Debates of 7 Nov 2018

MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:45 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:45 a.m.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Members, we have the Votes and Proceedings of Tuesday, 6th November, 2018, for correction.
Hon Members, any corrections?
Page 1…20
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member for North Tongu?
Mr Ablakwa 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am very grateful.
Mr Speaker, I am sorry to take the House back to page 10 of the Votes and Proceedings. On the directive you gave, I thought that you were very specific that the Hon Minister for Transport should attend upon this House within two weeks, but that has been omitted. So, this is just for the records.
Page 20… 21.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Odoom 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, yesterday the
sub Committee on Agriculture met the Burkinabe delegation, but it was not recorded.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Member, when the Report is ready, I am sure it would be recorded in the booklet of the next Votes and Proceedings.
Hon Members, the Votes and Proceedings of Tuesday, 6th November, 2018, is hereby adopted as the true record of proceedings for that day.
Hon Members, we also have an Official Report for correction. It is the Official Report of Wednesday, 31st October, 2018.

Hon Members, we would move on to item numbered 3 -- Questions.

Hon Members, the Hon Minister for Trade and Industry is available and is hereby invited to take the appropriate chair.

Hon Members, the first Question is in the name of the Hon Daniel Kwesi Ashiamah, the Hon Member for Buem.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 10:45 a.m.
MINISTRY OF TRADE AND 10:45 a.m.
INDUSTRY 10:45 a.m.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member, you may do a follow-up question.
Mr Ashiamah 10:55 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would want to find out from the Hon
Minister; from paragraph 5 of his Answers it says:
“Furthermore, Mr Speaker, in order to ensure that all the statutory requirements including environmental issues are adhered to by the Business Promoters, the Ministry has set up District Implementation Support Teams (DIST)…”
I would want to find out from him whether the Ministry of Trade and Industry has really put up a business case? The implementation support teams are in the district, but has a business case that anybody who would like to undertake this project or venture of one district one factory been put up by the Ministry?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Yes, Hon Minister?
Mr Kyerematen 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I have had the privilege of addressing this august House on a number of occasions on this matter. I have indicated that the process for participating in the 1D1F initiative actually starts from submitting an expression of interest by a business promoter.
So the business case that the Hon Member is alluding to is made by the business promoter. For the avoidance of doubt, these projects are not designed or intended to be state enterprises. These are projects being promoted by private entrepreneurs but facilitated by Government.
So my understanding is that the business case is reflected in the business plan that is submitted by the business promoter, then it is reviewed by the Ministry. Thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Ashiamah 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, expression of interest comes where the Ministry has put out --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Member, you must restrict yourself to your Question. This is not an opportunity to explore the whole project. Your Question is on taking into account environmental protection. Please, stay within that.
Mr Ashiamah 10:55 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
In the case of the environment, he has mentioned institutions including the EPA, FDA, GSA, Ghana National Fire Service, Ghana Water Company and Electricity Company of Ghana, but I did not see the Ministry of Roads or the Roads Department there. They are going to be the people to clear the way to the factories. I wanted to know if that was an oversight?
Mr Kyerematen 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the list that is provided in the Answer is not exhaustive, it includes other institutions. This is the basis for the setting up of the DISTs. So, the Ministry of Roads and Highways is part of the DISTs.
Mr Ashiamah 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to know whether the environmental impact certificates are available, and if he can make it available to us to also look at it in the 1D1F project?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
For which specific factory are you referring to?
Mr Ashiamah 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, any of them. This is because it is a business for the nation, and we also have to look at how it would affect us.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Members, he just said it is a private initiative; Government is a facilitator. He has said that twice here. So if there is one, it would be in the hands of the owner of the business. Please, ask another question.
Mr Ashiamah 10:55 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, the 1D1F project is a flagship project in the country, and so whatever must be done even if the New Patriotic Party (NPP) is not in power to ensure that we can continue with it is the reason for which I am asking for this particular document.
So with the environmental protection certificate that I am talking about, we are going to deal with manufacturing chemicals. We would be flowing and people would be moved from one place to another. The issue therefore is, do we have such for the promoters into these businesses?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Very well, Hon Minister, he would want to hear you on this.
Mr Kyerematen 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, respectfully, the requirement for pro- ducing environmental impact assessment report lies in the belly of the EPA. As a matter of procedure, they require that that is provided and cleared before one can commence his project.
So the Hon Member may wish to observe and note that the Ministry provides this facilitation role, but the regulatory requirement in terms of oversight lies with the EPA. If you want environmental impact assessment reports, the various promoters would have those reports.
I did not understand that I was required by this Question to produce environmental impact assessment reports in this august House. Thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Member for Nsawam Adoagyiri?
Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh 10:55 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me congratulate the Hon Minister for a very bold attempt at meeting the environmental impact assessment requirement.
I am aware that with relative environmental impact assessment for every district, we have a representative from the Ministry of Trade and Industry who serves on committees, particularly, on the area of environmental impact assessment (EIA).
I also see here, in the fifth paragraph, the formation of District Implementation Support Teams. Would the Hon Minster recognise this as excessive or in its absence, would the existence of committees that have right from the Ministry not been enough to deal specifically on EIA matters?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
His question is that do you need the District Implementation Support Teams? That is his question.
Mr Kyerematen 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if I understand the enquiry posed by the Hon Member, I would not think that the District Implementation Support Teams perform activities that may be superfluous, for want of a better word, because the representation on this particular team is not taking away the powers and responsibilities of the institutions and agencies that are domesticated at the district level.
In actual fact, what the team does is to provide a coordination mechanism so that you have representatives from all these agencies at the district level that have an
Mr Edward Kaale-ewola Dery 11:05 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the Hon Minister if he could tell the House how many of these factories are in operation, and probably if he could just give us a typical community or district that we can refer to that which is in operation.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Member, your follow-up should relate to the Question. This is a substantive question, you can file one yourself.
Hon Member for Adaklu?
Mr Kwame Governs Agbodza 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity.
Mr Speaker, may I ask the Hon Minister if there is a comprehensive policy document on the One District One Factory mantra, which can address all these issues of who qualifies and other things, and if the Hon Minister could make one available to Parliament?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Member, ask your own Question.
Hon Member for Keta?
Mr Richard Quashigah 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity.
I would like to find out from the Hon Minister if he could mention to this House the number of One District One Factory companies that have gone through this process of EIA as examples.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Minister, do you have the records now? If you do, share it. [Laughter]
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we are guided by rules even in asking Questions, and the rules are clear.
Order 61 provides and I quote with your permssion:
“As soon as a Question is answered in the House any Member beginning with the Member who asked the Question may, without notice, ask a supplementary Question for the further elucidation of any matter of fact regarding which the answer has been given, but a supplementary Question must not be used to introduce matter not included in the Original Question”.
This matter is not included in the Original Question. Mr Speaker, you advised him to file the appropriate Question in this regard.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Well, I am saying if the Hon Minister has that information, he should share it, but if he does not have it now, we could probably solicit it later.
Mr Kyeremateng 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, that can be provided later to the Hon Member.
Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa 11:05 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, I rise to ask a supplementary Question based on paragraph 4 of the Hon Minister's Answer, which has to do with a sanctioning regime.
We all know that if sanctions are not severe, companies may be tempted to violate these environmental regulations, so I would just like to find out from the Hon Minister if he could share with us what the sanctions regimes are and if in his view, they are severe enough to deter
businesses from violating our environ- mental policies?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Members, if you do not have a follow-up question, do not force. They are not making any new laws. The sanctions regimes are in the laws we have already passed, so I do not believe it is a fair question.
Mr Ebenezer Okletey Terlabi 11:05 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, I believe that in the assessment of the Ministry, they have an idea of the kind of factories that have the potential in each district, and since the EIA is project specific, does the Ministry have an idea or has it done some work on the impact of these potential factories in the specific areas?
Mr Speaker, if I may expatiate. Hither to this idea of one district one factory, we had a pie chart with each district and the kind of factory that the Government intends to promote, for example, my Constituency for instance, the Government continues to talk about the mango factory.
My question is, have they done any assessment on the impact of the mango factory on the environment of Manya Krobo?
Mr Kyerematen 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the responsibility of the Ministry starts with profiling the resource endowment of each district, only as a guide to prospective business promoters who may wish to start a factory, but respectfully, we believe that it is the responsibility of the business promoter.
If he is so minded to take opportunity of that particular resource endowment to first prepare a business plan, and the
preparation of the business plan would then require him to prepare an extensive environmental impact assessment report, but I am not sure that it would be appropriate beyond identifying the resource endowment of each particular district to go ahead and then prepare an extensive environmental impact assessment on the project in each district.
Mr Speaker, the point is that the impact of any project on the environment may depend on a number of factors, including the type of process technology that you adopt for that particular project, and it does not lie with the Ministry to determine the type of process technology which may have consequential impact or effect on the environmental impact of that particular project.
So Mr Speaker, we allow the project promoter to then conduct the impact assessment.
Mr Ras Mubarak 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, following from the Hon Minister's Answers, especially in respect of the District Implementation Support Team, what is the level of collaboration between his Ministry and the District Assemblies so far as the district implementation team is concerned?
11. 15 a. m.
Mr Kyerematen 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in composing the representation of the District Implementation Support Teams, the Ministry takes guidance from the District Assemblies. In actual fact, it is the District Assembly that proposes the composition of the District Implemen- tation Support Teams.
So, we are working together with the District Assemblies to first, compose the team and to also make sure that they provide the kind of support that is required for the implementation of each project.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
The next Question stands in the name of Mr Yussif Sulemana, the Hon Member for Bole/ Bamboi.
Location of Factories to be Established in 2018 Under the Government
Flagship Programme, ‘One district, One factory'.
Q. 395. Mr Yusif Sulemana asked 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.
Mr Kyerematen 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, just to provide the appropriate context for the Answer to this particular Question.
Mr Speaker, the ‘One District One Factory' initiative aims at establishing at
least one factory in each district across the country.
The initiative is private-sector-led, whilst the Government plays a facilitating role including providing technical assistance for the planning and implementation of projects as well as facilitating access to credit and infrastructural support. The Government has also approved a package of incentives for 1D1F companies.
The enterprises being established under the initiative are therefore owned and managed by private investors; and the entrepreneurs determine the location of their projects. In selected cases, government could act as an equity partner.
It is important to indicate that both new and existing factories that seek to expand their operations qualify to be part of the ID IF programme.
Mr Speaker, by the end of this year 2018, a total number of seventy nine (79) projects would have been approved under the 1D1F and these projects are currently at various stages of implementation.
The following table indicates the number of districts in the regions where the selected projects are being implemented.
Mr Speaker, some of these 79 projects indicated above have commenced operations, others are under construction whilst others have received approval from the Participating Financial Institutions and are ready to commence implementation.
In addition to these projects, 22 flagship large scale projects are to be financed under the MOTI-China National Building Materials (CNBM) US$400 million facility.
Another set of 35 projects are going through further critical credit appraisal by the Ministry's technical team and the Participating Financial Institutions to ensure that these projects receive financial support to ensure smooth implementation.
Mr Sulemana 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in his response, he said that in some cases, government comes in so I thought that in this particular case, government would have come in. As government has not come in, I would like to find out if the Upper East Region has done something wrong?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
If you pose it that way, I would not let him answer. Ask him whether Government proposes to intervene in Upper East. If you ask it that way, I would admit it for him to answer.
Rather than ask him, call the Upper East Members of Parliament and ask them why nobody has proposed a business in Upper East?
Mr Sulemana 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I ask to know what accounts for the zero in the Upper East?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Minister, do you have any plan to intervene in the Upper East?
SPACE FOR TABLE - PAGE 2 - 11.15
A.M.
Mr Kyerematen 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am grateful for your contribution to clarify the issue.
Hon Member, just to first emphasise that the selection of projects is based on the expression of interest by business promoters and the private sector.
But in cases where it is clear that no interest has been established in a particular district, government proposes to play an interventionist role and we believe that it is appropriate for government to do so under such circumstances. But in all cases, our preference would be that, business promoters would initiate and government would support.
This is because our intention is not to set up State enterprises. Even under circumstances where government plays an interventionist role, our proposal and hope would be that, when the factory is established, at an appropriate time, we would identify strategic investors from the private sector, either to co-share the equity with government or actually take up the full equity of the company at the appropriate time.
So just to assure you that, even in the unlikely event that no business promoter shows up to establish an interest in Upper East, Government would intervene directly.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Sulemana 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to make reference to the 2018 Budget; page 139, paragraph 783 where the Hon Minister gave us a list of regions and the proposals that they received from them and that these proposals -- [Interruption.] --
So the regional breakdown for the companies are as follows.
When you come to the sixth one, you have Upper East with four (4). It means
Mr Kyeremanten 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if the Hon Member would carefully read the text of the Budget Statement, he would realise that we were reporting on potential projects and those for which expression of interest have been submitted.
My understanding of my requirement in terms of responding to this Question is to provide an update on the implementation of projects and not expression of interest.
So, there is no conflict in terms of what was provided in the Budget Statement and the status report of those that are already in the process of being implemented. Beyond this, as I have said, at the appropriate time, if Government has to intervene, we would do so.
Mr Sulemana 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to make reference to the first paragraph in line 6 of the Answer which reads:
“The Government has also approved a package of incentives for 1D1F companies.”
I would want to find out from the Hon Minister the kind of package he is talking about. Out of the 79 companies, how many of them have received this package?
Mr Kyerematen 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, Cabinet has approved a set of incentives which include among others, a five-year tax holiday for 1D1F companies. Secondly, a
waiver of duties on the raw materials for the establishment of 1D1F companies and thirdly, a waiver of duties and taxes on the importation of machinery and equipment.
However, as required by law, after the approval by Cabinet, it would then be passed through the appropriate channels such as Parliament before the incentives could then be taken advantage of by the companies.
Mr Joseph Bipoba Naabu 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like the Hon Minister to give me the names of the beneficiary districts in the Northern Region, as well as those in the Upper West Region. Could he give us a breakdown from the regions through the districts, most particularly, the Northern Region and Upper West Region?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Minister, do you have those details?
Mr Kyerematen 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the Northern Region, there is one project in the Tamale Municipality and two others also in Tamale. There is one in Yendi and another in Savelugu. So, in all, there are four projects in the Tamale Metropolitan area. I can give the details of all the projects.
Mr John Abdulai Jinapor 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, during the vetting of the Hon Minister, I was present and he made a categorical statement that the factories that were to be built from scratch, would be on-stream within a year to two years. The Hon Minister assured us that he was committed to ensuring that the factories were up and running within a year or two.
Mr Speaker, on the 21st of June, 2018, the Hon Minister appeared before you, right in the Chamber and assured us that he had received 700 proposals, out of
which 329 had been screened to be successful.
Two years is just about ending. Given the snail-pace at which this programme is being implemented, could the Hon Minister assure this House that by the end of the two years, he would succeed in getting at least these 70 that he quoted in his Answer at various stages of implementation, given the fact that the 1D1F was trumpeted loudly by the NPP in opposition?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Minister, do not worry, I am disallowing it. Hon Member, you can file your own Question. The Question before us is the state of implementation, so if you want to ask your own Question, you are welcome.
Mr Shaibu Mahama 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Answer to Question 395 is very clear and I quote:
“It is important to indicate that both new and existing factories that seek to expand their operations qualify to be part of the 1D1F programme.”
In an earlier Answer to Question 394, the Hon Minister said, and I quote:
“Mr Speaker, the ‘One District One Factory' programme aims at establishing business enterprises to process and add value to the country's natural resources.”
Existing factories are now being considered as part of 1D1F. The policy says “establishing” which eliminates “existing”. Could the Hon Minister reconcile these two statements?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Frankly, I should disallow this question. [Laughter] Hon Minister, please provide the explanation. I know you are capable.
Mr Kyeremanten 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, before I proceed to provide an answer, I would want to clarify, as a matter of record -- and I am choosing my words carefully. It is unlikely that with my modest experience in the private sector and in industry, I would have given an indication that within one or two years, all the 216 factories would have been completed.
Mr Speaker, respectfully, establishing a factory is not exactly the same process as going —
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Minister, I disallowed that Question. You can speak to that when you leave here. [Laughter]
Mr Kyerematen 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr Speaker, in the programme framework for the implementation of the One District One Factory, right from beginning, the conceptual understanding of the 1D1F Initiative includes the fact that if there is an existing enterprise in any district, then government would accredit and approve that particular enterprise as
1D1F.
Mr Speaker, if we apply the basic rules in economic management and we intend to establish a factory in a district but find that there is already an existing factory that requires additional support to become more competitive, my understanding is that it would be more appropriate to support that particular enterprise to necessarily establish one.
Mr Sayibu 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I refer to the last paragraph of the Answer provided by the Hon Minister on page 23, and I beg to read:
“Mr Speaker, by the end of this year 2018, a total number of Seventy Nine (79) projects would have been approved under the 1D1F…”
Mr Speaker, this is contrary to information provided by the Minister for Information only last month, when he said that so far, 18 factories had been accredited.
Mr Speaker, I would want to find out from the Hon Minister the difference between the 79 approved projects with the 18 accredited projects that the Hon Minister for Information told the nation that that had been done only last month. While at it, I hope that the Hon Minister would tell us how many new jobs have been created as a result of this approved 79 or 18 accredited.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Minister, do you know anything about “accredited”? That is all you have to answer if you wish to. Do you know anything about the 18 accredited -- And if you have any information, please share. Otherwise, your answer is clear.
Mr Kyerematen 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there is no discrepancy between the information that may have been provided by the Hon Minister for Information and the Answer that I am providing to this august House.
Mr Speaker, just to clarify that at any given point in time, when we provide statistics or updates on the imple- mentation of these projects, it is based on what is on record as at the time of the report. When the Hon Minister for Information makes reference to accreditation, it is synonymous with approval.
This is because the processes that these projects go through, if I may explain, there is a certain criterion that is required for us to approve projects.
Mr Speaker, hopefully, Parliament would soon be giving its blessing to the incentive package that has been proposed by Cabinet for 1D1F companies. Unless companies are given approval or accreditation, as it were, to benefit from the incentive packages, it would be a free- for-all exercise.
That is why when we talk about approval and accreditation, it shows that one has gone through the process and is now in a position where the person qualifies to take advantage of the incentives that are provided for the 1D1F companies.
Mr Speaker, and so, if on a particular date the Hon Minister for Information talked about 18, within that period, there are projects that are continuously being upgraded from being with the banks to where there is approval given for the implementation of the projects and as soon as they cross that path, then they qualify to now become approved 1D1F projects. So there is no contradiction between the figures that have been provided.
Mr Speaker, if I come here a week after today, one may find that there is more progress. I thought that was the whole
purpose of this exercise; that conti- nuously, we would be receiving updates which would then indicate where we are with the implementation of the Project at any point.
Mr R. Acheampong 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, reading through the answer provided by the Hon Minister at page 23 on the Order Paper, it has been indicated that by the end of the year, 79 factories would be approved under the 1D1F. In the next page, reading through the table provided, I see one in the Western Region and one in the Volta Region.
Mr Speaker, I just want to ask the Hon Minister if he could share with the House where those in Western and Volta Regions are located?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
You can ask your own question. The answer he has given is clear.
Ms Angela Oforiwa Alorwu-Tay 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the Answer provided by the Hon Minister, he said both new and existing factories would benefit from the expansion — My question is, what about the collapsed factories that are lying there, for instance, Aveyime, Pwalugu and the rest? What is the plan for those collapsed factories also?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:35 a.m.
I do not know if the Hon Minister wants to share anything. But this is not coming out of this question. But if the Hon Minister has any information he wants to share, I would allow it. Otherwise, it is not coming out of this Question.
Mr Kyerematen 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, following the principle that we have just discussed about the fact that existing projects could also qualify to be 1D1F projects, the
Pwalugu Tomato Factory is potentially a company that can be accredited or approved as a One District One Factory.
This is because it actually illustrates exactly what we seek to do under the 1D1F initiative.
But we require a business promoter to express interest in, whether it is Aveyime Rice Project or the Pwalugu Tomato Factory, then the Government would provide the facilitation that is required for them to come up to a stage where they would be approved as One District, One Factory.
Mr Speaker, I can share with you that there is currently a major strategic investor that has already expressed interest in the Pwalugu Tomato Factory and we are in consultation and discussions with that particular investor, but it has not come to a point where they can be reported on as ready for implementation.
Mr Speaker, I thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Let me give the Majority Side an opportunity.
Yes, Hon Member for Savelugu?
Mr Muhammed Abdul-Samed Gunu 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, my constituency's name was mentioned and I believe that I need to add to the fact that the Sugar Factory -- [Interruption.]
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Member, do you have a question?
Mr Gunu 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, they were contemplating whether the Sugar Factory at Savelugu is actually Feasible. I would want to clarify that we have had --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon
Member, do not worry. After this you can speak to the press.
Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I referred to the Table provided by the Hon Minister on page 24 of the Order Paper which gives us a breakdown of the number of factories in the various regions.
Mr Speaker, I have in my hands the NPP Manifesto for the 2016 Campaign under the One District, One Factory Initiative; page 43. With your kind permission, it reads:
“In collaboration with the private sector, the NPP would implement the One District, One Factory Initiative. The District Industrialisation Programme would ensure an even spatial spread of industries.”
Mr Speaker, in the Table provided, the manifesto promises to achieve an even spatial spread of industries in Ghana. We now have one factory for the Upper West Region, that of the Upper East Region is zero; Volta Region is one; Northern Region is six while others like Greater Accra has 22 and Brong-Ahafo Region has 13 factories.
How is the Hon Minister ensuring that this pledge of an even spatial spread is achieved since the Table he has provided so far does not meet the manifesto's objective?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Member, I would encourage Hon Members to do their interpretation out of the Chamber. Here, there is a question which has been asked and answered. Let us stay within because my interpretation is different from your interpretation.
So, this is not a question I would admit. Hon Member, you can ask your own question or do your interpretation but in relation to this Question, the Question is on the level of implementation. The question reads:
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',
That is what we are restricted to; unless the Hon Minister wants to share some information.
Yes, Hon Minister?
Mr Kyerematen 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the indication in our manifesto is of our interest to ensure even and spatial distribution of industries which is actually a constitutional imperative -- article 36(2) (d) of the Constitution reflects the same strategic objective.
Mr Speaker, as we have discussed in this august House, Government is supporting the private sector to establish these enterprises. So by logical implication, it means that the private sector has a lead and very important role to play in ensuring this even spatial distribution of industries. The initiative would come from the private sector and Government would support them.
We have also clarified on this Floor that in the event that there is no business promoter that shows interest in a particular district, then Government would play a direct intervention role. The Government would ensure that that strategic objective of having even and spatial distribution is achieved.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.
Alhaji Muntaka 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I refer the Hon Minister to his Answer on pages 23 and 24 of the Order Paper. It reads:
“Mr Speaker, by the end of this year 2018, a total number of Seventy Nine (79) projects would have been
approved under the 1D1F and these projects are currently at various stages of implementation. The following table indicates the number of Districts in the regions where the selected projects are being implemented.”
SPACE FOR TABLE - PAGE 6 - 11.45 A.M.
Mr Speaker, I would want to refer to the Budget Statement and Economic Policy of the Government of Ghana for the 2018 Financial Year that was read on 15th November, 2017, paragraph 781 on page 138. It reads and with your permission, I quote:
“Mr Speaker, the One District, One Factory Programme was launched by H.E. the President on the 25th of August, 2017. The Ministry of Trade and Industry completed technical, financial and commercial viability analysis of 462 proposals out of which 191 covering 102 Districts were selected for implementation. It is envisaged that, these 191 Districts Enterprise Projects will collectively generate about 250,000 direct and indirect jobs. Out of the 191 projects selected for implementation, 104 of these
companies will be operating in the agribusiness sector whilst 20 are businesses in the meat and poultry sector. 40 of these companies will be operating in the construction and building materials sub-sector, whilst the remaining 27 are businesses operating in the Cosmetics and Pharmaceuticals sectors.”
Mr Speaker, this Budget Statement clearly stated implementation of 191; the Hon Minister comes with implementation of 79. I would want to ask which of the information this House should take since they all talk about implementation.
We would be grateful if the Hon Minister would let us know which of these pieces of information are accurate; the Budget Statement of 2018 Financial Year or his Answer today?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:45 a.m.
I think this
question has been answered already.
Yes, Hon Minister?
Mr Kyerematen 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there is no discrepancy between the information contained in the 2018 Budget Statement and the report that I am providing to this august House.
If the Hon Member is minded to carefully read the text, as he did, he would recall that it says “were selected for implementation”; it does not mean that they have been implemented. There is a process that every project goes through. It starts with expressing an interest from a business promoter, the business promoter submits a business plan and the business plan is then reviewed by the Ministry.
So if the Hon Member would recall, from what he read, it says that such a number of business plans have been reviewed by the Ministry. Now, once one reviews and one is not the investor as a Ministry or Government, one cannot determine the financing of the project. So, the Ministry would do its part and make a recommendation to a particular financial institution and then the process is carried forward.
Mr Speaker, respectfully, I think it is appropriate for us, as a Ministry, to report on what we do which precedes the work of the banks and other agencies that help with the implementation.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Very well.
Hon Members, Question numbered 427 stands in the name of the Hon Alhaji Abdulai Bistav Fuseini, MP for Tamale Central?
Mr Kyerematen 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the textile manufacturing sector in Ghana has been confronted with very significant challenges over the last three decades including the piracy of indigenous designs and logos of wax prints, as well as the non-payment of duties and taxes on imported textile prints.
As an illustration, the total revenue from duties on imported textiles recorded for 2016 was only GH¢1.7m against a projected revenue of over GH¢56m. This calculation is based on the fact that the total local demand for wax prints is estimated at 120m yards per annum while the total production from the existing three (3) local manufacturers is less than 40m yards, leaving a balance of 80m yards imported every year.
From this statistics, only GH¢1.6 m was paid as tax revenue from GH¢80 yard of textile print which were imported into this country.
Mr Speaker, the unfair trade practices in the textile sector has literally collapsed local manufacturing companies leading to a significant reduction in the number of employees in the sector from a high record of 30,000 in the early 90's to a current level of less than 5000.
Mr Speaker, against this background, the Ministry on June 1 2018 initiated a nationwide stakeholder consultation
exercise in Accra, to develop a comprehensive and integrated reform programme to provide a sustainable solution to this canker.
The consultation exercise involved all the major Stakeholders including the Management and Local Unions of the Local Textiles Manufacturers; Leadership of both the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union (ICU); and the Textiles, Garment and Leather Employees Union (TGLEU); Wholesalers and Retailers Associations; Consumer Protection Agency and relevant Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs).
These consultations and sensitisation exercises have continued to date in all major market centres -- Aflao, Takoradi, Tamale, Kumasi and Accra.
Mr Speaker, the new policy measures to be introduced with effect from 15th November are as follows:
1. Introduction of Tax Stamps for locally-manufactured as well as imported textiles;
2. Introduction of a Single Dedicated Entry Corridor for imported textile products; This will be the Tema Port.
3. The implementation of a Textile Import Management System to coordinate all Import of textiles, including the vetting of design and logos.
4. Providing support and incentives to local manufacturers to improve their competitiveness.
5. Attracting foreign textile manufacturing companies par-
ticularly, those in china to locate and produce in Ghana.
6. Conducting market surveillance exercises by the Textile Task Force to monitor compliance with new policy measures.
Mr Speaker, the introduction of tax stamps on textile prints will give buyers the confidence and assurance that they are buying genuine textile fabrics and that local designs have not been pirated. It would also ensure that appropriate duties are paid on imported wax prints.
Mr Speaker, it is important to note that local manufacturing companies are not against the importation of textiles as long as the appropriate duties are paid and there is no piracy of designs and logos.
Mr Speaker, in addition to the above, the establishment of the Ghana International Trade Commission (GITC) will among other things, provide oversight in the textile sector, to protect the domestic Manufacturer from unfair trade practices as stipulated under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) rule.
Mr Speaker, the Ministry, through the Swiss Ghana Intellectual Property Project is also training the Police and Customs Officers in the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, which will contribute to finding appropriate solutions to some of the challenges confronting the textile sector.
Mr Speaker, the Government is committed to implementing these measures by working closely with relevant MDAs, particularly the Customs Division of Ghana Revenue Authority, National Security, Workers Unions, Wholesale and Retail Traders to enhance the competitiveness of the textiles sector.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
piracy is an activity that is inconsistent with the regulations of Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the
WTO.
Would the Hon Minister agree with me if I tell him that the description of piracy as an unfair trade practice is misleading?
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Yes, Hon Minister? [Interruption.]
Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
Mr
Speaker, the question by my very experienced Hon Colleague seeks to elicit an expression of a personal opinion from the Hon Minister.
Mr Speaker, the Standing Order 67(e) is very clear and with your permission I quote:
“a Question shall not solicit the expression of an opinion or the solution of an abstract legal case or a hypothetical proposition;”
Clearly, he seeks a personal opinion from the Hon Minister. In that case, I would urge you to strongly urge him to either rephrase it or rule him out of order.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Sorry, Hon Majority Leader, was the end of your statement, “to rephrase it or rule him out of order”?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:55 a.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker. [Interruption] I said, I am urging
-- 11:55 a.m.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 11:55 a.m.
Hon Minority Leader, do you want to respond to that or I should give my ruling? [Interruption]-- No, I mean the Hon Minority Leader.
Mr Iddrisu 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he has subjected himself to your jurisdiction and mandate as Speaker. Therefore I rest my case for the Hon Inusah to be guided by you and probably rephrase his Question.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
I do not want to agree that Hon Fuseini is seeking his opinion. He is inviting him to agree that the definition undermines the policy he wants to implement. Is it a matter of fact or not? So the question is allowed.

The question was whether you agree that the definition of policy is --
Mr Kyerematen 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if I understood the question of the Hon Member, he indicated that piracy is an infringement on WTO rules under TRIPS. If that is the case, then my understanding is that indeed, being an infringement on the rules, then within the context of WTO language, it is an unfair trade practice.
So in actual sense, he has confirmed -- [Interruption.] that it is unfair trade practice, within the context of the WTO language --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Minister, do not engage with him; just give your answer and take your seat.
Mr Kyerematen 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my understanding of unfair trade practice includes piracy, which is an infringement on the WTO rules.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, indeed, on page 24 of the Order Paper, where we have the Answer, the Hon Minister provides that there is a gap in meeting the market demand for textiles in this country.
That is why other companies engage in what he describes as unfair trade practices.
What is the Ministry doing to ensure that the gap in demand is met by Ghanaian textile manufacturers?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Minister, I thought you had provided that in the Answer already. Item numbered 5 on page 25 of the Order Paper, “Attracting foreign textile manufacturing companies to locate in Ghana”. Once a company is registered in Ghana, it is Ghanaian; that is the law.
Hon Member, you may ask another question.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the next question is, is the Hon Minister aware that Akosombo Textiles Limited (ATL) and the Ghana Textiles Printing Company Limited (GTP) have in recent times faced serious crises by reason of the absence of a market for their produce?
Mr Kyerematen 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yes, indeed, I am aware that the local companies that the Hon Member referred to have some challenges in selling their products on the market.
There are three reasons for this. One is the fact that they are unable to compete because the imported textile prints are under-priced because duty is not paid on them.
So obviously, if they are competing with other products that are priced lower because duty is not paid on them, then
we could understand why their products would not be competitive on the market.
Secondly, the cost of capital in Ghana is such that they are unable to provide the kind of price regime that would enable them to compete against their competitors who borrow at three or six per cent. That is another element of it.
Also, there are other incentives that would enable the local companies to compete against the imported fabrics.
Mr Speaker, I understand that this question was posed partly to illicit from us, as a Government, what measures we are undertaking to deal with this. This is the Answer that we have provided.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Member, your last Question.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister is wearing a very nice local textile. It appears to be a cocktail of local designs; prominent amongst them is what the Akans call “akyekyedie akyi” . [Laughter.] Would the Hon Minister tell us --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Member, is that a statement of fact or you are conjecturing? [Laughter.]
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 12:05 p.m.
I know the name in Dagbani.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Do you see that in the shirt of the Hon Minister?
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 12:05 p.m.
Yes, this is a typical akyekyedie akyi. [Laughter.]
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Yes, you are right.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 12:05 p.m.
There is a

Mr Speaker, my question is that, is the design of this beautiful shirt that the Hon Minister is wearing produced locally or it was imported?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Member, you are out of order. The question is very clear here. Your Question was to ask the Hon Minister what plans the Ministry had put in place to control piracy. Now, you are zooming in on whether the shirt of the Hon Minister is pirated or otherwise. [Laughter.] That is disallowed.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
I was going to give one more slot to the Hon Minority Leader, but he is on the phone.
Hon Ayariga, I would give it to you.
Mr Ayariga 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister, in his Answer to the Question has provided information on page 25; one of the measures to be implemented is the introduction of a single dedicated entry corridor for imported textile products -- specifically, the Tema port.
Mr Speaker, Bawku has several borders and entry points. Does the Hon Minister suggest that when this policy is introduced, no border point in this country would be allowed to be used as an entry point for textiles except the port in Tema? So we cannot enter through the Bawku borders.
Mr Kyerematen 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the interpretation of the Hon Member is exactly correct and right.
Now, as the Hon Member is aware, the borders between Ghana and Burkina Faso, Togo and Cote D'Ivoire, according to the records available to us, have been the entry points of most of the smuggled textiles into this country.
Under this particular policy initiative, they would no longer be allowed as entry points for textile prints. We are introducing this policy to ensure that goods that are imported into this country attract the right duties and taxes.
There is no evidence that there is a company in Togo or Burkina Faso that produces textile prints. Most of the prints for which duties are not paid on actually come into our country from China.
We are not aware that the Chinese actually use our local textile prints but most of them are imported through Togo and Burkina Faso and they find their way into our country.
So part of the objective of this policy measure is to ensure that indeed, if there are genuine importers who want to bring imported textiles into the country, why would they be importing through Togo or Burkina Faso? If the goods are destined for Ghana, why would they not import them directly through our ports but route them through Togo which is a free port?
Mr Speaker, I believe that we have come to a point where if we want to save our local textile companies, we have no choice than to ensure that we take measures that will help us curtail this unfair trade practice.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Hon Minister, let me ask you one --
What about if it is air flown?
Mr Kyerematen 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that is a good question. We will interrogate that matter.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Hon Leader, I have said that I was going to give the last one to you but because you were on the phone, I gave it to --
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
All right.
Yes, Hon Minority Chief Whip?
Alhaji Muntaka 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to find out from the Hon Minister whether we do not have custom officers placed at these border posts?
Also, bearing in mind the ECOWAS Protocol on Free Movement of persons Residence and Establishment, if the Hon Minister says only the Tema port will be used as the entry port — Why would the Hon Minister not rather ensure that the equipment and gadgets required to do whatever measurement and collection of tax is provided regardless of the point of entry instead of the Tema Port being the only point of entry?
Mr Kyerematen 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe that the Hon Member has raised a valid point. The simple answer to that is, as a country, for many years, we have not been able to do the kind of policing that he is referring to.
It is a question of capacity and the extent to which one can ensure that, as he said, the right facilities and infrastructure is available to keep, as it were, guard over our borders.
My understanding is that the Tema Port has the most comprehensive and structured facilities and infrastructural
framework to undertake that kind of policing that will help --
Mr Speaker, let us all remember that our interest is to save the jobs in the local manufacturing companies and also to enhance our export revenue.
So, even though it may be incon- venient to some of the importers, if, indeed, they are genuine importers, as I said, why would they import through Togo and not directly to Ghana?
Mr Iddrisu 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
I have just one question for the Hon Minister for Trade and Industry and I appreciate the fact that he sees the opportunity to highlight Government policy.
May I refer him to the second paragraph of this Answer, page 26 of the Order Paper and with your indulgence, I quote:
“Mr Speaker, it is important to note that local manufacturing companies are not against the importation of textile prints as long as the appropriate duties are paid and there is no piracy of designs and logos”.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister is aware that our markets are flooded with textiles for which no duties have been paid and that is exactly undermining the local textile industries; the Akosombo Textiles Limited (ATL), GTP and Volta Star Textiles Limited are in distress. When will our task force act?
Mr Kyerematen 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my understanding is that the set of policy measures that we have provided is meant to ensure that our local manufacturing companies would be able to compete
Mr Iddrisu 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, a final one. Part of the policy thrust as he has mentioned is to use the Ghana International Trade Commission, but we need to keep and protect jobs for the distressed companies.
Does the Hon Minister have any special plan to keep ATL, GTP and the larger textile industries in Ghana with some support from Government? Any assurance from him?
Mr Kyerematen 12:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yes we have elaborate plans to support them.
First of all, we have provided stimulus support to, at least, ATL and then we are going to extend same to the other textile companies.
Secondly, part of the reason they are distressed is because of the unfair trade practices. So apart from the stimulus support given to the companies, our understanding is that if we are able to implement these policy measures, then they can compete. I believe that is part of helping the distressed companies to be able to come up alive.
For the avoidance of doubt, because reference was made to my fabric, it is actually produced by Printex Limited which is a local manufacturing company.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
That brings us to the end of Question Time.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
— rose—
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Hon Leader, do you want to ask a question?
Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, at the heart of the response from the Hon Minister to the Question asked by Hon Alhaji Inusah Abdulai Bistav Fuseini - This is the first time I am hearing the full complement of his name. At the heart of this response is the Hon Minister's attempt to save the local textiles industry.
Mr Speaker, would the Ministry consider collaborating with the Ministry of Agriculture to improve the variety of cotton that is grown in this country since the bud that is harvested from the indigenous species really produce very short yarns, which when used to produce textiles, comes at a very great cost?
So, would the Ministry consider collaborating with the Ministry of Agriculture to save the indigenous textile industry?
Mr Kyerematen 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yes, we are going to work very closely with the Ministry of Agriculture to be able to implement the forward and backward linkage integration programme for this particular sector.
Indeed, part of the challenge, as the Hon Majority Leader has alluded to, is the fact that we do not have a fully integrated industry, and that also makes us uncompetitive as against other countries that have a more fully integrated value chain.
Mr Speaker, we would work closely with the Ministry of Agriculture to develop this integration programme.
Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:25 p.m.
Very well. That brings us to the end of Question time.
Hon Minister, we thank you for attending upon the House to answer the Questions. You are discharged.
Hon Members, we would move to Statements.
The first Statement is in the name of the Hon Member for Ningo-Prampram on the current impasse on the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology.
STATEMENTS 12:25 p.m.
Mr Samuel Nartey George (NDC -- Ningo-Prampram) 12:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to make a Statement on the current impasse on the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology Campus.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for this opportunity to make a Statement on behalf of all Old Fellows and Continentals here in Parliament on the series of sad events that happened on the campus of the prestigious Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, an institution that we hold very dear to our hearts.
As Old Fellows and Continentals from the University and Unity Halls respectively, we hold dear the traditions of these two great halls that helped shape and guide us during our sojourn on campus. These all- male halls play a special role in the ecosystem of campus and add to the overall experience that KNUST offers its students.
It therefore came as a worrying news to us and like-minded Fellows and Continentals, the intention to convert these traditionally male halls of residence to mixed halls.
One would have thought that tradition would be respected and upheld. It is not for nothing that sorority and fraternity halls in Ivy League institutions have been maintained, in some cases, for over two centuries.
It is also worrying how a policy aimed at increasing female intake has ended up reducing the number of males in traditionally male Halls. This lends credence to the suggestion that the removal of all male students from the main hall of the University Hall goes beyond the announced policy decision to a more purposed intent to emasculate and dilute student power, the fulcrum of which is the University-Unity Hall axis.
Mr Speaker, let us hasten to add that we are not against an increased intake of women into the sciences and the attendant need for accommodation. Our position, however, is that this increased female enrollment must not come at the cost of several decades of tradition.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Hon Members, let me caution that this Statement is one of the most conciliatory I have heard on this matter, and I would want contributions to be in that tone, too. We would not want to pour petrol on a fire that is not quenched.
Therefore, I reserve the right to take an Hon Member out if I find his contribution to be inflammatory and endangering to the return of normalcy to the campus.

Hon Yieleh Chireh, I would start from you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.


One of them is the policy that young women should join the Unity Hall and the University Hall. I believe that those who stand and talk about the tradition of these halls being alone --

Mr Speaker, the important thing is that many more women qualify for the universities nowadays but they do not have accommodation. So, what was the Hon Member implying when he said that, those halls should continue to be traditional halls or those halls should continue to be for boys or men only?

I believe that it is a very backward Statement which should not be encouraged. We should rather embrace everybody and give them the opportunity.

Mr Speaker, secondly, the issue that must be pointed out clearly is that, this issue is not the cause of what happened in the University. It is not the issue of the mixing of females and males in the same hall that is the cause of this. They have all supported it.

In fact, the Hon Minister for Education and the Hon Minister of State in charge

of Tertiary Education embraced it. It is a clear policy and it has been going on.

Mr Speaker, when I was in the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Queen's Hall was made a mixed hall and this was followed by the Republic Hall. So I do not see why the Unity Hall, which was at that time the largest hall, should keep its doors closed to women. I believe that it is a wrong idea.

Mr Speaker, we call for cool heads, but the most important thing is that we as a Parliament must also look at the legislation that we have in place. There has been a misunderstanding of those who have a role to play. I believe that as the Statement itself says, we should be cool headed and make sure that people do the proper consultations.

We should not at this stage be calling for a change in the constitution of those constituted bodies, such that we eliminate all those who were on the University Council. In any case, from what all of us know, the responsibility of the University Council is not about investigating crises that emerge.

Mr Speaker, the statute and the Act establishing the University should clearly point out how such grievances are resolved and that should be emphasised. We should not be in a hurry to say that those who were members of the Council were wrong because there was a crises.

Otherwise, every time that we demonstrated, even during the “aluta” days, we should have sacked all the members of the University Council at that time. This precedent is not called for. People must be cool and make sure that in establishing the University Council, their duties are clear and the statues should spell this out.

Mr Speaker, finally, I would want to call on Parliament because the University Act that we passed would need to be looked at fundamentally. We should make sure that we eliminate the causes of the conflict on who is to appoint who, how it is to be done and the constituted bodies.

All these things would have to be clearly spelt out, and I believe that as soon as we do so, the problem of the universities would be resolved.

Mr Speaker, it is sometimes dangerous to allow something to explode, but at the same time, it also tells us what we would need to do to prevent it. I believe that what we did as legislators in the past would also continue to be part of our solution. I believe that we should re- examine all that we have done so far.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
I actually want to avoid Hon K. T. Hammond, but he is the most senior Hon Member standing, so I would give him the Floor.
Mr Kobina Tahir Hammond (NPP -- Adansi Asokwa) 12:35 p.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague just told me that you may have gotten the protocol wrong, because I believe I am senior to the Hon Colleague whom you asked to speak before me. That is just for the records.
Mr Speaker, I rise to make a few comments on the Statement made by our Hon Colleague. There are various segments to the Statement that he has made -- the bit about what happened on campus, what is going on now, the question about the Council, its reconstitution, and the other elements that he talks about.
Mr Speaker, it is a very sad reflection of what happened at the University of Science and Technology -- the phrase “Kwame Nkrumah” is added to it, and I believe that is the proper designation. Those days, it was called the University of Science and Technology and now we have it as the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology.
Mr Speaker, in early 1982, when the Jerry John Rawling's regime decided to visit mayhem on the universities, when we were at Legon, there was the usual “aluta”. What we did not do was to vent our spleen of disillusionment on the University itself.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon Members, order!
Mr Hammond 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I object strenuously to the point they made out there.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon Member, nobody has been given the Floor; so nobody has made any point. Continue with your contribution.
Mr Hammond 12:45 p.m.
I would continue, please.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, please, do not confirm that you were breaching the university rules. It is still there. At 12.00 midnight, no visitor is permitted to any hall.
Mr Hammond 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it was just before 12 midnight. [Laughter.]

So Mr Speaker, you fast forward to 2018 and to suggest that students should not operate on campus after 10.00 p.m., they have been extremely unfair to the students to think about it that some security guards on the campus actually arrested and incarcerated some of the young guys over there.

It was completely unfair. That is not to talk about human rights alone, but to really talk about the ambience within which students operate.

Mr Speaker, my Colleague, the Hon Member whom you called to be the most senior to speak was undermining the context of the argument altogether. He just got up and said that he does not see anything wrong with the breaching or diluting the so called traditions on campus.

All over the world, there are traditions on campuses. I cannot imagine any authority on campus suggesting that University of Ghana's Commonwealth Hall should be turned into mixed hall. I cannot imagine it happening.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
It has happened; it is the court that stopped it.
Mr Hammond 12:45 p.m.
The court stopped it?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Yes.
Mr Hammond 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, those at the Judiciary would live for a thousand years with their generations. They would be there. [Laughter.]

We talked of getting them to mix up with the males. I went to Legon Hall the other day. I was in room K10. We were all men who were there at the time. I go in there, and there were about 10 girls in my room. [Interruption.] They were in my room. [Laughter.] I was not happy, but that is what the university has become.

It is simple to make the point that there are traditions much as we appreciate innovation, development and dynamism. We should try so that some of these things are maintained. The atmosphere on campuses under which we study -- Put it in this context; studying is a serious business.

One would rack his brains. We need some opportunities to liberate our senses, to liberate our energy. We cannot be encapsulated. We were not encapsulated within the whims and caprices of the authorities.

We do not think they should be doing it now. There must be sanity and freedom on the campuses. Let us allow them to operate from there.

We talked about me standing here. Somebody made the point that some of the Leaders in the House had their status from there. I stood for the presidency of Legon Hall. Mr Speaker, most of them do not know. You see those boys who have just been born do not know.
An Hon Member 12:45 p.m.
Did you win?
Mr Hammond 12:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, two votes. [Laughter.]

Mr Speaker, it would be in a very sound springboard for political activities. Ultimately, we are here talking about those who are seasoned politicians.

Mr Speaker, we will leave the resolution of the matters to the University Council, the Vice Chancellor and all that to the appropriate authorities. They should get around this matter, resolve it quickly and get the students back to school. The authorities must learn from this, authorities not only from the traditional universities.

I am concluding.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Leaders, do you want to be last?
Yes, Hon Ablakwa?
Mr Samuel O. Ablakwa (NDC -- North Tongu) 12:45 p.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to this very important Statement.
I will follow your guidance, that this is a very sensitive matter that requires a lot of circumspection. We should not speak in a way that would aggravate matters. Already, we know that the University has been closed down for more than two
An Hon Member 12:55 p.m.
Taboo, taboo.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Members, shall we avoid matters which have not been confirmed? Let us avoid them. Concentrate on what happened.
Mr Ablakwa 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I can assure you that these are matters that I have verified.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Verified by you, but it is not confirmed, please.
Mr Ablakwa 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you. I follow your guidance.
So certainly, the high handedness has to be questioned, and then we have to be balanced to also condemn the violent d e m o n s t r a t i o n o n t h e 2 2
nd October which
led to destruction of property.
I have heard a figure of an initial estimate of the damage put at GH¢ 1.7 million, and the claim is that that figure could go up. That is a huge figure; that amount of money could have been invested in providing more residential facilities as the Hon Member who made the Statement has said.
Mr Speaker, I believe that what is important is the way forward. How can Parliament contribute to the swift resolution of the impasse so that the prestigious KNUST can be re-opened?
Mr Speaker, I believe that if you could invite the Committee on Education of Parliament to look into this matter, if the Hon Minister for Education could come and brief this House so that we can have a deeper understanding of what is happening, it would be useful.
Mr Speaker, only last Friday, during the reading of the Business Statement by the Hon Majority Leader, I pointed out an omission which has been happening for some time now; the annual reports of these public universities.
Section 14 of Act 80, the Act establishing the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology -- It is a public institution. Every year, they are supposed to produce an annual report.
I have been checking. As a House, I do not recall the last time we saw an annual report from KNUST and for that matter the other public universities. That does not help. In all the Acts of the public universities, they are supposed to present annual reports to this House.
We have not received these annual reports. The Ministers responsible through the National Council for Tertiary Education must ensure that these reports are brought before us, so that we can have an understanding and have a say in these institutions that belong to all of us, and we can help in preventing some of these things in the future.
Mr Speaker, I would appeal to all the stakeholders -- UTAG, TEWU, FUSSAG, GAWA, VCG, SRC and GRASAG -- that it is important we all commit to peace. Fortunately, the Chancellor, the wise King Otumfuo Osei Tutu II has been leading the mediation effort. Unfortunately, it
appears that there are entrenched positions and there is also the view that some encroachments are taking place where the government is not comfortable with the representatives of these institutions.
I believe that all sides would have to be interested in how quickly we can reopen this University.
Mr Speaker, there are consequences if this University remains closed. Beyond a certain time, the academic calendar cannot be completed and so we would have to be looking at the next academic calendar. We have thousands of international students who, as we speak, do not know what to do.
Then there are international partner- ships. I know for example the World Bank Centres of Excellence Programme, one of the key requirements is stability. If you are not stable as a higher institution of learning, the funds would be withdrawn and sent to a competing university.
So there are grave consequences if we do not quickly resolve these matters. That is why this Statement is timely.
Mr Speaker, I would want to commend you for admitting this Statement. We need to find an immediate solution. Let us not take entrenched positions. Let us return to respecting the values of academic freedom, institutional autonomy and permitting the statutes and the laws to work.
I believe that if we all work within the remit of the laws, the statutes and the regulations, respecting the rights of students, allowing university manage- ment to operate and then broad based consultation -- As a former National Union of Ghana Students (NUGS) president, I recall how sometimes it was
Mr Ablakwa 1:05 a.m.


so difficult to get university authorities, even Ministers for Education, to listen to our point of view.

It does not hurt. Let us broaden up, open up and listen to all stakeholders so that we can all find a common ground.

The alumni have a position. Unity and Katanga alumni have been contributing to the development of this University. Let us listen to them. They petitioned the President, what has happened to that petition?

So let us all create an opportunity to listen to everybody and find a common ground to quickly reopen this university for teaching, learning and research to continue.

Mr Speaker, with these few words, I thank you very much for the opportunity to contribute to this Statement, and I hope that Parliament would help in finding a swift and amicable solution.
Mr Alexander Kwamena Afenyo- Markin (NPP-- Effutu) 1:05 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to make some comments on the Statement by my respected Hon Colleague, Samuel Nartey George.
Mr Speaker, you have commended him highly for his input and his thoughts, and I would do my best in my commentary to live up to that standard.
Mr Speaker, I would precede my comment with a quote from the Statement, and here I refer to the last page of the Statement, second paragraph:
“We urge government and non- government actors to be mindful of their comments at this time as the
revered Otumfuo navigates us all through these challenging times for the University. We wish to call on all the various stakeholders, including and not limited to UTAG- KNUST, TEWU, GRASAG, the SRC and the Alumni Body to work conscientiously with one goal -- the restoration of full academic and administrative work on campus”.
Mr Speaker, if all stakeholders act in good faith, and this becomes the main anthem, I am sure that in a matter of days, the problem would be resolved.
We cannot take away our partisan interests, but it is important that no matter our partisan interests, where there are situations that require that we act in good faith, we do so without hiding behind our partisan interests to undermine the very authority that we are supposed to support.
Mr Speaker, my respected Colleague, Hon Okudzeto Ablakwa said, and I quote; “this House cannot sit quietly as this impasse continues”.
Indeed, we cannot sit quietly, but in making our views known, we must equally be conciliatory. We must not create the impression as though it is the Minority against Government or the Majority in support of Government. We should point out the real issues.
I have heard time and again this argument of academic freedom and academic independence; and I agree with that.
I have seen myself as an adjunct in some of these institutions and I cherish the need to uphold academic autonomy and academic freedom. But in a situation where there is the need to intervene, same must be seen as a necessary step in ensuring that the right things are done, not as an interference.
My respected Hon Colleague, Mr Okudzeto Ablakwa has been there before. I have not been a Deputy Minister for Education in charge of tertiary education before. But I am sure if we ask him to share with us his experiences, we would hear a lot.
I have spotted my other senior at the Bar, Hon Ayariga, who was also privileged to serve at that Ministry. I am sure if we call on him to share with us his experiences, he would tell us. But I have heard, and I am not at liberty to quote, that sometimes interventions of Government are seen as interference by our professors and this does not augur well for the development of our universities.
Mr Speaker, it has been lamented on this Floor that by law, each year, reports of activities are supposed to be laid, but nothing of the sort has ever happened. ‘Na who cause am?' If some form of reports — [Interruption.] Very well. Mr Speaker, it has been clarified by the Hon Majority Leader in a whisper; it is in arrears but it is not an absolute non- performance. But be that as it may, we are not being given the full update. If we were, we would have been making very important inputs and some of these things could be averted.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 a.m.
Hon Member, return to KNUST.
Mr Afenyo-Markin 1:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would. That the issues —[Interruption.] The matter I have raised regarding
academic freedom is a matter that has been raised in respect of the KNUST matter.
This is because the intervention of Government, the public commentary on same, was to the effect that Government was interfering. I am only suggesting that Government's effort must not be seen in that light. That is the point I am making.
Now, on the issue of the students. Mr Speaker, I have read somewhere, a quote attributed to Mahatma Ghandi, that non- violence weakens the morale of the oppressor and works on his conscience.
Mr Speaker, our dear students are the future of this country. It cannot ever be accepted, that a peaceful demonstration should lead to the destruction of State properties. Never! And those students who did that must bow their heads in shame. Never!
This House would never support it, nobody would ever encourage them to do so. In this era of social media, their interaction even on social media to make the point, would have been sufficient force to effect whatever change they so desire. For them to destroy properties, really, “I cannot think far”.
Mr Speaker, those security men who were harassing these young ones also have a case to answer. But at this stage, as you have given us the direction, I would want to comply by urging the interim Council, the yet-to-be formed governing council, the respected, revered Otumfuo II and all stakeholders to look at the interest of the students.
Mr Speaker, today, our public universities have been so proactive in the sense that they have been able to take away the market from the private universities, running various programmes.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 a.m.
No, the truth of the matter— let me tell you, in my days and in the days of Hon K. T. Hammond and others, they used to call Cape Coast University an ‘‘over-grown training college'' --[Laughter]-- and they used to call KNUST “carpenters and masons' training college”.
Mr Afenyo-Markin 1:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I know you have not expressed your own views and I know you can never be in contempt. But you are the father of this platform so I cannot debate you. But Cape Coast University is the premier university in the Central Region. — [Laughter.]
Mr Speaker, when I had admission at UCC and they said my hall of residence was Casford Hall, it was all joy. I wanted to be in an all-male hall where I would be asked to charge, hold my ten properties, [Laughter] wear my red and be active.
Mr Speaker, we learnt a lot; we did not use our affiliation to that hall to misconduct ourselves. The fact that somebody is a Vandal does not make him a vandal.
Dr Pelpuo 1:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he just said that —
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 a.m.
Sorry; all right, Senior, let me hear you.
Dr Pelpuo 1:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he was talking about Casford and he said that they were harmless and et cetera. Mr Speaker, it is not true. I contested Students Repre- sentative Council President election, they came en bloc and voted massively against me. [Laughter.]
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 a.m.
That was very violent! Again, that was very violent!
Mr Afenyo-Markin 1:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am sure he did not come to Casford to register and that is where things happen. He should have come to pay homage. He failed to do so and we did the needful.
Mr Speaker, the point here is that if one involves himself in morale activities on campus, it does not make one a bad boy. It is part of everyday life to relieve them of that tension. It is not easy; that stress at the universities, they need morale. So our university authorities must be mindful.
I was told that a Vice Chancellor in one of our universities was the entertainment prefect in his days in a secondary school.
It means he appreciates the principle of action morale -- Action in context. It is like saying “Vandal”, it does not make one a vandal. -- Action morale.
Mr Speaker, they need as students to be protected. It is equally important.
Per the enactment, we have given 100 per cent of internally generated funds (IGF) to the universities. The expectation is that these funds would be utilised to expand facilities and make -- [Interruption.] Never, it was never touched. It is at KNUST.
It is expected that these funds would be used to support students --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 a.m.
Hon Member, you have used 10 minutes already. Please wind up.
Mr Afenyo-Markin 1:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, they are intimidating me.
It is expected that these funds would be utilised to expand facilities and create an enabling environment for students to learn. Lecturers need offices and research facilities among others. If all these things are put in place, our universities would be better placed for the principle of academic freedom to be well achieved.
Mr Speaker, in concluding, I would want to humbly urge all stakeholders to look at the law governing universities. There are a lot of issues that we would have to address as a House and I am sure that at the appropriate time, if it comes up, we would all support.
However, for now, as Hon Ablakwa said, they need to go back to school; campuses
must reopen, academic work must start and nobody should for political partisan purposes, undermine any efforts, be they University Teachers Association of Ghana (UTAG), Teachers and Educational Workers Union (TEWU), Federation of University Senior Staff Association of Ghana (FUSAG), Vice Chancellors Ghana (VCG) -- [Interruption] -- NDC, CPP, GCPP, Haruna Iddrisu, Afenyo-Markin, Patrick Boamah, et cetera -- We must all work together without looking to scoring cheap political points. We need a solution.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 a.m.
Vandals, it is all right. You have had your day in court. [Laughter.]
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC --Asawase) 1:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I commend the Hon Member who made the Statement and also commend you for giving us this opportunity to speak to the issues concerning our great University,
KNUST.
Mr Speaker, I am a product of KNUST and both my first and second degrees are from KNUST. I reside in Kumasi and I have a lot of students in my constituency who attend KNUST. I think with the exception of one or two members of my family, almost every other person in my family who has a degree, Ph.D. or Masters, had it through KNUST. I am close to the school.
The Statement was apt but we need to correct some facts. There is the issue about Unity Hall where I resided during my first degree days. I was on the first floor, “ Abstract”, and later moved to 4th floor ‘‘Beverly Hills”. Later when I did my Master's, I was still in Unity Hall, so I am very attached to the Hall.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 a.m.
Hon Member, it is these facts that I want us to avoid. When others spoke to the students' reasons, I stopped them. I am also aware of these facts but let us avoid them for now. The university authorities have not spoken on the main reasons for which they were doing this but I believe the Committee would hear all that. For now, let us allow the Committee to work.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:15 a.m.
Very well Mr Speaker. There were a lot of factual inaccuracies
that were said and I thought that it was important that we took the opportunity -- not talking deeply about them. When the issue about converting the halls came up, I remember very well that the Hon Minister for Education and I were at the last graduation of KNUST and took the opportunity in the inner room to discuss this with the Vice Chancellor.
I was part of those who thought that we needed to keep the halls the way they were and keep the tradition. However, two things came out clearly. As a result of those two things, I supported the mixture. One had to do with the female population
of the school as it was no longer fair for the university authorities to keep two halls with such huge capacities for only male students.
I wish the Hon Minister for Education were here. We raised the issue that steps should be taken in that instance for Africa Hall, which is a female hall, to also be mixed and they said they were doing that. Most importantly was the security and peace of the university, so we all said it was fine.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 a.m.
Hon Majority Chief Whip and Hon K. T. Hammond, please.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in the various halls, even during our time, when we were having these “high morale”, in the case of Unity Hall, when we ‘‘sharpbrain'', we were mindful of the majority of students who were in their rooms. Some were studying, or asleep and others could have been sick. We did not extend our activities beyond certain hours.
It became apparent that a lot of complaints were coming from resident students and that was why the authorities said that whatever activities were held within the halls should not go beyond 10 p. m. That was so that others who wanted to sleep, could do so.
Mr Speaker, you can check, we have relatives in school and nobody's movements are restricted. They can study, sit in front of the halls or move around the halls. It is the activities that disrupt other students from having their right to sleep and study that were restricted.
The issue about the Junior Common Room (JCR); because of KNUST's huge population, for the past 10, 12 years or so -- When I was there, the total number of students in KNUST was 6000.
Today, I am told that the estimated number is 50,000 which is almost ten-fold. Meanwhile, with the exception of the new hall which was built behind Republic Hall, the SRC Hall and private facilities, the same six halls remain.
So about 12 years ago, the university authorities decided to do this “in-out-out- out”. When they started it, they elected executives and they were supposed to stay on campus throughout.
The resident students started complaining that they elected students who lived off-campus and so they did not take their residents' concerns on board. So the authorities decided that one has to be a resident to lead.
It is not first-year students who lead the JCR. They are elected in the second semester of their first year. Since they are elected executives, even when their colleagues are non-residents, the executives are residents. However, they could do that for only one year, so that they could move out for new executives to move in.
So it is not true that it is first-year students in their first semester who are elected to lead students. That correction needs to be made.

Mr Speaker, I perfectly agree that the brutalities that were meted out to students, regardless of the cause, cannot be justified. This is because you and I are

not security persons. If I were sent to control students rioting, I may not be able to do it well. But when a security person is sent, that person is trained to be able to deal with that situation. To go brutalising the students as if they were going to kill them cannot be justified and it cannot be right.

Mr Speaker, when we were in school, security on campus, with the greatest of respect, could not come near any student to even imagine arresting or beating that student. They were to give directions and they would show the way when one needed something, but not to impose themselves on students. I think this is one thing that needs to be corrected.

Mr Speaker, but we must also call a spade a spade. What the students did was wrong. We had several demonstrations when we were on campus. We did not go attacking or destroying university properties in the name of just being students. And this is one of my concerns.

When they decided to converge at the point of the demonstration, I saw some of their colleagues holding sticks and clubs. How could they say that they were going for a peaceful demonstration when they were holding sticks and clubs? What were they going to use them for?

And I thought that the students themselves -- we used to do during the Haruna Iddrisu's days as NUGS President, was to get amongst us, some students who would be guarding us to ensure that those who were drunk do not follow us and those who were holding sticks and other things were cautioned to either drop them or remain in their rooms but not to follow us.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Does the Hon Leader or the Majority Leadership want to speak on this matter?
Very well.
Then let me listen to one more from the KNUST and I would then come to the Minority Leader.
Dr Samiu Kwadwo Nuamah (NPP — Kwadaso) 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you so much for the opportunity to also contribute to the Statement ably made by my Hon Colleague from the other Side.
Mr Speaker, I would like to commend the Hon Member who made the Statement for hitting the nail right on the head.
Mr Speaker, it seems that the core issue that led to the brutalities and the demonstration and the subsequent vandalism is gradually being glossed over. It seems that what is being captured in the airwaves now is the fracas between government and UTAG, TEWU et cetera.
But that was not the core issue. And so I would like us to focus our attention on what actually caused all these, so that together, we can come out with solutions to arrest the situation.
Mr Speaker, I stand with the Hon Member who made the Statement in totally condemning the vandalism that has been witnessed on campus by the students. It is totally appalling and together we reject it.
But in so doing, I would like us to be guided by some laws of Newton.The first law states that a body will remain stationary or continue in a lineal motion, until compelled by an external force to act otherwise. In Twi, it means “biribi anka papa a engye kyerede” — [Laughter].
Mr Speaker, again, I would like us to be guided by the third law of Newton, which states that action and reaction are
Dr Samiu Kwadwo Nuamah (NPP — Kwadaso) 1:35 p.m.
equal but opposite. In Twi it means, “wo de ebuor bo edan a eba bebo woa.”
Mr Speaker, we need to actually be guided by these laws whiles we try to decipher what we are exactly faced with today.
Mr Speaker, this whole thing started from a policy which is so unpopular that the authorities started implementing on campus. Some of us would always stand by the authorities. Why? It is because I have once been a lecturer at the University of Ghana.

I was once a member of UTAG and I was also once a student at KNUST and I was at this University Hall. So however, I have been on both sides and I understand exactly how the two parties feel.

Mr Speaker, the reasons behind the hall conversions which have so far been thrown about are two. The first one is to increase female population and also to increase the number of in-hall residents. We all support the idea of increasing female population on our campuses.

I do not think there is any individual in this Chamber or in this country who is against our mothers, sisters and cousins having access to tertiary education; that has not been the point. We all support the fact that we need to do that.

Mr Speaker, but what baffles some of us is that, is the conversion of the halls to mixed halls a remedy to the problems so far put forward? Is converting Katanga or Continental Hall into mixed halls a panacea so far to the problems being put forward? So it does not come in at all.

If we are trying to increase female population on campus, we can all sit down and there is a clever way of doing that.

Mr Speaker, the motto of the University as my brother clearly stated, is ‘‘Nyansapo wosane no badwenma'', to wit, the knot of wisdom is untied by the wise.

So there is nothing that cannot be untied by that University if they properly sit down to look at the situation. But if you look at the motive behind the hall conversions, it is nothing but trying to weaken the student front.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Where is that stated? Is it not a deduction? If it does, state that “I suspect that or I deduce” but it is not a fact.
Dr Nuamah 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, borrowing your words, I suspect that the whole conversion policy is nothing but just to reduce or weaken the student front. What do we gain by doing that?
Mr Speaker, I listened to my Hon Colleague on the other Side citing instances where students had had confrontations with one another and stabbed themselves.
That happens everywhere; we were in this country where the Vandals and Okponglos had issues; they fought, vandalised things and people got injured but the remedy to that situation was not to convert Commonwealth Hall into a mixed hall. That has to be looked at. So the conversion has got nothing to do with that.
Mr Speaker, single-sex halls and schools play important roles in this nation of ours. We have schools like Prempeh College, Opoku Ware Senior High School, Presby Boys' Senior High School; we all know how well they perform academically.
That is how it is and they play a role in this country of ours. Likewise, single-sex halls like Katanga, for example, provide a better avenue to mobilise student front to fight social injustice and promote student wellbeing which has frankly been unmatched by the mixed halls.
Mr Speaker, I believe that as a country, we need students who are courageous, patriotic and full of confidence. And KNUST would feel proud to have students with such attributes. I believe that together we can move forward in this country.
Mr Speaker, what I am calling for is to invite stakeholders and investors to come on board to build more halls of residence for our females.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader?
Minority Leader (Mr Haruna Iddrisu) 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, let me thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the Statement ably made by the Hon Samuel Nartey George to bring to fore matters relating to the respected and prestigious but not premier university, KNUST.
Mr Speaker, in doing so, I commend the Hon Member who made the Statement and also commend our Hon Colleagues who have contributed to this debate so far. I would urge that Parliament must take a serious view of this matter.
We should demand the immediate reopening of KNUST, the restoration of normal academic life and the restoration of the University Council and the restoration of the Vice Chancellor.
Mr Speaker, in contributing to this, I have had to refer to the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology Act, 1961 (Act 80). The dissolution of the University Council essentially could not be a panacea to resolving the tension and conflict on campus. I am aware it is revised.
Mr Speaker, in times past, even the President of Ghana, under article 68, was the Chancellor and head of the universities; but in our wisdom, we have shifted.
His Royal Highness, the respected Otumfuo Osei Tutu is now the Chancellor of the University. No consultation was done, even as I referred to the revised Act, to remove and dissolve the Council- modicum of respect to him and his standing.
Mr Speaker, what has happened in KNUST is repugnant to academic freedom. If you go to the United States of America, universities are rated. We call them the Ivy League Schools.
I am sure if we were to have our own Ivy League School in terms of rating them, what we have done will contribute to lowering the respectability of that institution and it can even affect the products of that institution.
Therefore, when Government is interfering or intervening, it should do so cautiously and still guard and respect the academic freedom of those institutions. If we can have the University Council dissolved, then the academic boards can also be dissolved tomorrow.
Someday, a Minister or President would even think that he or she can sit somewhere and award marks in the university. That is why, jealously, we must guard and protect academic freedom and that of KNUST.
Minority Leader (Mr Haruna Iddrisu) 1:45 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the students are wrong and
we must be bold and courageous to tell them that they are wrong. We should tell them that their action was excessive.
The security working at KNUST who worked with the University Council and the Vice Chancellor were wrong and they were excessive in their actions; we should be bold and courageous to tell them that was wrong.
The action of Government to dissolve the University Council was wrong and we should be bold and courageous to tell Government that it was wrong. You do not interfere with the Council of a university the way and manner they did.
Mr Speaker, but with demonstrations; I have had the privilege to lead a student union and I have led a number and series of demonstrations to demand action on matters that we felt so strongly about.
Mr Speaker, let me use Commonwealth Hall and Volta Hall as examples. The universality of the policy is what is in question. In the University of Ghana, there is the Commonwealth Hall -- we the Vandals, including the Rt Hon First Deputy Speaker. And then there is the Volta Hall; we overlook them. Apart from those matters relating to comfort that some are confessing, we relate to them very well.
Mr Speaker, Unity Hall and University Hall - mixed halls - must it be an imposition in a tertiary institution? No. That is why it is an institution of higher learning. It must follow a consultative process and that consultative process must lead to an acceptance of its implementation or not.
What consultation went on in the conversion for the students to choose that
the way to resolve it was the way they went?
Mr Speaker, in difficult times, a few years ago, when the University of Ghana (UG) had problem with the NDC Administration, was the University Council dissolved? Was the Vice Chancellor asked to go home?

Mr Speaker, consultation; I believe our student leaders must appreciate that the essence of the Junior Common Room leadership and Senior Common Room leadership is to engage in a healthy dialogue and consultation with the leadership and management of the university in order that we could amicably resolve this.

Mr Speaker, my suggestion is that the Government of Ghana is capable of building a new mixed hall of residence for

KNUST.

The Hon Minister for Education has come here for finance for the Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund). Government should build a new hall of residence for the KNUST and dedicate it as a mixed hall and accommodate those who want to move into it.

In the meantime, the students have protested; restore normalcy and let academic work proceed. We are prolonging the tenure of students with respect to academic work; we are prolonging matters in the institutions. There are unresolved matters in the university even including book and research allowance.

Mr Speaker, I do not believe the way to go is the blame game. We pretend in Parliament that we are not petty and partisan. We should stop the pretense.

How many of us are courageous to tell government when they go wrong when we are in the Executive? We do not have that courage. I pray that we would live to see a day in this Parliament when we would identify issues as national ones and that goes beyond our petty partisanship that this President was right or wrong.

No; university education is university education. If we fail there, we would be failing the future generation of this country.

Mr Speaker, some of our Hon Colleagues have raised germane issues about higher education in Ghana including the financing of same. Who cares about which hall or hostel one sleeps in in the United States of America? In civilised jurisdictions, is that the business of the universities? Theirs is to give you the academic training; you find your own accommodation.

Mr Speaker, but we have come very far. I recall 18 years ago when we struggled with government to get parents and students participation. I still recall being stoned by the current Minister for Transport and his contemporaries at the University of Cape Coast when we discussed matters of cost sharing because people felt strongly about it.

Mr Speaker, today, the halls of residence, unlike your generation and generations before you, are not as free. Even with the payment, at least, it is not at the level when you were in the university. So the students must have a say because they pay for the accommodation.

It is not those days of Hon Kobina Tahir Hammond when the Government generously said that they should enjoy free accommodation and therefore, it could decide what it did with students. Today, students pay for their own accommodation. [Interruption.] Mr Speaker, they even had the benefit of an allowance. So there should be consultation.

Mr Speaker, my other issue is the enforcement of law and order. The Regional Security Council (REGSEC) has a mandate but it must be occasioned based on law. If REGSEC wants to declare curfew, what does the Public Order Act provide?

They should consult with the Minister for the Interior and let him be the declarant and not REGSEC. This is because we would need the National Headquarters to handle matters of reinforcement and policing.

Mr Speaker, they should not underestimate the power of the students and their numbers. They could overpower management and even the security agencies.

Mr Speaker, we have done it before. When University of Ghana, Legon was invaded by some police in one of the clashes in our era -- I hope the Hon Banda is listening. When they entered through the Faculty of Law and other places, we found a way to contain them within the university.

This is because we the students were there and they would find where they would pass and go out after molesting us.

Mr Speaker, but that is not the issue. Let me conclude by commending the Hon Member who made the Statement. The
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
But Hon Minority Leader, Commonwealth Hall was a mixed hall. It was the first mixed hall in the University.
Mr Iddrisu 1:55 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker, but we have passed that stage. That is why I spoke about the universality of the policy.
Mr Speaker, let us also remind REGSEC that they should not act beyond their powers; ultra vires actions are not acceptable.
Mr Speaker, finally, even if we want to dissolve the Council, there is a National Council for Tertiary Education (NCTE) Act and the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology Act which give us the composition of the Council and how to revoke the appointment of same. But to just announce one midnight that everybody must go home looks as if they were being victimised.
Mr Speaker, strongly, I am against it today; I would be against it tomorrow. Let us not send wrong signals in victimising any Vice Chancellor in the exercise of his managerial responsibilities. It is important that we do not scape goat.
This must stop. Is he the only person who supported the mixed hall policy? We have heard people in government also support it. If it is not popular, it is not popular.
So that unpopular policy must be withdrawn for further dialogue and consultation with the student leadership. We require that Government work through the Council.
We trust the judgement and leadership of His Royal majesty, the Chancellor of the University. Government should take off its hands. The Chancellor is very capable and with the management of the University to restore normalcy and order in accordance with due process of law.
We must collectively condemn the excessive actions of the students. We must collectively condemn the excessive action of the security officers.
Mr Speaker, destruction of valuable public property is not acceptable at this stage. So while we resolve the issues we should be guided. It is said that conflict is inevitable. It would always occur. The superiority lies in how you manage inevitable conflicts. Conflicts between students and management --
This is not a major issue. It is just about compelling students to live together in a mixed hall. If they find objections to it, they are free to express it if they do not find it acceptable.
We should be accommodating. It is a mark of intolerance. Mr Speaker, in a 21st century university, there are too many issues and I believe that you should direct that we interrogate all the Reports of the Universities here.
All universities have departed even from their vision and many of them from their mission. That is not the mandate
Parliament gave them when the institutions were being set up.
When the world is talking about science and technology, we are still drifting towards humanities and the arts, and marketing courses and we complain daily about unemployment and employability of our graduates? We need to interrogate it here in Parliament and take a major decision going forward.
Part of the build-up of unemployment in our country is training of persons who are unemployable. At least, as a country, we benefit from the fact that we could read and write.
Mr Speaker, the world is drifting. Why would a Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) ship look for a technician from outside Ghana? Are we not capable of producing them?
Mr Speaker, if you have observed, every university now wants to train lawyers; every university wants to now do social sciences. What was the mandate of the University of Cape Coast at birth? What was the mandate of the University of Ghana at birth? What was the mandate of the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology at birth? They have all drifted and we must call them to order.
In fact, they are lucky that today they could go home even with Internally Generated Fund (IGF). If they want to demand accountability, we would demand it in the way they use their resources.
Mr Speaker, if we take just admission forms and how much they charge poor students and parents. What goes into the use of those moneys? Yet, they expect government to continue to support them.
Tuition still remains free in Ghana at the higher level thanks to the generosity of successive governments.
I believe that it must continue, but what does the universities do with those related charges?
We have revolutionised accommo- dation. The students pay for their accommodation and yet they say they cannot have a say in where you put them? Some of them now even enjoy better rooms unlike what the Hon K. T. Hammond referred to; packing them in rooms like sardine.

Mr Speaker, on this note, let me urge that you guide us well, that Parliament should demand an immediate reopening of the university, allow for the restoration of normalcy and academic work, and get the Council properly constituted. We should trust the Chancellor of the University to work to get that done.

Mr Speaker, we should be bold - you have quietly discussed this with me. As a country, our problem is “we” and “they”; we are right, and they are wrong. We are the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and they are the National Democratic Congress (NDC); this is the way they think.

If we begin to identify matters that are national -- university and higher education is national. The young people need to be nurtured well; going to factories and institutions to visit violence cannot be part of their training -- Who employed them?

The students themselves must know that in some parts, this record would follow them even after school, if they are identified, and gaining employment would become a major challenge. So Mr Speaker, we call for calm.
Majority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu) 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would be very brief.
Mr Speaker, I thank Hon Samuel George for the Statement that he drafted for us. Mr Speaker, this Statement is a collaborative effort between Hon Samuel George, himself a former Katangee, and myself. I thought that it really recognises the various notes in the events that have played out at the university.
Mr Speaker, it is important -- Indeed, I would want to stay guided by Standing Orders 70(2) and 72, which provide that a Statement and, indeed, a comment on a Statement on the Floor should not provoke debate. In that context, as much as possible, I would want to stay in the middle course and my comments would be very neutral.
Mr Speaker, however, one must recognise certain facts. It is not for nothing that the Constitution provides in article 38(3)(a), which for emphasis, I beg to read:
“The State shall, subject to the availability of resources, provide -
(a) equal and balanced access to secondary and other appropriate pre-university education, equal access to university or equivalent education, with emphasis on science and technology;”
Mr Speaker, it is not for nothing that the Constitution provides emphasis, in our pursuit of tertiary education, on science and technology. If we subjected ourselves to that, it would address the
issue raised by the Hon Minority Leader. We are drifting away. Even the new universities that --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader, let me just announce that having regard to the state of Business in the House, I direct that the House Sits outside the regular Sitting hours.
Please, continue.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that is at the heart of our tertiary education. We are drifting away from the core functions of the various universities. Indeed, even with the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), one of the core courses that is pursued is fine arts. I believe that it should not even belong there in the first place -- fine arts at a university of science and technology?
Mr Speaker, so we should be careful where we are taking our education to and which aspects of our education we emphasise. It is the reason I find unfortunate, a comment by one of our Hon Colleagues, which really appeared to justify the dilution of the various halls at the University.
This, “it happened to someone, so if it happens to another, what is wrong”? attitude is most unfortunate. This is because if we should encourage the thinking that we want to really emphasise enrolment of females at the tertiary level, very soon, we shall come to senior high schools.
What would happen? We would not have any strictly boys or girls' senior high schools. That is the necessary consequence or sequence of events. I do not think that is justifiable.
In any event, if that is at the heart of it, why do they then dilute Africa Hall and take males there and bring females to University and Unity Halls? If they want to do that, at the end of the day, what would we see? At the University Hall now, the females outnumber the males.
So what is at the heart of that thinking -- the introduction of females into otherwise male halls? Mr Speaker, we should be truthful to ourselves. I think that if we are candid with ourselves and there is no room for suspicion, then perhaps good counsel and reason would prevail.
Mr Speaker, the brutalities that happened -- We all know that people did not want to respect laid down statutes. It appeared that people were in a hurry to implement whatever they had agreed on at various levels, be it at the University Council, within the ranks of the students and even the campus guards.
This is the third incident in the annals of KNUST where campus guards have attacked students with venom. What is at the heart of it? We should interrogate it; it cannot be right.
That is not in any way to justify the aftermath of that event, which resulted in the destruction of property, for which the Government, and indeed, the university may have to make available money to the tune of GH¢1.7 million, we are told, to repair. It cannot be right, but we should go to the heart of the event.
As I said, I associate myself with the Statement made by the Hon Colleague. I do not want to be repetitive of the issues that have been raised because as I said, it is a collaboration that I had with my Hon Colleague to produce this. I thank him for what he did.
I believe that the comments that we have heard really stand the Statement in good stead.
Mr Speaker, in a lighter vein, this is most uncharacteristic of Hon Samuel George in this House. [Laughter.] Mr Speaker, this statement should be expunged. [Laughter.] I think that we have had a very useful Statement.
Mr Speaker, going forward, what is the relevance of our Committees in Parliament? Article 103(3) of the Constitution provides a solution and, for emphasis, I beg to read:
“Committees of Parliament shall be charged with such functions, including the investigation and enquiry into the activities and administration of ministries and departments as Parliament may determine; and such investigation and inquiries may extend to proposals for legislation.”
Mr Speaker, I believe that at the end of the day, we could charge the Committee on Education to look into this and proffer suggestions to us.
Already, one of our Hon Colleagues suggested that we should standardise the laws relating to all the universities. I disagree with him. It cannot be; we cannot have the enactment for a university of science and technology being the same as a university that is arts oriented. It cannot be justified.
So the Committee could be charged with such responsibility and given some time to respond and report back to us. Whatever Report that they submit, Mr Speaker, I believe should serve as a useful guide to all of us.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Very well. As much as possible, we will try to stay within the Statement but one thing I find interesting is that in this debate, we appear to have honed in on the change of halls of residence to a mixed hall as the basis of the violence.
The students themselves said no, the reason for the violence was the brutalities against their members and I think that we should stay there.
I believe that the issue relating to the convention of the halls of residence is strictly an alumnus one, because as we speak, every student stays in for a year. So, which students are talking about conversion? Those who are entitled to be in the halls of residence now are the first year students.
They are not the ones complaining but it is those who have left the halls of residence already and their leaders, as we have heard now, who are championing this argument.
The issue about more female students being denied access to the universities, because there is insufficient accommodation, was an issue when I was a student leader. About some 30 something years ago, Mrs Odoteye who was then the Volta Hall Senior Tutor, was always seriously arguing with the Vice Chancellor that they were not being fair to female applicants.
This is because a male applicant could obtain aggregate14 in those days and would be given admission because there was room for male applicants unlike a female applicant who would obtain aggregate 12 and would be denied admission because the female halls of residence were full.
I think that should be the gravamen of the discussion as the Constitution provides for equal access.
So we should not create space for one group of applicants and leave other groups and when there is no room in the other group -- notwithstanding that they have performed better, then they do not get access. I believe that is the way we should hold the discussion.
However, I believe that there is a matter which came up out of the debate which is very important, that the universities are drifting off their core mandates. It is so critical; probably, the polytechnics are producing more marketing graduates than even technical -- [Interruption.] I think it is time we investigated and held them back to their core mandates.
Hon Leader, are we suggesting that we assign some responsibilities to our Committees in this matter? I thought that we should allow the Committee to continue and finish their work and let us see the outcome. I think that we should further discuss this at Leadership meeting and consider it.

Very well. The next Statement shall be taken by the Hon Second Deputy Speaker in honour of the late Hon Peter Boakye Ansah.
MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:11 p.m.
Hon Members, I am told it is time for a second
Statement to be made which is a tribute in honour of the late Hon Peter Boakye Ansah, former Hon Member of Parliament for Ejura-Sekyedumase.
STATEMENTS 2:11 p.m.
Mr Muhammed Bawah Braimah (NDC -- Ejura-Sekyedumase) 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for granting me the permission to eulogise a great personality who brought tremendous development to the Ejura-Sekyedumase District in the person of the late Hon Peter Boakye Ansah, a former Hon member of this House in the 1st and 2nd Parliament of the 4th Republic.
Mr Speaker, the late Hon Peter Boakye Ansah was born in the year 1947 to the late Opanin Kwaku Bempah and Obapanin Ama Yinkah in Sekyedumase. He had his elementary education at Sekyedumase Presby Primary and Middle School. He proceeded to Osei Tutu Training College in Akropong where he obtained his Teacher's certificate “A”.
He taught in a number of communities in the Ashanti Region including Kodie, Asonomaso and Sekyedumase.
Mr Speaker, the late Hon Mr Peter Boakye Ansah distinguished himself as a patriot and one who was interested in the development of his community and as such, he was the District Organising Assistant of CDRs for the Offinso District during the revolutionary days of the Provisional National Defence Council
(PNDC).
Mr Speaker, it was therefore not surprising that when the Ejura-
Sekyedumase District was carved out of Offinso and Sekyere Districts in 1988, he was appointed the first PNDC District Secretary.
Mr Speaker, the tenure of the late Hon Peter Boakye Ansah as the PNDC District secretary brought tremendous develop- ment to the Ejura-Sekyedumase District, notable amongst them is the establishment of the Ejuraman Anglican Senior High School at Ejura, the Sekyedumase Senior High School in Sekyedumase, the connection of the Ejura and Sekyedumase towns to the national grid, and the construction of a number of feeder roads to open up the District.
Mr Speaker, it is worth mentioning that he ignited the sense of communal spirit in the district and the current building which houses the Municipal Directorate of Education in Ejura was built under his leadership using communal labour and Internally Generated Funds of the Assembly.
Mr Speaker, in recognition of his hard work and drive for development, the Ejura Traditional Council under the Presidency of the late Nana Kwaku Sarfo 11 installed him Nkosuohene (development chief) in 1991 in recognition of enormous development he brought to the District.
Mr Speaker, in 1992, when the country opted for multi-party democracy, he played a pioneering role in the organisation of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the Ejura- Sekyedumase Constituency and was the NDC's candidate in the 1992 parliamentary elections.

Mr Speaker, it is worth mentioning that when the New Patriotic Party (NPP) won the 1992 parliamentary election, I was his
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Hon Member, thank you.
Is there any indication as to the number of people who want to contribute to this Statement? None.
Well, I would just say that I knew the late Peter Boakye Ansah very well. Many of you are new faces and so you do not know the contributions that he made in
the establishment of parliamentary democracy in Ghana and so I would understand why we do not have many Hon Members who are willing to contribute to this Statement.
I could see only Hon Alhaji Collins Dauda who was in that Parliament and without anything we managed to establish multi-party parliamentary democracy in Ghana.
He was a very dignified Hon Member of Parliament and he was quite senior to many of us who were very young. He was 10 good years ahead of me in age and we took a few lessons from such senior Hon Colleagues.
I think that when he was a member and Hon Chairman of the Committee on Lands and Forestry, which my Hon Colleague, Hon Collins Dauda, took over later on, he did a lot to lead the House to pass legislations, resolutions and so many things concerning lands and forestry in the country.
So it was with a heavy heart that I heard of his sudden demise because I recollect meeting him in Kumasi a few months ago. Even though he was frail, he looked a bit healthy and I did not know that he could pass on so soon; none of us here could prevent that.
Once you are born, you must die. We do not determine when we come into the world and we also do not determine when we would leave the world. So, we could only thank the Almighty God for his life and what He led him to do for his family, constituency and mother Ghana.
I would also say that may his soul rest in perfect peace. Amen.
Hon Members, we would now move to public business unless there is any other indication from the Majority leadership.
Mr Matthew Nyindam 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, we could take item numbered 5. Unfortunately, the Hon Minister for Finance is not here so I beg to make an application for the Hon Deputy Minister for Local Government and Rural Development, Hon O. B. Amoah, to lay the Paper on his behalf.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Hon Members, at the commencement of Public Business. Item numbered 5 -- Presentation and First Reading of Bills.
There is an application for the Hon Deputy Minister for Local Government and Rural Development to present this Bill for and on behalf of the Hon Minister for Finance.
Minority leadership, any comment?
Dr Ayine 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we have no objection.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Thank you very much.
Hon Deputy Minister for Local Government and Rural Development?
BILLS -- FIRST READING 2:15 p.m.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr George 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr Speaker, with the greatest amount of respect and deference to you, I would want to draw the attention of the House to our Standing Orders; Order 48, even as we seek to proceed with Government Business, especially one of great importance that comes from the Ministry of Finance.
Mr Speaker, finance is an important business and Standing Order 48 talks about quorum in Parliament. Mr Speaker, I am raising this issue so that you would advise the House such that when we have less than one-third of Hon Members of the House -- Is it right for us to proceed with issues relating to the Ministry of Finance or finance related matters?
Mr Speaker, so respectfully, I seek your guidance.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Hon Member, you have not read the Standing Orders. Which section are you referring to? Is it the whole Standing Orders?
Mr George 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, Order 48 (2) says that: and with your permission, I beg to quote:
“If at the time of Sitting a Member takes notice or objection that are present in the House, besides the person presiding, less than one- third of the number of all the Members of Parliament, and after an interval of ten minutes a quorum is not present, the person presiding shall adjourn the House without Question put until the next Sitting day.”
Mr Speaker, it is my position that we have less than one-third of the numbers of Hon Members in this Chamber. So, if we could go by standing Order 48 (2) pending your guidance.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
I have made myself very clear with regard to this particular Standing Order and I have placed a lot of emphasis on the interpretation of “if at the time of Sitting”.
My understanding of it is that if at the commencement of the Business when we enter and we are to Sit -- “at the time of Sitting” -- an Hon Member realises that the Hon Members present are less than one-third, then the Hon Member is at liberty to raise the issue of quorum.
That is why half-way through it says “and after an interval of ten minutes a quorum is not present”. Do you understand?
It is at that time that an Hon Member could raise this point of order. So, I completely disagree with you and I believe that the House is properly composed. We have a quorum and we could continue with Business.
My reason is that usually during the course of Sitting, we have many Hon Members called upon to attend Committee Sittings, and while they are there it is part of Parliamentary Business. So, they are present and working in Parliament.
It is not always that an Hon Member of Parliament must be seen on the Floor of the House. If that were to be the case then we would not have any Business to transact because our Reports would not be ready and nothing would come here.
So, I disagree with any other person who interprets this Standing Order in a different manner. When it comes to the interpretation of the Standing Orders the Speaker is the master; and when it comes to the Business of the House, then the Speaker is a servant.
With regard to this interpretation, I am the master here and I so interpret and the Business would continue.
Dr Dominic A. Ayine 2:25 p.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
I would want to agree with you regarding the interpretation. As you have said, you are the judge and the law just like the Standing Orders which is in your bosom.
Mr Speaker, I wanted to know whether this interpretation you have given is related to the taking of decision at the material moment when there is no quorum; what will be your position on that? This is because, at this point in time, supposing a matter arose that required that we took a decision, and supposing an Hon Member rose and raised the issue of quorum, what would have been your position on that?
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
I would allow the Hon Majority Leader to contribute, but I will tell you the practice and the precedence.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I really want to be able to know the position of the Hon (Dr) Dominic Ayine on this matter.
When the Speaker has clearly given an opinion on a matter that has been raised for the Speaker to rule on, does he want to engage the Speaker in a debate? If he wants to do that, he should let us know his position in this. If it is no, then he should leave the matter to rest.
Otherwise, I would sit down and yield to him. He should tell us that he wants to engage the Speaker in debate. He should be bold and tell the Speaker that he wants to engage him. He cannot sit and tell me no.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Well, let us listen to the Hon Member who raised the point of order.
Mr George 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am grateful for the education. I agree with your ruling and accept the fact that the Standing Orders and its interpretation rest in your bosom.
Mr Speaker, I wish to also draw your attention to article 102 of the 1992 Constitution, which is not part of our Standing Orders. The position is clear -- A quorum of Parliament.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Hon Member, you are completely out of order. The issue raised by the Hon (Dr) Ayine is very simple. The House recognises that it sits also in Committees. Read the Standing Orders well. When a Committee is sitting, it is considered as a Sitting of the House.
So, at any time that a decision is about to be taken and the Hon Members present on the Floor are less than the quorum, the attention of the House in Committee is drawn and the Hon Members come to take votes and go back to continue with the Business at the Committee level. This is what is practised all over the world. It is not only in the Parliament of Ghana.
The nature of Parliamentary Business is that we cannot at any time always have so many of the Hon Members present on the Floor of the House. If that were the case, your work will only be on legislating, but we have other functions. Apart from the functions, we have so many duties; and apart from duties, we have so many responsibilities as Hon Members of Parliament.
So the perception that is carried throughout the country that those that are always present in the House are less
and therefore Hon Members of Parliament are not performing their duties is wrong.
Please, I believe Hon Members would do well to assist the Speaker to educate the public about this. We have so many committees Sitting and there are so many Hon Members there doing parliamentary work. Therefore they are attending on Parliament.
Hon K. T. Hammond, I would allow you, but I am sure you are not also going to start debating the Speaker on this.
Mr Kobina Tahir Hammond 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, no, I would not be debating Mr Speaker on that. I just will be inviting Mr Speaker to consider the matter in another shape.
Mr Speaker, in the years that have gone by, respective substantive Speakers have upheld the interpretation as suggested by the Hon Member for Ningo-Prampram. In any situation where there has been occasion like this, a quorum had been called and substantive Speakers have upheld it and adjourned the House to the following Sitting day.
Mr Speaker, it would appear that the ruling you have made today would contradict what the substantive Speakers have consistently held.
More importantly, Mr Speaker, I also draw your attention --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Hon Member, you are completely wrong. The earlier Speakers have always given the opportunity for Hon Members at the committee level to be drawn to the Chamber. That is why they ring the bell.
So they come in and if after 10 minutes, they are unable to show up, it means they are not at the Committee level, they are
Mr Hammond 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that fact is not disputed at all. That is the point he made so that Mr Speaker could have asked for the bell to be rung, and if after the 10 minutes there is no quorum, then the Standing Order 48 (2) would have then been activated.
Mr Speaker, I think the ruling has just been made that --
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, please, read Standing Order 48 and tell me where that is stated?
Mr Hammond 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, actually -- [Interruption.]
No, I have read it, I know what it is.
I was drawing Mr Speaker's attention to another Standing Order that actually supports what he called for.
Mr Speaker, I would refer you to Standing Order 91 -- Interruptions of debate. I am not sure whether I should read it or allow Mr Speaker to read it silently.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Read.
Mr Hammond 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it reads:
91. “Debates may be interrupted--
(c) by attention being called to the absence of a quorum;”
Mr Speaker, the provision refers to the Standing Order 48 that he talked about, which stipulates that the presence of one- third of Members shall constitute a quorum for the House.
So Standing Order 91 actually reinforces Standing Order 48 and calls for the House to be adjourned if there is no quorum.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, what you read said “debates may be interrupted”. That is all. Interrupting debates is what that Standing Order is about. He succeeded in interrupting the debate. With that one, he has succeeded. That is just interrupting debates. That was what he succeeded in doing.
Mr Hammond 2:25 p.m.
I do not understand. He interrupted the debate by drawing the Speaker's attention to the absence of a quorum.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Which is what he has done.
Mr Hammond 2:25 p.m.
Aha! But the effect is that, Mr Speaker, there is the question of quorum.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
And Mr Speaker has looked at the question of quorum and given a ruling. With what you are doing now -- Read the Standing Orders. I do not want to apply the Standing Orders.
Mr Hammond 2:25 p.m.
I do not understand. [Laughter.]
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
You will not understand.
Mr Hammond 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I did not quite hear what you said, but the Hon Leader said that the point the Hon Speaker is making is that I do not want to subject myself to the ruling of the Speaker. I do not think that is what the Speaker is suggesting. Who am I to do that; not to subject myself -- ?
Mr Speaker, what we are doing is for clarification of the rules. So nobody is in any doubt; what Standing Orders 48 and 91 are about as supplemented by the Constitution. The Constitution, I think in article 102 talks about quorum; what really is the point and status of quorum when it comes to these matters?
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Yes, Hon Collins Dauda.
Alhaji Collins Dauda 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
The Hon Member for Ningo-Prampram rose on a point of order and made reference to Standing Order 48 (2). That is what you ruled on.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
That is so.
Collins Dauda: Nobody in the Chamber has got up to raise anything relating to Standing Order 91. If my Hon Colleague, K. T. Hammond feels strongly about quorum, the Speaker has ruled on Standing Order 48 (2). He can also rise and raise Standing Order 91 and wait for the Speaker to make a ruling on that. He has not raised it.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, as I indicated, you have interpreted 48(2) to only mean that it is only exercised at the commencement of Business, because the operative word is a definite article, not an indefinite article -- “at the time of Sitting”, not “at a time of Sitting”, as you read.
Mr Speaker, look at it again. You read “at a time of Sitting”. It is “at the time of Sitting”. What you quoted is a definite article, and having said so, the Standing Order 91 that the Hon K.T.Hammond is quoting is only applicable when there is a debate on the Floor. There is no debate, so you cannot invoke a debate and apply it.
Mr Speaker, there is no debate yet, so I suppose we can make progress.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
Hon Members, you are at liberty to consult other authorities. There is a lot of literature on this matter, and so you may do well to go through them and learn from the precedents.
You could also go through the practice and procedures of other Parliaments, and you would see what is stated there.
We all know that, as you sit here, you have a lot of Hon Members performing other parliamentary duties, and by virtue of the nature of the duties, they could not possibly be performing those duties on the Floor of the House.
So when we bring the new Standing Orders, let us deliberate seriously on this matter. If we were to stretch this thing beyond the interpretation I have given, we would not be in the position to do business in this House, and therefore, please let us go by the ruling and proceed with the Business of the House, unless Leadership gives a different indication.
Dr Dominic Ayine 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I take the point that you are making about Committee work forming part of the work that we do, but would it matter if on the Order Paper the Committees that are advertised, if you take their number in total, it may not be up to the quorum needed for the performance of business?
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
Hon Member, I do not want to rule you out of order, but there is a document you refer to when you are dealing with attendance, and you know that would be the Votes and Proceedings.
When you come to the point of taking a decision, that is the time you need the number on the Floor to be able to take that decision depending on what type of decision.
In some decisions, you need two-thirds of Hon Members. There are some decisions on which you need a simple majority, and so when you get to that time and you see that the numbers are less than the legal provision, then you can raise the issue of the quorum, and then if after ten minutes you do not get the numbers on the Floor, then the matter is stood down or you adjourn the House and continue the next day.
That is the letter and spirit of the Standing Orders, and that is what is practiced all over the world, so please, I have taken this time to explain it further, so that it can guide Hon Members. If not I would have applied the Standing Orders, and the Standing Orders is that you do not debate the Speaker when he makes a decision.
I could have called the Marshal -- [Laughter] -- to marshal you out, because it is my duty to maintain peace and order. When it comes to your decision, my only role is to play the servant role. I do not see, I do not hear, it is your
decision. But when it comes to the maintenance of law and order, the Speaker is the master.
Are we together?
Hon Members: Yes.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
So next time you depart from this rule, I would apply the whip, and the Marshal would be so willing to marshal Hon K. T. Ham- mond out of the Floor of the House.
So the available Majority Leader, do we take item numbered 6?
Mr Nyindam 2:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we would take item numbered 8.
Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
Item numbered 8. Hon Members, we are moving, once again, to the Consideration Stage of the Right to Information Bill.
Hon Members, my attention has been drawn to the fact that because of the interruption, I did not refer the Bill that was laid to the appropriate Committee, so the Bill has been accordingly presented and it is referred to the Finance Committee for consideration and Report.
Item numbered 8, -- Right to Information Bill.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION STAGE 2:35 p.m.
  • [Resumption of dabate from 16/11/ 18]
    • Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think I did something wrong the first time, and my attention was drawn to how I should do it properly. So, Mr Speaker, I now intend to do it properly by referring the House and the Speaker to Order 91 of our Standing Orders.
    Mr Speaker, Order 91 says --
    Mr Second deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    Hon K.T. Hammond, there is no debate on the Floor.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we are just about starting a debate.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    So we have not started any debate.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    I thought you were saying that the Speaker was out of Order.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I could not possibly dream of that.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    So, Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Banda 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, still on clause 13, we have advertised the new renditions in an Addendum. Unfortunately it has not been finalised yet, and for that matter it has not been distributed.
    2. 45 p. m.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, I have just been shown the new rendition. But since it is not captured in the Order Paper, I believe it could be taken tomorrow. So we defer it to tomorrow. And that applies to the whole of clause 13, so we could move to clause 17.
    Clause 17 at page 4 of the Order Paper -- There is a proposed amendment standing in the name of Hon Kobina Tahir Hammond, popularly known as “Hon K. T. Hammond”.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker. I believe this is the commencement of the debate, so it takes me back to Standing Order 91. The Order has been moved and the debate has started. -- [Interruption].
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, address the Chair, I am listening to you.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I am not sure it is a rude interruption, but the unnecessary interruption from the other Side is not helping my concentration.
    Mr Speaker, there are two issues now; in the course of the debate, clause 17 has been called into the debate. It happens that there is an item there which comes under my name so I am supposed to deal with it. There is also another matter which I have been canvassing all along.
    Mr Speaker, kindly help me with the comprehension of that. The issue is that, that Order could only be invoked when there is a debate.
    I am saying to Mr Speaker and the House that the debate has now started, so I am invoking the provisions of Order 91 and I invite Mr Speaker to act accordingly, failing which I would go to the issue that I have to deal with on the Order Paper. But for now, I am inviting Mr Speaker to look at Order 91(c) of the Standing Orders.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, you just laid the foundation and then sat down. You have not said anything.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, forgive me, I thought we realised —
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    You are drawing my attention to Order 91(c).

    that:

    “Debate may be interrupted --

    (c) by attention being called to the absence of quorum;”

    Mr Speaker, I believe we would also accept in all the rulings that Mr Speaker is giving that absence of a quorum does not make it possible for us to continue with debate. So, we come back to article 102 of the Constitution.

    This whole thing is carried on the back of the constitutional provision, which talks about quorum of the House. This is also variously reinforced by Order 48, which has been ruled out, and now the Order 91.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    The constitutional provision is very clear. Article 102 of the Constitution says:
    “a quorum of Parliament, apart from the person presiding, shall be one- third of all the members of Parliament”.
    That is a quorum.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is correct. We do not have one-third in the House.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    What is the quorum? What are the numbers? You have not said anything.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am trying to be charitable. We all know the numbers here. But if we should — [Interruption].
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, you were called upon to move your Motion. You have not moved your Motion and you are drawing my attention
    to the absence of a quorum. And with that—
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was wondering if I would not be breaching Order 91 if I went on with my Motion. Clearly, there is no quorum for me to move my Motion. That is my worry.
    My Motion calls for me to ask for the deletion of the entire paragraph as Mr Speaker suggested yesterday. It is important. But Order 91 says there must be a certain number of people in the Chamber for me to move the Motion before them. Mr Speaker, they are not here, what should I do?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:35 p.m.
    You have not moved your Motion; you have not told us of the number and you have not said anything. I cannot rule based on your speculations and guess work. I do not have the evidence before me to make a ruling.
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, by my count— Mr Speaker, let me do it this way, maybe, it would make for a lot more comprehension.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 17 — delete
    Mr Speaker, right on the back of it—
    Mr George — rose —
    Mr Hammond 2:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am getting support. Thank you very much.
    — [Interruption] Yes, I am yielding. I have moved my
    Motion for the deletion of the entire clause, I realised that an Hon Colleague was up and I thought Mr Speaker would acknowledge him because—
    Mr Speaker, I moved my Motion and I would explain the basis for which I asked for the deletion. I started doing that yesterday and I indicated that there is a pattern to the formulation of a Bill, particularly with respect to the exemptions.
    Mr Speaker, we would see that — I believe it starts from clause 5 — Mr Speaker, clause 5 right up to clause 16, they have clearly indicated the various exemptions. Mr Speaker, there are absolute exemptions and qualified exemptions which are to be taken in the context of public interest.
    Mr Speaker, I said that clause 17 is actually a stealth which puts a detonator under all the other exemptions. Mr Speaker, if you study the exemptions carefully, what you see is that there are specific reasons, some of which are about public interest, prejudice, security. They have all been underlined; specifically why have they been exempted?
    What clause 17 then does is that, it goes back to take away all the exemptions in the name of the elements that have been identified over there. To some extent, clause 17 is otiose; it is redundant because all the various elements underlined under clause 17 have been taken care of within the various segments from clause 5 to 16. What then is the use of clause 17?
    Mr Speaker, if the point is that the information is no longer exempt because there is something about miscarriage of justice within that, then it had already been taken care of within one of the exemptions that looks at miscarriage of justice or the interplay of law and social justice.
    Mr Speaker, there is an instance, for example, where we have provision which
    says that communication with the foreign entities, foreign Governments, foreign relations is exempt. It is a suggestion now being made that by virtue of clause 17, that communication with the foreign elements, the security element is no longer exempt?
    Mr Speaker, this is the point that I make that the mischief that clause 17 is supposed to resolve had already been done in the various segments — from the Presidency right at clause 5 to the ones at clause 16.
    Mr Speaker, it serves no other purpose but rather undermines all the exemptions. That is the point I wish to bring to the attention of the House, that by deleting it, no violence would be done to the remaining exemptions from clause 5 to clause 16.
    They would be left intact, except that there is the danger that this would introduce a very dangerous element which would conflate and confuse the situation. There would then be the need for interpretation and it would make the functioning of these exemptions pretty unruly. That is why I called for the clause to be deleted in its entirety.
    Mr Samuel N. George 2:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that with your reference to putting this up for the consideration of the House, we understand the Motion moved by Hon K. T. Hammond.
    Respectfully, I draw Mr Speaker's attention to Standing Order 91 (c) of our Standing Orders which says that:
    “ Debates may be interrupted --
    (c) by attention being called to the absence of a quorum”
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:55 a.m.
    Hon Member, you have not established anything to get my ruling. [Interruption]
    You do not need to catch my ear, you have to catch my eye. So you should wait and when you catch my eye, I would definitely call you and then you can rise on your feet. So you would need to do more than you are doing.
    Yes, Hon Member for Wa Central?
    Dr Pelpuo 2:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have never heard about a situation where quorum was raised and somebody had to do something more. Maybe, they would have had to draw your attention to it and then you might cause the bell to be rang. If there was still no quorum, maybe some counting would have to be done by the Clerks-at-the-Table to establish the quorum.
    So I think it would be difficult for the Hon Member to do the counting and tell us whether there is quorum.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:55 a.m.
    Preceding Standing Order 91 is Standing Order 90. It says:
    “Mr Speaker, shall not take part in any debate before the House.”
    So when you call the Speaker's attention to the absence of a quorum, you must state the numbers for him to know that there is the absence of a quorum.
    If there is a doubt, the Speaker would then call on the Table Office to either confirm or deny the figures. Then the
    Speaker could rule on that. I am not going to use conjectures to make a ruling.
    Mr Osei Bonsu Amoah 2:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am surprised that Hon Members are going about this issue this way. I thought my good Hon Friend would rather help us but he has created more confusion.
    The reality is that we have in the Constitution and in the Standing Orders what qualifies as quorum. They should state them and let us know that the number here falls below that number for which reason they are moving the Motion. They have not stated all these things but want Mr Speaker to rule that we do not form a quorum.
    If they read article 102 of the Constitution, it says:
    “A quorum of Parliament, apart from the person presiding, shall be one- third of all the members of Parliament.”
    That is the foundation they should lay first and then go ahead to say that they have counted us and we fall below this number, so they are inviting Mr Speaker to rule on the matter. They have not done that, yet they have risen to say we do not form a quorum. What do they expect Mr Speaker to do? Are they inviting Mr Speaker into this matter?
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:55 a.m.
    Since Hon George moved the Motion, let us listen to him.
    Mr George 2:55 a.m.
    Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
    With reference to article 102 of the Constitution and Standing Order 91 (c), one-third of Members of Parliament would be 91.6 Members. I have counted those of us in the Chamber and we have less
    than 91 Members. We have 35 Hon Members, excluding Mr Speaker, as per my count in the Chamber, which falls short of our Standing Orders' requirement of 91 Hon Members.
    On the basis of the foregoing, I request Mr Speaker to make a ruling. I am drawing Mr Speaker's attention to the absence of quorum as per Standing Order 91 (c) in the Chamber to do official business.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 2:55 a.m.
    Hon Members, our attention has been drawn to the absence of a quorum. [Laughter] Now, it has been properly done and so, it is not the Speaker who would participate in the debate.
    Table Office, the practice is that you cause the bell to be rung. In the meantime, we would go on for 10 minutes and then advise ourselves.
    Hon K T Hammond has moved his proposed amendment for the deletion of clause 17.
    Question proposed.
    Mr Chireh 2:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, since yesterday, Hon K. T. Hammond has been urging the House to delete clause 17. However, if we look at clause 17, first, it was part of the Bill that was introduced during the NDC period and has always been an integral part of this consideration.
    I think this House would have an incomplete Right to Information Bill if we delete it. The reasons he assigned are precisely the reasons we should have it there, so I think that we should retain clause 17 of the Bill.
    There have been a number of amendments made to it or some other
    amendments which were not taken yesterday, and I consider these to be sufficient reasons for us to keep it.
    It is very important. What does the headnote say; “Disclosure for the protection of public interest”. Does he not want us to protect public interest? I urge my Hon Colleagues to reject this proposal to delete the entire clause.
    Mr George 3:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I side with Hon Chireh. When the Committee on Communication and the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs met to look at the Bill as presented to us, we looked at the needs and all the exemptions that have been provided, be it for national security, sovereignty or economic interest among others.
    We believe that all those interests seek to protect the state, its agencies and machineries. However, this Bill is a coin with two sides.
    In protecting the State, its agencies and offices from being subject of disclosure that could be harmful, it is also important and incumbent on us, as legislators who represent the people, to also put in place protection for the public interest. That is what clause 17 actually does.
    Mr Speaker, so clause 17 is in reference to the protection provided to the State from clauses 5 to 16. If in the provision or exercise of any of those exemptions, it is discovered that -- For example, clause 17(c) says; “a miscarriage of justice”. Information available that would lead to the correction of a miscarriage of justice.
    I believe that as representatives of the people, we cannot fight against this. We cannot fight against the disclosure of information which would expose a
    Mr Amoatey 3:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to support the position taken by my two Hon Colleagues who spoke earlier opposing the amendment proposed by Hon K. T. Hammond.
    Mr Speaker, we have a line in our National Anthem which says, “and help us to resist oppressors rule”.
    Mr Speaker, if we look at clause 17(1)(d), it reads 3:05 p.m.
    “an abuse of authority or a neglect in the performance of an official function”. This is protection for the weakling in society to put the Executive or officialdom in check.
    Mr Speaker, further, if we look at clause 17(2), as my Hon Colleague proposed that it should be deleted, then we would not be doing justice to the Whistle Blowers Act. Clause 17(2) reads:
    “A person who discloses infor- mation or authorises the disclosure of information under this section is not liable in criminal or civil proceedings for the disclosure or authorisation of the disclosure of information under this section.”
    This is protection for persons who would genuinely and in the interest of the State want to blow the whistle to expose wrong doing through the access of information. I would therefore urge my Hon Colleagues to resist the amendment proposed.
    Mr Hammond — rose --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:05 p.m.
    Hon Member, are you on your feet to withdraw your — ?
    All right, then let me listen to them and I would come back to you.
    Mr Ahiafor 3:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me the opportunity. I have listened to Hon K. T. Hammond, and looking at the provision very carefully, I would urge upon him to withdraw his proposed amendment.
    Mr Speaker, there are provisions in this Bill that clearly spell out information that are exempt from disclosure. What clause 17 seeks to do is to clearly state that though information are exempt from disclosure, based on the circumstances spelt out in paragraphs (a), (b), (c) (d) and (e), even though they are exempt information, they should be disclosed, and when it is done, the punishment that goes with disclosure of exempt information would then not be applicable when an exempt information is disclosed under these circumstances.
    So, clause 17 is making provision where though information is exempt, there would be a provision for which an exempt information can be disclosed and the usual punishment would not go for it. I think clause 17 is very necessary in this particular Bill to be able to achieve the aim, since it is restricted to paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e).
    Mr Pelpuo 3:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I also think that clause 17 is necessary. This is because if we allow exemptions in particular instances and there is no situation where a particular exempt can be examined, then everything that comes can be boxed under “national interest” and we would then come back to square zone.
    Mr Speaker, but I would like to find out who establishes the fact that a particular situation of demand of information is in
    the interest of the nation and its benefits would be much more than the harm it would cause? Who establishes that? It is not in that — [Interruption.] Is it there? All right. I have not seen it.
    Mr Hammond 3:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague, the Hon Member for Wa Central, suggested that the reasons I articulated for the deletion of the clause 17 are the same reasons why it should actually be maintained. I did not quite understand that. My reasons were the same as the reasons to delete and so they could not be the reasons why they should be maintained.
    Mr Speaker, my other Hon Colleague invites me to withdraw it, and I do not quite see the basis for that. They talk about clause 17(2).
    Clause 17(2) has already been taken care of in a separate Act altogether. I beg to read clause 17(2):
    “A person who discloses infor- mation or authorises the disclosure of information under this section is not liable in criminal or civil proceedings for the disclosure or authorisation of the disclosure of information under this section.”
    Mr Speaker, we have the Whistle Blowers Act. It is already there; people who divulge information which are news in the public interest, are protected. So that should not be a concern or worry at all.
    Mr Speaker, I refer you for example, to clause 7, and typically to the paragraph (b), and I beg to read:
    “(7) (1)Information is exempt from disclosure if it contains matters which if disclosed can reasonably be expected to --
    Mr Hammond 3:15 p.m.
    (b) prejudice the investigation of a contravention or possible contravention of a law,”

    Mr Speaker, implicit in that is the fact that if any of the clause 17 rubrics is satisfied, that information does not become exempt to start with. This is because there is that element that has been drawn up here -- the abuse of authority or the failure to comply with the law and all those things are already there. And if they are there, they would not exempt them; they would be disclosed.

    Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague, Dr Pelpuo, also asked about who actually has the responsibility to explain what is public interest and all that. It is there in the context.

    First, the information goes to the information officer at the Ministry who would then decide whether it is one of the information to disclose or not to disclose and the reason for that. He then moves on to the Information Commissioner when it comes to the appeal process.

    So, along the line, there is space for whoever is in place to indicate whether it is to be disclosed. As to whether it should be disclosed or not, reason has to be advanced and the reason for that is whether it is qualified or absolute.

    Of course, if they look at it and it is absolute, it would be provided that this is exempt. But if it is not absolute and it is qualified like the one I have just indicated, what is “reasonable” -- the ‘reason- ableness' is that, somebody must be there and it must be built into the Act.

    Mr Speaker, I have made my point and I reiterate it that it does not serve any purpose which is more than what has

    already been articulated and provided for in the Bill from clause 5 to 16. It is a surpulsage.

    Some Hon Members — rose --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:15 p.m.
    Hon Members, let us listen to the Hon Chairman of the Committee before we come to Leadership.
    Hon Chairman of the Committee, what do you say to the proposed amendment?
    Mr Banda 3:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the clause 17 must stay. In all standard Right to Information Law, there must be this particular provision. This provision is what is referred to as the harm and the public interest test. It is prevalent in every standard Right to Information Law.
    Mr Speaker, that is why article 21 of the Constitution says it emphatically that all persons must have right to information subject to such qualification and laws that are necessary in a democratic State. Therefore, at all material times, the presumption is always in favour of disclosure.
    Mr Speaker, we have laws and models that we can refer to. We have laws and models from which this Right to Information Bill, 2018, which is under consideration, takes much inspiration.
    Mr Speaker, the first document that I would refer to, with your permission, is the Africa Union (AU) Model Law on Access to Information for Africa. Most of the provisions in this AU Model Law on Access to Information find expression in our law, and there is a similar provision.
    Mr Speaker, it is stipulated in article 25 (1) of the AU Model Law and with your permission, I read:
    “Notwithstanding any of the exemptions in this Part, an information holder may only refuse a requester access to information if the harm to the interest protected under the relevant exemption that would result from the release of the information demonstrably outweighs the public interest in the release of the information.”
    Mr Speaker, at all material times, the information officer must weigh the benefit of disclosure against the risk that would be occasioned to a protected interest. So if the benefit of disclosure in public interest far out-weighs the risk that would be occasioned to a protected interest, the information officer must disclose the information.
    Mr Speaker, it is not only that. The Indian Right to Information Act, 2005 is one of the most cited right to information laws in the world. They also have a similar provision which I may quote with your permission. This is found in section 8(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 of India. It reads and I beg to quote;
    “Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923) nor any of the exemptions permissible in accordance with sub- section (1), a public authority may allow access to information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests.”
    Mr Speaker, this is a similar provision.
    Mr Speaker, last but not least, is the Access to Information Act, 2016 of Kenya. Most of our provisions are taken from this Access to Information Act, 2016 of Kenya. The Kenyan Access to Information
    Act also has a similar provision. If I may quote Section 6(4) of the Act, it reads and I quote with permission:
    “Despite anything contained in subsections (1) and (2), - ‘subsections (1) and (2) deal with exemption clauses' - a public entity or private body may be required to disclose information where the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to protected interests...”
    Mr Speaker, I can go on and cite a lot of information laws in other countries. We can talk about Nigeria, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Venezuela and so on and so forth.
    , this is a standard provision that finds expression in any Right to Information Law regime. To say that this provision must be deleted is to suggest that what is being given to citizens as regards their right to access information must also be taken out. And that is not the intendment of article 21 of the Constitution.
    Mr Speaker, so my humble and simple submission is that to accede to his request would be tantamount to derogating from the right that is given and enshrined, which right is a constitutional right stipulated under article 21 of the Constitution.
    Mr Speaker, so I respectfully and humbly submit that the submission of Hon K. T. Hammond, with the greatest of respect, is not tenable.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:25 p.m.
    Hon Members, you are aware my attention was drawn to Order 91. In spite of the efforts to get Hon Members to do the right thing, it was moved emphatically with data.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:25 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member for Wa Central?
    Dr Abdul-Rashid Hassan Pelpuo 3:25 p.m.
    I thank you, Mr Speaker. Your pronouncement has sunk deep and I believe that it would be one of the areas of guidance when we conduct Business in this House.
    Mr Speaker, but it is important also for the public to notice that when they see us in small numbers, it is not time for them to go to the media to chastise us for absence in the House.
    Today, it is known that even in small numbers in matured democracies we could conduct Business. Once people come and for one reason or another, go for Committee sittings or some other official functions, the few who are in the House could still conduct Business.
    Essentially, I joined the debate not just because I wanted to question the quorum but to have a ruling so that we could understand exactly what the ruling was; and not just because we wanted to have the House adjourned.
    Mr Speaker, it is also on record that it is even the majority Side who arranged Business here and that raised the issue of quorum. It was wrong for my good friend, Hon O. B. Amoah, to say that it
    was confusion somebody was creating when we wanted clarification.
    I thank you.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:25 p.m.
    Well, Hon Member, I have noted what you said, but at least the Hon K. T. Hammond has made his position clear to everybody. When he is pursuing that position, I believe that nobody should begrudge him because it is his right to do so. You could take a decision to support or oppose. That is his democratic right. I am drawing the attention to the issue of quorum.
    Hon Members, unless there is any other thing, I would proceed to adjourn the House.
    Yes, the available Leader?
    Mr Moses Anim 3:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you very much. We take a cue from your ruling which is very good for the House. I would just say that it takes a few converted souls to also continue the spirit of work to convert those who are not converted.
    As you put it, it is the right of every individual member of this House to apply himself or herself to the Standing Orders. So the issue of a Majority member citing the Standing Orders is an individual right that he has exercised.
    It should not be recorded as if it is a Majority position; it is a Member's position to cite the Standing Orders or Constitution because it is the right and privilege of every individual member to take this opportunity.
    Therefore, Mr Speaker, we believe that we are in your hands. In any case, we have passed the 2:00 p.m. and let us also continue to appreciate the effort of the
    converted souls who continue to stay in for the extended Sitting. We appreciate and show our gratitude to them so it could also encourage the others to join us during extended Sittings.
    Mr Speaker, we are in your hands and would agree with your ruling.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:25 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member?
    Mr Ohemeng-Tinyase 3:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would just want us to have it on record that when the issue of quorum was raised, we had already passed our extended time. Therefore the normal time would have been that we closed at 2:00 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, beyond the 2 3:25 p.m.
    00 p.m., the records should show so that it does not go out that Hon Members were not in Parliament as expected.
    I thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:25 p.m.
    Hon Member, are you by this saying that extended Sittings are -- ? [Laughter.]
    Yes, Hon Member for Wa West? [Uproar] -- I would want to adjourn. I see that -- [Interruptions]
    Yes, Hon Dominic Ayine?
    Dr Dominic Ayine 3:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minority Leader, I wish to add my voice to what the Hon Second Deputy Majority Whip has said.
    We take a cue from what Mr Speaker has said today, especially in respect of situations where the numbers have fallen below the quorum and yet the Business of Parliament must proceed.
    Mr Hammond 3:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I originally said that, having made a ruling that you adjourn the House -- It was adjourned and all the other contributions were not entirely --
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, I did not make a ruling that the House was adjourned. I wanted to rule and adjourn the House, but I saw the Mace was still tilted, which meant that we were still at the Consideration Stage.
    So I drew the attention of the Clerks- at-the-Table to rectify it, which they did. By that time, Hon Members had risen to make contributions. I have not actually put the Question.
    Mr Hammond 3:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I need to make a point on what my Hon Colleague, Dr Dominic Ayine, just said. I think that it is the entitlement of every Hon Member in this House to refer to any part of the Constitution, Standing Orders or whatever suits them in a certain circumstance.
    Mr Speaker, the Standing Orders and the Constitution are there to help the work of this House. If it is to the extent that there is something that has to be referred to so that we all debate, vote on it or for Mr Speaker to ultimately rule on, nobody is injuncted from doing that.
    rose
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, why are you on your feet?
    Mr Agbodza 3:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague held an iPad and referred to it as the Standing Orders and the Constitution.
    Mr Second Deputy Speaker 3:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, you are information technology savvy; you are a specialist in information technology. The soft copy may be in the iPad he held, and he referred to it; there is nothing wrong with that. [Laughter.]
    Hon Members, the House stands adjourned till tomorrow when we would reconvene at 10.00 a.m. to continue with the Business of the House.
    ADJOURNMENT 3:35 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 3.38 p.m. till Thursday, 8th November, 2018 at 10.00 a.m.