Mr Speaker,
Hon, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa would
like to know exactly when we would have
the Mid-Year Review. On two occasions,
we have this response to this House by
stating and giving indications and I would
not want to repeat what I said. It is the
duty of the Hon Member to be in the
House to listen and when he is absent,
whatever is transacted in the House, it is
his responsibility to apprise himself a bit.
It is not for me to be repeating myself
every time as I have given the indication
on two occasions already.
Mr Speaker, the same Hon Member
said that he has Urgent Questions and that
he is sure had been forwarded to the Rt
Hon Speaker on the 3rd June, 2022. The
fact that he submitted Questions and they
have got to the Rt Hon Speaker, as he has
diligently traced and tracked, I thought he
was going to say that the Questions had
been admitted by the Rt Hon Speaker. If
the Rt Hon Speaker had not admitted the
Questions, they would not come to the
Business Committee for programming.
So, he has some further work to do as
regards to tracing and tracking. I think it
is important that he has undertaken to do
this. We would liaise with the Table
Office to see the status of those
Questions, and what must be done sequel
Business of the House
to the admission of the Questions or
otherwise by the Rt Hon Speaker.
My Speaker, I agree with my Hon
Colleague that the National Security
apparatus is having some engagements
with the civil society and the general
populace, and it is important that we are
briefed because when we go back to the
constituencies, we should be well-
positioned to respond to issues that may
come before us.
Mr Speaker, the final question from
Mr Okudzeto is about the provision of
timelines to some outstanding issues in
respect of some shooting incidents in
Nkoranza and Beposo, and the Islamic
School, which I bear testimony to the Rt
Hon Speaker when he said that the
Committee has been given up till early
next week to report to us.
I know the Committee has submitted a
request to the Rt Hon Speaker to be
funded to go and discharge that
responsibility. I hope they would be given
the necessary resources immediately for
them to prosecute that assignment — [Interruption] —
Hon Member, I have responded to the
Question on Mid-Year Review. It is your responsibility to trace and track what you said in the House. I have given that indication in terms of dates on two occasions here. The Hon Member is lost. I gave the indication here. If he was not
Mr Speaker, regarding Dr Clement
Abas Apaak's, Question numbered 264, he said that the names of some of the communities have been misspelt. I guess his handwriting may not be legible enough to the Clerks-at-the-Table, so he should do what is appropriate. Next time, maybe he could type out the names of those communities, now that he has admitted that his handwriting is not legible enough.
The Hon Member said that he filed a
Question to the Hon Minister for Finance, but a Motion which addresses a similar matter has appeared on the Order Paper. I would have to look at it, and see what to do. He appealed that when the Hon Minister appears on Wednesday, 22nd June, 2022, he should Answer more than 16 Questions. We could programme him to Answer 30 Questions, but how would that benefit the House? Question time is for an hour, so if the Hon Minister has to Answer more Questions, he would not be able to get to the bottom of the issues that may be raised. So the fewer the Questions, the better it would be for us, so that we would get to the very bottom of those Questions that are asked. If indeed we want to be very probious, I am of the view that, the 16 Questions would be one too many for him to Answer.
Mr Speaker, as for Dr Apaak's own subjective analysis of the economy in
nose-dive, I would not litigate the matter
with him, because he must get his
Business of the House
bearings right. In any event, it has nothing
to do with the Business Statement before
us.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Member for Ningo Prampram, Mr Samuel Nartey George, also raised issues about the security situation in the House, and I think it is a legitimate concern. It is not for the Parliamentary Service but the Service itself is just for the staff. It is one of the issues that, perhaps, we would have to deal with. The Parliamentary Service relates to the public service component who are required to provide services to the Hon Members of Parliament (MPs). It appears that within the ambit of the Constitution, matters relating to Parlia- ment, and indeed, MPs are not sufficiently covered. It is one of the reasons why perhaps, looking at the Constitution holistically, we have to provide for, because the Parliamentary Service Board really deals with the public servants who are working with us, and not the Hon MPs. That is where we have the difficulty.
So, perhaps, in doing serious intro-
spection on the Constitution, it is som- ething that should engage our attention. Notwithstanding, it is important that we find ways to deal with this because of circumstances in the countries around us. We should take our own security very seriously.
Mr Speaker, the conditions of Hon
MPs — every Administration has been very guilty of this, and it is because the
Presidents have shown extreme sensi-
tivity to the plight of the workers in the
general body polity. The very day one is
inaugurated to begin business as an MP,
they should know their conditions of
service, but it does not happen.
It is the reason some of us have been
advocating that as a House, we should
agree for the emoluments Committee,
appointed under article 71 of the
Constitution, to build in the necessary
triggers in the Reports they submit to us,
so that there would be that automaticity if
those conditions are triggered. Thus, once
a person becomes a Member of
Parliament, they know that these are the
conditions of service, and not for us to be
required to ritualistically set up these
Committees every four years, which
would attract a lot of brouhaha which in
my view, is not necessary.
Today, people talk about ex-gratia
being given to Members of Parliament
and Ministers, and so on. There is nothing
like ex-gratia. It is gratuity that is paid to
Members of Parliament, not ex-gratia;
the difference must be known to people.
Unfortunately, we also fall into that trap
and talk about ex-gratia. Members of
Parliament are not paid ex-gratia, but
gratuity, which is totally different. Mr
Speaker, perhaps, all of us have to put our
heads together, alongside, maybe,
Business of the House
officers from the Presidency so that going
forward, we would know the appropriate
thing to be done so that this ritual of
having our heads “on the gavel” every four years becomes a thing of the past.
Mr Speaker, on the National Identification Authority and the issuance of cards for the people of this country, I agree that ultimately, the card should be what bears testimony of one's Ghanaian identity, so that we could use it to vote. Are we there yet? That is the issue that perhaps, we may have to interrogate because the card should be sufficiently complemented by the records from the Births and Deaths Registry, which is not functioning effectively as we would have wished. The two, together, should provide us with the basis for us to identify who is a Ghanaian, and who is not; who then would be eligible to vote, and who would not be eligible to vote. Hence, we should find a way of synchronising the activities of the Births and Deaths Registry.
Fortunately, we have passed a new Act
quite recently. And when we talk about the lack of job opportunities for our graduates, it provides enough space for them to be able to go to the communities and undertake this assignment. We should not forget that, apart from the Births and Deaths Registrars, every zone and every community would have officers. How many communities do we have in the system? If we want to sufficiently implement that law, it would offer opportunities to our graduates. Therefore, we need to look at that and I
believe that it would be a very useful complement to the activities of the National Identificiation Authority (NIA), and ultimately legitimise the identity cards which would be issued.
I think the Hon Rockson Dafeamekpor
related to the same thing in the first issue
that he raised and so, I would not go over
that. He also said that there are Private
Members Motions which we must
prosecute in the course of the ensuing
week. I believe that there are many of
them that are really harmless, and we
would have to deal with them. Maybe,
next week, and the ensuing week, there
are about three or four that we can deal
with.
He also insists that Hon Deputy
Ministers must be allowed to answer
Questions in the absence of the
substantive Hon Ministers. We should
come to some determination on that; we
keep wavering. On some occasions, we
say that we would not permit Hon Deputy
Ministers to answer Questions. If we
agree, then in the absence of the Hon
Ministers, let the Hon Deputy Ministers
come and answer Questions, so that we
are able to clear the backlog of Questions.
Mr Speaker, on the issue of Bills that
are outstanding, we would be able to start
some of them today because the 7th
Parliament passed many Bills and it was
unprecedented in the history of the Fourth
republic and we must follow that path.
Business of the House
Mr Speaker, the Hon Bawa says that if
one wants their Questions to be
Responded to in the House, they should
not add COVID-19. He should advise
himself then, if he knows that to be the
truth. [Laughter] I believe he said that on
a lighter note. On the Question that he
said he has asked, if the Rt Hon Speaker
has admitted it, we would follow through
to its logical conclusion.
The Hon Kpodo has revisited an old
matter. It is an ancient matter that he has
raised in the House, and I think that we
should sometimes be pragmatic, and not
dogmatic. This is because we have total
national revenue, but there are statutory
payments that must be made by this
country. Is it the case that one would do
their allocations before considering how
much debt they owe? So that one
becomes international because one is not
able to fulfill their debt obligations? What
should be the better way about that? I am
aware that the courts have made a
pronouncement on this, but I think that
pragmatism should take the place of
dogmatism.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Armah-Kofi
Buah raised issues about research
assistants and their remuneration. I guess
Leadership would have some consul-
tations on that. Again, he spoke about the
NIA cards; It is a repetition of what has
already been asked.
Hon Acheampong's question about total revenue and amounts to be allocated
to the Common Fund and how much is in
arrears is about the same as the other.
Mr Speaker, the Hon Murtala says we
should add, “since 2017” to his Question, numbered *385, which reads:
“To ask the Minister for Finance how much revenue the state
generated from the sale of power
to neighboring countries.”
I do not know the original Question
that he filed. If he wants this change to be
effected, certainly, it would amount to a
new Question, and he must know what he
must do: he must go through the process
again. Since I do not know his original
Question, I would not like to comment
further on that.
The Hon Abgodza asked about
Business to the House; that is, what
comes before the Business Committee.
We only programme what comes before
us. We do not suo moto generate Business
for the House, and I think I have related
to this question on many occasions. He is
an Hon Senior Member of this House; he
should not bring rudimentary questions
Mr Speaker, we have sufficiently
addressed the issue raised by the Hon
Minority Leader on whether the Electoral
62 Business of the House
Commission would use the NIA cards. I
have also responded to the issue about
poultry farmers.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much for
the opportunity.