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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (Wednesday, 25 August 2004) . . Page.. 4262 ..

that, “Oh it sounds like a good idea.” Well, I think we need a bit more of a justification than that.

Mr Stanhope: Just on a point of order, Mr Speaker. No monies were appropriated in the budget for this proposal. It may be, as the minister has indicated, that we are talking here potentially of a cost of some millions of dollars. This proposal imposes an obligation on the government to expend, potentially within this financial year, monies that have not been appropriated.

I wonder if you could rule on whether this amendment is in order. It seems to me that this is an appropriation. This provision imposes on the government an obligation, from the day of the legislation being passed, to provide something free of charge. We do not have monies appropriated to supply this particular item. The government simply does not have the money. It does not have the legal wherewithal to implement such a provision were it to be passed.

Mrs Dunne: On the point of order, Mr Speaker. This is technique No 375 for the Chief Minister to avoid doing things. The Chief Minister says that this amendment may be out of order because there is no appropriation attached to it. But, Mr Speaker, we just passed a piece of legislation, setting up a taskforce to look into asbestos use, which had no money appropriated to it and that was not considered out of order.

Almost every time a piece of legislation is passed in this place, whether it be a private members’ bill or a government bill, there is an extra impost on the territory. Legislation passed here today at the instigation of the government—this was essentially private members’ legislation—imposes an impost on the territory and that was not out of order.

MR SPEAKER: Chief Minister, standing order 200 is pretty clear: an enactment, vote or resolution for the appropriation of the public money of the territory must not be proposed in the Assembly except by a minister. This bill is not such an enactment, vote or resolution. Those sorts of proposals can be introduced only by a minister. So, no, I think the bill is in order.

Mr Stanhope: The provision cannot be met. The government would have to breach the legislation. On the ruling—and I accept the ruling, Mr Speaker—I just make the point here now for the record that if this provision passes it will not be implemented until after the next budget.

Mrs Cross: What a cop out.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism, and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (12.23 am): This is quite clearly just a hip shot appeal on behalf of Mrs Cross.

Mrs Cross: What nonsense.

MR QUINLAN: It is not thought through.

Mrs Cross: Shallow nonsense.

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