Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 9 Hansard (23 November) . . Page.. 2578 ..

Transfer of funds between votes

16. Section 65(2) enables a member to move an amendment to a vote provided the amendment does not increase the amount of public money of the Territory to be appropriated. It seems that the only way to transfer money from one vote to another is to amend one vote by decreasing the amount of public money of the Territory being appropriated in that vote, and to amend another vote by increasing the amount of public money of the Territory being appropriated in that vote. In my view, the former amendment would be allowed. However, the latter amendment would increase the amount being appropriated in a vote and would therefore be invalid.

17. Following this reasoning, it is not possible to transfer funds from Division 250 to either Division 180 or 190 because to do so would require an amendment to Division 180 or 190 increasing the amount appropriated to that Division. Such an amendment would be an amendment to a proposal (ie a vote) contrary to section 65.

Question 2

Transfer of funds within a vote

18. Within each vote, there does not appear to be any legislative restraints on transferring amounts. This view is consistent with the statement in the Explanatory Memorandum to the Self-Government Act which refers to allowing a 'transfer' of amounts. In my opinion this would mean any transfer that is not prohibited by section 65(2), or in other words, transfers within a proposal (ie. a vote).

19. Accordingly, in my opinion, section 65(2) would permit members to, say, transfer amounts between recurrent and capital expenditure within a vote.

In accordance with past practice, I shall be forwarding a copy of this advice to the Attorney-General.

Andrew Barram
A/g Director
Parliamentary & Constitutional

10/11/95.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .