Parliament has rejected a private member’s motion moved by Bawku Central MP, Mahama Ayariga on the need for government to absorb admission fees for public tertiary education institutions for the 2020/2021 academic year.
The House also turned down a call for the extension of support to accredited private universities as part of the national Covid-19 alleviation measures. The motion was originally moved on the 20th of this month but was withdrawn yesterday and replaced with a new one.
The motion received support from the NDC Minority group but opposed by the NPP majority group. After the debate, majority of the members in the Chamber collectively voted against the motion and it was accordingly rejected.
The original motion moved by the MP for Bawku Central, Mahama Ayariga on Wednesday the 20th of this month and seconded by the MP for Akatsi North, Peter Nortsu-Kotoe was asking the House to request the President to take urgent steps to suspend the payment of admission fees by fresh students of public tertiary education institutions for the 2020/2021 academic year as part of COVID -19 alleviation measures being implemented by government.
Members from the majority group most especially the Majority Group Leader, Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu and his deputy Alex Afenyo-Markin as well as the majority Chief Whip, Frank Annoh Dompreh raised preliminary objections to the motion. They argued that the motion was incompetent in two respects. First, the wording and secondly the request being made. The speaker however dismissed the objection and admitted the motion on the basis that it is competent and it was properly before the House.
The speaker nevertheless postponed debate on the motion and directed the leadership of both sides to meet and agree on a consensual motion. Reluctantly, Mr. Ayariga agreed to a variation of the motion in terms of the wording and scope. At the commencement of the debate, Mr. Ayariga with the leave of the House withdrew the earlier motion and moved the new one which was once again supported by the MP for Akatsi North.
The new motion is to request the President to take urgent steps to absorb instead of suspend fees in general and later extend that support to private tertiary institutions. From the onset of the debate on the new motion, it became apparent that there was no consensus on the motion. NPP MP for Ofoase Ayirebi and Minister nominee for Information, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, who was the first to contribute to the debate, said the motion did not meet some four criteria that he set out, which include clarity of purpose, constitutionality and non-discrimination and for which reason the motion should be rejected.
NDC MP for North Tongu and former deputy minister of education, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa for his part expressed the view that the Covid 19 pandemic is having devastating effects on economies all over the world and countries are implementing measures to cushion their students and Ghana should also do same. He argued that Ghana’s constitution requires government to make education progressively free even at the university level and the motion is in line with that requirement and it should therefore be adopted.
NPP MP for Bosomtwe and Minister-Designate for Education, Dr. Yaw Adu Twum said the motion was belated because in some instances, about 70 percent of the new admitted students had already paid their fees.
NDC MP for Pusiga, Hajia Ladi Ayamba refuted the suggestion that the motion was discriminatory. According to her, it is in line with the government’s free SHS, free water and electricity policies which are not being enjoyed by every Ghanaian. She also touched on the suggestion that the students have already paid the fees.
Deputy Majority leader, Alex Afenyo-Markin argued that the motion was defective and lacked clarity. He also argued that the motion was unconstitutional as its implementation would result in a charge on the consolidated fund. According to him, it’s only the president or his representative who can introduce any such motion or bill in parliament.
NDC MP for Wa West, Rashid Pelpuo also supported the motion.
At the conclusion of the debate, the speaker was not sure whether to put the question immediately or defer it to another day. This was in view of the fact that only one-third of MPs were permitted into the makeshift tent serving as the chamber while the remaining members were asked to be in their offices and follow proceedings on virtual platforms.
The speaker was not sure if it was fair to exclude those who through no fault of theirs were not in the chamber from voting. The vote was eventually put and the nays had it, effectively rejecting the motion.
