 |
| Prof. Akilagpa Sawyerr |
Professor
Akilagpa Sawyerr, chair of the Government Team for the Review and
Re-Negotiation of Stability and Mining Agreements has distanced himself and his
team from the recently concluded Goldfields Ghana Limited Development Agreements.
The
Full text of a statement he issued to that effect is published below unedited;
The
Government of Ghana recently concluded Development Agreements with Gold Fields
Ghana Limited, in relation to the Tarkwa and Damang mining operations of the
latter.
In
a recent letter the Third World Network-Africa (TWN) asked the Mining Review
Committee (the Government Team for the Review and Re-Negotiation of Stability
and Mining Agreements - to give it its full name) to clarify its role in the
development and negotiation of the Gold Fields agreements. Further to this, I
am aware of the perception in some quarters, arising from the mandate of the
Mining Review Committee (MRC) that those agreements had been negotiated by that
Committee.
In
the circumstances, I feel obliged, as Chairman of the MRC, to state
categorically that the MRC was not involved in the development of positions,
nor the conduct of the negotiations that produced the Gold Fields Development
Agreements ratified by Parliament on 17 March, 2016. Indeed, those negotiations
were carried out on the blind side of the Committee.
 |
| Dr Yao Graham, Third World Network |
As
chair of the MRC, I did not get to hear about the negotiations till after they
had been concluded, even though I was in regular contact with the Ministry of
Lands and Natural Resources at all times. When I finally got the news I asked
for, and was given a copy of the proposed agreement, together with a request
from the Minister of Lands and Natural Resources for a review of the documents.
After a hasty review I sent critical observations to the supervising Ministries
(Lands and Finance) and to the Minerals Commission on two separate occasions.
The
essence of my observations, which were subsequently endorsed by the Mining
Review Committee, can be summarised as follows:
1.The negotiations with
Gold Fields had been conducted on the basis of fundamental misconceptions about
(i) the limits of the powers given the
Minister under the relevant provisions of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006
(Act 703); and (ii) the import of the revised Newmont Agreements, negotiated by
the MRC and signed less than a year ago;
2.The tax and royalty concessions
granted Gold Fields in the stability clauses [reportedly estimated by Gold
Fields to be worth $26 million
this year] were serious fiscal give-aways, for which no justification was
apparent;
3.The entire approach to the
negotiations, especially the by-passing of the Mining Review Committee and the
rush to conclude had the tendency to undermine the national position in future
negotiations.
I
concluded that, on the basis of a quick review, the Gold Fields Development
Agreements
"[made]
needless concessions to Gold Fields ", "[were] unsupportable, ... should
not have been sent to Parliament, nor should they be ratified by the latter.
In
spite of information that my detailed comments had been received and favourably
considered at the highest levels of government, the agreements remained
essentially unchanged, and were subsequently ratified by parliament in an
expedited process, which dispensed with the Standing Order requirement of a
minimum 48 hour period between notice of a motion for ratification and its
movement and acceptance-for reasons that are not stated.
Akilagkpa
Sawyerr
20th
April, 2016
IN WHOSE NAME, AND FOR WHOSE WELFARE
 |
| Dr Wereko Brobbey |
By Dr
Charles Wireku Brobbey
The
President of Ghana, His Excellency John Dramani Mahama has embarked on a
nationwide tour, ostensibly to account for his stewardship of the last four
years and to ask for a fresh mandate on November 7, 2011. The account has
consisted largely of inauguration of infrastructure projects ie roads, schools,
hospitals, as well as cutting sods for the start of new projects, albeit more
infrastructure.
The
President’s tour has generated a lot of heat from the chattering classes.
Unfortunately, all the hot air has been directed at whether there has been an
abuse of incumbency by the President, when the chatter should be about the impact
of the President’s efforts to the welfare of the people.
Impressive
as the infrastructure projects are, they are being rolled out in an environment
of deteriorating and deleterious effects on the people of Ghana. It is rather
unfortunate to build shining new hospitals and watch trained nurses going on
strike to be employed. What use is a
well equipped hospital, which turns away desperate patients because the
Government has failed to reimburse the cost of treatment supposedly covered by
the NHIS?
It is an
utter disgrace when doctors have to abandon their patients to come to Accra to
chase their unpaid salaries when we have a bloated public service. There is no
rhyme or reason for teachers to teach for more than three years without being
paid and expect them to deliver instruction to very high quality on empty
stomachs.
Don’t get
me wrong. Infrastructure development is good and constitutes a very important
component of the development of a nation. However, it is only a means to an
end, which end being to improve the welfare of the people. So without connecting the dots to demonstrate
without equivocation, how the infrastructure will lead to improvements in the
welfare of the people, it becomes a mere show.
As I
write, the government has put out a tall litany of jobs that have been created
since 2013. It apparently adds up to a gargantuan total of about eight hundred
thousand in just about every sector of our economy and in every corner of our
country. Unless of course, this
‘impressive achievement’ is completely cancelled out by the number of jobs lost
from closures of manufacturing companies and other challenges to the private
sector.
Given that
the President won the last election by just about 500,000, if this job creation
figure were to be real and net, the President might as well abandon his
accounting tour now and simply wait for all of these beneficiaries to show
their appreciation and love on Election Day.
The fact
that the President has to embark on a nationwide tour to account for his
stewardship is a clear indication that there is a real gulf between the figures
on paper and those whose welfare has been improved.
But the
shortcomings of the incumbency’s message should not be construed to mean that
we are bound for an inevitable change of baton on November 7, 2016; far from
it. The case for replacing the ‘Change
that is happening’ with the ‘Change that is to come’ still has to be made
convincingly to the people of Ghana.
It is not
good enough to exhort the people of Ghana to give you a chance without making a
convincing case as to how giving you a chance will lead to an improvement in
their welfare. Simply invoking the achievements of a predecessor from the same
political tradition is not enough to convince the people that you will deliver
to the same or better levels; especially when you are unable to maintain order
within your own ranks.
The notion
that the” business of the opposition is to oppose and offer no alternatives” is
no longer tenable.
In the
dispensations that are well practiced in democratic politicking and elections,
it is required, nay demanded, that those who are offering themselves as offering
better governance, present policies and programmes demonstrating the happy days
yet to come. These are then subjected to scrutiny for deliverability and
fitness of purpose.
So the
people of Ghana deserve something more from Nana Akufo-Addo than ‘just trust me
to do better than this’. Promising to
build more SHS schools than NDC’s 200 without addressing the related issues of
what else you will do to ensure that more teachers are not only trained, but
employed to produce quality education to our children, will not do.
The
opening article of the 4th constitution of the first Republic is very clear and
unambiguous about why we elect governments: “The Sovereignty of Ghana resides
in the people of Ghana in whose name and for whose welfare the powers of government
are to be exercised in the manner and within the limits laid down in this
Constitution”
Governance should be in our name and more importantly for
the betterment of our welfare, rather than the betterment and welfare of the
governors, which is what happens when it’s all about putting up infrastructure
without squaring the circle of how that infrastructure would actually work with
other factors to improve the welfare of the people.
Our Constitution also reminds us that choosing our governors
is based on the principle of universal adult suffrage, or ‘one person, one
vote’. Therefore, those who are competing for us to give them the powers of
government should know that whatever it is they do or want to do in our name
must ultimately be for our welfare.
Weather change will continue to happen or Change is now
coming will be based on the principle that all powers of government springs
from the sovereign will of the people.
Will the ‘grateful’ 800, 000
overcome the as yet uncounted thousands of unemployed nurses, unpaid teachers,
unemployed graduates and the now redundant private sector workers? It is the perception
of improved welfare of these people that will decide whether Change will go on
Happening or Change will come.
Charles
Wereko-Brobby (Dr)
Chief
Policy Analyst, GIPPO
Email: tarzan@eyetarzan.org
Twitter;
@eyetarzan
No comments:
Post a Comment