Bills Digest no. 86, 2017–18
PDF version [279KB]
Dinty Mather and Daniel Weight
Economics Section
16 March 2018
Contents
Purpose of the Bills
Structure of the Bills
Appropriations generally
Constitutional requirements
The ‘ordinary annual services of the
Government’ and ‘other’ annual services of the Government
The Senate’s powers
Presentational requirements
Departmental and administered
expenses
Outcomes and programs
Appropriations for ‘outcomes’ of non-corporate
Commonwealth entities
Appropriations for corporate
Commonwealth entities
Non-operating appropriations
Appropriations for payments to the
states
Notional payments - transactions
between entities that are part of the Commonwealth
Advance to the Finance Minister
Committee consideration
Senate Standing Committee for the
Scrutiny of Bills
Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018
The Advance to the Finance Minister
Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2016–2017
Statement of Compatibility with Human
Rights
Concluding comments
Date introduced: 8
February 2018
House: House of
Representatives
Portfolio: Finance
Commencement: Both
Bills would commence on Royal Assent.
Links: The links to the No.
3 Bill, its Explanatory Memorandum and second reading speech can be found
on the Bill’s home page, or through the Australian
Parliament website.
The links to the No.
4 Bill, its Explanatory Memorandum and second reading speech can be found
on the Bill’s home page, or through the Australian
Parliament website.
When Bills have been passed and have received Royal Assent, they
become Acts, which can be found at the Federal
Register of Legislation website.
All hyperlinks in this Bills Digest are correct as at
March 2018.
Purpose of
the Bills
The purpose of the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018
(the ‘No. 3 Bill’) is to appropriate an additional $1,355,473,000 ($1.4 billion)
from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF)[1]
in the 2017–18 financial year for the ordinary annual services of the
Government.
The purpose of the Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2017–2018
(the ‘No. 4 Bill’) is to appropriate an additional $132,714,000 ($132.7 million)
from the CRF in the 2017–18 financial year for the other annual services of the
Government.
These amounts are in addition to amounts appropriated for
the Executive Government and Judiciary in May 2017 by:
-
the Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2017–2018[2]
and
-
the Appropriation Act (No. 2) 2017–2018.[3]
The details of the additional amounts proposed to be
appropriated were set out in the 2017–18 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook
(MYEFO) that was released by the Treasurer on 18 December 2017.[4]
The ‘Abstracts’ to Schedule 1 of the No. 3 Bill and
Schedule 2 to the No. 4 Bill provide the following summaries of the
amounts proposed to be appropriated by Portfolio by each Bill.[5]
Portfolio |
No. 3 Bill Total |
No. 4 Bill Total |
|
$'000 |
$'000 |
Agriculture
and Water Resources |
60,901 |
2,200 |
Attorney‑General’s |
76,800 |
17,778 |
Communications
and the Arts |
7,246 |
- |
Defence |
33,170 |
3,190 |
Education
and Training |
97,442 |
27,065 |
Environment
and Energy |
17,475 |
- |
Finance |
40,761 |
10,793 |
Foreign
Affairs and Trade |
26,279 |
3,875 |
Health |
116,875 |
4,560 |
Home
Affairs |
579,831 |
20,749 |
Human
Services |
9,228 |
15,946 |
Infrastructure
and Regional Development |
93,687 |
- |
Jobs and
Innovation |
101,021 |
4,464 |
Prime
Minister and Cabinet |
24,722 |
11,700 |
Social
Services |
36,689 |
- |
Treasury |
33,346 |
10,394 |
Total |
1,355,473 |
132,714 |
Significant items within each Portfolio are identified in
the Assistant Minister for Finance, Mr Coleman’s, second reading speeches
to each Bill.[6]
Structure
of the Bills
Part 1 of each Bill deals with preliminary matters,
including when the Acts commence, how to interpret the Acts, and the deeming of
notional payments between non-corporate Commonwealth entities to be real
transactions.[7]
Part 2 of each Bill outlines the quantum and types
of appropriation from the CRF.
Part 3 of each Bill provides for an Advance to the
Finance Minister (AFM).[8]
Part 4 of each Bill deals with technical matters
including crediting amounts to special accounts, the formal appropriation of
moneys from the CRF, and the automatic repeal of the subsequent Acts.
Schedule 1 of the No. 4 Bill nominates the
Ministers that are able to impose conditions on grants of financial assistance
to the states and territories proposed in that Bill.
Schedule 1 of the No. 3 Bill and Schedule 2
of the No. 4 Bill contain the details of the amounts and types of appropriation
proposed to be made to each entity.
Appropriations
generally
An appropriation is the legal release of moneys from the
CRF. Appropriation Acts, however, do not create a source of power for the
Commonwealth to spend money; they merely release that money from the CRF. The
Commonwealth’s power to spend money must be found in other parts of the Constitution.[9]
Under the terms of the Constitution, a Bill
proposing to appropriate moneys from the CRF must satisfy certain unique
requirements. An Appropriation Bill must also comply with certain
presentational requirements.
Constitutional
requirements
Section 81 of the Constitution provides:
All revenues or moneys raised or received by the Executive
Government of the Commonwealth shall form one Consolidated Revenue Fund [CRF],
to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth ...[10]
Section 83 of the Constitution provides that no
money may be withdrawn from the CRF ‘except under appropriation made by law’.[11]
The effect of these two sections is that all moneys received by the
Commonwealth must be paid into the CRF, and must not be spent before there is
an appropriation authorising specific expenditure.
Section 53 of the Constitution prevents proposed
laws appropriating moneys originating in the Senate.[12]
Further, under section 56 of the Constitution, all proposed laws for the
appropriation of moneys may only be introduced into the House of
Representatives following a recommendation by the Governor-General.[13]
As the Governor-General only acts upon the advice of the Executive, this
provision of the Constitution prevents non‑government members of
the House of Representatives from introducing Bills that would propose to
appropriate money from the CRF.[14]
The
‘ordinary annual services of the Government’ and ‘other’ annual services of the
Government
Section 54 of the Constitution requires that there
be a separate law appropriating funds for the ‘ordinary annual services of the
Government’, and that other matters must not be dealt with in the same Bill.[15]
However, neither the ‘ordinary annual services of the Government’ nor the ‘other’
annual services of the Government are defined in the Constitution.
A working distinction between ordinary and other annual
services was agreed in a Compact between the Senate and the Government in 1965.[16]
Several amendments have been made to the Compact since 1965 and, in 2010, the
Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations and Staffing recommended that the
Senate restate the Compact in a consolidated form.[17]
On 22 June 2010, the Senate resolved as follows:
(1) To reaffirm
its constitutional right to amend proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys
for expenditure on all matters not involving the ordinary annual services of
the Government.
(2) That
appropriations for expenditure on:
(a) the construction of public
works and buildings;
(b) the acquisition of sites and
buildings;
(c) items of
plant and equipment which are clearly definable as capital expenditure (but not
including the acquisition of computers or the fitting out of buildings);
(d) grants to the states under
section 96 of the Constitution;
(e) new policies not previously
authorised by special legislation;
(f) items regarded as equity
injections and loans; and
(g) existing asset replacement
(which is to be regarded as depreciation),
are not
appropriations for the ordinary annual services of the Government and that
proposed laws for the appropriation of revenue or moneys for expenditure on the
said matters shall be presented to the Senate in a separate appropriation bill
subject to amendment by the Senate.
(3) That,
in respect of payments to international organisations:
(a) the
initial payment in effect represents a new policy decision and therefore should
be in Appropriation Bill (No. 2); and
(b) subsequent
payments represent a continuing government activity of supporting the
international organisation and therefore represent an ordinary annual service
and should be in Appropriation Bill (No. 1).
(4) That all
appropriation items for continuing activities for which appropriations have
been made in the past be regarded as part of ordinary annual services.[18]
Adherence to the Compact has not always been strict, and
the High Court has held that any disagreements between the Houses are not
justiciable.[19]
Any disputes, therefore, are to be determined between the Houses themselves.
The
Senate’s powers
Section 53 of the Constitution provides, among
other things, that the Senate may not amend proposed laws appropriating revenue
or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government. The Senate may,
however, return such proposed laws to the House of Representatives and request,
by message, the omission or amendment of any items or provisions.
The Senate may amend proposed laws appropriating revenue
or moneys for purposes other than for the ordinary annual services of the
Government, as long as it does not ‘increase any proposed charge or burden on
the people’.[20]
Conceivably, the Senate could amend an appropriation Bill for the other annual
services of Government in order to, for example, redirect the proposed
appropriation to another purpose, or reduce the proposed appropriation to nil.
Where a Bill for the ordinary annual services of the
Government includes amounts that the Senate considers should, because of the
Compact, be included in a Bill for the other annual services of the Government,
the Senate may elect to deal with that Bill as if it were a Bill for the other
annual services of government. In other words, the Senate may treat such a Bill
as being susceptible to amendment.[21]
Presentational
requirements
Departmental
and administered expenses
Australian Accounting Standard 1050 Administered
Items requires that government agencies distinguish between revenues and
expenses that they administer for the Government, and those over which they
have some control.[22]
Generally, administered expenses are the costs of providing the programs that
agencies run for the Government, while departmental expenses are the costs
incurred in running agencies.
Appropriation Bills, therefore, distinguish between
‘administered’ expenses and ‘departmental’ expenses. Administered appropriation
may only be used for the program or outcome that it is appropriated for, while
departmental appropriation may be moved between different departmental
activities.[23]
Clause 8 of the No. 3 Bill and clause 9 of the
No. 4 Bill provide the appropriation of administered amounts for the purpose of
contributing to the specified outcomes for a non-corporate entity. Administered
amounts are appropriated separately for each outcome to provide for
transparency in terms of what the funding is expected to achieve.
The Explanatory Memorandum to the No. 3 Bill states:
Administered items are those administered by a non-corporate
entity on behalf of the Government (e.g. certain grants, benefits and transfer
payments). These payments are usually made pursuant to eligibility rules and
conditions established by the Government or the Parliament.[24]
Outcomes
and programs
While the level of detail necessary for an Appropriation
Act to be valid is generally low, in the Pharmaceutical Benefits case
the High Court held:
... there cannot be appropriations in blank, appropriations for
no designated purpose, merely authorising expenditure ...[25]
The Appropriation Bills must therefore describe—in general
terms—the purpose for which moneys are to be used. The Bills use four methods
for describing the purposes of the proposed appropriations.
Appropriations for ‘outcomes’
of non-corporate Commonwealth entities
For non-corporate Commonwealth entities, the purposes of
operating appropriations (both departmental and administered) are specified
with reference to the ‘outcomes’ of those entities, as articulated in an
entity’s outcome statement. The Department of Finance’s Guide to Preparing
the 2017–18 Portfolio Budget Statements advised as follows with respect to
outcome statements:
... outcome statements articulate Government objectives and
form an integral part of the appropriations framework. They:
- explain
the purpose for which annual appropriations are approved by the Parliament for
use by entities;
- provide a basis for budgeting and reporting against
the use of appropriated funds; and
- measure
and assess entity and program non-financial performance in contributing to
Government policy objectives.
An outcome statement should provide an immediate impression
of what success looks like. It should provide readers with a sense of what
performance information is likely to be useful in assessing whether a specific
outcome is delivered satisfactorily.[26]
Appropriations
for corporate Commonwealth entities
As corporate Commonwealth entities (CCEs) are legally
distinct from the Commonwealth itself, moneys cannot be appropriated directly
to those entities.[27]
Instead, amounts are appropriated to relevant departments for on‑payment
to CCEs within the department’s portfolios.[28]
Clause 9 of the No. 3 Bill and clause 12 of the No. 4 Bill provide
for appropriations of moneys for CCEs to be paid from the CRF by the relevant
Department, with a requirement that those payments be used for the purposes of
those CCEs.
Generally, under section 51 of the PGPA Act,
appropriations for corporate entities are managed by the Finance Minister who
has a discretionary power in terms of the amount paid and the timing. Subclause
9(2) of the No. 3 Bill and subclause 12(2) of the No. 4 Bill provide
that if an Act provides that a corporate entity must be paid amounts
appropriated by Parliament for the purposes of that entity, then the full
amount of the corporate entity payment must be paid to the entity.
Non-operating
appropriations
Non-operating appropriations are amounts designated for
the capital needs of entities. Typically, these amounts are equity injections
into entities, or moneys for the purchase or development of the assets of
entities. Under the Compact, they can only ever be proposed in a Bill dealing
with the ‘other’ annual services of Government.
Appropriations
for payments to the states
Under section 96 of the Constitution, the
Commonwealth Parliament may make payments to the states with or without
conditions. Amounts intended for payment to the states are identified
separately in appropriation Bills. Again, because of the Compact, amounts to
the states can only ever be proposed in a Bill dealing with the ‘other’ annual
services of Government. Amounts to the Australian Capital Territory and the
Northern Territory are also included with the amounts for the states.
Notional
payments - transactions between entities that are part of the Commonwealth
Because of section 83 of the Constitution, all
withdrawals of moneys from the CRF require an appropriation. Constitutionally,
however, payments between entities that are both part of the Commonwealth, such
as between two non-corporate Commonwealth entities, do not require an
appropriation as they are movements of moneys within the CRF, not a withdrawal.
To avoid the difficulties that might arise in working out
whether or not an individual payment does or does not require an
appropriation—that is, whether a payment is between entities that are both part
of the Commonwealth (such as between two departments), or whether a payment is
from the Commonwealth to an entity outside of the Commonwealth (such as to an
individual or a corporation)—the Appropriation Bills contain a deeming
provision that requires all notional transactions between non-corporate
Commonwealth entities to be nonetheless treated as withdrawals from the CRF.[29]
Advance to
the Finance Minister
An Advance to the Finance Minister is an appropriation of
moneys without any particular outcome or purpose specified. Typically, the Advance
is established in the first Appropriation Acts each year and then replenished
whenever supplementary Appropriation Acts are passed.
The Finance Minister may use the amount appropriated as an
advance to modify the schedule to the Appropriation Act, but only where:
the Finance Minister is satisfied
that there is an urgent need for expenditure, in the current year, that is not
provided for, or is insufficiently provided for, [...]:
(a) because of an erroneous
omission or understatement; or
(b) because
the expenditure was unforeseen until after the last day on which it was
practicable to provide for it in the Bill for this Act before that Bill was
introduced into the House of Representatives.[30]
The amount of appropriation allocated to the Advance to
the Finance Minister in 2017–18 was $295 million in relation to the
ordinary annual services of the Government and $380 million in relation to the
other annual services of the Government.[31]
In order to access an Advance, the Finance Minister must
issue a determination under the relevant Appropriation Act. A determination is
a legislative instrument, but disallowance and sunsetting under section 42
and Part 4 of Chapter 3 of the Legislation Act 2003[32]
respectively do not apply.[33]
The Federal Register of Legislation shows that during 2017–18,
$122 million of the Advance to the Finance Minister provided for by Appropriation
Act (No. 1) 2017–2018 was accessed and provided to the Australian Bureau of
Statistics to provide for a postal survey on same sex marriage.[34]
In Wilkie v Commonwealth, the Member for Denison, Andrew Wilkie and
others challenged the accessing of the Advance to the Finance Minister on
various grounds, including that the Advance to the Finance Minister Determination
made under the Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2017–2018 did not
sufficiently describe the purposes for which the moneys were to be expended,
and was therefore invalid as an “appropriation in blank” of the type warned of
by the High Court in the Pharmaceutical Benefits case. In rejecting that
argument, the High Court held that ‘the degree of specificity of the purpose of
an appropriation is for Parliament to determine.’[35]
Clause 10 of the No. 3 Bill would reset the amount
available under the Advance to the Finance Minister for 2017–18 in relation to
the ordinary annual services of the Government to $295 million, and clause
13 of the No. 4 Bill would reset the amount in relation to the other annual
services of the Government to $380 million.
Committee consideration
Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
In its Scrutiny Digest No. 2 of 2018, the Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills made comments in relation to both
Bills.[36]
Appropriation
Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018
In relation to the No. 3 Bill, the Committee noted (as it
has in relation to past Appropriation Bills):
The inappropriate classification of items in appropriation
bills as ordinary annual services when they in fact relate to new programs or
projects undermines the Senate's constitutional right to amend proposed laws
appropriating revenue or moneys for expenditure on all matters not involving
the ordinary annual services of the government. This is relevant to the
committee's role in reporting on whether the exercise of legislative power is
subject to sufficient parliamentary scrutiny.[37]
The Committee noted that expenditures that appear to have
been improperly classified as ordinary annual services of government and
therefore included in the No. 3 Bill are:
- Menzies
Institute and Library ($7 million in 2017–18)[38]
- Australian
Stockman's Hall of Fame—construction of new facilities and displays, amenity
upgrades, and establishment of the Australian Rural Heritage Foundation ($15
million in 2017–18)[39]
and
- Qantas
Founders Museum—construction of roofing facilities ($11.3 million in 2017–18).[40]
In relation to this matter, the Committee:
... again notes that the government's approach to the
classification of items that constitute ordinary annual services of the
government is not consistent with the Senate resolution of 22 June 2010
relating to the classification of ordinary annual services expenditure in
appropriation bills.
The committee reiterates its agreement with the comments made
on this matter by the Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations and Staffing,
and in particular that the division of items in appropriation bills since the
adoption of accrual budgeting has been based on a mistaken assumption that any
expenditure falling within an existing outcome should be classified as ordinary
annual services expenditure.
The committee draws the 2010 Senate resolution to the
attention of Senators and notes that the inappropriate classification of items
in appropriation bills undermines the Senate's constitutional right to amend
proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys for expenditure on all matters
not involving the ordinary annual services of the government. Such
inappropriate classification of items impacts on the Senate's ability to
effectively scrutinise proposed appropriations as the Senate may be unable to
distinguish between normal ongoing activities of government and new programs or
projects.
The committee draws this matter to the attention of Senators
as it appears that the initial expenditure in relation to certain items in the
latest set of appropriation bills may have been inappropriately classified as
ordinary annual services (and therefore improperly included in Appropriation
Bill (No. 3) 2017-2018 which should only contain appropriations that are not
amendable by the Senate).
The committee will continue to draw this important matter to
the attention of senators where appropriate in the future.[41]
The Advance
to the Finance Minister
With regard to the Advance to the Finance Minister, the
Committee noted that the Advance to the Finance Minister determinations:
... are legislative instruments, but they are not subject to
disallowance or parliamentary scrutiny by the Regulations and Ordinances
Committee...[but]...one of the core functions of the Parliament is to authorise and
scrutinise proposed appropriations.
In particular, while the High Court has held that an
appropriation must always be for a purpose identified by the Parliament, '[i]t
is for the Parliament to identify the degree of specificity with which the
purpose of an appropriation is identified.[42]
Appropriation
Bill (No. 4) 2016–2017
In relation to the No. 4 Bill, the Committee raised a
specific concern with clause 15 of the Bill, which deals with
Parliament's power under section 96 of the Constitution to provide
financial assistance to the states.
The Committee noted that it had previously[43]
sought advice as to:
whether the Department of Finance is able to issue guidance
advising departments and agencies to include the following information in their
portfolio budget statements where they are seeking appropriations for payments
to the States, Territories and local government in future appropriation bills:
- the
particular purposes to which the money for payments to the States, Territories
and local government will be directed (including a breakdown of proposed grants
by State/Territory);
-
the specific statutory or other
provisions (for example in the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009, the
COAG Reform Fund Act 2008, Local Government (Financial Assistance)
Act 1995 or special legislation or agreements) which detail how the terms
and conditions to be attached to the particular payments will be determined;
and
-
the nature of the terms and
conditions attached to these payments.[44]
In relation to the 2017–18 Budget:
The committee welcomed the significant progress made ... to
provide additional information about section 96 grants to the States. This
included the addition of an Appendix E to Budget Paper No. 3, 2017-18, which
provided details of the appropriation mechanism for all payments to the States
and the terms and conditions applying to them, and a new mandatory requirement
for the inclusion of further information in portfolio budget statements along
the lines of that suggested by the committee.[45]
However, the Committee remains concerned that only one of
the four departments seeking appropriations for payments to the states had fully
implemented the new mandatory information requirement.[46]
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
As required under Part 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth), the Government has assessed the
Bill’s compatibility with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of that Act.[47]
In relation to the human rights implications of the Bills, the Government
states:
[t]he Bill performs an important constitutional function, by
authorising the withdrawal of money from the CRF for the broad purposes
identified in the Bill.
However, as the High Court has emphasised, beyond this,
Appropriation Acts do not create rights and nor do they, importantly, impose
any duties.
Given that the legal effect of Appropriation Bills is limited
in this way, the Bill is not seen as engaging, or otherwise affecting, the
rights or freedoms relevant to the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny)
Act 2011. [48]
However, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights
has previously raised concerns about whether or not the allocation of funding
proposed in Appropriation Bills might engage human rights considerations;
particularly given the capacity for Appropriation Bills to give effect to a
reduction in funding for programs that might be aimed at the realisation of
human rights.
In its assessment of the No. 3 and No. 4 Bills, the
Committee referred to its comments in relation to prior Appropriation Bills
before stating as follows:
The committee notes that the
statements of compatibility for the bills provide no assessment of their
compatibility with human rights on the basis that they do not engage or
otherwise create or impact on human rights. However, while the committee
acknowledges that appropriations bills present particular challenges in terms
of human rights assessments, the appropriation of funds may engage and
potentially limit or promote a range of human rights that fall under the
committee's mandate.
Given the difficulty of
conducting measure-level assessments of appropriations bills, the committee
recommends that consideration be given to developing alternative templates for
assessing their human rights compatibility, drawing upon existing domestic and
international precedents. Relevant factors in such an approach could include
consideration of:
-
whether the bills are compatible with Australia's obligations of
progressive realisation with respect to economic, social and cultural rights;
and
- whether any reductions in the
allocation of funding are compatible with Australia's obligations not to
unjustifiably take retrogressive or backward steps in the realisation of
economic, social and cultural rights.[49]
The Committee stated that it did not require a response
from the Minister in relation to these concerns.[50]
Concluding comments
The requirement for the Executive to secure the passage of
Appropriation Bills from the Parliament is an important financial control on
the Executive by the Parliament. These Bills, if passed, will be effective in
releasing the proposed appropriations from the CRF.
Members, Senators and Parliamentary staff can obtain
further information from the Parliamentary Library on (02) 6277 2500.
[1]. The
CRF consists of all revenues and moneys raised or received by the executive
government of the Commonwealth. The CRF is self-executing, which means that all
money received by the Commonwealth automatically becomes part of the CRF.
[2]. Appropriation Act
(No. 1) 2017–2018.
[3]. Appropriation Act
(No. 2) 2017–2018.
[4]. S
Morrison (Treasurer) and M Cormann (Minister for Finance), Mid-Year Economic
and Fiscal Outlook 2017–18, Commonwealth of Australia, December 2017.
[5]. Appropriation
Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018, Schedule 1, p. 9; Appropriation
Bill (No. 4) 2017–2018, Schedule 2, p. 11.
[6]. D
Coleman (Assistant Minister for Finance), ‘Second
reading speech: Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018’, House of
Representatives, Debates, 8 February 2018, p. 712; D
Coleman (Assistant Minister for Finance), ‘Second
reading speech: Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2017–2018,’ House of
Representatives, Debates, 8 February 2018, p. 713.
[7]. The
need for notional payments to be deemed to be real payments is explained on page
7 of this Digest.
[8]. An
Advance is a provision in the Annual Appropriation Acts that enables the
Finance Minister to provide additional appropriation to entities for urgent and
unforeseen expenditure in the current year. This is known as an Advance to the
Finance Minister. The Advance to the Finance Minister is explained further on
page 8 of this digest.
[9]. Pape
v Commissioner of Taxation (2009) 238 CLR 1, [2009] HCA 23.
[10]. Australian Constitution,
section 81.
[11]. Ibid.,
section 83.
[12]. Ibid.,
section 53.
[13]. Ibid.,
section 56.
[14]. B
Wright and P Fowler, House
of Representatives practice, 6th edn, Department of the House of
Representatives, Canberra, 2012, p. 424.
[15]. Australian Constitution,
section 54: ‘The proposed law which appropriates revenue or moneys for the
ordinary annual services of the Government shall deal only with such proposed
appropriation’.
[16]. J
Odgers, Odgers'
Australian Senate practice, 14th edn, Department of the Senate,
Canberra, 2016, p. 386.
[17]. Senate
Standing Committee on Appropriations and Staffing, Ordinary
annual services of the government: 50th report, The
Senate, Canberra, June 2010.
[18]. Australia,
Senate, Journals,
127, 2008–10, 22 June 2010, pp. 3642–3.
[19]. Osborne
v Commonwealth (1911) 12 CLR 321, [1911]
HCA 19, per Griffith CJ at [336].
[20]. Australian Constitution,
section 53.
[21]. Wright
and Fowler, House
of Representatives practice, op. cit., p. 430.
[22]. Australian
Accounting Standards Board (AASB), Administered
items, AASB 1050, December 2013.
[23]. Combet
v Commonwealth (2005) 224 CLR 494, [2005]
HCA 61, per Gummow, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ at [123].
[24]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018, p. 8. See also Explanatory
Memorandum, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2017–2018, p. 7.
[25]. Attorney-General
(Vic); Ex rel Dale v Commonwealth (‘Pharmaceutical Benefits case’) (1945) 71
CLR 237, [1945]
HCA 30, per Latham CJ at [253].
[26]. Department
of Finance, Guide
to preparing the 2017–18 portfolio budget statements, March 2016,
p. 32.
[27]. Public Governance,
Performance and Accountability Act 2013, section 11, ‘Note’.
[28]. A
corporate Commonwealth entity is a body corporate that has a separate legal
personality from the Commonwealth, and can act in its own right exercising
certain legal rights such as entering into contracts and owning property. For
example, the Central Land Council is a CCE which comes under the portfolio of
the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Department of Finance, Governance
Structure: corporate Commonwealth entities, 16 March, 2018.
[29]. Appropriation
Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018, clause 5; Appropriation
Bill (No. 4) 2017–2018, clause 6.
[30]. Appropriation Act
(No. 1) 2017–2018, section 10; Appropriation Act
(No. 2) 2017–2018, section 12.
[31]. Appropriation Act
(No. 1) 2017–2018, subsection 10(3); Appropriation Act
(No. 2) 2017–2018, subsection 12(3).
[32]. Legislation Act
2003.
[33]. Appropriation Act
(No. 1) 2017–2018, subsection 10(4); Appropriation Act
(No. 2) 2017–2018, subsection 12(4).
[34]. Advance to the
Finance Minister Determination (No. 1 of 2017–2018), 9 August 2017.
[35]. Wilkie
v Commonwealth, [2017]
HCA 40 at [91].
[36]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny
digest, 2, 2018, The Senate, 14 February 2018.
[37]. Ibid.,
p. 1.
[38]. S
Morrison (Treasurer) and M Cormann (Minister for Finance), Mid-Year Economic
and Fiscal Outlook 2017–18, Commonwealth of Australia, December 2017, p.
145.
[39]. Ibid.,
p. 171.
[40]. Ibid.,
p. 174.
[41]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny
digest, 2, 2018, op. cit., pp. 4–5.
[42]. Ibid.,
p. 10.
[43]. Senate
Select Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny
digest, 8, 2016, The Senate, 9 November 2016, pp. 457–60.
[44]. Senate
Select Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny
digest, 2, 2018, op. cit., pp. 9–10.
[45]. Ibid.,
p. 10.
[46]. Ibid.,
p. 10.
[47]. Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.
[48]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2017–2018, p. 4; Explanatory
Memorandum, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2017–2018, p. 4.
[49]. Parliamentary
Joint Committee on Human Rights, Human
rights scrutiny report, 2, 21 March 2017, p. 46.
[50]. Ibid.,
p. 44.
For copyright reasons some linked items are only available to members of Parliament.
© Commonwealth of Australia
Creative Commons
With the exception of the Commonwealth
Coat of Arms, and to the extent that copyright subsists in a third party,
this publication, its logo and front page design are licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia licence.
In essence, you are free to copy and
communicate this work in its current form for all non-commercial purposes, as
long as you attribute the work to the author and abide by the other licence
terms. The work cannot be adapted or modified in any way. Content from this
publication should be attributed in the following way: Author(s), Title of
publication, Series Name and No, Publisher, Date.
To the extent that copyright subsists
in third party quotes it remains with the original owner and permission may
be required to reuse the material.
Inquiries regarding the licence and
any use of the publication are welcome to webmanager@aph.gov.au.
Disclaimer: Bills Digests are prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament.
They are produced under time and resource constraints and aim to be available
in time for debate in the Chambers. The views expressed in Bills Digests do
not reflect an official position of the Australian Parliamentary Library, nor
do they constitute professional legal opinion. Bills Digests reflect the
relevant legislation as introduced and do not canvass subsequent amendments
or developments. Other sources should be consulted to determine the official
status of the Bill.
Any concerns or complaints should be
directed to the Parliamentary Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are
available to discuss the contents of publications with Senators and Members
and their staff. To access this service, clients may contact the author or
the Library’s Central Enquiry Point for referral.