Debates of 2 Nov 2018

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:02 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:02 a.m.
Mr Speaker 10:02 a.m.
Hon Members, we have the Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 1st November, 2018, for correction.

Hon Members, we also have the Official Report of 30th October, 2018, for correction.

Hon Members, any corrections?
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 10:02 a.m.
Majority Leader/ Chairman of the Business Committee (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu) 10:02 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Com- mittee met yesterday, Thursday, 1st November, 2018 and arranged Business of the House for the Second Week ending Friday, 9th November, 2018.
Mr Speaker, the Committee accordingly submits its report as follows 10:02 a.m.
Arrangement of Business
Formal Communications by the Speaker
Mr Speaker, you may read any available communication to the House.
Question(s)
Mr Speaker, the Business Committee has scheduled the following Ministers to respond to Questions asked of them during the Week:
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister for Local Government and Rural Development signalled yesterday in the evening that she is not going to be available. It has been decided that as much as possible, the Hon Ministers themselves should be in this House to respond to Questions and that being the case, because the Hon Minister for Local Government and Rural Development is travelling outside the country this weekend and returning on Wednesday, we may possibly have to relocate her to either Thursday or the ensuing week.
Mr Speaker, my information is that you have admitted two additional Urgent Questions. Those Urgent Questions relating to roads may be answered on Friday of next week. So under this circumstance, instead of the 14 Questions slated for the House and for Hon Ministers to respond to, we may have 16 Questions that Hon Ministers may have to respond to.
Mr Speaker, Five (5) Ministers are expected to attend upon the House to respond to sixteen (16) Questions during the week. The Questions are of the following types:
i. Urgent - 3
ii Oral - 13
Statements
Mr Speaker, pursuant to Order 70(2), Ministers of State may be permitted to make Statements of Government policies. Statements duly admitted by Mr Speaker may be made in the House by Hon Members in accordance with Order 72.
Bills, Papers and Reports
Mr Speaker, Bills may be presented to the House for First Reading in accordance with Order 120. However, those of urgent
No. of Question(s)
i. Minister for Business Development 1
ii. Minister for Local Government and Rural Development 1
iii. Minister for Trade and Industry 3
iv. Minister for the Interior 4
v. Minister for Roads and Highways 5
Total number of Questions 14
nature may be taken through the various stages in one day in accordance with Order 119.
Pursuant to Order 75, Papers for presentation to the House may be placed on the Order Paper for laying. Committee reports may also be presented to the House for consideration.
Motions and Resolutions
Mr Speaker, Motions may be debated and their consequential Resolutions, if any, taken during the week.
The Business Committee reiterates the recommendation made during the presentation of the Business Statement for the First Week that the House devotes more time to the consideration stage of the Right to Information Bill, 2018, to enable the completion of this stage of the Bill before the introduction of the Budget.
All Hon Members are hereby encouraged to avail themselves for business in plenary.
Presentation of the Budget
The Committee takes this opportunity to inform Hon Members that the Budget Statement and Economic Policy of the Government for the year ending 31st December, 2019 is expected to be presented in the House during the third week of this Meeting. Further information in this regard would be communicated in due course.
Conclusion
Mr Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 160(2) and subject to Standing Order 53, the Committee submits to this Honourable House the order in which the Business of the House shall be

taken during the week under consi- deration.

Questions --

*306. Mr Edward Abambire Bawa (Bongo): To ask the Minister for Business Development how the private sector partner for the National Entrepreneurial and Innovation Plan (NEIP) was procured and how much was involved.

*391. Mr Yaw Afful (Jaman South): To ask the Minister for Local Government and Rural Development whether the Ministry is aware of the evacuation of refuse dumps at Kwasibuorkrom and Katakyiekrom in the Jaman South District, and if so, whether it was awarded on contract, and what the associated cost is.

Statements

Motions --

(a) Adoption of the Report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Report of the Auditor-General on the Public Accounts of Ghana (Consolidated Fund) for the Year ended 31st December, 2015.

(b) Adoption of the Report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Report of the Auditor-General on the Public Accounts of Ghana (Ministries, Departments and other Agencies of the Central Government) for the year ended 31st December, 2015.

Consideration Stage of Bills --

Right to Information Bill, 2018. (Continuation of Debate)

Committee sittings.

Questions --

*394. Mr Daniel Kwesi Ashiamah (Buem): To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Ministry will take into consideration the environmental impact of the ‘One District, One Factory' initiative and how the Ministry plans to deal with such impact.

*395. Mr Yusif Sulemana (Bole/ Bamboi): To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry where the factories to be established in 2018 under the Government's flagship programme, ‘One district, One Factory', would be located.

*427. Alhaji Inusah Abdulai Bistav Fuseini (Tamale Central): To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry what plans the Ministry has put in place to control the piracy of indigenous designs and logo of wax prints from the textile manufacturing industries which is collapsing these industries.

Statements --

Consideration Stage of Bills --

Right to Information Bill, 2018. (Continuation of Debate)

Committee sittings.

Questions --

*428. Mr Kwame Governs Agbodza (Adaklu): To ask the Minister for the Interior the circumstances leading to the recall of the Ghana Police Unit on United Nations mission in South Sudan on allegations of sexual misconduct.

*429. Mr James Agalga (Builsa North): To ask the Minister for the Interior whether there are plans to implement the Arms Trade Treaty which was acceded to and ratified by Parliament in 2015.

*445. Dr Clement A. Apaak (Builsa South): To ask the Minister for the Interior when a District Police Commander will be posted to Builsa South to head the Builsa South Divisional Police Headquarters and what is being done to improve law and order in Builsa South.

*463. Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa (North Tongu): To ask the Minister for the Interior whether a statement from the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, dated February 24, 2018, alleging that UN Peacekeepers from Ghana and part of a Formed Police Unit had engaged in sexual exploitation, has come to the Ministry's attention and if so, what responsive measures are being taken by the Ministry.

Statements --

Presentation of Papers --

(a) Report of the Finance Com- mittee on the Financing Agree- ment between the Government of the Republic of Ghana and the International Development Association (IDA) of the World

Bank Group for an amount of twenty-seven million, nine hundred thousand Special Drawing Rights (SDR27,900, 000.00) [Equivalent to US$40 million] to finance the proposed Tourism Development Project.

(b) Report of the Finance Com- mittee on the Request for the Utilisation of a Portion of GETFund's Revenues for the Debt Service of a Medium Term Loan Facility of the cedi equivalent of one billion, five hundred million united states dollars (US$1,500,000,000) to be used for Educational Infra- structure.

(c) Report of the Finance Com- mittee on the Protocol of

Amendment to the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonisation of Customs Procedures.

Motion --

Adoption of the Report of the Committee of Privileges on Breach of Privilege and Contemptuous Remarks Allegedly Made by the Hon Member for Assin Central Constituency, Mr. Ken Ohene Agyapong.

Consideration Stage of Bills --

Right to Information Bill, 2018. (Continuation of Debate)

Committee Sittings.

Urgent Question --
Mr Ras Mubarak (Kumbungu) 10:15 a.m.
To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways why the 17.4km Zugu - Satani road, which is in very poor condition was not graded in the 2017 maintenance programme contrary to assurances to Parliament on June 16, 2017, that the road was programmed for grading in 2017.
Questions --
*476. Mr Twumasi Kwame Ampofo (Sene West):To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways when the construction of the following roads in the Sene West Constituency will be completed: (i) Atebubu - Kwame Danso (ii) Kwame Danso - Akyeremade Battor (iii) Kwame Danso - Konkonse (iv) Kyeamekrom - Tatto Bator (v) Kyeamekrom - Chababa (vi) Shafa Zongo - Dogondage.
*477. Mrs Comfort Doyoe Cudjoe- Ghansah (Ada): To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways the current state of the implementation of the refurbishment works on the Ada Foah town roads in the Ada Constituency.
*478. Ms Joycelyn Tetteh (North Dayi): To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways when the construction of the following roads will commence: (i) Tsrukpe - Botoku (ii) Sabadu - Awatey (iii) Vakpo - Wusuta (iv) Botoku - Bradatornu.
*479. Mr Kobena Mensah Woyome (South Tongu): To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways when the following roads will be constructed: (i) Kodzi Junction (Gladysco Junction) - Agbeve (ii) Lolito Junction - Galotse - Hawuii.
Statements
Motions --
Adoption of the Report of the Finance Committee on the Protocol of Amendment to the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonisation of Customs Procedures.
Consequential Resolution
Consideration Stage of Bills --
Right to Information Bill, 2018. (Continuation of Debate)
Committee sittings.

Mr Speaker, consequently, it may become necessary, going forward into next week, to have extended Sittings on the consideration of the Right to Information Bill, 2018, to enable the House conclude the consideration of the Bill before the 15th of November, 2018, when the Budget Statement and Economic Policy of Government for the year ending 31st December, 2019, is likely to be introduced in the House. Hon Members are hereby encouraged to avail themselves for Business in Plenary.

Mr Speaker, the Business Committee takes this opportunity to inform Hon Members that the Budget Statement and the Economic Policy of Government for the year ending 31st December, 2019 is expected to be presented in the House during the Third Week of this Meeting, precisely Tuesday. It is likely to be presented on the 15th of November, 2018. Further information, if necessary in this regard, would be communicated in due course.

Mr Speaker, just so that Hon Members may stand prepared as we do know, we would have the Post-Budget Meeting in respect of the presentation and indeed consideration of the Budget, the weekend following after the presentation of the Budget.

Mr Speaker, the following Monday, the House would start the debate on the principles underpinning the Budget. That is so because the constitutional instruments relating to the conduct of the referendum has been laid in this House. It is required to see maturation before the end of November 2018.

Therefore, that would mean that we would have to conscript two Mondays and have Sittings on these Mondays. Sittings on these two Mondays would be devoted to the debate of the principles underpinning the Budget.

Mr Speaker, in concluding, allow me to reiterate the point that because you have admitted two more Urgent Questions, those would be added to the Urgent Question slated for Friday, the 9th of November, 2018.
rose
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Hon Member?
Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we thank the Hon Majority Leader for the Business Statement.
Mr Speaker, on the issue of Hon Ministers being present to answer Questions, there has been an ongoing concern for making sure that substantive Ministers are available to answer the Questions. We just started the Meeting and we already have the first excuse from the Minister for Local Government and
Dr Clement Apaak 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, let me extend my felicitations to the Hon Majority Leader and Chairman of the Business Committee for the Business Statement presented.
Mr Speaker, my comment is more of a question of seeking guidance. I have taken a look at Part Nine of the Standing Orders; where it is outlined regarding Questions to Ministers and other Members.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Hon Member, is it from the beginning of Part Nine to the end?
Dr Apaak 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am looking at Order 65.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
You may proceed.
Dr Apaak 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, my question, generally, is what the process is regarding Questions that may have been posed in the previous Meeting being rolled over in the current Meeting. This is because some Questions that Hon Members pose are timeless, yet it looks as though at the beginning of every Meeting, those Questions that are outstanding from the previous Meeting do not see the light of day.
So I would want to seek clearance with regard to this quagmire. This is because if we would have to refile Questions that we filed in the previous Meeting, I think that it would be important that it is clarified.
Mr Speaker, I thank you.
Mr Daniel Ashiamah 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, first of all, I thank the Hon Majority Leader for the Business Statement.
Mr Speaker, I would want to find out from him what the House is doing about the Public Private Partnership Act (PPP Act); we had a hint in the previous Government. I believe the PPP Act is very essential; an Act that enhances trans- parency in doing business in this country.
Mr Speaker, looking at the trend today, even the Ministry of Trade and Industry is talking about One District, One Factory (IDIF) being done by PPP, meanwhile I do not know whether we have the Act yet. So I would want to find out what we have to do to ensure that we have that Act before indulging in PPP.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to just assure the Leader of the House that he can count on our support for the mandatory article 11, on the 21 days on any instrument that would
be introduced. I am sure with your good self, we would make the appropriate interventions to ensure that the Electoral Commission's Paper laid, would be before the Committee of Subsidiary Legislation to be examined.
We have seen instruments in this House, which naturally would become law by virtue of article 11 of the Constitution once 21 days pass, whether Parliament considers its Report or not.
Mr Speaker, tactically, we have avoided bringing it to the Floor for debate. I would insist that on some of these matters, we do not wait and just count 21 days. A referendum is a national exercise, and the people of Ghana would want to know -- I could give instances of one or two Reports that were not a matter of counting 21 days, but we were not apprised and given an opportunity to go into the Report of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation.
Mr Speaker, secondly, we lost the opportunity at the Business Committee meeting yesterday because we wanted to respect the punctuality principle. A request was made to you on the fees of the universities. We should get it done because it is affecting students, management and governance of the universities. We must make a determination on that for them.
Mr Speaker, we are ready except that when the Hon Leader said that the debate would start on Monday, I insist that he should speak with certainty.
When he says “likely”, he should tell us that the Budget Statement would be read on 15th November, 2018, because the business and international communities will listen to him and they would want to know when the Budget Statement and Economic policy of the Government would be read. I am not excited with “likely”.
When it comes to the Budget Statement, we must speak with certainty and accuracy that on 15th November, 2018 - It is good for those who use the Budget Statement for purposes of planning as well as the diplomatic community.
Mr Speaker, we thank the Hon Majority Leader. I am sure this is the Business. He has emphasised that he is in charge. Hon Ministers must avail themselves, and stop giving us excuses and sending Hon Deputy Ministers. As I have said, we are human. When the exigencies require, we would adjust accordingly; except that we have seen that some Hon Ministers are not just interested in the Business of this House. We hardly see them here.
Mr Speaker, I thank you.
Mr Speaker 10:15 a.m.
Thank you very much.
Hon Majority Leader and Leader of the House?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank Hon Members for the supplements and enquiries they have made relating to the Business for the ensuing week.
Mr Speaker, the concerns of Hon Members have been that, as much as possible, substantive Hon Ministers should be present in the House to respond to Questions.
I made a strong case for this yesterday at Cabinet. I assure the House that the President ruled that Hon Ministers avail themselves to answer Questions. The President himself has been an Hon Minister before. During his tenure as the Hon Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration, although he
travelled out a lot, he made time to be in the House to respond to Questions. So the President insists that Hon Ministers must avail themselves to answer to Questions filed.
Mr Speaker, but sometimes, trans- mission of Questions to Hon Ministers or to the Ministries is delayed a bit. Of course, we also work within a timeframe. Sometimes Mr Speaker admits Questions, but transmission delays.
Sometimes the Questions are trans- mitted after Mr Speaker has admitted them; it goes to the Ministry, yet the Hon Minister would not have sighted it and maybe, two or three days before the Hon Minister is due to answer the Questions, the directors then give the Answer to the Hon Minister.
Yesterday, when I related to the Question that the Hon Minister for Local Government and Rural Development would have to respond to, she was not aware that a Question had been filed. I insisted and even broached the subject matter to her, whereupon she said that she would do everything possioble to be present in the House.
Unfortunately, she is already pro- grammed to travel out tomorrow, so she cannot be with us. She is not due back in the country until Wednesday night. That explains why she has applied to possibly come to the House on either Thursday or Friday. I would look at the times to see what is possible.
Hon Dr Clement Apaak raised issues about rolling over Questions. The principle is that when referrals are made to Committees, they are not supposed to stay within the ambit of the Committee for more than three months within a current Meeting.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Thank you very much. Both Hon Leaders must endeavour to convey to the Hon Minister that Wednesday is very much recommended and for very good reasons. Hon Members will need to have the documents for some two days so as to go on the weekend retreat. Of course, resource persons must also read, otherwise, we shall have not too meaningful an exercise and this, I believe, can be easily done.
In fact, I have personally had a discussion in the company of the Hon Majority Leader with the Hon Minister impressing this point on him and I trust that with the joint exercise of both Hon Leaders, this can be ensured. This is because it is very important for our programme and for efficacious the examination and study of the Budget.
On that note, the Business Statement, as presented, is hereby admitted.
Item listed as number 4 -- Questions.
It is good to see that the Hon Minister is already here and has been here from the very beginning. So Hon Minister, you would kindly take the relevant chair for us to proceed with that Business. We must record our appreciation for your continuing participation when it comes to Questions and for that matter, your punctuality in the same regard. Hear! Hear!
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 10:35 a.m.
MINISTRY OF ROADS AND 10:35 a.m.
HIGHWAYS 10:35 a.m.
Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to ask the Question on behalf of the Hon Member for Gomoa Central.
Q. 459. Mr Armah-Kofi Buah (on behalf of Ms Naana Eyiah) asked the Minister for Roads and Highways what plans the Ministry had to construct the following roads in Gomoa Central:
i) Gomoa Abaasa - Gomoa Ayensuadze
ii) Gomoa Awobrew - Gomoa Nsuaem
iii) Gomoa Achiase - Gomoa Dahom
iv) Gomoa Nndiwom - Gomoa Lome
v) Gomoa Ekwamkrom - Gomoa Manso.
Minister for Roads and Highways (Mr Kwasi Amoako-Atta) 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to first thank you for your kind words.
Mr Speaker, I would start with the Gomoa Abassa-Gomoa Ayensuadze road as the itemised list indicates.
(i) Gomoa Abaasa - Gomoa Ayensuadze
Background
The Gomoa Abaasa -- Gomoa Ayensuadze feeder road is 3.20km and located in the Gomoa Central district of the Central Region. It is a gravel road with poor surface condition.
Current programme
There is no current upgrading programme on the road.
Future programme
The road has been programmed for bituminous surfacing during this last quarter of the year 2018. The evaluation report on the procurement process has been submitted to the Central Tender Review Board awaiting its concurrent approval.
(ii) Gomoa Awobrew -- Gomoa Nsuaem
Background
The Gomoa Awobrew -- Gomoa Nsuaem feeder road is 4.20km and located in the Gomoa Central District of the Central region. It is a gravel road with poor surface condition.
Current programme
There is no upgrading programme on the road.

Future programme

Engineering studies have been carried out on the above road and is programmed to be procured for upgrading to bituminous surfacing under the Department of Feeder Road's 2019 budget. However, project execution will be subject to the availability of funds.

(iii) Gomoa Achiase -- Gomoa Dahom

The road is engineered and it is 4.00km in length.

Background

The Gomoa Achiase -- Gomoa Dahom feeder road is 4.0km long and located in the Gomoa Central District of the Central region. It is a gravel road with poor surface condition.

Current programme

There is no upgrading programme on the road

Future programme

The road was programmed for bitu- minous surfacing during the last quarter of year 2018. The evaluation report on the procurement process has been submitted to the Central Tender Review Board waiting for its concurrent approval.

(iv) Gomoa Nduem -- Gomoa Lome

The road is engineered and it is 6.00km in length.

Background

The Gomoa Nduem — Gomoa Lome feeder road is 6.0km and located in the Gomoa Central District of the Central Region. It is a gravel' road in poor condition.

Current programme

There is no upgrading programme on the road.

Future programme

The road was programmed for bituminous surfacing during the last quarter of year 2018. The evaluation report on the procurement of the works has been submitted to the Central Tender Review Board waiting its concurrent approval.

(v) Gomoa Ekwamkrom -- Gomoa Manso

Background

The Gomoa Ekwamkrom - Gomoa Manso feeder road is 3.20km and located in the Gomoa Central District of the Central Region. It is a gravel road in poor condition.

Current programme

The contract for the upgrading of the Gomoa Ekwamkrom -- Gomoa Manso and others (11,80km) was awarded on 24th December, 2015, for upgrading to bituminous surfacing. The contract commenced on 17th June, 2016, and was expected to be completed on 19th March,

2018.

Activities undertaken to-date on Gomoa Ekwamkrom — Gomoa Manso feeder road alone include:

Construction of l/700x900mm U- culverts = 2Nos;

Construction of 1/900mm Pipe culverts = 2Nos;

Construction of 450x450x150mm U- drains = 3186m;

Construction of 600x600x150mm U- drains = 2122m;

Construction of 900x900x 150mm U- drain = 222m;

Construction of 1200x1200mm rectangular drains = 228m;

Sub-base and base - 2.5km.

Other roads in the contract package include;

Amanful Town Roads (1.25km),

Nyakrom Town Roads (4.85km) and

Agona Nyakrom Senior High School Internal Roads (2.58km).

The project is being financed from the Ghana Road Fund and overall physical progress of work is 40 per cent.
Mr Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Minister, thank you very much.
Hon Buah, any follow-up questions?
Mr Buah 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the Hon Minister's Answer, he admitted that the Gomoa Abaasa to Gomoa Ayensuadze road is in a very poor condition.
In fact, he said that it is a gravel road with poor surface condition, yet the Hon Minister said that there was no current upgrading programme for that road. The Hon Minister also said that the evaluation report and the procurement process has been submitted to the Central Tender Review Board awaiting approval.
Mr Speaker, could the Hon Minister inform us when the approval would be secured and having regard to the poor nature of the road that he admitted, could he assure the people of Gomoa about the plans he has to really carry out the surfacing of the road?
Mr Amoako-Attah 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I wish to assure my Hon Colleague that anything sent to the Central Review Committee from my Ministry is always followed up.
I am very hopeful that judging from the scheme of work and what has gone on in the past and the relationship between us and the Committee, within a month, the approval should be received.
Mr Speaker, so I am hopeful that within the month of November, we should get the approval from the Central Review Committee, but before that, I would further assure him that our normal and routine periodic maintenance programme would
cover the road. I have indicated that the road is not in good condition. We would keep an eye on it until it has been properly worked on to bituminous level.
Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr Buah 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, on the Gomoa Ekwamkrom to Gomoa Manso road, the Hon Minister chronicled the progress that has been made with the construction of the road.
Mr Speaker, he said that progress is up to 40 per cent and he indicated that the slow progress of work is due to the delay in the payment of work done. Could the Hon Minister assure the people of Gomoa what efforts are being made to ensure that the outstanding payments are made so that the contractor could complete the work?
Mr Amoako-Attah 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as indicated in my Answer, this road has been captured under the Road Fund and I could assure him that we are now in a position to make periodic payments from the Road Fund following its refinancing.
Mr Speaker, that would be done and we would ensure regular payments on whatever is due for this road for the work to be carried out.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Thank you. Question numbered 473 which stands in the name of the Hon Member for Hohoe
Construction of Motorable Road to Wli- Todzi
Dr (Mrs) Bernice Adiku Heloo asked the Minister for Roads and Highways what plans exist for the construction of a motorable road to Wli-Todzi.
Mr Amoako-Attah 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
Background
The Wli-Todzi road is a 7km unengineered feeder road in the Hohoe Municipality of the Volta Region. It starts from Wli town (located at the foot of the Agumatsa Range) to Todzi (located at the top of the mountain), a border town with the Republic of Togo. The existing road surface is mainly rocky and in poor condition.
Current programme
There is no upgrading or rehabilitation programme on the road.
Future programme
Engineering design studies were planned to be undertaken on the above road in the first quarter of 2018. However, this could not be done due to logistical constraints.
The proposed studies are therefore planned to be undertaken within the first quarter of 2019, thereafter the appropriate improvement interventions will be considered under the Department of Feeder Roads (DFR) periodic maintenance programme when funds are available.
Dr (Mrs) Heloo 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Hon Minister whether he is aware that there is also an alternative route from Fodome Xelu? This has been worked on by former Municipal Chief Executives and now it is also being worked on with the communities.
I would like to know whether he would consider this alternative route, which is more motorable, and thus work on it in the interim for the people to be able to move freely.
Mr Amoako-Attah 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would have to check whether that alternative road leads to Wli-Todzi. I am aware that there is an alternative road. That is why we are taking steps to ensure that the existing road is worked on properly because it would involve a lot of work. It must be properly engineered because of its rocky nature.
Until that is done, the alternative route is being used though the existing one is shorter in distance. What I am not too sure of, which we have to find out is if it will lead to Wli-Todzi.
But I can assure the Hon Member that until that main road is constructed, obviously, it makes a lot of sense. That is what we are expected to do to ensure that the alternative route is maintained to offer smooth driving surface for motorists. I can assure her of that.
Dr (Mrs) Heloo 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to assure the Hon Minister that the alternative route leads to Wli-Todzi. I have been on it myself, so I would be glad if he could follow up on that while we think of the major one.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Thank you, Hon Member, if you are done then we would move on to question numbered 474. Yes, Hon Member for Garu?
Construction of Garu to Nakpanduri Road
Mr Albert Akuka Alalzuuga asked the Minister for Roads and Highways when the road from Garu to Nakpanduri would be constructed.
Mr Amoako-Attah 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
Background
The Garu - Napkanduri Road is a 30km section of the National Route N2, also termed as the Eastern Corridor Road. This road section stretches from Nakpanduri in the Bunkprugu Yunyoo District of the Northern Region to Garu in the Garu Tempane District of the Upper East Region.
The first 2km in Garu town and the last 4km to Nakpanduri are bituminous surface and both sections are in fair surface condition.
The remaining 24km section (thus km 2.0 — km 26.0) is gravel surface and in fair condition.
Future programme
The Garu-Napkahduri Road is to be upgraded/rehabilitated to bituminous surface under the next phase of the Eastern Corridor Road Development Programme.
In the meantime, routine maintenance (reshaping) and gravel patching works are being undertaken to ensure an all-year motorability of the road.
Mr Alalzuuga 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the Hon Minister to the fact that just four days ago, I used the road on my way back here. The portions that he is talking about has deteriorated badly due to the rains. In fact, one can hardly move for 20 kilometres per hour on that road.
The Hon Minister has described it as fair, so I wanted to draw his attention to it.
The second question I would want to ask is that --
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
One question at a time.
Mr Amoako-Attah 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank my Hon Colleague for this latest information because he says he used it only a few days ago. I can assume that he has the latest information on the road. I am not surprised about it because of the intensity of the rains this year. We are experiencing the fast deterioration of some sections of our roads throughout the country.
I would want to assure him that I will give the necessary instructions to the Regional Director of Ghana Highways Authority to visit that road next week so that we put in immediate emergency interventions on that section. I therefore urge my Hon Colleague the Hon Member that we should work together next week to solve that problem.
Mr Speaker, I thank you.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Thank you, Hon Minister, for your assurance.
Mr Alalzuuga 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I also would want to draw the Hon Minister's attention to the fact that the portion that he described as bituminous surface from the foot of the scarp climbing to the Nakpanduri township also in a very deteriorated state, and especially because of the scarp, a lot of rocks have fallen on to the road.
When you are moving, it is very dangerous, especially when you are meeting other vehicles along the scarp.
It is an accident-prone area, and I would like to appeal to the Hon Minister to pay attention to that particular portion of the road, because a lot of lives are lost along that stretch.
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I can confirm that I am aware of what he is talking about.
There are about ten of such roads nationwide where we experience rocks falling because of the scarp that he is complaining about, and as I said in my Answer a short while ago, these issues are coming up almost every day because of the nature of the rains that we have experienced this year.
It would be taken care of; I also thank him for drawing my attention to it. It would be included in the instructions to the Regional Director to pay attention to that. Whatever has to be done in an emergency situation such as this would be done to protect lives and property.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Alalzuuga 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, finally, I would like to find out from the Hon Minister, as he spoke about the rehabilitation of bituminous surface under the next phase of the Eastern Corridor Road Development Programme, when would that next phase be awarded on contract?
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, procurement processes have been set in motion. Interested contractors are even carrying out their individual feasibility studies on that stretch of the road, and as part of the Eastern Corridor Road, I would like to assure the Hon Member that it forms part of the priority roads to be undertaken by the current Government under the Leadership of His Excellency the President, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo- Addo, that the road would be done within the first term of his Administration.
A large portion of it is even being covered under the proposed Sinohydro facility. That road has been unattended to for many years. At least, we can talk about the last (almost) ten years. That section of the road has been neglected, but it would
be fixed during the first term of President Akufo-Addo's administration, so be rest assured.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Minister, thank you very much.
The last Question numbered 475, Hon Member for Bole/Bamboi?
Frequent Accidents on the George Walker Bush Highway
475 Mr Yusif Sulemana asked the Minister for Roads and Highways what measures the Ministry was putting in place to avert the frequent accidents on the George Walker Bush Highway.
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
Background
The George Walker Bush High otherwise known as the Tetteh Quarshie - Mallam Highway is part of the National Route N1 and is 14km long. It is a 3 lane dual carriageway with various points of pedestrian crossings and vehicular intersections. There are six (6) footbridges already constructed on the highway for pedestrian crossing.
Current programme
There are currently three Road Safety Intervention projects on-going on the stretch to enhance road user safety on the road.
Lot 1:
Supply and Installation of Materials for Rehabilitaion and Five (5) years Maintenance of Street Lights to improve night time visibility.
Street lights have been installed on the whole stretch. The contractor will continue to maintain the street lights and replace same for the next five years
Mr Sulemana 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the Hon Minister how much has been disbursed so far to the contractors under the Lots 1 and 2?
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the question was not clear to me.
Mr Sulemana 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, my question is, we have Lot 1 and Lot 2. I am asking how much he has disbursed to the contractors so far under the Lot 1 and Lot 2?
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not have that information with me at the moment, but I know that the work has been done at various stages and the contractors are on; so I would check on it and know the exact amount paid to each of them so far.
Mr Sulemana 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, closely related to the first question is that, I would want to find out whether the contractor is on schedule, especially with Lot 2, because the Hon Minister said that by close of this month, the Project would have been completed. He said that he expects that it would have been completed. I would want him to confirm whether by close of November, the Project would have been completed.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Hon Minister, the Hon Member wants an assurance which is a time frame.
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as I indicated, the various works, as he is aware, are in currency and out of the lots, at least, almost each one of them has gone beyond completion of 50 per cent. So I would want to assure him that these projects are very important because they border on safety. We would continue to monitor all the three lots very closely to ensure that they are executed within the contract term. It is key because of its safe nature. So it would be followed up closely.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Hon Member, your last question. [Laughter]
Mr Sulemana 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am not sure that he has answered my question satisfactorily.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
You would want to ensure that the Hon Minister has answered, not “he” or “she” business. We
are in this Honourable House of Parliament.
Please go on.
Mr Sulemana 11:15 a.m.
My final question is, if you look at the “Future programme”, it says that three footbridges would be put in place in 2019 and in the “Background”, it says six footbridges had already been constructed. I would want to find out if the three footbridges are constructed, making nine bridges; would that be enough to reduce accidents on that road?
Mr Amoako-Attah 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the gravamen of the Hon Member's Question bordered safety and I have indicated that we have a number of footbridges on that stretch of road -- a distance of 14 kilometres.
We have done proper engineering assessment, post completion engineering assessment on that road and we have realised that we need three more footbridges at very critical intersections. I mentioned those intersections - LaPaz junction, Akweteman Junction and Awoshie Junction.
It is because we would want to improve safety and visibility that all these will go even with lighting. Once we fix this, I can assure you that the entire stretch would have been fully covered so far as footbridges are concerned.
Perhaps the only problem that we may have as a Ministry and as a nation is to educate our people to use the footbridges so that we completely avoid the regular and continuous knockdown of our people. So your question is fully answered and I am sure you are happy about it.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Minister, for attending to the House and answering our Questions. You are respectfully discharged.
There being no Statement admitted, we would move on to the Commencement of Public Business. I am advised that items numbered 6 and 7 are not ready. Is that correct? We are not in the position to move on with the items numbered 6 and 7. Is that so, Hon Member?
Mr Ahmed Ibrahim 11:15 a.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker, you are right.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Item listed as number 8 - - Right to Information Bill, 2018 at the Consideration Stage.
The Hon Second Deputy Speaker would take the Chair.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION STAGE 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
There is an amendment proposed which stands in the names of the Hon Chairman of the Committee and the Hon Minority Leader.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, you may start.
The Hon Second Deputy Speaker will take the Chair.
MR SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:24 a.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional,
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Ben Abdallah Banda) 11:24 a.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 12.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:24 a.m.
Clause
12?
Mr Banda 11:24 a.m.
Rightly so, Mr Speaker.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:24 a.m.
You may go on.
Mr Banda 11:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this stands in the joint names of the Committee and the Hon Minority Leader, Hon Haruna Iddrisu.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 12 subclause (1), line 2, delete “information” and insert “from disclosure”.
So, Mr Speaker, the new rendition reads:
“Information obtained from a tax return or gathered for the purposes of determining tax liability is exempt from disclosure.”
Mr Speaker, this is the kind of rendition this august House has adopted. Instead of “is exempt information”, we have sought to adopt “is exempt from disclosure”.
Mr Speaker, that is the sole reason this amendment is being effected.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:25 p.m.
Hon Members, the amendment has been moved by the Hon Chairman. Since the Hon Minority Leader is not around, would somebody speak for or on his behalf?
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:25 p.m.
The Chairman has already moved it.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 11:25 p.m.
We support it.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:25 p.m.
Thank you very much.
Mr Bernard Ahiafor 11:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the amendment on the Floor appears to be a consequential amendment. It has been used in clauses 5, 6, 7 and 11. So we have been using “from disclosure” but not “exempt information”. For consistency, I think the amendment is in place and should be supported.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:25 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee, I hope you would not bring in any more amendments to clause 12 because I cannot see any on the Order Paper.
Mr Banda 11:25 p.m.
Rightly so, Mr Speaker. There are no more amendments to clause 12 as captured on the Order Paper.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Clause 12 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 13 -- Internal working information of public institutions.
Mr Banda 11:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, for some reason, I would want to have clause 13 stood down. The amendment we seek to make is to add “an opinion or an advice”
to subclause (1), line 2 at the end. If it is so effected, subclause (1) would read:
“Information is exempt from disclosure which if disclosed would reveal an opinion or advice”.
We all know that subclause (13) (1) has two paragraphs; paragraph (a) and paragraph (b). If the amendment should be effected the way it has been proposed, it would leave paragraph (b) hanging. So I would want to do further consultation with the Hon Ranking Member and a few other members of the Committee before we revert to clause 13 of the Bill.
Mr Speaker, I would plead, with your permission, that clause 13 be stood down while we continue with the rest, unless the Hon Ranking Member has something to say.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 11:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that was the first consideration we arrived at, to delete clause 13 (a) and insert “an opinion or an advice”. Subsequently, we wondered how an “opinion” “advice”, or recommendation prepared or recorded might be exempt. How can an opinion or advice be exempt from disclosure? The person could take it or otherwise. How can the record be exempt?
So in the next advertised amendment, which is item numbered 8 (iii), the Chairman recommended that the whole of clause 13 (1) (a) be deleted. And that is the only amendment there. This is because we do not think that it should be exempt.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:25 p.m.
Hon Ranking Member, we have two proposed amendments to clause 13. One is on page 3 and the other is on page 4 of the Order Paper. On page 3, the proposed amendment is to add to the end of
subclause (1), line 2. The Chairman then said he needs further consultation on it, so we should stand it down.
Hon Chairman, do you seek for us to stand down the whole of clause 13 or just the first proposed amendment?
Mr Banda 11:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I seek to have clause 13 stood down because there is no proposed amendment under clause 13 (2). The amendment relates to clause 13 (1). If we effected the current amendment as proposed, it would leave paragraph (b) hanging. This is because we would delete clause 13 (1) (a) but add “an opinion or an advice” to the end of clause 13 (1).
If we should do that, it would leave clause 13 (1) (b) hanging. So it should be stood down for further consultation to be made, so that we could continue with the rest of the proposed amendments.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 11:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that he is right. This is because if we made an amendment to clause 13 as advertised on page 3 of the Order Paper, that amendment would hang and it would not be in sync. So it is better to stand the whole thing down.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:25 p.m.
Hon Members, accordingly, clause 13 of the Bill is stood down for further consideration.
Clause 14 -- Parliamentary privilege, fair trial, contempt of court
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:25 p.m.
There are a number of proposed amendments to clause 14, the first one stands in the name of the Chairman of the Committee and then the Hon Minority Leader, Hon Iddrisu. So, we would start with the Chairman of the Committee.
Mr Banda 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move,
Clause 14 — opening phrase, line 1 delete “information” and insert “from disclosure”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Banda 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, Clause 14 — add the following new paragraph:
“(a) contravene the Standing Orders of Parliament”
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would be 11:35 a.m.
‘'Information is exempt from disclosure if the disclosure of that information can reasonably be expected to contravene the Standing Orders of Parliament''.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Chairman of the Committee, we would need further explanation on this one. Why should that be exempt information?
Mr Banda 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Standing Orders are the rules of Parliament, and we seek to effect this amendment because not all information that pertain to the work of Parliament should be disclosed.
Mr Speaker, in a situation where a Committee of Parliament or Parliament as an institution, for instance, or the Hon Speaker of Parliament says that a certain type of information is exempt, this proposed amendment says that, that information should be exempted.
Mr Speaker, for instance, when the House goes into close Sitting and the Speaker says that any information which
pertains or arises out of the Closed Sitting should not be disclosed, we all know that information must not be disclosed, and if it is disclosed, we know the consequences that would ensue.
Mr Speaker, in the same way, if your Committee of Parliament for instance, should undertake any investigation as it was done in the previous Parliament, and because of the sensitive nature of certain pieces of information the Committee is of the view that certain types of information should not be disclosed because of the precarious nature of the information, what this amendment seeks to do is to make that information exempt.
Mr Speaker, as I said yesterday and would continue to say, this exempt information is still subject to the public interest override, which therefore means that, if the disclosure of the information would be in the interest of the public, that information, though it has been declared as exempt, would still be disclosed.
Mr Speaker, this proposed amendment is not one which would take away the right of the public to have access to information. That is the reason we seek to effect it, so that if there is any information, the disclosure of which would endanger the security of Parliament, the safety of an Hon Member of Parliament, the Speaker of Parliament or any other person who works within the confines of Parliament, we believe that information should be exempted.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the first place, I do not see how a breach of the Standing Orders - if it is in contravention of law -- [Interruption] — My attention has been drawn to the fact that if we are engaged in an act, which is an illegality and contravenes Parliament, and we want that information exempted,
then it is dangerous for us. This is because under clause 17, information is not exempt if it is in contravention of law. So, if we have done something which is in contravention of law, under this Act we cannot seek to protect the disclosure of that information.
Mr Speaker, if we take a decision in this House which is in contravention of the Standing Orders -- and my Senior ,Hon K.T.Hammond has just drawn my attention through a whisper that if we take a move and accept a resolution without meeting the express provisions of the Standing Orders, we cannot seek to insulate ourselves from disclosure. Anybody should be able to file and to ask how many Hon Members were in Parliament at the time the decision was taken. It should be possible.
Mr Speaker, this is a dangerous ground. We are trying to cover illegalities and that should not be done. This is because the Standing Orders is the law that regulates parliamentary practice. If we the Hon Members of Parliament contravene the Standing Orders, then should we be protected?
rose rose
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Member for Suhum, did you rise on a point of order?
Mr Hammond 11:35 a.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker —
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, Hon K. T. Hammond does not have the Floor.
Mr Hammond 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, It was not exactly a point of order, but the Hon Inusah Fuseini drew me into his submission. I had not blinked an eye and
so I am not so sure why he said that I had indicated to you one way or the other — [Interruption]. I did not even blink an eye and he said I whispered. I have not whispered anything, I have not spoken, or laughed; and I have not said a thing to Hon Inusah Fuseini.
Mr Speaker, we are not on the same telepathic wave length so I could not have sent any information, but I have my own views and would express them in a minute.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Inusah Fuseini, just for the record, Hon K. T. Hammond wants to say that he did not whisper to you.
Hon Hammond, is that the case?
Mr Hammond 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I disown everything he attributed to me.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Member.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thought he was whispering to me. If it was not intended for my consumption, I do apologise for saying that he whispered to me.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, inasmuch as I agree with the principle behind the amendment being proposed by the Hon Chairman of the Committee, if we go to the next amendment, as has been filed on the Order Paper which stands in my name, one would realise that in moving his amendment, he actually adduced the reasons offered in my amendment.
And that suggests that there is the need to do some winnowing of this particular set of amendments before we proceed.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Well, let us first deal with the amendment proposed by the Hon Chairman.
Mr Iddrisu 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the proposition by the Hon Chairman, as Hon Fredrick Opare-Ansah has said, relates to the second proposed amendment that we have not come to. But my difficulty is that, legislation of freedom of information throughout the world is referred to as “sunshine legislation”. It is “sunshine” because it should be at the level of transparency.
Mr Speaker, Parliaments are the home of transparency and accountability. Therefore I have a difficulty with we wanting to water down access to information. This is the home of transparency. If we cannot be transparent, then we should forget it. It means that even democracy has no future.
Therefore to contravene the Standing Orders of Parliament in itself is punishable by the Standing Orders and by Parliament. Why must we hold our rules in breach and not in honour?
So I would persuade the Hon Chairman to step it down.
Mr Speaker, you are here with Leadership. We should not encourage the Speaker or Leadership to traverse the Standing Orders of Parliament. They must hold to it with certainty.
It would be a sacrilege to encourage the contradiction of the Standing Orders. But maybe, as we travel along, we would come through an omnibus provision, like what Hon Fredrick Opare-Ansah is proposing, that maybe, Parliament may exempt -- Then we should define that information. But not relative to --
Mr Speaker, not Parliament. I cannot see any Parliament in the world, in the freedom of information legislation, that wants — No, it cannot be parliament. This is the home of democracy, debate and transparency and accountability. We should not be seen watering down the potency of this legislation.
Mr Speaker, it is only democracies that have Parliaments and it is only Parliaments that are managed with Standing Orders. And we are saying that it contravenes the Standing Orders?.
Mr Speaker, we are public officers; Members of Parliament, Ministers of State. This is where we are. We are those who this legislation seeks to--- If any person wants information about us, relative to the performance of a public duty or public mandate, they can ask for it. If we do so, we would be rendering this legislation impotent. So in my view, the Hon Chairman should abandon it. Let us not bring Parliament into this.
Why is it that the Official Report (Hansard) is a public document? This is because we want the public to follow through what happens in this House and for them to hold us for what we say in the Hansard. Therefore, to say that we want to exempt anything relative to Parliament, I would have an opposition to it.
Mr Speaker, we are persuading the Hon Chairman. Exempt information must serve the national and public interest. Members of Parliament double as Ministers of State, Members of Parliament serve on Boards and we should not come and hide under some rules to prevent the public from having access to information. I say no to that.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Chairman, do you have anything to say? I also have that difficulty.
When we look at the Standing Orders, the areas that you are referring to are areas that deal with privileges or immunities of Hon Members, and that is covered under clause 14(a): “infringe or contravene a parliamentary privilege”. But to give such a blanket term to whoever is here and how the language is even couched, “reasonably be expected to” -- That would be too general and generous to whoever is requested to disclose the information.
The person would just say, by my understanding, I think this thing would infringe the Standing Orders and so I would not give the information. I do not think that is right.
We should try as much as possible to move away from these exempt clauses. We are passing Right to Information Law and we are exempting almost every information from disclosure.
We want this to be one of the best in the world. Already, our media has one of the best legal framework as granted by our Constitution. We should not legislate and take away these rights from the people. I am of the same view. Maybe, you would have to reconsider it.
I have the same view with the proposed amendment from the Hon Member for Suhum. This is because I think that in your proposed amendment, we are giving powers to the Speaker and he has no such powers to make laws at all. Please, let us move away from those areas, but it is up to the House. It is not for the Speaker to take a decision in this matter. I only guide you.
So Hon Chairman, what do you say?
Mr Banda 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I have taken a cue from your good self. But the idea behind it was to effect this proposed amendment by putting the rendition within context.
Mr Speaker, we all do know that editions of the Hansard are public documents and so no information that is contained in the Hansard would be declared as exempt information. We all do know.
But I was speaking, taking into consideration the fact that there are certain categories of information within our Standing Orders themselves which are
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Chairman, I believe you are referring to Closed Sitting, example of which is in Standing Orders 44 and 45. If you read Standing Order 45, it is very clear. It says, and I read with your permission:
“Disclosure of proceedings or decisions of a Closed Sitting by any person in any manner shall be treated as a gross breach of privileges of the House.”
So, it is covered under the proposed Bill. We do not need to give just a general subclause to people to hide under and decline to disclose information. This is because, in the view of the person, one would then be breaching the Standing Orders and that is not fair.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with respect, the Standing Orders of Parliament are just as it is. The Standing Orders of Parliament, as it were, regulate our proceedings. The Bill before us, when it is enacted into law, would be a superior piece of legislation to our Standing Orders.
So if we do not have a mechanism through that piece of law that enables the House or the Rt Hon Speaker to exercise our extension, then that provision in our Standing Orders -- [Interruption] -- For instance, if we take the situation where we have a Closed Sitting and the Rt Hon Speaker directs that the record be kept for the purposes of Parliament's own internal affairs and so directs that it should not be published and a request is made through this law to the House to get this piece of record, what then happens?
Do we then contravene the provisions of --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
It is a privileged information and it is covered by Standing Order 45.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, that is our Standing Orders, and that is why we are trying to put that privileged information under --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
The person releasing the information is governed by the Standing Orders of the House.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:55 a.m.
The person's choice would be a sanction of breach of priviledge or a sanction under the Right to Information Act. Those would be the two options a person would have to choose from. If he does not respond to the request under the Right to Information Bill, he would be in breach, and if he responds to it, he would also be in breach of the rule of this House. So we would now have to choose; It is like a corporate entity --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
A person would not have to choose. The law, as we have it, in the Right to Information Bill, has a provision that deals with priviledges.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we would want to add more information to that priviledge --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
No, it is there already. It is in the Bill now.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:55 a.m.
And does it include Parliament's information?
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
What does “parliamentary priviledge” mean? That is what is referred to as “parliamentary priviledge” so it is included. This is a dangerous piece of legislation that you are proposing.
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, my own rendition was advised by a visit to the House of Commons, where as we speak today --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Member, did you say the act of God?
Mr Opare-Ansah 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I said the British House of Commons.
Mr Speaker, as we speak today, the House has to put together a team of experts to try to see how it can best deal with issues that regard their Freedom of Information Act.
This is because, the kind of requests that come in and the determination of what information can be given out by Parliament is giving them a headache. I believe we would need to tread quite cautiously in this manner. It is not so much about Parliament's refusal to give out information but rather, Parliament's ability to make a determination of what infor- mation ought to be given out.
Mr Speaker, this is because as we keep mixing up our private-personal infor- mation and our public information, which ones are exactly supposed to go out under this Act and which cannot go? That is why we would need to give the Rt Hon Speaker, the Committees of Parliament and our own Standing Orders room to make that kind of determination.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
But Hon Member, you know that Parliament is not an adjudicating body. So if there is any dispute on the interpretation of any law, you know what should be done. They go to court. Do not cite the United Kingdom when we are dealing with the right to information. It is one of the worst regimes in the world. So far, when it is analysed, it
is one of the worst regimes and so the worst case scenario should not be used in guiding our legislation here. No.
Mr Emmanuel Bedzrah 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, this is just a piece of information to my Hon Colleague. He mentioned that after we have passed the Right to Information Bill into law, our Standing Orders would become subservient to that piece of legislation. I would want to draw his attention to article 110 of the Constitution, which says and I beg to read:
“Subject to the provision of this Constitution, Parliament may by standing orders, regulate its own procedure”.
So our Standing Orders cannot be subservient to any legislation because we passed these Standing Orders as well.
Mr Speaker, I just want to add my voice, the Hon Chairman should withdraw the amendment, because we are looking out for an open Parliament - a Parliament that is open enough to give information out. If we are saying that any disclosure from Parliament would create problems for us, then we are not opening Parliament enough. So I would want to ask the Hon Member to withdraw his amendment.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Member, your earlier submission is incorrect. This is because the Hon Member for Suhum was talking about the hierarchy of laws. But the constitutional provision you referred to is the power that is being given to Parliament; that is different.
However, the Hon Chairman of the Committee is at liberty to reconsider it because the amendment does not come from him as an individual; rather it comes

from his Committee. So the Committee can reconsider the issues that we have raised.
Mr Iddrisu 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I should believe that both the Hon Chairman and the Hon Opare-Ansah would take a cue from your guidance. We should not drag Parliament into this.
Mr Speaker, even with clauses 14 and 15, we are dealing with the same matter. It talks about parliamentary privilege, fair trial and contempt of court and so we need not have a new clause called “15”. We have already given the head note as “Parliamentary Privilege”.
Mr Speaker, they should abandon their propositions. As a Parliament we cannot exempt ourselves as I have indicated strongly. Dwelling on clause 15, even when we come to lawyer-client professional relationship and the doctor- patient relationship, must it be disclosed or not?
Mr Speaker, there would be a limit because as public officers, under the Constitution, on medical grounds, we may want information on the President, the Vice President, the Rt Hon Speaker, Ministers of State, and Hon Members of Parliament as to their capacity and ability to perform a public role.
So I believe that as Hon Opare-Ansah suggested, we should winnow on this particular clause and get a more acceptable rendition by certainly not bringing in our Standing Orders, the Rt Hon Speaker, or the Committees of Parliament. That would water down the efficacy of this legislation.
We should re-do in clauses 14 and 15, in order that matters that relate to privilege, fair trial, contempt of court and
parliamentary immunity, enjoy the exemptions that are due them.
Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Chairman, what do you say?
Mr Banda 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would withdraw the proposed amendment. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker, alternatively --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Unless some of your members object to the withdrawal, you are entitled to do so. But if they object, then it can be re-considered by the whole Committee.
As at now, I believe that the sense of Hon Members who have spoken is that, they are not in support of it, and I myself would not advise that we proceed without further consideration on this matter. I am not convinced that this is one of the areas that we should exempt from disclosure.
I do not think that is right.
Mr Banda 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, once the proposed amendment is coming from the Committee, I will seek your leave to have it stood down so that we can do further consultations on this and come up with a more appropriate and apt proposed amendment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Members, the whole of clause 14 is accordingly stood down for reconsi- deration.
We would move on to clause 15.
Clause 15 -- Privileged information
Mr Banda 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 15 subclause (1), opening phrase, after “exempt” delete “information” and insert “from disclosure”.
Mr Speaker, again, this stands in the joint names of the Hon Minority Leader and the Committee. It is a consequential amendment.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
I would put the Question.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
I will put the Question on the whole of clause 15.
Mr Iddrisu — rose --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
There is no proposed amendment to clause 15.
Hon Minority Leader, are you bringing a -- ?
Mr Iddrisu 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if you would accommodate me and grant me leave.
It is because I have seen in clause 15
(1)
(i) “lawyer and client professional relationship,”
I am minded to add a subclause (3) -- “doctor-patient relationship” because that must also be exempted. Indeed, medically -
Mr Banda 12:05 p.m.
Consider clause 15 (b) --
Mr Iddrisu 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, then I so abandon it as that has been taken care of.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.
Clause 15 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 16 -- Disclosure of personal matters
Mr Banda 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 16 subclause (1), line 1, delete “Information the disclosure of which” and insert “Where information to be disclosed” and in line 3, delete “deceased is exempt information” and insert “deceased, the information is exempt from disclosure”.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would read 12:05 p.m.
“Information the disclosure of which involves the unreasonable disclosure of information concerning the personal affairs of an individual whether living or deceased, the information is exempt from disclosure.”
Mr Speaker, the sense has not been changed; it is the rendition which has been changed in order to make it more elegant. Otherwise, the substance remains the same.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Iddrisu 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the Hon Chairman of the Committee's amendment. If he is comfortable, probably to further suggest that the word “unreasonable” must also be deleted. What is reasonable in this particular case?
Mr Speaker, personal affairs are personal affairs. We are then giving a window that some amount of personal information can be shared, save when it
Mr James Agalga 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if we read clause 16 in its entirety, it appears the use of “unreasonable” is not problematic. This is because if we come down further to clause 16 (2), we would find out that “unreasonable” has been explained. So, what constitutes “unreasonable” has been defined.
We would then see at clause 16 (2):
“Disclosure is reasonable if it reveals or is likely to reveal information about the individual's
(a), physical or mental health;
(b) business or trade secrets of commercial value to the individual;
(c) confidential, professional, commercial or financial affairs”.
Mr Speaker, in my view, therefore it is alright to maintain the use of the word “unreasonable”.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
The rendition looks so clumsy; that is the problem.
Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Iddrisu 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I wanted to abandon my opposition, having heard from the Hon Agalga. Suffice it to add that he should go to clause 16 (3) -- “Disclosure is reasonable if”.
So even in the introductory words, they have used “unreasonable” yet in the merit of it, they have positioned reasonability and unreasonability. In subclause (2) they are talking of “unreasonable”.
“Disclosure is reasonable if it reveals or is likely to reveal information about the individual's
(a) physical or mental health;
(b) business or trade secrets of commercial value to the individual;
(c) confidential, professional, commercial or financial affairs”.
If the person is in public office, must that be exempted? They must relate this to an asset declaration regime as a country. Therefore when we say that it is unreasonable, it may be reasonable. Who determines the reasonability? So that was the reason I sounded a word of caution.

Alright, let me abandon my opposition.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 16 (1) talks about non-disclosure of information which involves unreasonable disclosure of certain information. Then in clause 16(2), it explains what “un- reasonable” is.
Clause 16(3) it says that even though something might be unreasonable in its disclosure, if it falls within those described in Clause 16(3), it is reasonable. I would give an example, subclause (2), says:
“Disclosure is unreasonable if it reveals or is likely to reveal information about the individual's
(c) confidential, professional, commercial or financial affairs.”
Subclause (3) then says that if the individual to whom the information relates gives prior consent, then it is reasonable.
So the reasonability listed in subclause (3) relates to those items in subclause (2), which have been described as unreasonable. If one wants to give information about my profession, business or commercial, the law says that without my consent, it is unreasonable; but if I give my consent, then it is reasonable to so do. That is what those lists of reasonabilities refer to. So, it relates to those items that have been described as being unreasonable. There is no need to put “reasonable” in subclause (1).
Thank you.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Is it the conduct of the person disclosing the information that is unreasonable or the information that is unreasonable?
Hon Chairman of the Committee, I am not getting it right.
Mr Banda 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, “unreasonable information” is a term of art. So “unreasonable” relates to the information, but not the person. I hold the humble opinion that clause 16(1) does not admit any ambiguity.
Mr Speaker, in any case, we are distinguishing between reasonable information and unreasonable information. “Reasonable information” is also a term of art. “Reasonable information” has been defined under clause 16(3) and “unreasonable information” has been defined under clause 16(2).
So anything that falls outside clause 16(2) is not unreasonable, and anything that falls outside clause 16(3) is not reasonable. The categories of reasonable information and unreasonable information are well defined and captured under the law. Mr Speaker, with due respect, I hold the humble opinion and view that this is not controversial.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
We are not talking about it being controversial; we are talking about clarity. The first rendition says:
“Information the disclosure of which involves the unreasonable disclosure of information concerning the personal affairs of an individual whether living or deceased is exempt information”.
Now, you propose to amend it to read:
“Where information to be disclosed involves the unreasonable dis- closure of information concerning the personal affairs of an individual whether living or deceased, the information is exempt from dis- closure”.
Mr Banda 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, “Where information to be disclosed involves the unreasonable disclosure of information …” So, the words here are “unreasonable disclosure of information concerning the personal affairs …”
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Why not say “Where disclosure of information is unreasonable…”; but when you say “Where information to be disclosed involves the unreasonable disclosure of information …”
Hon Member for Suhum?
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, even “Information the disclosure of which is unreasonable…” works. In subclause (2), it is “Disclosure is unreasonable if…” So, that would have set it right in the context -- “Information the disclosure of which is unreasonable concerning the personal affairs of an individual, whether living or deceased, is exempt from disclosure.”
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
That would be a better rendition than what we have now.
Hon Chairman, have you noted what he said?
Mr Banda 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would yield to his rendition.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Please, can you go over it again so that we can take it and move on?
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:15 p.m.
“Information, the disclosure of which is unreasonable concerning the personal affairs of an individual, whether living or deceased, is exempt from disclosure.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
We have further proposed amendments to clause 16. The next one stands in the name of the Hon Chairman of the Committee, which is clause 16(3).
Mr Banda 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 16 subclause (3), paragraph (h), line 1, after “would”, insert “not”.
The new rendition would read:
“(h) the disclosure would not prejudice the future supply of information.”
Mr Speaker, the addition of “not” would make the sentence clearer, sensible and better understood. This is because to say that disclosure --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
This deals with reasonable disclosure.
Mr Banda 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, rightly so.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
The final amendment to clause 16(3) is proposed by the Hon Member for Suhum, Hon Fredrick Opare-Ansah.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 16 subclause (3), after paragraph (i) add the following new sub- paragraph:
“(a) the information is about the physical or mental health of a public office holder whose physical or mental capacity may be a cause for removal from office.”
Mr Speaker, as we explained earlier, if we go to clause 16(2)(a), it says that 12:15 p.m.
“Disclosure is unreasonable if it reveals or is likely to reveal information about the individual's
(a) physical or mental health;”
Mr Speaker, in our Constitution, there are several public office holders and some of these office holders, one of the reasons for them vacating their offices is when they are adjudged or held to be physically or mentally unsound. How does one come by such information if you cannot request for, and have a right to that kind of information?
So this proposed amendment seeks to say that whereas, clause 16 (2) says that it is unreasonable to reveal information about the individual's physical or mental health, it is creating a reasonability in the case of those office holders. An example is the Rt Hon Speaker of Parliament where in article --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Yes, you are referring to the state of mind of a public officer particularly, those who are responsible for adjudication.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, precisely. So if you look at --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
There is a question mark on that mental capacity.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, exactly. If you look at 95(2) (c) it says::
“if any circumstances arise that , if he were not Speaker, would disqualify him for election as a member of Parliament; or”
One of the disqualifications for an Hon Member of Parliament in article 94(2) (b) (ii) of the 1992 Constitution is to be of unsound mind.
Mr Speaker, so, if I cannot request for and have a right to that kind of information, how then do we make the determination that the Rt Hon Speaker should vacate his Seat or other public office holders?
So this piece of amendment is to ensure whereas, generally, it is unreasonable to release information that relates to a person's mental or physical health, in the case of public office holders who have the requirement to vacate offices if this determination is made that kind of information when given, is reasonable.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
It is likely to undermine clause 16(2) (a) but Hon (Alhaji) Inusah Fuseini?
Alhaji Inusah A. B. Fuseini 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that this amendment is good and we should support Hon Opare- Ansah. It does not undermine clause 16(2) (a) but rather, it is a general exemption of information on the physical and mental health of a person.
The Hon Member's amendment seeks to deal with problems in the public service. Where a person occupying a public office can be removed by reason of infirmity of mind.
Mr Speaker, now, there is evidence of infirmity of mind which is physical or
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Let me listen to the Hon Minister for Monitoring and Evaluation.
Dr Anthony Akoto Osei 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was quietly going to let this amendment pass but we have to look at it closely. The phrase, “may be a cause”, who determines that “may be”?
Mr Speaker, it is very dangerous and I am not a medical practitioner. So, supposing that I determine that there may be a cause for Hon Agalga to be removed as an Hon Member of Parliament, this
gives me room. “May be a cause” which is determined by me is very dangerous and I am very worried about that.
rose
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Let us listen to the Hon Member and then I will come to you.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the amendment does not seek to make the physical and mental records of all public office holders accessible. No. It is only those whose mental or physical capacities or infirmities may be a cause for their removal.
It is not every public office holder whose -- [Interruption] -- Hon Members of Parliament, although the Constitution talks about us being of sound mind, when we get to the causes for vacating our seats, it did not say that if any condition arose for which we would not have been --
Mr Speaker, so, it does not apply to us and many other office holders as well but the “may be a cause for removal” is distinguishing those office holders, for whom, if they found themselves in that situation, could be removed from office such as the Rt Speaker, the President, the Vice-President and those categories of persons.
So it does not seek to make the information of all public officers accessible and so, we should look at it in that sense.
Dr Ayine 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, initially, I was minded to support the proposed amendment but then as the debate proceeded, I am beginning to change my mind.
The reason is simply because in the time honoured practices of the public service, whenever there is an issue
relating to the mental capacity of a public officer, a medical board is set up to investigate.
In fact, in relation to the Constitutional office holders that he mentioned, for instance, if he is the President or the Rt Hon Speaker, the Constitution itself has a procedure for determining whether or not the issue of mental capacity can be established.
Mr Speaker, so I believe that the amendment in and of itself may ran against the grain of the practice in the public sector and then also, the Constitutional requirements for the determination of whether a person has the mental capacity to perform in office.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Maybe, you want to say that unless the disclosure is permitted by law or something like that. Apart from that this one is too general and is going to undermine what I see as clause 16(2) (a).
I disagree with Hon (Alhaji) Inusah Fuseini when he said that it would not undermine it. You talked about infirmity of mind but he talked about the whole mental capacity and our mental capacities are not the same. Mental capacity is not the same as infirmity of mind, so you would need to reconsider it.
Hon Chairman, this is not an amendment from your Committee. It is from Hon Member, but I would want to hear you. What do you say to this proposed amendment?
Mr Banda 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I respectfully disagree with him because the concern he
is raising is captured under 16 (3) (b) -- “the disclosure is required to promote public health or public safety.”
It is there --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
That is not the issue he is raising - he is not raising that issue at all.
Mr Banda 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, very well. But how do we determine that somebody's physical or mental health is an issue? It could only be determined by a professional doctor.
Mr Speaker, just like Dr Ayine said, under the Constitution, if there is an issue relating to the health of the people or persons mentioned in the Constitution -- For instance in relation to the President, there is a procedure that is to be followed.
In the same way, if the basis for the qualification of a public officer becomes an issue -- For instance if an Hon Member of Parliament has entered Parliament and in the course of his work an issue arises about his physical wellbeing or mental wellbeing then I believe that there is a procedure that has to be followed and that becomes a basis to me, if that assertion is well established for the removal of that Hon Member of Parliament.
Mr Speaker, so these procedures are well established and well-known and so I hold the view that to the extent that the procedures are known, we do not have to legislate what is already an absolute. It is an absolute and so we do not have to legislate it.
Mr Speaker, in any case, why would an applicant want an information that relates to somebody's mental or physical health? In what capacity does the person want that information? Is it in a private capacity
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
It is not only confidential, it is privileged information and I do not see how one could go under that. A person has not waived that privilege and we want to bring a provision to say that because it would involve the removal of the person from office --
I believe that we are taking away the essence of that privilege and I do not think that it is right because it is privileged information.
Mr Agalga 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the arguments made by Dr Ayine and the Hon Chairman of the Committee finds expression even in the Constitution. So as we engage in this debate I believe that it is important that we put matters beyond doubt by seeking guidance from the clear provisions of the Constitution.
Mr Speaker, with your permission, I beg to refer the House to article 69 to illustrate the point. Article 69 of the Constitution is on the removal of a President and 69 (2) reads:
“For the purposes of the removal from office of the President a notice in writing --
(a) signed by not less than one- third of all the members of Parliament, and
(b) stating that the conduct or the physical or mental capacity of the President be investigated on any of the grounds specified in clause (1) of this article,
shall be given to the Speaker who shall immediately inform the Chief Justice and deliver the notice to him copied to the President.”
Mr Speaker, if we go further to clause 12, it provides that proceedings relating to the investigation to be carried out on the mental capacity or state of the President be held in-camera.
So straight away we would find that all information bordering on the mental capacity of the President is expected to be kept confidential.
The President is a public officer and if we relate this to the debate on the proposed amendment, we would find that the amendment may in a way interfere with the provisions of the Constitution because we would have to make disclosures and the manner in which the disclosure should be done is not even stated.
So the question to ask is, would we make the disclosure in-camera? That is not captured in the proposed amendment and it would result in a crises in that certain disclosures may not be kept confidential. When we do that then when the Bill becomes an Act, it would be in conflict with the Constitution.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Except that with the subclause 12 that you quoted the proceedings are not to be held in-camera. That is what is stated there.
The procedure of Parliament for the removal of the President shall not be held in-camera except where Parliament
otherwise orders in the interest of national security. You did not get that right.
rose
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Hon Member, are you going to reconsider your position?
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the opposers of this proposed amendment are presuming --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Hon Member, there is only one proposer. I am not aware of proposers.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I said the opposers - those in opposition and not necessarily those on the other Side of the House. In this case, it includes the Hon Chairman.
Mr Speaker, those opposing --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Those you pointed to are not in opposition, they are in the minority.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, their actions would make you see that they are in opposition.
Mr Speaker, the arguments that they have adduced pre-supposes that for all the public office holders who may be removed from office by reason of infirmity of mind or body there is a clear laid-down procedure for doing so, but I argue that it is not so.
That is why in the case of the Speaker of Parliament for instance, it says that the
Speaker shall vacate the seat if he is of unsound mind. It does not say how that would be determined in an elaborate fashion as has been done for the President; and the same applies to the Judiciary.
Whereas it talks about how the person may be removed from office, it does not talk about how the determination of the unsound mind would be done as in the case of the President.
So it is only in the case of the President that we noticed that the Constitution gives an elaborate provision on the process for determining that indeed, the President is of sound mind or not.
That is why the amendment I am proposing, probably, with the caveat introduced earlier by the Speaker, if it is not so specified by law in the case of the President, it is done. But in several other instances, persons may be removed from office or may vacate their offices by reason of infirmity of mind, and there is no such procedure.
So it may rest on the populations; somebody looking at the behaviour and the utterances of a person in public office to say that, no, let me request to see how this person's mind is functioning so that we can either at the Judiciary level file the necessary number of signatures to remove the person or in Parliament ask Hon Colleagues to ask the Speaker to leave the Seat.

My Colleague, the Hon Member for Old Tafo and Minister for Monitoring and
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
You have not addressed the issue of it being a privileged information.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if your state of mind is necessary for your continuous performance of public functions because you occupy a public office, I do not know how the state of your mind then becomes privileged information.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
In all the laws, it is and even with this Bill it is at clause 16 (2).
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 16 (2) is general. That is why clause 16 (3) is now making exceptions out of the generalities in clause 16 (2).
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
It is not general. It is specific. The disclosure is unreasonable if a reveal of it is likely to reveal information about the physical or mental health of the individual.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if you look at clause 16 (3) (b), it talks about disclosure. Even though it has been specified in clause 16 (2) to be unreasonable if it reveals or it is likely to reveal information about the individual's physical or mental or health; in clause 16 (3) (b), it says it is reasonable if the disclosure is required to promote public health and safety.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
It is with the person's consent. It is there.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the consent is only one.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
The paragraph (b) you are referring to deals with public health. It is not individual but public health or public safety. That is the difference.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we spoke about this earlier, that the unreasonableness of the disclosure is explained in clause 16 (2). But the exemptions to those unreasonablenesses which make them reasonable is contained in clause 16 (3).
So even though it might be un- reasonable to disclose your own mental or health status, if you consent to it, it makes it reasonable. In the same way, clause16 (b) says if it would make the public safer to promote public health and safety, then whether you consent or not, it is reasonable to disclose. That is what the list in clause 16 (3) is about.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
No-no- no. Hon Member, you are missing the issues; clause 16 (3)(a) is responding to clause 16 (2) (a). So public health and public safety is differently defined from the individual's health. If it is dealing with the individual's health including his mental health, then you would need his consent. [Interruption.]
Who has determined that the person is mad? That is where the disclosure comes in.
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Is Mr Speaker saying that if some institution found that Hon Agalga, just as an example, is of unsound mind -- [Laughter.]
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I said it is just as an example. He is the one I saw.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Who has found out?
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:45 p.m.
Where you are making the application to, it could be the psychiatric hospital at Pantang or Ankaful in Cape Coast, I am making an application that they have reviewed the state of mind of this Member of Parliament; I would want to know the state of his or her mind.
Now, clause 16 (3) (a) says we need his consent? Assuming they found him to be of unsound mind, it cannot be -
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
No-no- no. That is a different situation altogether. With this one, the process has been passed through, and the experts have been brought in. It is not an ordinary person like you.
An expert has been brought in to analyse. It is usually not one person; it is a whole Board. It is a number of persons. A Board would have to go through it before they certify that the person is of unsound mind.
Yes, Hon Member for Tamale Central?
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I still appreciate it, except that he compromises his own amendment by giving reasons. That is why we have this debate. It compromises it because in acting, one does not have to give reasons. He has given reasons why we need medical records.
But Mr Speaker, yes, personal records are protected under various laws, and it is privileged information, but it is not absolute. That is why we have clause 16
(3).
I will abandon him if he would not get the approval of the House to amend the provision to seek comfort in clause 16 (3) (d):
“(3) Disclosure is reasonable if
(d) the disclosure does not unjustifiably damage the reputation of any other person referred to in the information;”
If we extend it, it could cover the application for the personal records of a person who is suspected to be of unsound mind.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon Members, please, could you go through clause 16 (3) (l) and see whether that is the situation the Hon Member for Suhum is referring to?
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 16 (3) (l) is actually dealing with two situations; an infant and a person who is incapable of understanding even the consent.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
It is not an infant.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 12:45 p.m.
A person under the age of eighteen years and not an infant or a person who has no legal capacity and a person who has no capacity to even understand.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Like the one he was referring to.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with that person, we do not need that consent. We do not need the disclosure of the information or wellbeing of that person. So the disclosure of that information would be reasonable.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
It is the second leg that is relevant and not the first one.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 12:45 p.m.
All right. Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
But if the disclosure is unreasonable as you are saying, why the need to disclose?
I am afraid we would undermine the issue of the physical and mental health of the individual, which is privileged information. If you go through the Evidence Act, you would be advised on this.
Hon Chairman, there must be an end to litigation, unless you want to continue. If you want to continue, we would flag that clause and then take a bow.
Mr Agalga 12:55 p.m.
As an intervention, Hon Opare-Ansah made a statement in relation to the Speaker, and sought to suggest that in relation to the removal of the Speaker, the provisions are not very adequate when it is about the mental status of the Speaker. I think that argument is very misleading in the face of article 95 (2) (c), but let me start with article 95(2).
Article 95(2) says;
“The Speaker shall vacate his office - -
(a) If he becomes a Minister of State or a Deputy Minister; or

(c) If any circumstances arise that, if he were not Speaker, would disqualify him for election as a member of Parliament;…”

Mr Speaker, clearly, what this means is that the rules of eligibility for one to qualify to run for the office of Member of Parliament would apply to the Speaker.

That being so, what does the eligibility criterion say? Article 94 (2) is instructive. It reads as follows:

“ A person shall not be qualified to be a member of Parliament if he --

(a) owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana; or

(b) has been adjudged or otherwise declared --

(i) bankrupt under any law in force in Ghana and has not been discharged; or

(ii) to be of unsound mind or is detained as a criminal lunatic under any law in force in Ghana;…”

So it is very clear that if at any point in time the Speaker is determined to be of unsound mind, he or she can be removed, but subject to the procedure outlined by Dr Dominic Ayine in his earlier submission. In that case, a Board would have to be constituted to investigate the state of mind of the Speaker.

So there are provisions to deal with a Speaker who is of unsound mind, If his position is grounded on the inadequacy of provisions in our Constitution and other laws then I am afraid that is not the case.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Member, is it the case that you want to continue with it, or you would be advising yourself based on the arguments of your Hon Colleagues?
If you are minded, I would put the Question.
He just entered, and I do not think he has got the gravamen of the proposed amendment. So I would put the Question. It is the House that would determine.
An Hon Member 12:55 p.m.
He is highly opposed to it.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
He is highly opposed to something he is not aware of?
Mr Opare-Ansah 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I get the sense of the House and I accordingly withdraw the proposed amendment.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 16 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Members, I have been advised that the House has to do some other business, and so we are to take an adjournment.
Leadership, is that right?
Mr Anim 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, rightly so.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
So you do the proper thing by moving a Motion, unless any Hon Member objects to our taking an adjournment. Let me end the Consideration Stage of the Bill so that the formalities are followed.
Mr Anim 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, as you were notified, we agreed to end proceedings today at 1.00 p.m., and I believe it is the right time to adjourn until Tuesday in the forenoon.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Members, the Motion for adjournment has been moved. Any seconder?
Dr Ayine 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion on behalf of the Hon Minority leader.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT 12:55 p.m.
  • The House was accordingly adjourned at 1:04 p.m. till Tuesday, 6th November, 2018, at 10:00a.m..