Minority storms out of Parliament over AMERI deal – Starr Fm

The Minority has stormed out of parliament over the controversial Ameri deal.

This follows unsuccessful attempts to stop the Member of Parliament for Adansi Asokwa K.T Hammond from moving a motion in Parliament seeking the review of the deal.

According to a seventeen-member committee put together by the Energy Minister Boakye Agyarko , there are technical, financial and legal lapses in the 510 Million Dollar power contract signed between Ameri Energy and the Ghana government under former President John Mahama.

The committee said although the contractor who built the plant charged 360 Million Dollars, Ameri forwarded a bill of 510 Million Dollars in the B.O.O.T agreement.

The committee said that was not equitable, informing its recommendation that Ameri should be invited for renegotiation of the 150 Million Dollar commission.

The Addison committee said if Ameri turns down the invitation, government should renounce the contract on the basis of fraud.

The committee accused the Mahama administration of failing to do due diligence before awarding the contract since it did not have any information on the shareholders and directors of AMERI and other third parties.

It also said AMERI does not have a license to operate the plants in Ghana which is contrary to section 11 and 25 of the Energy Commission Act.

In view of this, the Adansi Asokwa legislator filed an urgent motion in Parliament to have the House overturn the deal.

According to excerpts of the motion, the deal was suspicious based on some fresh information available to Mr. Hammond.

The motion has since been moved by Mr. Hammond and subsequently forwarded to the Mines and Energy Committee of Parliament.

Angered by the move, the Minority led by its leader Haruna Iddrisu walked out of parliament in protest, arguing forcefully that an illegality is being committed by the parliament.

Addressing the House before the walkout, Mr. Iddrissu said “without debate on it, Mr Speaker we in the Minority were raising constitutional issues relating to the accessibility of the motion pursuant to order 93 (3),” adding, “first of all we want to know on which leg and standing the mover of the motion is making this application in this House.”

Citing the aforementioned standing order,  he said it shall be “out of order to attempt to reconsider any specific question upon which the House has come to a conclusion during a current session. “

Published on 1 August 2017 | 2:15 pm at Source