Hon Members,
enough is enough. Let me assure all
of you that the Hon Minister for
Finance will be given ample
opportunity to defend himself.
[Hear! Hear!] There is a vast
difference between censure and
removal. Censureship is done
because the person is appointed by an
Instrument of appointment, and that
process is handled by Parliament and
His Excellency the President.
Members of Parliament and the
President are not appointed; they are
elected by the people. Both are
elected. The Vice President supports
the President. During the four-year
term, the people do not have the
opportunity to come back to
reconsider the decision they made in
electing us, and that authority is
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
enshrined in the people's House called Parliament. So, we are given
the power to remove a Member or the
President or the Vice President. Our
election is not through an Instrument.
We come in through votes, and we
swear an oath, and that is why in the
1992 Constitution and our Standing
Orders, the provisions are different.
Before the President can revoke the
appointment, the Minister or Deputy
Minister is to come before where it all
started. The ladder that you climb is
the same ladder you have to go down
through.
So, you start with Parliament,
and then Parliament, through some
constitutional appeal to the President,
calling on him — that is why it is not “shall”. It says “may” revoke the appointment of the Minister. So, they
are different. But premising your
preliminary objection on the 1992
Constitution, you know definitely
well that I do not have that authority
to interpret and enforce the
Constitution. My authority is to
interpret and enforce the rules of the
House, the Standing Orders. So, I
cannot give an opinion on the issue of
the constitutional provision that has
been cited. I cannot interpret them; I
cannot enforce them because I am not
part of the Judiciary. What I can do at
this time is to allow the Motion to be
seconded. I will give an opportunity
for it to be responded to and in
accordance with our Standing Orders
because I am guided by the Standing
Orders, which I can interpret, the
matter would be referred to an ad hoc
Committee to investigate, where the
Hon Minister would have the ample
opportunity to defend himself, and
what our Hon Colleague said cannot
constitute evidence. The evidence
would be placed before the
Committee. The Hon Minister would
have the opportunity to defend
himself. A Report would be
presented to the House and we would
debate that Report.
Hon Members, I said today, 10th
November, 2022, is historic. The first
Motion in the nature of a removal of
a Minister, who was another Minister
for Finance was on the 10th of
November, 1999. So, the same 10th of
November is today. Now, that debate
took a number of days. It started on
the 10th of November and ended on
the 12th of November and a decision
was taken. But that, as I said, was of
a moral persuasion. It was a Motion
to address a public interest, an urgent
public concern, but this one is
constitutional. It is more serious. So,
you will get ample opportunity to
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
dilate and present your evidence, and
the Hon Minister would be given the
opportunity to defend himself. Do not
forget that in our Standing Orders, it
is provided that the Hon Minister can
appear before the Committee with a
counsel. A counsel cannot appear on
the floor of the House. It has to be at
the level of a committee, and that is
why when you go through Order 106
(1) of the Standing Orders, it reads:
“The House may pass a resolution to remove the
President, the Vice President,
Mr. Speaker and Deputy
Speakers and a vote of censure
on a Minister of State. The
House may consider such motion
and come to a decision or refer it
to a committee on a motion made
by any Member.”
And that is why I will be
referring it to a committee because
the Hon Minister is entitled to appear
before the Committee with a counsel.
That would also give the applicants
the opportunity to put across the
evidence at their disposal, then the
Committee would report to the House
for decision to be taken.
Hon Members, please, these are
serious businesses. We have not had
any copious, detailed layout/procedure.
We are guided by the 1992
Constitution and our Standing Orders
and we would go accordingly. So,
please, with all due respect to my
Hon Colleague, my son, the Hon
Member for Effutu, I dismiss your
preliminary objection and would call
on the Hon Minority Chief Whip to
second the Motion, then I would
come back to the Majority Side to
respond before the referral to the Ad
Hoc Committee.
So, please, Hon Minority Chief
Whip, you may now second the
Motion.
Minority Chief Whip (Alhaji
Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka):
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, I rise to second the
Motion ably moved by the Hon
Minority Leader as advertised on
pages 5 and 6 of today's Order Paper.
Mr Speaker, to do so, permit me
to just repeat the items numbered 6
and 7 in the Motion and Mr Speaker,
the
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
“6 Alarming incompetence and frightening ineptitude resulting
in the collapse of the
Ghanaian economy and an
excruciating cost of living
crisis; and
7 Gross mismanagement of the
Ghanaian economy which
has occasioned untold and
unprecedented hardship.”
Mr Speaker, where did we start
with the Hon Minister for Finance?
Mr Speaker, we started with the
Hon Minister for Finance on the
Budget Statement he read to this
House on behalf of His Excellency,
the President, in 2017 and with your
permission, I quote paragraph 19,
page 3 of the 2017 Budget Statement.
Mr Speaker, with your permission,
I quote:
“Mr Speaker, the Budget will set the pace for job creation and
accelerated growth by empowering
the private sector. To accomplish
this, we will shift the focus of
economic management from
taxation to production. This will
reduce the cost of doing business
and create a conducive climate
for investment and job creation.
In this regard, a number of taxes
that impedes growth will be
reviewed, and if necessary,
abolished. Government will
reverse the recent low growth
trend by boosting agriculture and
industrial productivity.”
Mr Speaker, I quote again from
pages 2 and 3, paragraph 14, of the
same 2017 Budget Statement:
“This commitment however, is hampered by five constraints
which we need to overcome:
• low revenue collection;
• expenditure overruns and corruption;
• high wage bill;
• rigidity of fiscal structure caused by heavy earmarking
of tax revenue; and
• high debt service payments.”
Mr Speaker, this was where Mr
Ken Ofori-Atta started with us. He
told us these were the problems he
was going to deal with, and six years
down the line, where are we?
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
Mr Speaker, this is the Hon
Finance Minister that has moved our
debt from, averagely, GH₵120 billion to over GH₵500 billion. This is the Hon Finance Minister that has
moved our debt servicing from
GH₵14.1 billion in 2016 to, averagely, about GH₵48 billion in 2022. This is the Hon Finance
Minister that has moved our wage bill
from approximately GH₵14.8 billion in 2016 to now, GH₵37 billion in 2022. How did this Government
balloon the wage bill?
Mr Speaker, right from the
Presidency, the number of
Presidential Staffers has increased
from 300 staffers to over 995 staffers
in 2022, as reported to this
honourable House in 2021. In almost
all the public agencies, you would
find persons that have been engaged
just because they are party
apparatchiks who do not really have
anything to do. A clear example is
our Metropolitan, Municipal and
District assemblies. There are district
assemblies that have as many as 14
Assistant Directors, others have 18
and these Assistant Directors
alternate in coming to the office.
Mr Speaker, this is the Hon
Minister who is claiming that all the
sufferings we are faced with today is
as a result of COVID-19. This is the
Hon Minister for Finance who took
advantage of the COVID-19 situation
and got in excess of GH₵22 billion that was supposed to support the
economy. This is the only country,
probably, one of the few countries in
the world, where during the COVID-
19 pandemic, while Ministers of
Finance were doing everything they
could to support their citizens, in our
country, this is the Hon Minister for
Finance who decided to task the
citizenry because of COVID-19. So,
we have the COVID-19 Levy.
Mr Speaker, this Hon Minister
for Finance has made it a habit to
avoid coming to this House even
when he has duties to perform here.
Today is a typical example of the Hon
Minister for Finance, deliberately,
refusing to be present.
Mr Speaker, this is the Hon
Minister for Finance who
deliberately falsified figures just to
create the impression that everything
was going on well.
Mr Speaker, if you took the
Budget and the reporting he has done
to the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) and the World Bank, in 2018,
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
the Hon Minister reported to this
House that the fiscal deficit was 3.9
per cent of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP). When he now had to report to
the World Bank, the actual figure
reported was 7.1 per cent of GDP.
Mr Speaker, in 2019, the Hon
Minister reported to this House that
the fiscal deficit was 4.8 per cent of
GDP, when the actuals are now to be
reported to the IMF and World bank,
it is 7.1 per cent of GDP. In 2022, he
reported to this House that the fiscal
deficit was 11.7 per cent but when he
was confronted to report the truth, the
actual is 17.2 per cent. In 2021, he
reported to this House that the fiscal
deficit was 9.2 per cent when the
actual was 12.4 per cent. For the first-
half year in 2022, the fiscal deficit is
5.6 per cent above the target of 3.9
per cent.
Mr Speaker, what are we waiting
to see from this Minister before we
would all believe the time for him to
exit is now? This was the Hon
Minister who, emphatically, told the
whole world that Ghana would never
go to the IMF. Yes, it is said that
“only a fool does not change his mind” but the Hon Minister said this with emphasis and today, we are at
the IMF.
Mr Speaker, I am reliably
informed that he is part of the
impediment that is preventing us
from completing the negotiations
with the IMF. There are senior
economists in this country stating this
for a fact. A typical example is Mr
Kwame Pianim who says that this
Minister for Finance is hindering the
progress that Ghana has to make with
the IMF.
Mr Speaker, poverty, as reported
by the World Bank, is growing very
fast in Ghana due to this incompetent
Minister for Finance. I must say that
the time to act is now. On this excuse
that the Hon Minister for Finance
should be allowed to finish with the
IMF negotiations, present the Budget
Statement and the Appropriation Bill,
you and I know that it does not take
just one person to complete these
processes. Two years ago, when the
Hon Minister was not available, the
Hon Majority Leader read the Budget
Statement. The Budget Statement of
this country did not collapse. There
are technical people who prepare this
Budget Statement; it is not the Hon
Minister for Finance. If he is removed
from office today, the Budget
Statement of this country will not
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
collapse. There are equally technical
people who will carry on for the next
person to carry the mantle.
Mr Speaker, I would refer you to
the day that this Motion was filed.
With just the announcement of the
possibility of the Minister for Finance
being removed from office, you
yourself acknowledged it in your seat
that our currency started gaining its
strength, and at least, for the past two
weeks that the whole country has
been waiting for today, we are seeing
some seeming stability. Our failure,
today, to remove the Minister for
Finance from office, would continue
to hurt each and everyone of us; it
would continue to hurt our
constituents, the economy and
businesses. Businesses are collapsing
and ordinary citizens are now
struggling to feed themselves. This is
a responsibility for all of us.
Mr Speaker, I would like to urge
my Hon Colleagues, especially the
“Rambo 80”, to have at the back of their mind that they have a reason for
rebelling. They know that this is a
Minister for Finance who does not
listen. They know the efforts that they
have made several times to get him to
do the right things and he refused.
Those are the reasons that led them to
rebel. I can assure them that if they
backtrack, they would regret it,
because they know the kind of
President and the family that he has.
They will surely go after them. It is
better that, today, they help us to
remove him from office. It would
give them mileage and make people
believe them. Today, they need to
justify all the rumours that circulated
that people made an attempt to bribe
them. They need to prove to the
world that they were never bribed or
influenced, and truly, their move to
get the Minister for Finance removed
from office is not out of hatred, but
simply on the basis of principle. They
should keep to the principle today.
Mr Speaker, this is a Minister for
Finance who has deliberately and
consistently, throughout his tenure,
been dragging his feet when it comes
to the release of statutory funds that
Parliament has approved. Some of
these statutory funds are
constitutional, and some are by
legislation of this House. This
Minister for Finance deliberately
frustrates these statutory funds so that
they are not able to perform. One of
the constitutional ones is the District
Assemblies Common Fund (DACF).
As we speak today, the arrears of the
DACF is over GH₵3.9 billion. With
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
the Ghana Education Trust Fund
(GETFund), the arrears is over GH₵3 billion, and that of the National
Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) is
well over GH₵2 billion. Mr Speaker, this is a Minister for Finance that we
must remove from office.
The Hon Minority Leader said
that: “We have the men! We have the men! We have the men!”. We heard the Vice President scream, “What a solid team! What a solid team! What
a solid team!” Today, when the real challenges came, we have now come
to realise that apparently, it was not
the men they had; they were just
“area boys” because they are not able to confront the real challenges of our
country.
Mr Speaker, I would like to end
with reference to article 82 of the
1992 Constitution. Article 82 (4) is
very clear. As I conclude, I would
like to urge you, being in the Chair,
to be mindful of article 82 (4) which
says that:
“A Minister of State in respect of whom a vote of censure is
debated under clause (3) of this
article is entitled, during the
debate, to be heard in his
defence.”
Mr Speaker, the catchword is “during the debate”. I did not get the opportunity or the privilege to attend Presbyterian Boys Secondary School (PRESEC), Legon, neither did I get the privilege to attend Achimota School, but I believe “during the debate” means during the debate, and it is after seconding the Motion that the Hon Minister is supposed to be heard.
Mr Speaker, I would like to refer
the House to Standing Orders 106 and 108 which are very clear. In the case of Standing Order 108, it is virtually a verbatim lifting of article 82(4) of the 1992 Constitution. The interesting thing is with Standing Order 106, and with your permission, I beg to quote. It says:
“The House may pass a resolution to remove the President, the Vice President, Mr Speaker and Deputy Speakers and a vote of censure on a Minister of State…”
My emphasis is here:
“…The House may consider such motion and come to a decision or refer it to a Committee on a motion made by any Member.”
Vote of Censure on the Minister for Finance
With all humility and respect to
you, in this text, nowhere did it say
that Mr Speaker would refer the
matter to any Ad-hoc Committee; it
says that the House may take a
decision, and decision, in this House,
is taken by vote. If any Hon Member
can move a Motion that a matter
should be referred to a committee, it
is for the decision of this House. That
is what Standing Order 106 is saying,
and therefore we would have to vote
on it —
