Debates of 13 Aug 2020

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 11:16 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 11:16 a.m.
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Hon Members, Corrections of Votes and Proceedings of Wednesday, 12th August, 2020.
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Hon Members, item listed 3 -- At the Commencement of Public Business, Presentation of Papers. Item numbered 4(a), by the Learned Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice.
Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
Majority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu) 11:16 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to lay the document on
behalf of the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice.
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Hon Majority Leader, you may.
PAPERS 11:16 a.m.
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Hon Members, item numbered 4(b) -- Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee on Health? Is there a Member of the Committee, who can present the Paper?
rose
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member? -- Is it not ready? --
All right, thank you very much.
Hon Members, item numbered 4(c), Report of the Finance Committee.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:16 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman of the Finance Committee is on his way; he is not here yet. We also have to do a lot of Motions and Resolutions, most of them standing in the name of the Finance Committee.
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Hon Member, which Motion? Is it Motion numbered as 5?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:16 a.m.
Mr Speaker, many of the Motions are in the name of the Hon Chairman of the Finance Committee. There is one that is jointly sponsored by the Chairmen of the Finance and Defence and the Interior Committees, but none of them is here yet. That being the case --
Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman of the Finance Committee is moving into the Chamber now, so we could listen to him. If they are ready with some of the documents, we could go on.
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Hon Chairman of the Finance Committee, are you in the position to take item listed 4(c)(i)?
Chairman of the Finance Committee (Dr Mark Assibey- Yeboah) 11:16 a.m.
Mr Speaker, items numbered 4(c) (i) and (ii) are not ready. We could take items listed 4(c) (iii) and (iv).
Mr Speaker 11:16 a.m.
Thank you very much.
Hon Members, item listed 4(c)(iii).
By the Chairman of the Committee --
(iii) Request for waiver of Income Taxes amounting to one hundred and seventy-four million, six hundred and ninety-six thousand, seven hundred and twelve Ghana cedis and fifty pesewas (GH¢174,696,712.50) on personal emoluments of Health Workers and on additional allowances paid to Frontline Health Personnel for the months of July 2020, August 2020 and September
2020.
(iv) Report of the Finance Committee on the Commu- nication Service Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2020.
Mr Speaker 11:26 p.m.
Yes, Hon Majority Leader, where do we go from here?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe we could take the Motion numbered as item 9.

item listed 9, Motion.

Hon Chairman?
MOTIONS 11:26 p.m.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 11:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we have to take the Motions listed as 9 and 11 together.
Mr Speaker 11:26 p.m.
Hon Chairman, you may please go on; Motions 9 and 11 together.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 11:26 p.m.
I beg to move, that this honourable House adopts the Report of the Finance Committee on the Loan Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Finance) and Israel Discount Bank Limited for an amount of seventy-four million, one hundred and twenty thousand United States dollars (US$74,120,000.00 [inclu- ding ASHRA's Premium of US$6,120,000.00]) to finance the supply of Armoured Vehicles to the Government of Ghana;
AND 11:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker 11:26 p.m.
Thank you very much. Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Richard Acheampong (NDC -- Bia East) Mr Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to second the Motions moved by the Chairman of the Finance Committee —
Minority Chief Whip (Alhaji Mohammed Mubarak Muntaka) 11:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yesterday, the dis- cussion with the Minister for Defence and the Leadership was to do this in Close Sitting. As in time past, some of the military supplies were discussed in Close Sitting.
I know a number of issues that would be raised by some Hon
Members, and in my view, those issues do not need to be in the public domain so -- [Interruption] -- they are accountability issues. Mr Speaker, per the discussions, in my view, and as discussed with the Minister for Defence yesterday, it is best we do it in Close Sitting so that we could freely raise the issues.
I do not think it would be good to raise those issues in the glaring eyes of everybody, but if we choose as a House that we could go ahead, fine. Yesterday, some of the issues were raised with the Minister for Defence and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration and they all agreed that we should do this in Close Sitting. I was surprised that we chose to do this in the open. Unless if we are indeed aware, we could go ahead and whatever the issues, people could raise them, but I would prefer that like we have done in some time past, these are accoutrements for our military and it is not best discussed in the open Chamber.
I thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we had some discussions yesterday; unfortunately, the Minority Chief Whip was not in the Chamber. We had the discussion with the Deputy Minority Leader, and indeed, the Minority Leader agreed with us
that we fashion a way because the Reports have already been distributed anyway. And we said if there are any matters we could raise subsequently, we would raise them.
We have an arrangement because some of them, we may even have to seek direct answers from not only the Minister, but some of the Generals. So we said to ourselves that we would manage the discourse which is why we said yesterday that it was just going to be the Ranking Members for Committees on Defence and Interior and Finance and the Leadership. Mr Speaker, that was the discussion that we had with Minority Leader and the Deputy Minority Leader. As I said, the Minority Chief Whip was not around, and I would have thought that, maybe, the communication would have gone to him which is why before we started, I asked the Deputy Majority Whip to see him so that we conform to that agreement.
Mr Speaker, that is it; if anybody wants to go outside the arrangement and make his own thing, it is left with the person, but this is the arrangement we had amongst ourselves yesterday and I believe the Hon Members who are here would respect the format that
we agree on ourselves. The Hon Agalga is here, and I called to even personally engage him and so on.
Mr Speaker, but these are critical issues. We can have a platform to deal with them because all of us acknowledge the fact that there should be civilian control over the security forces and they should respond adequately to us, so that is the agreement and I believe that we could proceed.
Mr Speaker 11:36 a.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Majority Leader, we will proceed to discuss. I just want us to note that in all democracies, matters relating to foreign relations, national security and defence are regulated in a certain way. In this connection, I, as the referee here, will ensure that we do not go overboard. If anybody decides to go overboard, I will keep the discussion on track because matters regarding military power and issues cannot be toyed with and it is not done anywhere.
I will advise that we show maturity and that we are capable of appreciating these matters. If there is any feeling that this is not being appreciated, it is my duty to ensure that the right thing is done. So, Hon Members, do apply your own
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as I said, Hon Richard Acheampong is on his feet and you could begin with him.
Mr Speaker 11:36 a.m.
He was actually on his feet.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Richard Acheampong (NDC -- Bia East) 11:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much, once again, for
the opportunity to second the Motions moved by the Hon Chairman to approve a loan facility of US$74,120,000.00 and a commercial agreement of US$12,000,000.00 to procure armoured vehicles for our security services. In this case, we are referring to the Ghana Armed Forces.
Mr Speaker, as you rightly said, many of the issues border on our national security, so we need to know how to deal with those issues. We raised a lot of issues at the Committee level. We requested the unit costs among others; and some of the items cannot be shared in the public domain. However, clearly, as a House, at all times, we have to make sure that there is value for money for anything that we do for our dear nation.
We were told at the Committee that they would procure 8x8 armoured vehicles, 6x6 armoured vehicles and other ammunition to deal with our internal security. At the Committee, we asked them if these armoured vehicles would be used for peacekeeping operations. We were told that, as we spoke, they were procuring these armoured vehicles for our internal security against external attacks, terrorism among others.
When the need arises however, and either the United Nations or any other
body requires us to support any international peacekeeping operation, because these vehicles are fit for purpose, they can be used. So, in this case, we need to augment the fleet of vehicles we have for national security, so that they can also deal with our internal security as well as external attacks from other aggressors among others.
Mr Speaker, if you look at the course component that they gave us, as we said, there are certain things we cannot share in the public domain. So, as a Committee, the only thing we are praying for is that there should be value for money, so that we would know that we are spending so much and are getting so much for it as regards the amount of money we are spending to procure these armoured vehicles for our security personnel.
In terms of security issues, we cannot segregate New Patriotic Party (NPP) and National Democratic Congress (NDC) and say that I do not belong to this party or the other party. It affects our entire lives, so we need to take security matters very seriously. It does not mean that taking matters seriously, we would not ask for value for money. We need to ensure quality of the equipment that we are procuring and their ability to stand the
test of time, so that we can make sure that, going forward, even if we are going to procure another armoured vehicle or ammunition, we would know the stock that we have and can augment them.
It is not like we are just throwing money around, because we are taking loan facilities for this purpose. The insurance facility for even the US$74 million that we are taking is US$6,120,000. It is a very expensive facility that we are taking, so whatever we are getting from it must stand the test of time, so that God forbid, in case of any aggression, we would know that our men in uniform would be in a better position to protect our sovereign nation. Also, when we go to sleep, we know that there are people out there who would give us the needed protection that, as a sovereign State, we require from them.
Mr Speaker, we cannot joke with security issues. I support the Motion and call on other Hon Members to raise the critical issues. I thank God that the Minister for Defence is here and he would take all those issues on board. He even told us that we can look at the cost of those armoured vehicles in Switzerland to compare with what they are quoting to us and see if we are getting value for money.
Mr Anthony Effah (NPP -- Asikuma/Odoben/Brakwa) 11:46 a.m.
Mr Speaker, this is a very important request before the House to provide equipment for our Armed Forces. The funding is 100 per cent provided for the purchase of these equipment for the Ghana Armed Forces. We are confronted with some potential threats along the borders and we understand that this is going to improve our security situation at the borders.
Mr Speaker, at the Committee meeting, all relevant questions were
asked and information that was not provided in the Memorandum to Parliament was supplied by the Minister to the Chairman and then it was also perused by the Ranking Member. So, we presume that any information that should not come to the public domain is already known by the Chairman and the Ranking Member, therefore, we presume that it is also known to the House.
Going through the financing documents, I realised that there was a special condition that was provided under the terms. The special condition was that the financing agreement has no link to the commercial agreement. Ordinarily, when we do this, the two are connected, but there was a special condition to separate them.
What that means is that should there be any default on the part of suppliers or even on us, not to ensure we get what we need, the financing would still have to be paid. So, whether we get the equipment into Ghana or not, the moneys must be paid according to the special condition. This is a good observation I thought I should bring up to the attention of the Hon Minister for Defence. I am sure he saw it and he knows about it, so that we do not pay money when we do not have the items with us. Extended due diligence could enhance what we need because the
value-for-money issues would all be addressed.
Mr Speaker, with these few words I support the Motion.
Mr James Agalga (NDC -- Builsa North) 11:46 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the Motion.
Mr Speaker, in doing so, I want to invite you to make a definitive pronouncement on a matter that was thoroughly debated yesterday. The Hon First Deputy Speaker was in the Chair but at the conclusion of the debate, I was not too sure about the position of the House. The issue had to do with value-for-money audit. Yesterday, when a loan agreement was presented before this House in the form of a Motion, the issue of value-for-money audit came to the fore.
It appears in times past, this House had occasion to make some pronouncements that when loan agreements of this nature came before the House, they should be accompanied with value-for-money audit but some arguments were made to the contrary that value for money audit were supposed to be done at the ministerial level. The counter argument was that if Parliament had
to perform its oversight mandate well, we should be in the position to carry out our own value-for-money audits.
Mr Speaker, giving the fact that decisions given by the Chair do not bind on successive Parliaments because they only serve as a guide, maybe, we should have another definitive pronouncement on this subject so that we could all be guided in moving forward.
Mr Speaker, having said that there is no gain say that we need to sufficiently equip and retool our Armed Forces to defend the territorial integrity of our country, especially, at a time when there are several emerging threats such as terrorism and so on. So, the procurement that is about to be made is in the best interest of our country but we need to take the value-for-money issues very seriously.
Mr Speaker, the Ghana Armed Forces intends to establish new units. They made it very clear that a new armoured unit and training school would be established at Sunyani and another one in Tamale in the Northern Region and that would compel them to acquire the new armoured vehicles to start those new units. The time has come for us to begin to expand our Armed Forces, so the new recce units would be handy.
Mr Fuseini Issah (NPP -- Okaikoi North) 11:46 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to support the Motion.
Mr Speaker, every Ghanaian would be happy that the Government has thought about the security of the nation, giving what has happened within the sub-region.
Mr Speaker, in literature available everywhere, especially, on the internet about security situation in the sub- region, it behoves us as a nation to be up and doing to be able to guard our land borders giving what has happened in our neighbouring countries, especially, within the Sahelian Region. With the current activities that happen within the region, their ultimate aim is to get access to the sea so they could promote their nefarious activities.
Mr Speaker, I had the opportunity to visit Burkina Faso last year and I learnt that about half of the nation was not under the central government because of the activities of terrorists and other outlawed organisations. With these happening in the northern borders, we need to take steps to guard and ensure that these activities
do not come down south to affect the activities within our jurisdiction.
Mr Speaker, the House has to support and we have shown from comments so far that we would unanimously support this move. I want to urge us that we should discuss what needs to be discussed in plenary and other issues would have to be taken on the other level.
The Hon Member who spoke before me mentioned the fact that new units would be established by the Ghana Armed Forces but these units have not been able to be operationalised because they do not have the requisite tools to get them up and running.
Mr Speaker, with these words I support this Motion, so that we could acquire these tools to enable the new units stationed in Tamale and Sunyani to be up and running to be able to guard better our territorial areas.
Mr Speaker, I thank you.
Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC -- Asawase) 11:56 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the Motion.
Mr Speaker, as we have all agreed that matters that have to do with our military we are very sensitive issues
and therefore, as much as possible, we should try to be mindful of our comments in a way that it does not undermine our national security. In doing so too, we should also be mindful of accountability on our part as Hon Members of Parliament to be able to hold the military accountable in whatever endeavour they pursue.
Mr Speaker, one of the most important issues that I want to raise is the issue of the value for money. A number of times in this House, we have said that we would approve loan agreements subject to the value for money so that details would later be brought to the House but many times after it is done, we never get to hear from the Ministry again.
Mr Speaker, in the concluding part of the Committee's Report, this was stated about why most of the details were usually not put out in the public domain. I agree; those of us who have been in this House for long would attest to the fact that there have been instances where we had to do this in Close Sitting. However, the issue of the value for money is very important so that we would be sure that we get these equipment at cost not detrimental to our state.
Mr Speaker, secondly, there is an amount of US$12.5 million that has
been lumped up and even at the Committee meeting, it came up that it needs to be segregated so that we would know the cost lines. This is because they are about seven items, which were indicated in the Report as “training''.

M r Speaker, when we asked for the detai l s, we were told that i t i ncl uded warranty, spare parts package, field trials and acceptance, and support for practical training. There were about seven items.

M r Speaker, i t is important that these items are properly listed with the associated costs so that we would be able to know how much would go to each par t of thi s act i v i ty or programme instead of just lumping them together with one heading and then providing a verbal or some details that do not indicate how each and every one of them costs.

M r Speaker, I hope when the Hon M i ni ster f or Def ence gets the opportunity to speak, he may be able to give us the line items that add up to the US$12.5 mill ion so that, at least, w e know ex act l y the costs of individual items which build up to that amount.
Majority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu) 11:56 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to make a few observations and remarks about the Report before us.
Mr Speaker, this is a Report from the Committee on Finance on the Finance Agreement. We are not there yet into the Contract Agreement. Looking at the Finance Agreement, what should be our concerns?
Mr Speaker, our concerns as a House should relate to, first of all, the object; what the amount that we are contracting is meant for. The object of the loan, we are told, is to secure funding to procure armoured vehicles and ammunitions for the Ghana Armed Forces. The amount involved in this case is US$74, 120,000.00 which is from an ASHRA facility. It comes with another component which is a commercial loan of US$12 million.
Mr Speaker, the concern for us at this stage, as I have indicated, is to relate to the total cost involved, and as I keep saying, the terms and conditions of the agreement of the facility should concern us now. What should also concern us would be the effect generally of this loan agreement on the economy.
How we intend to pay back and so on should be the concern of this House. It is the reason Hon Members have raised issues relating to value- for-money. That is legitimate but to go to source countries and the dictates about what the procurement would go for would relate to the Contract Agreement. So, if there are any observations, we would save that.
Mr Speaker, unfortunately, because the Hon Ranking Member for the Committee on Defence and the
Interior came into the frail, it was made to appear as if we are debating the Contract Agreement. We are not there yet.
Mr Speaker, having said so, I believe the terms and conditions of the loan facility are favourable and they have been captured on page 4 of the Report to us. If there are issues that we have to interrogate, they relate to Table 1. Thus far, the Hon Members who have spoken before me have expressed comfort in the terms and conditions. They are a commercial facility and it is the reason we needed some due diligence to have been conducted. I keep saying that the House and the Committees have a charge, if they do not have due diligence report from the Ministry, to at least engage experts in the field.
Unfortunately, almost every time, we hit the same hurdle. It is as if the Committee's do not avail themselves of that opportunity which is unfortunate but I think we should come to some conclusion on this as a House. When facilities are brought to the House which are not accompanied by Value-for-Money audit reports, the relevant Committees should seize the opportunity and interrogate same, invite experts and submit them to the experts, at least, for some preliminary study and report to the Committee.
Mr Speaker 11:56 a.m.
Hon Members, order! Is the Hon Minister for Defence inclined to making any remarks?
Mr Nitiwul 12:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I will just thank Hon Members on the Committee on Finance of Parliament and Parliament itself.
In fact, when I was called upon by the Committee to assist them in their deliberation, they were extremely very gracious, civil and cooperative. I will not be doing myself, the Ministry and the people of Ghana any good if I do not acknowledge the way they conducted themselves in this particular loan agreement. They were very sensitive to security matters and the needs of Ghana and the fact that we need to protect ourselves. I need to make that point very loud and clear.
Mr Speaker, after listening to what Hon Members from both Sides of the House have said, it is clear to me that the same sentiments have filtered unto the Floor. I just hope that the same sentiment will filter unto the fourth realm of our governance, which is the Press.
There are several security challenges that keep evolving, especially, that face this nation and so, we need to be very careful of what we let out about what we have.

Mr Speaker, so I would like to thank Hon Members very much. As for value for money, it takes various forms; the Public Procurement Authority, Parliament and the Ministry of Finance will also do value-for-

money audit before, as I have come to experience, the contracts are finally executed and concluded. This is just to give Hon Members the assurance that this top-notch quality equipment that the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) have been looking for, for a very long time and I am glad that Hon Members are very supportive of it.

When it comes to the amounts, types and the specifications, when the Committee itself makes its case and there is a need for clarification, I will. But for now, I just want to thank Hon Members of the Finance Committee for what they have done and the assistance given to the Ministry and to the people of Ghana and ultimately to the GAF to be able to use it to defend all of us.

Mr Speaker, thank you very much.
Mr Speaker 12:06 p.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Minister.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, respectfully, we may deal with the Motions numbered 10 and 12. I would want to entreat us to allow the Hon Minister for Monitoring and Evaluation to stand in for the Hon Minister for Finance to move the
Motions for the adoption of these Resolutions.
RESOLUTIONS 12:06 p.m.
Dr Mark Assibey-Yeboah 12:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Minister for Monitoring and Evaluation (Dr Anthony Akoto Osei) on behalf of the (Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that
WHEREAS by the provisions of Article 181 of the Constitution and Sections 55 and 56 of the Public Financial Management Act, 2016 (Act 921), the terms and conditions of all government borrowings shall be laid before Parliament and shall not come into operation unless the terms and conditions are approved by a resolution of Parliament in accordance with article 181 of the Constitution;
PURSUANT to the provisions of the said article 181 of the Constitution and sections 55 and 56 of the Public Financial Management Act, 2016 (Act 921), at the request of the
Government of the Republic Ghana acting through the Minister responsible for Finance, there has been laid before Parliament a Commercial Loan Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Finance) and Israel Discount Bank Limited for an amount of twelve million United States dollars (US$12,000,000.00) to finance the supply of Armoured Vehicles to the Government of Ghana.
THIS HONOURABLE HOUSE 12:06 p.m.
HEREBY RESOLVES AS 12:06 p.m.
Dr Mark Assibey-Yeboah 12:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Question put and Motion agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, item numbered 7.
MOTIONS 12:06 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Kwame Seth Acheampong) 12:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move that this honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee on Defence and Interior on the Contract Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Defence) and Elbit Systems Land Limited of Israel for an amount of eighty million United States dollars (US$80,000,000.00) for the supply of Armoured Vehicles to the Government of Ghana.
Mr Speaker, in so doing, I beg to present the Committee's Report.
Mr James Agalga (NDC -- Builsa North) 12:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to support the Motion. As I earlier observed, the loan Agreement is aimed at equipping the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) to be able to perform its traditional mandate of defending our territorial integrity to the best of its ability. So, one cannot, but to support such an endeavour. At the Committee level, it was made very clear that the GAF intends to establish the 154 and 155 armoured units which would be based in Tamale and Sunyani respectively to aid the operations of our army in the light of emerging security threats that we have on our northern frontier.
Mr Speaker, there are also some challenges on our eastern frontier and
so, it is important that we equip and re-tool our armed forces to be able to protect us.
The Committee has had the occasion to visit the Ministry of Defence and on that occasion, we paid courtesy calls on the Air Force, Navy and Army and so, we are very much privy to the challenges that confront them. It is very important that when Agreements of this nature comes before us, we refrain from the usual politicking and put all hands on deck and support a national cause.
Mr Speaker, having said that, we made a very quick observation that we have to re-tool and equip our armed forces but a conscious effort should be made to reduce the visibility of our armed forces in civil operations, unless of course , it is very compelling . We must restrict them to the performance of their traditional mandate of defending our territorial integrity. On that note, I wish to call on all to support the Motion.
Mr Speaker 12:16 p.m.
Thank you very much, Hon Member. Leadership?
Minority Chief Whip (Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka) 12:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to support the Motion. I would also like to say that
most of the comments earlier made, equally affect this Report. So, I would not virtually have to go into detail, except to say that on looking at paragraph 6.2 of the Report, which has been titled -- Value for Money and Transparency of Purchase.
The caveat given is that the Ministry of Finance has tried to do due diligence or the value for money assessment by itself. Mr Speaker, this cannot be tenable and we know that the Ministry of Finance cannot do that and so as a matter of fact, we need to get the real value for money assessment.
In relation to this, the Hon Majority Leader talked about the budget that would enable Parliamentary Committees to engage experts and consultants to assist in considering referrals and reports. Mr Speaker, considering the volume of work that has been referred to the Finance Committee for the past three weeks, it goes without saying that we are virtually on their heels to generate Reports hurriedly.
So, what time would they have to engage a consultant to assist them? If we really want our Committees to work diligently, we would need to give them ample time because no consultant or expert would receive a document that he is expected to peruse
Mr Speaker 12:16 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader?
Majority Leader (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu) 12:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to make a brief comment on this Report and to urge Hon Colleagues to adopt this Report and approve of the request from the Ministry of Defence.
Mr Speaker, we were informed that the rationale for this Facility is that currently, there is a threat of terrorism and other land-border threats from neighbouring countries in the sub- region, particularly, from up north.
Mr Speaker, we are told that these armoured vehicles that the nation wants to procure are suitable for all terrains. We are told that the last time that the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) procured such vehicles was about 10 years ago and the urgent need has arisen because of the circumstances of our times, to ensure that we purchase these not only for the Ghana Armed Forces to engage in combats or peacekeeping but to also allow them to train on modern equipment. Usually, the armoured vehicles are known by their operational efficiency. The manoeuvrability of the vehicle is what the GAF would look out for. Also, the rigidity or robustness of the vehicles are the typical features that
the GAF look for. As for the source of the procurement, we all know that, certainly, Israel possess the wherewithal and the competence to manufacture some of the best armoured vehicles in the whole world. Israel is one of three countries that manufacture the best of these facilities. So, I have no doubt in my mind that this is purpose-fit.
Mr Speaker, having said so, I agree with the Hon Minority Chief Whip about the fact that we need to afford time and space to the various Committees when referrals are made so that if on own their they have to engage experts and consultants, they would have enough time to do so. Mr Speaker, in Parliament, there is never enough time for anything and that is why we really count on the competence of Parliament as an institution and the individual Hon Members of Parliament.
Yet, we all acknowledge that it is not possible for every Hon Member on a Committee to be an expert on his own. Sometimes when referrals are made to Committees, they sit on it because of course they would be inundated with business. What a Committee that has so many assignments would have to do is to form subcommittees and refer these matters to them. This is what the
Mr Speaker 12:16 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader, thank you very much. I do not know whether the Hon Minister for Defence may want to make a few remarks.
Mr Nitiwul 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, as I said earlier, I was given a similar treatment by the Committee on Defence and Interior. They were very cooperative and very supportive of the activities of the Armed Forces to enable them protect and defend this nation against aggressors and people.
However, the value for money audit is done by the Ministry of Finance. Largely, this nation uses Crown Agents, which is a United Kingdom- based company to do a lot of our value for money audits, and they do it through the Ministry of Finance. If the Committee reports that the Ministry of Finance would do the value for money audit, it is not the Ministry itself that they are talking about but the Crown Agents or any other agency chosen by the Ministry of Finance to
do that audit. It has always been done. I has been done for the last 15 to 20 years by Crown Agents for us.
The assurance I would want to give this nation is that, this armoured vehicles which are being procured are some of the best we could find in the world, and they would be used appropriately. In fact, they are comparable to the Muax that were bought in the 1970s, and they served this nation faithfully for more than 30 years, and some of them are still in use.
The setup of this loan and the structure of this sales would enable the Ghana Armed Forces use these vehicles for more than 30 years. The vehicles would not be used for peace keeping purposes. These vehicles are to be used to defend the nation and to serve as a piece of equipment that would deter anybody attempting to destabilise either inside or from outside the nation.
So Mr Speaker, the Ghana Armed Forces have been looking for these equipment as I said earlier for a very long time. Finally, this nation has, through this Government, reequipped them with these type of equipment.
I would say kudos to all of us and congratulate Parliament. I would
thank leadership and you, Mr Speaker as well, for what you are doing for this nation through the Armed Forces.
Mr Speaker, I would again assure the nation and Parliament especially of the concern raised by Hon Minority Leader that the Armed Forces of this nation are neutral and would continue to be neutral. They are for the people and they would serve the people and continue to serve the State. They are loyal to the State and they are neutral in their activities. I do not believe that there is any Government that can ever use the Armed Forces for nefarious activities.
Mr Speaker, as I said earlier, it is imperative for the Ghana Armed Forces to set up an Armoured Regiment in the northern part of Ghana, particularly in Tamale because the current threats of this nation especially of terrorism comes from that side. But that is not to say that the threats cannot come from any part of the country. The Armed Forces are ready and prepared and are being prepared to defend us in any path; whether by sea, air or by land or even by space. This this Government would continue to reequip and modernise the Ghana Armed Forces to defend us at any time so that this nation would continue to be the oasis of peace that it is.
RESOLUTIONS 12:26 p.m.
Minister for Defence (Mr Dominic B. A. Nitiwul) (MP) 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that
WHEREAS by the provisions of article 181(5) of the Constitution the terms and conditions of any international business or economic transac- tion to which the Government of Ghana is a party shall not come into operation unless the said terms and conditions have been laid before Parliament and approved by Parliament by a Resolution supported by the
votes of a majority of all Members of Parliament;
PURSUANT to the provisions of the said article 181(5) of the Constitution, and at the request of the Government of Ghana acting through the Minister responsible for Defence, there has been laid before Parliament the terms and conditions of a Contract Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Defence) and Elbit Systems Land Limited of Israel for an amount of eighty million United States dollars (US$80,000,000.00) for the supply of Armoured Vehicles to the Government of Ghana.
THIS HONOURABLE HOUSE 12:26 p.m.
HEREBY RESOLVES AS 12:26 p.m.
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Kwame Seth Acheampong) 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Resolved accordingly.
Mr Speaker 12:26 p.m.
Hon Members, indeed, as the Hon Majority Leader was speaking regarding our committee work, this is one of the reasons we are coming to the provision in our Standing Orders, that Hon Members would now belong to one committee so that we do not move about, and with the hope that it would allow us to concentrate on special areas and adopt more efficiency in those areas and sharpen our performance. It is important once more to draw your attention to our own Order 194 for the future. Standing Order 194 reads:
“194. Any Committee may, if it deems fit, appoint a Sub- Committee and assign to it such of its functions as the Committee considers fit.”
In future, it would be important for Hon Members to consider this. At the end of every exercise, the decision would be one of the Committee as a whole and the responsibility that
emanates therefrom and so on. These are areas that we must develop for the future improvement of the work in this honourable House. Thank you very much.
Hon Majority Leader, the next item.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we can now do item numbered 4(b).
Mr Speaker 12:26 p.m.
Item numbered 4(b), Hon Chairman of the Committee on Health?
PAPERS 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker 12:26 p.m.
Yes, Hon Majority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, item numbered 22.
Mr Speaker 12:26 p.m.
Item numbered 22, the Hon First Deputy Speaker may please take the Chair.
Mr Speaker 12:26 p.m.
Hon Members, item numbered 22, Development Finance Institutions Bill, 2020 at the Consideration Stage.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 12:26 p.m.
STAGE 12:26 p.m.
Chairman of the Finance Committee (Dr Mark Assibey- Yeboah) 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yesterday, we winnowed clause 74 and so I think we have agreed to what is on the Order Paper and I would move those amendments.
Clause 74 -- Appointment of an auditor
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, subclause (2), paragraph (a), after “institution”, insert “before the first annual general meeting”. Mr Speaker, it would read:
“the first auditor of the development finance institution before the first annual general meeting.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, subclause (2), paragraph (b), opening phrase, line 2, at end, add “a new auditor is appointed at an annual general meeting”.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would read 12:26 p.m.
“an auditor to act in place of the auditor who is for any reason unable or unwilling to act until a new auditor is appointed at an annual general meeting.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, subclause (2), paragraph (b), subparagraphs (i) and (ii), delete.
12.41 --
MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we have moved the subparagraph (i) to join the concluding parts of line 2 of paragraph (b) and subparagraph (ii) is deleted.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, subclause (7), delete and insert the following:
“Despite subsections (1) and (2), where a development finance institution fails to appoint an auditor, the Bank of Ghana shall appoint an auditor for the development finance institution and order the submission of a report within three months after the development finance institution commences operation or within three months into a new financial year, as the case may be.”
Where the Bank of Ghana is dissatisfied with a report of an auditor appointed by a development finance institution, the Bank of Ghana shall appoint a new auditor and order the submission of a new report within the period determined by the Bank of Ghana.”
Mr Speaker, this is a result of the winnowing of last night and we arrived at this beautiful rendition.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:26 p.m.
Hon Seth Acheampong and Hon Agalga of the Committee on Defence and Interior, continue your discussion outside.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, a further amendment to what I just moved. In line 3 of the second paragraph, we want to delete “order” and insert “request”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my attention has been drawn to the fact that there is a consequential amendment in the first paragraph in line 4.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:46 p.m.
Clause 74 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
We finished with clauses 79 and 80 yesterday, did we not?
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yes we did. They have been advertised in the Order Paper in error. We are on clause 85.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:46 p.m.
Very well.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 85, subclause (1), paragraph (b), delete “matter” and insert “information” So that paragraph 9(b) would now read:
“…any other information that the Bank of Ghana may require.”
Mr Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity. May I find out from the Hon Chairman, whey he is deleting “matter” and replacing same with “information”?
Mr Speaker, for me, it does not really make any difference. So, he needs to justify why he wants to rely on “information” instead of “matter”.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, if the Hon Member reads the preamular, he would find that in line 2, it states:
“…submit any information or data…”
So, in paragraph 9(b), it should be “any other information”. This flows from the preambular.
Mr Richard Acheampong 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, yesterday we met and discussed clause 74 -- [Interruption] -- Mr Speaker, the last part, we did not want to --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:46 p.m.
Hon Member, I have called a clause, we have not taken a decision on it. You have arrested the decision, so I thought you wanted to comment on the clause that I called. If you have another matter on another clause, kindly let us finish with this one, then I would allow you to come in.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, though I was part of the initial agreement that in clause 85 (b), we should delete “matter” and substitute it with “information”, I think that if you read the preambular of clause 85 (1), perhaps, we do not need to amend subclause (b).
The reason is, clause 85 (1):
“The Bank of Ghana shall, for the purposes of supervision, require a development finance institution to submit any infor- mation or data relating to --
(a) The assets, liabilities, income, expenditure, affairs of the development finance institution; or
When we come to paragraph (b), it is any information relating to any other matter, but not to any other information. So, I feel that we would need to retain the original. Otherwise, it would be conflictual.
Mr Joseph Yieleh Chireh 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the Hon Chairman should withdraw his amendment. It is not necessary, because the information and detailed requests are, for assets and liabilities as listed and then any other matter. And not that we should change “any other matter” to “information”.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the amendment is withdrawn.

Clause 85 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 86 -- Examinations
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 86, paragraph (a), line 1, delete “of” and insert “by”.
So that it reads:
“…evaluation by the Bank of Ghana of micro-prudential and macro-prudential concerns.”
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the principle, but the use of the word “examination”. Maybe, we should have a better technical work.
“The Bank of Ghana shall, carry out examinations of the operations…”
If we want to say, the Bank of Ghana shall supervise or evaluate, but to examine, I have a difficulty with the use of the word “examinations”. Maybe, it should be “oversee”, but to examine, I am not sure we intend to do. Mr Speaker, if you read further:
“The Bank of Ghana shall, carry out examinations of the operations and affairs…”
Operations and affairs are not examined. Mr Speaker, indeed in clause 86(a), the use of the words “evaluation of the Bank of Ghana”. If the Hon Chairman has no objection, I have difficulty with the headnote and the use of the word in the body. But I would yield to any superior word, for example, “oversee”.
Mr Chireh 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minority Leader has no objection to drop the request. [Laughter]
Mr Ben Abdallah Banda 12:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe that we should adopt the Hon Chairman's proposed amendment, because “examination” and “supervision” are completely two different words. If we were to insert “supervision” in place of “exami- nation” that may practically change the intended meaning in the clause.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 86 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 87 -- Investigations or scrutiny.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:46 p.m.
There is no advertised amendment.
Mr Iddrisu 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, “investigation or scrutiny” cannot mean the same thing. Yet, we are using it. So, let us choose. Scrutiny can stand as the headnote.
Mr Speaker, when we go further, with your leave, clause 87 (1), line 2, reads 12:56 p.m.
“…Bank of Ghana may, without prior notice, carry out an investigation or scrutiny into a specific matter of activity or office relating to the affairs of the development finance institution”.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader last week observed that we are competing with other countries to attract this kind of institutions. Now, when we say “without prior notice”, I hope the Bank of Ghana is not going to operate like some secret police that at any time wakes up and says that it is investigating a particular development finance institution.
My first difficulty is the use of the word, “investigation”. Maybe, we could use “scrutiny”; they can scrutinise the activities and operations. I would have wished that the phrase, “without prior notice” was deleted but I am not too sure I would be successful. Why do they want? -- a
bank is a bank, if we want to go to a bank -- because we have said somewhere in this Bill that it would operate and even use the name of a bank. If Bank of Ghana wants to scrutinise the activities of a development finance institution, they should write formally to them and let them be aware but without notice, then, quietly, they are probing it?
Mr Chireh 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the way his argument is going, the important thing is that as for “prior notice”, if the Bank of Ghana is the regulator, at any time, they would go into a bank and do investigation or examine documents so it is not something that is new. Apart from that, this Bill is based on Act 930 which sets up banks and special deposit-taking institutions. It is as the Hon Minority Leader himself said, it is going to operate like a bank; it is just like these other development banks.
So, the issue is that it should be as it is captured because the Bank of Ghana as a regulator, has the authority at any time, to go into any deposit- taking or a bank and do examination or scrutinise some of the things they do.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
So, I will put the Question?
Clauses 87 and 88 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 89 -- Taking custody of records.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 89, subclause (1), lines 5 and 6, delete “records, files or any other documents” and insert “books and records”.
Mr Speaker, we are doing this because further down, we would define “books and records”, which would include all of these.
Mr Iddrisu 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I did not get your attention as I was consulting with the Hon Yieleh Chireh. Even though you have put the Question, clause 88, the first line; “a person”, there —
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, may I suggest that since he has moved a Motion on clause 89 now; let us finish with clause 89 and I will come back to clause 88.
Mr Iddrisu 12:56 p.m.
Thank you Mr Speaker.
Question put and amendment —
Mr Iddrisu 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, on clause 88, and I am sure I would
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we are going back to clause 89, subclause (1), line 5. That is what we are dealing with but I thought before going there, in fact, line 1 of subclause (1), if we look at it, we do not need the words, “who is”. “An official of the Bank of Ghana authorised…” not, “who is authorised…”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
Leader, let us deal with the advertised amendments, after that I will allow you to --
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 89, subclause (2), line 2, delete “that document” and insert “the books and records” and in line 3, delete “document” and insert “books and records”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 89, add the following new subclause:
“For the purpose of subsection (1), “books and records” include documents, minute books, customer files, personnel files, cash and securities and information in an electronic medium.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
Now, Hon Majority Leader, we may listen to your proposed amendment.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I was saying that for clause 89, line 1, “an official of Bank of Ghana who is authorised”, we do not need the “who is” so; we delete the “who is” for it to read:
“An official of Bank of Ghana authorised to carry out an examination or investigation”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Iddrisu 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, probably, that is what the Hon Majority Leader has done so we have to go back to clause 88(1) —
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
I think the Hon Yieleh Chireh had another one on —
Mr Iddrisu 12:56 p.m.
Yes, I have shared it with him. Then, we come to clause 88(4) so consequentially, wherever we —
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
Very well, then, let me put the Question on clause 89.
Clause 89 as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
Clause 88?
Mr Iddrisu 12:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, just for you to give consequential directive to clause 88(1), after “person who is”, then, it travels to subclauses (4), (5) and (6). The words, “who is” be deleted.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:56 p.m.
I direct the draftspersons to effect those changes by deleting “who is” before “authorised” in clause 88 as appropriate.
Clause 90 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 91 -- Examination reports
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 91, subclause (3), line 2, delete “entity” and insert
“development finance institution” and repeat same in subclause (4), line 1 and again, though not advertised, in subclause (1), paragraph (a), and subclause (1), paragraph (b)…..
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 90 (1) (b) says:
“(1)The Bank of Ghana may authorise --
(b) a qualified auditor”.
We do not need the description “qualified”. Then we would come to the closing phase of clause 90 (1) and again, the auditor is qualified. We do not need “qualified” there. We would delete the same thing as in clause 90 (1) (b).
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Iddrisu 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like your guidance. I generally agree with clause 90 but under “Verification of information”, I have seen,
“(1)The Bank of Ghana may authorise
(b) a qualified auditor or
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 92, subclause (2), line 1, delete “entity” and insert development finance institution” and repeat same in subclause (3), line 1.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 92 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 93 -- Remedial measures
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 93, subclause (2), opening phrase, delete and insert the following: “The Bank
of Ghana may, in furtherance of subsection (1)”.
Mr Speaker, what we have here is “Pursuant to subsection (1), the Bank of Ghana may”. We want to begin the clause with the subject, “The Bank of Ghana” and then “in furtherance of subsection (1)”.
Mr Chireh 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not understand what he is saying because “pursuant to” is to say that because of subsection (1). Then he says he will delete “pursuant to” and say “in furtherance of”. What is “in furtherance of”? It is “pursuant to” and not “in furtherance of”. The amendment is not necessary.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that we have to maintain the amendment. One, we are making “The Bank of Ghana” the subject. These are the same people who have always argued that we should make the entity the subject, so we are making the Bank of Ghana the subject. So, “in furtherance of” does not change anything, flowing from subclause (1). So, “The Bank of Ghana” is the subject.
Mr Jabanyite 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the issue raised by Hon Chireh is about the use of the preposition “of” but I have checked and realised that we can either say “in
furtherance to” or “in furtherance of” and it still carries the same meaning. So, we should allow the amendment to stand.
Mr Chireh 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I said that if you want to say, “The Bank of Ghana”, you can bring “The Bank of Ghana” first and say, “The Bank of Ghana may pursuant to subsection (1)” and not in “furtherance of”. That is what I said. I agree with the first part but not with changing “pursuant to”. The phrase “pursuant to” is in relation to that one.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, so he wants the amendment to read, “The Bank of Ghana may pursuant to subsection (1)”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:06 a.m.
So, which one? Is it “pursuant to” or “in furtherance of”?
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:06 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it is “The Bank of Ghana may pursuant to”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 93, subclause
(2), paragraph (d), line 1, delete “the affirmative” and insert “any”.
Mr Speaker, clause 93 (d) reads 1:16 p.m.
“The Bank of Ghana may pursuant to subsection (1)
(d) take the affirmative action”.
Mr Speaker, we do not know what “affirmative action'' is in this circumstance. So, it should be:
“take any action that it considers necessary to eliminate the grounds order”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 93, subclause 3, paragraph (g), line 2, delete “restricting'' and insert “restrict'' and do same in paragraph (h), line 3.
The new rendition would read:
“A remedial action under paragraph (b) of subsection (2), may include any of the following:
(g) suspend or remove from office the Chief Executive Officer of the development finance institution or
Mr Iddrisu 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to propose amendments to clause 93.
Mr Speaker, with your permission, I beg to quote 93 (1), which says 1:16 p.m.
“Where the Bank of Ghana determines, after an examina- tion…”
Mr Speaker, in my view, the word “determine'', should come after “an examination”.
Mr Speaker, my second observa- tion is that the words, “at the disposal'', in line 2, is an ordinarily straight language, so it should not be added after the word “information''. When the Bank of Ghana has information, it is qualified with the words “at its disposal'', as if it is an oral communication. Again, at your
directive, the word “determined'', should be properly placed by the draftsperson.
Mr Speaker, my third observation is that the last line of subclause 3, paragraph (b), should be; “the Bank of Ghana determines has resulted'' and not “the bank of Ghana determines has caused''. The word “caused'', should be substituted for the word “resulted''. A causative action results in a consequence, so when we say “has caused'', it means “has resulted into material losses”.
Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I beg to move the above amendments.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Minority Leader, has packed one basket with too many ingredients. He should go one after the other, so that we would be able to follow him.
He said in clause 93 (1), line 1, it should be “where the Bank of Ghana after an examination determines”, instead of “where the Bank of Ghana determines, after an examination”.
Mr Speaker, I want to oppose that not because of what he proffered but because there is a second leg to it.
“Where the Bank of Ghana determines, after an examination
or otherwise based on information…”
Mr Speaker, the construction is clumsy, so it should rather read 1:16 p.m.
“Where the Bank of Ghana determines, after an examination or in respect of information at the disposal of the Bank of Ghana, that a development finance institution has...”
Mr Speaker, even though I appreciate the point made by the Hon Minority Leader, because of that other leg that is when they access some other information, if it is constructed the way he has proffered, it could cause some problems in the flow of that preambular phrase.
Mr Speaker, it could read 1:16 p.m.
“Where the Bank of Ghana determines, after an examination or in respect of information available to the Bank of Ghana…”
If the Hon Minority Leader, said that “at the disposal of the Bank of Ghana”, is a bit pedestrian, we could use the words “information available to the Bank of Ghana”.
Mr Iddrisu 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I agree with the Hon Majority Leader because “information available” is better. If he does not seem to agree with me on the repositioning of the word “determine”, I would not be fussy about it -- I accordingly abandoned it. However, with the rest of the amendments, I would take them one after the other when we get to them.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is clumsy to have “the Bank of Ghana”, in lines 1 and 2.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:16 p.m.
So, can we get the agreed rendition?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would read:
“Where the Bank of Ghana determines, after an examination or on account of information available to the Bank of Ghana, that a development finance institution has…”
Mr Speaker, there are two legs. The Bank of Ghana, would have after examination come to some deter- mination -- that is one. Secondly, they may have some information even before the examination, which would suggest that a particular development finance institution has failed to comply
Mr Iddrisu 1:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would now attempt to go gingerly.
Mr Speaker, with regard to clause 93 (1) (b) and (c) -- just as the Bill in paragraph (a) “failed to comply”, so in paragraphs (b) and (c), the words “been should be deleted. So that the paragraph (b), would be:
“engaged in an unsafe or unsound practice;”
Then paragraph (c), would be:
“conducted the affairs…”
Mr Speaker, I so submit.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the Hon Minority Leader's amendments. So, paragraph
(b), would be “engaged'' and paragraph (c), would be “conducted”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 93 (3) (b):
“…the Bank of Ghana determines…has resulted in material losses in the development finance institution” [instead of “caused”]. I do not think the intention there is “caused”. At that time, they would have moved beyond causation to consequence and that would be a result.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:26 p.m.
Was it a proposed amendment?
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am opposed to this one. The amendment is deemed withdrawn. [Laughter]
Clause 93 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:26 p.m.
Now, Hon Member for Yilo Krobo?
Mr Magnus K. Amoatey 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I seek your leave to take the House back to item numbered (xiv), clause 91. The last line of the
advertised amendment is “and repeat same in subclause (4), line 1”. If we effect that amendment, then it would read, “… an development finance institution”. I pray that the article should read “a” - “a development finance institution”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:26 p.m.
Very well, I direct the draftspersons to insert the appropriate article since we have put the Question on that already.
Clause 94 -- Remedial measures for relevant persons.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 94, delete and insert the following:
“Remedial measures for relevant persons
94. (1) Where the Bank of Ghana determines that a relevant person has con- travened a provision of this Act, the directives, any condition or restriction attached to a licence issued by the Bank of Ghana or engaged in an unsafe or unsound practice, the Bank of Ghana may take of the following actions:
(a) issue an order to the relevant person to take the remedial action as the Bank of Ghana may specify within a stated period and the relevant person shall comply with the order;
(b) impose an administrative penalty of not more than one hundred penalty units on the relevant person for each day that the contra- vention continues;
(c) require the relevant person to reimburse the develop- ment finance institution;
(d) prohibit the relevant person from direct or indirect exercise of voting rights attached to shares of the development finance institution;
(e) suspend the relevant person from office or declare that the relevant person is no longer a fit and proper person; or
(f) prohibit the payment of capital distributions or dividends.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:26 p.m.


(2) Where the Bank of Ghana determines that a relevant person has --

(a) wilfully caused a con- travention of a provision of this Act, the Regulations or directives issued under this Act following a written warning or an order from the Bank of Ghana under section 93;

(b) been engaging in an unsafe or unsound practice that has resulted in a material loss to the development finance institution or financial gain to that relevant person; or

(c) been conducting the affairs of the development finance institution in a manner detrimental to the interests of creditors of the development finance institution, the Bank of Ghana may in respect of the actions referred to in subsection (1), issue an order taking any of the actions specified in subsection (3).

(3) The Bank of Ghana may, in furtherance of subsection (2),

(a) direct the dismissal of the relevant person from the development finance institution.

(b) prohibit the relevant person from serving in or engaging in the develop- ment finance business for a stated period;

(c) impose an administrative penalty of not more than one hundred penalty units for each day that the contravention continues; or

(d) require the relevant person to dispose of all or any part of the direct or indirect holding or interest in the development finance institution or cease to hold a significant interest in the development finance institution.

(4) If the relevant person is charged with a criminal offence, the Bank of Ghana may issue an order tempora- rily suspending the relevant person from the development finance institution: and if applicable, suspend the exercise of voting rights of shares in the development

finance institution by the relevant person, pending the determination of the criminal case.

(5) A dismissal of the criminal case or an acquittal on the merits shall not preclude the Bank of Ghana from taking any enforcement action authorised by this Act with respect to the relevant person.

(6) A relevant person shall not hold any position in an affiliate of a development finance institution without the prior written approval of the Bank of Ghana, if that relevant person is the subject of a directive or order of the Bank of Ghana.

(7) The Bank of Ghana may take the following actions if a relevant person contravenes subsection (6):

(a) suspend or remove the relevant person from a position in that develop- ment finance institution;

(b) prohibit the exercise of voting rights in shares of the

development finance institution; or

(c) require the person to dispose of the holding or interest of that relevant person in the development finance institution.

(8) The power of the Bank of Ghana to take an action under this section is in Addition to any other specific penalties that may be imposed by the Bank of Ghana under this Act.”

Mr Speaker, what we did was to ask that all of clause 94 in the Bill be redrafted because in clause 94, the subclauses had lots of cross- references to the same clause and this did not make it neat. So, we agreed that it is redrafted.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:26 p.m.
Very well, Hon Members, this is a very long one, so, I will allow space and time for consideration.
Mr Bernard Ahiafor 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 94, subclause (2), paragraph (b), line 1, delete “been engaging” and insert “engaged”. This flows consequentially from the amendment proposed by the Hon Minority Leader.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, for consistency, the Minority Leader just raised issues with respect to whether an all sound practice may cause a material loss or result in a material loss.
Here in subclause (2), paragraph (b), the Chairman of the Committee proposes that we use “has resulted in a material loss”. I think we need to be consistent.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, so, we would delete “resulted in” and insert “caused”.
Dr A. A. Osei 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not agree with my Chairman. He says that because he disagreed the first time, he should always disagree. He cannot do that. The context here is correct.
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 1:26 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the proposed new amendment to clause 94, my concern has to do with subclause (4). It is a constitutional matter, and with your permission, I would like to read:
“If the relevant person is charged with a criminal offence, the Bank of Ghana may issue an order temporarily suspending the relevant person…”

But if one is being investigated, who says that he or she is guilty?

Mr Speaker, this is my concern.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:26 p.m.
His amendment has been withdrawn, so, I will put the Question?
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 94 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 95 -- Appointment of advisor
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:36 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 95,
subclause (6), paragraph (a), delete and insert the following:
“(a) perform the functions and hold office for the period that the Bank of Ghana may specify in the letter of appointment; and”
Mr Speaker, in this section, an advisor is being appointed and we would want to specify in the appointment letter the functions of the advisor. Lately, in revoking licences of banks, advisors have been appointed and their functions have not been clearly spelt out and we would want to avoid that.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 95 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 96 -- Liquidation
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:36 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move subclause (1), lines 2 and 3, delete “a period determined by the Bank of Ghana” and insert “the next sixty days”.
Mr Speaker, it will read 1:36 p.m.
“Where the Bank of Ghana determines that the development finance institution is insolvent or
is likely to become insolvent within the next sixty days, the Bank of Ghana shall revoke the licence”.
That period determined by the Bank of Ghana is unknown to the Development Finance Institution and so, we would want to put some time frame to it.
Mr Kpodo 1:36 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to propose that we re-phrase it to read: “Where the Bank of Ghana determines that the development finance institution is insolvent, the Bank of Ghana shall, within the next sixty days…”
Mr Speaker, I want us to put the burden on the Bank of Ghana before giving the condition of 60 days and that is what we have been doing all along.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:36 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like us to delete “next” and insert “within sixty days”. If the Hon Kpodo agrees to that then it will be:
“within sixty days” and not “within the next sixty days”.
So, it will read:
“…insolvent within sixty days, then the bank shall revoke the licence”
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 1:36 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I do not know what informed the cut off? If we put a cut off, for instance, “sixty days after the determination” and the Bank of Ghana determines that the bank will become insolvent in three months' time --
Mr Speaker, the way the provision has been couched, if the BoG determines that the development finance institution is insolvent, immediately, their licence is revoked. If it determines that the DFI will be insolvent within a period determined by the BoG, they revoke their licence and the revocation of their licence will trigger subclause (b) which is the appointment of an official liquidator. However, if we use “sixty days”, like in the amendment, it means that if the BoG determines that a DFI will go into liquidation or will become insolvent in 90 days' time, they cannot revoke the licence.
Mr Speaker, the intendment of the provision is to safeguard depositors and persons who have equity interest in the bank and so, they will take pre- emptive action. If we tie their hands, they might be constrained; that is the difficulty to be encountered.
Mr Kobina Tahir Hammond 1:36 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this provision is so important that I ask that we put in a specific amendment to protect those institutions; banks and so on. This is because I have an experience on record that in a similar Act where the provisions are as clear as they are here, and I believe that the regulator is the BoG. It is the same BoG which is not respecting this particular provisions here and in the process,
they turn around to tell these banks that they do not have the right to challenge them when they have screwed up on similar provisions as we have in clause 96.
Mr Speaker, I wish to suggest to the Hon Majority Leader, Chairman and the others that we make specific amendments here and include a statement to the effect that when the Governor of the BoG has made such determination and whether it properly carried it out or not, the institution has the capacity to challenge the decision. The Bank of Ghana is telling the entire world that when institutions are closed down, they do not have the capacity --
When we look at sections 1, 2 and 3 of Act 930 we will see what is there and the BoG determines that an institution has gone bankrupt or within sixty days, it is going to go bankrupt, it shall close it down. They capriciously close down the institution without any notice when none of the determination has been gone through, the BoG turns round and tells the institutions that their company has no capacity to challenge them.
Mr Speaker, I am saying that we should make the provision to protect the institutions when such incidents
happen, they would have the capacity to challenge the BoG.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, I thought that is a question of law. The capacity of a company or otherwise is a matter of law. We do not have to state it here.
Mr Hammond 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would not debate it because you and I will talk about it later, but the point is that we got to the Supreme Court with this type of matter and I would let you in on all that happened. Let us save everybody by putting it in there. The companies have capacity and we can give them capacity because it is a matter of law and the law is what we are enacting today so why can we not put something in there to put everybody at ease?
Mr Speaker, as I indicated, this is the law and one day if the Bank of Ghana closes down institutions and someone wants to challenge them but Bank of Ghana says that the person does not have the capacity and then somehow a court upholds that the person does not have the capacity, then what would that mean? Mr Speaker, if this is the law then this law is blind. Let us open the eye of this particular law and give capacity to the institutions that would be victims.
Mr Hammond 1:46 p.m.
Who may apply?
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:46 p.m.
The person who is dissatisfied. This was previously not in the -
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
Hon K. T. Hammond, it is in the Bill under clause 96(3) so take your time to read it before you respond.
Mr Hammond 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the exact replication of this is in clause 141 of that Act. It talks about a person who can go to court and inspite of that they are still saying that the person does not have capacity.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
Hon Member, but what you or I say is not the law. The Supreme Court would determine what the law is. If it is --
Mr Hammond 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would tell you what happened so that you would appreciate the law.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
Once it is provided, the Court would do the interpretation.
Hon Member for Wa West?
Mr Chireh 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the argument that was raised was that the Committee recommended that we put in there “within 60 days”, but as was argued by the Hon Member for Tamale Central, the issue was whether we give them a timeline or we leave it as it is. Such that when the Bank determines that they are likely to be insolvent then they would take the action. I am of the view that if we give a timeline and there is a problem then the depositors would suffer unduly even if the Bank has an idea that in 90 days that is likely to happen.
I do not think that we should constrain them by fixing a timeline for them. If it were something that would disadvantage the development finance institution then that is all right. However, we are now protecting the depositors so I believe that if within the reasonable calculation of the Bank of Ghana, they think that the institution is likely to be insolvent, then they can take the action rather than “within 60 days”.
Mr Speaker, if they are to determine that and we now want to
give them a timeframe within which to act, again, it would be difficult to decide because they have determined that they need to take the action. However, once we do not know whether they have determined that then we cannot give them the timeframe within which to act.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, what obtains in the Banks and Specialised Deposit-Taking Institutions Act, 2016 (Act 930) in clause 123 is that “When the Bank of Ghana determines that the bank or specialised deposit-taking institution is insolvent or is likely to become insolvent within the next sixty days, the Bank of Ghana shall revoke the licence of that bank or specialised deposit-taking institution”.
Mr Speaker, in the Development Finance Institution Bill, 2020, the equivalent provision in clause 96 is too open ended. It states “When the Bank determines that the development finance institution is insolvent or it is likely to become insolvent within a period determined by the Bank …”
Mr Speaker, what the Hon Chairman is doing now is to import what we did in clause 123 of the Banks and Specialised Deposit- Taking Institutions Act, 2016 and so the timeframe of sixty (60) days should be given. If it is not to the Bank then the discretionary powers could be abused. So, this is being done to synchronise it with clause 123(1) if the bank is likely to become insolvent within the next sixty (60) days. Mr Speaker, we were just saying that sixty (60) days should be qualified with “after the determination is made by the Bank of Ghana”. This is all that we are saying.
Mr Speaker, the recourse that is opened to a person who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Bank is provided under clause 96(3). I am not too sure that my Hon Colleague has to worry his head about anything contained in clause 96.
Mr Speaker, however, I beg to further amend the proposed amendment by the Hon Chairman that we insert “after the determination is made by the Bank of Ghana”. This is to further protect the development finance institution. Mr Speaker, I believe we can go on.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
I would put the Question?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
I thought this is the same amendment proposed by the Hon Majority Leader?
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, no. the Hon Majority Leader has further amended it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
In this case, it was on the last amendment that I wanted to put the Question.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, then the new rendition would read “… within the next sixty days after the determination by the Bank of Ghana”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
I would put the Question?
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
Item numbered (xxii).
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 1:46 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move clause 96 add the following new subclause:
“An action filed under subsection (3) shall not have the effect of suspending or staying the implementation of the decision of the Bank of Ghana until the final determination of the matter.”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:46 p.m.
I think the Hon Member for Adansi Asokwa would be interested in this proposed amendment?
Mr Hammond 1:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the issue has been whether an appeal pending before the Court before the suspensive effect - it has always been that it has not got to that unless specifically there is an application for stay.
If we feel to really make a specific provision -- I am interested in making some of these specific provisions because there have been so many litigations as to the effect of this or that.
We can go beyond any adventure by changing it because as it is, I have not seen a single appeal to a higher authority which really has a suspensory effect. It does not hold anything in abeyance.
So Mr Speaker, if you ask me, as it is in most of the current legislations, this is it, “It shall not”, but we could
change it to give breathing space to litigants and make the rendition “file under this, shall have the suspensory effect” so that all these applications to stay -- Mr Speaker, there is quite a lot of permutations about this stay business.
Again, you are right; I am happy you drew my attention to this. With these financial institutions and banks, look at how much moneys are involved, people's investments and all that. In one fair swoop, the Bank of Ghana destroys everything.
In appropriate cases, yes, they misbehave, but we have examples of cases where they are completely inappropriate because the victims have not committed any offence at all; and I am handling some of them. So I am talking to you from a clear experience.
So if for that reason we would want to say that because errors might occur in such sensitive situations we are asking that the law should be such that whether there is an appeal filed, the implementation of that decision should be stayed, I am all for it and it should be stayed pending the resolution of this rather than having no suspensory effect and by the time we go, the situation is destroyed beyond redemption.
Mr Speaker, I am grateful you brought this to my attention. My amendment is that, this should be restructured to read:
“An action filed under subsec- tion (3) shall have effect of suspending or staying the implementation of decision of Bank of Ghana until the final determination.”
This should be the proper rendition. I am upset with my leader.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:56 p.m.
You have made your proposal.
Mr Hammond 1:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is for you to thank me if what I have said makes a lot of sense. It is not for him to thank me. Why is he thanking me litigiously on your behalf? Is it his job?
But let us look at it very seriously. They have been creating problems all over the place.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:56 p.m.
I have to go to the Minority. Yes, Hon Member for Wa West?
Mr Chireh 1:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the last speaker has made a case for us to allow for the action initiated to be a stay of further action by the Bank of Ghana.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:56 p.m.
Hon Members, having regard to the state of Business in the House, I direct that the House Sits outside its regular Sitting hours.
Hon Chairman of the Committee of Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs?
Mr Banda 1:56 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is trite that if you file an action in court, that does not in itself stay or terminate a wrong doing in respect of which you file an action. You have to take a step further to file the relevant process, maybe, injunction or any other related application for a restrained order to keep in suspense the status quo until the final determination of the matter. So you do not even have to state it; it is trite.
Mr Speaker, if you read this provision carefully, it seeks to prevent an applicant or prevent or restrain a court from even entertaining an interim application because the provision says “until the final determination of the matter”. And we are talking about a winding up proceedings where at the end of the day, properties could be sold, or creditors could be paid, and in which situation they cannot be redeemed.
Mr Speaker, assuming an applicant who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Bank of Ghana goes to court.,
this provision is saying that nothing should be done until the final determination of the matter. And if the applicant wins and it so happens that the finance institution has been wound up, properties have been sold, creditors have been paid and the situation is irredeemable, what becomes of the victory or success of the applicant? Mr Speaker, the victory won in court at the end of the day becomes ineffective.
Mr Speaker, so I would want to propose that this provision is needless because one cannot say that a person who is dissatisfied with the decision of an administrative body cannot even apply to the High Court for a remedy. That mandate is enshrined in the Constitution under article 33.
Mr Speaker, I am proposing that this provision is not necessary and it should be deleted. From the way it has been couched, it is intended to restrict the powers of the Court to do what it is mandated under the Constitution or under our existing enactments to do. I so move.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:06 p.m.
Hon Members, I have two motions practically saying the same thing - in different motions.
Yes, Hon Member for Akatsi South?
Mr Bernard Ahiafor 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs because the provision seeks to oust the jurisdiction of the Court in terms of granting injunction. It reads:
“An action filed under subsection (3) shall not have the effects of suspending or staying the implementation of the decision of the Bank of Ghana until the final determination of the matter.”
And the action that would be filed is where a person is dissatisfied with the decision of the Bank of Ghana. Though a person might be dissatisfied and filed a lawsuit, the Bank of Ghana's decision should be implemented. By so doing, if a judgement is given in your favour, the end result would be fruitless because the Bank of Ghana would have implemented their decision.
Therefore where the Court deems it fit to restrain the implementation of the decision of the Bank of Ghana by way of an interlocutory injunction, that should be allowed. But the provision is saying that the court cannot even do that and it is not proper in the circumstance.
Dr A. A. Osei 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am not a lawyer but nothing here stops the Court from doing what it is supposed to do. So to get up and say that this stops the Court from taking a decision is misleading. It says that the action filed does not take back a decision. It does not say that the Court cannot do what it is supposed to do. The Court can do what it is supposed to do. This new clause does not prevent the Court from doing that
so I do not know why he is telling us that it does?
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the provision is in two parts. I see nothing wrong with the first part. This is because that is the position of the law, “an action filed when a person is dissatisfied with a decision and goes to court over it and appeals against the decision”. That does not operate as a stay of execution. I agree with the first part but the second part is the problem; “… until the final determination of the matter” this is where the problem is.
This is because if one appeals against the decision, the appeal does not operate as a stay and this is trite law. It is trite on the second part which is the problem. If one appeals and wants a stay, he must apply to the Court and demonstrate to the Court why and show prima facie that damage would be caused if a stay is not granted. But if we say “until the final determination”, then it becomes a matter. So I think that the second part is what should be off.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I propose that we delete all the words after “Ghana” so that it reads:
“An action filed under subsec- tion (3) shall not have the effect
of suspending or staying the implementation of the decision of the Bank of Ghana.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 96 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 97 -- Voluntary winding- up
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 97, subclause (2), delete and insert the following:
“(2) Where the Bank of Ghana, at any stage of the voluntary winding up, considers that the development finance institution which is being wound up is unable to meet the obligations of the development finance institution in full to creditors, the provisions of section 96 shall apply.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 97 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 98 -- Review of decisions of the Bank of Ghana on licensing
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 98, delete.
Mr Speaker, the proposal is that all the clauses that deal with a certain Act of an adjudicative panel be deleted. That is why in proposing to delete clause 98 it references the adjudicative panel.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 99 -- Adjudicative panel
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 100 - Functions of the Adjudicative Panel
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 101 -- Procedure of the Adjudicative Panel
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete.
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 103 -- Expenses of the Adjudicative Panel
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 104 - Appeal to the High Court
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clauses 98 to 104 are ordered to be deleted from the Bill.
Clause 105 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:06 p.m.
Mr Speaker, from clause 105 to 115, there are no advertised amendments so if we can take them together?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
Very well.
Clause 106 to 115 ordered to stand part of the Bill…
Clauses 105 to 111 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 112 -- Administrative penalties
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in respect of clause 112, I would like to seek clarification from the Hon Chairman on the second line. I do not think that the words “which is not fixed” should be there. It should read:
“The Bank of Ghana shall, for the purpose of imposing an administrative penalty, under this Act, take into account…”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, it refers to administrative penalty, which has not been stated -- has any been stated? So this is to differentiate this from those where the penalties have been stated.
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would take that guidance from you, but the words “which is not fixed” --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
Hon Member, “or not fixed”.
“…imposing an administrative penalty not prescribed under this Act.”
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I hope the Hon Chairman would be guided? He cannot say, “which is not fixed”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Ahiafor 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the administrative penalties are fixed with a minimum and a maximum limit. So, I believe that is what the law says, that in the application of the administrative penalty, the gravity and impact of the contravention should be taken into account. I do not think that in crafting this particular law, there are certain things that are left without the prescribed penalty.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
Hon Member, it reads:
“The Bank of Ghana shall, for the purposes of imposing an administrative penalty, not prescribed under this Act, take into account …”
So, all is just a directive as to how to come to a conclusion on the matter.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, it is an omnibus position. So to determine how to deal with it, we have to look at the gravity and the impact.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 112 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 113 to 115 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the preambular of clause 107 (1), we have template for that. Let them relate to that and proffer the relevant amendments. The drafts- persons know that.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
So, I will direct the draftspersons to redraft this in terms of the template already adopted by the House.
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, sorry to draw you back.
Clause 113, “the Attorney-General may authorise …”, why do we want to add the words by executive instrument? We can just say that:
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.


What is the meaning of that? An executive instrument issued by the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice for the purpose of prosecution? I am not aware of one in practice. If we just want to say that, the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice can delegate the power to prosecute in accordance with article 88, that is permissible. But to use the words “by executive instrument”, I have a difficulty with it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
Hon Member, how else will the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice authorise an official?
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in the same way he or she does it in practice. We could just say that he or she could authorise an officer of the Bank of Ghana to prosecute.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
Hon Member, is it by a letter?
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am guided by the Hon Deputy Attorney- General and Minister for Justice that in practice that is it. Proposition abandoned.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
The Hon Member has withdrawn his amendment.

Clause 116 -- Regulations
Dr Assibey-Yeboah 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 116, line 1, delete “in consultation with” and insert “on the advice of”.
So that it would read:
“The Minister may on the advice of the Bank of Ghana…”
Mr Iddrisu 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the amendment. But when the Hon Member says “on the advice of” the Bank of Ghana, I presume the Bank of Ghana has a Board or a governing board, which must have -- [Interruption] -- No, when he says Bank of Ghana, he should be specific. This is a regulation and I wonder whether -- we should not qualify the Bank of Ghana, and not the Board -- [Interruption] -- No, in the Bank of Ghana Act, what is the role of its Board? Decisions cannot be taken without the Board -- [Interruption] --
“The Minister may on the advice of the Board of the Bank of Ghana. I would insist that he qualifies it with “the
Board”, it just cannot be “the Bank of Ghana”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:16 p.m.
Hon Member, if you say “the Board”, is it still not the Bank of Ghana?
Dr A. A. Osei 2:16 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this involves the day-to-day work of the Bank of Ghana. The Board is not available to help the Bank do the day- to-day work. So, we should leave it at “the Bank of Ghana” and it will be alright. Leaving it there does not exclude the Board, but generally, it could be delegated.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 116 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 117 -- Interpretation
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:26 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if I may, I think there is a minor issue that has arisen and the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parlia- mentary Affairs has drawn my attention to it. It has to do with clause 112, subclause (1). So, if we could listen to him?
Mr Banda 2:26 a.m.
Mr Speaker, in respect of clause 112 (1), what we sought to amend is not what clause 112 intends. If we read carefully, what it says is that if the penalty is not fixed, it means there is no range; at times, for a sanction regime, they give minimum sentence and maximum penalty so, it is not fixed. In coming to a determination, then they have to take into consideration, (a) and (b) in imposing an administrative penalty whether to impose a minimum or middle or the maximum.
But where it is fixed, it means that the thing is fixed. Let us say one pays one thousand penalty units; it is fixed and there is no range and it neither gives any minimum nor maximum limit. But if we say that if it is not specified, then, this provision would be dangerous because it gives the Bank of Ghana an unlimited power to slap or mete out any administrative penalty that they deem fit, which is dangerous.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:26 a.m.
Hon Member, what is your complaint? Let us listen to the amendment that was made; the penalty which is not fixed was changed to “an administrative penalty not prescribed”. Are there any differences? It is only the “not fixed” and “not prescribed” which were changed; we did not touch the gravity and the impact.
Mr Band 2:26 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if we say an administrative penalty which is not specified, it means it is not stated. It is different from it is not fixed, like it does not give any range; it is not prescribed, it is not stated so, “penalty” is not stated at all which it means that the Bank of Ghana has an unlimited discretion to mete out any penalty that they want. I do not think that is the intendment of the provision.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:26 a.m.
I am not sure whether I am following the difference that you try to draw. “It is not prescribed”; it means that no specific term or punishment has been stated, and it is not fixed - the same thing. I want to see the difference. “Not prescribed” and “Not fixed”, what is the difference?
Mr Banda 2:26 a.m.
Mr Speaker, “not prescribed” would mean “penalty not stated”; nothing is stated so not prescribed. But if we say a penalty is not fixed, it means that there is a penalty but it gives a range, maybe, minimum and maximum in which case, the Bank of Ghana in coming to a determination as to how many penalty units the Bank of Ghana would have to impose, they have to take into consideration (a) and (b).
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:26 a.m.
This is not penalty unit; this is administrative right.
Mr Banda 2:26 a.m.
Yes.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:26 a.m.
Let me listen to somebody else.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 2:26 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we are making a law and in the Bill, we have administrative penalty. There is a litany of administrative penalty. Clause 71(2), for example, says:
“A development finance institution which fails to comply with subsection (1) is liable to pay to the Bank of Ghana, an administrative penalty of not more than one thousand penalty units”.
So the penalty unit is prescribed; there is no lower point, but there is an upper limit. Clause 72(4) also talks about a penalty unit of not more than one thousand penalty units. There is no lower limit so there is a penalty. [Interruption] -- So, there is no range; it is from zero to one thousand.
Now you go to clause 75 and it says “of not more than one thousand penalty units”. And when we go to clause 82(3) it says and I quote:
“An auditor who does not comply with the subsection (1), commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not less than one hundred and
twenty-five penalty units and not more than two hundred and fifty …”
That is an offence -- Now, in the administrative penalty -- clause 84(8) states and I quote:
“In addition to any penalty provided under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2008, (Act 749), a person who contravenes a directive issued under this section is liable to pay the Bank of Ghana, an administrative penalty of not less than two thousand penalty units and not more than ten thousand penalty units”.
So there is a range. Now, all through the Bill, offences and administrative breaches have been provided for as well as the penalties for breaches. A provision of this nature in clause 112 which says that there can be administrative breaches for which no penalty has been prescribed. So, in determining the penalty for such a breach, we must take the gravity of the breach and the impact of the breach into consideration.
Mr Ahiafor 2:26 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with all due respect, we need to be guided by clause 115 under the heading, General penalty:
“A person who commits an offence under this Act for which a penalty is not provided is liable on summary conviction
(a) in the case of an individual to a fine of not less than five hundred penalty units and not more than two thousand penalty units or to a term of imprisonment of not less than six months and not more than two years or both;
Mr Speaker, the paragraph (b) provides for a corporate body. I believe it is the same general power we want to give to Bank of Ghana in a situation where the administrative penalty is not prescribed in the Act --[Interruption] -- But what we are not doing is providing the Bank of Ghana, the limit within which to operate just like how we provided the Courts the limits within which the Court could operate when the penalty is not provided by this law. In clause 112, we appear to be giving a blanket or general power without any limit and all the offences prescribed by this particular law.
There is an upper limit so all that we are saying is that the way we have crafted clause 115, clause 112 should also be crafted that way so that too much discretion would not be given
Mr Ahiafor 2:36 a.m.
to the Bank of Ghana in imposing the sanctions. That is all that we are talking about. -- [Interruption] --

Mr Speaker, when we read clause 112, what is the limit? The Bank of Ghana would say that considering the gravity of the offence, a development finance institution should pay one million penalty units. Is that what we are legislating? If that is what we want to legislate, then we should go ahead and leave the rendition the way it is.

However, if we want to legislate by way of giving room to the Bank of Ghana to operate, then the way we have set the upper limit for all the offences that we have created and all the administrative penalties that we have provided, we should equally provide the limit of that administrative penalty in a situation where the law has not prescribed the penalty.
Mr Banda 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, even in court, before a judge sentences, though punishment is prescribed, the judge takes into consideration the gravity of the offence because the minimum and maximum is stated. So, the judge in coming to the deter- mination, takes into consideration the circumstances of the matter.
What Hon Ahiafor said and what I said are to a large extent on the same wavelength, except I differed a bit by saying that which is not fixed, we should suggest some means for a range to be given. The way we have couched it seems to suggest that no penalty is stated and the Bank of Ghana is given the discretion to state the penalty units it deems fit. That would be dangerous.
The long and short of our argument is that let us state the maximum just as clause 115 of the Bill is seeking to do. So, where a specific penalty is not stated, the Bank of Ghana would have the discretion by taking paragraphs (a) and (b) into consideration and coming to a determination as to how much penalty it has to impose on a person who flouts the provision under clause
112.
However, if we leave it the way we have sought to do, that would give a very wide and dangerous discretion to the Bank of Ghana to do what it pleases and I do not think that is good enough.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Hon Members, now, the discussion is changing. The discussion was that changing what is not fixed to that which is not prescribed is changing the meaning. Now, we are going into introducing providing maximum and
minimum administrative penalties when we do not know the offence. You do not know what the person has done, so how can you provide for it?
All it is saying is that in determining what administrative fine to give to the person, consider the gravity of the contravention and its impact. It does not take away the responsibility to be fair but to provide an upper limit. How would you provide an upper limit when you have not described the offence? Would you say “for whatever, you cannot impose an administrative limit exceeding GH¢100,000 or not lower than GH¢10,000”? How are you going to provide that? Clause 115 is dealing with offences and penalty units and is not the same as administrative fines.
Mr Ahiafor 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there is a thin line between the offence and administrative breaches.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
So, what is your proposed upper limit for the Bank of Ghana?
Mr Ahiafor 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we can even say not above 5,000 or 10,000 penalty units.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Even if they stole GH¢100 million and collapsed the bank?
Mr Ahiafor 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, so what happens to clause 115? It is saying that, “A person who commits an offence under this Act for which a penalty is not provided”. We are giving a limit for that but we do not know the kind of offence for which the penalty has not been provided. So, if we use the analogy that because we do not know the offence, we cannot provide the upper limit, then in clause 115, we should not also provide the limits to which a judge should go. We should leave it to the discretion of the judge.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Hon Member, look again. Clause 115 says, “A person who commits an offence under this Act”. It means that an offence has been created but there is no penalty fixed. It is not the same as saying an Act which we have not defined. When it comes to administrative penalty, we are not providing any definition or prescribing the offence. It is the conduct and its gravity that would determine the administrative penalty. I think that it is good as it is. Yes, Hon Minister?
Dr A. A. Osei 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the worry is that we are giving the Bank of Ghana unlimited power. The people of the Bank of Ghana are reasonable and rational people and even though it is not stated in terms of the upper limit, we cannot a priori determine
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Hon Members, I think that I would allow you to go back and consider among yourselves. I would suspend Sitting and come back at exactly 4.00 p.m. but by 6.00 p. m. we would close. So, if we do not start at 4.00 p.m., I would still close at 6.00 p. m.
2.44 p. m. -- Sitting suspended.
4.30 p.m. -- Sitting resumed
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Hon Majority Leader, would we continue with clause --?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we would rather commence item numbered 23 on the Order Paper.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Item numbered 23 instead?
What do you propose to do with the Addendum Order Paper? If the Paper would be laid, I suggest we do that before we continue.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I requested the Hon Chairman of the Committee to do some engineering but he has not yet reported. If he does, we would take that one.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
I am looking for my copy of the Bill. Item numbered 23 -- Security and Intelligence Agencies Bill, 2020, at the Consideration Stage.
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 2:36 a.m.
STAGE 2:36 a.m.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
The first proposed amendment is in the name of the Hon Minority Leader, unfortunately, he is not in the House.
Hon Member for Akatsi South, do you have his authority to move it on his behalf?
Mr Ahiafor 2:36 a.m.
No, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Very well. It is considered abandoned. If he comes to the House and he wants to move it, we would consider it.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, as much as possible, I would want us to go by the language of the Constitution.
Clause 1 provides:
(a) the President
(b) the Vice- President
With regard to paragraph (c), let us use the language contained in the Constitution. So that it would read:
(c) the Ministers holding the portfolios of foreign affairs, defence, interior and finance and such other Ministers as the President may determine.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Hon Majority Leader, do you propose that it should be changed to “as may be determined''?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it should be “may determine”. The constitutional language is for the time being holding, so we could do away with those words “for the time being” but “the Ministers holding the portfolios of foreign affairs, defence, interior and finance and such other Ministers as the President may determine”.
Mr Ahiafor 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the amendment because that is the constitutional language used in article 83(1)(c) : “…as the President may determine”. We cannot be wrong if we use the constitutional language.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Hon Minority Leader, you were not in the House when Sitting resumed? Your amendment was to delete the entire clause 1.
Mr Iddrisu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I should -- I had just boarded a flight and I needed to send a text message because my email was not active. So, he did not see it well.
I said that the way clause 1 was constructed was not for an entire deletion. So, if I have your leave, I could proffer an amendment to read:
“There is hereby established a National Security Council in accordance with article 83 of the Constitution”.
However, what is contained in the Bill as; “The National Security Council established by article 83 of the
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, respectfully, I am opposed to what the Hon Minority Leader said because it is not this Act that would establish the National Security Council. It is established by the Constitution, which is why the language is:
“The National Security Council established by article 83 of the Constitution consists of.”
It has already been established.
Clause 1 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill
Chairman of the Committee (Mr Kwame Seth Acheampong) 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there was a minor amendment to clause 2 (3). In line 1, we deleted “the” and inserted “a”.
So, the new rendition would read:
“A person invited to participate in the deliberations of the Council under subsection (2) shall…”
Question put and amendment agree to.
Mr Iddrisu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, with regard to clause 2 (4), the language as I have seen elsewhere - normally, we would say:
“The Council shall regulate its own procedure at the meetings of the Council”.
I have seen a consistent use of “regulate'' but normally, the words are:
“The Council shall regulate its own procedure”.
So, with your leave, unless, it is provided for in the Constitution, it should be “the procedure at its meetings”.
Mr Speaker, I am guided by article 83(5), which says 2:36 a.m.
“The National Security Council shall regulate the procedure at its meetings”.
It has been lifted from the Constitution and there is nothing more I could add.
Clause 2 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 3 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 4 -- Functions of the Council
Mr K. S. Acheampong 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, paragraph (a), line 2, delete --
rose
Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:36 a.m.
Hon Chairman, hold on.
Yes, Hon Member?
Mr Boamah 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if we would lift from the Constitution, then we have to appropriately do so. With regards to clause 3, which says:
“The Secretary to the Cabinet is the Secretary to the Council''
Article 83 (6) in Constitution says:
“The Secretary to the Cabinet shall be the Secretary to the National Security Council”.
Mr Speaker, we have to be consistent.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:36 a.m.
Mr Speaker, there are certain slight re- engineering that we could do that is permissible. Otherwise, we have to go back to clause 1, to say that:
“The National Security Council established by article 83 of the Constitution shall consist of”.
It is already established, so once it is established it consists of but then the language of the Constitution is “it shall consist of after the establishment''. There are these minor tweaks that we could accept, which is why we do that. Otherwise, we may even also have to say that it is not known to the Constitution, and so we should repeat “the National Security Council shall regulate the procedure at the meetings of the National Security Council''. I think that because “Council'' has been defined, it would take care of - there are these minor tweaks that are permitted.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 4:40 p.m.
Alright, so, we are on clause 4.
Mr Kwame S. Acheampong 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, paragraph (a), line 2, delete “the country” and insert “Ghana”.
So, it will read:
“Considering and taking the appropriate measures to safe- guard the internal and external security of Ghana.”
Mr Kwame S. Acheampong 4:40 p.m.


Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Kwame S. Acheampong 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, paragraph (b), lines 1 and 2, delete “the country” and insert Ghana and in line 3, delete “Council” and insert “security of Ghana”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Kwame S. Acheampong 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 4, paragraph (c), lines 1 and 2, delete “the country” and insert “Ghana”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, this is just to serve you notice. In some of the issues, I may appear argumentative because I want the Parliamentary Debates to capture it as a guide for interpretation tomorrow.
Therefore, when I insist, it is to establish that beyond Pepper v Hart, Parliamentary Debates are now a guide to constitutional interpretation so that tomorrow, anybody interpreting this law would be guided that this was the sense or thinking of Parliament. I will get the respective
quote for you from the Supreme Court for your records. Mr Speaker, when we come to paragraph (d) , I am just raising it so that we are guided. At the time they were crafting the Constitution, they used these words:
“…taking appropriate measures regarding the consideration of policies on matters of common interest to the departments and agencies of government concerned with national security”.
Conspicuously lost here is Ministers and we know that there is a Ministry for the Interior and Ministry for Defence which naturally have an association with matters relating to national security.
I am just proffering whether we could not as a Parliament be guided by the ejusdem generis rule add Ministries to the Departments and Agencies because at the time that the Constitution contemplated this, they did not focus on Ministries. Today, we know that there is a Ministry for the Interior and the Ministry for Defence. They are not agencies nor departments but they have something to do with national security.
Mr Speaker, I so submit but I would be guided that I cannot do anything to the constitutional amendment but this is just for the record of Parliament.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 4:40 p.m.
Yes, it states:
“…policies on matters of common interest to the departments and agencies of the government concerned with national security.”
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in reality, I would think that if anybody should suggest that at any time we attempt to tinker with the language in the Constitution, it amounts to an amendment. I disagree. Other than that, what we are seeing in article 84 should be replicated in its entirety because the moment we touch one word, then it constitutes an amendment. I do not think so at all.
Mr Speaker, I do not think that it is an amendment to the Constitution because, as he rightly argued, the Ministries, Departments and Agencies, everywhere else in the Constitution are mentioned together. I would think that this was really an unconscious mistake or omission. So, if it is inserted, I do not think it would amount to a constitutional amend- ment.
However, with the understanding as he said, and I refer him particularly to the Interpretations Act, where we insist that if any case should ensue from any Act that is passed by Parliament
and it calls for interpretation, whatever we do in Parliament should guide the Presiding Judge. In that regard, if it is construed that the Ministries are part of this or maybe the Departments and Agencies are subsumed under the Ministries and for that reason we could go along with it, I have nothing against that.

Yes, it is a recommended amendment when we come to clause 11. Mr Speaker, I believe we can make progress.
Dr A. A. Osei 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my understanding is that Ministries are Agencies of Government. So it is implied. What is an agency? It is a tool that we employ to do something. The Ministries are part of it, so, I do not see any harm there at all. We do not need to bring Ministries explicitly to show that they are there because they are agencies of government, otherwise, why are they there?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 4:40 p.m.
When we work in the Ministry, they differentiate between Ministries, Departments and Agencies. They make us feel that the Ministers are on top, then the Departments and Agencies are below, so, when you mention the Departments and Agencies and leave out the top tier, then you must have done something wrong. But I think we can proceed because, at worse, it comes to interpretation and it would be interpreted to include the Ministries.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 4 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 5 -- Establishment of regional and district security councils.
Mr Kwame S. Acheampong 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 5, head note, delete “Establishment of”.
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 4:40 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the amendment by the Hon Chairman of the Committee. It does no harm but for elegance. The head note is to guide us to understand. At that level, my only worry is when we look at the other heading, “Committees of the Council”, then, we come to “Regional
and district security councils”. Mr Speaker, I was thinking that the committees would come elsewhere because as I read through, I do not see “committees” coming immediately. I see:
“There shall be a security council…” but I support the amendment by the Hon Chairman of the Committee. It is more elegant if it reads:
“Regional and district security councils”.
Mr Patrick Y. Boamah 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am opposed to the amendment of the Hon Chairman of the Committee. My submission is grounded on paragraph (iii) of the memorandum accompanying the Bill. It states: “Clauses 5 - 11: Clause 5 establishes a security council for each Region” so this clause is taking its roots from the memorandum of understanding accompanying the Bill.
The creation of those regional and district offices, is founded on the accompanying memorandum and so, it ought to be established. If we leave the heading as you want us to, that is; ‘Regional and district councils', we have not done anything. We have to create it within the statute.
Mr Ahiafor 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the amendment of the Hon Chairman of the Committee. If you read the entire provision in clause 5 from subclause (1) to (4), there is no mention of ‘establishment'. In fact, clause 5(1) says:
“There shall be a security council for each region and district”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 4:50 p.m.
Hon Member, that is the establishment.
Mr Ahiafor 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the confusion in the use of ‘establishment' is; what are we establishing as what? As a body corporate or what?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 4:50 p.m.
Hon Member, I agree with you but we did not use the word; ‘establishment'.
Mr Ahiafor 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, what is established is the national Security Council by the Constitution and by this law, we are saying that; there will be a district and regional security council.
So, if we are by this law, establishing, what are we establishing it as? As a body corporate with all the features?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, further to reasons alluded to
by the Hon Chairman of the Committee, what is established is the National Security Council which the Constitution establishes. Any other matter or unit ensuing from the National Security Council would not be established by this law. It will just ensue from the apex body or to satisfy the umbrella body that is established by the Constitution.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that sub clause (2), redraft as follows:
“(2) The regional and district security councils shall --
(a) operate as committees of the Council; and
(b) perform in the regions and districts, as the case may be, the functions deter- mined by the Council.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that Subclause (3), line 2, delete “Security Council” and insert “security council”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that subclause (1), paragraph (c), delete.
Mr Speaker, this is because in our report, the decision on it was inconclusive.
Mr Agalga 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am opposed to the amendment. Paragraph (c) is the regional officer of the Bureau of National Communications (BNC). We have argued on the underlying principle for the establishment of the BNC and I thought that there was unanimity at the close of the debate at the Second Reading.
So I want to strongly suggest that we retain the paragraph (c) in view of the arguments raised here.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 4:50 p.m.
Hon Chairman, the argument is that you are undercutting your Committee.
Mr Chireh 4:50 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that the amendment should not be supported because the BNC and the background to this is that if we have
the -- By practice, they are very important institutions in the affairs of the International Security Council.
Indeed, there is a form of it already existing in the National Security Secretariat. They are supposed to deal with issues of cybercrime as well as even helping the National Intelli- gence Bureau and also, the Research Department. They are technology based, monitor frequencies and anyone who wants to sabotage this country, goes through this system. That is why the proposal was that they should be the third agency of the National Security Council.
Mr Speaker, as my Hon Colleague has already indicated, we all agreed but all of a sudden, the Committee is shaking left and right. There should not be any such shaking because that is the trend in the world; after all the experts were consulted, they proposed that we should term this.
Fortunately for us, this is not just declaring that an institution is part of the thing, it has gone ahead to indicate clearly that we are in conformity with article 85 of the Constitution. We have given a name, structure, functions and therefore, it is not a strange animal that is being found here. This is a structure that everybody, together with those who elected us, will know that we debated and it is now part of the three
agencies of the national Security Council.
So there should not be any issue of deleting this. Whatever the fears of those people are, without this Bill, we also still stand a risk of not being able to defend ourselves in terms of security.
Dr A. A. Osei 5 p.m.
Mr Speaker, when I read the Committee's Report, the impression I got was that even though it was put in the Report that this amendment should come, it appeared there was no consensus.
I agree with what Hon Agalga explained to us the other time but their rationale was that article 85 was why they thought it could not be done.
However, we are told that we would have to read that together with clause 93(2) and so it is all right and it exists in reality. It has been existing since 2003 or 2004 and it performs this function for the nation. Mr Speaker, I do not see how we can throw out such an organisation because a lot of money has been invested into it.
I do not think we should exclude them at all, rather, we should make
sure that they are there because if they are not there then there would be a huge gap in our security system. The Hon Chairman should consider this because the reality is that it performs this function for Ghana. We should not delete it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5 p.m.
Hon Member for Okaikoi Central?
Mr Boamah 5 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am also opposed to the proposed amendment by the Hon Chairman of the Committee. This amendment does not support global trends and we are living in a situation where our neighbouring countries are having all sorts of challenges.
Mr Speaker, communication has become a national security issue across the world. If a country does not have a good national communication system to support operations then the country would have no backbone to rely on. So, I am opposed to the Hon Chairman's amendment. We need to retain this provision to support the architecture that exists because it has been with us and as the Hon Minority Leader said, all those “white noise” would go.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5 p.m.
Hon Chairman, in view of the over- whelming disagreement, what would you propose?
Mr Iddrisu 5 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to persuade the Hon Chairman to abandon this amendment. As the Hon Minister for Monitoring and Evaluation observed, along the line, I became an Hon Minister for Communications and a late Major Adasi who had been referred from the military to the National Security was the head of the Bureau of National Communications (BNC).
Mr Speaker, when one drives past Golden Tulip in Kumasi and heads
towards the Regional Coordinating Council, one would see a structure being constructed in the name of the BNC. In Tamale, just before the National Health Insurance office and the National Communications Authority, there is another building which houses the BNC.
So, the Hon Chairman should abandon this amendment because they matter and we would need them going forward. I would persuade the Hon Chairman to not pursue this further. Mr Speaker, all the people who are holding the GOTA mobile phone are regulated by the regional
BNC.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 5 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that in principle, nobody disputes the central role of the BNC. Nobody disputes the fact that in recent times, intelligence and intelligence gathering, hinges so much on communication and it must necessarily be part of the architecture we want to construct. As we argued the other time, I think the issue that should agitate our minds is whether or not we would not offend article 85 of the 1992 Constitution if we included it at this stage. Article 85 provides :
“No agency, establishment or other organisation concerned with national security shall be
established except as provided for under this Constitution”.
Mr Speaker, how do we establish it? We would establish it by an enactment. Would the BNC being part of this architecture amount to enacting the existence of the BNC as an agency? Mr Speaker, certainly, no, and this is where the difficulty is. As a matter of fact, initially, I argued strongly that it should be part of the architecture.
Unfortunately, more astute constitutional lawyers and purists are indicating to us that if we include it in the architecture, then we would be offending the Constitution and it would be unconstitutional. Mr Speaker, so they indicated to us that if we have to elevate the BNC as an agency, then we would need an enactment to establish it by law and then after we could include it in this if we want to.
So, perhaps we may have to err on the side of caution and that is the only reason compelling me to support the position of the Hon Chairman. Even when I had the opportunity to meet the constitutional lawyers, there was no unanimity but as a matter of fact, seven of them argued that if we did that, we would be going against the Constitution and two of them said that they did not think so. Mr Speaker,
but we do not want to embarrass ourselves that in the face of the Constitution, we want to provide a window to more or less include an agency that has not been formally established by any enactment. This is my worry.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:10 a.m.
Hon Member for Tamale Central?
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:10 a.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 6 is about the membership of the Regional Security Council and we are being invited to delete subclause (1) (c). The question to ask is whether there is a Bureau of National Communication. The answer is yes. The other question is, does the BNC have a regional director or regional officer? The answer is yes. Another question is, is the regional officer necessary for the composition of the Regional Security Council. The answer is yes.
Mr Speaker, this is not about the legal status of the BNC. Clause 6 is not talking about the legal status of whether or not we should enact an Act or to deem it to be in existence.
Clause 6 is just recognising that there is a regional officer for the BNC and that it is desirous that this regional officer who is already on the ground
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:10 a.m.
The Hon Chairman is lobbying.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:10 a.m.
On the Floor of the House? [Laughter.]
Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman knows that there is already in existence, a Bureau of National Communications. He also knows that in the Northern Region, as the Hon Minority Leader said, there is a regional officer of the Bureau of National Communications. He knows, and we all agree that communication is sine qua non in this modern day and era for our fight against many of the security issues that are caused in our sub-region and even globally.
This is because, the District Chief Executive is not a security officer; the Regional Minister is not a security officer and the Deputy Regional Minister is not a security officer, but they are important for the purposes of coordinating security in the regions.
So is a regional office of the Bureau of National Communications. So we are talking about membership, and if we get to its establishment or deeming it to be in existence, then we could deal with that. However, for now, we are dealing with the membership of the Bureau of National Commu- nication at the regional level.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:10 a.m.
Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee of Constitutional, Legal and Parlia- mentary Affairs?
Mr Ben Abdallah Banda 5:10 a.m.
Mr Speaker, this deletion is informed by clause 12 of the Bill which is seeking to make the Bureau of National Communications part and parcel of the Security and Intelligence Agencies. At the appropriate time, a subclause is also being proposed to be deleted.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Leader has argued and in no uncertain terms articulate why clause 6(1) (b) cannot stand because of article 85 of the 1992 Constitution. In article 84, we have external, internal and military intelligence. If we would want to make the Bureau of National Commu- nications part of the Security and Intelligence Agencies, we can only do this by an Act of Parliament.
Mr Speaker, we cannot just lift it and incorporate it as being part of the Membership of the Regional Security Council if we do not give it a legal basis. Some have argued that we can just straight away create it by providing an establishment clause in the Bill. This is not the intendment of article 85. When we are establishing State agencies, you would bear me out and most Hon Members here would attest to the fact that there is a procedure to follow. We have to give it a governing council in accordance with the Constitution and so on and so forth.
Mr Speaker, the long and short of it is that, if we purport to make the Bureau of National Communications part of the Security and Intelligence Agencies so far as this Bill is concerned, article 85 which has well been referred to would have been breached. It is on the basis of this submission that this deletion is being predicated upon.
So, I would also support the Hon Chairman by his proposal that this provision should be amended, and I also support the Hon Majority Leader that based on the relevant provision of the Constitution, this provision cannot stand. I so submit.
Ms Angela Oforiwa Alorwu- Tay 5:10 a.m.
Mr Speaker, just to provide you
with an information that currently, in our various districts, municipal and metropolitan assemblies, the Bureau of National Communications (BNC) officer for the district is a member of that particular committee. And so it would not breach anything because they already attend meetings all the time.
Dr A. A. Osei 5:10 a.m.
Mr Speaker, since we are sharing information, we anticipated this problem back in 2004 when it was set up. And we advised the National Security to bring a Bill to make it legal. They told us that they would be bringing it. And this is what is causing the confusion. If they had done that then, this would not be a problem. It is true that in practice they are around, but as my colleague said, legally, they do not have an arm.
Mr Speaker, it looks like this may keep us here till 6.00 pm. I would plead with you if you could ask us to step it down, then we would winnow and come back to it.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:10 a.m.
I think so. This amendment should be deferred because we have already wasted too much time. We should proceed with the next one.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:10 a.m.
Mr Speaker, if you would indulge me, I would step this amendment down so that we make progress.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:10 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 6, subclause (1), paragraph (m), delete “head” and insert “Director”
Mr Collins Owusu Amankwa 5:10 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I support the amendment proposed by the Hon Chairman in the sense that if you look at the current legislation that established the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO), in terms of ranking, hierarchically, it is from the Director-General then you come to Regional Director, then to Municipal Director to District Director.
So the title attached to the rank is Director, and in my view, there is nothing wrong with the amendment proposed by the Hon Chairman.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 6, subclause (1), line 1, before “one”, insert “at least”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
We would defer the Question on clause 6 because we have deferred discussion of item (viii).
Mr Chireh 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I had an amendment to propose in respect of i
(i). This is because if we look at clause 12 of this Bill, we changed the name of the BNI to NIB and yet when it comes to the composition of the regional council, they have decided to use Internal Intelligence Agency which was an indicative position in the Constitution, article 84, where the National Security Council was mentioned.
Now, the argument is that we have said that it is now renamed and yet we come here and say that that person is the director of Internal Intelligence Agency. Our BNI is not called Internal Intelligence Agency. Our Research Department people are not called external intelligence agency. This is indicative because in the whole world there is always an intelligence agency operating within and the one without.
Since independence, the Research Department has been the one responsible for external intelligence and the BNI has been the one for the internal intelligence and we have passed regulations and laws meaning in this institution as BNI. If we want to change it, the change has to be effected here to reflect but if we now put intelligence agency here and go to 12 and maintain Internal Intelligence Agency there, we are changing the name of the BNI and nobody does that.
Internationally, we always have external and internal agencies. So the Constitution in article 84 just shows indicative positions that in military intelligence there should be external intelligence and - but we have names for them and we have legislated for them. So if we are changing the name, it must reflect in (i) and not.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:20 p.m.
Hon Member, can you propose your amendment?
Mr Chireh 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, my proposed amendment is that the regional commander of the National Intelligence Bureau -- [Interruption]
-- No. This is because in clause 12, we have changed the name from BNI to NIB so it should so reflect.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:20 p.m.
Which subclause are you referring to?
Clause 6 (1)(i):
“the Regional Commander of the Internal Intelligence Agency”
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, with respect, what we have in article 83 are not indicative. We have the Director of External Intelligence. They are capitalised so they are not indicative. If we have the “director” spelt with a small “d” and “external” is spelt with small “e” and “intelligence” with small “i”, that would be indicative. These are official names assigned to the agencies.
Mr Speaker, you would appreciate what we did even in 1. So what we could do, recognising this, is just to go to the interpretations column. This is because it does not only relate to what Hon Yieleh Chireh has just said. If we come to the Commissioner of Custom Excise and Preventive Service, the person there now is not known as the Commissioner. He is the Commissioner-General of the Ghana Revenue Authority.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:20 p.m.
Very well. The Question has been deferred on clause 6, anyway. So I am going to clause 7.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would like to draw your
attention to item numbered (x), clause 6. The advertised amendment is “subclause (1), line 1”. It is wrong. It is subclause (1), paragraph (o), line 2. So that the draftspersons would know exactly where it is.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, we are a little bit challenged with the documents we are both using. I am using just a printout from the Ministry. This is because we took this business under a certificate of urgency so this print came before us. The print my Hon Colleague is using is different from what I am using and based on the work that the Table Office did. They worked with the script that I am holding. That is why the advertisement is so. But it is “o” and in mine, it is
“1”.
Clause 7 -- Functions of Regional Security Council
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, delete and insert the following:
“Without limiting subsection (2) of section 5, the functions of the regional security council in the region are;
(a) provide early warning signals to the Government of the
existence or likelihood of a security threat to the region, the country or the Govern- ment;
(b) in consultation with the Council, take appropriate measures to ensure peace in conflict areas in the region;
(c) take measures to ensure peace building in, and the unity and stability of the region;
(d) take immediate steps to ensure law and order and assist the affected population in the event of an emergency or a disaster; and
(e) perform the functions of the Council assigned to that regional security council by the Council.”
Mr Speaker, we are redrafting the preamble and so it starts with what we have advertised.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Haruna Iddrisu 5:20 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, opening phrase, delete “relation to”.
Mr Speaker, this is just to see if we can improve the rendition. Currently, clause 7 reads:
“A regional security council shall in relation the region…”
Mr Speaker, it should just read 5:20 p.m.
”A regional security council in the region shall…”
Mr Speaker, then I will criticise his own. In clause 7 (a), it reads 5:30 p.m.
“…provide early warning signal to the Government…”

Mr Speaker, thank you.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:30 p.m.
Very well, so your amendment has been overreached.
Mr Iddrisu 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, no. I raised an objection to the use of the word “Government” in paragraph (a). It must be communicated to somebody that we can hold responsible. Who is Government?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:30 p.m.
Hon Member, “Government” as defined in the Constitution.
Mr Banda 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that clause 7, there should be before paragraph (a), “to” otherwise the statement for the provision will not make sense. It should read:
“….the function of the regional security council in the region are to…” it has not been provided for in the amendment.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, apart from what the Hon Chairman for Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs has indicated, there seem to be a repetition in paragraph (a). It should read:
“…to provide early warning signals to the Government of the existence or likelihood of a security to the region or the country”
Mr Speaker, “or Government” again is not needed. It should be deleted. [Interruption] --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:30 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader, the first reference to Government is to receive the information. It reads:
“…to provide early warning signals to Government...” is one. “…of the existence or likelihood of security threat to the region, the country or the Government.” So, “the Government” is important because it can also be informed that there is a security threat to it. Even though it is the same which would receive the information, it may also be that it suffers a security threat.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman for the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, Hon Banda proposed an amendment to paragraph (a), in my view, one attaches to all, because in paragraph (b) reads:
“…in consultation with the Council, take…”
Mr Speaker, it is in the infinitive and all of them are supposed to be in the infinitive.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 7 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 8 -- Membership of district security council.
Mr Iddrisu 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 8, opening phrase, after “council”, insert “shall”
Mr Speaker, I was guided by article 88, which uses the mandatory word “shall”. So, it would read:
“A district security council shall consist of…”
Mr Shaibu Mahama 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, that is in line with clause 7, which reads:
“The regional security council shall in relation to…”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, item numbered (xiv) is similar to the earlier deletion. So, I would want to step it down for now.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, in item numbered (xiii), the insertion of “shall” is right, but there should have been agreement between the auxiliary verb and “consists”. So, I wanted to draw your attention, so that you direct the draftspersons --
Dr A. A. Osei 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker -- [Interruption] -- regarding the words “Internal Intelligence Agency” -- [Interruption] -- we know what
it is. It is National Intelligence Bureau. So, in paragraph (g), that consequential amendment should have been made. It should read:
“8(g) the Divisional Commander of the National Intelligence Bureau.”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:30 p.m.
Very well. We did not effect that amendment. We said we would provide the definition at the end, which body constitutes the Internal Intelligence Agency.
Hon Chairman, did you say we should delete subclause (1) of clause 8? It is the same matter that has been deferred?
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I would want to step item numbered (xiv) down for further consultation.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:30 p.m.
Very well, the item is deferred.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:30 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 8, subclause (1), paragraph (h), delete “District Officer” and insert “Officer in charge”
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would be 5:30 p.m.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 8, subclause (1), paragraph (k), delete “Head” and insert “Director”
Mr Speaker, the new rendition would be 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, it reads 5:40 a.m.
“The District Director of the National Disaster Management Organisation”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 8, subclause (1), add the following new paragraph:
“Head of Prison Service where applicable; and”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the amendment effected, both the last one and the one before where we substituted “District officer” for “Officer in charge”, that should be completed. So, when we say “the officer in charge of the internal intelligence agency in the district. We have the Fire Officer in charge of the district; the District Head of the National - we are mentioning officers in the district and that is why in all, we would find that it ends with “in the district”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
But the others do not have “in the district” there, they have the District Chief Executive; District Police Com- mander and so on. None of them has “in the district” at the end.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, paragraph (l), the designated officer of the military unit responsible for the district.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
That is because they do not have an established unit at any district.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe it does not cause any harm because the others, starting from (a), the District Chief Executive; the Divisional Police Commander where applicable; the District Police Commander; the District Crime
Officer; and where “district” does not begin, then, we at the end, we have “in charge of the district” so; really, I think the House could, for the avoidance of doubt, live with the amendment proposed.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
I cannot put the Question on the entire clause 8.
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I have a minor - on subclause (1)(m); in my document, it would be line 1, but in others', it would be line 2. Before the word, “one”, insert “at least”.
Mr Speaker, the new rendition reads 5:40 a.m.
“Three other persons appointed by the Chairman of the Council at least one of whom is a woman, and another, a community leader in the district with knowledge in human security”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
To which clause are we referring? Is it clause 8 (1)(m)? Mine does not read what you read that is why I asked. What I have here is:
“Three other person nominated by the District Chief Executive in consultation with the Regional Minister and Minister for National Security”.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 8(m) reads:
“Three other persons appointed by the Chairman of the Council…”
And we are saying that for consistency we should insert “at least one of whom is a woman…”
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
I am not looking at clause 6, I am reading the Security and Intelligence Agencies Bill, 2020 and clause 8 on page 7. Clause 8(1)(m):
“Three other persons nominated by the District Chief Executive in consultation with the Regional Minister and Minister for National Security”.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, respectfully, you may look at the 3rd July, 2020 edition. If you are not looking at 3rd July, 2020 edition, you may be getting it wrong.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
The amendments are contained in the Order Paper; I was inserting the

amendments in my copy but I appear to have had a different copy. Clause 8(m):

“Three other persons appointed by the Chairman of the Council at least one of whom is a woman, and another…”
Mr Seth Acheampong 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, before subclause (1), on the first line, “at least”.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think the amendment proposed by the Hon Chairman subsequently got amended. So; what was supposed to be done, is “Three other persons, at least one of whom is a woman appointed by the Chairman of the Council who are leaders in the communities; in the districts with knowledge in human security”.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
I do not get it; please Hon Members, are you following him; are you talking about one person or more people “one of whom is a woman and another; a community leader. But it appears to me that is what you want to propose but he is introducing
“leaders”. That generates confusion in my mind.
Alhaji I.A.B. Fuseini 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the way it is formulated, the woman needs not be a leader; it is just to satisfy the gender issue. But the way he had couched it, the woman necessarily has to be a leader. -- [Interruption] -- Mr Speaker, we should leave the woman -- if we make it that way, we would not get a woman.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:40 a.m.
I think what —
Mr Banda 5:40 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I think that “three persons, one of whom at least should be a woman and another person, a community leader in the district with knowledge in human security. That is the understanding.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:50 a.m.
That is clear.
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Now, I cannot put the Question on the entire clause 8 because we have deferred one paragraph.
Clause 9 -- Functions of District Security Council
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 9, delete and insert the following:
“Without limiting subsection (2) of section 5, the functions of the district security council in the district are
(a) provide early warning signals to the Government of the existence or likelihood of a security threat to the district, the country or the Govern- ment;
(b) in consultation with the Council, take appropriate measures to ensure peace in conflict areas in the district;
(c) take measures to ensure peace building in, and the unity and stability of the district;
(d) take immediate steps to ensure law and order and assist the affected population in the event of an emergency or a disaster; and
(e) perform the functions of the Council assigned to that district security council by the Council.”
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Clause 9 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 10 -- Establishment of committees
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 10, subclauses (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) delete.
Mr Chireh 5:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, when I looked at the amendment proposed, there currently exist the Joint Intelligence Committee which is functioning. The purpose of this Bill was to make sure that many of the things that exist and are functioning are formalised in an Act of Parliament. Therefore, the Hon Chairman cannot just say that he is deleting all the committees. What is the reason? Apart from one or two that I know, the Joint Intelligence Committee is made up of the Intelligence Chiefs, meeting with the Coordinator periodically to review the intelligence situation.
The other additions that were made like the National Security Committee, the Public Order and Civil Protection Committee and now the Ministerial Security Committee are additions. Obviously, if you look at the National
Mr K. S. Acheampong 5:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, I want to persuade my Hon Colleague who just spoke that in subclause (1), we are saying that the Council may establish committees consisting of members of the Council and non-members or both to perform the functions of the Council. Administratively, we would not want to tie the hands of the Council by legislating every manner of committee that we would want them to work with. We want to give them the flexibility to be able to work.
Indeed, it is true that there are other cross-sectorial committees but these are the functions of the National
Security Coordinator and there are no specifics. In Act 526, there is no clear committee set out as a joint intelligence committee. However, the National Security Coordinator coordinates the operations of the intelligence agencies as part of his functions. So, we would want to leave these committees out to the Council, so they determine the sort of committees they want. I want to persuade my Hon Colleague to at least listen to my submission.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 5:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman invited me to Akosombo and I was part of the meeting. I do not recall the decision to delete clause 10 (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6). They are very important. Clause 10 (1) is saying that they can establish committees but clause 10 (2) is saying that these committees in clause 10 (2) must necessarily be part of them. So, there must be a National Security Committee, a Public Order and Civil Protection Committee, a Joint Intelligence Committee and a Ministerial Security Coordinating Committee in addition to all the committees they can form in subclause (1).
What harm does it cause? Clause 10 (2) is saying that the membership shall be determined by --
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:50 a.m.
Hon Member, without subclauses (2) and (3), can they establish those committee?
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 5:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, they can establish all committees.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:50 a.m.
So, actually, it does not change anything? I think that the value is the same, but if you prescribe it, then it means they must by all means have it even if the circumstances change?
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 5:50 a.m.
Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 5:50 a.m.
Under intelligence, we are in a very fluid situation.
Alhaji I. A. B. Fuseini 5:50 a.m.
Mr Speaker, we all agreed that the National Security Council must operate in a transparent manner and not an opaque manner.
Also, that decisions concerning national security must be decided and determined by a committee set up as a national security agency, so that everybody knows that the sub- committee on national security considered it. This is in accord with transparency. If there is a problem with going on demonstration, we know that the Public Order and Civil Protection Committee has met on it,
decided and given recommendations to the Council. Why do we want to hide it under --
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6 p.m.
Mr Speaker, clause 10 (1) provides that the Council may establish committees consisting of members of the Council or non-members or both to perform a function of the Council. What it means is that they can set up as many committees as possible. The issues of security and intelligence really belong to a very fluid field. If we legislate these committees, tomorrow the environment may be altered completely. You also know that wherever it is, the national security and intelligence architecture is shrouded in a bit of secrecy, so that is one thing.
The second thing is that because of the fluid nature of matters relating to national security -- For instance, there has not been a final resolution as to the cause of the COVID-19 affliction that has invaded the world. Some scientists are saying that it was borne out of a test-tube experiment. Some are saying that it is a biological weapon; but it has not been settled yet.
If indeed it is settled, we may meet, perhaps, a committee at the highest level relating to national security. There may be an invasion of locust to
Mr Speaker, with your permission, I beg to quote Standing Order 47, which says 6 p.m.
“The proceedings of Parliament shall ordinary be conducted in the English Language, except that a Member may exercise the opinion to address the House in either Akan, Nzema, Ga, Ewe, Hausa, Dagbani, Dagaare or in any other local language provided facilities exist in the House for its interpretation”.
Mr Speaker, we met on the collective wisdom of the technical
committee of this House and subsequently, the Standing Orders Committee we decided that we do not need to particularise to the extent that any person could speak in his or her local language -- just let us say that “in English Language or any other local language”. That was what we did.
Mr Speaker, it is of the same application. If the Council could establish any committee that it deems fit and appropriate, why particularise? That is the rational.
Mr Iddrisu 6 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I have listened to the Hon Majority Leader and the Hon Chairman of the Committee and my first preliminary objection to the Hon Chairman's proposal is policy. When we read page (iii) on the explanatory memorandum, the Bill provides clear guidelines on the channels of reportage and it names these committees.
So, that is a policy decision. If we now want to delete clause 10 (2) -- I want to give one example. Why would we have a public order and civil protection committee? It is because the rights and freedoms guaranteed under this Constitution, particularly, under chapter five, are limited only to the extent that they infringe on matters of public safety, morality and national security.
In the Public Order Act, 1994 (Act 491) one may want to guarantee but the national security would determine whether a particular demonstration should happen or not happen. Then if the street action happens, individual civilians are beaten or suffer and the national security must review the consequences of that event. That is why we recommend a committee on the public order and civil protection. When we allow soldiers to go, we know what they do to civilians. We do not want those unfriendly relationships.
Mr Speaker, clause 10 (b), simply says that we should create -- but among the committees, there should be a committee on national security, which is the primary core function, then public order and civil protection because there is a Public Order Act. When it is actioned, there are ramifications which borders on human rights and freedoms. We want them to do an introspection themselves at the national security. What happened at the Kwame Nkrumah Circle, was it right or wrong? How do we improve upon it having granted the enjoyment of that particular right to procession and others?
Mr Speaker, I do not see the merit of the Hon Chairman seeking to delete clause 10(2) because it does
not sit with policy. In the explanatory memorandum, an explanation has been given why it is a part. We do not say that they cannot create the kind of committee the Hon Majority Leader talked about. For example, there is the coronavirus pandemic and clause 10 in its entirety does not prevent them from creating a public health or national security committee as additional to what is provided for in this law.
In clause 11, there is the Ministerial Security Coordinating Committee, which they have expanded in their wisdom to include what the Hon Majority Leader said they should add the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice. Even in some countries they would include the governor the Bank of Ghana. -- [Laughter] --
Mr Speaker, the Hon Chairman should abandon this amendment so it would stay as it is. It does not prevent them from doing that tomorrow.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6 p.m.
Yes, Hon Minister for Works and Housing?
I have already exceeded the time I allowed for --
Mr Akyea 6 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I am of the humble view that we should not
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6 p.m.
Hon Members, we have talked about much ado about nothing. In clause 10(2), it says:
“Without limiting subsection (1), the Council may…''
So, in actual fact, we want to give them a discretion. We want to suggest a committee they may set up. So, in truth and in fact, it does not add any value or take anything away from them. They may choose to establish them or not. If we spend all the time to discuss something they may or may not do, we do not add any value to the Bill. If it is not there; it would not add anything and if it is there, it would not add anything.
I suggest that we find a way to limit further discussion of this matter, so we could continue.
Hon Majority Leader, what do you suggest?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6 p.m.
Mr Speaker, are you minded to put the Question on clause 10 as amended?
Mr First Deputy Speaker; Yes, if we do not reach a conclusion I would put the Question.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6 p.m.
Mr Speaker, put the Question on clause 10 as amended, so we could make progress.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
Hon Member, there is nothing more to be heard that has not been heard. You
shouted even though not into the microphone but I heard you.
Question put and amendment negatived.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, respectfully, I saw one person punch his microphone and shouted into it. With respect, if you could put the Question again. [Laughter]
Question put and amendment agreed to.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
What is interesting is that those who intended to say yes were not paying attention at the time the Question was put and then they came back to find a way to get the Question re-put.
So, we can bring the consideration to a close for now and do the Order Paper Addendum.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, I believe we can speedily run through the Order Paper Addendum. The Papers would be presented and then thereafter we take an adjournment.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
Very well, Hon Members, that brings us to the end of consideration of the
Security and Intelligence Agencies Bill, 2020 for today.
Yes, Hon Majority Leader, there are two Order Paper Addenda before me. They are not one and two; they are all Addenda. Which one do you want us to consider?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, which ones?
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
There is one relating to the BOT Ashanti Port Services and there is one relating to Mineral Royalties and so on.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6:10 p.m.
All of them have been encapsulated in the new Order Paper Addendum. It is not the four paged one but the other one.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
All right. Order Paper Addendum, Presentation of Papers, item numbered 1 (a) (i) by the Minister for Finance?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Deputy Minister for Finance is here.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
Yes, Hon Deputy Minister, you may.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
Item numbered 1 (b) by the Minister for Roads and Highways.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 6:10 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the item 1 (b) really is the
joint enterprise between the Minister for Roads and Highways and Transport. So, now that we have the Hon Minister for Transport here, I believe he could do the presentation.
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
Very well, Hon Minister for Transport?
By the Minister for Transport --
(i) Design, Finance, Construct, Maintain and Transfer Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Roads and Highways [Department of Urban Roads]) and A. P. Moller Capital P/S and Africa Infrastructure Fund 1 K/S1 for an amount of two hundred and five million United States dollars (US$205,000,000.00) in respect of the Tema Arterial Roads and Asso- ciated Facilities Project.
(ii)Transaction Advisory Ser- vices Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana (represented by the Ministry of Roads and Highways [Ghana Highways Authority]) and Roughton International Limited of UK for an amount of
US$2,078,288.75 and GP£63,693.92 for the Public Private Partnership (PPP) Upgrading of the Accra - Tema Motorway Project.
(iii) Transaction Advisory Services Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana (repre- sented by the Ministry of Roads and Highways [Ghana Highways Authority]) and Messrs Feedback Infra Private Limited (in joint venture with Messrs Gibbs Africa Limited) for an amount of three million, five hundred and seventy-four thousand, seven hundred and ninety-six United States dollars thirty-eight cents (US$3,574,796.38) for the Public Private Partnership (PPP) Feasibility Study and Follow-up Procurement Activities for the Accra - Takoradi Motorway Project.
Referred to the Committee on Roads and Transport.
By the Chairman of the Committee --
Report of the Committee on Roads and Transport on the
Mr First Deputy Speaker 6:10 p.m.
Hon Majority Leader, we are not going to take the Motions, are we? [Interruption] -- Very well.
ADJOURNMENT 6:10 p.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 6.20 p.m. till Friday, 14th August, 2020 at 10.00 a.m.