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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 9 Hansard (23 November) . . Page.. 2582 ..

the community are lodged in the hands of an Assembly.' This salutary rule has too often been evaded.

12. May 21st edition states at pages 693-4,

The House of Commons has long found it necessary to place restrictions on the moving of amendments in order to keep intact the principle of the financial initiative of the Crown.

and May goes on to state:

The Crown's recommendation lays down the maximum amount of a charge and its object and purposes. An amendment infringes the financial initiative of the Crown, not only if it increases the amount, but also if it extends the objects and purposes, or relaxes the conditions and qualifications, expressed in the communication by which the Crown has recommended a charge. Accordingly no amendment to a motion for Supply is in order except a simple reduction of the amount demanded.

13. The background to the standing orders in the Assembly and the 1994 changes is set out in the June 1994 report of the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedures entitled Standing Orders 200 and 201, a copy of which is attached.

Issues

14. Standing order 201 places limitations on amendments that may be moved by Members other than Ministers, Members being prohibited from moving an amendment to a "money proposal" as specified in standing order 200 (ie. an enactment, vote or resolution for the appropriation of the public money of the Territory), if that amendment would increase the amount of the public money of the Territory to be appropriated.

An "enactment ... for the appropriation of ... public money".

15. Firstly, clearly, the Appropriation Bill 1995-96 is a bill for an Act to appropriate public money of the Territory, the public money of the Territory being defined by the Self-Government Act as "... revenues, loans and other money received by the Territory".

16. Section 65 and standing order 200 use the terms "An enactment, vote or resolution ... for the appropriation of public money". An "enactment" is defined by the Self-Government Act as "a law ... made by the Assembly under this Act" or "a law, or part of a law, that is an enactment because of section 34.". (Section 34 deals with certain laws that have been converted into enactments). However, I believe that it is clear that in the terms of standing order 200, the Appropriation Bill 1995-96 is an "enactment ... proposed in the Assembly". An amendment as suggested, that is to transfer money from Division 250 to another division, would not increase the amount of public money of the Territory to be appropriated as it is presumed the bottom line $1,343,690,900 would not be increased. However, we need to address the meanings of "resolution" and "vote".

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