Thank you, Mr Speaker,for the opportunity to make a briefcomment on the Statement made by theSecond Deputy Majority Whip. Mr Speaker, when I listened to portionsof the Statement by the Second DeputyMajority Whip, I got the impression thathe was indeed concerned about thedirectives emanating from the Ministry ofTrade and Industry relating to cashewnuts.
Mr Speaker, clearly, this is a very strongStatement which is urging Parliament totake some steps. Mr Speaker, but as wedo know, if a Statement is brought to thisHouse and delivered, comments could bemade. They are not supposed to generatedebate and sometimes, depending on thegravity of the issue before us, Mr Speakermay direct that the Statement be servedon the relevant Ministry. Mr Speaker, unfortunately, when thatresort is applied, what is achieved is that,we seek to persuade the Ministry or theHon Minister. The Statement or thatdirective would only have a persuasiveinfluence. Mr Speaker, it is not enforceableon the Hon Minister. That is why the Hon Member forSekondi proposed to us that, perhaps, ifthe Hon Member had come before us witha Motion, that would be compelling thisHouse to take a particular decision or callon the Hon Minister or the Ministry totake a particular action. As it is now, it is difficult for us to seeour way clearly on the face of theStatement that has been made in theHouse. Where Mr Speaker directs that thevarious comments made by Hon Membersshould even be included and be servedon the Hon Minister, it is still persuasive.We are only persuading him to dosomething that he may not want to do. But if the Hon Member had come by aMotion and we had concluded anddecided on that, and served on him, then,immediate action would be required of theHon Minister. That is where we findourselves, which is why I agree with theHon Member for Sekondi that if he hadcome by a Motion, rather than a Statement,we would have served a better cause andpurpose.
Having said so, Mr Speaker, I noticedfrom the account given by the HonMember who make the Statement, thatwhat is shot by the Hon Minister issupposed to be expressed between 31stMarch and 31stMay 2016. What it means is that, the Hon Ministeris not enforcing the confiscation now. Westill have about two weeks before the time.So Mr Speaker, we may perhaps, as aHouse, summon the Hon Minister andimpress upon him, flowing from thisStatement, to decline any further actionnot to enforce his own threats, because itis illegal. On the other hand, we may also urgeour Hon Colleague to come by a Motion,which could be taken tomorrow and thenwe serve on the Hon Minister to compelhim to take any further steps, failingwhich, Mr Speaker, I believe we could thenapply ourselves to article 82 of theConstitution, which is vote of censure. We could censure him if he refuses toobey what instructions that emanate fromthis House. We are not there yet. I believewe can apply ourselves to one or twoproposals. Either way, we summon himtomorrow and tell him that his resort isillegal and he must reverse it or as I amsaying, we can invite our Hon Colleagueto bring a Motion and serve on him directlytomorrow. Mr Speaker, as I said, fortunately, timeis still on our side. It is supposed to takeeffect from 31/3/ 2016. We have about twoweeks and if he does not apply himself tothat and the House deems it appropriate,then we could pass a vote of censure onhim and cause his impeachment and causethe President to send him on the path ofresignation.
All that I am saying, we are not thereyet. Let us hope that, one of these tworesorts would appeal to him and he wouldrescind what steps he intends or he isthreatening to take. Mr Speaker, I thank you.