The Minority caucus has clarified its stance on the Free Senior High School (SHS) bill, emphasising that they are not opposed to the initiative. Instead, they are urging the government to address existing challenges in the educational sector.

This comes after the Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, accused the Minority caucus of opposing the proposed bill on the Free SHS policy. The bill aims to regulate the Free SHS intervention by making it mandatory for future governments to sustain the policy.

Afenyo-Markin disclosed that the bill had received executive approval and would be laid before the house by the Education Minister, Dr. Yaw Osei Adutwum.

Speaking to journalists in Parliament on Tuesday, Afenyo-Markin demanded that the Minority provide reasons for their opposition to the bill.

However, in an interview with Umaru Sanda Amadu on Eyewitness News on Citi FM, the Deputy Ranking Member on Parliament’s Education Committee, Dr. Clement Apaak, indicated that while the bill had not yet been laid before the house, the Minority had pledged their commitment to it.

Dr. Apaak stressed that the Majority and the government should focus on addressing the challenges in the educational sector instead of lying and misleading Ghanaians.

“We in the NDC have never been opposed to the Free SHS policy…So I fail to understand why the NPP and now the Majority Leader are trying to revive the stale, dead and rejected propaganda message used against the NDC that we are opposed to the policy and that should Ghanaians give us the opportunity, we will cancel the policy.

“We have not said that anywhere, any day or anytime. The majority leader was the person who informed Ghanaians through the parliamentary press corps on the 11th of June 2024 that the government was going to bring to parliament a policy on the Free SHS policy with the intention of ensuring that future governments abide by the policy and implement it accordingly.”

“We are yet to even see the bill to examine its content. So for the majority leader to try and suggest that because our ranking member made a statement to the effect that it wasn’t necessary to have the bill that then translates to our side rejecting the bill is unfounded, totally unfounded in fact it is a blatant lie.”