Debates of 5 Feb 2020

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:45 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Members, correction of Votes and Proceedings of 4th February, 2020.
Page 1, 2, …18 --
Mr Kwame Governs Agbodza 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there must be a mistake here on page 18, the supplementary page. The Finance Committee started a meeting at 9:30 p.m. to consider these Commercial Agreements and it ended at 10:30 p.m.
I doubt if the Committee is actually saying that they used just an hour to approve a US$1billion contract in three different tranches. There must be a mistake. In any case, we have already argued that this is a Commercial Agreement which has to
Mr Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Hon Member, thank you very much.
Mr Iddrisu 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, this is not necessarily a matter of correction but what my Hon Colleague; Hon Agbodza has referred to --
Prior to our adjournment sine die that day, if you will recall, we had given our cooperation and commit- ment to do the Appropriation and to get the Chief Justice designate vetted. If you consider when this referral was done, first of all, it was inappropriate as it should not have gone to the Finance Committee since it is a Commercial Contract Agreement. I have made same application to the Hon Majority Leader to re-look at it, particularly when the President had
cause to commission this Project at Kpalugu, he emphasised and stated that this was a wholly Government -- funded initiative. So we have a difficulty reconciling it, now that it is being funded with a loan agreement worth US$366,011,991.38 and US$474,042,142.00 which is close to US$1 billion.
Mr Speaker, you see one side of it because at that time we could not withdraw from the Chamber; I am referring to Hon Members of the Finance Committee from the Minority side. So I think that my Hon Colleague should accept that the Committee should look at this more thoroughly. We cannot just borrow US$1billion as it has impact on the economy and debt distress. Particularly, the referral should, at worse, be to the Joint Committee to re-look at it and bring a Report.
I heard the President. As and when it is necessary, we can play his voice here. He said that this was wholly Government-funded and indeed, the highest ever initiative in northern Ghana.
So if we come back the next day with a loan agreement from China, we will have a difficulty doing the reconciliation.
Mr Speaker, so the Hon Majority Leader should note that this Agreement cannot be considered from one side as it went to an inappropriate Committee. Even the financing terms are not in the document as I have perused it.
Thank you.
Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minority Leader and I have had some discussions on this and I think it is unfortunate that he wants to bring this here as a rehash of the discussion that we had behind the curtain.
Mr Speaker, he has now come and unilaterally lifted the veil. A referral was made to a Committee and indeed, because they were not separate documents, the referral was that it should go to the Finance Committee plus the Leadership of the other relevant Committees, including Agriculture and Mines and Energy. My Hon Colleague opting not to be part of the deliberation, is not something that maybe, we can litigate here. In the House, nobody compels anyone to be in attendance or at a Committee meeting. A referral was adequately made and if Hon Members were not there, that is another discussion.
The issue about the time that they met and took a decision, is for the
Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:55 a.m.
Committee to respond to. Some other matters have come up and when I had the discussion with the Hon Minority Leader --

I said that a particular matter cannot be referred doubly to a Committee. If there are issues coming up, then when we interrogate the Report, the Committee members could raise it and if it becomes necessary for us to delay the consideration for those inputs to be made, so be it.

Mr Speaker, but at this stage we cannot say that the Report should be withdrawn and the referral should be made again. This was the technical issue that I raised with the Hon Minority Leader. This is not in any way to say that issues that may come may not be germane. So if we interrogate the Report and it becomes necessary for us to delay for those other considerations to be factored into the Report - in other words. if it is found out that the content could be further enriched on a wholesale basis, then I believe that as masters of our own procedure, we could accommodate that, but for now, we are not at that stage. So I think to say that we should withdraw and make another referral would be inappropriate.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Iddrisu 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I have listened to my Hon Colleague, the Hon Majority Leader, who is more seasoned in this House. Mr Speaker, our argument is that this House is governed by the Standing Orders; matters of contracts are not necessarily referred to the Finance Committee. The referrals to the Finance Committee are normal, pursuant to article 181 of the 1992 Constitution, that referral was inappropriate. This is what we are contesting and he knows that by my training, I do not need --
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Minority Leader, was it referred to the Finance Committee per se?
Mr Iddrisu 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, yes.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Were others added?
Mr Iddrisu 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, they were not added.
Mr Speaker, he is concerned about me lifting the veil and curtains, but he and I share confidences and so I am obliged to share one. On that day, he made a request to me that the only additional work that he wanted the House to consider other than the
consideration of the appointment of the Chief Justice was for the Hon Minister for Tourism Arts and Culture to lay a particular Paper for us to deal with. Mr Speaker, I yielded and so this one was not part of the issues that he engaged me, for us to take on the Floor.
So when it was brought akin to me, I raised objections because we had had a conversation and that was not included in the conversation. Mr Speaker, it was an inappropriate referral and Parliament, in exercising its oversight to borrow US$1billion means a lot to the Ghanaian taxpayer. We cannot interrogate a Report and have a one sided Report, because under the circumstance at that time, I had to support the Hon Chairman of the Appointments Committee on the appointment of the new Chief Justice.
So it is not that Hon Members on this Side opted out but they could not have participated. Mr Speaker, I want to know where the other Hon Leaders who were included are. It was inappropriate and per our Standing Orders, contracts are not referred to the Finance Committee. Let us check the records.
Mr Speaker, let it go to the appropriate Committee and it is alright if we want to add the Finance Committee, Committee on Food and
Agriculture and others. Mr Speaker, this is the application I am making and if I have lifted any veil, then the Hon Majority Leader compelled me to do that.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minority Leader has told me in Plenary that he would not allow himself to be predictable. He assured me that he would be evasive sometimes and not subject himself to predictability -- he wants same from me. Mr Speaker, but this is on a lighter note.

As I have said, I believe that this is an issue that is dear to all of us, and I think that we must do what is appropriate. I thought that the rules that I prescribed would lead us to that path and that was why I said that we should resort to this and if we have to go back we could do that. I am not saying that anybody should ride over anybody -- I am just looking at the appropriate means to achieve that end
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Thank you very much.
We all know that on a very regular basis on referrals, both Sides are often listened to and suggestions are made on a number of occasions and they are obliged accordingly. That is no big deal. We are only told here that a meeting closed at a certain time, but we all know that sometimes Committee meetings start as early as 7.00 a.m. in this House. So, it is not very accurate to talk about the time of closure without reference to the time it begun and assume therefore that they must have started at about 10.00 a.m., therefore they could not have closed at 10.30 a.m., knowing very well that we are capable of working virtually around the clock.
Hon Members, so at the appropriate time, further debate would be made on the matter as such, but at this moment, that is not what is before us. Let us continue with the Votes and Proceedings of that day without any assumptions.
Page 18, 19, and 20.
Hon Members, in the absence of any corrections, the Votes and
Proceedings of Tuesday 4 th February, 2020 are hereby admitted as true record of proceedings.
Hon Members, we have the Official Report of Thursday, 28th November, 2019. Any corrections?
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
We have the Official Report of Wednesday, 29th January, 2020. Any corrections?
Mr Samual Okudzeto Ablakwa 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity. I tried to catch your eye earlier. I had the Official Reports of 29th January, 2020 and 28th January, 2020 in my pigeon hole but I do not know if other Hon Members have the dates that you mentioned. Mr Speaker, I heard you mention November, 2019.
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Member, are you referring to Thursday, 28th November, 2019?
Mr Ablakwa 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not have that Official Report. Probably, some of us were not served with that Official Report.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Do Hon Members have the Official Report of Thursday, 28th November? It appears some
Hon Members have it so you may check from your pigeon hole and if you have corrections on that Official Report, then let me know before I move on to the others.
So we admit the Official Report of Thursday, 28th November, 2019 as true record of Proceedings.

Now we move on to the Official Report of Wednesday, 29th January, 2020. Any correction therein, Hon Members?
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Members, we have a Statement to be read by Hon Annoh-Dompreh, the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs on matters relating to the Insurance Act.
STATEMENTS 11:05 a.m.
Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh (NPP -- Nsawam Adoagyiri) 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker,
I beg to make this statement to support parliamentary efforts concerning the development of a comprehensive agricultural insurance regime in Ghana, which includes quality agricultural insurance indices that are in line with global trends.
Mr Speaker, the Sub-Saharan African region have population percentages involved in crop production among other agricultural activities. With the relatively favourable weather conditions present, both small scale and large- scale farming form a significant part of the economic activities that are contributing to the total Gross Domestic Products (GDP) of the respective countries.
Recognising the significance of agricultural influence on GDP, it is imperative that holistic measures are put in place with the capacity to promote and sustain agricultural activities, especially crop production and live-stock rearing.
Mr Speaker, this honourable House ensured the passage of the Ghana Insurance Act 724 of 2006. Since that time, so much has taken
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Annoh-Dompreh?
Several Hon Members -- rose --
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Yes, Hon Buah?
Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah (NDC -- Ellembelle) 11:15 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker for the opportunity.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Yes, Hon Chairman of the Food, Agriculture and Cocoa Affairs Committee?
Mr Kwame Asafu-Adjei (NPP -- Nsuta Kwamang Beposo) 11:15 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to commend the Hon Member who made the Statement.
Mr Speaker, the purpose of having agricultural insurance is to protect the Ghanaian farmer during the time of distress. Unfortunately, our farmers are not as organised as farmers in Kenya, India, Malaysia, amongst others. There is the need for farmers to have strong associations. There are about 2.5 million Farmers' Day award winners and a starting point for forming farmers day association is to look at the award winners.
Mr Speaker, again, as we all know, agriculture is a very risky business and insurance companies are afraid to fully get involve in this venture. I would
recommend that the ADB should have a subsidiary which would be made as an insurance sector which would serve the Ghanaian farmers.
Mr Speaker, in this era of climate change, recognising the fact that we are in the bush fires season, the farmers have already started feeling the pinch. In the Afram Plains side of my area, maize farms are threatened by bush fires, and also beans, peanuts among others.
Mr Speaker, there should be a legislation to support our farmers as it is done in other countries, where farming is the backbone of those economies.
Mr Speaker, with these few words, there is the need for this august House to start to ensure that a piece of legislation is put in place to assist Ghanaian farmers.
rose
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Ms Laadi Ayamba (NDC -- Pusiga) 11:15 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker for the opportunity to contribute to the
Ms Laadi Ayamba (NDC -- Pusiga) 11:25 a.m.


Statement ably made by my Hon Colleague on the other Side.

Mr Speaker, I think it has been long overdue to have this amendment done. We all know the importance of agriculture and we know how much our farmers, even those that we may refer to as peasant farmers, suffer post- harvest losses. Sometimes when they are on the farms, they suffer some amount of losses that discourage them and it goes a long way to affect implementation, care and support for the individuals who are normally affected and they have nowhere to run to for any support.

Mr Speaker, I believe that if amendment is carried out, farmers would have a good relief of most of the issues that occur when they go to their farms.

Mr Speaker, for instance, if you observed the activities that took place when some individuals went for training at Kenya to look at the way vegetables are produced, you would realise that they had learnt a lot.

Mr Speaker, from the pictures that were produced, you would find that most of the farmers were able to produce some vegetables that are consumed locally, while other types of vegetables were also exported.

Mr Speaker, today, if I take my own constituency for instance, a lot of vegetables are being produced over there. Vegetables such as lettuce, cabbage, onions, pepper; both green, red and yellow are being produced in large quantities by these farmers over there. I say it is “large” because it is so much such that it cannot be consumed by only the people in that district.

At the end of the day, all those who cultivated come out into the market with these produce and they sell it at a very low price. They are not even able to pay for the fertilizers, the insecticides and the labour that they might have used to produce these vegetables.

Mr Speaker, I say this because if the insurance is put in place and the amendment is done, it would go a long way to support them so that at least, they would be able to transport these vegetables to places where they would get higher prices. During the planting season, they would also be supported to get some kind of weedicides, insecticides and what have you. If there are any losses, at least, it would be catered for.

It is very disheartening that today, one could find about a 100

kilogramme size bag; I would call it so, because it is more than a 50 kilogramme size bag of cabbage, that costs about GH¢25 to GH¢30 in Pusiga, meanwhile, they would have invested more than GH¢200 to produce that single bag. If they are involved, educated, put on board and made to understand that insurance is a safeguard for them, they would be ready to contribute, so that at the end of the day, they would realise that the contributions that they make is not for fun or on waste.

Mr Speaker, there is the need for education to be given to them to understand that it is important to have an insurance. This is because in case there are post-harvest losses, or losses during, before and after harvest, at least they would be supported. In case insects come in to destroy their farms, again, they would be supported. If this support is there, they would be ready to come on board, but without this insurance, we would always talk about how to support our farmers, but would only be able to support a few of them, while most of them would be left behind.

Mr Speaker, with these few words, I support the Hon Member who made the Statement and I congratulate him for that.
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Member.
Dr Kwaku Afriyie (NPP -- Sefwi Wiawso) 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank you very much for this opportunity. I would also like to add my voice in thanking Hon Annoh-Dompreh for bringing to the attention of this House, a very important subject.
Mr Speaker, we are in a very difficult terrain. Insurance, as applied to agriculture, is a very difficult area and it is so even in the developed world, where they have structured markets, organised farmers and what nots. Essentially, we deal in an area where the terrain is so difficult and full of imponderables. We have very confusing and confounding parameters with regard to the social sector, land acquisition, land use policy, primitive market structures and so on.
With that said, we have no business ignoring this area because as we know, with Ghana being part of the developing world, majority of our people are engaged in agriculture for their livelihoods, and also, agriculture affects a very huge portion of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as identified in the paper.
As if this is not enough, there is a big deficit in terms of policy. It seems
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Thank you, Hon Member.
We would take two more. We would take Hon Ayariga and the Leadership.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Mahama Ayariga (NDC -- Bawku Central) 11:35 a.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, this is perhaps one of the most important Statements that an Hon Colleague has made on the floor of this House, that touches on a matter that has not received that much national attention, and yet promises to be a major solution to our agricultural sector challenges.
Mr Speaker, agriculture is a very risky business, and there are two angles to the risk. There is the production risk, and the price risk. During production, all sorts of risks are involved, especially for a rain-fed agricultural economy like ours, which is without irrigation infrastructure. An Hon Colleague has already mentioned difficulties such as the land tenure system et cetera.
Again, we have the price risk. Price fluctuations, both at the local and global levels can affect the prices that farmers get for their produce. However, this country has a long history and experience of managing price risk. That is what we do in the cocoa sector.
In the cocoa sector, we have effectively managed price risk by State control of the pricing regime, negotiating the international sale of the produce, and making sure that syndication is done, and farmers are
guaranteed the price of the product at the end of the year, no matter what happens at the global level especially in terms of price fluctuations. We are therefore very skilled at that. The issue is how we would be able to translate this competence to the other commodities.
During my days as the Hon Deputy Minister for Trade and Industry, we did work to revive the cotton sub- sector, and we were confronted with a similar challenge. So, at the beginning of the year, negotiations were held with the farmers, and prices were pre-determined, even before the farmers embarked on the venture. At the end of the year, we made sure that the companies paid them that price.
There was also the issue of how we would be able to manage the year - on - year fluctuations at the global level.

So a charge was placed on every farmer's income to create a fund so that in years when we did not earn as much as was expected, we could fall on that fund to be able to level off in terms of the farmers' income.

Mr Speaker, there are many mechanisms for dealing with the price risk and this country has some experience, so we should explore how we apply it to the other crops.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Member.
Mr Kennedy Nyarko Osei (NPP -- Akim Swedru) 11:35 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker for the opportunity to add my voice to the Statement ably made by my Hon Colleague, Mr Annoh-Dompreh.
Mr Speaker, I think it is very important to note that at the time that statistics have shown that 30 per cent of farm produce goes to waste, if we are to put real figures to this, it would be a huge amount of money that we would lose as a country.
Mr Speaker, we are working hard to reduce hunger. What it means is that we do not need to allow anything
that we produce to go waste; but here we are, most of the farm produce at the end of the day go waste. And this is the time that we have to find a way to specially reduce the post-harvest losses.
Most of the affected farmers are the smallholder farmers. And if we look at the farmer population in the country, it is about some two million farmer population and if they produce and the majority of the produce goes waste, it tells us how it goes a long way in affecting our economic life as a people.
Mr Speaker, I think this Statement has come at the right time for us as a House to consider how we could make some amendment to the insurance law to make sure we are able to protect our farmers so that whatever they produce or grow, they would have some kind of insurance backing, so that when something goes wrong, they could fall on it. It is important.
As we deliberate on this issue, we should know that it is very germane because some of us here are into farming and it would come a long way to help us to protect the farmer. Now people want to go into farming and they find it difficult in getting loans or financial assistance from banks. Why
is it so? It is because of the risk aspect of whatever they are venturing into, but when we have a system where there is an insurance system supporting whatever the person wants to do, then it could give comfort to banks to also lend money to farmers to be able to expand their businesses.
Mr Speaker, I think as a country -- Ghana which is known as being an agrarian economy, should find it important to do something urgently to support our farmers so that we could assure them of whatever they produce from their farms and they would also be able to improve their economic life and livelihood.
Mr Speaker, with these few words, I would like to thank the Hon Member who made the Statement and encourage the House and Leadership to take this matter seriously and work towards it and make sure that we bring closure to the difficulties that our farmers go through.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Member.
Minority Leadership?
Mr Ahmed Ibrahim (NDC -- Banda) 11:35 a.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to make a few comments to the Statement. In doing
Mr Ahmed Ibrahim (NDC -- Banda) 11:45 a.m.


so I must commend the Hon Member who made the Statement for bringing this to the attention of the House.

Mr Speaker, calling for amendment of the Insurance Act to include farming activities is a worthy call. Coming from the rural constituency where majority of my constituents are engaged in farming, anything that would positively affect the well-being of farmers would include myself.

Mr Speaker, we are talking about insurance for farmers; what is insurance in itself? Insurance is taking cover in the form of payment of premiums in order to make sure that one transfers his or her risks to a third party. What risks are we talking of? What activities are these farmers engaged in? How could we ensure something that we do not even know or we cannot even quantify the value?

Mr Speaker, these are serious challenges happening in our agricultural sector. Therefore to say that we are going to insure the farmers, call for a holistic overhaul of the agricultural sector-we may be comparing the farmers with traders who are able to go for commercial loans and insure their activities. No trader has insured his or her goods and they operate without a warehouse.

Mr Speaker, do our farmers have warehouses? Most of them are farming without warehouses and this therefore, accounts for the major post-harvest losses that we encounter every year.

Mr Speaker, when we go to the rural sectors, a farmer and his wife may be living in their two- bedroom house that they have been able to build themselves. They may be operating on about four or five acre farm and at the end of the season when they harvest their produce, they may not have an additional resource to put up a warehouse to store their commodities. Therefore when there is fire outbreak, all that they do to protect their produce is to weed around the edges of the farm to make what is called fire belts.

Mr Speaker, they do fire belts, insure the produce and when there is a bushfire, all the produce they have been able to store for the whole year get burnt. Which businessman would go and insure farm produce stored in the farm and taken to the warehouse? No businessman would do that.

They ensure their produce and there is no access to the farm and when the major rainy season comes, no vehicle can go to the farm to bring the .produce to the market to sell. Which businessman or insurance

broker would ensure this kind of produce?

Mr Speaker, we are talking about climatic conditions. Truly, we have been able to improve on the activities of the Meteorological Services Agency by giving them additional equipment where they are able to give good predictions. They still need more; they are able to predict the amount of rainfall but they cannot control the rainfall so if one is engaged in agricultural activities and one is not engaged in irrigation where could one be rest assured that even if there is poor climatic condition, one is going to irrigate his farm and therefore, he could be assured that he would get something -- insurance broker would go and insure that farm.

Mr Speaker, besides, it is high time we rethought agriculture as including agricultural industrialisation and marketing. If we are engaged in agriculture and there is a bumper harvest, what the farmers face is called demand risk; the produce is there and nobody needs them; “you have yam, and I also have yam, who would buy yours and who would buy mine?”

So when there is a bumper harvest, how to even market the produce

becomes a problem. So if you have been able to get enough produce and you do not have a market to go and sell it, how can you transfer this risk to the insurance person? Where would he take them to?

Mr Speaker, in basic Economics, we all know that tastes and preferences affect even the demand and supply of a commodity, therefore, it is high time we started developing a taste for our local produce. Now, fufu is becoming a kind of food that urban dwellers do not patronise a lot. Therefore when there is a bumper harvest of yam, most people go to the malls and restaurants where there is no fufu. So if you have insured your yam, how can you break even and pay your premium?

There are major challenges in our agricultural sector which we need to solve. There need to be some kind of effective or radical construction of warehouses nationwide, so that even if there is not enough market for the produce for this year, we would have a place to stock them in the form of silos where they could be stored for over a year. So if this year there is enough rainfall and in next year there is no major rainfall, we are assured that leftovers from last year's produce could be sold this year.
Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Member. Majority Leadership, any contribution, please?
Majority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu) 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to also add my voice to the clarion call for us as a country, to engage in this endeavour; that is the provision of insurance cover to our local farmers.
We must admit that even though it is a very useful suggestion that would lead to greater productivity to ensure food security and guarantee production to feed the agro processing factories that we have, some of which are still under construction, we must admit that this is a very complex endeavour.
Mr Speaker, insurance should relate to identified risks. In farming, we know of droughts, excessive rainfall and the havoc that the opening of the Bagre Dam up there in the north causes sometimes. We know of gluts -- when farmers are encouraged to produce, they are given incentives to produce and glut ensues often. So insurance should deal with such situations.
My Hon Colleague has related to the roads to farm lands and farmsteads. We should be thinking about that. The menace of bushfires, storage facilities, price instability and the strength of our local currency also affect production and farming activities. Again, we should look at uncontrolled import of produce that could be produced in this country.
It is a rather complex endeavour that we should thoroughly interrogate even though in principle, we believe that the farmers have some form of insurance to be played to the good of not only the farmers, but to Ghana and indeed, industry and also ultimately boost our export to strengthen our local currency.
Mr Speaker, I agree to the suggestions that have been proffered by my Hon Colleagues except to say that it is something that we must leave to experts to thoroughly investigate
and submit proposals arising out of which some insurance could be developed for the farmers.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to say these few words.
Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Majority Leader for your contribution. This is a very important matter indeed, as all contributors have indicated. It is referred to the Committee on Food, Agriculture and Cocoa Affairs, together with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs. They are to look at the possibility of us recommending some legislative drafting, together with the Legal Department and possibly with a Private Member's Bill, jointly sponsored by both Sides of the House.
Could we possibly move on to the Commencement of Public Business and please take item numbered 5 after which the First Deputy Speaker would take the Chair. Item numbered 5, Motion, by the Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs?
MOTIONS 11:45 a.m.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Ben Abdallah Banda) 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs on the Written Petition by the National Association of Law Students Seeking Reforms in the Country's Legal Education System.
1.0 Introduction
1.1 On 7th October, 2019, the National Association of Law Students submitted a written petition to His Excellency the President, seeking reforms in the country's legal education system, and copied the petition to the Speaker of Parliament.
1.2 The Rt. Hon Speaker subsequently referred the petition to the Committee for consideration and report pursuant to Order 179 of the Standing Orders of the House.
2.0 Deliberations
2.1 The Committee first met with Representatives of the General Legal
Alhaji Inusah A. B. Fuseini (NDC -- Tamale Central) 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion moved by the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs and to urge the Hon Members of this House to adopt the Report.
Mr Speaker, first of all, in contributing to this Report, I wish to express my sincere gratitude to you
for offering an opportunity to the law students who had invoked your jurisdiction by a petition to have this matter looked into. Also, to the Leadership of the House who had stood on the floor of Parliament to receive the petition of the law students on your behalf and also to the Hon Members of the Committee for working diligently to meet the reasonable and legitimate expectations of the students.
There is no gainsay, that legal education in this country has been rocked with difficulties and challenges of late. It is not only in the entrance examination that these challenges manifest, indeed, even in the professional examination, the record of passes is diminishing.
Mr Speaker, in our interaction with the students, we saw that many things account for this sorry state of affairs at the Ghana School of Law. In fact, the manifestation of the challenges confronting the Ghana School of Law was when only 128 students out of 1,820 passed the entrance examination. That was less than 10 per cent and statistically speaking, if less than 10 per cent of students pass an examination, it is a crisis. It is just like when a disease, an emergency or calamity strikes and more than 10 per cent of the population, are hit, it becomes a crisis.
Mr Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Member, thank you very much.
The Hon First Deputy Speaker will make a contribution after which he would take the Chair.
Mr Joseph Osei-Owusu (NPP -- Bekwai) 12:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
The challenge with entrance to the Law School has been with us for about five years or so, but last year it was brought to the fore very strongly with a demonstration by the students who do not understand why they had failed the examination. This is
Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Hon First Deputy Speaker, thank you very much. I am expecting you in the Chair in a moment.
Hon Members, allow me to make a comment by way of direction. We must be very careful about this matter. The history of law studies in this country is such that sometime ago,
when one entered a faculty of law, the person was already a lawyer, virtually because all those who passed had direct access to the postgraduate level by way of being trained to be lawyers. Those were those days and they are gone forever. Legal training as a whole in the whole of the Commonwealth has got to do with numbers.
In England, there are people with first class honours in law from Oxford who never become lawyers and do not enter law schools. This is because, having got one's law degree, one would have to fight for a place at the law school and the schools remain what they have been from time immemorial. There is nothing anybody could do about that. Therefore, that should be taken into consideration; legal education for lawyers is different from university law education. A lot of issues are taken into consideration, including character.
In the whole of the Commonwealth, there is no single country including the United States, Canada et cetera where people move straight from the university with the law degree and become lawyers as well.
You realise that we have private institutions. We could train law graduates privately, which is a different ballgame, but we cannot train lawyers privately which is the business of a whole Ghana General Legal
Council just like the Medical Council which has that say over who becomes a doctor. The idea among others is that, if you look at a person, who when a person is dead, comes to say “This is his will, I made I;” and the person speaks from death. There is a certain integrity issue that sometimes we must not forget.
The training is also not some part- time one. It is a full-time business. We must therefore be very holistic in our consideration of this matter in all these aspects.
Hon Ayariga, I have recognised you.
MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr Mahama Ayariga (NDC -- Bawku Central) 12:22 p.m.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
Indeed, I think after this guidance, perhaps debate on this matter should have terminated, but the first danger we face is to allow legal education to be held hostage by political forces of activism and efforts by political bodies to determine the substance of legal education. So we must be careful not to try as much as possible to meddle into the curriculum and substance of legal education. This is because, in
Mr Mahama Ayariga (NDC -- Bawku Central) 12:25 p.m.
every academic setting, academic freedom does not allow the content of education to be determined by political forces.
Mr Speaker, having said that, we also have a crisis of people wanting to have access and the best that could be done is the design of a fair system that gives everybody a fair opportunity to have access to legal education.
Indeed, the process to create a fair and level ground started in this House. It was here that students petitioned that the interview system which was part of the system of determining entrance into the school was unfair or it was a system that had inherent challenges of unfairness and biasness. This House stood its grounds and took out the interview system because of the level of discretion in the hands of those who were conducting the interviews and agreed that we should create a fair system for everybody even though one would not go into the content of the examination et cetera.
Mr Speaker, again, the issue of fairness in the running of the school which is having one person teaching students, setting examination questions, marking examination scripts and determining who passed was also reported as an unfair system. I recall as far back as the days when we were
in the law school, there were all sorts of allegations of favouritism levelled against lecturers on the basis that personal relations informed who passed and who did not. So it called for the design of a system that could be determined as fair, hence the separation of the person teaching from the person conducting the examination; another indicator of fairness so that the person teaching cannot use his or her personal relationship with a student to inform the outcome of the examination.
Mr Speaker, so it is not the case that this House has not been up to its responsibility to design a fair system that provides equal opportunity to everybody who would want to become a lawyer in the country.
In spite of the advances that we have made, challenges still remain. The question is; how do we deal with those challenges? The first challenge which has been indicated in the Report which was very clear during several meetings with the law school is that sometimes they provide room for so many people, but at the end of the day they also receive not even up to the numbers. This affects their revenues, budget, plans and even the under-utilisation of their infrastructure. So they complain.
Then the students said they sat and wrote the examination but complained that so many of them failed. So both
the Law School and the students complain. What is the problem? The problem is, as indicated earlier in the debate, the law faculties have been liberalised and many private institutions now run legal degree programmes. I see in the re- commendation that we have not really addressed that problem because the General Legal Council is not involved in what is happening at the faculty level. Therefore they are not capable of informing the system on practices there which would result into quality products being presented to them.

So when the students complain today that in the past they enjoyed a seamless system where, from the law faculties, one automatically progressed into the law school, it was also because as far as then, the Ghana General Legal Council had a hold on what happened at the Law Faculty of the University of Ghana. So, when we separated and they no longer had control over what happened in individual private university faculties, then of course, they cannot shape the output from the law faculties.

So we need to reconsider this legal arrangement, where the GLC has no control over what happens in the law faculties of the private universities and even in some of the other public

universities. We have to go back and amend the law which establishes the National Accreditation Board and the law which establishes the National Council for Tertiary Education, so that the GLC would be brought into the picture at the level of the accreditation of faculties that want to run law degrees. The argument that law degrees are just law degrees, so a person cannot go for law degree and come and want to be automatically admitted into the Law School, this argument is not accepted by the students because they claim we enjoyed it, so why do we make those arguments? So if we enjoyed it under a certain setting, then the system today must be reconfigured to have that quality, so that the argument would be equally applicable to today.

Mr Speaker, so we must amend the National Accreditation Board's Act and the National Council for Tertiary Education Act, so that we bring the GLC into the accreditation of private universities who want to run law programmes and put them into the monitoring of standards there, so that they could secure products that are of standard and of quality that could seamlessly progress into the Law School. That is one aspect of the problem.
Mr Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi (NPP -- Asante Akim Central) 12:25 p.m.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
This problem has existed for some time now, and interventions by this House and by the GLC has brought us to a certain level. As we speak, the people who teach at the Law School are different from the people that set the questions for the students to write their examinations. They are also separated from the people who mark the scripts.
Mr Speaker, in spite of this, we had 128 students passing, out of over 1,000 students who wrote that examinations. That accounted for only seven per cent pass.
Mr Speaker, the Law School actually made preparations expecting to admit 1,200 students and yet they had 128 students who passed the examinations. This means that the Law School could not get the students they expected to enter it.
Mr Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi (NPP -- Asante Akim Central) 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am privileged to have been trained at the Faculty of Law at the University of Ghana, Legon. I have also had an opportunity to teach others at the Faculty of Law at the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST). Further, I had permission from Mr Speaker to do some part-time teaching at some private institutions, and the conclusion I have come to is that, the training that we received, when every subject in law, we used to have at least five hours training in that subject alone, that is not what I am experiencing now; that is not what I am witnessing. We would have at least four hours of teaching time and one hour tutorials in every subject that is read.
Mr Speaker, now, at the institutions, they do not have more than three hours per subject per week. There are no tutorials. There are no libraries at the various Faculties of Law and the students do not attend tutorials in any way.

The attitude of students towards the learning of the law is different from what we have witnessed. People think that others block others. Why would the General Legal Council create a facility for 1,200 students and admit

only 128? Would that make sense? So, if we would want to take a holistic approach, then to me, we must address the issue of the various faculties. That is why I agreed with my friend when he said that we must look at the National Accreditation Board.

If the National Accreditation Board actually accredits an institution to train lawyers; I do not talk about the law Schools but the Bachelor of Laws (LLB). Some facilities must be available. There must be books.

Mr Speaker, I had an opportunity to ask a proprietor why there was no library in their school, and the answer that he gave me was that early on he had provided books, but the students stole them, and so he never bothered to buy some more books for the library. Yet the training of students continued at the school. Therefore if we do not look at it with a holistic approach --

I have not heard of any such situation, where students wrote an examination, they failed the examination, and wanted to create an impression that somebody failed them, for which reason they take to the streets. If we should continue with this, then what we would do, is to give the lecturers, the markers and the what nots a wholesale pass, and that to me, would not help this country.

It is a professional course. Some people had actually admired this course, and it was for a purpose. The Medical School would not ask a person who has failed to come out because when the person comes out and he practices, it would create a disaster in the country, and I agree to that extent.

Of course, it is not 100 per cent right that no lecturer would ever make a mistake when he marks or whatever. After all, he uses his judgement. Where a re-mark has to be done, it needs to be done. We should also put other things in place, such that we could even have one or two external examiners to look at the results that the lecturers or the people that had marked the scripts gave.

Early on, in the case where the people that taught were the same people that marked and set the questions, we thought that such a situation was the cause of the problem, but now, it has been proven that such was not the cause of the problem. Actually, 70 per cent or more of the problem, I believe, rests with the students. Therefore when we look at the approaches, we should also look at the attitude of students, look at the various institutions and the facilities that they put in place to train lawyers.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
I would now listen to a non-lawyer before I come to the leaders.
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC -- Asawase) 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is a very important debate, and I think that we need to thank the Committee for the work that they have done. A number of times, petitions come before the House, we receive them, but we do nothing about them. At least with this one, I could say that after it had been received and referred, the Committee has done well to report on it.
Mr Speaker, we need to know that a country is being run. We do not run a system of argument, where everybody tries to justify that he or she is right. Since this issue started, what I have noticed, as I sit as an Hon Member of Parliament is that the General Legal Council makes itself a demi-god, and makes complains as to why it should not be blamed.
The institutions that churn out these students complain, while their students also complain. However, we all seemed to allow people to keep to their corners without looking at the holistic system. I have always argued that I do not think that to train doctors is less cumbersome and less
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Hon Member, who does the “you” refer to?
Alhaji Muntaka 12:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the “you” refers to whoever allows those institutions to be able to operate private law faculties. The responsibility lies on that person. As Hon Members of Parliament, as part of our responsibly of oversight, we must ensure that such institutions, whether it is the National Accre- ditation Board or whether it is the General Legal Council; whoever is to do what is right has that responsibility to ensure that the right thing is done.
We as Hon Members of Parliament also have that same responsibility. We must not sit down and allow people to sit in their corners to jeopardise the future of our children and constituents in the name of this person or that person has not done right.
Mr Speaker, I have been privileged to chair the House Committee. What happens in the case of medical students is that there is a situation where the Medical and Dental Council sits up, and when a school is about to be opened - I remember very well when the University of Development Studies (UDS) wanted to open a medical school, the Medical and Dental Council, together with the National Accreditation Board, had to certify before it was done.
In the case of the students, where would they do their practicals? Where would they do their clinicals? In the interim, if an institution does not have the facilities, then where would the students do these practicals? When UDS established their medical school, for many years, they had to bring their students for clinicals in Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital and
KNUST.
When the University of Cape Coast wanted to open their medical school, the Medical and Dental Council, together with the National Accreditation Board, had to insist on the minimum requirement for it to be established. They needed to have a morgue and a laboratory. They also needed to have a certain number of lecturers. They constantly push to ensure that these schools do the right thing.
While a student is being trained, they keep eyes on them every year, to the extent that in medical schools in this country, students write nine papers. When a student trails one paper, he would have to repeat the whole year. That is the system used to produce medical students, so that they do not move we could therefore get a student, who would spend twelve years in a six-year course in medical school because the Medical and
Dental Council, together with the National Accreditation Board and the institution, ensure that they mark student by student, and not year groups. They track every student. A student must pass every examination before he could move to the next stage.
Why do we allow people to open law schools, while we sit here to complain about their lack of libraries, and others? Why do those schools run? We must shut them down because they do not have what it takes to give the minimum training.
Mr Speaker, the next thing has to do with our attitude. We like to over- lord on each other. When the former Chief Justice made her comments, I felt very sad because I thought that she personalised the issue. She said that so long as she remained the Chief Justice, there would be no mass production. What does that mean? She has the responsibility as the Chief Justice, to ensure that the system works. If there are loopholes, then we would all have to discuss it dispassionately, to see how those loopholes could be closed.
Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague just said that we have institutions who claim that the books they put in the libraries are stolen by students, so they refuse to buy many more books.
Alhaji Muntaka 12:45 p.m.
However, they continue to train students. Why would a student go and steal books? It is a general attitude we have in this country which is so bad.

Mr Speaker, with the greatest of respect, sometimes I am compelled to tell my Hon Colleagues that being a Member of Parliament is a full time job; one cannot take public time and say that he or she is going to school. If a Member wants to go to school, that Member must resign as a Member of Parliament and go to school. He or she cannot be shuttling between Parliament and some institutions that they are going to school. That is a bad attitude.

If a Member chooses to go to school, the Member must resign as a Member of Parliament, go and school and when he finishes, then he comes back to contest and become a Member of Parliament. One cannot double as a Member of Parliament and also a student.

Mr Speaker, in the same way, if we go to most of our offices -- even here in Parliament, our staff leave their job at 3. 00 p.m. or 4. 00 p.m. and run to school. How could such a person sit and concentrate and learn?

They hop in and out and yet, the system allows people to hop in and out. Legal education is a full time course; if one wants to become a student, one has to be a full time student. And if one cannot be a full time student, one must not be admitted.

Mr Speaker, however, because of the bad attitude, the administrators look at the money that the student would pay; they do not look at the students' commitment towards the course. Is there an institution that trains medical students on part-time basis? No! There are a lot of professions in this country; engineering and others that cannot be pursued on part-time basis.

Mr Speaker, why should we allow civil servants, public servants, Members of Parliament, and in some instances, even Ministers to go to school? Our general attitude is just so bad that we think that we can take public time pretending to be going to school. And sometimes we hear people -- even the assignments that are given to them, they pay people to do it for them to submit. Some of them go online and plagiarise and also collect people's work, put them together and submit because they do not just have the time.

Mr Speaker, this general bad attitude of all of us as Ghanaians must

change if we want to produce quality in any field of endeavour.

Lastly, my concern is that if we could train medical students in those large numbers, we could equally train lawyers in those large numbers with quality. There cannot be any examination that one writes that the examiners' report is not published. The examiners' comments are not published and there is nothing to be traced. It cannot be right!

There should be an opportunity -- even at the university, such that when one writes an examination and fails, there is a system where one is able to apply for a re-mark. And that system is well-laid out and it is not exorbitant to the extent that it makes the individual incapable of asking for a re-mark. If we look at the cost they put on it, it is simply to say that, ‘you want a re-mark? Then, go for it'. The cost itself would deny the examinees the opportunity for a re-mark.

Mr Speaker, I think the examination fee should include the possibility of a re-mark where an examinee could ask for a re-mark without necessarily paying that exorbitant fees. It is the only way we could get a fair system. other than that, this rattling up and down would not help our country.

We currently have before this House a Bill -- Mr Speaker, the amendment that they seek is very minimal and Hon Colleague, Dr Dominic Ayine is putting up a Private Member's Bill and many of us are willing to support him to test it on the Floor to see whether through this, we would be able to deal with it comprehensively once and for all.

I would urge the General Legal Council to look at the model of the Medical and Dental Council with the National Accreditation Board and those institutions as a very good model that may help. This is because then, we do not wait for our people; our children and constituents to go through the ladder, get to the top and they are cut and pushed down simply to say that they are badly trained; we should be interested right from the beginning.

We need to give the General Legal Council that mandate to monitor right from admission, training while in school and all those points before the students complete so that if there is a bad nut, the person is plucked out right at the beginning and not to wait till the end when a lot of resources and time have been invested.

Mr Speaker, with these comments, I hope that our comments about this on many times would not just continue but actions would be taken especially
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Yes, Hon Deputy Minister?
Mr Alexander Kodwo Kom Abban (NPP -- Gomoa West) 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the debate.
I speak as someone who pre- viously had the rare opportunity to teach at the Ghana School of Law. I taught at the Ghana School of Law from 2010 to 2015. At the time that I was there, what happened was that it was the lecturers who also administered the examinations and marked. One of the advantages of this was that when a lecturer marked someone's papers, the lecturer would be able to even question why somebody did not do very well because we had class work; we also assessed contributions of students when we were in class.
Then, something happened -- in fact, the independent examination committee that came had a history; the history was that -- I think in 2013 or thereabout, examination questions
were alleged to have been leaked. Beyond that, there were issues of swapping of marks and because of that some people were even dismissed from the Ghana School of Law as administrators.
It was in response to these happenings that the General Legal Council decided to institute the independent examination body. Mr Speaker, but the question is, how was it possible especially in a tertiary institution that we would have lecturers teaching students; meeting them in class and at the end of it, they were only required to submit sample questions and the independent examination body would then select from among these many questions what they thought were right to be administered to the students? And obviously, this was going to lead to some kind of problems.
Mr Speaker, the other thing I would like to talk about is the entrance examination. I have looked at the summary of the petition as contained in point numbered 5.0 to 5.5. and this is the accurate recount of events that led to this; the General Legal Council cannot say that the examination and interviews were introduced just to ensure quality. I do not think so; I was there myself as a lecturer. We realised that the numbers had become overwhelming and that is why the
examination came as a measure to sieve some of the students.
I believe that we should be fair to the issues to know that the examination that was introduced was not to check quality. In any case, in those days when -- [Interruption] -- and I repeat that it is not to check quality; probably, that is only tangential to it because when we were in the University of Ghana, Legon and that was the only Law Faculty, everybody from there got seamless admission into the Ghana School of Law without going through any written examination again and without going through interviews.
Mr Speaker, then, we had law schools springing up. Those law schools that sprang up received proper accreditation. And indeed, some of the students even from the University of Ghana, Legon, which used to be the only institution, also had to go through this examination. And some of them were actually cut off. The question is, what had changed that even students from the University of Ghana, Legon, which we thought had the best quality of Faculty still had to be weeded out through the examination?

So I am of the opinion that the examinations were introduced not to check quality per se but the first object was to sieve down the numbers. This is because the Law School had become overwhelmed by the sheer numbers churned out by the various law faculties that had been established.

I had the benefit of reading my Masters in Boston University in Massachusetts. What I observed is that in the United States, they do not have law schools the way we do in Ghana. I do not think that they are producing lawyers of less quality than we are doing in Ghana.

Mr Speaker, I think that looking at all the history up to this point, the time has come for the General Legal Council (GLC) to wean itself as a teaching body. They should just be an examining body and in charge of standards among others. They should let students go through the various faculties and find ways of writing the Bar examination. So, the GLC should just administer questions for people to be admitted to the Bar.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Member, if people cannot pass, would they not demonstrate again because the issue for which we are
Mr Abban 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the answer to that question is that the GLC should also come out with examiners' reports and marking schemes among others, so that when you are going to write the examination, you would know what you are actually required to do. When you go to the various States in the USA, the analogous body of the GLC there has their report which they produce every year.
They produce their report, people know the kind of questions which would be asked and the preparation they should do. Also, they administer the Bar examination twice every year. Why can we not do that? I believe that the Ghana School of Law (GSL) as it exists now has become anachronistic. It was set up to deal with a problem and that problem does not exist anymore. So it is time that we took the bull by the horn, deal with it, get comprehensive reforms and do away with the GSL.
Mr Speaker, we should let the GLC just be an examining and certifying body and let students who have finished with their Bachelor of Laws (LLB), find ways of writing the Bar examinations as administered by the GLC which should not necessarily
operate a school. As it is now, if the GSL is still going to operate a school, then they have to create the rules for it.
Mr Speaker, I think that the best way is what we have recommended. The Attorney-General should introduce a new Bill which would deal with Act 32. Act 32 should not exist because that is what is creating the problem and that is the fundamental thing. Once we deal with it, have a holistic view and bring proper reforms, the GLC would then only be an examining, certifying and regulatory body and then the students could find their way of writing the Bar examinations.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, you came in when the debate was over. Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
Minority Leader (Mr Haruna Iddrisu) 12:55 p.m.
Mr Speaker, let me thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the important subject of legal education. In doing so, I would start by responding to my Hon Colleague who is a former lecturer at the law school. If the essence of examination was not to check quality, essentially, the essence of examination was not to promote mediocrity.
Mr Speaker, Ghana has a two stage legal system. In one, you do the raw legal education and the second step is professional legal education that qualifies you to become a barrister of law to be able to practise. Legal education has evolved over the years. We must also recognise the significance of population growth.
Mr Speaker, gone are the days when probably, in the Bekwai area, you would have been the most celebrated lawyer because at the time, you were rare. You were rare in terms of numbers. If you come to my own village, up to the late 1980s, it was still for a special few. Thanks to expanded access to education as a response to population growth --
Mr Speaker, let me refer you to your Committee's Report and I would go to the second paragraph of the conclusion. I beg to quote:
“In that regard, the Committee strongly recommends to the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice to submit a new Bill to the House to replace the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill, 2018”.
Mr Speaker, this Parliament is running away from what we must do. Why withdraw a Bill? In any case, we
have all been students of governance and there is a relationship between need, policy and legislation. You would legislate on policy when you feel strongly about that policy. We feel strongly that there is a crisis in legal education, therefore the question this Parliament must answer is how we would use legislation to cure the defects that we have recognised, subsequent to the petition presented.
The Committee should not run away from an onerous responsibility. If there is a Bill before us, how do we fine-tune that Bill to respond to all the issues of re-marking examiners' reports and comprehensive review of legal education? My own suggestion is that the President who is a lawyer himself, should appoint an eminent five-member committee to review and reform legal education in Ghana.
There should be a national conversation or a national symposium on the future of legal education. We have academics in Ghana. If you put Prof Kwapong and Akilagpa Sawyer and Prof Benneh among others together and say that you want to know what the legal education should look like in the next 20 to 30 years for Ghana, I am sure that they would give you a roadmap. I however, have a difficulty with this Parliament running away from the responsibility.
Minority Leader (Mr Haruna Iddrisu) 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, secondly, this same Committee says that interviews -- In the heat of this debate and in the last days, I had to formally go and pay a courtesy call on her ladyship Justice Sophia Akufo and I needed to appreciate where she was in terms of one; improvement of infrastructure generally for the Judicial Service and judicial system to support justice delivery and second, her position on this matter.
Her concern which is our concern and must be the concern of every current Ghanaian is the quality of legal education. We should not do anything that would dilute the quality of legal education. What is the essence of examination as I responded to my Hon Colleague, even though legal education has evolved?
Mr Speaker, the second issue is that this Parliament must admit that we got it wrong when we took away interviews in the legislative instrument (L. I.) that we passed. It is not wrong to swallow a humble pie.
Thirdly, independent examination. Where in this world do you have a lecturer teach, then somebody would sit somewhere and set questions for that person and mark? It is wrong and we must condemn it. If you lecture, you must set examinations.
Mr Speaker, they are hiding something from us. I am sure that there are integrity problems associated with the conduct of examinations, integrity problems with marking and with those who pass and those who do not pass. You do not deal with it by running away and setting up an independent examination authority. That is not right, so we can also do so by way of legislation.

Mr Speaker, the prohibitive high re-marking fees. We must legislate that anybody who fails is entitled to it.

Then also, we should not over pamper the students as if everyone writing an examination has the right to pass. That is not and cannot be the case that everyone who writes an examination, must necessarily pass. It is academically impossible and let them be told that quality will emanate from quality on the basis of what they do.

So fundamentally, I agree that there is something wrong with legal education in Ghana and we need to have a national conversation on it. I would advocate for the appointment of a five-member eminent committee to give us a road map on the future of legal education but we all should not, in our contributions and statements run away from these issues.

Mr Speaker, is the academic ecosystem of legal education today favourable and good enough? It is not. How then do we improve the transition between a degree in law and a professional training in law? The Hon Minority Chief Whip was making a point.

I have always believed and probably -- during the Second Reading of one particular Bill and its consideration, you were very strong on paralegals. Why is everybody concerned about training lawyers? We need paralegals in the young people who have a degree in law and so, we must legislate for some of them to divert into those new areas in order to contribute to the delivery of justice in this country. I am sure that even if we set up an institution and define its remit of paralegal education, a lot of them will get in.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, we need to relook at legal and medical education as a country. When doctors are posted to some rural areas in Ghana, they tell you that they are unwilling or not prepared to go. Maybe, we should have a strategy that every district must recommend three or five young people to be trained as medical doctors by the State and it should be mandatory to go back and serve those rural areas

and districts. However, when the opportunity is only for some parts and privileged institutions, that discrepancy will still exist. We need to do more.

So, I would not share all the recommendations of the Committee but I generally think that the L.I 2355 is problematic and will need a review. The Bill before us gives us an opportunity to fine tune it and we must be bold to confront it that there is a crisis in our legal education.

Mr Speaker, finally, as for the young people, an opportunity to attain their cherished goals of becoming lawyers and having training in legal education, we cannot deny them that opportunity. So as a State, we should be looking at how we can expand the opportunities in that particular area.

Thank you for the opportunity and I trust that legal education reforms in Ghana will be holistic, farsighted and inclusive to deal with all the issues that we have so mentioned.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader, do you defer to -- ?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I noticed that the Hon Member has moved from his original position to be by my side because he
Mr Kobina Tahir Hammond (NPP-Adansi Asokwa) 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much. What I would be saying --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon K.T. Hammond, can you listen to me? It is with grave reluctance that I am agreeing that you take the place of the Hon Majority Leader in this case. I pray that you shame me in your presentation. So, please -- [Laughter] --
Mr Hammond 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is about the greatest coded language I have ever come across in all my life. It is going to be very difficult to be able to decipher but I will try to crack the code.
Mr Speaker, to start with, with respect to the Hon Majority Leader, the only thing I would be saying about him on the streets of Asokwa when I visit tomorrow or the day after, is that I am not so sure why people are bent on contesting the Leader of the House by way of primaries or whatever. This
is the Hon Majority Leader of Ghana's Parliament and the House. I do not see --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon K.T. Hammond, we will do that out of the Chamber.
Mr Hammond 1:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, am I beginning to impress you or I am losing the plot? Thank you for the opportunity but I am not sure why you would say that; “with great reluctance…” As usual, you and I -- do not worry, I am not upset.
There is this talk about legal education and it is actually becoming a bit of common expression on the streets. I am not so sure why the suggestion is that it is only the General Legal Council (GLC); the institution responsible for legal education which seems to be taking the flag for what is happening.
Mr Speaker, I heard my Hon Colleague who said that he is actually still a lecturer at the Ghana School of Law. There are major problems and I do not think that the bulk of it really sits at the door of those who train lawyers in the country and we should be looking at the students, the new institutions who masquerade under the pseudonym of university. I am not so sure whether they are all universities. We should be looking at
all those universities that have sprawled all over the country which all purport to be teaching in law classes and have established law faculties.
I have also had the opportunity of hearing some of the individuals responsible for the conduct of the examinations in respect to teaching the students in the country. They have their stories to tell and I guess the students should be really listening -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon Members, Order!
Mr Hammond 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the aphorism has always been this but I am not sure if I can quote it right: “ the heights by great men reached and kept were not attained by sudden flight but, they while their companions slept, they were toiling upward in the night.”
Mr Speaker, the modern crop of students who want to become lawyers, is not very clear whether they toil into the night. Think about your good self, how you toiled to be able to go through University of Ghana, Legon and cross over the road to go to Ghana School of Law in Makola to become who you are; is that what we are seeing now? When you talk to those in charge and then they tell
you that most of the students do not even attend classes.
They give you a peep into some of the scripts written by someone who wants to become a lawyer in two years' time -- I now even hear the argument canvassed that the one year pupillage period should be cancelled. They just want to go through School and whatever they obtain out of there straightaway go into legal practice.
Mr Speaker, there is so much cacophony in the system and it has to be sorted out in one way or the other. Let us go back to the universities. You may have read yourself and it is reported on high authority that in some of these institutions that claimed that they are lecturing the students in law, the heads of those faculties are not lawyers -- [Interruption] -- That question should be asked to those who are clamouring and making all this noise. The head of the faculty is not a lawyer and yet, he is purporting to be teaching legal principles, jurispru- dence, constitutional law and so on.

This is a big problem we have in this country and nobody for a minute is suggesting that we do not need lawyers in the country. The developmental agenda of any country
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Let the record reflect that the Hon Majority Leader has never presented himself as a mini lawyer.
Mr Hammond 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I give it to him. When he stands up in the House and espouses the principles of the Constitution, we sit down and admire him even though as you have said, he has never claimed to be a lawyer. Mr Speaker, but there are those who pride themselves to be lawyers but do not understand the first principles of the Constitution. It is abominable and sad, we would not have that situation in the country. I was very unhappy when people started criticising the former Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Justice Sophia Akuffo, when she talked about her
unwillingness and reluctance to just accept any stream of people as lawyers because we must have quality in the country. The students should sit down and learn because we all learnt.
Mr Speaker, the terror that we went through at the University of Ghana, Legon. For instance, Professor Kofi Kumado told us that we would fail. I remember Mr Fui Tsikata during one tutorial assignment where I was to lead the presentation, I somehow defaulted and then a letter was written to me that I would not be allowed to write a final examination paper.
However, thanks to the grace of God and the good heart of Mr Tsikata, I was given the opportunity to present the paper and have discussion with my colleagues in a tutorial session. It later was an examination question and so if I had prepared and presented on that then you would know the marks I got in that examination.
Mr Speaker, we toiled and worked very hard but these modern students do not want to work hard. You meet these students on the streets and they would tell you that they are reading law but if you ask them a question they would not have an idea. The last entrance examination had a compulsory question and a couple of
them came to discuss the issues with me, but during the discussion it became clear that they did not understand the question. If they did not understand the questions that they were supposed to answer, then why are they going around saying that the lecturers have done something? Mr Speaker, most of them deviated and some do not even know how to write “we were” Mr Speaker, Hon Collins Dauda and I are the BBCs - “Born Before Computers”.

We want quality staff because sooner or later we would hang our stuff --
rose
Mr Hammond 1:15 p.m.
What are you up in arms against? Is it the quality lawyers like K. T. Hammond?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Hon Member for Ho West?
Mr Bedzrah 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague just mentioned that we want lawyers like K. T. Hammond. I know lawyers go to court and so I want to find out from my Hon Colleague the last time he was in court to defend a case?
Mr Hammond 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would be in court on Friday. [Interruption] ---

Mr Speaker, I want to spare the blushes of an Hon Colleague today but if he tempts me I would be very brutal. I am involved in a case with an Hon Colleague on the other Side who is also the former Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr Ayine. He actually sat with me here and he whispered in my ear to know the next date we would be in court and I told him that it would be next Friday. We were to be in court last week, I was present but he was not.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, please ignore the asides and address me.
Mr Hammond 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, he is listening so if I spill the beans he
would hear it, so I would tell you later in confidence. Mr Speaker, the Hon Member should not spend his time on K. T. Hammond because I have been to higher places.
I would conclude that the system is so bad that some of them who have gone through the system have no manners in court. They are absolutely useless in court. They have no manners and I would give you a classic example --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Hon Member, kindly withdraw the word “useless”.
Mr Hammond 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would explain if you would allow me.
At the Bar, there are very clear manners and the court was full of lawyers and some of us had to appeal to the Judge to discipline them because it is unheard of.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
So, the person may be indisciplined but the word “useless” is --
Mr Hammond 1:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I defer to you. Please which word should I use?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
You may use unprofessional.
Mr Hammond 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I withdraw “useless” and replace it with “unprofessional”.
I was there as a counsel and not an Hon Member of Parliament but this colleague lawyer started shouting that “ Member of Parliament sit down, this is not Parliament”. This was when I was making my legal submissions to the Judge. The colleague lawyer did not know that when he had completed his submissions he had to sit down and allow me to continue with my submissions. Ultimately, the arbiter was the Judge and I had the occasion to say to the court that if the Lordship was abdicating the Chair to allow the counsel to sit in the Chair then he could do so.
Mr Speaker, it is the kind of lawyers that we are producing in this country. It is bad, abysmal and not a good situation. We would not allow the little ones to come up and destroy the system this way. They should go through the system the way we went through. With Prof. Kofi Kumado, Prof. Kotey, Mr Tsikaka, Prof. Kuenyehia and the rest who taught us, Mr Speaker, you know what we went through. I am told there are good, quality lecturers there. I cannot speak for the other institutions, but if they would want to establish law faculties, they should bring themselves up to
scratch. What passes for law there is not good, second rated and substandard those students should thrive. They go for engagements far from the schools and then go and do some two hours of study and it is as if they are tired. They would not sit and study.
They should study. If they study hard, we would support them completely. They should stop the shorthand they use in writing the examination. Law is not social media. It is more serious than social media. Which institution takes pride in failing all the students? If it is bias, what kind of bias is it, and what kind of hatred could it be? How would they say that it is an organised cabal to make sure that all of them fail? It does not happen like that.
It is because they themselves are not pulling their socks up. They should try and work hard without blaming the system. This is the system that everybody has gone through from our law school days. This law we are considering is of course ripe for revision since it was crafted in 1960. However, the law has nothing to do with the brains, it is just the mechanism of going through the training processes. We would look at those deficiencies in the law.
Mr Speaker, ultimately, the responsibility lies on the student. They
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Hon Members, we are considering the Report of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs. Does the Hon Chairman want to conclude? If you are alright, I would put the Question on the acceptance of the Report.
Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee?
Mr Banda 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not have much to say apart from what I read from the Report. I only want to take this opportunity to thank colleague Hon Members of Parliament who contributed to the Report. We have listened to their submissions and their good counselling with respect to the Amendment Bill which is currently before the Committee.
The Committee intends to organise a stakeholder engagement to have a national debate on the way forward with respect to legal education in Ghana and to find a lasting solution to the numerous challenges bedevilling legal education currently.
Mr Speaker, having said this and without much ado, I am most grateful to you for giving me the opportunity to present the Report.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe we are not in the position to take the Motion listed as items 6 and the consequential resolution, and also item numbered 8 because the Hon Chairman of the Finance Committee is not here. As I said in the morning, maybe, once we start, we could have an avenue to carry on board what issues are coming from the Floor.
So we would stand those ones down and go straight to the consideration of the Narcotics Control Commission Bill, 2019.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am sorry I was distracted. Did you say we should continue with
the Consideration of the Narcotics Control Commission Bill, 2019?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that was what I said.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Very well. Hon Members, the Narcotics Control Commission Bill, 2019 at the Consideration State.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 1:25 p.m.
STAGE 1:25 p.m.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Yes, Hon Minority Chief Whip?
Alhaji Muntaka 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was drawing the attention of the Hon Majority Leader, that the Hon Chairman, Ranking Member and members of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs are not here. Also, looking at the time -- It would have been good if they were here so that we make some effort, but they are not there. I do not know whether the Hon Majority Leader would consider an adjournment of the House
since we did not plan for an extended Sitting. If they were there, it would have been good to consider some few clauses before 2.00 p.m. but the Hon Chairman, Ranking Member and Members are all not here. I do not see how we would proceed with this Bill without them.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe we could make good progress. The reason is; we have had some Winnowing Committee consideration of the proposed amendment and have agreed up to clause 27. So there cannot be any inhibitions. I believe we would be able to go very fast. There are agreement on these ones. We agreed and dictated the construction of these ones.
In fact, we agreed yesterday that we would not take any Statement to enable us have enough space to take the Consideration of the Bill. Unfortunately, we came to consider a Statement.
Which was relevant, anyway. I believe if we start we would be able to make considerable progress on the amendments proposed.
Alhaji Muntaka 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not dispute what the Hon Majority Leader is saying. What I said was that, if you look at the amendments,
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the truth is that the Hon Chairman of the Committee would admit many of these amendments which even came from me and the rest of them bought into it. I normally do not insist that my name should be there. So if a member continues, then I would say it should be in the name of that person. So we have that general agreement.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Yes, Hon Kpodo?
Mr Benjamin K. Kpodo 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree very much with the Hon Majority Leader that even after the Committee has agreed on certain things, it could go through smoothly.
But our records in Parliament show that even after the Committees work, some issues come up and we still debate them.
Yesterday, we had a very long debate on an issue which the Committee had already agreed upon. We still had to debate whether the narcotic substances had to be destroyed immediately or deferred and the Hon Member is aware of what happened yesterday. So if the other members of the Committee especially, from my Side are not there, it would not be good for us to just say that because the Committee had some agreement earlier, we should not go without debate and just go on to say ayes or nayes. I think we should have our Hon Members here, so that the quality of work that we produce from here can be acceptable to all.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if we are to take what my Hon Colleague has said on face value, what we have in clause 4, every one of them up to (xi) is in the name of the Chairman of the Committee and he is here.
Mr Speaker -- [Interruption] -- Do you know who chaired the Committee? This Bill is sponsored by the Minister for the Interior, so the Chairman is the -- You do not even know that -- Chairman for the Committee for Defence and the
Interior. The Hon Chairman for Constitution, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs was there to help.
Mr Speaker, the issue that my Hon Colleague spoke about yesterday was because of the fact that the person who raised it had not sufficiently addressed himself to the preamble of clause 3, which has suggested that investigations and prosecutions would be done by the Commission. That was the misunderstanding, but we eventually cleared it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Very well.
Clause 4 -- Governing body of the Committee
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Kwame Seth Acheampong) 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, subclause (1), paragraph (a), after “chairperson”, insert “who shall have the relevant competencies in drug - related matters and be of high moral character and proven integrity.”
Mr Speaker, it would read 1:35 p.m.
“The governing body of the Commission is a Board con- sisting of a chairperson who shall have the relevant competencies in drug-related matters and be of high moral character and proven integrity.”
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think we considered it. The only slight amendment I would want to include is, ‘drug-related'. It should rather read, ‘narcotics-related' matters and be of high moral character and proven integrity.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Hon Member, if I recall correctly, yesterday, all the amendments we made were to substitute ‘drug' with ‘drug and plant'.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that is so. But if we now remove ‘drug' and substituted it with ‘narcotics', that would take care of it. So that we do not say “narcotic
Mr Ben Abdallah Banda 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to do a further amendment to this amendment with reference to the phrase ‘…who shall have the relevant competencies…'
Mr Speaker, the clause has the tendency of being interpreted in two ways 1:35 p.m.
either futuristically, ‘who shall have' or ‘must have', but I believe that in a situation, we must speak to the present, so it should be ‘who has'. I believe Hon Majority Leader agrees with me.
It should read: ‘…who has the relevant competencies in narcotics- related matters…'
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, consequent on the amendment proposed, in line 3 of the amendment on the Order Paper, we must delete ‘…be...' and substitute it with ‘…is…'
“The chairperson who has the relevant competencies in narcotics- related matters and is of high moral character and proven integrity.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, subclause (1), paragraph (c), line 2, delete “that” and insert “the” and in line 4, delete “Commissioner - General” and insert “Ghana Revenue Authority”.
Mr Speaker, the amendment would read 1:35 p.m.
“The Commissioner of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority or a repre- sentative of the Commissioner not below the rank of an Assistant Commissioner nomi- nated by the Ghana Revenue Authority.”
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we said we would not relate to an officer but to the office. So the Commissioner of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority or a representative of the -- [Interruption] I do not know whether it should be the ‘Commission' or the ‘Authority'.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:35 p.m.
It is the Authority.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yes, it is of the Authority and not the Commissioner.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
Hon Member, it is a position originally for the Commissioner.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
If he is not there, it is proposed that a representative of his -- but do you want a representative of the Commission?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
Mr Speaker, of the Authority, not below the rank of an Assistant Commissioner, nominated by the GRA.
Mr Joseph Yieleh Chireh 1:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the purpose of this amendment was that, we should not refer to the one holding the office.
The person represents the office or the institution, therefore as the Hon Majority Leader said, he should be nominated by the Commissioner- General of the Ghana Revenue Authority.
There are three divisions within the GRA, and they are the Internal Revenue, the Customs Division and the VAT. This person however, would have to come from the Customs Division. They on their own should not nominate a representative. It should
be the Commissioner-General of the Ghana Revenue Authority.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 a.m.
Hon Members, it is for your consideration. What is the final rendition?
Mr Banda 1:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thought that once the first person to be nominated is the Commissioner of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority, in the absence of the Commissioner, the representative should rather come from the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority, nominated by the Commission. That is what I thought.
In the paragraphs that precede, it is either the boss himself or a representative from the institution, nominated by the boss. That has been the understanding. So I wonder why we now say that the representative should be nominated by the Commissioner-General, but not the Commissioner of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority.
Mr Speaker, I would therefore want to propose that it be captured as 1:45 a.m.
“the Commissioner of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority or a representative of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority, not below the rank of an Assistant Commissioner nominated by the Commissioner- General”.
Mr Chireh 1:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, indeed, the head of the GRA is the Commissioner-General, so, once he says “Commissioner General”, it is fine. It was when he tried to refer to the Commissioner or Customs Division that I said no; because the head of the whole GRA institution is the Commissioner-General. I think this one is tidy.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 a.m.
Hon Members, I would want to get the final rendition, so that I could put the Question.
Mr Banda 1:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the final rendition reads: “the Commissioner of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority or a representative of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority not below the rank of an Assistant Commissioner nominated by the Commissioner-General.”
Mr Banda 1:45 a.m.
Very well.
Mr Agbodza 1:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I wanted to understand what my Hon Colleague just said. He said “not below the rank of Commissioner- General”. Is that what he said? All right, it is the “Assistant Commissioner.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 a.m.
Hon Members, I would suspend Sitting for five minutes.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 a.m.
Hon Members, let us continue.
Hon Members, we would move on to clause 4, item numbered (iii), by the Hon Chairman of the Committee.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, subclause (1), paragraph (b), line 4, delete “Chief Executive Officer” and insert “Food and Drugs Authority”.
Mr Chireh 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with the amendment, as I said, this one as captured is correct. Either the Chief Executive Officer goes to the Board, or a representative of the FDA does so. With the others, reference was always made to a representative of the Chief Executive Officer.
However, we do not want a person. We rather want the institution that they represent, so there should not be any amendment to this one.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think it is inappropriately captured. As the Hon Member for Wa West says, if we look at (c), it provides for the Commissioner of the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority or a represen- tative of the Commissioner and we are saying that it should not be a representative of the Commissioner; it should be a representative of the Division.
Mr Speaker, when we come to (e), the Chief Executive Officer of the Financial Intelligence Centre or a representative of the Chief Executive Officer, we are saying that that representative should be the representative of the institution.
Now, subclause (d) is right because it says; the Chief Executive Officer of the Food and Drugs Authority or a representative of the Food and Drugs Authority. Here, it is not a representative of the Chief Executive Officer. Subclause (d) is appropriately captured so it should be maintained.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Are you withdrawing the proposed amendment in subclause (d)?
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I withdraw the amendment.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Very well.
Item iv?
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, subclause (1), paragraph (e), line 3 and 4, delete “the Chief Executive Officer of”
-- [Pause] --
Mr Speaker, I withdraw my earlier amendment advertised.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Is the original rendition all right?
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, no, we would substitute the ‘Chief Executive Officer' with the Financial Intelligence Centre. That should be the insertion after the deletion.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Where are you inserting what?
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, let me read the original rendition:
“The Chief Executive Officer of the Financial Intelligence Centre or a representative of the Financial Intelligence Centre not below the rank of a director nominated by the Chief Executive Officer of the Financial Intelligence Centre.”

are substituting ‘Chief Executive' with ‘Financial Intelligence Centre' in that line. Is that right?

Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Item numbered (v)?
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4 subclause (1), paragraph (f), lines 3 and 4, delete “Executive Director of”.
Mr Speaker, I give the new rendition 1:55 a.m.
“The Executive Director of Economic and Organised Crime Office or a representative of the Economic and Organised Crime Office not below the rank of a director nominated by the Executive Director of the Economic and Organised Crime Office”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Bandah 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the rendition is correct but what has been captured in the proposed amendment on the Order Paper is erroneous.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
What is before me is what has been read out. I will put the Question.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Item numbered vi, clause 4, Hon Chairman of Committee?
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, subclause (4), paragraph (g), lines 4 and 5, delete “Coordinator” and insert “Council”.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would read 1:55 a.m.
“The National Security Council, represented by the National Security Coordinator or a representative of National Security Council who is not below the rank of Deputy National Security Coordinator nominated by National Security Coordinator”.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Let me listen to Hon Kpodo.
Mr Kpodo 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in line with the earlier amendment, we should retain the Coordinator as the last
word over there. This is because the institutions are rather inanimate and the people are in charge to carry out the activities.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, just so that we get it right. It was supposed to be deleted in subclause (g); the opening phrase -- ‘the National Security Council represented by -- It should rather begin: ‘the National Security Coordinator'. And that indeed is that amendment that was proffered by the Hon Yieleh Chireh so we decided to go by that. That one was right and the Hon Chairman ought to drop his own so that it is tidied up in that manner.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Should the Chairman's amendment be withdrawn and then we take subclause (vii)? [Interruptions]
Mr K. S. Acheampong 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, yes. On that note, I withdraw the earlier amendment.
Amendment withdrawn by leave of the House.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 a.m.
Now, Hon Yieleh Chireh, item numbered (vii)?
Mr Chireh 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if we look at the original, it added the National Security Coordinator or his deputy. And they may be two so what I have proposed is that the National Security Council, represented by the National Security Coordinator or a deputy National Security Coordinator nominated by the National Security Coordinator.
Mr Bandah 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there must be consistency. All along, we precede the paragraph with the person before the institution so it should be:
“The National Security Coordi- nator of the National Security Council or a representative of the National Security Council who is not below the rank of a deputy National Security Coordinator nominated by the National Security Coordinator”.
That ought to be the rendition.
Mr Chireh 1:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not have any objection to that; what I was trying to do is that if we see the original, they talk about the Coordinator or his deputy. And to simplify it, just like you said, if it was a Ministry, we would say ‘Ministry' but the way the Hon Member has put it, I do not have any objection to it.
Mr Chireh 2:05 p.m.
I agree with the further amendment.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Hon Member, kindly read out your -- Let me listen to the Hon Member for Keta.
Mr Quashigah 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I hold an entirely different view with regard to these amendments that have been made. I still think that it is still a bit clumsy compared to when we say:
“The National Security Council represented by the National Security Coordinator or his representative not below the rank of a Deputy National Security Coordinator.”
It runs through from those ones that we have already passed because even with that one, --to clause 4 (d), says:
“the Chief Executive Officer of the Food and Drugs Authority or his representative not below the rank of a Director”.
Instead of the repetition of the entire organisation, I think that where a phrase would do, we should not bring a whole sentence. From my perspective, that would even make it tidier. So I want to propose a new amendment, taking it from clause 4 (g). It must say:
“the National Security Council represented by the National Security Coordinator or his representative not below the rank of a Deputy National Security Coordinator.”
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that we are making some progress. Just as we did not begin in clause 4 (c) and (d) with the names of the outfits, that is, we did not say the “the Food and Drugs Authority represented by the Chief Executive Officer”. So we would begin clause 4 (g) simply as a further amendment to the proposal of Hon Yieleh Chireh. That is why I said that we should delete the initial phrase of
“the National Security Council represented by”.
Mr Speaker, so we would begin with 2:05 p.m.
“the National Security Coor- dinator or a representative of the National Security Council who is not below the rank of a Deputy National Security Coordinator nominated by the National Security Coordinator”.

Hon Quashigah, we have done some winnowing and made progress. You are introducing some labyrinthine clause and sending us back.
Mr Kpodo 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the proposal by the Hon Majority Leader is in place. When we take that, it would rhyme in with all the amendments that we have made from clause 4 (d), (e) and (f). So I perfectly agree with him that they should bring “the National Security Coordinator” to begin the clause till we come to the final end to show that the person nominated is also by the National Security Coordinator.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I go with the rendition of the Hon Majority Leader that says, delete in line 1, the entire phrase of “the National Security Council represented by”. And then we could start with:
“the National Security Coor- dinator or a representative of the National Security Council who is not below the rank of a Deputy National Security Coordinator, nominated by the National Security Coordinator.”
Mr Agbodza 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader does not want me to make this point but I have with me the Constitution, under the National Security Council. I find it difficult to see whether there is anything called the National Security Coordinator in law. Is it not the case that our Presidents just created that for coordination? If there is, could he tell me?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
I took part in crafting that law, so I know that it exists. There is a National Security Council, National Security Coordinator and they say you may also appoint a National Security Minister. It is in the Act.
Mr Quashigah 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I know the Hon Majority Leader is
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Just address me, I gave you --
Mr Quashigah 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am not a lawyer and I have been told that this is not grammar, but we make laws for people to read and how we have crafted it is too much of a mouthful. I strongly believe that reducing it in terms of words and maintaining the meaning, we would not lose anything. I propose that even though we have gone past clause 4 (a), (b) and (c), we could still go back, so that it all rhymes.
I am proposing:
“the National Security Council represented by the National Security Coordinator or his representative not below the rank of a Deputy National Security Coordinator”.
It does not change the meaning, the essence remains.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
Your point is well made.
Having regard to the state of the Business of the House, I direct that the House Sits outside the regular
Sitting hours. It is already 2.15 p. m. and we have not finished with one clause.
Mr Banda 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is better to be repetitive than to be ambiguous. The flaw in the Hon Member's proposed amendment is that, first of all, it is not consistent with the previous amendments that we have effected. This is because we begin with the personality, that is the head of the institution but not the institution.
Secondly, he has proposed the insertion of the possessive “his” which is not acceptable because it is masculine and not gender sensitive. Thirdly, it is archaic. [Laughter] So, I believe that the rendition given by the Hon Majority Leader is proportionate and in line with modern drafting, so we should proceed.
Mr Kpodo 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that my Hon Colleague's intention to reverse the earlier amendment would not be in place, with all due respect.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
I did not take note of that. Let us deal with what is before us.
Mr Kpodo 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in all of these organisations, the Council or Authority, the best person placed with authority to run the institution is either the Coordinator, the Director-General
or the Chief Executive. So they should be there first. If they cannot be there, then they should find a representative of the organisation to go and be on the Board. So let us keep to what we have started from clause 4 (d) to (f) in (g).
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
I want the final rendition, so that I can put the Question on it.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 2:05 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the final rendition would read:
“The National Security Coordinator or a representative of the National Security Council who is not below the rank of a Deputy National Security Coordinator nominated by the National Security Coordinator”.
Mr Chireh 2:15 p.m.
That rendition could have been correct but he asked who is -- We should just say not below the rank of a Deputy National Security Coordinator. He has added “who is not below” but he should just say “not below” the deputy.
He has added “who is not below”. We just said “not below the deputy national co-ordinator.”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Very well.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Hon Members, that was clause 4 (vii), right? So we go to item (viii).
Mr K. S. Acheampong 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move --
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, there is something missing and I think we should deal with (h) which is lost out. However, what we have here is: “the Minister for Health represented by a health professional specialised in Addiction Medicine nominated by the Minister for Health”.
Mr Speaker, I think that we said that it should be a representative of the -- All right. I think it shifted and so we have (x) which should precede the (vii). So the Hon Member in whose name it stands could move it. We need to just tidy up and therefore Hon Yieleh Chireh should move that amendment.
Mr Chireh 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if we look at the one standing in my name, I explained early on that instead of “a Minister”, it should be “the Ministry”. That is how we have always put it because we are talking about a Board
An Hon Member 2:15 p.m.
It is paragraph (h) which stands in your name.
Mr Chireh 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that was what I said and I have moved that anywhere we see “a Minister”, it should be replaced by “Ministry” since that is what the person is representing and not the Minister. However, in the end, it is the Hon Minister who will nominate and there is no problem.
That is, instead of the “institution”, we should not put “office holder” and in terms of this, I so move --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
That will be moving (x) in place of (vii), right?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think it was inadvertently left out but what we propose was that (h) should now read; “a representative of the Ministry for Health who is a health professional with specialisation in Addiction Medicine, nominated by the Minister for Health”.
Mr Benjamin K. Kpodo 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I have gone through the previous ones we have done and I do not know why there is any particular interest in the Ministry rather than the Service. This is because I was thinking that instead of “Minister for” or “Ministry of Health”, why would we not emphasise the Ghana Health Service (GHS) rather than the Ministry? This is because we have the Ministries of the Interior and Defence but references have been made to the Director Generals, Coordinators and so on that is why I want to suggest that we do not concentrate on the professional wing of the Ministry which is the GHS.
Mr Chireh 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, as I said and was supported by the Hon Majority Leader, the purpose is not -- in the case that we specified, what is the main task of the Food and Drugs Authority? It is specifically about medicines and drugs that they regulate. Now, at the GHS, there are specific things which do not pertain to drugs but the Ministry of Health could even choose someone from the GHS. We want the Ministry, though --
Mr Speaker, normally, in our legislation, we always make mention of the Ministry. When it came to those who dealt directly -- financial intelligence is again about how to deal with drug importation and so on --
[Interruption] -- We do not quote -- because they have specific functions which are related to what we are doing concerning narcotic control because money laundering and so on, will come under financial intelligence unit. Now, the National Council, we did not say the Ministry of National Security; we said, Coordinator because they handle intelligence as far as this is concerned. That is why we cannot repeat the same thing and substitute it with the
GHS.
This is because under the Ministry of Health, the GHS does not handle the teaching hospitals or the children hospitals. You could get a specialist in any of these places and that person would be a representative of the Ministry. If we mention GHS and they do not have a specialist in Addiction Medicine, obviously, we would be limited. So that is why we will not put GHS there. The draftpersons did not put GHS.
Mr Quashigah 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, to make a case for the argument adduced by the Hon Kpodo, the GHS, we obviously have those specialised Addiction Medicine under the GHS. This is because when we take the psychiatric hospitals, they all fall under the GHS.
Mr Chireh 2:15 p.m.
No, they do not. They are now an Authority --
Mr Quashigah 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, so to say that GHS does not apply in this context, I disagree. We can obviously go by --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
Hon Members, the Ministry is the umbrella agency and GHS is under the Ministry. The Hon Minister may nominate from any of the places but we are talking about policy, GHS is only a service delivery and the Hon Minister may use their facility if they need to. So let us continue.
Mr Quashigah 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in a case of the Commissioner of Customs Division and the Ghana Revenue Authority, they also fall under the Hon Minister for Finance. So if it is in that vein, then we should rather be talking about a representative of the Hon Minister for Finance.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I guess, if we had gone further to (i) that is after paragraph (h), the Hon Quashigah would understand where we are drifting to.
In paragraph (h), we need a Ministry; “a representative of Ministry of Health who is a health professional with specialisation in Addiction Medicine” but we changed that to
Mr Kpodo 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I did not hear the new rendition on which we have taken the vote.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
It is all right. I did not hear you vote but we have the decision so -- [Laughter] --
Mr Kpodo 2:15 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was indeed waiting to hear the proper rendition before the vote is taken.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, for the avoidance of doubt I said “a representative of the Ministry of Health who is a health professional with specialisation in substance use disorders nominated by the Minister for Health”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
We are now introducing a lot of new lexicon.
Hon Chireh?
Mr Chireh 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the problem we have is that after we did the winnowing -- [Interruption]
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my attention has been drawn to the fact that the addiction medicine is the course relating to substance use disorders. So in that regard let us leave the “addiction medicine”.
Mr Speaker, so I rescind my earlier formulation in respect of the addiction medicine. I understand that is the name of the course so we would rather maintain the “addiction medicine”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Please read the new rendition for the records.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would be:
“A representative of the Ministry of Health who is a health professional with specialisation in addiction medicine nominated by the Minister for Health”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Hon Members, I would put the Question again.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Item numbered (viii).
Mr K. S. Acheampong 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move clause 4 subclause (1), paragraph (j), line 3, delete “Director-General of” and in lines 5 and 6, delete “Inspector- General of Police” and insert “Police Service”.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, they have mixed the whole thing up. In paragraph (i) we suggest that it should be a representative of the Ministry of the Interior.
Mr Speaker, I think that Hon Chireh proposed a formulation which is in (xi) --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
Hon Leader, I think I should adjourn so that we do further winnowing.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we did the right thing. I think how it has been captured on the Order Paper is what --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
What is before me is not the right thing that was done.
Mr Chireh 2:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree with you because we did the winnowing and they have advertised the old one instead of what we agreed on. This is what has caused the problem because even if we change the substance abuse here, those who did not attend would --
All these things have been agreed on and the Hon Chairman was supposed to capture them but they just brought the Order Paper without what we had considered. This is what has delayed the matter so I suggest that from tomorrow they should make sure that all what has been agreed would be captured properly on the Order Paper, then we could go faster.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:25 p.m.
That is why I want to adjourn at this stage so that we correct the Order Paper to make proceedings easier.
Hon Members, this brings us to the end of Consideration Stage for the Narcotics Control Commission Bill, 2019 for today.
ADJOURNMENT 2:25 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 2.31 p.m. till Thursday, 6th February, 2020 at 10.00 a.m.