Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Hansard source

On the motion moved by Senator Cormann, can I say first it is disappointing that Senator Cormann was extended the courtesy by the government of being given leave to move this motion on the basis he would speak for five minutes and then spoke for 10 minutes and read out letters that the government indicated we would give him leave to table. It is hardly a useful time in the Senate. I understand he wants to make a political point, which he has done.

I will respond briefly to some of the issues raised. Obviously the Constitution does require that proposed laws, such as the bill passed by the Senate, appropriating revenue or moneys must originate in the House, not in the Senate. I refer to the response to the order for production of documents which has been tabled by the relevant minister, Ms Roxon, and, together with that, the minute of advice from the Attorney-General. I am advised that on any reading of section 53 of the Constitution its effect is clear: a bill appropriating money cannot originate in the Senate. The government is advised, or I am advised, that there is no doubt that the Health Insurance Amendment (Revival of Table Items) Bill is a bill appropriating money. The effect of the bill is to increase the amount under a standing appropriation. Under the Constitution, the House of Representatives is the only place where such a bill can originate. The Constitution also requires that such bills not be passed unless the purpose of the appropriation has been recommended by message of the Governor-General. Those requirements have not been met in relation to this bill.

The Minister for Health and Ageing, Ms Roxon, provided a copy of a minute to Senator Cormann on the substance of this advice on 5 November 2009. Senator Cormann was also advised at that time that, in accordance with established practice in relation to the legal advice provided to the government, the minister did not propose to release the actual legal advice which the government had received. I would note that this practice has been observed by governments prior to this government taking office. We have, however, provided a copy of a letter from the Attorney to the Leader of the House which provides a more detailed analysis of the operation of sections 53 and 56 of the Constitution.