An Hon MP who is assessed without his or her work in Committees cannot be said to have been properly assessed. Therefore, you need to know the person's contribution at Committees because the Committee is the workshop of Parliament, and it is well established throughout the world.
That is where we do the nitty gritty before we come to Plenary. We should all understand these and make them part of our assessment.
I would not want anybody to say that Hon Members of Parliament and the Rt Hon Speaker of Parliament do not want to be assessed; but assessment should have (i), methodology and (ii), the areas for assessment. If the subject areas for assessment are not right, then a person cannot be assessed. In other words, what is he or she supposed to do?
When what he or she is supposed to do is known, in perfect harmony with the rules of the game, then the person can be assessed. He or she cannot be assessed over something that is not even a constitutional duty of that person.
I would, therefore, invite — and our doors are open— all those who would want to carry out such exercises. Please, it is not a matter that should be done in secrecy; it must be done openly.
In fact, research demands that before results are published, explanation is sought, especially, where adverse reports are published. The person must have the opportunity -- That is why the Auditor-General's Report is initially only a draft. When the person explains, then there is a final report.
Therefore, in fact, research is important in national development, but we must be very careful about some of these things. I do not want to be misunderstood, that I mean that Hon Members of Parliament should not be assessed.
Some people will ask whether they are not human beings; are they also not public officers? That is not what we mean. Some people talk about our statement with regard to prosecution on days we sit.
In fact, in our Statement here, we said that Hon Members of Parliament are subject to the law. Those who tout that Hon Members say they are above the law are not being fair. We clearly said on Mondays, holidays and days
we do not Sit. Let our constitutional protection on the way to Parliament and so on and so forth observed. During Sitting days, the Constitution says that on Hon Member cannot be prevented from doing that because of any questioning, trials or whatever.
I would plead that we should understand these things because Hon Members of Parliament are representatives of the people so- elected. To tout that they would leave the House en masse because of what somebody else has said is not fair to the institution of Parliament or to the people's own representative power. In fact, it might be tantamount to incitement, and it is not fair.
The Leadership and the House Committee should seriously contact those relevant persons and quickly make out certain areas for assessment with them. They should make them understand the true intent and purpose of the work of Parliament. We are ready to cooperate in all these things; but the very areas of assessment must be clearly defined by the people.
If a person is generous to dish out moneys, upon which they would say that somebody else would not come back to Parliament, they are making a sad mistake because it is not part of the business of the Hon Member to
issue largesse. If you do that, the attrition rate will continue to be high, the quality would continue to come down, and it will not be in the interest of the nation. I think, as a nation, we all must be very careful about this development.
Hon Leader, would we take the Statements?
In the process, the Hon First Deputy Speaker will take the Chair.
Yes, Hon Member?
Ghanaian Girl-Child and the Issue with Child Marriage