Chapter 16 - Committees
Referral
of matters to committees
Estimates
For considering
estimates committees receive their references in accordance with standing order
26.
Usually following the introduction of the relevant appropriation bills, a minister moves
that the particulars of proposed expenditure be referred to the committees for
inquiry and report by a nominated date. These references are usually moved
twice a year in relation to the main Budget bills (Appropriation Bills Nos 1
and 2 and the Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill) and the
additional estimates contained in Appropriation Bills Nos 3 and 4 and
Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2). Statements of
expenditure from the Advance to the Minister for Finance and tax expenditure
statements are also referred to the committees.
Further appropriation bills to accommodate specific additional
expenditure requirements may be introduced. On occasion, the particulars of
this expenditure have been referred to estimates committees. In the 1982-83
financial year there were six appropriation bills, the second pair of which
were passed by the Senate on the second day of the new Parliament in order to
accommodate the new government’s pressing requirement for funds in advance of
the usual additional estimates due for introduction later in the Autumn
sittings (22/4/1983, J.40-42; SD, 22/4/1983, pp 85-6). The funds in
Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1982-83, for example, were required to respond to
the disastrous bushfires of that year. An amendment was moved to the motion for
the second reading of both bills to provide for the schedules of expenditure in
the bills to be referred to the appropriate estimates committee for examination
and report at the same time as the additional estimates for the 1982-83 financial
year. In other words, the estimates committees were to examine the proposed
appropriations after they became law.
Estimates committees also reported on a bill after it had passed in
1991-92. A fifth appropriation bill was introduced in March 1992 before the
third and fourth bills had been agreed to by both Houses. It contained
provision for expenditure on three programs which had already been provided for
in Appropriation Bill No. 3 but whose urgency was such that the government
could not wait for Appropriation Bill No. 3 to undergo the usual lengthy
scrutiny. The relevant funds were subsequently omitted from Appropriation Bill
No. 3 by amendment in the House of Representatives and the particulars of the
expenditure covered by the resulting Appropriation Bill No. 5 were referred to
estimates committees (26/3/1992, J.2128). An attempt to postpone consideration
of the bill until the estimates committees had reported was unsuccessful as was
an attempt to refer the bill to three standing committees for consideration (30/3/1992, J.2144-5). The
relevant estimates committees reported on the particulars after the bill became
law and in conjunction with their examination of additional estimates for that
year (29/4/1992, J.2207-8; 5/5/1992, J.2255).
In the 1993-94 financial year three sets of particulars were referred
to estimates committees as a consequence of the bringing forward of the Budget
from August to May. In 2003-04 there were two extra appropriation bills (Nos 5
and 6) which were referred to legislation committees for estimates hearings (11/5/2004, J.3382). Two
extra appropriation bills (Nos 5 and 6 of 2004-05) were also referred for
estimates hearings with the annual appropriation bills of 2005-06 (10/5/2005, J.594).
The
particulars of proposed expenditure are detailed in three documents, known as
Documents A, B and C, tabled by a minister. Each of the documents refers to one
of the bills, with Document A, for example, giving details in relation to
Appropriation Bill (No. 1) and Document C giving details in relation to the
Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill. With these documents, another set of
documents is tabled, giving a breakdown of expenditure and proposed
expenditure, with accompanying explanations, according to the output structure
of agencies.
Departmental explanations of the estimates are tabled in the Senate and
used by the committees. They were originally known as Explanatory Notes. The
name changed briefly to Program Performance Statements (PPS) between 1991 and
1994 to reflect program budgeting, and yet another change of name occurred in
1994 when the Budget was introduced in May. The documents then became known as
Portfolio Budget Statements (for the main Budget round of estimates) and
Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements (for the additional estimates). These
documents were significantly shorter than the former PPSs and attracted adverse
comment from all estimates committees when they first appeared in relation to
the 1994-95 Budget estimates considered in May-June 1994. The reason provided
for the diminution in information was that in the absence of full year
performance information, which would not be available before the end of the
financial year, the statements focused only on new budget measures and
significant variations in expenditure, the latter defined as variations in
excess of $10 million and 5 percent of an agency’s budget. The focus of the
documents was therefore designed to be prospective. Retrospective information
would be provided in the annual reports of agencies, now required to be tabled
by 31 October each year and to contain information about the year’s performance
which had previously been provided in the PPSs.
Under previous arrangements for an August Budget, PPSs provided a
comprehensive picture on a program basis of departmental expenditure from all
sources including the appropriation bills and any special or standing
appropriations (which now account
for over 80 percent of government expenditure). The documents
provided an effective agenda for the full consideration in September-October of
an agency’s performance over the previous year and its expenditure proposals
for the current financial year. Estimates committee scrutiny of additional
estimates in February-March was confined to those programs for which additional
moneys were being sought (see Procedure Committee, First and Third Reports of 1992, PP
527/1992 and 510/1992). Changes in timing now mean that the fuller examination
of performance occurs in the context of additional estimates (now
November-February) in light of performance information provided in annual
reports at the end of October. Orders of the Senate of 24 August 1994 (now in SO 25(20)) provide
explicitly for committees to examine annual reports in conjunction with their
consideration of estimates, thus opening up the agenda, particularly for
additional estimates.
In 1999 the
government converted the Commonwealth’s budget to an output-based accrual as
distinct from a cash flow basis, the main change being full accounting for
liabilities, assets and depreciation. This change affected the content of the
appropriation bills and the documents now called Portfolio Budget Statements.
It also potentially widened the scope of inquiry at estimates hearings.
Previous page | Contents | Next page
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 31 July 2009 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
