Debates of 4 Jun 2020

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:35 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Hon Members, Correction of the Votes and Proceedings of 3rd June, 2020.
Page 1 -- 8 …
rose
Mr Ras Mubarak 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, on page 8, not only was I physically present in the Chamber, I even asked the Hon Minister for the Interior a Question. I also threw a modest birthday party to colleagues and staff of the House yesterday on the occasion of my 41st birthday. Strangely, I see that I have been captured as having been absent from the Chamber.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Thank you very much. You were manifestly present.
Page 9 -- 12
rose
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Banda 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am sorry for taking you back. I just entered and have realised that I have been marked absent, but I was present yesterday.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in much the same way, I see that some two Hon Members of Parliament were present in the Chamber yesterday yet they have been marked absent. They include Hon Kingsley Aboagye-Gyedu, listed as number 1; and Hon (Prof.) George Yaw Gyan-Baffour who is listed as number 19; and Hon Benito Owusu- Bio who is listed as number 35.
Mr Speaker 10:35 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Majority Leader.
Page 13 -- 27
Hon Members, the Votes and Proceedings of 3rd June, 2020 as corrected is hereby adopted as the true record of proceedings.
Hon Members, item listed 3 -- Urgent Question. If the Hon Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection could take the appropriate chair?
URGENT QUESTIONS 10:35 a.m.
MINISTRY OF GENDER, 10:35 a.m.
CHILDREN AND SOCIAL 10:35 a.m.
PROTECTION 10:35 a.m.
Mrs Mavis Nkansah-Boadu (Afigya Sekyere East) 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to ask the Hon Minister responsible for Gender, Children and Social Protection the measures the Ministry has put in place to protect street children amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection (Mrs Cynthia M. Morrison) (MP) 10:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, streetism has become a national security issue and therefore goes beyond the Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Protection. We are therefore working with the National Security, the Ministry of Local Government and Rural
Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection (Mrs Cynthia M. Morrison) (MP) 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, ever since H. E. the President of the Republic of Ghana, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, announced the lockdown of the Greater Accra and Greater Kumasi due to the COVID-19 pandemic, street children have been on the Ministry's priority list to provide care, support and protection.
Mr Speaker, my Ministry, through the Social Welfare officers in the first instance, undertook some recog- nisance on the numbers and locations of children and thus gathered data on these children on the streets. This was followed by public sensitisation and counselling services which are still ongoing to let children know the kind of services available to them on the Social Welfare shelters in Madina.

Mr Speaker, through the help of the National Security, five Millitary buses were released to the Ministry of transport to convey over 380 Kayayeis to a shelter in Madina provided by a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The office of
Mr Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Minister.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mrs Nkansah-Boadu 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I also would want to find out from the Hon Minister, what deterrent mechanism the Ministry has put in place to ensure that these children do not return to the streets after the COVID-19 Pandemic is over?
Mrs Morrison 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as I said, the Ministry, together with the Ministry of Finance and National Security are putting up measures, so that we could move the children from the streets to a place that they cannot return back.
We are also re-assigning some of them back to their parents. There are some that we cannot find where their parents are, because they would take us round and round and bring us back; they pretend as if they do not know where their homes are. Unfortunately, we do not have data to locate where their parents are. So for those ones, we are working with the security. We would come back to this House to tell you the measures that we have put in place.
Mrs Nkansah-Boadu 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there is a growing number of foreigners who also engage in streetism. What are we doing to ensure that we reduce the number of foreigners engage in such activity since it contravenes our laws?
Mrs Morrison 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the first batch of children picked from the streets, together with their parents, we took them to the Nigerian Embassies. We are in collaboration with the embassies to let them know that we cannot harbour such people on the streets. The Embassies took those we sent to them back to their countries, and yet others came.
So in collaboration with the National Security, we would see how it goes. We do not also want to infringe on other people's rights. They can
come here, but they cannot be on the streets. So when we sit together, we think that we would find a solution to it.
rose
Mr Speaker 10:45 a.m.
Yes, Hon Ntoso?
Ms Helen Ntoso 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, may I know from the Hon Minister whether she has plans to resource the Department of Social Welfare to manage streetism since we have been complaining that they do not have the resources?
Mrs Morrison 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, every department has their allocation and I believe that their quota has been given to them. When it comes to the ration of food, in my Answer, I stated that we send them enough food to take care of the children there.
Mr Ras Mubarak 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, following from the Hon Minister's answer, she indicated that there are some collaborations with the Ministry of Finance to relocate the street children.
I would want to find out from the Hon Minister, the number of street children we are trying to assist in terms
Mrs Morrison 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in my Answer, I stated that we were taking the data, so when we get it we would know. But in collaboration with the National Security, we are sending some back to their families and the others are in our shelter. So for those in our shelters, we would need to prepare a budget to take care of them, but those who would go back to their families, we would not take care of them.
Mr E. Nartey 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister mentioned in her Answer that the Ministry would collaborate with the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of the Interior.
May I also know whether she is in touch with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration, because when she comes to my constituency, some of these people are in their thousands? They sleep in front of the stalls on the main street? They do everything there.
Mr Speaker, has she also liaised with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and Regional Integration to ensure that these people are sent back to their countries?
Mrs Morrison 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I am glad he drew my attention to that; I have not thought of it. We are talking about the street children, and not the adults. The adults are not under my supervision. So I would draw the attention of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration to see what we can do, especially those in his constituency, which I am aware of.
Mr Patrick Yaw Boamah 10:45 a.m.
Thank you very much.
Since we are talking about street children, I would want to find out from the Hon Minister, the steps she is taking towards the enforcement of Beggars and the Destitute Act of 1969 (NLCD, 392) since most of these children she referred to undertake the unpleasant practice of begging on our streets?
Mrs Morrison 10:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, any time I get the opportunity, I tell the nation that when somebody is on the streets begging, we do not give to that person. But most of the time, people give moneys to them. I do not have control over that. The only thing I can
do is to restate that nobody should give them money, because if we do not, they would stop coming out for alms. But if we do, they will continue to be on the streets.
We will continue to educate and ensure that when we see these children, we would rather pick them and send them to the shelter rather than give them money. To control it looks a little impossible.
Ms Jocelyn Tetteh 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister mentioned that some of these children have been sent to a shelter. I would therefore want to find out the number of children that have been sent to the shelter, and where the shelter is located?
Ms Morrison 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, normally we do not disclose the location of the shelter, but I would tell the Hon Member. The shelter is at Madina, and I can take her there. We have more than 40 children there, and some of them are in schools. We have some at Labone and the Osu Children's Homes.
When we pick them, because of the -- we have now received some moneys to put a fence wire on the Madina shelter because some of them
escaped through there, but those at the Osu Children's Home and in Labone are able to stay because it is a bit secured than that of the Madina shelter.
Ms Laadi Ayii Ayamba 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the response of the Hon Minister, she did mention that some of these street children are normally sent to Madina. I believe that this is a temporary situation. This is because if we are talking about COVID-19 and we are picking at random or getting any street child at all and taking them to Madina, then what would they do to ensure that they reconcile these children to their parents? Otherwise, are they keeping them there for good?
Mrs Morrison 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I stated that with some of the children, we send them back home, but with others, we keep them in the shelter. Others too we take them to the Osu Children's home and to Labone which are our preferred homes.
We do not know those children on the street, and we do not know where they come from. So if we pick a child and the child takes us round and brings us back to where he was first found without being able to identify his home, then there is no way we would be able to know where that child is coming from.
Mr Abdul-Rauf Tanko Ibrahim 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it is a good idea to get these children taken care of in the interim. Under the circumstance, in relation to the COVID-19, we are talking about social distancing.
Therefore could the Hon Minister assure this House and the nation that when these children are being sheltered or are kept under shelter, they would not be treated as the Kayayeis were treated when they were kept under the care of the Ministry?
Mr Speaker 10:55 a.m.
Hon Member, you are out of order.
Hon Minister, thank you very much for attending to the House and answering our questions.
Hon Members, we would move on to take the item numbered 4.
The Hon Minister for Works and Housing may please take the appropriate chair.
Hon Member for Nsawam- Adoagyiri, you may ask your question.
ORAL ANSWERS TO 10:55 a.m.
QUESTIONS 10:55 a.m.
MINISTRY OF WORKS AND 10:55 a.m.
HOUSING 10:55 a.m.
Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh (NPP -- Nsawam-Adoagyiri) 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to ask the Hon Minister for Works and Housing when the awarded drainage works in the Djankrom area and its environs would be completed.
Minister for Works and Housing (Mr Samuel Atta Akyea) 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Works and Housing has over the years been implementing the National Flood Control Programme across the country. It is an annual programme whose objective is to make systematic and consistent interventions in areas with critical drainage and sewage problems. The recent time this programme was implemented by the Ministry of Works and Housing was in the 2018 Programme.
Mr Annoh-Dompreh 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to commend the Hon Minister. After many decades, the residents of Djankrom, particularly
Mr Akyea 10:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I can assure my Hon Colleague that because we have identified the challenges as urgent, immediately we have the financial space, we would just engage a contractor to carry out the works to avert a situation in which floods
would destroy lives, property, and livelihood in the Djankrom area where my Hon Colleague is an Hon Member of Parliament.
Mr Annoh-Dompreh 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to find out again from the Hon Minister what his general appreciation of the quality of work executed by the contractor is?
Mr Akyea 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I must say that the contractor has done a good work. As a matter of fact, a contractor would never get paid until the Hydrological Services certifies that his work has passed their engineering test. The contractor has done a good job, and he is in our good books.
Mr Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Question 718.
State of the Saglemi Housing Project
Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh (Nsawam--Adoagyiri) 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Hon Minister for Works and Housing the state of the Saglemi Housing Project and when Ghanaians may have the benefit of it.
Mr Akyea 11:05 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Saglemi Housing Project, whose contractor is Messrs Construtora
Mr Akyea 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, on 27th February, 2014, the then Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing, Hon Collins Dauda (MP), on his own motion, rubbished the parliamentary approval and reviewed the original agreement and signed his own First and Restated Agreement with Messrs Construtora OAS Ghana Limited to downsize the number of houses to be constructed to 1,502 housing units with the same contract sum of US$200 million.
Mr Speaker, on 21st December, 2016, 14 days after President John Dramani Mahama had lost his position in the elections, the then Chief Director, Alhaji Ziblim Yakubu, and the contractor, reviewed the First Amended and Restated Agreement and signed the Second and Restated Agreement, in which the scope of the works were reduced to 1,024 instead of the parliamentary-approved 5,000 housing units, 388 units to be finished completely externally and 90 units to be left at foundation or lintel levels. This brings the total units to be constructed to 1,502 units at a revised contract sum of US$181,519,000.
On 31st July, 2017, the Chief Director of MWRWH reviewed the Second Amended and Restated Agreement and signed the Third
Amended and Restated EPC Agreement. This was to extend the period to December 2017 to allow the contractors complete the project. The scope in the Second and Restated Agreement was maintained, but the contract price was reviewed further downwards to
US$181,018,000.
Status of Implementation
Mr Speaker, on 10th January, 2013, the Ministry of Finance informed MWRWH that Messrs Credit Suisse International had disbursed a total amount of US$198,450,000 being, US$200 million less fees and transaction expenses of US$1,550,000 into the Escrow account at the Bank of Ghana.
Mr Speaker, I do not know if the then MWRWH had been bewitched by the contractor. A fantastic sum of US$80 million, representing 40 per cent of the contract sum, was paid as mobilisation to the contractor by MWRWH. Immediately the sum of US$80 million was released to the contractor, when actual work had not started, the contractor transferred to abroad US$40 million.
I submit, that the seed of the bankruptcy of the Saglemi Housing Project was sown by this dubious act.
This racket was so strong that the Ministry did not demand a performance bond as a necessary prerequisite before the release of the US$80 million.
Mr Speaker, in early 2014, actual construction works were commenced by Messrs Construtora OAS Ghana Limited at the project site. Currently, the racket could only deliver 636 housing units which are unfit for human habitation because the necessary amenities like water and electricity have not been fixed, and the entire project lacked on-site infrastructure
especially a drainage system. Three hundred and eighty-eight housing units are at various stages of completion.

3.0 Amount Disbursed by the
MWRWH 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Thank you very much. Yes, Hon Annoh-Dompreh, proceed with your supplementary question?
Mr Annoh-Dompreh 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, let me again commend the Hon Minister for the quite revealing detailed Answers. The details of the Answer are in --
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Hon Member, please your question?
Mr Annoh-Dompreh 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if you would permit, I would like to refer the Hon Minister to paragraph 2.2 of his Answer and with your permission, I wish to quote.
“Mr Speaker, I do not know if the then MWRWH had been bewitched by the Contractor. A fantastic sum of US$80m representing 40 per cent of the contract sum was paid as mobilisation to the Contractor by MWRWH. Immediately the sum of US$ 80,000 was released to the Contractor, when actual work had not started, the Contractor transferred to abroad US$ 40 million. I submit that the seed of the bankruptcy of the Saglemi Housing Project was sown by this dubious act. This racket was so strong that the Ministry did not demand a performance bond as a necessary prerequisite before the release of US$80 million.”
Mr Speaker, I wish to find out from the Hon Minister what kind of engagement his outfit executed with the former Minister to understand this seemingly strange behaviour, relative to the quote I just made?
Mr Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Yes, Hon Minister?
Mr Akyea 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the facts are speaking for themselves and they are not in party colours. As a matter of fact, it is not the remit of a Minister to call a previous Minister to come
and answer. It might seem you have converted yourself into the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO). So what we are doing is that we are about to assemble all the facts after the audit and then submit it to the Attorney-General.
I think the Attorney-General will know the professional engagement that she would have with all those involved in this. The facts however, are clear and nobody would want to improve upon them. We know that by all contract practices, 40 per cent by way of mobilisation was outrageous.
More so, if you pay such huge sums by way of mobilisation, it behoves every prudent person, to exact what we call the performance bond which is an insurance cover, so that in the event that somebody sprints away with the money, you would fall on the bond to recover.
I am afraid to say that they never did this, that is why we are asserting that it was a racquet. It looks like moneys were being thrown away for the benefit of this Brazilian company.
Mr Annoh-Dompreh 11:15 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with your permission again, I have to make a quotation again from the Hon Minister's Answer on the clear enterprise of short changing the country.
Mr Akyea 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we have been educated by the President that we should not witch-hunt -- it is a principle which is very clear to me. Besides, we also believe that we should not lay false charge against our neighbours and that is why we are of the humble view that without what we call a professional engagement by way of quantity surveying undertakings, which the Ghana Institution of Quantity Surveyors are doing, where they would come out in terms of proper measurements of what they have received, what they sunk in and the rest of it, we do not think it is appropriate to surrender the documents in terms of the financials. We have the financials -- the moneys actually received and we also have the counting of the properties.
We are persuaded that indeed and in fact, there is a misappropriation on the part of the contractor of an outrageous sum of US$159, 040,000. When we finish with the audit of the projects we would put everything together and surrender the document to the Hon Minister for Justice and Attorney-General, who would take the requisite action in relating to what I consider a rake of the exchequer.
Mr Annoh-Dompreh 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the last paragraph of the Hon Minister's answer, he said that there was an ongoing Ghana Institute of Surveyors value for money audit. I wish to know from him when the audit started and when it would be completed?
Mr Akyea 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in the first instance, we opened it up for competitive bidding as to who would carry out the audit. I must report to this august House that the quotations from the private surveyors were too high and we did not have the financial space for it.
So we referred the issue to the Ghana Institute of Surveyors and presented to them our circumstances. With the understanding that it would be reduced, we submitted it to the procurement authority and they were single-sourced to do the job. They started the work last week and the commitment is that the whole audit report would be submitted to the Ministry by the end of this month.
Mr Sampson Ahi 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to know whether the Hon Minister is aware that per the record of the Ministry by the consultant to the project, the mobilisation fund paid to the contractor was 20 per cent, that is US$40 million and not US$80 million as he alluded to in his Answer.
Mr Akyea 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I know the difference between US$80 million and US$40 million and I am educated enough to stand before this august House that I would not lay false charge against my neighbour. The records are conclusive -- the amount of money that was doled out to the contractor without the requisite performance guarantee was US$80 million which represents 40 per cent of the contract sum. The facts would speak for themselves when people are invited to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), or wherever they would take them.
Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with your permission, I beg to quote paragraph 1.8 of the Hon Minister's Answer which says:
“On the 31st day of July, 2017 the Chief Director of the Ministry of Works and Housing, reviewed the Second amended and restated agreement and signed the Third Amendment and restated EPC Agreement. This was to extend the period to December, 2017, to allow the contractors complete the project''.
Mr Speaker, on the 31st day of July, 2017, the Hon Minister was at post, so I want to find out from him whether he suggests that this was done
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Member, that is definitely speculative. Where the Hon Minister was at that particular time and what could possibly have been, I think this would require further investigation to prove that.
Mr Agbodza 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, may I ask the Hon Minister if he could accept that he misrepresented the facts when he said that there was no performance guarantee to back the advanced payment? I put it to him that we do not use performance guarantee to back advance payment -- we use advanced payment guarantee. So could he accept that he misrepresented what he said?
Mr Speaker, secondly, he said that it is unusual for huge amounts to be transferred when there is mobilisation for EPC contracts. Is he aware that under EPC contracts the contractors are allowed to source 80 per cent of what they do with the money from abroad? Is he aware that he misrepresented again -- ?
Mr Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Member, you said a person may be allowed to transfer a certain amount - by what regulation or authority or law?
Mr Agbodza 11:25 a.m.
Mr Speaker, all EPC contracts we approve in this House, including what has been approved this year, the moneys are borrowed from somewhere and it is indicated that a certain amount of that money should be used to procure goods and services from the borrower's home country. For example, if the contract is from China or the United States of America (USA), a chunk of the items would be procured from these countries.
I would want to ask the Hon Minister if he has adverted his mind to the fact that under EPC contracts more than 50 per cent and even in some cases 80 per cent of the goods are supposed to come from the borrower's country? In that case, his presentation towards this money is very misleading, so if he could accept that and then correct himself again.
Mr Akyea 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, no matter the spin or engineering confusion one would want to feed this House, it would not detract from the fact that the US$40 million cannot be found. There is no shred of evidence that when the money was taken out of the country, there was a corresponding importation of material to do the Project. He should not go there.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Members, order! Order!
Mr Akyea 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he should not use the general to define the particular. We are talking about a situation in context. So I am not going to apply the general principles of EPC contract to this particular Project.
This particular Project is clear and we would see that when people are about to answer criminal charges that when US$40 million was taken out of the realm, there was no corresponding imports which were used for the projects. It is as clear as that.
Mr Speaker, the second part of the Answer, he is playing on words -- [Interruption] -- Let me finish; do not rise when I am answering a Question.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Member, please -- [Interruption] -- Order!
Hon Minister?
Mr Akyea 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, may the peace of God which passes all understanding -- [Laughter] -- rest and abide in this realm. I am answering the Question. I have never been afraid -- [Uproar] -- Mr Speaker, please, save me from my Hon Colleagues because I am answering the Question.
When one talks about performance guarantee or advance mobilisation bond, whatever it is, even if my language in the technical sense is challenged, I can submit to this House that no guarantee, whether performance or advance mobilisation bond was posted because it is a prerequisite for giving out such a whopping sum of money by way of guarantee.
A prudent person would never give US$80 million, 40 per cent of the contract sum to an individual by way of mobilisation without the requisite guarantee. What if he never starts; that is when wise men would ensure that
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Question 719 -- well, Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Iddrisu 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I have one question for the Hon Minister for Works and Housing, and I refer to paragraph 3.1; which with your permission, I quote:
“The Ministry of Finance (Ministry of Finance) in a letter No DMD/MWRWH/OAS/ GEN/2018/01 dated 31st May, 2018, has indicated that, the total disbursement made by the MWRWH on the project to date is US$195,854,969.52.”
May I know from the Hon Minister, between 2017/2018 how much of this money was paid by his Ministry?
Mr Akyea 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not have the figures in my head but I could furnish him with how much was paid during our time.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Thank you very much; that would require notice which you may give.
Mr Iddrisu 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, he has paid, and if so -- and he is calling the payments criminal payments. Is he holding himself responsible for making criminal payments because his evidence is that he has paid?
How much has he paid?
Mr Akyea 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, whatever amount that has been paid when I assumed office, provided it is under my signature, I would account for it. But if we have wayward people -- I said “wayward chief directors” -- paying moneys -- [Interruption]
Mr Speaker, they do not understand the power of a thief -- [Uproar] -- to come and say it was under my watch. I would furnish the Hon Minority Leader with every detail of what has been paid.
Mr Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Thank you very much, the Hon Minority Leader has asked the question.
Hon Majority Leader, do you intend to ask a question?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, 2172 acres of land was secured for the construction of 5000 houses. Eventually, as he is telling us, only 1,024 houses are at various stages of completion.
I would want to find out from the Hon Minister whether the rest of the land is still held for and on behalf of the state?
Mr Akyea 11:35 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the rest of the land is still in our possession. That is why I am saying that immediately we finish with the audit, we would secure a contractor who would complete the housing units and also ensure that we have the full complements of the 5000 housing units as intended by this honourable House.
Mr Speaker, we intended that with US$200 million, the workers of this country should have the benefit of 5,000 housing units with full amenities. That is what we are going to secure. We would ensure that, in terms of the
Constitution, successive governments complete the work of their predecessors.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the facility of US$200 million was secured to construct 5,000 housing unit, and that meant that the facility that came before us, meant to produce affordable housing, was to cost about US$40,000 on the average per house.
Now, that same amount is spent on the construction of 1,024 houses and that meant that averagely, the cost had skyrocketed from US$40,000 to US$191,264. That is almost five times the cost.
Mr Speaker, I would want to know from the Hon Minister, what was the -- [Interruption] -- I know that people who know about housing construction would know that when we are constructing a house, we factor into it, the service facilities. And if the Hon Member does not know, he should know this. It is basic.
The issue I am raising with the Hon Minister is, what justification exists at the Ministry to skyrocket the price from US$40,000 to US$191,000? What justification for the escalation of the price has been provided and the
Mr Akyea 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there can never be any justification for what we are seeing. In the first instance, because we are a law-based country -- we came to this House that an amount of US$200 million be approved so that we can roll up 5,000 housing units. At the present level, if a two or three bedroom house is US$40,000, with what has been done so far, one is right in saying that a Ghanaian worker should pay for a house at US$191,000. That will be outrageous.
So these are the laws that are starring us in the face and I think a way must be found -- and we are going to do so -- such that it comes into what we call the affordable housing units limits and not with these kinds of outrageous prices that has resulted because of the fact that the moneys have been sprinted away.
Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Minister. The matter is further referred to the Committees on Works and Housing and the Leadership of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs are to join to
look into this matter which has appeared before the House in all its aspects and report as a matter of urgency to this honourable House within two weeks.
Question numbered 719?
Mr Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Hon Member, you have exhausted your supplementary questions and I will allow two supplementary questions.
Permanently Fixing the Drainage and Sewage
Challenges in the Country
Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh (Nsawam-Adoagyiri) 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to ask the Minister for Works and Housing the preparedness of the Ministry in permanently fixing the drainage and sewage challenges faced by the country.
Mr Akyea 11:45 a.m.
Mr Speaker, constraints and disparities in Ghana's economic growth are partly driven by climate risks. Ghana ranks high among African countries most exposed to risks from multiple weather-related hazards. In the last three decades, Ghana experienced seven major floods; most prominently were the ones of 1991, 1995 and more recently, those of 2007, 2008, 2010 and 2015.
Flooding in the northern part of the country has had a large spatial coverage while that in the southern part has been limited to the cities and has resulted largely from failing land use controls and zoning systems. A further concern is that Ghana's rainfall varies on decadal time scales. In the 1970s and 1980s, Ghana saw three major droughts. Since then, flooding has become a severe problem while drought has receded (World Bank,
2013).
Mr Speaker, the causes of flooding on the strength of the well- documented analysis of the Hydrological Services Department of my Ministry are the following:
(i) Climate change induced heavy rainfall;
(ii) Rapid urbanisation, and settlements in low lying areas;
(iii) Lack of properly engineered drainage systems -- construction, operations and maintenance;
(iv) Poor Waste Management - both solid and liquid waste;
(v) Building and construction on Water Ways;
(vi) Encroachment of natural water reservoirs -wetlands, lagoons and ponds;
(vii) Inadequate retention ponds;
(viii) High tides and coastal erosion;
(ix) Poor land use planning, implementation and enforcement;
(x) Inadequate funding for flood management; and
(xi) Lack of political will to address medium to long term flooding challenges.
The country until most recently had relied heavily on reactive measures or response-oriented approaches, which often focus on recovery instead of disaster reduction or mitigation. There is also little emphasis on forecasting, hydrological and meteorological monitoring.
Mr Speaker, flood Management needs strategic planning, effective stakeholder engagement and well- planned investments. The focus should be on integrated flood management to minimise loss of life, livelihood and property and maximise derived benefits of floods especially from floodplains.
Mr Akyea 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, enormous capital outlay is required to mitigate the problems that beset the drainage and sewage subsectors of the country.
The Ministry of Works and Housing has been making efforts to attract investment into the drainage and sewage subsectors of the country in order to address the associated problems.
The World Bank has responded favourably to the clarion call of the Ministry, and is currently supporting the Greater Accra Climate Risk Integrated Drainage (GARID) Project to mitigate drainage and related problems within the Odaw basin. May I remind the august House that on the 20th day of November 2019, you graciously gave approval to the World Bank loan in the sum of US$200 million to secure a permanent fix to this precolonial infrastructural challenge?
The pre-construction and engineering engagement are far advanced and we are programmed to commence serious construction in the last quarter of this year. The programme will be replicated in other parts of the country with similar drainage problems when the requisite financial arrangements are secured.
Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Works and Housing is also pursuing Private Public Partnership investment. Currently, discussions with some investors are ongoing.
Mr Speaker, it is worthy of note that the Ministry of Works and Housing is not relying only on foreign investors for the resolution of the drainage and sewage problems in the country.
The Ministry of Works and Housing has over the years been implementing the National Flood Control Programme across the country. It is an annual programme whose objective is to make systematic and consistent interventions in areas with critical drainage and sewage challenges.

The recent part of this programme implemented by the Ministry of Works and Housing was the 2018 Programme, and most of the projects have been completed.

This huge intervention in our drainage problems was very successful largely due to the President committing GH¢200 million to the programme, the highest capital injection so far since we started our smooth democratic journey in 1992.

Mr Speaker, it is almost becoming a mockery that the nation complains about perennial flooding when we have not been weaned off our subculture of dumping the garbage we hate to keep in our homes into the open drains. The upshot is that this subculture chokes the open drains and when we experience an inundation of rains as has been predicted by the Ghana Meteorological Agency, the mass of water runs off and translates into flooding. Until we destroy this subculture, the situation that eats our meagre budget will persists.

The Ministries of Sanitation and Water Resources, Local Government and Rural Development and Works and Housing, in a massive collaborative effort is pricking the conscience of our people to voluntarily desilt the drains of their neighbourhoods so that we can contain the floods which we have been warned would happen because of the heavy rainfall patterns.

Mr Speaker, our dear nation cannot afford to depend on President Nkrumah's open drains. Those infrastructures are painfully antiquated. The best engineering practices are subterranean. They are capital-intensive which does not breed mosquitoes or create an atmosphere for dysentery, cholera and other filth-

induced communicable diseases. Subterranean drains will not afford those who violate our environmental sanity the opportunity to dump their garbage in the submerged drains.

I beg to submit that we shall be making serious inroads in the area of subterranean drains if the nation can commit some US$20 billion in this world class but expensive capital outlay. This is when we shall be giving our drainage system a comprehensive and permanent fix.

In the meantime, while we wait for the long run, my Ministry is waiting to order the army of contractors to site immediately the Ministry of Finance gives me the financial space which is an additional boost to the yeoman's job we did in 2018 continuing to 2019.

Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
As I indicated, two questions; one from each Side.
Mr Kwame Governs Agbodza 11:55 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank our Hon Colleague the Minister for providing this very important Answer to the Question of drainage in our country.
May I know from the Hon Minister, apart from the US$200 million from the World Bank, exactly how much
  • [MR AGBODZA did the Government provide in the 2020 Budget Statement to tackle this problem? Mr Speaker, if the Hon Minister did not get the question, I am asking that he did mention a US$200 million World Bank loan. In the 2020 Budget Statement itself, how did Government commit to drainage?
    • Mr Akyea 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I cannot say offhand the dimension of drainage expenditure as captured in the 2020 Budget Statement but what I can say is that we have seen that what the Ministry of Finance gives my Ministry for these undertakings are woefully inadequate.
    That is why extra budgetary allocations are made and we are also saying that this time around, we want the Ministry of Finance to give us an additional GH¢350 million from the GH¢200 million that they gave us in the year 2018 for us to tackle the challenges.
    However, the truth of the matter is that by reason of the extra budgetary allocation of GH¢200 million which was able to contain the floods in the year 2019 was with regard to the pattern of flooding and the impact on
    us and this was due to the huge investment. I expect the Hon Minister for Finance to give us a bigger sum this year.
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Last question?
    Hon Okudzeto Ablakwa?
    Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am most grateful. I thank the Hon Minister for the Answer. He indicates that the US$200 million secured from the World Bank has been very helpful.
    I do recall that this House approved the request by the Hon Minister for Finance to hive off a bit of that for the management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Is the Hon Minister able to indicate if the Ministry of Finance has returned that portion of the GARID US$200 million to the Ministry of Works and Housing?
    Mr Akyea 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am amazed at the keen memory of my Hon Colleague here. Indeed, it is because of the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Hon Minister for Finance persuaded the World Bank to give some of the money for purposes of meeting those challenges. However, the firmest assurance is that the money will be
    returned in good time. As I speak, the money has not been returned and the project is actually going to take off on the last quarter of the year.
    Mr Speaker 11:55 a.m.
    Thank you very much, Hon Minister, for attending to the House this morning and answering our Questions. You are respectfully discharged. Hon Minister, you and your outfit will assist our Committee in doing the work they are assigned accordingly.
    We have two Statements but time will allow for only one. Hon Member for North Dayi on Nose Masks.
    STATEMENTS 11:55 a.m.
    Ms Joycelyn Tetteh (NDC -- North Dayi) 11:55 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to address the need for Ghanaians to use nose masks as prescribed.
    Mr Speaker, one of the key measures that have been outlined by health experts to help curb the spread of Coronavirus is the wearing of nose or face masks. It has become the norm the world over as more than 50 countries now require people to cover their faces when they leave their homes. Similarly, in our case, the
    Ministry has directed the compulsory wearing of nose masks as people who are asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic might not realise they are infected.
    Mr Speaker, thankfully, we have been given guidelines on how best to wear the nose masks to avoid contamination. Among others, the nose mask should cover the face from the bridge of the nose to the chin.
    We are also encouraged to wash our hands regularly with soap under running water and use alcohol-based hand sanitizers before wearing or taking off a nose mask. Additionally, the guideline states that masks should be removed from behind and we should avoid touching it from the front.
    Finally, nose masks should be safely disposed and the hands must be sanitised after the disposal of the nose masks. Mr Speaker, though it appears that many people have bought into the idea of wearing the nose masks, there is a worrying trend among the populace especially when it comes to wearing and handling the nose masks properly.
    In our markets, on commercial vehicles and even at work places, we find people wear the masks below their chin, on their foreheads, or simply hang it around their necks or carry it in their hands. The impression
    Ms Joycelyn Tetteh (NDC -- North Dayi) 12:05 p.m.
    is created that it is sufficient to own a mask and carry it around. The known reason for members of the public wearing the nose masks, particularly, non-surgical mask is to reduce the risk of passing Coronavirus to another person. This is why I am worried about the improper manner in which some of us wear the nose masks.

    Some of us wear the mask. Again, I am concerned about the way some of us handle the masks especially the homemade fabric types. Proper handling of the homemade ones require that the masks are washed with warm, soapy water, dried and ironed at least once a day, if possible.

    Sadly, I have seen people wearing masks which appear rather soiled and unkempt. This situation is alarming because experts tell us that clothing or accessories that we wear have the potential to be contaminated, and so it is true for our cloth masks.

    Mr Speaker, for this matter, Dr Daniel Griffin, an infectious disease expert at the Columbia University advises that we must wash our masks as often as we do our underwear.

    Mr Speaker, there would have been no need to use homemade fabric masks if all of us could afford

    disposable surgical masks. Unfortunately, many of us cannot afford them on regular basis. The current price for a surgical masks is GH¢6.00. This means a family of five will require an amount of GH¢900.00 per month just for procuring surgical masks.

    In light of this reality, the fabric masks are our best bet. We must therefore help our people to wear and handle the homemade fabric masks properly. While we applaud efforts made to enforce mandatory wearing of nose masks, we must go a step further to ensure that they are worn and handled properly.

    Mr Speaker, I see the need for more public education on the use of nose masks. All Government agencies must step up their public education efforts. The National Commissions for Civic Education (NCCE) must also do a lot more and so must the Health, Information and Local Government and Rural Development Ministries and to our numerous media houses.

    Hon Members as representatives must also support public education efforts in their various constituencies. We must all help to carry the message to our people that securing the masks is just one piece of the puzzle and for the masks to be effective, they must be worn and handled properly.

    Mr Speaker, we are told that wearing face masks alone might not prevent a healthy person from getting the virus, but at least, they might help to ensure that we do not spread the virus to others. It is therefore my hope that we would all adhere to the guidelines for using the nose masks so as to protect ourselves and other members of the public from the Coronavirus.

    I thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:05 p.m.
    Thank you very much. As indicated, we are taking one contribution from each Side including Leadership who might decide. Be very brief as the Hon Member who made the Statement, indeed, was.
    Ms Angela O. Alorwu-Tay (NDC -- Afadzato South) 12:05 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity. I thank the Hon Member who made the Statement on this particular issue.
    There is the need for education, especially as she stated in her Statement, about the handling of the face masks. In our constituencies, you see people wearing it and especially the white ones which turn brown because they do not wash them. They think whether it is dirty or not, one could wear it.
    So Mr Speaker, there must be a way which is by using the media through radio advertisement on the need to wash and iron one's nose masks. Other than that, they would be re-infecting themselves. We have the opportunity to have the disposable ones, and we thank you for that.
    Mr Speaker, indeed, without our constituents, we cannot be here, so I would want to appeal to you to work with our Hon Ministers in that sector to see how best they could just put up an advertisement for about two minutes on how to handle the nose masks.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity.
    Mr Speaker 12:05 p.m.
    Thank you very much.
    Hon Members, this brings us to the end of Statements time. We would move on to commence Public Business. Item listed 6 - Presentation of Papers. The Hon Chairman of the Committee should lay the Report of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my attention has been drawn to the fact that the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation is unavoidably absent.
    Mr Haruna Iddrisu 12:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you very much. You have ruled and have directed accordingly that the committees of Parliament could look into those other matters including the very one he himself raised regarding the availability of the parcel of land and who has it. Many issues have been raised which need further interrogation.
    Mr Speaker, it is without prejudice to any investigation by the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice or any criminal investigation institution to look into the matter.
    It is for Parliament's committee to take ownership of the facts, for instance, about how much payments have been made etween 2017 and 2019. We do not know this and even whether, per the contract agreement, there was provision for amendment of the contract.
    Mr Speaker, he should not disturb your ruling. Government could continue using the other institutions available to probe further into this matter and take consequential action.
    Mr Speaker, with the commencement of public Business, I have discussed with the Hon Majority Leader that Hon Bernard Ahiafor would lay the Paper on behalf of the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation. Hon (Dr) Dominic Ayine who started his day at the Supreme Court this morning - Hon Ahiafor would lay the Report of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation on the Public Elections Regulations.
    I thank you.
    Mr Speaker 12:05 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I just acted to draw attention to the necessary consequences of article 121(4).
    Mr Speaker, I believe we in this House should not allow ourselves to be led into any temptation. Mr Speaker, let us vacate what you have done, and allow the necessary consequence to follow. I do not want --
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, and allow the necessary -- ?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, consequence to follow. The Hon Minister has indicated that what he considers as grievous commissions, he would send everything to the Attorney-General. Mr Speaker, let us leave it at that. If any Hon Member wants to further probe by way of a motion, petition or question, that could be allowed.
    But to say that the referral should go to another parliamentary committee to further investigate, the outcome would be that, if anything untoward or impropriety is unearthed, one; the prosecuting
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, are you referring to article 121 (4) of the Constitution?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is so.
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Very well, I will rule. Article 121 (4) of the 1992 Constitution is quintessentially an extension of parliamentary privilege. What it says is that:
    “An answer by a person to a question put by Parliament shall not be admissible in evidence against him in any civil or criminal proceedings out of Parliament, except proceedings for perjury brought under the criminal law.”
    It says, an answer given here is not admissible or a contribution against that person in any civil or criminal proceedings outside Parliament, except proceedings for perjury brought under the criminal law. So its application is limited, and it does not impede the inquisitorial rights of this honourable House at all by ordinary interpretation of law.
    This House, as I have said on several occasions, will continue to be a House of inquisition from archaeology to zoology. The House may inquire into these allegations and counter-allegations strong in character made in this honourable House this day, and the House may decide what to do with its own findings at the

    Hon Members, Presentation of Papers -- item numbered 6. Hon Member, you may present it.
    PAPERS 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Hon Members, item numbered 7 -- Motion.
    Hon Majority Leader, are we in the position to proceed with item numbered 7?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister for Education is caught up in a meeting. I thought he would be able to get here. He sounded that he would be here by 12 noon, but it is past 12 noon and he is not here.
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Leader, you may proceed; you may move the Motion on behalf of the Hon Minister for Education.
    The Hon First Deputy Speaker will take the Chair.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there is a proposed amendment for the Education Regulatory Bodies Bill, 2019 which we were going to take at the Second Consideration Stage which stands in the name of Hon Dr Augustine Tawiah.
    Yesterday I had to exit the Chamber early, and we requested that we fine-tuned it. Unfortunately, it does not appear as if that has been; it still appears in its original form. So I do not know whether we could stand it down for the time being, and do what is appropriate so that in the fullness of time, we can take. We appreciate the principle that there must be a Second Consideration Stage to have some consideration of it.
    Mr Speaker, we could stand it down for the time being and not do the Third Reading, and go to the others: The Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management Ghana, Bill, 2019.
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Iddrisu 12:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there should be no problem at all. We could still do the Consideration Stage of the Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management Ghana, Bill, 2019 or the Land Bill, 2019. We are ready to work on any of the bills the Hon Leader wants us to work on.
    Mr Speaker 12:15 p.m.
    Thank you very much, it is stood down accordingly.
    Mr Speaker 12:25 p.m.
    Hon Members, we would move on to take the item numbered 8 -- Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management Ghana, Bill, 2019 at the Consideration Stage. Hon Chairman of the Committee, we would take clause 43.
    BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 12:25 p.m.
    STAGE 12:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker 12:25 p.m.
    Hon Members, from what I see here, there is a listed amendment.
    MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr William Agyapong Quaittoo 12:29 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, insert the following new subclauses in the appropriate order:
    “ Any moneys in a bank account held by or on behalf of the Institute of Human Resource Management Practitioners, Ghana in existence immediately before the Coming into force of this Act is transferred to the Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management, Ghana established under this Act.
    A contract subsisting between the Institute of Human Resource Management Practitioners, Ghana and another person immediately before the coming into force of this Act shall subsist between the Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management, Ghana established under this Act and the other person.
    A person who fails to comply with subsection (4) commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not less than one hundred
    penalty units and not more than two hundred penalty units or to a term of imprisonment of not less than six months and not more than twelve months or both. “.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 43 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    The Long Title is ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    Hon Members, that brings us to the end of the Consideration Stage of the Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management Ghana, Bill,
    2019.
    Hon Members, we would move on to take the items listed on the Order Paper Addendum. We would first take the item numbered 3 -- Motion.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:29 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, respectfully, we must begin with the item numbered 1 on the Order Paper Addendum.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    Do you want us to start with the item numbered 1?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:29 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker, it is procedural.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    Very well.
    Hon Members, we would take the item numbered 1.
    MOTIONS 12:29 p.m.
    Mr Joseph Yieleh Chireh 12:29 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Resolved accordingly.
    Mr Joseph Yieleh Chireh 12:29 p.m.


    Members, we would move on to the item numbered 3 on the Order Paper Addendum.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:29 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we would rather have to take the item numbered 2.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    All right.
    It is the Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management Ghana, Bill, 2019 that we are doing right now?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    I thought that it was rather the Chartered Institute of Marketing Bill, 2019.Hon Members, we would take the item numbered 2 on the Order Paper Addendum.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, what next?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:29 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we can now move on to the item numbered 3 on the Order Paper Addendum.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:29 p.m.
    Hon Members, we would take the item numbered 3 -- Motion.
    BILLS -- THIRD READING 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we would go back to the original Order Paper to the item numbered 7 which has to do with the Third Reading of the Education Regulatory Bodies Bill, 2019.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Item numbered 7
    Dr Augustine Tawiah 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that the Education Regulatory Bodies Bill,
    2019 be taken through a Second Consideration Stage in respect of clause 40.
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr William Agyapong Quaittoo) 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question put and motion agreed to.
    Resolved accordingly.
    BILLS -- SECOND 12:35 p.m.
    CONSIDERATION STAGE 12:35 p.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    Hon Members, the Education Regulatory Bodies Bill, 2019 at the Second Consideration Stage.
    Clause 40 --
    Dr Augustine Tawiah 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 40, subclause 1, line 3, delete and insert the following:
    “Where an institution is not able to meet the requirement for a charter within the four-year period, but demonstrates sufficient preparation towards the Charter, an additional two years may be granted.”
    Mr Quaittoo 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is not the intended amendment; we would want to maintain the rendition in clause 40, and the intendment is to say that if that university demonstrates commitment towards a charter, it could be given only one year in addition and not two years.
    Mr Speaker, the original rendition is there, but there is an amendment which is on the third line - criteria conditions. Then, we could have a subclause (2) indicating that a university that demonstrates commitment towards achieving the charter would be given only one additional year. That is the intention; what the Hon Members said is not the intention.
    Mr Joseph Yieleh Chireh 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would have liked the Hon Member who moved for the amendment to explain to us in relation to what the Hon Chairman said. Does the Hon Member want to add another subclause or he is replacing a subclause?
    Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the intendment of the amendment proposed by the Hon Member is that an affiliated institution in existence before the coming into force of this Act has four years to work towards being awarded a charter on its own. If the affiliated
    Mr Chireh 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the understanding I had was that if it is an additional sub clause, which means that after the four years, an institution demonstrates that it has been able to do, but did not acquire everything
    Is it that when we insert this subclause, it would mean that there would be three stages? The first stage is four years, then the charter is granted? If the institute does not satisfy it, then two years would be given from which it should complete it.
    Even if the affiliated institution fails in the two years, then the additional one year would be given. The Hon
    Member and the Hon Chairman should reconcile, unless the Hon Chairman says he does not support the proposed amendment.
    Mr Quaittoo 12:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, like I said, the discussions have been made. What is in clause 40(1) should stay.
    “An affiliated institution in existence before the coming into force of this Act shall, within four years of the coming into force of this Act, meet the conditions of the award of a Charter in accordance with this Act.”
    In subclause (2), we say that where a tertiary institution demonstrates commitment towards the achievement of the charter, but is not able to do that within the four years, an additional year would be given to that university. So it is only one that is to be added, and that should be captured in subclause (2). That is the intendment.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:35 p.m.
    First, is it intended that we amend an existing subclause or we are introducing a new one?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 40(1) stays and a new subclause is introduced so that as you said, if an affiliated institution in existence within the four years is
    not able to establish its credentials such that it is awarded a charter in accordance with this Act and they demonstrate sufficient cause that indeed, they are trying and maybe, one or two things are missing out, they would be granted an additional one year.

    This is just as we did in migrating the polytechnics into the realm of Technical Universities. About three or four of them could not migrate, so we granted them space to work towards that. So I am saying that in this case, they should be granted an additional period that the proposer of the amendment is suggesting, that they be granted two more years.

    The Hon Chairman is saying that whereas he agrees with the principle, he thinks that it should be just one additional year, so that they would have five years, instead of the total six years that the proposer of the amendment is suggesting. So that is where we are.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    All right Hon Member, you may move your motion again, proposing a new subclause. The draftspersons will number the subclause, so leave the number out.
    Dr Tawiah 12:45 p.m.
    Thank you Mr Speaker. I beg to move, insert new subclause:
    “where an institution is not able to meet the requirements for a charter within the four - year period but demonstrates sufficient preparation towards a charter, an additional two years may be granted.”
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, just a minor amendment. It is not every institution. We are talking about affiliated institutions in existence, so I think that was what he meant but in reading it out --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    So you are proposing that we insert “affiliated” -- ?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker, “an affiliated institution in existence”.
    Mr Chireh 12:45 p.m.
    I would want us to be very clear. Has the Hon Member now agreed with the Hon Chairman that it should be one year instead of the two years he originally proposed?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    The text he read is what we are discussing. I do not know any agreement. So what was the text, was it one year or
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would oppose the sponsor of the amendment that we add one more year. The reason is that most of them are already in existence. They have been in existence in anticipation of being awarded charters on their own. However, for some reasons, they are staying there.
    There are a couple of them though who are there, who just want to be where they are and take fees. They have no intention of migrating upstairs to be awarded charters on their own. They just want to stay there and take fees from students and that should not be encouraged.
    So Mr Speaker, we are saying that when you have been in existence all these years, you have four years to migrate. If you are still not able to do it, we are giving you an additional year. Some of them maybe for more than 10 years and do not need two more years for them to be marking the students. One more year should be sufficient. So, I would propose strongly to the Hon Member shepherding the amendment that he should allow for this further amendment, so that we have just one more year.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Member, your proposed amendment to your Motion. What sayest thou?
    Dr Tawiah 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I respect the Hon Majority Leader's position on the one year but at least let me make my point. The private universities who are caught in this web were accredited and given the opportunity to operate as both accredited institutions with their institutional accreditation and programme accreditation.
    In order to transition from being a merely accredited institution under the mentorship of a chartered university, they had to operate for 10 years. As it stands now, some are not up to five years, so if we change the law and all of a sudden say that we require them to be in operation for four years with a grace period of one year, if they do not become a chartered university, we would be disadvantaging those institutions which have operated for two years and were given the opportunity to operate, so that they can get the charter after 10 years.
    We know the process is not that simple. They have to assemble faculty in quantity and in quality and it is not very simple to produce a professor in four years. Besides that, the law requires them to have their own
    campus. Take for example, last week, the Ministry of Education granted charter to Ashesi University.
    Ashesi University started in a house in Labone and were able to move to their own campus in Brekusu -- [Interruption] Valley View University has already been granted, so is Pentecost University. They started on a small scale and had to move to this place. So my argument is number one, raising faculty in quantity and quality is an issue. Then also, the critical resources that are needed because they are tuition driven.
    Mr Speaker, the most important thing is that most of these institutions are registered as being limited by guarantees . Christian and Islamic institutions such as the Islamic University of Ghana, Methodist University, Pentecost University are not even profit making institutions and are tuition driven.
    Therefore at least, let us extend to them the opportunity to prepare very well and become chartered institutions where they grant their own degrees. So I respect his one year proposal, but I really want to ask for two years, so that after the grace period, if they have any form of lapses or gaps in their preparation, at least they can
    prepare sufficiently. Also degrees that are awarded by private universities in Ghana will be respected globally.
    Thank you Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    So do you agree to the proposed amendment to your text?
    Dr Tawiah 12:45 p.m.
    Yes, for a two year period. I am asking for two years instead of one please.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, really, there is not much difference between one year and two years, so if he says that we should add one more year to make it two years and they are not going to be able to make it, they would not be able to make it.
    These institutions have been in existence all this while. Pentecost University has been in existence for more than five years, so that example is even inaccurate. They have been in existence for more than five years and are asked to do this.
    If for five years, they have not been able to do it and are now under this dispensation, they would be given four years. If they have nine years and are not able to do it, then they are given one more year , making 10 years and
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:45 p.m.
    are unable to do what they promised to do, what can an additional year do to them?

    So Mr Speaker, I think that we can agree on the two years.

    Question put and amendment agreed to.

    Clause 40 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Chireh 12:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, could you direct the draftspersons that what has happened is no longer a subclause but one more year in addition to what is already in the Bill ? So it is an amendment to what is already in the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:45 p.m.
    The draftspersons shall provide the appropriate numbering for the amendment we just effected.
    That brings us to the end of the Second Consideration Stage of the Education Regulatory Bodies Bill,2019.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, we could do item numbered 7 on the original Order Paper.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
    You may move the Motion now.
    BILLS -- THIRD READING 12:55 p.m.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:55 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, l would want to commend the House for what we have been able
    to achieve these past few weeks to craft the Education Regulatory Bodies Bill, 2019 and what we have been able to do today, the Chartered Institute of Human Resource Management Ghana Bill, 2019 and the Chartered Institute of Marketing Ghana Bill, 2019.
    That effort really, is very commendable and I should express profound gratitude to that small army of winnowing committee which assisted the Education Committee and indeed, my humble self to bring these Bills into fruition. I thank them once again.
    But I urge them to be mindful that there is one matter that must be considered and that has to do with the Pre-Tertiary Education Bill, 2019. That one has attracted considerable attention and many people, groups and individuals have raised issues about them.
    It is not intended to be considered immediately but we want to give the opportunity to the stakeholders that the matter is before Parliament, and so if anybody has any issue or memorandum to supply to us so that it would ultimately affect the quality of the Bill before us, we strongly urge that they should do so through the
    Clerk to Parliament himself, the Head of Table Office, or the Clerk to the Committee of Education.
    In the meantime, what has come before the Committee is intended for them to go on a retreat over this weekend to consider those of them that have come before them, while awaiting the other inputs from the major stakeholders.
    Mr Speaker, it is intended that once we have a sampling of the contributions that may come from outside, it would determine what Parliament would do with the Bill. So I want to invite the general public to respond appropriately to this invitation.
    Mr Speaker, having said so, we would begin in earnest the Land Bill,
    2019.
    Mr Nortsu-Kotoe 12:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I also want to thank the Hon Majority Leader and the leadership, for giving the Committee the opportunity to at least, take three of the Bills that were referred to us some time ago.
    The Committee still has a number of Bills pending before it and it is our hope that when we submit them to plenary for consideration, the speed with which we treated these three Bills would be given to this Bill too.
    Mr Nortsu-Kotoe 12:55 p.m.


    There is one other Bill which is very important and it is the Ghana Technology University Bill, 2019. We are in June and by September, a new academic year would begin, so I want to appeal that once we have taken the Second Reading -- I do not know what happened at the Business Committee meeting today -- the Bill should be considered so that we could give it the necessary attention and speed that we gave the other Bills, so that we could pass it and have the presidential assent before the next academic year.

    Mr Speaker, in addition to the Pre- Tertiary Education Bill, 2019, as the Hon Majority Leader said, it is important for the Committee to go back and look at a number of issues that are still pending in the Bill because with the form in which it is now, if we continue with the discussion, we may not go further.

    As mentioned, there are other stakeholders like the teacher unions and we have asked them to meet the Ministry of Education and come back to us. We are yet to hear from them although we have heard that they have concluded their discussion. So it would be proper that we do not start the consideration now until we have resolved those issues.

    Mr Speaker, I thank you.
    Mr Quaittoo 12:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, what the Hon Ranking Member of the Committee said was the truth but now all disagreements have been resolved and the Hon Minister has given me the documents that were presented by the teacher unions. There are a number of provisions in the Pre- Tertiary Education Bill, 2019 that are to be deleted.
    In fact, all the ring Ministry have also been resolved. The Committee is yet to meet to discuss it so that when it comes to the plenary, it would move fast. The Committee is really ready to consider that those provisions are deleted. It has been agreed on by the Ministry as well as Cabinet and a memorandum has been given to me on that.
    Mr Nortsu-Kotoe 12:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman of the Committee said that what I said was the truth and by his conclusion, it is the truth. This is because we have asked the teacher unions to meet the Ministry and come out with a compromised decision and that is what they have done. So we expect them to meet with us as the Hon Majority Leader said. So I do not think that what he said is different from what I said earlier.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
    So why did you repeat it? [Laughter]
    If what he said is not different from yours, then what did you need to tell us?
    Anyway, Hon Majority Leader, what next?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, so as he said, to conclude on that, I have said that the Committee would be meeting on a retreat to consider the inputs from those of them who have submitted the memoranda but others have also signalled that they may be coming which is why I am saying that let them go and consider what is submitted.
    If it may affect the very foundations of the Bill and it may have to be re- engineered, that would be done. For the time being, it would be important for the Committee to have that retreat over the weekend to reconsider what is before them in addition to what memoranda that has been submitted to the Committee. When we have dealt with that and it becomes necessary to do any re-engineering, that would be done.
    Mr Speaker, that is where we are with it today. Having said that, I believe we can begin with the Land Bill, 2019 in earnest.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
    Very well; the Land Bill, 2019 at the Consideration Stage.
    BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 1:05 p.m.
    STAGE 1:05 p.m.
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr Francis Manu-Adabor) 1:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, Part One, sectional note, delete “and Rights”. This is because “Part One” relates only to interests in land and the rights is in Part Two. So we want that phrase deleted.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    PART ONE as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 2 -- Allodial title
    Mr Rockson-Nelson Etse K. Dafeamekpor 1:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, even
    Mr Joseph Y. Chireh 1:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there are two versions of the Bill. We have a 2018 and a 2019 one. If we are not all using the same Bill, we can have difficulty in considering this Bill. I want to draw your attention to this.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
    Hon Member, I did not understand you. What are there of two versions?
    Mr Chireh 1:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there are two versions of the same Bill. We have a 2018 version and a 2019 one. So the version we are dealing with
    now is the 2019. If anybody has the 2018 version, there would be a problem with the consideration.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:05 p.m.
    Yes, in the 2019 version of the Bill, his interest is that we are saying the State holds an allodial title but he differs in that view.
    Yes, Hon Deputy Minister?
    Mr Benito Owusu-Bio 1:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the State can hold allodial title and that is the case. [Interruption] -- Yes, States hold allodial titles.
    Mr Mahama Ayariga 1:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if we are guided by the media or methods by which one acquires allodial title, then it should not be impossible for the State to also acquire an allodial title because it says, “held by a stool, skin, clan, family or an individual and may have been acquired through conquest, pioneer discovery and settlement, gift, purchase, or agreement.
    What stops the State from acquiring its allodial interest through gifts, purchase or agreements? Unless we say that allodial title is frozen in time. If it is frozen in time and it is a title that can no longer be acquired as of today by anybody; but if we agree that it is not frozen in time and --
    conquest is no longer possible, pioneer discovery may no longer be possible but gifts, purchase and agreement are still possible. So I do not see how we can make a law that says that the State cannot acquire through these possible options or through the media that the law has stipulated. Unless we are saying that allodial title is frozen in time and from today when we pass the law no one can acquire an allodial title in any property.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that the State can have an allodial title to land. What is allodial title? It is the highest or ultimate interest in land.
    Mr Speaker, the discoveries that we are making now in respect of petroleum resources are in the land in the economic zone for Ghana.
    If the State cannot have interest, then a family, and perhaps, a contiguous community would say that, that land is for them. The state can have allodial title to it.
    Mr Speaker, I listened to my Hon Colleague and he wants to inject himself when I am talking. He should not assist me, I am capable of defending my own course.
    So I think that the state could have the highest or ultimate interest in land. I believe this should come without any question.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as indicated, the allodial interest is the highest interest in land title above and beyond which no further interest exists.
    I agree that we can acquire allodial interest by conquest, pioneer discovery, and settlement but definitely it cannot be as a result of gift, purchase or agreement or compulsory acquisition.
    This is because if a land is compulsorily acquired, there is a pre- acquisition owner who will probably be the allodial interest holder and therefore the state derives its interest from that allodial ownership as a result of compulsory acquisition.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    So is that not acquisition of allodial title?
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, so compulsory acquisition cannot be an allodial title.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Why? Hon Member, please explain further.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker --
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is because there is always a reversionary interest and due to this, your interest cannot be allodial. This is because allodial interest is the paramount interest above and beyond which no further interest exists.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    What do you mean by reversionary interest? Hon Member, if I am the allodial owner and the state acquires my interest, that is, my allodial title, who owns the reversionary interest?
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the interest --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, I am the allodial owner --
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the interest of the state will then become a derivative interest because somebody else holds the allodial title before you acquired it. If such is the case, if one has the lands and leases it to another, then the original owner can have allodial interest but that is not the case.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, no. You have introduced ‘lease'. That is, I give you a portion of my interest.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, so the portion that you have given me, do I have an allodial interest over it? No.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    The current law is that one cannot acquire allodial -- but there are people who own allodial interest in land. If the state acquires land from any of them, whether by agreement, purchase or by acquisition, what does the state get?
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with all due respect, the Hon Chairman of the Committee is confusing the “doctrine of eminent domain” with “allodial title”. What the state acquires becomes “eminent domain” and it is not the same as allodial title.
    For instance, the instance that the Hon Majority Leader cited in respect of our offshore oil resources is that it is because our people in Nzema land are the original owners otherwise that territory would never have been part of Ghana. So it is because the people are the original owners that is why Ghana, which is now the modern state that occupies the territorial area of Ghana as we speak, can lay claim.
    So the title that Ghana derives is what is called in law; ‘eminent domain'. It is not allodial.
    Mr Speaker, if we have to explain the ‘doctrine of eminent domain'; it is land acquisition, compulsory, purchase, resumption, acquisition or expropriation, that is the power of a state or provincial or a national government to take private property for public use.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, which law are you referring to?
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am explaining the term --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    I am talking about doctrines of countries other than -- we are making a law of Ghana --
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, are you on your feet? Let me hear you.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, let me conclude.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Let me hear somebody else. Yes?
    Mr Afenyo-Markin 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I wanted to come in for some point of clarification. My respected Hon Colleague, in forcefully making his point, submitted that the people of Nzema land are the original owners of all that resources --
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:15 p.m.
    But are they not?
    Mr Afenyo-Markin 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if the Hon Member had kept quiet for me to advance my point, he would have appreciated it.
    Mr Speaker, what does the Constitution say in terms of ownership of those resources? So we cannot say that they are the original owners and that is the point I want to make. They cannot be the original owners. If we are making the point, we should properly situate them so that students of constitutional law would appreciate and follow so that issues of land law will be properly appreciated.
    Mr Speaker, those resources in the sea cannot be said to be owned by the people of Nzema land as the original owners. That is not correct. That is the point the Hon Member made in support of his argument and I am saying that no --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, your point is well made.
    Mr Mahama Ayariga 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there is some confusion here. The space from the shore to about 20kms as part of the exclusive economic zone is vested in the country by international law.
    This is because it is part of our territory but unoccupied by any particular group of people and so we cannot say that the people who are onshore own all that space below water level. No that is vested in the state by international law and the natural resources there vested in the state by the Constitution. So I do not think that there should be confusion.
    Mr Speaker, I think that what this debate reveals is that in categorising the different interests that can exist in land, we have omitted to categorise interest acquired by the state. I think that is what appears to be missing in this architecture of interest acquired by the state which has not be captured.
    This is because upon further reflection and listening to Hon Colleagues, it is not that easy to say that the state has acquired an allodial title because it has taken the allodial title from somebody; compulsory acquisition.
    This is because like he said, under the Constitution, if the state is not going to use that land, the state cannot give it automatically to a third party but must give it back to the original allodial owners which is the general characteristics of any allodial interest.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    You are assuming that the only means by which the state can acquire interest or ownership is by acquisition. If I am an allodial title holder and by agreement, I am paid for, I surrender all my allodial interest to the state, why can the state not hold it? I do not get it?
    Mr Ayariga 1:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, because even for the individual, taken from an allodial owner, he or she does not take allodial interest. He takes a leasehold.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:15 p.m.
    Hon Member, that is where I disagree with you. It is because the current law says so, we are making a new law. If the new law permits the transfer of allodial ownership, it could be done.
    Mr Richard M. K. Quashigah 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am not a lawyer, but to start with, Hon Dafeamekpor raised a concern that the “State” should be deleted, and the Hon
    Deputy Minister for Lands and Natural Resources came in to indicate that “State” ought to remain because the State could hold an allodial title.
    Mr Speaker, I have been trying to make sense out of the whole debate, and I tried to look at the meaning of allodial title. Allodial title constitutes ownership of real property which is independent of any superior landlord. So if it is independent of any superior landlord, and in Ghana the State is the superior landlord, then the argument hold sway that including “State” in this context would be inappropriate. That is why I support the earlier argument raised by Hon Dafeamekpor that it should read “held by a stool, skin, clan, family” et cetera excluding the State because it is the superior landlord.
    According to the definition I found, allodial title is independent of a superior landlord, and I see the State as a superior landlord. This is my layman's argument.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the jurisdiction is based on the common law jurisdiction. As part of the common laws that we have borrowed, there are doctrines that we cannot detract from. We cannot enact a law, with all due respect, that is reprehensible to established norms.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    That is reprehensible to what?
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, a law that is reprehensible to common law doctrines.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    But even in making statute law.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is so. There is a principle which operates in this country. It is that there are no ownerless lands before the white man came. Before they assumed eminent domain over all our lands, every land in the present day Nation State had an owner. Professor Kludze of blessed memory disputed that but he did not succeed.
    So every land, before it was taken over by the State had an original owner. That is why they themselves agreed that there is an interest in land that we could call allodial. This allodial is part of the problems why our courts are replete with land litigations. It is because there are some stools and families who are in court seeking that the reversionary interest they have in some of the acquired lands for 99 years which by the fruition of time has expired should revert to them.
    So when one acquires an interest in land from another who held the initial interest, you cannot acquire all.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    That is my problem with you -- Leasehold. Who says leasehold is the only means of acquiring land? Is it the only means of acquiring land?
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:25 p.m.
    No.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    So why can I not acquire an allodial title?
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the problem is that any acquisition of land that a person undertakes would be reduced into some form of a conveyance.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    Yes, is the conveyance limited only to leasehold?
    Mr Dafeamekpor 1:25 p.m.
    No, Mr Speaker. But I am just citing them as example. That is why I am saying that in all the conveyances that would be drafted in respect of the agreement, even if it is a compulsory acquisition which an Executive Instrument (EI) would be issued in this case, there would always be a reversion, that if the State would not use the property or the land for the purpose for which
    it has acquired the land, the original owners must have the first option of reacquisition.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    Hon Member, you are quoting the Constitution. That was created to say that the State has acquired certain lands. It was intended for a certain purpose. It would no longer be used for that purpose, do not hold it, but give it back to the owners. In many instances, no compensations were paid, and it says even where it was paid, it might be sold to the owner.
    However, if the State acquired the land through purchase or an agreement with the leasehold title granted to it, it does not go back to anybody. You are limiting yourself to the Constitution, but we are making a new law, and the Constitution is not a limit. They were not talking about lands acquired by compulsion.
    We are talking about acquisition of land. If I have allodial interest in a land and the State pays me the proper value for it, the State acquires the allodial title. Nobody should say the State cannot acquire that land. I disagree with that.
    Yes, Hon Ranking Member of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs?
    Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 1:25 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, clause 2 just recognises the various interest in land. This is what it is doing. The allodial title is the highest and ultimate interest in land held by the State, a stool, skin, clan, family or an individual.

    Just take Professor Kludze's Land Law, you would find it there. The Bond of 1844 which gave part of the colony to the whites vested allodial title in the colonial masters. The Christian Borg Castle is a state land. The allodial title in that land is vested in the State. There cannot be a reversionary interest in it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
    Hon Members, I would put the Question.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 2 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 3 -- Customary law freehold
    Mr Banda 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with respect to clause 3, I see that the language of the clause is to the effect that no person could acquire a customary law freehold interest. However, it appears that this is taken from the Constitution and the Constitution makes a distinction between a freehold interest acquired by a citizen and a freehold interest that cannot be acquired by a non-citizen.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would like to refer you to article 266 of the 1992 Constitution. It places emphasis on non-citizens of Ghana. My submission is that, a citizen of Ghana could acquire a customary law freehold interest.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission I read article 266 1:35 p.m.
    “No interest in, or right over, any land in Ghana shall be created which vests in a person who is not a citizen of Ghana a freehold interest in any land in Ghana.” …;
    Mr Speaker, that distinction ought to be made, but it appears clause 3 (2) of the Bill does not make that distinction.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, make reference to the date. How was it proscribed?
    “The acquisition of customary law freehold interest in respect of stool and skin lands has since the 22nd day of August, 1969 been proscribed.”
    Mr Banda 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe it was taken from the 1992 Constitution. Article 266 (3) explicitly says so.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, I beg to read 1:35 p.m.
    “Where, on the twenty-second day of August 1969, any person not being a citizen of Ghana had a freehold interest in or right over any land in Ghana, that interest or right shall be deemed to be a leasehold interest for a period of fifty years at a peppercorn rent commencing from...”
    Mr Speaker, I believe that this is where clause 3 of the Bill was couched from.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Deputy Minister, the Hon Chairman of the Committee said that the Constitution does not bar everybody; it only bars non-Ghanaians from acquiring freehold interest in customary land. So why do you want to bar everybody, apart from non- citizens? --
    Hon Minister, this is a policy document, so it is your policy and I want to understand why -- ?
    Deputy Minister for Lands and Natural Resources (Mr Benito Owusu-Bio): Mr Speaker, I would want a little bit of clarification from the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon Member, he said, the 1992 Constitution, under article 266, a person cannot acquire freehold interest in a customary land, if that person is not a Ghanaian.
    Clause 3 in the Bill does not differentiate between Ghanaians and non-Ghanaians. Indeed, nobody can acquire a customary law freehold interest if you are not a Ghanaian. This is contrary to the Constitution.
    Hon Deputy Minister, why do you want to change it now, 28 years after the Constitution has come into force? Why do you now want to stop Ghanaians from acquiring freehold interests?
    Mr Owusu-Bio 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think you are right. We should revert to what is in the Constitution.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Very well.
    In that case, I would put the Question on that one; we will flag it for us to reconsider and draft the appropriate amendment.
    Mr Banda 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if you would permit me, I would proffer an amendment to subclause (2) of clause
    3.
    Mr Speaker, I would like to insert “by non-citizens” in line 1, after “interest”.
    It would read:
    “The acquisition of customary law freehold interest by non- citizens in respect of stool and skin lands has since the 22nd day of August 1969 been proscribed.”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    So “by non-citizens” would come to the end of line 3. Is that the proposed amendment?
    Mr Banda 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would insert “by non-citizen” in clause 3 (2), line, after “interest”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Very well.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 3 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 4 -- Common law freehold.
    Mr Banda 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there are couple of amendments to clause
    4.
    Mr Speaker, the new rendition is 1:35 p.m.
    “A common law freehold arises from a transaction to which the rules of law generally known as common law are applicable and the common law freehold is…”
    And then paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) would follow.
    Mr Alhassan Suhuyini Sayibu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not think that it is necessary to substitute “it” with what it represents, because it refers to the subtitle, which is “Common law freehold”.
    Mr Speaker, it is self-explanatory. With your permission, I beg to read 1:35 p.m.
    “The common law freehold arises from a transaction to which the rules of law generally known as common law are applicable and it is…”
    Then you list what is applicable; I feel that it would be too repetitive to have the words “common law
    freehold” when the subtitle captures what it is.
    Mr Banda 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if this was normal everyday English Language, “it” would not be appropriate. We are talking about drafting and we repeat in order to achieve better clarity. It is better to be repetitive and to achieve clarity, rather than to be brief and create vagueness in the provision.

    Mr Speaker, so if we read clause 4 well, there is the tendency to confuse it as representing perhaps a transaction, or to confuse it as representing rules of law generally known as the common law.

    So in order to avoid that ambiguity or vagueness, it is rather better to repeat “common law freehold”, rather than leaving it as it is, which would have the tendency of creating ambiguity. It is on the basis of this that I am saying that it is better in terms of clarity to replace “it” with the noun itself, which is “common law freehold interest.”
    Mr Ayariga 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, as the Hon Member indicated, this is a drafting matter, but I have an even more substantive proposal for amendment in clause 4.
    Mr Speaker, if you would recall, we just agreed that the State could also hold allodial interest in land. Unfortunately, in subclause (4) (1b), we said that -- [Interruption] --
    Mr Speaker, clause 4 (1b) reads 1:45 p.m.
    “A common law freehold arises from a transaction to which the rules of law generally known as common law are applicable and it is;
    (b) subject to the jurisdictional and cultural rights of the stool, skin, clan or family which holds the allodial title.”
    Mr Speaker, here, we need to make an amendment to capture the State. This is because we have agreed in principle that the State can also hold allodial interest. So if we take out --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Hon Member, your point is well made, but can we do it one after the other? Let us finish with the proposed amendment offered by the Hon Chairman of the Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee, and when we are done, then we can take your amendment.
    Hon Members, I would first call on the Hon Member for Keta.
    Mr Quashigah 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague in reference to clause 4 indicated that the amendment being proposed by the Hon Chairman of the Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee should not be taken, and I support his position.
    Mr Speaker, with respect to the “it” there, I do not see the clarity that the Hon Chairman of the Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee was making reference to. This is because when we read this statement, the context within which it is stated is very clear. There is no ambiguity whatsoever.
    I do not believe in a situation where we use a phrase when a word could be used, and again, where we use a sentence when a phrase could be used. In repeating “common law freehold”, in itself, it creates noise in the statement. I think that this is very clear. I agree that legally, they have a certain language that they abide by, but this is very common and clear.
    We are talking to ordinary people, so why should we always limit ourselves to legal terms when making
    Mr Quashigah 1:45 p.m.


    laws? The Hon Member talks about grammar, but this is very straightforward.

    Mr Speaker, the “it” there does not change anything. It is very appropriate, it is not ambiguous, and it provides clarity to the clause the way it is. I therefore propose and support that we maintain the “it” instead of adding that wordiness, which in grammar is obviously unwelcomed.
    Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I see what the Hon Chairman of the Constitutional, Legal, and Parliamentary Affairs Committee was trying to do. He was trying to be consistent with what we have been doing; substituting the pronoun for the noun itself.
    Mr Speaker, however, I think that we can cure it. The subject in the second sentence; “it”, refers to the “common law freehold”. If we delete “it”, would it make any difference?
    Mr Speaker, clause 4 reads 1:45 p.m.
    “A common law freehold arises from a transaction to which the rules of law generally known as common law are applicable and it is; (a) of perpetual duration…”
    Mr Speaker, the “it” there introduces the subject “common law”. So if we want the sentence to be one, then we could just delete the “it” and it would still make sense. It is the same thing.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Yes, the Hon Member who proposed the amendment, would it be sufficient to just delete the “it” and not insert the “common law freehold?”
    Mr Banda 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if we delete the “it” as the Hon Member is proposing, in terms of syntax or grammar, it is correct, but we want a better clarity. If we maintain the “it”, that better clarity would be achieved; otherwise, what the Hon Member is proposing is also grammatically right. There is no defect in that, but this is not an everyday English language. This is a language which is understood in a certain context.
    Mr Speaker, I would therefore urge my Hon Colleagues, who are saying that we should rather maintain the “it” rather than deleting it to still bear with me that this is not anything different from what we have been doing so far. It is not a departure from the practice that we have been adopting so far.
    Where we think that the usage of a pronoun would create an ambiguity, it is better to delete that pronoun and substitute that pronoun with the noun itself.
    Mr Speaker, in consonance with what we have been doing so far, I believe that we should do it by deleting the “it” and substituting same with the “common law freehold” interest, which would make a better clarity.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if I get the Hon Chairman for Constitutional, Legal, and Parliamentary Affairs Committee right, he is proposing that we avoid the use of the pronoun “it” and repeat the “common law freehold.”
    Mr Speaker, the rendition as it is does not create any ambiguity. It is very clear. If we would want to go by the drafting rule of not using the pronoun “it”, then we would have to go by the suggestion made by the Hon Ranking Member that we delete “it” entirely from the Bill, and then the meaning would be very clear and unambiguous, and we would achieve the same effect.
    Therefore I support the Hon Ranking Member's amendment that we delete “it” from the sentence and
    the new rendition would be captured as:
    “A common law freehold arises from a transaction to which the rules of law generally known as common law are applicable and it is; (a) of perpetual duration…”
    then the rest would follow. It is very clear and unambiguous, and there is no absurdity. It cannot be interpreted otherwise, apart from the ordinary meaning that would be subscribed to it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Is that agreeable?
    Mr Francis Manu-Adabor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, when we go back to clause 3 (1), it reads: “The customary law freehold is an interest which arises from a transaction under customary law, and it is…” So are we going to delete all the “its”?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Let us retain them. The draftspersons have been insisting that we do not use pronouns, but in this case, I do not think that it causes any harm.
    Hon Member for Bawku Central, now you may move your amendment?
    Mr Ayariga 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in clause 2, we took a position that the state can hold allodial interest. So I
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Is it “State” or “the State”?
    Mr Ayariga 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is “the State”. So it is further amended by the insertion of “the” before “State”. [Interruption] It is “the State” because “the” is already there before “State” is inserted.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Very well.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Are you speaking against his proposed amendment?
    Alhaji Sayibu 1:55 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker. I find a problem with the proposal because clause 4(1)(b) also speaks of jurisdictional and cultural rights being subject to whatever will take place. Now, if we insert “State”, are we going to say that we have to consider some jurisdictional and cultural rights of the State also in this case?
    This is because we are talking about jurisdictional and cultural rights of the stool, skin, clan or family. How does it relate in the case of the State of Ghana? With cultural rights, are we going to say, subject to the cultural right of Ghana? I think that it would make the phrasing problematic.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if care is not taken, whatever happened in clause 2 would haunt us throughout the Bill. If “State” is introduced in subclause (b), how would Ghanaians be able to inherit the title from the State? This is because if you look at clause 4(1)(d), it says, “inheritable and alienable”. So if the State has allodial interest, how am I going to inherit?--
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    You can alienate that interest -- it can be alienated to you.
    Mr Ahiafor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, but with inheritance, how am I going to inherit that as a citizen? However, if I

    am a member of a stool, clan or family that holds allodial interest in land, I can inherit that particular interest. So the State's allodial title, how can I inherit it quite apart from the issue being raised about the cultural and jurisdictional issues of a State?

    So Mr Speaker, if “State” is introduced here, then we should consider a possibility of inheriting the allodial interest of a State.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    We can just replace “and” with “or”, so it is alternative. There are things that are not practicable because nobody can inherit the State, but the State can alienate its title, so it gives room for the alternatives.
    Alhaji Sayibu 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, even that, I stand to be corrected that the State inherits itself by way of succession. When a Government takes over, it inherits both liabilities and assets. That is why I said that I state for contestation because my assumption is that when there is a succeeding Government, it inherits all liabilities and assets.
    Also, since the land is held in trust on behalf of the people of Ghana, the outgoing Government hands over, which is inherited by the incoming Government.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    The problem is that “the Government's” are not the State but they are managers of the State. However, if you change the “and” to “or”, then you can either have both or one.
    Hon Ayariga, I want to do this and then I would adjourn because it is past 2 o'clock. I want us to be sure on your proposed amendment, the insertion of “the State”.
    Mr Owusu-Bio 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you very much. I think that we can do it this way so that at least, we would solve the problem we have at hand. So I would want to propose this new amendment to clause 4(b):
    “subject to the interest of the State, the jurisdictional and cultural rights of the stool, skin, clan or family which holds the allodial title”.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Subject to the interest of the State.
    Yes, Hon Ayariga?
    Mr Ayariga 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was going to propose that same amendment, based on the argument made by Hon Sayibu because we cannot relate cultural and jurisdictional rights to the State per se. So it means that the interest of the State must stand
    Mr Ahiafor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, before you put the Question on clause 4, I want to be clear on subclause (c). I want to ask the Hon Chairman of the Committee how we can have a common law freehold from a State interest which will be free from obligation to any other person?
    You are deriving the title from the State and how can the common law freehold title you are deriving from the State be free from any obligation?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    What other obligation would there be if you have acquired a freehold interest?
    Mr Ahiafor 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, let us take it that the State has acquired a land compulsorily and is further going to grant that particular land to you. All the grants from the State that I have read go with terms and conditions.
    Here lies the case that we are making a law and introducing a “State” here but again saying that the grant
    that would be taken from the State should be free from any other obligations.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Then it would not be a freehold you are acquiring from the State. You keep confusing what is happening with what we are thinking. What is happening is leasehold with terms and conditions. If the State decides to give you a freehold of the Castle, it is freehold and that is it.
    If it decides that it is a lease, then it will give terms and conditions. We should not confuse what is happening now which is based on the current law with what we are envisaging.
    Mr Dafeamekpor 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am with you but we already have a system of laws that we operate with. Even if it is a freehold grant, it would come with conditions. Maybe, you are acquiring the land for a purpose like building a school. It has to be stated.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    That is land use and it comes with a different -- we are talking about ownership and it would be free from
    encumbrance. How you use it would be subject to the laws of the land, the local area and so on and it is not an encumbrance to your ownership.
    Mr Banda 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is just a consequential amendment with respect to clause 4(2), which deals with the “common law freehold interest”, the acquisition of which is being prescribed irrespective of the nationality of the acquirer. As we did a few minutes ago, I would want to propose an amendment --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, I would give the consequential instructions to the draftspersons.
    Clause 4 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    The draftspersons are directed to insert “by non-Ghanaians” in clause 4 (2), as contained in the Constitution.
    Hon Members, I thought we could, at least, do the first eight clauses which do not have advertised amendments but we cannot because land is an emotional matter, so we should allow people time and space to debate it.
    That therefore brings us to the end of the Consideration Stage of the Land Bill, 2019, for today.
    ADJOURNMENT 2:05 p.m.