Debates of 19 Jun 2018

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:34 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:34 a.m.
Mr Speaker 10:34 a.m.
Hon Members, correction of Votes and Proceedings dated Thursday, 14th June, 2018.
  • [No correction was made to the Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 14th June, 2018.]
    • Mr Speaker 10:34 a.m.
    Hon Members, correction of the Official Report dated Tuesday, 5th June, 2018.
    Any corrections?
  • [No correction was made to the Official Report of Tuesday, 5th June, 2018.]
    • Mr Speaker 10:34 a.m.
    Hon Members, item listed 3, Questions.
    The Hon Minister for Trade and Industry?
    Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister dutifully submitted the Answers to the Questions that were asked of him. But he indicated that he would rather be here tomorrow and not today. This is because he is engaged on some very serious matters this morning.
    That was why I was conferring with the Table Office; they are saying that they
    did not have that communication and that is why they published the Answers. But the Hon Minister indicated that even though he has submitted the Answers ahead of time, he would rather be here tomorrow.
    Mr Speaker 10:34 a.m.
    Do you want us to defer this to tomorrow?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, yes, subject to your indulgence.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 10:34 a.m.
    Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Iddrisu 10:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, there should be no difficulty with the Hon Minister for Trade and Industry appearing tomorrow to respond to the Question asked by the Hon Richard Mawuli Kwaku Quashigah. So you may want to re-schedule it with an assurance that he would appear tomorrow to respond to the Question.
    Thank you.
    Mr Speaker 10:34 a.m.
    The Hon Minister is to appear tomorrow as requested by the Hon Majority Leader.
    Statements, item listed 4.
    We have a Statement which stands in the name of the Hon Member for Oforikrom on mental healthcare.

    Hon Majority Leader, it is of great public interest so if you could arrange for it to be read on his behalf.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, unfortunately, the person in whose name we have the Statement is unavailable now, so —
    Mr Speaker 10:34 a.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, in view of its public interest nature -- [Pause]
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:44 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, Hon Dr Appiah-Kubi would want to take charge and make the Statement on behalf of Hon Dr Marfo.
    Mr Speaker 10:44 a.m.
    Hon Member, you may proceed.
    STATEMENTS 10:44 a.m.
    Mr Speaker 10:54 a.m.
    Hon Member, I thank you for this very useful Statement.
    Mr Governs Kwame Agbodza (NDC -- Adaklu) 10:54 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this Statement made by my Hon Colleague.
    Mr Speaker, the issue raised is of importance to this country. As a society, we have a lot to do in terms of admitting the existence of mental health issues and also making the necessary provisions to encourage people to seek support when needed. Whenever they turn up there, we should also make the provision to give them the appropriate treatment.
    Mr Speaker, by virtue of what many people do, anyone could be stressed beyond their own capabilities; either through family pressures, work related pressures and maybe things happening is society as a whole.
    Psychologists describe mental health as a clinically significant behaviour of psychological syndrome with significant personality and emotional disorganisation.
    Mr Speaker, the basis for which we say somebody has a mental problem in this country is still very vague. Unfortunately, it is not only people who may be walking on the street without clothing that have mental problem.
    I am not sure whether there is a baseline study that everybody can associate with which would tell us exactly at what point in time somebody can be classified as having a problem, where the person can voluntarily seek assistance. I believe as a country, we need to have that baseline document which must be available to maybe Members of Parliament or health personnel.
    Mr Speaker, we do not have to wait for somebody to get to the tipping point. One could see a friend or neighbour getting to a point and could tell him or her to seek assistance from professionals as to what is going on with him or her. That is not necessarily to say that the person is mad or something like that.
    But at a point in our lives, we all have been pushed to a point where we thought we could not handle it anymore. In times like that you are in that circle of your mind alone, and sometimes, depending on your ability to handle things may determine whether you can pull back or get to your tipping point to become somebody who would begin to do things you ought not to do.
    Mr Speaker, so, I am calling on the Ministry of Health and the relevant agencies to develop a baseline study that tells everybody how this works.
    Mr Speaker, the second thing is the stigma. Many people probably know that they have problems, but for the fear of what people would think I seek assistance. The fear of what people would think if
    Mr Speaker 10:54 a.m.
    Hon Member for Adaklu, I thank you very much. -- [Pause]
    Dr Emmanuel Marfo (NPP -- Oforikrom) 11:04 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to add that mental health care in this country has been a problem. Even among children, especially when you look at the incidents of autism, which is a condition that is rated to be the fastest growing disability in children.
    In many cases of autism, which is more or less a mental health situation, children are maltreated and kept at home. Parents fail to take them to school and even when they go to school, they are labelled as troublesome children and sometimes are not given the necessary care.
    Mr Speaker, if you go to our public schools, it seems that there are no facilities for children who are suffering from autism. So this is just one case of mental health situation that affects this country.
    As the Statement rightly pointed out, it is all because of superstition. Whenever people have a certain mental challenge, we always want to label that as being caused by the devil or witches. As a result, these people are usually referred to prayer camps instead of seeking medical care.
    Mr Speaker, this is not surprising because even when they are taken to these hospitals, because of cost and inadequate personnel in terms of doctors and nurses
    who support mental health in most of our hospitals, we are unable to give them adequate treatment and at the end of the day they have no option than to resort to spiritual care.
    Mr Speaker, let me use this occasion to commend one lady, Baaba of the Ghana's Most Beautiful fame, who has taken mental health care as her project and indeed has launched a foundation to mobilise resources to educate the public to appreciate the extent of the mental health situation in this country and also to support the effort by the public health delivery system.
    So, commending her, I would like to urge Hon Members to also commit some of our funds to help educate the public, especially those in our schools on the need to appreciate that mental health is a challenge in this country and that it is important that we seek care and also to more or less provide some support.
    Mr Speaker, I support parents with children who suffer from autism and I would urge my Hon Colleagues to go to the extent of looking for parents who might have children who suffer from such disabilities so that we could extend some form of assistance to them.
    Indeed, these conditions are very expensive to cure. For instance, the average child who receives therapy in any centre that treats autism pays not less than GH¢3,000.00 and if we look at the levels of salaries that people take in this country, we may appreciate that most Ghanaians would not be able to afford such therapy. That is why these children are mostly left uncared for.
    So Mr Speaker, I would like to thank you very much for giving me this opportunity.

    South): I thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting me this opportunity to comment on such a very important Statement. Obviously, I must express my gratitude to the Hon Member who made the Statement for drawing our collective attention to a very important matter that we all seemed to take for granted.

    Mr Speaker, the causes of mental health illnesses are many and varied, but we could all agree, as the experts have pointed out, that matters to do with depression comes in various forms. These include shocks and broken heartedness, alcoholism, drug abuse and, of course, extreme poverty which could all cause one to cross the line, so to speak.

    Mr Speaker, as one of my Hon Colleagues just whispered to me, given the level of stress that we have to experience while executing our mandate on behalf of our people, there is no reason to believe that some of us could not be on the brink of mental breakdowns.

    Quite clearly, the statistics show that about three million people of the Ghanaian population have one mental health condition or the other. As Members of Parliament (MPs), I believe one of the ways that we could help address this issue and to make sure that anyone who is a victim in one form or another in terms of mental stability gets help, and we need to move swiftly in working towards the coming into being of a Legislative Instrument (L.I.) to back the 2012 Mental Health Act.

    Mr Speaker, I could not conclude my brief comments without drawing attention to the fact that even, in spite of the challenges that were enumerated in the Statement for calling attention to the lack of personnel and the disproportionate concentration of the few mental health care facilities in the southern part of this

    country, we still need to do more to ensure that while we look at options and opportunities to perhaps establish mental health facilities in the northern part of this country, we should look at placing specialised persons in the hospitals in Tamale, Wa and Bolgatanga to help address the issue as we look at permanent solutions.

    On this note, Mr Speaker, I would want to thank you for the opportunity and I call on all of us to do our best to de- stigmatise mental health because any of us, at any moment, could be classified as mentally unstable.
    Mr Vincent Sowah Odotei (NPP-- Dade Kotopon) 11:14 a.m.
    I thank you very much, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity granted me to add my voice to this very important health issue in our country.
    Mr Speaker, I wish to also commend the Hon Member who made the Statement for bringing this issue to the fore and to this Floor, because as it has been said, about three million people, which is about 2.8 per cent of our population have one form of health issue or the other regarding their mental state.
    Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleagues who spoke before me have enumerated very eloquently and clearly what the causes of mental health are. They range from alcoholism and unstable marital issues to all other related issues. The question is: why have we not as a country dealt with these estimated number of people who are saddled with this problem?
    Mr Speaker, the World Health Organisation (WHO) sometime ago reported that out of about three million Ghanaians faced with mental health issues, only 2.8 per cent, which is about
    67,780 of them get some form of attention. This is not so surprising because, as a country, as we speak, our health system does not really show that we have the capacity to deal with this issue.
    Mr Speaker, it is reported that only 1.4 per cent of our health budget goes into the treatment and attention of mental health. As we speak, we have only three psychiatric hospitals across the country and the treatment has shown that it is skewed towards the urban areas leaving the majority of the people in the rural areas without any attention.
    Mr Speaker, it is clear that if we have to address this problem which affects about 10 per cent of our population, because the recent population census pegs our population close to about 30 million, we have to ensure that we increase funding.
    In 2012, we promulgated the Mental Health Act, Act 846 which gave a roadmap which showed the way and how we must mobilise ourselves as a country and ensure that we have a plan towards addressing this issue.
    We must ensure that the Ministry of Health goes back to Act 846 so that the provisions, plans and the statutory requirements on the percentage of the budget that must be reserved for this is adhered to, otherwise, as my Hon Colleagues have said, in one way or the other, we may all find ourselves exhibiting some traces of mental instability.
    Mr Speaker, somewhere last year, I recalled that one of my Hon Colleagues in this House made a statement that all of us must go for some form of treatment because we are all under severe pressure.
    We need 10 per cent of our population, that is, the expected three million people to be attended to, to ensure that we would all be able to contribute to the national development and the President's vision of a Ghana beyond aid.
    Mr Speaker, we need to increase funding. The stigmatisation must stop, and we must realise that when we see people go to the psychiatric hospital, they have mental problems just like any other problem, so that we ensure that people who have the problem would feel confident and ensure that they get the treatment they deserve or they seek for.
    Mr Speaker, once again, let me thank the Hon Member who made the Statement for bringing out this issue. I hope that this House would not leave this matter here but we would ensure that Act 846 is implemented to the letter.
    Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity.

    Miniority Leader (Mr Haruna Iddrisu): Mr Speaker, let me thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the Statement on mental health, and to draw attention to the fact that as a country we have not done enough and we are not doing enough to address the plight of mental patients.

    Mr Speaker, I have had a number of visits to the mental hospital, particularly, the one in Accra. Even their feeding remains a problem. Because of the specialised training of the nurses, a number of times, they have had to be on strike or boycott work in order to demand better conditions of service.

    However, Mr Speaker, I might want to use a hypothetical story to elaborate my point. In Ghana, there is sometimes the
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:14 a.m.
    Hon Majority Leadership, any comment?
    Majority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu) 11:24 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you very much for this opportunity to also add my voice to the Statement made by the Hon (Dr) Emmanuel Marfo but which came to be read by Dr Appiah-Kubi.
    Mr Speaker, as we have been told, about 10 per cent of the population of the country suffers from one form or the other of mental disability. That could be very scary. We are talking about a population in the region of thirty million. If the statistics is anything to be believed, it means that about three million of our compatriots suffer from one form or the other of mental illness.
    Mr Speaker, it also means that in this House, which is a highly stressed entity, about 28 out of the 275 Members suffer from one form or the other of mental illness.
    Mr Speaker, I believe I am not one of those 28 but I cannot vouch for the Hon Minority Leader.
    Mr Speaker, so we need to be careful. [Laughter]. I have not said anybody is deranged. I am saying that we should take
    Mr Speaker 11:24 a.m.
    Thank you very much for these well made contributions.
    Indeed, we would have to examine our laws on disability generally, which cover more of physical disabilities to the detriment of mental disability. This is very important, for which matter the Statement is referred to the Committee on Health and also Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee.
    In fact, it gives me an opportunity to direct further that we should consider the interest of the deaf and dumb and that the moment we leave this place, Leadership would meet and work on facilities for the deaf and dumb to follow proceedings in this Honourable House just as others do.
    This is all in a way of recognising our people's rights and broadening the dimensions and horizons of human rights. So we shall take this up soon after leaving this place.
    Hon Members, if once more, the Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee would assist the Committee on Health and Parliament in general to draft the Bill that would enhance the rights of the deaf, dumb, mentally ill and allied persons, we would be serving our people better.
    Thank you very much.
    The Hon Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection is in the House to make a Statement to commemorate the 2018 Day of the African Child.
    Hon Minister, just a moment, you may still remain where you are.
    ANNOUNCEMENTS 11:24 a.m.
    Mr Speaker 11:24 a.m.
    Hon Members, allow me at this juncture to introduce a benchmarking visit delegation to the Parliament of Ghana, who are on a weeklong visit. The Members of the National Council of Namibia are on a visit to our country to exchange ideas with their counterparts on matters of benchmarking, networking and how we could deepen relations between the two countries.
    The delegation include Hon Lebbius T. Tobias, who is the Leader and Swapo Party Chief Whip, Hon Peter Kazongominja, Hon Nguzu J. Muharukua, Hon Rosalia Shilenga, Hon Phillipus W. Katamelo and Hon Ruusa Joyce Namuhuja.
    STATEMENTS 11:34 p.m.
    Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection (Ms Otiko Afisah Djaba) 11:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in honour of the memory of those hundreds of gallant children killed on the streets of Soweto while protesting against inferior education and apartheid in 1976, the African Union dedicated and set aside the 16th of June as the Day of the African Child (DAC) to remember them and what they fought for.
    The Day of the African Child therefore, became a regional event which has been celebrated on June 16 every year since
    1991.
    Mr Speaker, according to Nelson Mandela, “There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its children”.
    In recent times, the Day of the African Child presents an opportunity for all stake- holders, including governmental, non- governmental and international entities, to reflect on issues affecting children in Ghana and Africa.
    The 2018 theme for the celebration is “Leave no Child behind for Africa's Development”. This highlights the need to ensure that ‘No Child Is Left Behind' in the struggle to reduce inequality, create opportunities and. liberate the innovative energies of our youth.
    The children and youth of today are impatient to participate in the transformation of our society. Consequently, we need to mainstream children's rights in all programme and projects for their growth and development.
    Mr Speaker, this year's celebration of the Day of the African Child was marked with various activities in all the ten regions of Ghana. These included a children's debate, Radio and Television discussions on the theme across the country. There were also press releases on some media platforms to advocate for the involvement of children in matters affecting them.
    On the 14th of June, 2018, the Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Protection held a press conference at the Ministry of Information to interact with the press and for that matter, with the whole country on the measures that the Ministry is taking to enhance the fortunes of children in Ghana.
    The climax of this year's national celebration of the Day of the African Child was marked with a durbar held on Saturday, 16th June, 2018 in Somanya in the Eastern Region.
    During the durbar, children took up roles like the chairperson master of ceremonies, statements and offering opening and closing prayers which hitherto have been performed by adults, to hammer the importance of child participation in issues that affect children themselves.
    The Ministry also organised and sent play equipment to all the ten regions of Ghana,, to ensure that no child is left out of the celebration.
    Mr Speaker, these activities are to create and increase public awareness of initiatives aimed at creating safe environments for children to ensure that no child is left behind. Every child has hopes and aspirations towards their future, and all parents have expectations of their children who must continue to pursue their dreams and achievements.
    Education is the key to provide opportunities of employment to improve the economic conditions of the individual, their families and communities.
    Nelson Mandela once said “No child in Africa, and in fact anywhere in the world, should be denied education”.
    However, most of the dreams of our children are often truncated due to parental irresponsibility, negligence, poverty, streetism, gender-based violence including child marriages, child trafficking, child labour, sexual harassment in our schools, defilement and children not being in school when they are of school going age.
    In selecting the 2018 theme, the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) once again confirmed the importance of highlighting the linkages between Agenda 2030 and Children's Rights, and also stressed that the implementation of all the 17 SDGs are crucial for the protection and development of all children.
    Ghana has demonstrated commitment to international and regional instruments to ensure the development and growth of children, to ensure no child is left behind, especially the disabled and the girl child.
    Let me take this opportunity to commend the Ministry of Employment and Labour Relations for a successful commemoration of the World Day Against Child Labour in Cape Coast, one of the source communities of victims of trafficking and the President and the Ministry of Education for initiating and implementing the Free Senior High School programme.
    It is important for stakeholders to intensify the level of awareness on child protection to reducing child labour and child trafficking as stated in the SDGs goal
    8.7.
    We also just participated in the 10th
    Session of the International Labour Conference of the International Labour Organisation in Geneva held from 28th May to 8th June, 2018 to highlight preventing, reducing and eliminating the worst forms of child labour.
    Currently Mr Speaker, there are 169 targets with 17 main goals that make up the Sustainable Development Goals. Gender and children issues cut across all the 17 goals and are relevant for children with the aim of facilitating the proper development of children from childhood to adulthood.
    Ghana as a country is mindful of the fact that some of the goals, like the right of the child not to be abused physically, psychologically and sexually and ending female genital mutilation, have a short- term time frame to be achieved while some also need critical attention to strengthen structures for effective and efficient support to secure the rights of children.
    Since 1992, the Free Compulsory Universal Basic Education (FCUBE) has been entrenched to state that every child of school going age should be in school and stay in school, but we still have
    Mr Speaker 11:44 a.m.
    Thank you very much, Hon Minister.
    One contribution from each Side, and then Leadership may contribute.
    Several Hon Members -- rose --
    Yes, Hon Member.
    Dr Mrs Bernice Adiku Heloo (NDC -- Hohoe) 11:44 a.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    I rise to thank the Hon Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection for her Statement to mark the 2018 Day of the African Child.
    Mr Speaker, the theme for the day, which is “No Child is Left Behind” is really appropriate in the context of what we are experiencing today. The main tenets of the Statement tells us to reduce inequality among children, create equal oppor- tunities for them, and liberate the innovate energies of the youth. The question to ask ourselves today is: are we really reducing inequality among children?
    Last week, we talked about the phenomenon of albinism. We know that many children are living with this condition. What are we doing to reduce the inequality among them? They feel traumatised wherever they find themselves.
    There is also the issue of mental health that we talked about today. Most children who are autistic or have learning difficulties are also living in unequal situations. They do not have equal access to education. Most of them are kept at home and maltreated; some are even maimed and killed.
    Mr Speaker, children living with HIV are traumatised, there is nobody to talk to and they do not see the future very clear.
    Today, there are children in situations of modern day slavery. Some are sold to work on the rivers to catch fish and to do jobs that adults cannot do. So we mark the day, let us think about these children and see what we can do to liberate them, because in the developed world, these children are helped to come out with the abilities that God has given to them.
    A child may be autistic, but he or she may have special knowledge or he or she can do something with his or her hands. A child may have learning difficulties, but he or she can be helped in some other way.
    So as we celebrate the day, I would like us to think deeply. That is why the Social Protection Bill is so important to target these children.
    On this note Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Hon Minister who made the Statement again and encourage all our children to shine wherever they are.
    Thank you Mr Speaker, for the attention.
    Mr Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi (NPP -- Asante Akim Central) 11:44 a.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to add my voice. I congratulate the Hon Minister for making this Statement on the Day of the African Child Celebration.
    Mr Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi (NPP -- Asante Akim Central) 11:44 a.m.


    [ANYIMADU-ANTWI] [ALHAJI MUNTAKA]

    Mr Speaker, it is commendable that the interests of children are being taken seriously. Going through what the Hon Minister has given us, the responsibilities that were given to children during the celebration at Somanya reminds me of the children's day that we used to observe at our Sunday schools when we were young. We were taught to learn these basic principles in order for us to become responsible citizens.

    Mr Speaker, I would want to draw our attention to the wake-up call of the Hon Minister. We must all make sure that we do our best to be inclusive in the approach to solving the problems with our children. She enumerated some of them; including child marriage. Is it possible for a child to marry another child? No, it is an adult who would marry a child. That is why the wake- up call is very important.

    Again, she mentioned child labour. If every parent were responsible, I do not think we would face the problem of child labour. Therefore the call on parents to make sure that children are removed from all these hazardous work would help us to move forward.

    When we talk about the responsibilities of parents, it is only those who are irresponsible who would leave their children on the streets. She mentioned streetism as one of the problems.

    Mr Speaker, she also mentioned sexual harassment. Can we ignore adults when we are talking about sexual harassment? It is only an adult who would harass a child.

    She also mentioned defilement. I know that most of these cases are criminal offences and I call upon every adult --

    Most of the times, we hear that people make an attempt to settle defilement cases out of the courts and this must not be encouraged. They must be brought to book and punished.

    Mr Speaker, the use of drugs by children and child trafficking are also issues of concern. I do not think that any child would traffic another; it is only an adult that would do that.

    Through peer grouping, other children may be introduced to drugs, but if all adults would actually make sure that children are not introduced to hard drugs like cigarettes and others -- [Interruption.] Cigarrette may not be hard to an adult, but if it is introduced to a child, it would be a hard drug to him.

    Mr Speaker, if we go to other countries, it is a serious offence for an adult to sell alcohol to a child. It is an offence for an adult to sell any of the drugs that are not recommended to a child. If we could educate ourselves to make sure that this is also not practised in this country, I believe it would go a long way to help the country.

    Once again, I would commend the Hon Minister and the Ministry for the celebration they held at Somanya. Thank you Mr Speaker, for the opportunity.
    Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC -- Asawase) 11:54 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, let me also commend the Hon Minister for the Statement ably made.
    Mr Speaker, we need to once again remind ourselves of the genesis of this day. Mr Speaker, in 1976, children in South Africa, precisely Soweto, demonstrated against injustice in education and inequality and they were just murdered by the brutal forces of the apartheid.
    Since 1991, Africa and the world chose this day, 16 th June, to remember the atrocity against children and to also set the day aside to remind us about our own children and the need to do the best that we can to keep them in school so that they would continue to learn.
    Mr Speaker, it is said that out of the 57 million children that are out of school in the whole world, 30 million of them are in sub-Saharan Africa, which is really a big concern for all of us. Mr Speaker, as part of our Millennium Development Goals, the target of Goal 2 was to get every child in the world to be in school learning.
    Mr Speaker, today, let us ask ourselves -- In Ghana we can say we have had a lot of improvement in terms of education because statistics shows that close to 99 per cent of children in Ghana, at least, have the benefit of sitting in a classroom.
    But Mr Speaker, we would all also attest to the fact that many of our rural and poor children have to attend schools that are really dilapidated. Mr Speaker, that reminds us about the same condition in 1976 in Soweto which led to the children demonstrating and being killed.
    Mr Speaker, we need to make a conscious effort, even in Ghana where we have made tremendous amount of efforts to ensure that we do not just send them to the classroom. They should have enough furniture so that they can sit on comfortable chairs to study. They should have roof over their heads so that they do not have to sit under trees.
    Mr Speaker, that is why the introduction of the School Feeding Programme was a very laudable one, because many children in Africa attend school on empty stomachs. We cannot
    expect that child to make anything meaningful out of his stay in school under those circumstances.
    Mr Speaker, today in many parts of Africa, child trafficking has become part of some people's culture and norm, where children way below the age of 18 are forced to work and do things that even adults may not be willing to do. These are some of the things that we need to avert our minds to. We should not look far; we should look closer.
    Mr Speaker, each and every one of us here -- 275 Hon Members of Parliament need to look closer within our own constituencies. We need to look closer within our own communities. What hinders children's capacity to be useful adults for our country? What is it that we can do in our own small way to reduce the burden of these poor children?
    Mr Speaker, one of the major things that affect children is poverty. Once their parents are poor, indirectly, without them calling for it, it affects them in the worst form because -- In the African set up, funny enough, you would see that the man of the house takes the best part of the food, when in actual sense, he the adult father does not need that much protein.
    Mr Speaker, it is the children who need that protein, yet a lot of the meat in a poor home goes to the father. It is rather in the rich homes that the father, because of health consciousness, does not take so much of the protein and passes it on to the children.
    Mr Speaker, these are very useful things that each and every one of us should look for within our communities. Mr Speaker, it is said that one out of six children in sub-Saharan Africa does not live to be five years due to malaria, cholera
    Ms Sarah Adwoa Safo (NPP -- Dome/ Kwabenya) 12:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I rise to comment on the Statement ably made by the Hon Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection and to also join the many of the voices that have congratulated the African child.
    Mr Speaker, for the 2018 Day of the African Child, the theme is well placed -- “Leave no Child Behind for Africa's Development”. Mr Speaker, if indeed we believe that children are our future and the future lies in the hands of our children, then Africa as a continent would have to look at the rights of children as well as their growth and education.
    Mr Speaker, education is the key to success. For that matter, if you want the African Continent to be a successful and developed one, to be one of no such problems as we face today — problems of poverty, war, child abuse and rape, Mr Speaker, it means that we need to take education seriously.
    Mr Speaker, it is in this light that the current Government has introduced the Free Senior High School (Free SHS) policy, which is very commendable.
    Mr Speaker, if we do not want to leave the children behind, then the backlog of children who, as a result of poverty of their parents could not continue their education at the Senior High School level —
    Mr Speaker, if we have a Government that believes our children should continue their education after the Junior High School (JHS) level, where they get stuck up — We need to move them further to the Senior High School level and even to the tertiary educational level. I believe that a Government of that nature should be commended.
    Mr Speaker, we have our laws that seek to protect the African child. In Ghana, we have our laws sitting in our law books, but we need to task ourselves as a country to enforce these laws.
    Mr Speaker, article 28 of the 1992 Constitution talks about the rights of the child. It states, and with your permission, I quote:
    “Parliament shall enact such laws as are necessary to ensure that—
    (a) every child has the right to the same measure of special care, assistance and mainte- nance as is necessary for its development from its natural parents, except where those parents have effectively surrendered their rights and responsibilities in respect of the child in accordance with law;”
    Mr Speaker, if you come to (d) of article 28 (1), it says 12:04 p.m.
    “children and young persons receive special protection against
    exposure to physical and moral hazards;”
    Mr Speaker, it is out of this provision in our Constitution that we enacted the Children's Act of 1998. We had the Trafficking of Persons Act in 2017; we have the Labour Act of 2003. They all seek to protect the child against hazardous labour or hazardous work.
    Mr Speaker, we find our children who are of school going age in our various communities and constituencies who are undertaking hazardous work. As Hon Members of Parliament and the people's representatives, it is our duty to protect these children and hold their natural or foster parents up to the task of protecting these children.
    Mr Speaker, if we go to the galamsey areas, we would see children engaged in galamsey. We go to our farms, we would see little children carrying heavy loads of food stuff.
    Mr Speaker, there is a difference between light work, which is permissible under the Labour Act. — Any child within the age of sixteen and above, under the law, is allowed to carry out light labour or light work.
    That is not what we are saying; household chores are considered as light work, and our laws permit that. But where it deprives the child of the basic opportunity to go to school and exposes the child to moral or physical hazards, we need to look at it again as a country.
    Mr Speaker, so in commending the Hon Member who made the Statement, I would want to put on authority that if you look for the minimum age for the employment of a child in our labour laws and Children's Act, it is fifteen years. When you talk about engaging in hazardous work, the minimum age is eighteen years.
    Mr Speaker, if you come to (d) of article 28 (1), it says 12:04 p.m.


    Mr Speaker, if we have these in our laws and we still find children prone to these physical challenges and being on the streets instead of going to school; if we leave our children this way, then the country has no future. Then what are we investing in?

    Mr Speaker, therefore in doing so, I would want to bring to the attention of the Hon Minister, a Report that was put out by the United States Department of States in 2017.

    Mr Speaker, this is what the United States Department of States had to say about child trafficking in Ghana. It states and with your permission I quote:

    “Government of Ghana has not fully met the minimum standard for the elimination of child trafficking. However, it is making significant efforts to do so.”

    Mr Speaker, this is a wakeup call for all of us. It means we are doing something, but we ought to do more to make sure that the number of children who are trafficked—

    Mr Speaker, in my Constituency for instance, the most prominent thing that is going on now is child prostitution. You would see the children below the ages of sixteen and eighteen years on the streets engaging in prostitution.

    The question we ask ourselves is, where are their parents? Where are our laws? Why are we not taking this matter as serious as it is so that these children would be encouraged to go to school or engage in some trade rather than stand on the streets and “sell their bodies”?

    Mr Speaker, if we are taking a word from what the United States Department of States has said, it means we need to do more.

    On that note, I would want to encourage the Hon Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection that she is doing what she has to do, but the United States Department of States is telling us that we need to do more to protect the children of Ghana, and to protect the children on our continent.

    I believe as parents of our various communities, if we are able to breakthrough in tackling this matter and making education and safe-keeping of children a priority on our lists, we would all be remembered one day for that and we would sit back in our old age and see our children take up the mantle and continue the fight for the liberation of the African Continent.

    I thank you Mr Speaker, and I wish all African children— I have some children here from my constituency. Today is the African Child Day and I wish them all a successful and a good day.

    Mr Speaker, pardon me for speaking to the children in the Gallery, but just to put on record, they are Mr Speaker's children as well.

    I thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 12:04 p.m.
    Thank you very much, Hon Deputy Majority Leader.
    This brings us to the end of Statement time. Hon Minister, thank you very much for attending to the House to make this Statement.
    At the Commencement of Public Business, item listed 5, Presentation of Papers.
    Item 5 (a), Hon Minister for Finance?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we have the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance here with us, she would present the Paper on behalf of the Hon Minister.
    Alhaji Muntaka -- rose —
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Hon Minority Chief Whip?
    Alhaji Muntaka 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Paper to be laid by the Hon Minister for Finance needs the attention of all of us once again.
    The Hon Minister for Finance is always absent from this House. It is more than ten times that this issue has been raised. He cannot always play Parliament as the second fiddle; he would want to do other things first and place Parliament second.
    Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, for the first time, we have raised this again —
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Hon Minority Chief Whip, “always” means always. Has he ever been here?
    Alhaji Muntaka 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I really wish you could check the records. When was the last time the Hon Minister was here to conduct a business?
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    But it is not always.
    Alhaji Muntaka 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, since we started this Meeting —
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Hon Minority Chief Whip.
    Alhaji Muntaka 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, well, most of the time or majority of the time, he has not found time to come to the House.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to beg that this is a very important loan. I have no doubt about the capability of my Hon
    Colleague, the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance, but for the Hon Minister to take this House seriously, Mr Speaker, let us stand it down for the Hon Minister to come and do it.

    Mr Speaker, I beg that the Hon Minister be here himself to lay this Paper so that he would know the heat and the temperature of the House, instead of sitting far away from the House.

    Mr Speaker, I beg that you would allow the Hon Minister himself to come and lay this Paper.
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, your Colleague wants the temperature of the House to be felt by the Minister for Finance.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am with the Hon Minority Chief Whip with regard to the Hon Minister coming to the House to feel its temperature. Except to say that yesterday, at the Board level, we wanted to have an engagement with him and even this morning.
    It became impossible because of a previous commitment. As a result, we suggested that he should be with us at 3 o'clock because of this morning's engagement.
    Mr Speaker, if you would remember, it is because of that12.14 p. m. that we said he should be here at 3.00 o'clock. Even that is subject to confirmation. Given the fact that we have a tall order between now and the period when Parliament is expected to go on recess, I would want to plead with my Hon Colleagues.
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    The Hon Deputy Minister is preparing to come here and attend to certain matters of great concern Parliament at 3.00 o'clock. If the Hon Minority Leader were here, knowing what happened at the Board meeting yesterday, he would want to oblige for the Hon Minister to finish whatever he is doing and come here at 3.00 o'clock to meet us.
    We would oblige and let the Hon Deputy Minister present the Paper. Hon Deputy Minister for Finance, you may.
    PAPERS 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Item numbered 5(b)(i). Chairman of the Committee?
    Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am told that the Reports listed under item numbered 5(b) are not ready. The Chairman indicated to us last Thursday that they were not ready. We would get them ready in the course of this week.
    So we would stand it down and go to item numbered 11 -- the Witness Protection Bill, 2017 at the Consideration Stage.
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, so we would not be able to take any of the subsequent Motions?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:14 p.m.
    No, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Item numbered 11 -- Witness Protection Bill, 2017 at the Consideration Stage.
    Chairman of the Committee, clause 6, debate to continue. Are we ready to proceed?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe we could begin today with clause 20. The Chairman of the Committee needed to do some further consultation with respect to clauses 6, 9 and 13. So, we could proceed with clause 20 now.
    BILLS -- CONSIDERATION STAGE 12:14 p.m.
  • [Resumption of debate from 14/06/ 2018]
    • Mr Speaker 12:14 p.m.
    Clause 20, there is a proposed amendment, standing in the name of the Hon Chairman of the Committee.
    MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Clause 20, Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    I called the Chairman of the Committee. Who are you?
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am a member of the Committee.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    But you do not respond to the Hon Chairman, so what is the explanation for that?
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was told that the Chairman of the Committee is unavoidably absent. May I crave your indulgence to stand in for him?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Very well, you may proceed.
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Vice Chairman of the Committee is in and I would want to cede to him.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
    Continue what you were doing.
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 12:20 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 20, Headnote, after “Victims” insert “Support and”, which then would read:
    “Establishment of Victims Support and Compensation Fund”.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Committee proposed that for the headnote, we insert after “Victims”, “Support and”, which then would read: “Establishment of Victims Support and Compensation Fund”.
    Mr Speaker, this whole Bill is about witness protection; so I just would want to be educated by the Hon acting Chairman of the Committee why they are talking about “Victims Compensation Fund” and not “Witness Compensation Fund”? This is about witness protection.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:24 p.m.
    Hon acting Chairman or Vice Chairman -- whoever would provide us with the information.
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 12:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, at the Committee level, we had discussed and proposed that it is not only compensation but support is also part of it. That is the reason we would want to --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:24 p.m.
    Hon Member, the question is that the whole Bill is about witnesses so why are we offering support or compensation to victims and not witnesses?
    Mr Alexander Kodwo Kom Abban 12:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the answer to the question is actually found in clause 21 -- Object of the Fund. If you read the object of the Fund, you would realise that it would be very important to add victims support. If we look at clause 21, it says and I beg to quote:
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:24 p.m.
    Hon Member, I believe the Memorandum accompanying the Bill should guide us in clauses and objects. This is because if we go to page (ii) of the Memorandum, it is talking about what is stated below:
    “The measures available to member States including providing pro- tection to witnesses, the relocation of a witness and the family of a witness, providing police escort to hearings, testifying in camera, support for the adoption of new identity under government protection, temporary residence or anonymity of the witness.”
    Under the UNCAC obligations, it is clearly about witnesses; unless the alleged victim or the person is a witness, there is no basis for providing a fund for any victim, so to speak unless the person we are calling a victim is actually a witness. If he is a witness, then there is no point identifying him as a victim.
    ‘Witness' would cover him, so why do we want to introduce a complication in which somebody would claim that he was ran over by a vehicle and therefore is entitled to compensation refund?
    Mr Abban 12:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with all due respect, that would mean that when we get to clause 21, then we would have to remove “victims” from that clause.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:24 p.m.
    Indeed, you should justify why “victims” should be introduced into the Bill at all. Who is a victim, so to speak? I was looking at the interpretation column and I am not seeing who is a “victim”.
    All right: ‘“victim” means a person who has suffered a loss, damage or injury as a consequence of commission of a crime when this is about protecting witnesses. I am not seeing the “victim” defined here as within the purview of the intended Bill.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I raised the issue but I have now realised that if we look at clause 21 -- we are yet to get there though -- it says that:
    “The object of the Fund is to provide financial resources to the Agency for the purpose of providing protection to victims, witnesses and related persons who are at risk of harm or intimidation or retaliation as a result of their co- operation with a law enforcement agency in the course of a criminal investigation or prosecution.”
    Now, a witness may become a victim but not all victims may be witnesses. Perhaps, one may even have a relative -- a son or a child and may become a victim by association with maybe, the parent who is a witness. So I believe that the use of “victim” in the case of the person having suffered some harm, intimidation or retaliation may be relevant.
    But at the first sight, I was not too sure and that was the reason I posed the question. It is unfortunate that the Hon Members of the Committee have not really
    apprised themselves of these possibilities, hence the use of the word “victim”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:24 p.m.
    Hon Member, I am still not persuaded but I am not a judge here.
    Mr Rockson-Nelson E. K. Dafeamekpor 12:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this matter came up at the Committee level and the position was that when we say “support”, it becomes discretionary. Now, when we speak of compensation, then it is properly anchored in law -- it becomes remediable.
    The person can seek judicial remedy in respect of that. So the use of the “Victims Compensation Fund” was therefore debated as to whether it should be Victims and Compensation Fund.
    Mr Speaker, we debated it but we could not conclude and so we thought that we should bring it to plenary for the House to look at , whether we should use ‘victims and witnesses' or we maintain “Victims Compensation Fund” because it is the meaning of witness that is in issue here.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:24 p.m.
    If I understand the Hon Majority Leader clearly, he is looking at a situation where somebody who is associated with a witness may also be targeted in a way. But I am worried about using the word “victim” which is too wide.
    If we use the “witness” as specified in the UNCAC, it is providing for a witness or a relative of the witness. We are restricting a causal link between the person we are protecting and somebody who may be at risk as a result.
    But as soon as we introduce “victim”, I am afraid that we may be opening the
    gate too wide and other people who may not in any way be associated with the witness, which is the intendment of the Bill, seeks to claim compensation under this Fund. I do not know but the decision is for the House to take.
    Mr Abban 12:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with all due respect, having heard from you, I am wondering what would happen in a situation of a victim who is not necessarily called as a witness.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:24 p.m.
    So, in what way is that person a victim? If he is a victim of a crime, he is entitled to other remedies. But under this Bill, we are looking at protecting the witness, and if some injury or loss occasioned to that person or a relative of that person as a result of being the witness, we have to compensate.
    But we are not talking about any other victim of a crime. What we introduced here and the definition we provided gives room for any person who is a victim of a crime to come and claim under this clause and that is where my worry is.
    Shall we flag this and think through it again?
    Mr Abban 12:34 p.m.
    That is so.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Very well.
    Mr Ahiafor 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, looking at the definition of “victim” at the interpretation column, I am tempted to agree with Hon
    Majority Leader because, it states 12:34 p.m.
    ‘“Victim' is a person who has suffered a loss, damage or injury as consequence of commission of a crime;”

    So it does not relate to the ‘witness' that we seek to protect. If we use the word ‘victim' here, it means anybody who suffers a loss as a result of a crime being committed and he is to be supported and given a compensation, but I do not believe that is what we are talking about.

    We are relating this particular Bill to a witness who would suffer a loss as a result of being a witness.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    So, let us flag and rethink through it.
    Item numbered (iv), clause 20 is flagged.
    Item numbered (v); Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Abban 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, item numbered (v) is the same thing. So, we may have to flag that one too.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Yes, it is consequential. So, we shall go to item numbered (vi); clause 22 in the name of the Hon Minority Leader.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there is no advertised amendment for clause 21.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Yes, we should have put a Question on that first; sorry.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:34 p.m.
    Yes, but before you do, I would just want to draw the attention of the Committee Members to section 2; “The Object of the Agency,”
    Section 2 (1) provides and with your permission, I quote:
    “The object of the Agency is to provide the framework and procedures for giving special protection, on behalf of the State, to persons who possess important information and face potential risk or intimidation due to their cooperation with the prosecution…”.
    I believe they should add, “investigative, and other law enforcement agencies.” I do not know whether they did it. [Interruption] If they did not do it, then it should have been there: “…prosecution, investigative, and other law enforcement agencies.”
    But Mr Speaker, the section 2 (1) includes persons who are exposed to potential risk or intimidation. I thought that we should find a way to include, “intimidation” in clause 21, since it is a prime object contained in section 2 (1). So, perhaps, it should be:
    “who are at risk of harm, intimidation or retaliation as a result of their cooperation with the law enforce- ment agency in the course of the criminal investigation or prosecution.”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Yes. It appears that clause 21 follows the clause 20. If you read the clause 21 --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I agree with you. There is still the use of the word, “victim”. I am not addressing that because consequentially, we would address it. I am just saying that we should find space for the word, “intimidation”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Very well, but I believe because we cannot recollect exactly what we did with section 2 now, we may have to make reference and check whether we made any amendment and if there is need to do further amendment, we would do so.
    So, I would suggest that the Chairman takes note of that and let us review that in due course, and if there is the need to proffer a further amendment, we would do it.
    However, but I think we should proceed with clause 22.
    Clause 22 -- Sources of Money for the Fund.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    The amendment is in the name of the Hon Haruna Iddrisu.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member for South Dayi, do you want to move it on behalf of the Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Dafeamekpor 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, indeed so, with your permission.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    Very well, you may proceed.
    Mr Dafeamekpor (on behalf of Mr Haruna Iddrisu) 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 22, paragraph (c), line 2, after “Minister”, insert “in consultation with the Minister for Finance”.
    Mr Speaker, the reason is that the use of the “Minister” simpliciter could be confused with the Minister in charge of the particular Ministry which in this case, we seek to place under the Attorney-
    General and Minister for Justice and the Minister for Finance.
    So, for purposes of clarity and in consonance with our normal phraseology in framing clauses like these, it is opportuned that we use, “in consultation with the Minister for Finance”.
    I humbly submit.
    Mr Ahiafor 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 60 defines “Minister”, which means the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice. So once “Minister” has been defined and the Bill talks about “Minister”, it means we are talking about the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice.
    If we would want to introduce, “in consultation with the Minister for Finance”, then that should be an addition because there is no confusion in this particular Bill as to who “Minister” is?
    If the reason is that we want “Minister” as an addition such that the approval by the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice should be in consultation with the Minister for Finance, then that is what we should be looking at. There is no confusion regarding the use of the word “Minister”.
    Mr Yaw Buaben Asamoa 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I stand to oppose the proposed amendment. That provision for the “Minister” is meant to avoid conflict of interest. As far as the Minister for Finance is concerned, there are enough provisions for the Ministry to offer money and for Parliament to approve.
    But the question is that, this is an Agency where there could be the possibility of compromise from people who
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:34 p.m.
    I believe “Minister” here relates to one who can approve that the Agency receives a gift. In this case, is it the Minister for Finance or the one responsible for the Agency? I believe that is the question we must answer.
    Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:34 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in that regard, it is the Minister responsible for the Agency. You would remember that, when we dealt with the Funds of the Agency in clause 17, we deleted subclause (c).
    We said, and with your permission I quote:
    “(a) moneys approved by Parliament;
    (b) donations and grants; and
    (c) any moneys that are approved by the Minister responsible for Finance.”
    We said because moneys approved by Parliament would usually come from the Ministry of Finance in any way, it would bear the stamp of the Minister for Finance.
    So even with this one, after the approval, it would definitely bear the stamp of the Minister for Finance. We do not mean that in that particular regard. The umbrella is provided by the Minister for Finance.
    Mr Speaker, so, we do not need to include that it must be done in consultation with the Minister for Finance.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    So Hon Minority Leader, what is your pleasure? Do you want us to vote on it or you would withdraw?
    Mr Iddrisu 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on some of it, with yourself as a trained lawyer, I am guided now by the Supreme Court ruling on parliamentary debates as an aid to interpretation and in many instances I would insist that you put the Question so that tomorrow, if there is the question of not understanding any aspect of this Bill, with Parliament as a reference point, this would become a good record.
    Ordinarily, I should withdraw, but I would want the Question to be put so that tomorrow, if anybody invokes the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, we would be guided by what the thinking of Parliament was on this particular process.
    Beyond Pepper v. Hart, there is now a Ghanaian ruling on the matter.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Very well.
    Hon Members, I would put the Question. The Question is that, clause 22 be amended by inserting in paragraph (c),
    line 2, after “Minister” “in consultation with the Minister for Finance”.
    Question put and amendment negatived.
    Clause 22 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 23 -- Bank account of the Fund
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member for Adentan.
    Mr Asamoa 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I need a bit of guidance here. From my understanding of what the Hon Minority Leader said, it would mean that even on the face of a palpable need to withdraw -- [Interruption.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Yes, what is the position, Hon Member for Adentan?
    Mr Asamoa 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want clarity and understanding. Is the Hon Minority Leader suggesting that on the face of it, even when, palpably, a proposed amendment ought to be withdrawn, per the Supreme Court, he needs it on record that it was voted on? In that case, it would mean crawling as he speaks, because we might have to debate everything to the bottom.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Hon Member, whatever amendment is advertised, a decision has to be taken on it unless it is withdrawn. So, if the proposer does not intend to withdraw, we would vote on it.
    Item numbered 11 (vii) -- Hon Haruna Iddrisu.
    Mr Iddrisu 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 23, line 3, delete “Minister for Finance “ and insert “Controller and Accountant-General”.
    Mr Speaker, the mandate to open an account does not vest in the Minister for Finance under the Public Financial Management Act. It is vested in the Controller and Accountant-General.
    I so submit, and to assure the Hon Member for Adentan, my senior Yaw Buaben, that it might not arise that we would go to court on this matter but for the purpose that there is a record so that the courts are guided by the thinking of the House.
    Dr Abban 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in my opinion, the Hon Minority Leader is right. [Interruption.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    The Hon Minority Leader is what? [Pause.]
    Yes, Hon Majority Leader.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, just for the avoidance of doubt. We have always maintained this standard on the Bills we have crafted in this House, we have always maintained this standard. We have always done so, but further to the enactment of the Public Finance Management Act, we need to change it. That is why I was asking him exactly where it is in the Act. And he was not too sure of it.
    Dr Anthony A. Osei 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Public Finance Management Act is a public document, and we are all expected to know where it is.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Still, it is opened to the Hon Member referring to the specific laws to quote the clause to guide The Table Office to provide a copy
    Mr Chireh 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was trying to support the Hon Minority Leader because the convention we have used here all the time is Controller and Accountant-General and not the Minister for Finance. This is because it is an activity closely monitored by the Controller and Accountant-General and he controls all our accounts.
    So where they are bringing in the Minister the Minister might minute to the schedule officer and he would never get it, but if the person writes directly seeking the consent of the Controller and Accountant-Generally, it is better that way. So I think that once the Chairman has no objection we should endorse the view of the Hon Minority Leader.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Hon Minister for Monitoring and Evaluation.
    Dr A. A. Osei 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not believe that is what my Hon Friend wanted to say. He said he rises in support of the Majority Leader.

    No. He said “Majority Leader”. That is what he said. He meant Minority Leader, and so he should correct himself.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Hon Minister, I believe in this one, you were not closely monitoring because I heard “Minority Leader”. That is why I said you were not closely monitoring.
    Hon Majority Leader, are you making the reference to guide us?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, for the National Health Insurance Act, we involved the Controller and Accountant- General, except that there we said it should either be the Controller and Accountant- General or the Auditor-General.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:44 p.m.
    Very well. There appear to be no disagreement. Yes, if you may --
    Mr Iddrisu 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, section 51 of the Public Financial Management Act, 2016 (Act 921) provides:
    “A bank account shall not be opened for any covered entity without the written approval of the Controller and Accountant-General.”
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 23 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Item numbered (vii), Clause 24
    Clause 24 -- Management of the Fund
    Mr Abban 12:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    clause 24 subclause (4), lines 1 and 2, delete “in relation to them”.
    Mr Speaker, I believe the use of this phrase was debated extensively the last time when we were considering clause 18 (1) and I believe the decision that we took should prevail in this matter too.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Abban 12:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 24, subclause (5), lines 1 and 2, delete “in relation to them”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:54 p.m.
    Very well, I believe it is consequential.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Before I proceed to put the Question on the entire clause 24, Hon Chairman, I want us to look at clause 24 (3):
    “Subject to the Ministries, Depart- ments and Agencies (Retention of Funds) Act, 2007 (Act 735), the Agency is authorised to retain all moneys realised in the performance of its functions.”
    If it is subject to and it is in that Act that you can retain the portion agreed, how can it be all? So we have to say, “notwithstanding” or “despite”. Is that right?
    We want them to retain all the moneys; not any portion of it. Is that the policy intention? If it is, then it cannot be “subject to”.
    Mr Abban 12:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on the basis of that guidance, we propose further amendment to delete the phrase, “subject to” and in its place, insert “despite”.
    Mr Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi 12:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to crave your indulgence that we do further consultation because I think the draftpersons may want to use some language and I am not sure if “despite” or “notwithstanding” would be accepted. So if we may flag it and get the best rendition and draw your attention.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:54 p.m.
    Once we get the intention clear, we can leave it to the draftpersons to capture it the way we want it.
    Mr Chireh 12:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it would still even be neater if we remove all that and say that: “the Agency is authorised to retain all moneys realised in the performance of its function”. So we do not use “subject to” any law or we “despite” any law. [Interruption] We just remove the whole of it because they are being authorised to do the job.
    So I move an amendment that the Agency is authorised to retain all moneys realised in the performance of its function.
    Mr Iddrisu 12:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think the Hon Chireh got the cue from you. I was expecting the Chairman to do same. We can further improve based on your guidance.
    The Agency is authorised despite the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (Retention of Funds) Act, 2007 (Act 735). The Agency is authorised to retain all moneys realised in the performance of its functions. I so submit.
    Mr Speaker, I was whispering to the Hon Majority Leader that even beyond Internally Generated Fund (IGF), there is now the Capping Act. Are we going to say “despite the Capping Act” because the law on capping has affected IGF and new Government policy on IGF may have to do that?
    So taking guidance from you, despite this, we can say, “the Agency is authorised to retain all moneys realised in the performance of its function.”
    Mr Speaker, in any case, we know and we can anticipate the kind of money they are likely to earn. It is not something we should be worried about. It is insignificant.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:54 p.m.
    I think once we agreed on the policy, “despite” is the appropriate legal terminology.
    So please move the amendment and then the draftpersons may sharpen it if we do not get it right.
    Mr Abban 12:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in the light of the guidance you have given, I beg to move, clause 24, subclause (3), despite the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (Retention of Funds) Act, (Act 735), the Agency is authorised to retain all moneys realised in the performance of its function.
    Mr Ahiafor 12:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to propose a further amendment to what the Chairman has said. Instead of using the words, “the Agency is authorised”, we use “shall retain all moneys realised in the performance of its functions”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:54 p.m.
    So clause 24, subclause (3) is amended, first in line 1, delete “subject to”, and substitute with “despite” and then in line 2, delete “is authorised to” and substitute with “shall”.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:04 p.m.
    That is so, Mr Speaker.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 24 as variously amended is ordered to form part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:04 p.m.
    Item number (x), clause 25?
    Clause 25 -- Disbursement of the Fund
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I got up earlier before you put the final Question on clause 24.
    I am not sure whether the rendition we have in clause 24 (2) (a) is appropriate. Clause 24 (1) says; “The Fund shall be managed and administered by the Board”, and subclause (2) says;
    “For the purpose of subsection (1), the Board shall
    (a) pursue and achieve the object of the Fund;”
    We are talking about management of the Fund. I am not too sure whether that is really necessary at this -- Clause 24 (2) (a), I tried to look at other pieces of legislation; National Health Insurance and other ones, I do not get that provision in any of them.
    I do not know whether it is appropriate for a management to have clause 24 (2) (a).
    Mr Avedzi 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that because this is the management of the Fund and not the account -- if it were the account, that would be the duty of the
    management staff of the agency. This is a Fund which must be managed by the Board because, decisions as to investment or part of that Fund is a Board function not management function.
    So I agree with what we have in the Bill, that it should be the function of the Board to manage the Fund. If it is the account of the Agency, that should be the duty of management.
    So I agree that management of the Fund should be the function of the Board.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:04 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, would you still like to propose an amendment?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is how clause 24 (2) (a) has been captured, that is my worry. I am not disputing the management function. It is how it has been captured, that was why I said that I was trying to look at other pieces of legislations that we have crafted here.
    It does not appear anywhere here, but I am not too comfortable with how it has been captured.
    “The Fund shall be managed and administered by the Board”, that is clause 24 (1), then subclause (2) says;
    “For the purpose of subsection (1), the Board shall
    (a) pursue and achieve the object of the Fund”.
    I am talking about that construction. That is my worry.
    Mr Chireh 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe what the Hon Majority Leader said makes sense.
    This is a general purpose thing but we are talking about management of the Fund, so the (a) is an objective of the whole Agency that we are creating. We should link it to the management of the Fund, but if we do not link it, it just hangs.
    I propose that he should just ask that we delete (a), because (a) does not belong to where it is placed. It is not about the management of the Fund, It is about the pursuing of the objectives of the Agency, which is provided for under the objectives and also the functions of the agency.
    Mr Iddrisu 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader's assertion is based on the principle that headnotes are a guide to interpretation, and the headnotes must summarise the content of what is contained in the particularised clause.
    In this clause, it is to pursue and achieve the object of the Fund, ensure disbursement of the Fund, initiate activities to generate money for the Fund and perform other functions. These are not essentially matters of management of the Fund.
    So like Hon Chireh said, we should delete the clause 24, Management of the Fund. Even the headnote, we have to delete it.
    Mr Speaker, you could direct the draftpersons to further look at it to get an appropriate headnote for that particular clause.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member seems to have a contrary view of what he stated in the object in clause 21. If we look at Clause 21, we would see that the object of the Fund is to provide financial resources to the Agency for the purpose of providing protection to victims, witnesses and related persons who are at risk.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:04 p.m.
    Yes, I agree with you, because it appears that the Fund has been set up specifically to ensure that there are resources available for the protection of witnesses, therefore the management of the Fund is taken independently.
    There is established Board for the Fund and so on. Their job is to manage the Fund to ensure that there is money available. I think it is appropriate and it belongs to where it is.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to propose an amendment to that in order for us to capture the sense properly. I am taking a leaf from a provision in the National Health Insurance Act.
    It relates to the management of the Fund. It says; “For the purpose of subsection (1), the Board shall allocate and disburse moneys from the Fund in order to achieve the object of the fund”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:04 p.m.
    Very well, in that case, you are proposing that Clause 24 (2) (a) should be deleted and substituted with --
    Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Abban 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that is a better rendition than what we have now.
    Clause 24 (2) (a), that for the purposes of subsection (1), the Board shall allocate and disburse -- if the Hon Majority
    Leader could help in the rendition that he gave?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:04 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, could you repeat your proposed substitution for the consideration of Hon Members?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:04 p.m.
    For the purpose of subsection (1), the Board shall allocate and disburse moneys from the Fund in order to achieve the object of the Fund.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Majority Leader's rendition cannot stand because of clause 25, Disbursement of the Fund. There is a specific clause on disbursement of the Fund, so under clause 24, where we talked about management, I do not think we should import what has already been dealt with by a specific clause in the Act into it.
    So Mr Speaker, I strongly propose that, the rendition should stand the way it is.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:04 p.m.
    I do not think they are the same things.
    Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Iddrisu 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader has a point, but I believe his rendition would be better in clause 24
    (1).
    “The Fund shall be managed and administered by the Board to achieve the object of the Fund.”
    Then all others can follow. We said that in managing and administrating the Fund, the desired goal would be to achieve the object of the Fund. So if he finds that acceptable -- Hon Leader of the House, I said that clause 24 (1) can cure your concern.
    “The Fund shall be managed and administered by the Board to achieve the object of the Fund.”
    Then we would have placed a burden on clause 24 (1), that they must administer it in a manner which achieves its desired goal or outcome, which is consistent with what he suggested, but not under clause 24 (2) (a). It is a suggestion to improve his original submission.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is about the same thing that he wants to achieve. But I would suggest to him, if we look at subclause (2 ) (b), it is supposed to follow after subclause 2 (a). If we do not have that, then it becomes difficult for us to understand the flow of it. This is because subclause 2 (b) says:
    “…ensure that disbursement of the Fund are accounted for by establishing guidelines and procedures for their management and disbursement.”
    So if it stands alone like I proposed, then subclause 2 would naturally flow from that. Otherwise, it is about the same. But certainly, subclause (2) (a) does not belong to that.
    Mr Iddrisu 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, seriously speaking, subclause (2) (b) belongs to clause 25, where the headnote is on Disbursement of the Fund. So if he wants
    -- 1:14 p.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:14 p.m.
    No, subclause (2) (b) is on guidelines to ensure accountability.
    Mr Iddrisu 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it states as follows:
    “…ensure that the disbursement of the Fund are accounted for by establishing guidelines and proce- dures for their management and disbursement.”
    Mr Speaker, the key word there is “disbursement” and the opening line is “disbursement”. We have headnote: Disbursement of the Fund.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:14 p.m.
    I beg to differ, the key words there are:
    “…by establishing guidelines and procedures for their management and disbursement.”
    So “disbursement” would come down there. But to do that we must establish guidelines and procedures to achieve disbursement before we come to it. But we still have to conclude on the appropriate rendition in subclause (2) (a).
    Mr Chireh 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think what the Hon Minority Leader proposed as a further amendment is a better arrangement for this. That is, it should come under subclause (1), where he said:
    “The Fund shall be managed and administered by the Board to achieve the object of the Fund.”
    It means that we have incorporated it in the management of the Fund and its purpose. So, if he agrees for the further amendment, then we can put the Question and resolve the matter from there.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I just quoted from two earlier Acts that we have enacted and they have that. That is the chronology of the sequence of the provisions. So I do not see why we should be splitting hairs over this.
    Mr Abban 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 25, subclause (2), paragraph (c), line 2, after “Act”, delete all the words up to end of line 5.
    So that the rendition would be:
    “The Board may approve a payment of other relevant expenses that the Board may determine as necessary in accor- dance with this Act.”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:14 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I wanted the Vice Chairman to tell us the reason for that proposal. I agree with him
    though, that maybe, the words that follow after “Act” could be captured in the Regulation. If that is the case, he should tell us.
    Mr Abban 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we thought that these areas which go to the nitty- gritty of it should be left to the Hon Minister responsible in a Regulation, so that we do not unduly restrict even the application of the Act itself.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:14 p.m.
    Shall I put the Question?
    Yes, Hon Ahiafor.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if we maintain subclause (2) (c), which says:
    “The Board may approve a payment of other relevant expenses…”
    Then it means, there must be expenses and other relevant expenses. The expenses are contained in paragraphs (a) and (b), before paragraph (c). So if we are deleting paragraphs (a) and (b), then -- [Interruption] -- Yes, he said we should delete all that -- [Interruption] -- Are we not deleting?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:14 p.m.
    They are deleting the words after “Act” in paragraph c, line 2.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:14 p.m.
    Very well, Mr Speaker.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:14 p.m.
    Hon Members, item numbered (xi).
    Mr Abban 1:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am looking at the proposed amendment and it appears to me it was captured in the way we agreed on at Committee. Otherwise, it comes to replace the various words that we deleted from clause 25, subclause (2) (c).
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    The proposed amendment does not make sense. So what do you propose to do? You probably wanted to do something else.
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we may have to do further consultation. If that amendment should be flagged, then we would know exactly what we agreed on because this does not make sense.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    Very well. We will defer the final Question on clause 25 for you to put your house in order.
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    We are grateful.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    Hon Members, item numbered (xii), clause 26.
    Clause 26 -- Authorised officers to exercise powers of the Police.
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, Clause 26, line 1, after “officers” insert “of the Agency”.
    Mr Speaker, we propose this amendment for clarity.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 26 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 28 -- Protective action.
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 28, subclause (1), line 2, before “shall” insert “in consultation with relevant agencies”.
    So that the rendition of that part would be:
    “The Attorney-General, through the Witness Protection Programme established by the Agency, in consultation with relevant agencies, shall take the necessary and reasonable steps …”.
    Mr Speaker, in line 3, delete “witness” and insert “person who satisfies the criteria specified in subsection (4)”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, are you done?
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, let me try and put the rendition together.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    Hon Member, you have not explained why you would want to delete “witness”.
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the reason we are deleting “witness” and inserting “person who satisfies the criteria specified in subsection (4)” would be to expand it in such a way that it covers all those people and not necessarily witnesses as defined in the Act.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    Hon Member, I really have a problem with the addition of the phrase “person who satisfies the criteria specified in subsection (4)”. All those persons are related to the witness. So you must be clear on the witness and persons who are related to the witness so to speak.
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is because of what is contained in subclause (4).
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am opposed to the proposed amendment because, the Act already defines who a witness is and it gives it a wider interpretation to include all persons and relatives who are related to the witness.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:24 p.m.


    So it would amount to surplusage if we have to, as it were, delete and instead of “witness” insert the phrase my Brother has proposed.

    Mr Speaker, on this basis, I urge the House to rather disapprove the proposed amendment so that we can maintain what is in the Bill or I would advise him to withdraw.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, the definition of “witness” covers everything you seek to --
    Mr Abban 1:24 p.m.
    Yes, so we have consulted among ourselves and we believe that we should withdraw the latter part of the amendment.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    So, the proposed amendment is only the insertion bewteen “Agency” and “shall” of “in consultation with relevant agencies” before “shall”.
    Hon Members, I will put the Question.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Vice Chairman says that the first leg stands. The first leg provides:
    “The Attorney-General, through the Witness Protection Programme established by the Agency, in consultation with the relevant agencies shall take the necessary and reasonable steps to protect the safety and welfare of a witness.”
    So who is going to do the communication? Who is going to take the steps?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:24 p.m.
    The Attorney-General. All the others refer to the Attorney-General.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, but the body that is taking the steps in the original rendition of clause 28 (1) is the Witness Protection Programme. It is a programme but they would discharge the responsibility of the Attorney-General.
    That is the original construction. It is the programme established by the Agency that would do that but they would carry out the orders of the Attorney-General.
    By this new construction, we are shifting the authority to embark on the taking of the steps. In that case, we are shifting it to the Attorney-General. It is not supposed to be the Attorney-General himself or herself. So, the Hon Vice Chairman should look at the construction. Mr Speaker, I believe if he would want to maintain it, it should read this:
    “The Attorney-General, in consul- tation with the relevant agencies, shall through the Witness Protection Programme established by the Agency, take the necessary and reasonable steps.”
    That is how it should be done.
    Mr Chireh 1:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not think we need this amendment. It is not necessary because, the function has been given to the Attorney-General. Then the Hon Vice Chairman says “in consultation with relevant agencies”. What are the relevant agencies?
    In any case, the functions to be taken are clear. Why does one consult when his function is clearly defined? If he consults with those other relevant agencies and they say otherwise, when indeed, that is why we are passing this law. I believe the Hon Vice Chairman should further withdraw this one and let us keep it as it is.
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I may want to propose that if the intention, “in consultation with relevance agencies”, comes after the word, ‘shall', instead of before the ‘shall', I believe the import would be made clearer so that the rendition would be:
    “The Attorney-General, through the Witness Protection Programme established by the Agency, shall in consultation with relevant agencies…”
    And I believe this would make it better —
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Hon Member, what is wrong with the existing rendition? We should always look at what we want; the Witness Protection Agency would have established the programme.
    The Attorney-General is to take action through the programme that has been established to achieve the purpose of protecting the witness.
    For this, in my view, is what the existing clause portrays. The consultation would have been done by the Agency in establishing the programme. The Attorney-General only implements the protection of the witness using the programme established.
    So I do not believe the amendment is necessary. We could achieve what we intend to achieve by leaving the clause as it is.
    Yes, Hon Chairman, what do you think?
    Mr Abban 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, we take a cue from your direction and accordingly seek to withdraw the proposed amendment.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, the Hon Chairman is seeking to withdraw the amendment so that we retain the original rendition. -- [Pause]
    Hon Leader, I am waiting for you. We want to retain the rendition as it is in the Bill.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, in clause 28?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Yes, Majority Leader, please.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, 28 is a very jinxed number --[Laughter]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    It is page 28 that has the problem, this one is clause 28, not page 28.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I started off by saying that that new introduction would complicate the provision unduly. So it was not necessary. And I have said that if they insist, then we should look at the arrangement.
    Mr Speaker, but with the under- standing, I believe that it is worth withdrawing the proposed amendment so that we have the original rendition.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Hon Members, the proposed amendment has been withdrawn.
    Amendment withdrawn by leave of the House.
    Clause 28 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 29 -- Inclusion in Witness Protection Programme.
    Mr Abban 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 29, subclause (4), line 1, after “shall” insert in writing”.
    Mr Speaker, so that the rendition would read as follows 1:34 a.m.
    “The Attorney-General shall, in writing, respond to a request under subsection (3) within seven days of receiving it”.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to propose a further amendment so that the rendition would rather read as follows:
    “The Attorney-General shall res- pond in writing, to a request under subsection (3) within seven days of receiving it.”
    Mr Speaker, I believe that becomes a better rendition than the first one.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am in support of the proposed amendment except that I would propose a further -- [Interruption.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Hon Members, Order! Order on the Majority side of the House.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, safe to proffer a further amendment to the clause in question regarding ‘within seven days of receiving it'. It should read: ‘seven days upon receipt of it'.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Yes, Hon Members, the Hon Member is proposing a further amendment for the consideration of the House.
    Hon Chairman, he says that, instead of saying ‘within seven days of receiving it', we should change it to ‘within seven days upon receipt of it'.
    Mr Abban 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that rendition is better.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Hon Members, shall I put the Question?
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Abban 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 29, subclause (5), paragraph (a), line 3, after “eighteen”, insert “year”.
    Mr Speaker, we believe that it was just an omission. We are talking about eighteen years.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr Abban 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 29, subclause (5), paragraph (b), line 2, after “eighteen”, insert “years”.
    Mr Speaker, it is consequential to the first one.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    We have done that already. Now, you are going to item numbered (xvii), where you seek to add—
    I think that is consequential, I would put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    Item xvii, Hon Chairman of Committee?
    Mr Abban 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, Clause 29, add the following new subclause:
    “(5) A person who has been refused protection by the Attorney- General after a written request has been made by that person to the Attorney-General for protection may apply to the High Court for a protection order.”
    Mr Speaker, we make this proposal so that the Attorney-General does not become the final decision maker.
    In the event that somebody feels aggrieved, then the person could go to Court to seek a determination to that effect.
    I believe it comes naturally that it should rather be subclause (6) instead of subclause (5).
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:34 a.m.
    So the addition would be subclause (6)? Very well.
    Ms Adwoa Safo 1:34 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to further propose an amendment to the new subclause (6). In line 2, delete “has been made by that person”.
    This thus makes it redundant. If you read it without “has been made by that person”, it is clear and impliedly, a request would have been made anyway.
    The new rendition would read:
    “A person who has been refused protection by the Attorney-General after a written request to the Attorney-General for protection may apply to the High Court for a protection order”.
    This is because it starts with the person any way.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am in full support of the proposed amendment because the phrase in question is a dangling modifier. It plays no role in the sentence, so I am in full support of the amendment proposed by the Hon Deputy Majority Leader.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:44 p.m.
    Any other contribution?
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 1:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to make a further proposal. By the same leg proposed by the Hon Deputy Majority Leader, I think the second “Attorney-General” in the sentence must be done away with.
    For the same reason as error of redundancy. So the new rendition would read:
    “A person who has been refused protection by the Attorney-General after a written request for protection may apply to the High Court for a protection order.”
    Mr Asamoa 1:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the next “for protection” is apparently also redundant. So the new rendition would read:
    “A person who has been refused protection by the Attorney-General after a written request may apply to the High Court for a protection order.”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:44 p.m.
    I think that is more precise. So we are deleting from line 2:
    “…has been made by that person to the Attorney-General for protection”.
    The final rendition would read as follows:
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is really not an amendment. Increasingly, we have substituted “wheres” for “ifs”. Until very recently, we used “where”.
    For instance, in clause 29 (2) (c) (ii), we would say:
    “(ii) a parent or guardian of the witness, where the witness is under the age of 18 years.
    (iii) a guardian or other person who is usually responsible for the care and control of the witness, where the witness otherwise lacks legal capacity to sign it.”
    We have now migrated back to use “if” in these instances. I just want to draw the attention of the draftpersons, if they do not find it relevant to continue with the current style. It looks like we have migrated backwards to use “if” in these instances. This is just for the draftpersons.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:44 p.m.
    Very well. The draftpersons should take note and be consistent.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 29 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:44 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, we have a Closed Sitting, shall we continue? We have finished with a whole section.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe we could continue just a little bit. This is because we must be in a position to finish this Bill, latest tomorrow. This is in order for us to begin the Right to Information Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:44 p.m.
    Very well.
    Clause 30 -- Assessing witness for inclusion in the Programme.
    Mr Abban 1:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 30, subclasue (2), line 3, delete “in relation” and insert “and the criteria for admission determined in accordance with clause 3 (b) as they relate”.
    The new rendition would read as follows:
    “(2) The Attorney-General shall not include a witness in the Pro- gramme if the Attorney-General does not have enough information to assess the matters referred to in this section and the criteria for admission determined in accordance with clause 3 (b) as they relate in relation to the witness.”
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:44 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the amendment says we should delete “in relation” and insert “and the criteria for admission determined in accordance with clause 3 (b) as they relate”.
    The subclause provides:
    “The Attorney-General shall not include a witness in the Programme if the Attorney-General does not have enough information to assess the matters referred to in this section on the criteria for admission determined in accordance with clause 3 (b) as they relate to the witness.”
    Clause 30 (3) (b) provides:
    “To achieve its object, the Agency shall
    (b) in consultation with the Attorney-General determine the criteria for admission to and removal from the Witness Protection Programme”.
    Mr Speaker, it appears confusing --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    This is what I was looking at. It is confusing, conflicting and rather nebulous.
    I believe the addition may not be necessary.
    Mr Abban 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we seek to withdraw the proposed amendment.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Hon Member, are you withdrawing the entire amendment or just the last addition? What about the “in relation to”?
    Mr Abban 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with all due respect, the withdrawal of the proposed amendment would mean that “in relation to” would still be there.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Very well.
    Ms Safo 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe the cross referencing to clause 3 (b) in the Bill is intended to reinforce the responsibility of the Attorney-General in determining the criteria for admission.
    Mr Speaker, so I am proposing a further amendment which would read --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Hon Deputy Majority Leader, but if the thing is there already in the Bill, do we need to ask the Hon Minister to work with that before he works with it by another clause? It is one on the criteria he is bound to use in any case. So, if we do not refer to it in the next clause, it does not make any difference.
    Ms Safo 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is purposely for the avoidance of doubt. That is the reason for cross-referencing, you would not have to state the entire provision, but just to re-emphasise the point that there is a preceding section that talks about the issue that is being considered in this section.
    Mr Speaker, so I am proposing that in the new rendition, we delete the words “determined in accordance with” which is in the amendment that is being proposed, so that we stick to inserting “and the criteria for admission”. I am proposing under clause 3 (b).
    Mr Speaker, so, the new rendition would read 1:54 p.m.
    “The Attorney-General shall not include the witness in the Pro- gramme if the Attorney-General does not have enough information to assess the matters referred to in this section and the criteria for admission under clause 3 (b).”
    Mr Yaw Buaben Asamoa 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in as much as the Hon Deputy Majority Leader seeks to tailor the provision, we still believe that clause 3 (b), as it stands, does not have any meat yet and it is likely to be fully fleshed out under regulations.
    Therefore, that cross-reference may not be extremely necessary at this stage. As withdrawn, we could let this stand. This is because all of clause 30 (1) provides criteria for assessment. Clause 30 (1) provides criteria in extension for assessment. Therefore if clause 3 (b) would be expanded in regulations, it may not be necessary to still maintain that cross-reference.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Clause 3 (b) does not provide any regulations. It only says that it may be determined in consultation with the Attorney-General. So, if you refer to it, it does not add any value to this clause in my view.
    Mr Asamoa 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am saying that the regulations would be provided under section 59 and those regulations are likely to contain the matters that are supposed to be provided for under clause 3 (b). Therefore the cross-reference may not be necessary.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    So at this point, reference to which may not be helpful?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as the Hon Deputy Majority Leader said, it is just for the avoidance of doubt and I thought that was the import of the original amendment proposed by the Committee.
    Mr Speaker, a subsidiary legislation -- an instrument cannot introduce anything substantial that is not contained in the Bill already. So what the Hon Yaw Asamoa is saying, really, is not correct. What the Hon Deputy Majority Leader is attempting
    to do, as the Committee itself has done is to embody the clause 3 (b) into clause 30 (2). So that we know the firm foundation where the exemption of the witness would be.
    Mr Speaker, so I believe it is just for the avoidance of doubt. How it has been formulated by the Hon Deputy Majority Leader, it captures the sense proposed by the Committee. But it is better expressed in the way she had formulated it. So we can go with the proposal from the Hon Deputy Majority Leader.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Very well.
    Hon Deputy Majority Leader, kindly reformulate your amendment so that I can put the Question on it.
    Ms Safo 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the new rendition would read: “The Attorney-General shall not include the witness in the programme if the Attorney-General does not have enough information to assess the matters referred to in this section and the criteria for admission under clause 3 (b).”
    Thank you.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 30 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Hon Members, it is past 2.00 o'clock and we have a Closed Sitting.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would plead with you to take us to clause 34. We have just two amendments with respect to two clauses. There are no further amendments until clause 57 -- that would mean that if we finish with it, we
    are taking ourselves to clause 56. So let us endeavour to complete clauses 31 and
    34.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Hon Available Minority Leader; what is your pleasure? The Hon Majority Leader says we should extend Sitting and go to clause
    34.
    Mrs Cudjoe Ghansah 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I support that we should extend Sitting.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Very well. In that case and having regards with the state of Business of the House, I direct that the House sits outside the regular Sitting hours.
    Item numbered XIX?
    Clause 31 -- Memorandum of Understanding
    Mr Abban 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    Clause 31 — Headnote, delete “Memorandum of Understanding” and insert “Witness Protection Agreement”
    Mr Speaker, we believe that that speaks to it better than just the “Memorandum of Understanding”. It also captures the content better.
    Mr Abban 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we felt that what is being done here is actually an agreement and it captures the sense better than just using “Memorandum of Understanding”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    I would put the Question. [Interruptions] There is nobody on his or her feet.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:04 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, what is the import of the “Memorandum of Understanding” in this case? [Pause.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:04 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member for Asante Akyem Central?
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that at the Committee level we were of the opinion that --
    If you look at the contents of the clause 31, after the first line, it goes to the specifics. So, what is the “Memorandum of Understanding” capturing and we believe it talks about the “Witness Protection Agreement”.
    That is why we did not want to leave it at the “Memorandum of Understanding” as the head note which is all encompassing but to specifically limit ourselves to what is being proposed. That is the reason; it captures it better than just the words, “Memorandum of Understanding”.
    The “Memorandum of Understanding” is only a prelude to what is being proposed here, and therefore we believe that the “Witness Protection Agreement” is a better rendition.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:04 p.m.
    My only worry is whether the legal implications of “Memorandum of Understanding” and “Witness Protection Agreement” are the same.
    Mr Anyimadu-Antwi 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not think so, but I believe one is a subset of the other. Like I have said, the “Witness Protection Agreement” is also a memorandum of understanding but if we say, “Memorandum of Understanding”, it is very wide in legal terms and we believe that we needed to be specific here.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I recall that, at the Committee level the legality of this document came up. But it was impressed upon us that it was a way of regulating, as it were, the relationship that would exist between the persons who would come under the programme and the institution.
    So we posed a further question whether this is remediable in law when somebody is aggrieved by a breach of the content and eventually, the Committee was impressed upon to accept the position of the proposers of the Bill that it is important that we have recourse to a form of a document that would regulate the relationship and name it as a memorandum of understanding.
    So I believe the clear intent in framing this is to ensure that there would be an agreed terms and conditions governing the relationship between the institution and anybody who comes under the programme. That is the intent of the framers of this particular clause. That is what we gathered from the Committee level. Other Members are here and I believe they could speak to it.
    Indeed, that is why it survived and it is before plenary.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, when I raised the matter, you went further to pose a question. Is the import of a memorandum of understanding the same as an agreement? If it is, then, perhaps we can begin by saying that the “Witness
    Protection Agreement” shall be a memorandum of understanding and then we proceed to capture it as a headnote. Other than that I do not see the relevance of what the Committee is proposing to us at all.

    They should gather courage to say that they have withdrawn.
    Mr Abban 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we could see the direction of the House and on the basis of that we seek your kind indulgence to withdraw the proposed amendment.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:04 p.m.
    Let us go to item numbered (xx).
    Mr Abban 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
    clause 31, subclause (6), line 1, delete “as soon as practicable” and insert “within seven days”.
    Mr Speaker, we would want to have certainty so that, “as soon as practicable” does not become a tool for further delays.
    Ms Safo 2:04 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to further enquire from the Chairperson of the Committee what informed them of that particular time period; seven days as opposed to 14 days?
    I ask this because looking at the Civil Procedure Act, the time period within which one files processes -- So I would want to ask why they decided on seven days as opposed to 14 or any other day?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    Yes, Hon acting Chairman of the Committee, why is seven days preferable?
    Mr Abban 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we are dealing with an Act that is talking about protection and risk. So it is for urgency and expeditious action. That is why we thought that within seven days they should be able to deal with these things.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    So the seven days is to ensure expedited action from the Attorney-General giving the notice within seven days after the Agreement has been signed. In my opinion, it is reasonable.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 31 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clauses 32 and 33 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 34 -- Cessation of protection and assistance.
    Mr Abban 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe this must be a mistake because there is no subclause (6) under clause 34.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    So do what you have to do.
    Mr Abban 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in that regard, I beg to withdraw this amendment since it is of no consequence.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker), subclause (1), line 3.
    Mr Abban 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thank the Hon Majority Leader; we have found it.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 34, subclause (1), line 3 delete “request” and insert “inform”.
    The new rendition would be that:
    “(1) Protection and assistance provided under the Programme to a participant shall be ter- minated by the Attorney-General if the participant informs in writing that it be terminated.
    Mr Speaker, a further proposed amendment is that, the verb “inform” should be “informs” since it is in the third person singular.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    Hon Members, does it sound right?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Yes.
    Very well.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 34 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, again, on the issue that I raised about the substitution of the word “where” for “if” in these constructions, I believe we should rather have “where” and not “if”.
    Like clause 34, subclause (2) for instance should read:
    “Protection assistance provided under the Programme may be terminated by the Attorney-General where:
    (a) the participant deliberately breaches a term where anything done or intended to be done by the participant is …”

    Mr Speaker, it is much more appropriate than migrating backwards to employ the word “if” in these circumstances, but again, we would leave it to the drafts persons.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    Very well. It is well noted.
    Hon Majority Leader, should we go through clause 35 to 57?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, because there are no amendments, I guess we could go through them quickly.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    Hon Members, there are no advertised amendments in the clauses onward to clause --
    Hon Jinapor, I can hear you from hear. Kindly let your voice go down.
    Clause 35 - 37 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 38 -- Causing harm to witness.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is a minor typographical error. In line 1, I believe the word there is “assaults” and not “assult”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    Which clause are we talking about?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Clause 38.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    “A person who threatens assaults --”
    Very well.
    Hon Chairman, I believe the amendment is noted. “Assaults” is spelt “a-s-s-a-u-l- ts”.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is so.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    Very well. So we would take that amendment. It is that in line 1, delete “assults” and insert “assaults”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 38 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 39 -- Identifying documents
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    There is no advertised amendment. I would put the Question.
    Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 39 (a) provides:
    “39. Without limiting the powers of the Attorney-General under the section 28, the Attorney-General may apply for a document necessary
    (a) To allow a witness to establish a new identity;
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:14 p.m.
    I am sorry. I did not hear you.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:14 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was just relating to the provisions of clause 39 (a).
    “Without limiting the powers of the Attorney-General under the section 28, the Attorney-General may apply for a document necessary
    (a)To allow a witness to establish a new identity;”
    Mr Speaker, I was just looking at the events of yesterday. So the Attorney- General is clothed with the power to change the identity of a person, however, that change is effective. I am relating it to the events of yesterday, the exposé of Anas Arimmeyaw Anas such that the Attorney-General could grant that.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:24 p.m.
    Well, he is not a witness in any case yet, to the best of my knowledge.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:24 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you.
    Clause 39 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 40 to 56 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:24 p.m.
    That brings us to the end of the Consideration Stage.
    Mr Speaker 2:24 p.m.
    Where is the Marshall? Can he come and re-position the Mace? [Pause]
    Hon Members, it is way past our closing time.
    ADJOURNMENT 2:24 p.m.