The Minister of Energy said the incentive offered to Sahara Energy Resources to lift crude oil for Ghana was not peculiar, adding that under the VITOL contract a similar arrangement existed.
Mr Albert Kan-Dapaah said under VITOL the actual contract fee for Bonny Light was 1.12 cents per barrel with a discount of 17.5 cents bringing the figure to 94.5 cents.
But, he said, clause 4 of the VITOL contract read: "In the event that NNPC ... does not supply the cull quantity of 450,000 (barrels), then VITOL shall meet to discuss changes to discount of 17.5 cents per barrel.
"And in accounting and in logic 'reduced discount' has the same effect as 'incentive payment'. "
Mr Kan-Dapaah was addressing journalists about concerns raised by the Minority in Parliament and a cross-section of Ghanaians, who are yet to come to grips with what the "Sahara Affair" was all about.
The main opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) members in Parliament last week demanded the resignation of the Energy Minister citing among other things, malfeasance in the Sahara Energy Resources contract.
This was the second time that the Minister has had to come out at a press conference to explain what the Sahara deal entails.
NPP functionaries intermittently interrupted the press conference by clapping and cheering at answers given to questions by journalists.
Mr Kan-Dapaah said the Sahara contract, like the VITOL one, did not require parliamentary approval.
"The contract for the allocation of crude was a straight contract between the Tema Oil Refinery and Sahara. The reference to government of Ghana was clearly superfluous and unnecessary ... in law and in fact, the government of Ghana was not party to either contract."
Mr Kan-Dapaah said if the NDC government did not see anything wrong with not bringing the (VITOL) contract before parliament, why do the NDC now in opposition see anything wrong with the Sahara contract not being put before the House.
He said the difference between VITOL's agreement and Sahara's was that "the VITOL contract is a financing and lifting contract and the Sahara contract is a lifting agreement only"
Mr Kan-Dapaah said the allocation contract was for 450,000 per cargo subject to the tolerance of plus or minus five per cent. The Minister was referring to the issue of Sahara lifting 430,000 barrels of crude oil instead of the contracted 450,000 barrels.
This implies that contractual quantity range to be loaded was 427,500 barrels minimum and 472,500 maximum, the Minister explained, adding: "Therefore, if NNPC loads about 430,000 barrels per cargo, it will be in tune with the terms of the contract".
He said the average cargo size in fiscal year 2000 was 436,202 barrels net of sediments of water, which is in the lowest end of the NNPC volume of tolerance of plus or minus five per cent.
Since April this year, when Sahara began to lift, the average cargo has increased to only 439,885 barrels.
The Minister of Energy said the incentive offered to Sahara Energy Resources to lift crude oil for Ghana was not peculiar, adding that under the VITOL contract a similar arrangement existed.
Mr Albert Kan-Dapaah said under VITOL the actual contract fee for Bonny Light was 1.12 cents per barrel with a discount of 17.5 cents bringing the figure to 94.5 cents.
But, he said, clause 4 of the VITOL contract read: "In the event that NNPC ... does not supply the cull quantity of 450,000 (barrels), then VITOL shall meet to discuss changes to discount of 17.5 cents per barrel.
"And in accounting and in logic 'reduced discount' has the same effect as 'incentive payment'. "
Mr Kan-Dapaah was addressing journalists about concerns raised by the Minority in Parliament and a cross-section of Ghanaians, who are yet to come to grips with what the "Sahara Affair" was all about.
The main opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) members in Parliament last week demanded the resignation of the Energy Minister citing among other things, malfeasance in the Sahara Energy Resources contract.
This was the second time that the Minister has had to come out at a press conference to explain what the Sahara deal entails.
NPP functionaries intermittently interrupted the press conference by clapping and cheering at answers given to questions by journalists.
Mr Kan-Dapaah said the Sahara contract, like the VITOL one, did not require parliamentary approval.
"The contract for the allocation of crude was a straight contract between the Tema Oil Refinery and Sahara. The reference to government of Ghana was clearly superfluous and unnecessary ... in law and in fact, the government of Ghana was not party to either contract."
Mr Kan-Dapaah said if the NDC government did not see anything wrong with not bringing the (VITOL) contract before parliament, why do the NDC now in opposition see anything wrong with the Sahara contract not being put before the House.
He said the difference between VITOL's agreement and Sahara's was that "the VITOL contract is a financing and lifting contract and the Sahara contract is a lifting agreement only"
Mr Kan-Dapaah said the allocation contract was for 450,000 per cargo subject to the tolerance of plus or minus five per cent. The Minister was referring to the issue of Sahara lifting 430,000 barrels of crude oil instead of the contracted 450,000 barrels.
This implies that contractual quantity range to be loaded was 427,500 barrels minimum and 472,500 maximum, the Minister explained, adding: "Therefore, if NNPC loads about 430,000 barrels per cargo, it will be in tune with the terms of the contract".
He said the average cargo size in fiscal year 2000 was 436,202 barrels net of sediments of water, which is in the lowest end of the NNPC volume of tolerance of plus or minus five per cent.
Since April this year, when Sahara began to lift, the average cargo has increased to only 439,885 barrels.
