Honourable Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa has debunked assertions that his two urgent questions to have the Defence and Finance Ministers hauled before Parliament on the issues of President Akufo-Addo’s trips to France, Belgium and South Africa in terms of the costs associated with the hiring of a private jet for these trips.
He says that he has confidence in Speaker Bagbin to wisely exercise his sole discretionary authority of admissibility under Order 66(1) of Parliament’s Standing Orders, particularly, when the two questions in issue are of great public interest.
He goes ahead to say that his questions do not flout any of the conditions of admissibility of questions under Order 67.
The MP failed to quote the part of Order 67 which makes nonsense of his two questions. Order 67 (1) which deals with conditions of admissibility of questions has been flouted blatantly by Ablakwa.
Order 67 (1) b states that a question shall not contain any arguments, expression of opinion, inferences, imputations, epithets or controversial, ironical or offensive expressions or hypothetical cases.
There is no argument about how Ablakwa went public, came up with what he said were the amounts and details involved in the trip, accused the President of profligate expenditure. He cast insinuations, made inferences, imputations and expressed opinions on these matters and these flout the provisions of the Standing Orders as already established.
He can’t conclude on these matters and still petition the Speaker to have the two ministers brought before Parliament to respond to him. He even wrote his conclusions on his Facebook timeline and organized a press conference on the matter.
The Speaker would have no option than to dismiss his questions assuming they have not been dismissed already. Ablakwa can’t eat his cake and still have it. How he handled the issues has rendered his questions moot.
P.K. Sarpong, Whispers from the Corridors of the Thinking Place.