Debates of 11 Nov 2015

MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Members, may I put the Question?
Mr Baffour 12:32 p.m.
I am ready, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
You are ready? Very well.
Mr Baffour 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete clause 37 (2) (b) because there is a Fees and Charges Act, 2009, Act 793 and that applies. It reads:
“An Act to provide for the regulation of various fees and charges on the various enactments and for related matters.”
So, it is superfluous; delete clause 37 (2) (b).
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Members, any comments? Otherwise, I will put the Question.
Alhaji Muntaka 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want some clarification from the Hon Chairman.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member of the Committee, how do you respond?
Mr Bernard Ahiafor 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree with the Hon Chairman of the Committee. There is a substantive law that deals with fees and charges. So, how then do we put it in this law again?This is because the Fees and Charges Act, 2009, act 793 enables the Hon Minister to charge the fees.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member for Sekondi?
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I guess both Hon Colleagues are making very important points but we must be asking, is it the Fees and Charges Act that empowers the Hon Minister to charge fees under the Immigration Service Act?
The Immigration Service Act must give the Hon Minister the power to charge the fees, whether by amendment or et cetera. If you look at the Fees and Charges Act, the fees are not laid before this House in vacuo. It refers to laws or regulations. This

is because if the law does not give the power to charge fees, the Fees and Charges Act cannot be activated. So, yes, it is just the fees to be charged under this Act are by the Hon Minister for Finance who charges fees, for instance. If you look at even the rules of courts, it is under the rules of court that fees are charged and that is by the rules of court committee.

In other laws, it is the Hon Minister for Finance, when it comes to road tolls et cetera. But then the road tolls say, fees shall be charged. So, I believe that this may be right except that we may say “ fees to be charged under this Act by the Hon Minister for Finance.”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Yes, Hon Minister for Employment and Labour Relations?
Mr H. Iddrisu 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to associate myself with the argument of Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah and to oppose the Hon Chairman of the Committee.
Mr Speaker, you may refer to a previous clause that we dealt with -- clause 21- Funds of the Service. And it provides in clause 21 (b);
“Moneys generated by the Service in the performance of its functions”.
It is an assumption that the Service would generate some resources and I am sure it is right to say it would do so through fees and charges, which is, in practice, what happens. The Immigration Service, even as they get people detained sometimes for some reasons, even as you are entering per the visa charges. So, I think that the Chairman should let the provision stay as it is.
It does no harm to say that the Hon Minister, by Regulation, may make a certain determination in respect of the fees that would be charged.
So, Mr Speaker, if the Chairman can abandon the amendment, it would be useful.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee?
Mr Baffour 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we looked at clause 37 (1) and it reads:
“The Minister may, on the advice of the Council, by Legislative Instrument, make Regulations for carrying out or giving effect to this Act.”
And that was what informed us. But we see no harm in retaining it. So, we withdraw it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Very well. In that case, we will let it stand.
But Hon Chairman, would recall. yesterday, we deferred a number of them. It means that what he is saying is that, clause 37 (1) will stand as it is.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am worried because this is really a legal question and the draftsperson should be able to advise the Committee whether this amendment, if it is accepted by the House would not deny the Immigration Service the power to charge fees.
Mr Speaker, my point is that, this amendment has a legal effect and it is the draftspersons who should advise us whether if we delete this provision under this Act, Regulations can be made to charge fees. Mr Speaker, I hope you understand the point I am making.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
I get the point that you are making.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:32 p.m.
Yes, it is just a general point. This is because -- [Interruption.]
I know but now, it seems as though some of these matters that come before
the House, the draftspersons have not had enough input and it is worrisome for me.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
So, you would want the Committee to get back to the Attorney-General's Department for advice in that regard. Is that not it?
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:32 p.m.
Yes, even before they brought the -- [Laughter] -- I thought that on these amendments, the draftsperson would know and give an opinion, et cetera, on it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Yes, Hon Chairman of Committee?
Mr Baffour 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we had a long meeting with the Attorney-General's Department this morning and though they said it was not something that we could haggle about, we put forward the deletion. But we have abandoned it because it does not do any harm. That was what you said. Therefore, it is not that they remiss in what they are doing. So, it is alright.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Hon Majority Chief Whip?
Alhaji Muntaka 12:32 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with regard to what my Hon Colleague, Papa Owusu-Ankomah was saying, we used to have a draftspersons who normally sat behind to give technical advice as we carried on. Mr Speaker, of late, we do not see such officers assisting Parliament.
Mr Speaker, I think your goodself should help. This is because if they sit behind, they help us with technical issues that concern Bills of this nature. So, maybe, for today, it may not be possible but subsequently, it is important that the Speaker's Office --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:32 p.m.
Let us first find out if there is nobody from the Attorney-General's Department, the
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, propose that, we have been talking about a parliamentary draftsperson to help this House. As the years go by, Mr Speaker, the need has become more and more pressing, particularly, when as Hon Members of Parliament, we are so much involved with our representational duties and constituency matters.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member for Old Tafo?
Dr Anthony A. Osei 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I always assume that, there is an insitu parliamentary draftsperson in the person of Mr Ebenezer Djietror. So, I am surprised that my Hon Senior Colleague says that, there is no parliamentary -- [Interruption.]
Oh all right, but a draftsperson does not have to have audience here. He can be behind the scenes.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Dr Matthew O. Prempeh 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, what the Hon Member for Asawase said is very important and the Rt Hon Speaker
should help us. It is not only the parliamentary draftsperson who is important; even the Assembly Press and its relations with this House is -- Last week, about four Legislative Instruments (L. I.) were laid but up until now, they have not even given Parliament copies. Time is ticking and the days are counting in respect to the 21 days as set in the Constitution.
So, what Hon Muntaka and Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah are saying is that we should build the capacity of Parliament to take charge of some of these things because it makes our representational work over and above the --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
I think that the point is well made and once the Department has captured it, the Rt Hon Speaker's attention would be drawn to it to try and expedite action on it -- We have all been aware that we need this establishment within the Parliamentary Service. So, we would take note of it and draw the attention of the Rt Hon Speaker to it.
Mr Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, if I may be of some assistance, if my memory serves me right. Yesterday, when we were dealing with clause 35, “Disposal of Property in the possession of the Service”, it became necessary for us to defer it because we needed to look at -- So, do we have it there? [Pause.]
Chairman, we are in your hands.
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 37, subclause (2), paragraph (f), after “matters”, insert “and proceedings”.
That reads “disciplinary matters and proceedings”. The reason for this is for clarity because it is not only disciplinary matters, you have proceedings as part of the Regulations.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
I am not too clear. I do not think that I understand you.
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
I said that, clause 37, sub- clause (2), paragraph (f), after “matters”, insert “and proceedings”
The reason is that we want clarity. This is because it is not only disciplinary matters, but it also results in certain disciplinary proceedings and regulations.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
The same clause 37?
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Paragraph (f).
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:45 p.m.
Actually, disciplinary matters include disciplinary proceedings but the Chairman said it is for emphasis. So, it does no harm to it. It includes it but proceedings are specific. Normally, it sets out the steps that have to be taken.You could also say that “matters including proceedings”, instead of “and disciplinary matters including proceedings”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Mr Chairman, do you have any objection to the proposal?
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not think it does any harm to change from “and” to “including”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
So, do we take it that there is a further amendment to the proposed amendment?
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Including proceedings, yes.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 37, subclause (2), paragraph (i), at end, delete “and”.
So, it goes from there to “the effective management of borders”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Could you give us the rationale behind it?
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Delete the “and”. It is for clarity -- “the use of firearms and effective management of borders”. I do not see the -- So, we just move the “and”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
The understanding I had of it was that you were going to the last bit of -- this “and” and so on.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, they are adding an “L” and that is why they are deleting the “and” from that place. I think the “L” has been stated as “i”, it is not “i”. That is “L”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Very well.
If that is the case, then they should let us know.
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
In the next amendment, there is a clause, add the following new paragraph: “disposal of property in the possession of the Service” and that becomes “i”. So, that is where the “and” would come in. So, we can delete the “and”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Members, could we leave that to the draftspersons? Since you are adding another one, the draftspersons should just clean it up and render it the way it should. Are we alright with that?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I have no problem, except that in clause 35, the Chairman pleaded that we delete the entire clause 35. In fact, we stood it down to see how best to capture it. Now, this single provision appears to encapsulate clause 35. Whether it sufficiently does so, is another matter. If it does, then we could delete the entire
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 35, when we discussed with the Attorney- General's Department, they said there was no harm in retaining clause 35 and also including it in the Regulations. So, that is why we have retained it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Mr Chairman, as matters stand, could you just withdraw the proposed amendment seeking to delete the “and” so that we leave it with the draftspersons to handle and then we could move on?
Mr Baffour 12:45 p.m.
Alright. As instructed.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the reason I am bringing this back is this -- the retention of that preposition in clause 35. The Hon Minister is to do that by a mere issuance of guidelines in clause 35. But in 37, the Minister is compelled to come via the vehicle of a Legislative Instrument (L.I.) The two cannot be the same.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
I think that I am on all fours with you except that when we complete clause 37, we might have to go back and look at clause 35, if it is possible to delete the whole thing. This is because it has been taken care of under clause 37 as we have dealt with it now.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that we could just simply amend clause 35 (1), the first line, after the word “issue” and insert “by Regulations”. It would read:
“The Minister may by Regulations, issue guidelines on the disposal of property”.
So that he does so by Regulations. If you say “guidelines”, they do not have the force of law; guidelines are just guidelines.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
I thought we would try to combine the two ideas in one. This is because we are dealing with properties under clause 35; meanwhile, we have under clause 37 “the power being given to the Minister on the advice of the Council by Legislative Instrument (L.I.)” to make the Regulations for carrying out or giving effect to this Act.
Therefore, if the issue of property has been left out and we think that for the avoidance of doubt, we want it included, we can let it come under clause 37.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, except that until the Regulations are made, we cannot dispose of property. That is it.You might know about the experience that we have. If it is considered so important and we stick by “Regulations”, it would compel them to bring the Regulations early. Other than that, it will be left at large.
Mr Speaker, my worry is that, generally, guidelines do not have the force of law. They are just guidelines. I do not know. But they can explain. Probably, the guidelines can be changed every week. By experience, they do not have the force of law. However, insofar as it is stated in the Act, we can say that they are doing it, pursuant to the Act.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Very well.
Yes, Hon Prempeh?
Dr Prempeh 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, what Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah has said is not different from what is stated.
Mr Speaker, it can be made simpler. I think that we should delete the whole of clause 35. And when we go to clause 37 (2) (k), we can add an “l” so that, it may read “the Minister may provide Regulations in the disposal of property in the Service”.
It is the guideline that will show how he is going to do it and if that guideline comes to the House, it serves the same effect. Therefore, the whole of clause 35 should be deleted and if we go to clause 37 (2) (k), we add an “l” for the disposal of property in the possession of the Service.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Member, can you propose an amendment?
Dr Prempeh 12:55 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker. That is the amendment I have proposed.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Member, I will prefer that you propose an amendment. At the same time, let us be mindful of the fact that we have not completed clause 37 to be able to go back to clause 35 and get it deleted. We have a bit of a problem.Yes, we can add an “l” to clause 37. Can you come up with some proposal?
Dr Prempeh 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 37 (2), insert sub paragraph (l), “the disposal of property in the possession of the Service”. That means that the Minister may by Regulation, provide for the disposal of property in the possession of the Service. When we go back to clause 35, we can delete the whole of it.
Dr A. A. Osei 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I thought we concluded on clause 37. This is because you directed that we should let the draftspersons do the changes. Therefore, by implication, that amendment has been effected. I thought you were going to call the version of that --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
It is to do with the word “and”. I directed that -- If we are going to agree that an “L” should be added, then we should know where to place the word “and”. So, let us --
Dr A. A. Osei 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I thought that was agreed upon and we had moved on.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Yes, but we have not completed it. Since we anticipate that we are going to do away with clause 35 completely, that portion dealt with by clause 35, should be incorporated in clause 37, so that we would be safe.
Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee, do you agree with the proposed amendment?
Mr Ahiafor 12:55 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker. I agree with Hon Matthew Prempeh. The reason is that, clause 37 deals specifically with Regulations and the Minister may on the advice of the Council, by an (L.I), make Regulations for carrying out or giving effect to these Acts. For that matter, we propose that instead of maintaining section 35, we add to section 37, “the disposal of property in the possession of the Service”.
This will follow the portion that says that “the Minister may by Regulations dispose of property in the possession of the Service”. For this reason, clause 35 should be deleted.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Members, if we are on the same page, I will put the Question with regard to --
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Kwasi Amoako-Attah 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it looks as if clause 37 (2), is too restrictive
Mr Kwasi Amoako-Attah 12:55 p.m.


and we may be tying the hands of the Minister in coming out with the appropriate Regulations.

I would want to suggest that we add an “L” to the itemised list, which says that --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
We are dealing with the proposed (L).
Mr Amoako-Attah 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, a new subclause that will deal with any other relevant matter as an omnibus --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Member, if you look at the wording, at clause 37 (2), it says that:
“Without limiting subsection (1), the Regulations may provide for…”
Therefore, it is not exhaustive. --
Mr Amoako-Attah 12:55 p.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Very well.
I will put the Question with regard to the proposed amendment by Hon Matthew Opoku Prempeh.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Did you hear the proposed amendment?
Can you please, go over it for the Hon Member's benefit?
Dr Prempeh 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, “without limiting subsection (1), the Regulations may provide for the disposal of property
in the possession of the Service” -- [Interruption] -- That was why I said we could take it as clause 37 (l). We will go back to clause 35 and delete the whole of it. That is what we have done.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, can we now deal with clause 35 if there is no more to add to or delete from clause 37?
Hon Members, are we alright with clause 37? I will put the Question on clause 37 as amended and then we go back to clause 35.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is a drafting matter. If we look at clause 37 (2), there are no “d” and “j”. Mr Speaker, do you see what I was talking about?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
That is interesting. -- [Laughter.]
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 12:55 p.m.
And the Committee did not notice? [Laughter.]
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Well. We will leave it with the draftspersons to clean it up.
Question put and amendment agreed to
Clause 37 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Hon Chairman, can we go back to clause 35?
Mr Baffour 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 35, delete.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Yes, Hon Members, I think --
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member for Old Tafo?
Dr A. A. Osei 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I did not hear what he said.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
He prayed that clause 35 be deleted.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, but he has not given us the rationale for — [Interruption] — No! That is part of it. Just adding the parts “k” or “l” is not sufficient —
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon Member, if I understand everything, the rationale behind it is that, that issue that is dealt with by clause 35, as it stands, has been taken care of under clause 37.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is not necessarily so and I will tell you, why. If we look at clause 35 (5) (b), and I beg to quote:
“The proceeds from the sale of a property may be used --
b) for any other purpose that my Minister may direct.”
Mr Speaker, how do we take care of that under clause 37? That is a very dangerous provision. Supposing one finds a “crazy” Minister like me and I decide to use the proceeds to purchase something that is not relevant to the work of the Immigration Service --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Then take a second look at clause 37. You will see that it is taken care of. It says:
“The Minister may …”
Dr A. A. Osei 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my worry is that clause 35 would now be taken care of under clause 37, including clause 35 (b), and I do not want that there. That was what they said. But I think that we should not make that general statement.
Dr Prempeh 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, what my Hon Senior Colleague should realise is that, if clause 35 had stood and had been passed by this House, then we would have given the Minister the power to do that. Now, the whole of clause 35 is deleted. So, when the Bill becomes an Act, this will not even happen.
The Minister will just come here with a Legislative Instrument (L.I) on how he is going to dispose of the assets. If the Minister, in that L.I., presupposes that we are going to permit him to have that power, then it is up to this House to — [Interruption]— The House can reject that L.I.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am just serving notice to the Hon Minister, that a future L.I should not include that provision.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 35 deleted from the Bill.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, I believe we deferred quite a number of the clauses. Can we look at clause 26 -- “Establishment of Immigration Officers Welfare Fund”?. Have we dealt with it?
Alhaji Muntaka 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, I thought we were going to get to the end of the Bill before we start dealing with clauses that we have stood down. We seem to be going into things that we have stood down when we have not finished. So, if we could finish, then we would do those we stood down.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Very well. So, we move to the Schedule. Is that it?
Schedule —Posts in the Immigration Service (Section 2)
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, I have been instructed that clause 40 has been dealt with and that is why I am moving on to the Schedule.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we have dealt with the interpretation, that is clause 38. I just want to draw the attention of the Chair to the interpretation that we have accorded “salary”. It is said that “salary” includes wages….” I thought that we could give it an expanded meaning than what we have just stated. This is because the Constitution provides that salary includes allowances, facilities, privileges and retiring benefits or awards. So, why do we restrict ourselves to just wages?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
So, what would you want to see in the definition? It says “salary includes wages….” It stops there and continues to “service”. So what would you want to be captured in addition to what is stated?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, why do we abandon the meaning accorded to “salary” by just stating that it includes wages because other benefits that may accrue to the officers may have been captured as part of their salaries.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, if you look at it, it says that “salary” includes-- The word “includes” there makes room for what you are concerned about. It is not cast in —
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would just draw your attention to the meaning accorded “salaries”. It also provides that “salary” includes allowances. It does not
say “salary means”. It says “salaries includes allowances, facilities and privileges or retiring benefits of officers”. So, why do we restrict ourselves to just wages?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Maybe, it is for the avoidance of doubt.
Chairman of the Committee, what is your respond?
Mr Baffour 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would defer to the Leader's intervention.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Can we hear from the Hon Member for Effutu?
Mr Alexander K. Afenyo-Markin 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the understanding we had at the Committee level in making reference to the Constitution was that, the fact that we have said it includes wages in itself, means that we are not limiting the meaning of “salary.”
Mr Speaker, secondly, in the event of conflicts, so to speak, if there is an expanded meaning in the Constitution, that is the mother law. So, we have an option of lifting same to what we are trying to do, or perhaps, if we stay where we are, we may equally not be wrong because saying that it “includes” in itself, so to speak, means we are not limiting the meaning.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
I agree with you except that normally, on the side of caution, if we have a constitutional provision, ideally, it would be best to capture it in the Act.
Yes, Hon Afenyo-Markin, how do you respond to that?
Mr Afenyo-Markin 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, then the easiest way to resolve same is to go by his proposal. I believe -- [Interruption.]
Dr A. A. Osei 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the Hon Chairman has said that he had no objection to replicating what is in the Constitution. So, we can move on.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Well. Shall we then get the Hon Minority Leader to formally couch his presentation --
Dr Prempeh— rose --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Yes?
Dr Prempeh 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, before that, I asked the Hon Chairman of the Committee, that yesterday, we came across “junior rank” and “senior rank” -- [Interruption] -- Wait, I will get to the Schedule. [Laughter.]
Bonsu — rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Yes, Hon Minority Leader, you have the floor.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was just saying that we should apply ourselves to the meaning accorded “salary” and I think that we should replicate what obtains in the Constitution that says that salary includes wages, allowances, facilities, privileges and retiring benefits or awards.
Mr Baffour 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, The Schedule -- Headnote, delete “Posts” and insert “Ranks”
Since it is a security service, “ranks” is the right nomenclature.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Very well.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Baffour 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move,The Schedule, add the following after item 11:
12. “Sergeant Major I”
13. “Sergeant Major II”
14. “Sergeant”.
This is in keeping with what obtains the other Services, so that they know the rank and its equivalent in the other Services to keep a uniformity.
Dr Prempeh 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree that there are equivalences in the security services but the equivalences exist only for comparable positions. If the Ghana Immigration Service does not already have a Sergeant Major I and a Sergeant Major II or Sergeant, why do we want to create those and overburden the Consolidated Fund with more people from somewhere else to be paid?
I think Hon Chairman would have to educate us on the need for this Sergeant Major I, II and Sergeant. Otherwise, we would very soon have a similar problem that we did with the Single Spine Salary Structure and the Ghana Police Service and we have never recovered as a country.
Mr Speaker, they should come again. If the position does not already exist, we should not create one by this law.
Thank you.
Mr Baffour 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is actually to replace Immigration Control Officer, Assistant Immigration Control Officer I and Assistant Immigration Control Officer II. The reason is that we
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
So, do I understand you to be doing away with clauses 12, 13 and 14 in the Bill? Do you want to do away with those and substitute them with these? [Pause.] Your proposed amendment did not reflect that kind of situation.
Yes, Hon A. A. Osei?
Dr A. A. Osei 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, following what you have said, I thought that the issue was the equivalency. So, the proper way to bring it in is that if there exists a position like Assistant Immigration Officer III -- They do have an Assistant Inspector now. Right? However, what the Hon Chairman has just said means that we should drop that; but that would not be the proper way to go.
If we would want an equivalency, then we should use the current position as it were to create a balance but just adding “Sergeant Major I” -- The honest question is that is there a Sergeant Major I in the Ghana Immigration Service now? No! So, we cannot just create it or add it. [Interruption] -- I was not there but there is a difficulty here and we need to think it through.
Maj. Oduro (retd)— rose --
Dr A. A. Osei 1:15 p.m.
The Hon Deputy Ranking Member is on his feet; this is not a soldier's thing -- This is not butubutu, to wit this is not done aggressively. Sergeant Major I does not exist. So, how can we just add it?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
I believe that the way to go about it, probably, would be for the amendment to seek to delete certain provisions in the Bill, and in their places substitute whatever they would want to be the Rank they are talking about. This is because just saying that you are going to have clauses 12, 13, 14 and Sergeant Major I and II and then a Sergeant, would not be enough.
Yes, Ranking Member?
Maj. Oduro (retd): Mr Speaker, this is a new law that we are enacting and whatever needs to be brought here must be done.
In the Armed Forces, we used to have Brigadier; it is the same thing like Brigadier-General in every Armed Forces, especially in the Armed Forces of America. However, when we meet in an operational theatre, they look down upon the Brigadier because the “General” is not added. Everywhere in Ghana now, we say Brigadier-General as they have in America.
So, it is better that we do the right thing over here, so that -- Nobody would say that this one is higher than the other, so that it would not create problems in the future, Mr Speaker.
Thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
I have no problem with you wanting to introduce this but I think that by way of procedure, looking at the application for amendment, we were not seeking to delete anything and we are bringing these ones in. How do we go about it?
Yes, Hon Osei?
Mr Isaac Osei 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I just do not understand this amendment at all. We have the list here; if we would want to have the equivalences with respect to the
other Forces, then we might as well call Comptroller-General, General or Lieutenant-General; there is no need for it. I just cannot see it. Where would the “Colonel” be? [Pause.] [Laughter.] It is not necessary. Let us not belabour the point at all. This amendment actually should be withdrawn because what we have here is sufficient.
Mr Baffour 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is for uniformity in ranks and the note is that it is also for the junior ranks who do not have the relevant qualifications and they cannot rise above a certain rank. That is the reason they would want to do that, so that it is uniform. As he rightly said, when they reach a certain stage -- They are -- Maybe, a driver gets to the apex of where he or she is supposed to go and he or she cannot go beyond it.
We thought it could be best because it is uniform with the other Services. For example, the Senior Inspector becomes Sergeant Major I --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think this is one area that we really need to consult with the officers in the Service. They could better educate us in this; we cannot assume that we know better than they do know.
My worry, however, is that they are telling us that what they seek to create should come after item 11. Between items 11 and 12-- item 11 is for Inspector and item 12 is Assistant Inspector. Now, if we create these positions or ranks in between the ranks of Assistant Inspector and Inspector, we would be creating a problem.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee, how do you respond? It looks like your intention is to bring these three positions in between certain numbers in the Bill.
Do I understand you? -- Let us know where you want those ones inserted, so that we can move from there and then we can look at the concerns raised by the Hon Minority Leader whether we really would want to go that way.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member for Old Tafo?
Dr A. A. Osei 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we take guidance from you but I think there is a fundamental issue we should not lose sight of. If these positions do not exist, we cannot just by a stroke of the pen create them. [Interruption.] -- Where is Sergeant Major I? [Interruption] This is a list of positions in the Ghana Immigration Service -- Sergeant Major I and II are non- existent. Therefore, for what purpose do we just add them here?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Do you not think that there was any consultation between the draftspersons and the Ghana Immigration Service whether they were -
- 1:25 p.m.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:25 p.m.
I think that is why we need to further consult because there is something missing here.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Very well.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the fact that these positions are not in existence, does not mean we cannot create them under this Act. [Interruption.] However, they need to give the rationale behind this amendment to convince us, that the amendment is necessary and it will promote efficiency in the Immigration Service. That is all.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
I think I agree with you.
Hon Chairman, can you give us some rationale behind these provisions that you are trying to introduce?
Mr Baffour 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, what I would do is; we would sit down again with them and go through the rationale. This is because certain holes have been punched in the rationale that was given. I think that we would sit down with them and come back. [Pause.]
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this amendment is a major one. Indeed, it is more of a policy issue. The Hon Minister is not here. Seriously, that is my problem with business of government these days. Major policy matters -- responsibility of which must be taken by Government and it seems as if Parliament, by amendment, is supposed to be doing that.
I am not saying that we cannot intervene by legislation and change policy but it must be informed by weighty reasons. This must have gone to Cabinet
as it is a major matter. I agree with the Hon Chairman except that I think it would better serve this House in terms of dealing with this amendment if the Hon Minister is also here to explain because this is the Minister's Bill. It is not a Bill from the Ghana Immigration Service; it is from the Minister for the Interior.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Hon Members, I will want to come across with some suggestions. It looks like the Ghana Immigration Service itself is interested in getting these positions there but I think the way the amendment has been couched, is not helping us.
I am informed they would want to do away with the position of Assistant Inspector and have these ones in place. Do you get me? [Interruption.] I think we should look at how we have couched the proposed amendment to satisfy what their need is.
Yes, Hon Matthew Opoku Prempeh?
Dr Prempeh 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree with you. They will want to delete items 12, 13 and 14 and substitute them with -- That is what the Hon Chairman is saying to me right now.
I am saying that if they do that, the weakness would be -- What happens to item 15? Why do we not have a different name for item 15? [Interruption] -- Yes! When the Chairman of the Committee rose, we proposed the amendment listed on the Order Paper but we have a problem. He says we should delete items 12, 13 and 14. However, what happens to item 15?
What the Hon Member for Nkoranza North sought to say about the military, I agree. However, we should then call the Comptroller-General, Field Marshall; that is the equivalent. So, Mr Speaker, it is neither here nor there. Equivalencies are for the human resource department to establish but not in the manner that we would want to do it.
If they say that Assistant Inspector is equivalent to Sergeant Major I, the human resource department should strike those equivalencies with the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission, to establish that those are the real equivalencies. This is because there are lots of government agencies with these equivalencies but we do not come here to change their names. That is why I asked the first question, do these positions already exist? The answer is, no.
So, Mr Speaker, maybe, they should drop the amendment and then when they come with the Legislative Instruments, they can state their equivalencies for us to support. As it is now, if they delete items 12, 13 and 14, what happens to item 15 -- Assistant Immigration Officer II; what becomes his new title?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think now, they have indicated to us that they will delete only item 12 and insert the rank of Sergeant in place of Assistant Inspector except that that position itself is also being graduated -- Sergeant, that is the base -- Sergeant Major II and Sergeant Major I. I think that is what they have indicated to us.
However, I would propose to them that in that case, we should qualify it. So, maybe, we shall have for item 12 -- Immigration Sergeant Major I, Immigration Sergeant Major II and Immigration Sergeant. This is because all the other officers are qualified with the title, “Immigration”; that is the name of the Service except for items 10 and 11 -- Senior
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, are you in agreement with what he is proposing or were you not following it?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my worry is that, there seems to be an inversion in that arrangement. If you look at the proposal from the Committee, it would appear that the “Immigration Sergeant Major I” would be higher than the “Immigration Sergeant Major II”. Then item number 14 under the Schedule, we would have the base “Sergeant”. Is that the case?
If that is the case, then the arrangement for items 13, 14 and 15 under the Schedule cannot be right. This is because, we have the “Immigration Control Officer”, and then we go down to “Assistant Immigration Control Officer I” and then “Assistant Immigration Control Officer II”. Let us look at that arrangement. I am not sure that it is tidy there.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Actually, there is some disconnect if you look at it that way.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to urge the Hon Chairman to pay attention to the explanation given by the Hon Minority Leader.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
The Hon Minority Leader is proposing that it should be “Immigration Sergeant”.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:35 p.m.
All right; whatever.
So, “Immigration Sergeant”, but there would not be “Assistant Inspector”. Then after that one, you would have “Immigration Sergeant Major II” and the “Immigration Sergeant Major I”. That would be the dead end for any person who has not got formal qualification in the Service. That is just like you have the Warrant Officers ending in the military. You would then have the “Inspector”, which would be the entry point of those who have qualification and then it would move on.
So, technically, it is only two levels that are being introduced as fresh levels, which are the “Immigration Sergeant Major II” and “Immigration Sergeant Major I”. But the “Assistant Inspector” is being replaced with “Sergeant”. So, it would be only those two levels that would be added.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Fine. So, you agree with the Hon Minority Leader except that from what he said, we also need to look at “Inspector”simpliciter. Do we want “Immigration Inspector”, “Senior Inspector” -- This is because all the other rankings have “Immigration”. So, why do we not try to --
Hon Member for Old Tafo?
Dr A.A. Osei 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Chief Whip is trying to tell us what they are trying to do.
One difficulty I have is, why “Sergeant”? Why not “Colonel” but Deputy Commissioner of -- Mr Speaker, let us create titles that are germane to the Immigration Service, and not say that because the military uses “Sergeant”, therefore, we must use same to establish equivalence. That can be established, but we have to be very careful.
There are financial implications for this. It is not a minor policy issue. It is a huge human resource problem. Let us make sure that the Government that wants to do it understands the implications. This is because if we do that, we are creating new financial obligations that the Government ought to be aware of. I do not have any difficulty, but let us make sure that is what they want.
This is because, if not, once we create it by the Act, it would have financial implications starting in the 2016 Budget Statement. So, it is not a minor addition. That is why it is important that for the policy level, we need to be sure that is what we are doing.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Thank you very much for your contribution.
I think that we need to be a bit more alert.
Let me listen to the Hon Member before I give a directive.
Mr Alex K. Agyekum 1:35 p.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Having listened to the submission, especially by the Hon Minority Leader and the last Hon Member who spoke, Mr Speaker, this Bill has travelled a long distance with some of us, the Committee members. All these issues have been thoroughly discussed.
The creation of the two ranks, just like we have said -- I do not think that the Service is so much interested in the name that we give to that particular rank.
Just like the Hon Minority Leader said, the spirit behind what we wanted to achieve is that, already, in the Service,
there are some Service personnel who are already engaged. By the passage of this Bill, they must specifically fit into a rank by the structure which has been laid.
The implication that Hon Dr A. A. Osei was saying -- the whole thing would still have a financial implication. So, I would want to draw the attention of the House to the fact that if we are looking at the whole Bill, there is no way that when we try to create those particular ranks, they are not going to have a financial implication; that one would come. But we are also concerned about making sure that the basic qualification that some of the Service personnel would have, can also let them --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Hon Member, from your contribution and from that of the Hon Member from Old Tafo, I think that we need either the Hon Minister or the Hon Deputy Minister to assist us in taking this decision. This is because there may be some financial implications we are not looking at or have not been brought to our attention.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, as I speak, there is a similar problem with the Ghana Police Service, which is not minor. That is why I am cautioning that we have to be careful. Something similar has happened and we are doubtful; it is creating problems for the system.
That is why I am cautioning that, let us not just look at it. If it is a major policy issue, let them come and address it.
This is because, Mr Speaker, if we have about 400 such individuals and suddenly, we do that, the implications are not minor. So, let us look at it carefully.
In principle, I do not have a problem but let us be aware that is exactly what we are doing.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Hon Members, I will like to direct the Committee to take a second look at the proposed amendment and couch it the way the Hon Minority Leader has proposed.
Then apart from that, we will need to hear from the Hon Minister or the Deputy Minister with regard to the details as far as financial encumbrances are concerned, so that we do not end up doing something that would be difficult to carry out or implement.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, while we are at that, since some Hon Colleagues believe that the rank that is being introduced;”Sergeant”, “Sergeant Major I”and”Sergeant Major II” are foreign to the establishment -- perhaps, they could consider retaining “Assistant Inspector I” and “Assistant Inspector II” then “Assistant Inspector” before the “Inspector”. So that, the people who are frightened that we are introducing new terminologies or ranks into the Service may relax a bit.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Is it the “Assistant Sergeant Major”? Or “Assistant Major”? This is “Assistant Major” could help --
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:45 p.m.
“Assistant Inspector”. What is being deleted is “Assistant Inspector”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Yes!
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:45 p.m.
And in its place, they seek to introduce, “Sergeant”,”Sergeant Major I”and “Sergeant Major II”. I am saying that, that in itself, is frightening some people or it is not sitting well with some people because they think that it is not in sync with that establishment.
I am saying that, they could maybe, consider retaining that title -- “Assistant Inspector” except to consider that, it could also be graduated. So, we could have “Assistant Inspector”, “Assistant Inspector I” and “Assistant Inspector II”. That is the point I am making.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
There is also a possibility which should be looked at.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, since the Hon Ministers are not here, we would be grateful if we could stand this down just to get the clarity whether there are cost implications. If there are cost implications, are they aware and have enough provisions been made, so that the consequences would not be unexpected?
Mr Speaker, having said this, I would be grateful if the Consideration of this Bill could come to an end to enable us take the Motion that is outstanding as regards the Chartered Institute of Taxation Bill.
Thank you very much.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Thank you very much.
Hon Members, so, that is deferred for the Committee to take a second look at it and come back.

Yes, Hon Majority Chief Whip, can you assist us?
Alhaji Muntaka 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with your indulgence and that of the House, we would be grateful if we could permit the Hon Deputy Minister for Education, who is our Hon Colleague, to stand in for the Hon Minister for Education, to enable us take item numbered 6 on page 2.
The Motion on the Chartered Institute of Taxation Bill, 2014.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Item numbered 6.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:45 p.m.
By the Hon Deputy Minister for Education.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Very well.
Hon Minority Leader, he is asking for permission to allow the Hon Deputy Minister to stand in for the Hon Minister for Education.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was not exactly following what you were saying. The Hon Deputy Minister to stand in for? To do the Second Reading.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:45 p.m.
Yes, the Second Reading.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:45 p.m.
But we have some 10 more minutes, so, we would be minded.
Mr Speaker, secondly, it just occurred to me that even though we have dealt with this, on page 17 of the Votes and Proceedings, the amendment that I proposed and which was also enforced by the Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah--
The definition of “Senior Officer” means an officer of the rank of Assistant Superintendent and above”. “. . . of Immigration” is missing. So, let them take note of that. This is because it is not in sync with what we did on item numbered 21, page 17, clause 38. I think that was missing; it is “Assistant Superintendent of Immigration”. That one is lost -- just so that they would capture what we have done appropriately.
He said Second Reading by the Hon Minister, to perhaps, lead it and then we could stand the debate
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
Very well.
Item numbered 6 on the Order Paper --Motion by the Hon Minister for Education and in his place, the Hon Deputy Minister.
BILLS -- SECOND READING 1:45 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Mathias Puozaa) 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I rise to support the Motion that has been ably moved by the Hon Deputy Minister for Education.
Introduction
The Chartered Institute of Taxation Bill, 2014 was laid in Parliament and read the First time on 17th December 2014. In accordance with article 106 (4) and (5) of the Constitution and Order - I86 of the Standing Orders of the House. The Rt Hon Speaker referred the Bill to the Committee on Education for consideration and report.
The Committee, in the course of its work, was assisted by the Hon Minister for Education, Prof. Naana Jane Opoku- Agyemang and her team, Council Members of the Chartered Institute of Taxation, Ghana as well as officials from the Attorney-General's Department. The Committee is grateful for their assistance.
Reference
The Committee referred to the following documents during its delibera- tions:
a. The 1992 Constitution
b. The Standing Orders of Parliament
c. The Chartered Institute of Taxation Bill, 2014
d. The Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria (Act) Act No. 76, 1992 (now CITN Act, CAP CI0 Vol. 2, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004)
The Committee also considered a petition received from the Chartered Institute of Certified Accountants (Ghana) as well as a communication from the National Accreditation Board (NAB) in respect of the Chartered Institute of Certified Tax Accountants (Ghana).
Background
The Chartered Institute of Taxation, Ghana (CITG) is a registered professional body under the Professional Bodies Registration Act (NRCD 143). The Institute, since its establishment, has and continues to play a significant role in the education and training of personnel in the tax profession. The Institute, in collaboration with other actors, provides capacity building for tax professionals in both the public and private sectors to improve knowledge, practices, and standards for effective mobilisation of government tax revenues.
Furthermore, the Institute conducts research into issues relating to taxation, and makes invaluable contributions towards the planning and formulation of tax policies and strategies for the public and -- private sectors. It is significant to note that the recommendations of the Institute largely contributed to the establishment of tax courts by the Judiciary.
The CITG is a founding member of the West African Union of Tax Institutes and the Africa Association of Tax Institutes. The Chartered Institute of Taxation
(Ghana) occupies the presidency and the vice-presidency positions of these associations.
Object of the Bill
The Bill seeks to give the Chartered Institute of Taxation Ghana, the legal mandate to regulate the practice of taxation in the country.
Content of the Bill
The Bill is made up of forty clauses and divided into four main Parts as follows:
a. Chartered Institute of Taxation
b. Qualification and membership of the Institute
c. Administrative and financial provisions
d. Miscellaneous provision.
Part One, comprising clause 1to11 focuses on the Establishment of the Institute, its object and functions and the Governing Council, among others.
Part Two, made up of clause 12 to 25, sets out the registration of tax practitioners, qualification, categorisation of members, prohibition from practicing as a chartered tax practitioner or tax practitioner, removal of name from register, to mention but a few.
Part Three encompasses clause 26 to 32 and highlights among others, the appointment of a Registrar, Functions of the Registrar, Appointment of other staff, and Funds of the Institute.
Part Four covers clause 33 to 37 which capture Offences, Regulations, Interpre- tation, Transitional provisions and Repeal and savings.
Observations
The Committee noted that over the years, the Chartered Institute of Taxation, Ghana has been playing a key role in the promotion and development of taxation in the country. It is worth noting that a number of tax professionals and practitioners in both the public and private sectors received their professional training through the accredited- programmes of the Institute.
The Committee observed that in spite of the significant contribution of the Institute to the development of taxation in the country, the Chartered Institute of Taxation, Ghana, lacks the requisite mandate accorded sister chartered institutes in countries like Nigeria to regulate the practice of taxation.
The Committee noted in particular, that the Chartered Institute of Taxation, Nigeria (CITN), which is backed by Act No. 76, 1992, (now CITN Act, CAP C10 Vol. 2, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004) makes it the only professional body with the authority to regulate the practice and administration of taxation in the country. This regulatory framework, has contributed tremendously in streamlining the practice of taxation in Nigeria.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Hon Member for Old Tafo, is it on a point of order?
Mr A. A. Osei 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, unless I heard the Hon Chairman wrongly, he said, “the Committee during the consideration.” We are at the Second Reading, not Consideration.
Mr Puozaa 1:55 a.m.
No! In the consideration of the Bill.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
At the Committee level.
Mr A. A. Osei 1:55 a.m.
At the Committee level? So, I was wondering why this Mace was standing there.
Mr Puozaa 1:55 a.m.
At the Committee level.

This is a very serious thing, so, let me just read it out --

. . . that it obtained its full registration (registration number 59, gazette no. 143) on 12th July, 2012, under the Professional Body Decree 1973 (NRCD 143). The petition sought to question the basis for making the Chartered Institute of Taxation, Ghana -- the National Tax Regulator. According to the petition, since the Chartered Institute of Taxation, Ghana is a professional body just like the Chartered Institute of Certified Tax Accountants, it will be unfair and against the principle of Freedom of Association to make the latter assume the position of a National Tax Regulator.

The petition views as discriminatory clause 19 of the Bill, which prohibits individuals or members of other professional bodies from practicing as tax professionals unless they are members of the CITG. The petition therefore advocated for the creation of an independent institution/body to regulate the practice of taxation in the country.
Mr Puozaa 1:55 a.m.


Clause 18 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (1), line 3, delete “two state owned newspapers in the country” and - insert “one — daily newspaper of nation- wide circulation”

Clause 18 -- Amendment proposed -- sublause (3), paragraph (a), after “and” insert “their”.

Clause 19 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2), delete “practise” and insert “practice” and after “means” delete “a person who”

Clause 19 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2), paragraph (a), line 1,

delete “engages” and insert “engaging”,

delete “professes” and insert “professing”

delete “practise” and insert “practice”.

Clause 19 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2), paragraph (a), line 2, after “chartered tax practitioner” insert “or” and after “tax practitioner” delete “or tax adviser”

Clause 19 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2), paragraph (b), delete “offers” and insert “offering” and delete “performs” and insert “performing”

Clause 19 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2), paragraph (c), line 1, delete- ”renders” and insert “rendering” and delete “assistance” and insert “assisting”

Clause 19 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2), paragraph (d), line 1, delete “renders” and insert “rendering”

Clause 19 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2), line 10, delete “that” and insert “a”

Clause 21 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (2) line 1, delete “fee”

Clause 22 -- Amendment proposed-- subclause (2), paragraph (a), line (2), delete “a”

Clause 24 --Amendment proposed -- paragraph (c), line (2), after “offence” insert “involving fraud or dishonesty”

Clause 35 -- Amendment proposed -- line 4, after “taxation” insert “Ghana”

Clause 36 -- Amendment proposed -- subclause (1), line 6, after “taxation” insert “, Ghana”

First schedule -- Amendment proposed -- clause 2,subclause (1), line 3, delete “secretary of the Council” and insert “registrar of the Institute”

First schedule -- Amendment proposed -- clause 2, subclause (2), line2, delete “secretary of the Council” and insert “registrar of the Institute”

First-schedule --Amendment proposed -- clause 3, subclause (1), line1, delete “secretary of the Council” and insert “registrar of the Institute”

First schedule-- Amendment proposed -- clause 4, subclause (1), line 4,delete “secretary of the Council” and insert”registrar of the Institute”

First schedule -- Amendment proposed -- clause 4, subclause (3), line1, delete “secretary of the Council” and insert”registrar of the Institute”

Second schedule -- Amendment proposed -- clause 1, subclause (1), paragraph (a), delete and insert “elect their representatives to the council”
Mr Puozaa 1:55 a.m.


Second schedule-- Amendment proposed -- clause 1, subclause (1), paragraph (c), delete “determine” and insert “recommend to the Minister”

Second schedule --Amendment proposed -- clause 1, subclause (6), paragraph (a), line 2, delete “secretary” and insert “registrar”

Second schedule-- Amendment proposed --clause 2, subclause (1), line 2, after “twenty add “percent of”

Second schedule- Amendment proposed - clause 3, subclause (1), line-1, delete “secretary” and insert-registrar”

Second schedule-- Amendment proposed -- clause 3, subclause (2), delete “secretary” and insert “registrar”

Second schedule -- Amendment proposed -- clause 3, subclause (2), paragraph (e), delete

Third schedule --Amendment proposed -- paragraph (c), sub- paragraph (iii) delete “any” and insert “the”

Third schedule- --Amendment proposed -- paragraph (c), sub- paragraph (iv) delete “any” and insert “the”.

Third schedule --Amendment proposed -- paragraph (1), sub- paragraph (ii) line 2, after “practitioner” insert “or tax practitioner”

Long title -- Amendment proposed -- line 1, after “taxation” add “, Ghana”

Conclusion

Undoubtedly, taxation could be described as the lifeblood of every nation, the practice of which is greatly dependent on professionally trained personnel.

Considering the expertise of the Chartered Institute of Taxation Ghana and its contributions to the practice and development of taxation “over the years, the Committee is of the view that giving the Institute the exclusive legal mandate to determine the standards of knowledge and skills to be obtained by persons seeking to become professional tax practitioners and administrators, as well as regulating the administration and practice of taxation through the appropriate legal and ethical regime, this will go a long way to improve performance and standards in the tax profession.

The Committee, therefore, recommends that its Report on the Chartered Institute of Taxation Bill, 2014 be adopted by the House.

Respectfully submitted.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Hon Members, I wish to direct that having regard to the time, Sitting will proceed beyond the stipulated time for not more than 15 minutes for the purposes of considering this -- Report
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, for the records, when the Hon Chairman for the Committee on Education rose to present the Report of the Committee on this Bill, he said “I am rising to support the Motion moved by the Hon Minister”, he did not second it.
So, the Motion remains not seconded.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee, can you correct the error?
Mr Puozaa 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I remember the other time I was corrected from “seconding the Motion” to “support”. So, that is why I thought it was in order to support the Motion and not to second it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Very well. Thank you very much.
The Motion has been moved, the Hon Chairman has presented his Report, and it is for the consideration of the House.
Mr Atta Akyea 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, for some of us who are learning the rules, the Hon Minority Leader has raised a very important issue and because the rules are in your bosom, I think this is a very fine opportunity to shed light on this matter, so that we learn from the House.
Mr Speaker, I think we should clear this hurdle and then we proceed. With all respect.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Very well.
I will refer you to Standing Order 81:
“Unless otherwise provided in these Orders, every motion unless
made at the Second Reading or Consideration Stage of a Bill, must be seconded, and if not seconded shall not be debated or entered in the Votes and Proceedings.”
Any contributions? Otherwise, I will put the Question.
Yes, Hon Member for Old Tafo?
Mr A. A. Osei 1:55 a.m.
I was under the impression from what the Leadership agreed that it would be moved and seconded and stood down, so that more people can come and debate it because it is such an important Motion.

That is the issue --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Very well. If that is the thinking of the House, then we will defer the debate to a future date.
Since we have gone past the normal Sitting time, I direct that Sitting be adjourned till tomorrow at ten O'clock in the forenoon.
Thank you very much.
ADJOURNMENT 1:55 a.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2:04 p. m. till Thursday, 12th November, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.