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Atta Akyea, why did you choose 10 years, please? Why not six or seven years?
    Mr Atta Akye a 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is because of what is at stake and the issue of seniority. It is known generally that, in matters of seniority, we talk about a minimum of ten years.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    That is the point I will like to clear.
    Mr Atta Akyea 1:20 p.m.
    A minimum of 10 years is what would qualify someone as a senior member.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    I will recognise Hon Muntaka.
    Alhaji Muntaka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in rational terms, the suggestions by my Hon Colleague, Hon Atta Akyea would have been excellent. However, he seems to have forgotten the other leg, where we might have an Immigration Officer who has been in the Service for long, and as a mature student, decides to go to the Law School.
    The person might then have experience in immigration issues and he would also have a legal background. Therefore, when we make it 10 years, what is likely to happen is that, all the mature persons who have gone to do law at an older age and have been in the Service for long would be counted out.
    I can assure my Hon Colleague that, even if he were the one person to make that decision, one of the things that he would definitely consider would be that, if the Officer is in the Service with just, five years' experience, he would not select him to serve that purpose.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Muntaka, you have shown me that the rules of natural justice are very important. We have to hear both sides of the story.
    I telegraphed this amendment and I totally agree with Hon Atta Akyea. However, after you spoke, I think I now agree with you. -- [Laughter].
    The rule of natural justice. Mr Speaker is now swaying from left to right.
    I will put the Question. [Laughter].
    Hon Atta Akyea, I would have agreed with you, but when Hon Muntaka added the experience, I think your 10 years is now --
    Mr Atta Akyea 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, have you changed your mind? It is not about experience as an Immigration Officer. It is
    about legal research and so, you could see that the (c) is qualified. If a person has been around for a long time but he is not a lawyer, he can comfortably be in the finance and administration --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Atta Akyea, do not worry, I am not voting and so, you do not have to persuade me. All my comments are obiter, if we are looking at the rule of law.
    Continue.
    Mr Akyea 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my point is that, we are talking about Head of Legal, Research and Monitoring. When it is legal, then we cannot import amateur to head it.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Are you suggesting five years is an amateur?
    Mr Atta Akyea 1:20 p.m.
    Yes. Mr Speaker, certainly. You are reveling the ropes. Five years at the Bar, to be incharge of the head of a legal outfit.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Atta Akyea, did you not open your firm at five years at the Bar?
    Mr Atta Akyea 1:20 p.m.
    No, Mr Speaker. It was 10 years. I could not have done so. So, for Legal, Research and Monitoring, I think we should raise the bar a bit. Five years minimum is too low for comfort.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think with five years at the Bar, one is even qualified to be a Circuit Court Judge.
    A person with the status of a Circuit Court Judge should be able to discharge his duties as Head of Legal, Research and Monitoring at the Immigration Service. So, five years is very good.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    If I understand Hon Muntaka, he agrees to Hon Atta Akyea except that, if the person has experience in immigration as well, then we would be prepared to make it five years.
    This means that if somebody has no experience in immigration, he would not agree to the five years. From what I deduced from Hon Muntaka, five years' experience is acceptable.
    Alhaji Muntaka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the challenge is that, it is not only as a legal head. It is Legal, Research and Monitoring. The person would be using his legal knowledge as an add on. The person will necessarily be an Immigration Officer for some number of years.
    Hon O.B. Amoah -- rose --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Yes, Hon O.B. Amoah?
    Hon Osei Bonsu Amoah: Mr Speaker, the clause as it stands now is too open. The Board can decide to recruit somebody who is just five years at the Bar to head the department and nothing would stop the Board from doing that.
    Indeed, if we want to agree that, when the person has experience in the Service and he has gone to read law, he can combine, then we should specify. As it stands now, anybody who is five years at the Bar can head the place and nothing would stop him.
    If we are saying that the person is already in the Immigration Service, he has spent fifteen years there, he has gone to read law and he is now five years at the Bar, so they could ask him to head the legal department, we may understand.
    However, as it is now, anybody with five years experience can head the Legal Department of the Immigration Service. And I do not think that is the proper thing. Five years?
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Avoka?
    Mr Avoka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as it is stated in the Bill now, I do not think that it is very appropriate. I know that it provides here that, at least, it should be five years; that is the minimum. Yes, but I think we can modify it and say that it is the “minimum requirement to be qualified”. I think that it would be more appropriate to take somebody who is more senior than five years because of the position he should occupy -- Deputy Comptroller- General.
    Five years at the Bar, as Hon O. B. Amoah said, somebody might say, by the provision of the law, he or she is qualified, because he or she is five years at the Bar. The person might not be a staff; he comes and he rises to that high level, I think it is a mischief. Laws are made to take care of some of these imbalances.
    Therefore, we must make the provision that, where the applicant is already a staff, and he or she has five years tenure at the Bar, he/she qualifies. That takes care of those who have already risen through the ranks who are knowledgeable and experienced in immigration matters and the law. We can take care of that.
    However, for a young practitioner who is five years at the Bar and who is not a member of the Immigration Service, to qualify for this position, I think that it will not augur well for the administration of the Service.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Avoka, how many years are you at the Bar, please?
    Mr Avoka 1:20 p.m.
    At the Bar? I? -- [Laughter].
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Yes.
    MrAvoka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with the exception of Hon W. O. Boafo, I have no equal here -- [Laughter].
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Member, how many years?
    Mr Avoka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, from 1978. So, I am 37 years at the Bar.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Congratulations.
    Mr Avoka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am 37 years at the Bar. I was a lawyer before some one or two Hon Members in this august House were born.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Avoka, I am informed that you are over qualified even for the Supreme Court.
    Mr Avoka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, exactly so.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    If you apply for this job, they would not give it to you. This is because it requires five years and you are 37 years at the Bar. -- [Laughter].
    Mr Avoka 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on a more serious note, I think that we should try to look at it more soberly. We can even consult the technical people. Otherwise, we are making a dangerous law where some young man can become a Deputy Comptroller-General. This is because he is five years at the Bar. -- [Interruptions].
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    Hon Amoako Attah, I will recognise you. But first, let me recognise Hon Asiamah.
    Mr Isaac K. Asiamah 1:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, just that my senior Colleague mentioned that, he was called to the Bar before some of us were born in 1978. I would want him to mention those people who --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
    It was before you were born. -- [Laughter].
    Yes, Hon Amoaka-Attah?
    Mr I. K. Asiamah 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was born before 1978 and so, it is not true.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Were you born in 1977 -- [Laughter.]
    Yes, Hon Amoaka-Attah?
    Mr Amoako-Attah 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to take it from what Hon Muntaka said. He based his argument on two legs. One, the number of years that the person might have had at the Bar. In his opinion, that might not be of too much significance, provided the person is a serving officer and that combined experience should be enough for the person to hold that high office?
    Mr Speaker, I would want to draw the House's attention to a practice which has gone on for a very long time, particularly with the Immigration Service, that the President has been appointing even the head of Immigration from outside of the Service. In most cases, we even see police officers heading that institution. So, it defeats that argument. This is because if you look at article 195 of the Constitution, in line with what we are discussing, the President has the prerogative to appoint the Comptroller- General and the deputies. And we cannot guarantee that the President in his own wisdom cannot appoint from outside.
    If he appoints from outside, it means that the person would not have the requisite immigration experience unless we take steps to stop that practice. I would be an advocate for that, that whatever authority the President has to appoint an outsider to head the Immigration Service in our country, I think the time has come that it must stop and that professionals
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Derek Oduro, how long does it take you to become a Major in the Army?
    Maj. Oduro (retd): Mr Speaker, it took me nine years.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    So, if you had stayed, how many years would you make to be a Colonel?
    Maj. Oduro (retd): Mr Speaker, from Major, you could be even promoted the following year to Colonel.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    They are talking about their trade; it is their trade.
    Maj. Oduro (retd): Mr Speaker, that is the reason I am saying that somebody can even specialise as an immigration lawyer.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    No! In their trade, even if you have a Ph.D in a particular area of law, you have to be ten
    years at the Bar before you are recognised as a senior. That is what they are saying and I understand what you are saying. But they are talking about the nuances of their trade and are of the view that, for you to head the Legal Department, you must be a senior at the Bar. Because being a senior at the Bar, has consequences as Hon K. T. Hammond would tell you.
    In the United Kingdom, they have silk gowns but there are qualifications; it is like being a junior officer and a senior officer in the Army. Your ability to go to the Mess or the ability to go somewhere and do certain things; that is what they are saying. That being a senior at the Bar comes with certain -- the Director of Immigration, Deputy Comptroller-General of Immigration goes to court and he is sitting in court for the whole day because he is a junior at the Bar. All the seniors would come and hear their cases before him.
    Hon K. T. Hammond, seniority at the Bar comes with something. Does it not?
    Mr K. T. Hammond 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, take it again?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    I said seniority at the Bar comes with something. Does it not?
    Mr K. T. Hammond 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it actually comes with a red badge with your name specifically embossed on it, showing the level. That is when you have not become a Queen's Counsel (QC) yet, to show how close you are to becoming a QC, you are entitled to what we call a red bag. Not a blue badge; a blue badge is for the little boys who have just started.
    I take on board entirely, the argument that to become a person of that stature, you have to be a senior at the Bar but I am just wondering if anything below five years or six years, you cannot be
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Thank you.
    Dr Kojo Appiah-Kubi 1:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I just would like to understand the need for that person to occupy that position to be a legal practitioner.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Appiah Kubi, I will not allow you to ask that question.
    The Deputy Comptroller-General, Legal must be a lawyer; he must be a lawyer. You cannot practise law --
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:30 p.m.
    I am not against being a lawyer but what I am talking about is that he is also going to do research and not --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Appiah-Kubi, if you have a Director, Research and Monitoring, he does not have to be a lawyer; if you have a Director, Legal, Research and Monitoring, Medical, Accounting -- if you add all, once the “Legal” is there, he has to be a lawyer.
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:30 p.m.
    Good.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, you must be a lawyer, qualified to practise in Ghana before you can --
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:30 p.m.
    - A lawyer with ten years experience?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    That is another issue. [Interruption.]
    Hon Appiah-Kubi, as far as the years at the Bar are concerned, I agree with you that you can disagree with them, but I think that to be a Director, Legal, you must be a lawyer, even though there are other things.
    Yes, so you can disagree -- Let me give you the opportunity to finish -- with the years, you can talk about that, you can disagree.
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:30 p.m.
    I would want to go along the lines of Hon Muntaka, that somebody could be -- [Interruption] -- I am not against lawyers, please. I am not. But it appears that there are too many lawyers in the House who seem to be -- [Interruption.]
    Papa OwusuAnkomah 1:30 p.m.
    — rose --
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:30 p.m.
    Oh, you are also a lawyer, so you will always speak on behalf of lawyers. [Laughter.]
    Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah is up on his feet.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Is it a point of order?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:30 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member 's conduct is contrary to our Standing Orders. He is engaged in a debate with an Hon Colleague instead of addressing you.
    Hon Member for Atwima Kwanwoma, Dr Appiah-Kubi, formerly of National Development Planning Commission (NDPC) [Laughter.].
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
    Hon Dr Appiah Kubi -- sorry -- Is it Dr or Professor? [Laughter]
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:30 p.m.
    It is Doctor.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    It is Doctor. Sorry, Hon Dr Appiah-Kubi, have you finished, please?
    Dr Appiah-Kubi 1:40 p.m.
    With all due respect, it appears that there are too many lawyers in the House and they intend to dominate the discussions in their favour. I must actually put it across.
    Thank you.
    Mr Avoka 1:40 p.m.
    — rose --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    I recognise you, Hon Avoka.
    Mr Avoka 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that I would want to make an intervention by way of a compromise, so that we can move forward.
    People are saying that five years is too small for a lawyer to head that department and that they would want ten years. But the Bill proposes five.
    By way of compromise, I suggest that we make it seven years standing at the Bar or serving as a lawyer and then that might take care of the inexperience and other challenges that they are talking about.
    Seven years is reasonable enough. This is because that is the period that qualifies one to go to the Circuit Court.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Circuit is five years.
    Mr Avoka 1:40 p.m.
    Five years -- yes, but at least -- The High Court is --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    All right.
    Mr Avoka 1:40 p.m.
    The High Court is 12 years. [Interruption]-- Is it nine or 12 years? So, seven years.
    Mr Fredrick Opare-Ansah 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that these laws that we are making have inter-relationships. The heads of Immigration Service, Police Service, Prisons Service and the Fire Service and then their deputies have to inter-relate.
    This is not the first law of its kind that we are making. What were the qualifications that the House used in making, for instance, the law in respect of the Prisons Service?
    The Director, Legal, in the Prisons Service, should not have a different set of qualifications from the Director, Legal for the Immigration Service and we should be guided by what those qualifications are in the other laws that we have passed in this House.
    So, I would urge, since they are all coming from the Ministry of the Interior, for the Hon Minister to guide to let us know -- It does not matter how many years ago we did it. He is the Hon Minister for the Interior; if he does not know, he should tell us.
    He should guide us by telling us what pertains in the other entities that he finds in his Ministry, so that this House is properly guided and to make sure that we do not deviate too much from what provisions we have made in the other respect.
    Thank you Mr Speaker.
    Mr K.T. Hammond 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think my mind is made up. I am now reading the clause carefully and I do not see any difficulty with the rendition at all.
    The (c) “Legal, Research and Monitoring” and then, you go to the (2) and it says “A Deputy Comptroller- General appointed for this purpose…”
    Mr Speaker, it is at least, five years. I do not see the difficulty at all. Five years,
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    So, I will put the Question on --
    Mr K.T.Hammond 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we were just consulting --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    I will put the Question on clause 17 and the only amendment that has been agreed to by the House is the advertised amendment. That is the only amendment that has been agreed to by the House.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    I will put the Question on the whole of clause 17 - - But there are other amendments --
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah, can you be of assistance?
    There are other amendments -- Somebody said seven years and then somebody said -- Nobody proposed any -- the amendments.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thought this whole clause would be stood down. This is because there must be this policy rationale -- why would we want to box ourselves?
    I mean the Immigration Service is an evolving Service. The Ghana Police Service, they have Director or Commissioner , Legal and they do not put any qualification there --
    It is not in the Act. Why would we want to box ourselves like this?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    I could not agree with you more. That is why I am putting the Question. I am not raising it to 10 years.
    Hon Members, we have one advertised amendment for clause 17. We have discussed other clauses but nobody has put forward a definite proposition to further amend clause 17.
    So, clause 17 as it is now, is the Question I am putting. Is there a proposed amendment to the clause?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I proffered an amendment early on.
    With respect to the proposal from the Hon Member for Wa West -- Hon Yieleh Chireh, who wanted --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    We will put the Question on 1(d). There is another amendment -- and so, we will put the Question on 1(d).
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    I am not talking about 1(d).
    Mr Speaker, that involves (a), (b) and (c). You remember, he was canvassing that, we establish a Directorate and then appoint the officers to head the Directorates and I came with a counter- proposal, that we do not need to create a Directorate for the (3). But that we should appoint the Deputy Comptrollers-General to be in charge for the various underlisted offices.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Yes.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thought that was the way to go and when I proffered that suggestion, the former Hon Leader of the House was nodding profusely and we could make progress on that.
    This is because we do not need to create Directorates, which is why in the wisdom of the Committee, they are proposing to us that, we delete clause 20. It is absolutely unnecessary and if clause 20 is unnecessary, then we need to re- engineer clause 17 to be in accordance with what proposal I am submitting.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, that amendment -- was not put before the House. Your argument and reference to clause 20, I think there was a general consensus that we do not need that amendment.
    The amendment that was put to the House was clause 17(1) (d) -- “any other function …” which was the amendment proposed by Hon Cletus Avoka, that “any other function that the Comptroller- General, in consultation with the Council, may assign.”
    So, we have two amendments to clause 17. The first one is the “at end” “or” and the second one is 17 (1) (d). Those have been put before the House and adopted.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, those ones do not even go to the heart of that construction that we need. Those ones we have already agreed on, that is, in respect of (d) and now, clause 17 (2).
    The first one, which was not advertised, really relates to 17(1) (a), (b) and (c). That is the proposal we were trying to formulate and I thought that would make it tidier.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, in what way do we tidy it?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the proposal that made may be further --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    Is that substantive?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is substantive.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    In what way, please?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in a way that I would put forth --which you would soon understand.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    I am sorry.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, you were asking, in what way it could be substantive and I am saying that --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    You want to propose another amendment?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am proposing -- I just went through it and I do not know whether I have to go over it again.
    Mr Speaker, if we understand the principle, I have to leave it with the draftspersons, then --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    What is the principle?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the principle is not establishing a Directorate --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
    But we have agreed to that.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:40 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, yes.
    Then that would have to affect the formulation of clause 17 (1) (a), (b) and (c).
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Why should it affect it? This is because it says that it is responsible for. That does not mean a Directorate is being created.
    There are 3 Deputy Comptrollers- General who are responsible for (a), (b) and (c). Hon Yieleh Chireh said, then we have to create 3 different Directorates and you made the point that we do not have to -- Even the Directorate is being cancelled by clause 20. Then we talked about the Speaker and Speakership in that context. Do you recollect?
    I do not know what other changes you can make to clause 17. Maybe, you are not getting me. So, we will defer it and tomorrow, we will continue with it.
    Let us go to clause 18. We have spent too much time on this.
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, following from my earlier submission and that of the Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah, I would want to propose an amendment to clause 17 by deleting “who is of at least, five years at the Bar”.

    This is the Constitution; he should tell me where it says that the Attorney- General shall be a legal practitioner. The only thing that the Constitution says is that, the Attorney-General shall be the head -- article 88 (6) says:

    “The Attorney-General shall have audience in all courts in Ghana.”

    There is no provision in the Constitution that says that the Attorney- General shall be a lawyer and yet all Presidents have appointed only lawyers as their Attorneys-General. So, why do we make this provision, trying to tie the President's hand to who he appoints as the Attorney-General?
    Mr Agalga 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member is misleading this House. Article 88 is clear; an Attorney-General must be a lawyer. Let me take you through some of the provisions. Look at article 88 (5) and even 88 (4):
    “(4)”All offences prosecuted in the name of the Republic of Ghana shall be at the suit of the Attorney- General or any other person authorised by him in accordance with any law.”
    How does one institute legal proceedings if he is not a lawyer? So, it is necessary by implication. One is not admitted to institute legal proceedings before our courts if you are not a lawyer.
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:50 p.m.
    It is precisely because the Constitution recognises that, one day, somebody might appoint an Attorney-General who is not a lawyer; that article 88 (6) explicitly states that person should have audience in all law courts, recognising that, if one is not a lawyer, he might not be given audience of that nature in a court.
    Now, he says, it is by implication. I have not seen where article 88 says that the Attorney-General should be a lawyer. It is only specifying his responsibilities. It is not saying whether he must be an engineer, a doctor or a lawyer. If he shows me the clause that defines his profession, I would be very happy to sit down.
    Meanwhile, Mr Speaker, my point is, if the Constitution does not tie the hands of the President to appoint a lawyer as the Attorney-General, why should we, in enacting an Act of Parliament, say we are tying the President's hands not only in appointing a legal practitioner, but must also be of a certain number of years at the Bar.
    That is why I am proposing that we delete that portion of the clause, leave it standing as it is and trust in the discretion and judgement of the President in making the right appointment.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to disagree with the learned Hon Member, that one cannot be an Attorney-General if one is not a lawyer. How does he give legal advice if he is not a lawyer; how does he conduct criminal cases on behalf of the Republic if he is not a lawyer and how does he institute civil actions on behalf of the Republic if he is not a lawyer?
    So, one must be a lawyer to be able to act as an Attorney-General and a Minister for Justice.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    I am not required to give a ruling on this matter, but I think my views are even known before I speak.
    How can a non lawyer be an Attorney- General? My Hon Friend who is an engineer, do you want to be appointed as an Attorney-General? How can you practise law?
    Please, apart from the Constitution, there is a Legal Profession Act of 1960, Act 32 and there are other Acts that govern the practice of law, but I will not give a ruling on that.
    Also there is a purposive approach in interpreting the Constitution. In Agyei Twum vs Attorney-General for example, matters were inserted into the Constitution. So, by necessary implication, the Supreme
    Court has said that the Constitution must be interpreted in a manner that would show the purpose of the Constitution. But luckily for me, I am presiding and so, you cannot ask me what the citation is. It is sufficient if I say it is the Supreme Court that said it.
    In anyway, this is a matter that we can debate ad infinitum. But Hon Members, this is not the ruling; these are my comments.
    Let us now defer clause 17.
    My Hon Friend disagrees with me, but it does not matter. That is the whole purpose of democracy.
    Clause 17 deferred by leave of the House.
    Clause 18 -- Commissioners
    Mr Yakah 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 18, subclause (1), delete “The Comptroller-General shall, in the consultation with the Council” and insert the following:
    “The President shall, in accordance with article 195 of the Constitution”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Pardon me?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, why should it be the President to appoint Commissioners. We are not talking about the Attorney-General or Deputy Comptroller-General. Does the law say the Commissioners should be appointed by the President? Why?
    Mr Speaker, can the available Chairman of the Committee explain to me the reason this appointment should be done by the President?
    rose
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with respect -- [Interruption] -- to the available Hon Chairman and not the Hon Deputy Minister.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, the Hon Chairman has moved his amendment. And so, if the Hon Minister would want to supply the answer, we cannot gag him.
    Yes, Hon Avoka?
    Mr Avoka 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the provisions of subclause 18 (3) should be made consequential, regarding the fact that the Commission shall consult the Council before directing them. It is consequential as the one we did in subclause 17 (d). [Interruption] -- I am saying that subclause 18 (3) should be taken as consequential amendment with regard to subclause 17 (d).
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    The question that is being put is that, why should that level of appointment be done by the President?
    Yes, Hon Member for Akatsi South?
    Mr Ahiafor 1:50 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to take it from article 195 (1). With your permission, if I may read:
    “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the power to appoint persons to hold or to act in an office in the Public Services shall vest in the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the governing council …”
    Clause 18 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 19 -- Appointment of other staff
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 1:50 p.m.
    Hon Members, having regard to the state of the proceedings, I direct that we Sit beyond the prescribed time. Having so directed -- this is not an extended Sitting. I am directing, so that we finish with this particular clause and take just one resolution and then we adjourn.
    So, we are on clause 19.
    Yes, Chairman of the Committee.
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, subclause (2), delete and insert as the following new clause:
    “Delegated power of appointment
    The President may, in accordance with article 195 (2) of the Constitution delegate the power of appointment under sections 11v(1), 18v(1) and 19 to the Council.”
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with the question that I asked earlier, constitutionally, it is so provided but if indeed, we recognise the existence of clause 195 (2), why would we not say same about the appointment of Commissioners? This is because the President can also delegate functions in respect of that. Why is it that we are relating it only to the staff that, there he can delegate?
    Mr Ahiafor 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe we do not need clause 19 at all, in view of the fact that it has been taken care of by article
    195 (2).
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    So, Chairman of Committee, do you agree with that?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    You agree? So, you want to withdraw it?
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Do you want to withdraw it?
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the amendment is withdrawn.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Which one?
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 19.
    Mr Ahiafor 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on the clause 19 again, I believe we have to delete 19
    (2):
    “The President may in accordance with article 195 (2) of the Constitution delegate …”
    It is the same spirit. So, we need not have it in the substantive law.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Then why do we need clause 19 (3)? If they could appoint consultants, do they have to be given statutory power to do that? It says that:
    “The Council may on the advice of the Comptroller-General engage the services of consultants and advisers in the performance of its functions under this Act.”
    Does it need to be in an Act of Parliament before the Council could appoint advisers or consultants?
    Mr Ahiafor 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would withdraw it.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    So, Chairman of Committee, do you want to amend clause 19 by deleting the whole
    clause based on the discussion? Clause 19 (1) is the constitutional provision; 19 (2) is also a constitutional provision and 19 (3) is superfluous. There is no need to have a provision in an Act that gives the power as a public institution to engage a consultant. Do they need it? So, what happens to the whole of clause 19?
    If you move that we should delete it
    -- 2 p.m.
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that the whole of clause 19 be deleted.
    Question put and amendment agreed to. Clause 19 deleted from the Bill.
    Clause 20 -- Directorate of the Service
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 20, delete.
    Question put and amendment agreed to. Clause 20 deleted from the Bill.
    Clause 21 -- Funds of the Service
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 21, paragraph (b) delete.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Are we deleting 21(b) because it is internally generated funds and there is a method by which we cannot put it in the Act that it is part of the funds?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Chairman of the Committee should help us. We want to be carried along with the process of the consideration. He just rises and say: “Paragraph (b), delete” and sits down.
    He should give us a little indication what mischief he is trying to cure with this “delete”.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    But “delete” is “delete”? [Laughter.]
    Hon Chairman, why are you deleting clause 21 (b)?
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Hon Opare-Ansah, I hope you are not going away?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not going away. I am with you.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    And so, Hon Chairman, why are you deleting it?
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the IGF has already been dealt with in the subsidiary legislation.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    What is IGF, please?
    Mr Yakah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, internally generated fund.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Thank you very much.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 21 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    Hon Members, should we then end here and take the Resolution?
    Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah?
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 2 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is after 2.00 p.m. and it is entirely at your discretion to adjourn the House. [Laughter.]
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2 p.m.
    In fact, there is a Motion on theAddendum before me and the Minority Leader and I know why I do not want to superintend over it, but we would keep it between ourselves.
    Minority Leader, have you seen it? Give him a copy.
    Do you see the list being proposed there?
    Clerk-at-the-Table, could you give the Minority Leader a copy?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was really rising and unfortunately, I could not catch your eye before you closed the chapter. But this is something that occasionally, we have been exercising our minds on. It relates to the clause 21(d), the funds of the Service:
    “The funds of the Service include:
    (a) moneys approved by Parliament;” and
    “(d) any other moneys that are approved by the Minister responsible for Finance.”
    Mr Speaker, the question is, could the Minister, without the approval of Parliament, on his own, allocate any moneys to the Service? If the Minister has to do that, he has to seek the approval of Parliament. He cannot approve of any allocation to the Service.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, that is a very interesting question you have raised. At first glance, I will agree with you. I recollect that, when we were going to release money from the Contingency Fund, that question arose, whether the money could be released, then subsequent to that, we can go by the constitutional provision.
    If my memory serves me right, at the time we were doing that, the money was released subsequent to that. Has the money even been released before the approval of the Finance Committee has been sought? Is that possible?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that one would have to be done by the Finance Committee.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    I am not disagreeing with you. It is in the Constitution.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Subsequently, it is the Committee that acts on behalf of Parliament.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Yes, I am asking you whether there has ever been an occasion where the money has been released. Subsequent to its release, did the Committee approve it or the money had been withdrawn and the Committee approved it. Has it ever happened?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker. It happened some time ago, when Government on its own, decided to make some purchases without referral to this House. We challenged them and then they came later for approval. We told them not to go again and sin the way they did.
    However, it is important that we have these checks and balances. They cannot do that. The Hon Minister himself cannot on his own say that he is making an allocation to the Service without recourse to Parliament.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, it is a very important point. I have put the Question. So, my direction is that it shall be looked at at the Second Consideration Stage. Your point is well taken.
    Hon Minority Leader, do you encourage me to invoke my flexibility rule?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as you deem appropriate. The principle is that we must revisit it.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    All right. I will take it again.
    Yes, Hon Gyan-Baffour?
    Prof. George Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not so sure about what the discussion is,whether it is Contingency Fund or a contingency item on the budget. If that has been approved by Parliament, the Finance Minister can approve of it when there is a contingency item on the Budget Statement, which has already been approved -- [Interruption] -- All right.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Prof. Gyan-Baffour, once the contingency line you are talking about has been approved by Parliament, then it comes under clause 21 (a). This is because clause 21 (a) says:
    “moneys approved by Parliament.”
    Mr Opare-Ansah 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, his point is that, Parliament would approve that contingency line item not for any specific purpose but then the Hon Minister for Finance can make specific releases by approving --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Yes, but the money has already been approved by Parliament as part of the Budget Statement and Parliament has already given the Hon Minister that amount of money to use for contingency as the condition arises. So, it means that he is not doing it on his own.
    He is doing it because Parliament has approved of that amount for it to be used for the purpose of contingency.
    Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, what I mean is that, Parliament has approved of an omnibus fund and that fund is the consolidated --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    So, is that omnibus fund money approved by Parliament?
    Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Please, look at clause 21(a).
    Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    When you come under --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Please, read clause 21(a).
    Yes, Prof. Gyan-Baffour, the funds of the Service include moneys approved by Parliament. It can be moneys specifically approved for the Ministry or that agency or contingency line. It is all approved by Parliament. Am I wrong?
    Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, you are right; they have all been approved by Parliament. The first one is something Parliament may have approved for the agency directly and the second one is a contingency on the budget which the Hon Minister can approve for somebody else.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Who must approve it before the Minister approves it?
    Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, Parliament has already done that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    It all comes under clause 21 (a).
    Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 21 (a) is very specific. It is that Parliament has approved of something for this organisation.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Where does it say that?
    Prof. Gyan-Baffour 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is the generic understanding in here.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Clause 21(a) says that:
    “The funds of the Service include moneys approved by Parliament.”
    Let us take it to the Second Considera- tion Stage.
    Prof. Gyan 2:10 p.m.
    None

    Yes, it is enough. I thought the money was approved by Parliament -- the Appropriation Bill is approved by Parliament. It is enough.
    Papa Owusu-Ankomah 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the last one is completely unnecessary. This is because it is not the Minister for Finance who approves -- No! He just spends or releases.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Hon Members, let us look at clause 21 again. What was approved to be deleted should not be deleted. This is because it gives the opportunity for internally generated funds (IGFs) to be given.
    If that clause is not available -- I think we should go back to clause 21--
    Hon Members, I am invoking the flexibility rule and we will look at clause 21 again. It has already been read. So, any amendment to clause 21?
    Mr Yakah 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I will abandon the amendment.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    Are you abandoning the amendment proposed for clause 21?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:10 p.m.
    We come to the amendment of the Hon Minority Leader.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:10 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would propose to the House that we delete clause 21 (d), that is:
    “Any other moneys that are approved by the Minister respon- sible for Finance.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 21 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Hon Members, this brings us to the end of the Consideration Stage for today.
    Hon Members, we have an Order Paper Addendum.
    Mr A. Ibrahim 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to crave your indulgence to move Motion numbered 1 on the Order Paper Addendum on behalf of the Hon Majority Leader.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Permission is granted.
    Hon Minority Leader, do you have any objection to the leave being sought?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    To the Motion?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    No! The leave to move on behalf of the Hon Majority Leader.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, no objection to that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    All right.
    Leave is granted.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Are we moving Motion 1? Is that what we are doing now?
    Mr A. Ibrahim 2:20 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker, I sought your leave and that of the House and that has been granted.
    MOTIONS 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, any seconder?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Motion stands in our joint names, so, I do not know whether technically I can turn round and second it.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Why do you not delegate your power?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I wanted to ask. This is because our Standing Orders require of him who makes this application to conform to Order 3 of the Standing Orders. He has not done that. So, I wanted to know why he is abandoning that course. If he can persuade us, then we can move along with him.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Standing Order 3?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, you know that I am not even in favour of this Motion and you are putting obstacles in my way.
    Hon Minority Leader, you are a party to this; your name has also been advertised. All right. You satisfy us because your name is on the Order Paper Addendum. In fact, you are the only person --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, he is the lead person.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    However, you are asking him --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    I am asking him to provide the reason.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, as Speaker, I am directing that you give us that reason. Your name is jointly advertised as a party to the Hon Members who are to move the Motion. So, please, tell us, in the light of Standing Order 3, why we should --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the reason really is that, we are caught by time. If we do not act with haste, Ghana may be imperilled especially in the allocation of positions at the ECOWAS Parliament. That is why it has become imperative that we do so as soon as practicable. That is why he is bending the Orders. I felt that he should avail this information to the House.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    Any seconder?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    In that case, Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    You cannot because you are jointly moving the Motion. You cannot move and second.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on this occasion, I have de-dualised my role to second it.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Resolved acccordingly.
    MOTIONS 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Mr A. Ibrahim 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, Resolution numbered item 3 on page 2 of the Order Paper Addendum.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:20 p.m.
    This is not a Motion. What are you moving? Item 3 is not a Motion, Hon Member.
    Mr A. Ibrahim 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, the Resolution numbered item 3 on page 2 of the Order Paper Addendum.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is highly irregular for the Hon Member to move a Motion and say that he is moving the Resolution. He cannot move the Resolution. He must do the proper thing.
    Mr A. Ibrahim 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I did not want to go into the details.
    RESOLUTIONS 2:20 p.m.
    NOW THERFORE THIS HONOURA- 2:20 p.m.
    BLE HOUSE HEREBY RESOLVES AS 2:20 p.m.
    FOLLOWS 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Resolved accordingly.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:30 p.m.
    Hon Members, before I adjourn the House, I just want to announce that, tomorrow marks the formal opening of Job 600.
    At long last, Members of Parliament will not be operating from their cars. I am sure tomorrow, we will be told the role that Comrades have played over the years to bring this to fruition.
    Due to the opening ceremony, we will meet at 10.00 o'clock sharp in the Chamber. In fact, it is my advice that we congregate here, perhaps, by 9.45 a.m. We should take it as the State of Nation Address; this is our day. We should come here at 10.00

    a.m., have a short Sitting in the House and then we all proceed for the grand opening, so that maybe, by this weekend, or early next week, we shall be in occupation. So, I am appealing to you to come early, so that we can all participate in the programme.

    On that note, I hereby --

    Yes, Hon Muntaka?
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, except to plead with you to let me make this announcement that our vehicles cannot have space in front of the Chamber tomorrow. All of us would have to park our vehicles at the other end. Those of us who have drivers, they could drop us and then move the cars to that end. Right from the Speaker's Block all the way to the other end would be clealred tomorrow. So, please, Hon Members should do well to co-operate with us.
    It is for only tomorrow while we take the necessary steps to arrange where we would be permanently parking our cars.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:30 p.m.
    Hon Muntaka, I have just adverted my mind to Standing Order 53, Order of Business. I have looked from (a) to (d), and I do not see any space for announcement by the Minority or the Majority. So, I do not know what place this announcement has in our Standing Orders. I thought that you would have let us close and you hold a Committee of the Whole.
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it was to add to the information that you gave to Hon Members. I was only contributing further to the details of information that Mr Speaker gave to Hon Members -- [Laughter] --I did not want that information to escape Mr Speaker and the House, I did not want it to create any problem tomorrow. That is the reason I did that.
    Mr Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:30 p.m.
    Hon Muntaka, I will not comment further; you are my Friend. [Laughter.]
    I was momentarily dazed and confused because Order 53 is guiding me strictly and I did not see where you were coming from.
    On that note, the House is accordingly adjourned.
    Hon Minority Leader, do you have something to say?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, having almost ruled the Majority Chief Whip out of order, I have developed cold feet in what I intended to say.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:30 p.m.
    Oh, say it.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, except to make the observation that, the greater burden lies on the shoulders of the Hon Majority Whip to gather his people and bring them here. If he looks behind him, he can see the paucity of the numbers; I do not want to put my finger on any number behind him. [Laughter] -- Mr Speaker, I think if you would want the event to be successful and colourful, we need to have as many Hon Members as possible to be here.
    It is important that the Majority Whip extends his whip to get his people to be here tomorrow.
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on a lighter note, when they were besieged especially in Suame, we held the fort for them. Our expectation is that they would try and hold the fort for us tomorrow.
    But on a more serious note, Mr Speaker,
    -- 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:30 p.m.
    Hon Majority Whip, were some people besieged in this House?
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on a more serious note --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:30 p.m.
    No! Hon Majority Whip, I have asked you a question; were some people besieged in this House?
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:30 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, people were besieged in their constituencies -- [Laughter] --We needed to be there to be able to put some of the fire off.
    But on a more serious note, we are doing everything possible to get as many Hon Members as possible to be able to fill the chairs tomorrow, hopefully. We are very optimistic that Hon Members would attend to the House for this inauguration.
    Thank you.
    ADJOURNMENT 2:30 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2.36 p.m. till Friday, 6thNovember, 2015 at 10.00 a. m.