Page 2810 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Last year when I ruled on an amendment to the appropriation bill I indicated that I intended to rely on that resolution as a resolution of continuing effect, unless otherwise directed by the Assembly. I am informed that the Clerk has suggested in his submission to the review of the standing orders that the resolution be adopted as a resolution of continuing effect to avoid any doubt on the matter. As I believe that the proposed amendment is in conflict with the resolution agreed to in 1995, I therefore rule the amendment out of order.
Mrs Dunne: Further to your ruling, Mr Speaker: you have said that the amendment conflicts with the resolution of 1995, but you have not said in what way. The resolution of 1995 says that the only thing that can be done is something to reduce revenue. As this is a revenue neutral item, it does not affect the revenues of the territory and is therefore clearly in compliance with the 1995 resolution.
MR SPEAKER: I take a different view. I do so because the standing orders were suspended in 1995 specifically to deal with that motion in relation to appropriation bills. I will read it again. It says:
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 than those to reduce items of proposed expenditure.
I declared my position when the Assembly was last asked by, I think, Mr Mulcahy, to amend an appropriation bill.
Proposed expenditure—Part 1.17—Canberra Institute of Technology, $60,359,000 (net cost of outputs) and $5,170,000 (capital injection), totalling $65,529,000.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (3.46 am): Mr Speaker, the appropriation for the CIT is, essentially, a new one this year, attracting $65.5 million in the 2006-07 budget. The new appropriation was explained to the estimates committee by the dean of corporate services in the following terms:
We have changed financial arrangements … there is now a direct appropriation to CIT rather than via the department.
The minister emphasised that this meant that the CIT was more directly accountable to him as the minister. On the surface, the change in the appropriation and the creation of more autonomy for the CIT may be a good thing but, in light of the huge disruption that we are seeing in the education system, it may not be as efficacious as it could be in a time of more stability. I am concerned and the other members of the opposition are concerned about the impact that this will have and also about the additional costs that necessarily arise as a result of any sort of organisational change. In addition to this perhaps needless organisational change, we are concerned that there are considerable numbers of staff cuts. Some of those are going to the shared services area—78 are being referred to the shared services area—and there will be some cut in casual staff and contract teaching.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .