Page 2809 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006

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

---

That the proposed expenditure be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

Proposed new part 1.16A.

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (3.42 am): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 2828].

MR SPEAKER: Members, standing order 201 states:

A Member, other than a Minister, may not move an amendment to a money proposal, as specified in standing order 200, if that amendment would increase the amount of public money of the Territory to be appropriated.

Members will be aware that on 23 November 1995 the Assembly passed the following resolution in relation to appropriation bills:

That this Assembly reaffirms the principles of the Westminster system embodied in the “financial initiative of the Crown” and the limits that that initiative places on non-Executive Members in moving amendments other—

my emphasis—

than those to reduce items of proposed expenditure.

In a report to the Assembly in June 1994, “financial initiative of the crown” was described as:

• the executive government is charged with the management of revenue and with payments for public service;

• it is a long established and strictly observed rule which expresses a principle of the highest constitutional importance that no public charge can be incurred except on the initiative of the executive government; and

• the executive government demands money, the House grants it, but the House does not vote money unless required by the government, and does not impose taxes unless needed for public service as declared by ministers of the crown.

---

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