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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 9 Hansard (23 November) . . Page.. 2589 ..

would arise because of the direct inconsistency that would occur and the general rule of statutory interpretation that a later enactment in time prevails.

5. As regards enforcement of a provision in the Appropriation Bill 1995 expressly requiring expenditure to occur, I note that our view, in relation to the provision in the 1993-94 Appropriation Bill prohibiting expenditure, was that standing to seek judicial assistance in making the Government comply with such a provision would be quite wide and open to anyone who was directly affected by the Government's non-compliance.

6. However, apart from the technical difficulties in obtaining mandatory orders from a court, in my opinion, it would be difficult to draft a provision that could be enforced in practice. For example, circumstances could arise where it was practically impossible to spend the money allocated - I do not think a court would direct that public money could be literally thrown away if there is not genuine occasion under the terms of the legislation to spend it.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you wish to discuss any aspect of this opinion.

M. Baxter

for Len Sorbello Contact officer: Michelle Baxter
Deputy Law Officer Telephone: 70548
4 October 1995

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