Including deficit levy in supply bills could cause constitutional dilemma
It would be ‘highly problematic’ if Coalition tried to get levy through Senate by tacking it on to supply, says Senate clerk
constitution says you can’t tack extra things onto those bills.'
Photograph: Alan Porritt/AAP Image
Australia could be gripped by another constitutional dilemma about
the Senate’s ability to delay supply bills if the government tries to
get its planned deficit levy through the upper house by including it in
appropriations legislation.
If the controversial deficit levy –
temporarily increasing tax rates for higher income earners – is
presented as separate legislation, it is highly likely to be blocked in
the Senate, because it is opposed by Labor, the Greens, the Palmer
United party and other crossbench senators.
But seeking to get
around this obstacle by including it in appropriation, or supply, bills –
which are usually passed unamended – would be “highly problematic” and
could lead to a showdown with the upper house, according to the clerk of
the Senate, Rosemary Laing.
Asked whether the levy could be
included as an appropriation, Laing told Guardian Australia: “I can’t
really see how it could be … that would be highly problematic.”
“The
constitution says you can’t tack extra things on to those bills, and it
says a bill imposing taxation can only deal with that tax … the Senate
has always taken the view that whether it is a new tax or a rise in an
existing tax it should be subject to those rules and be presented as
separate legislation,” Laing said.
Although Labor has promised to
fight the tax increase, which it calls “the mother of all broken
promises”, Labor sources have indicated they have advice it could
successfully pass through the Senate as an appropriation. But Laing
insists the Senate has powers to prevent that outcome.
“Taxation
and appropriation have always been considered separately … if taxation
was included in an appropriation bill the Senate could try to amend the
bill to separate the tax measure or it could express the view that the
tax measure should not be in there and a majority in the Senate could
vote to prevent the appropriations bill from being debated until it was
taken out and presented separately.”
Asked whether that would amount to blocking supply, Laing said it could be seen that way.
The
Labor leader, Bill Shorten, has said his party would “have no part” in
passing a deficit levy because it was “the mother of all broken
promises”.
“Labor will not support increasing income taxes on Australians,” he said this week.
Christine
Milne has said the Greens would not support the levy, and Clive Palmer
told the ABC’s World Today program this week: “We would vote against any
debt levy, because we may as well change the name and call it an
'Abbott levy', or a 'Hockey levy' – that's the irrelevance of it. It's
got nothing to do with our debt.”
Other senators-elect, including
the Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm, also oppose the idea. Leyonhjelm
said “a deficit levy equals a tax increase. I will never support any
increase in taxes.”
DLP senator John Madigan said he was "100% against" the levy.
"I won’t support any tax that harms families," he said.
Before the election, Abbott promised: “What you'll get under us are tax cuts without new taxes.” Abbott also campaigned on Julia Gillard’s promise before the 2010 election not to introduce a carbon tax.
Tony Abbott and the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, have all but confirmed a
deficit levy will be imposed on high-income earners in next week’s
budget, despite intense external criticism and the Coalition’s clear
pre-election promise not to impose new taxes.
Addressing reporters
in Canberra on Wednesday – the day cabinet met to approve the May
economic statement – Cormann said there was a need for “an immediate
special effort in order to put ourselves into a stronger starting
position as we repair the budget”. Abbott replied to questions about the
levy by talking about the need for all Australians to "chip in" to
address Australia's debt levels.
LETS HOPE FOR A DOUBLE DISSOLUTION SO THAT WE CAN VOTE OUT THE MOST CALLOUS, TOXIC GOVERNMENT IN HISTORY NEVER TO RETURN
the Senate’s ability to delay supply bills if the government tries to
get its planned deficit levy through the upper house by including it in
appropriations legislation.
If the controversial deficit levy –
temporarily increasing tax rates for higher income earners – is
presented as separate legislation, it is highly likely to be blocked in
the Senate, because it is opposed by Labor, the Greens, the Palmer
United party and other crossbench senators.
But seeking to get
around this obstacle by including it in appropriation, or supply, bills –
which are usually passed unamended – would be “highly problematic” and
could lead to a showdown with the upper house, according to the clerk of
the Senate, Rosemary Laing.
Asked whether the levy could be
included as an appropriation, Laing told Guardian Australia: “I can’t
really see how it could be … that would be highly problematic.”
“The
constitution says you can’t tack extra things on to those bills, and it
says a bill imposing taxation can only deal with that tax … the Senate
has always taken the view that whether it is a new tax or a rise in an
existing tax it should be subject to those rules and be presented as
separate legislation,” Laing said.
Although Labor has promised to
fight the tax increase, which it calls “the mother of all broken
promises”, Labor sources have indicated they have advice it could
successfully pass through the Senate as an appropriation. But Laing
insists the Senate has powers to prevent that outcome.
“Taxation
and appropriation have always been considered separately … if taxation
was included in an appropriation bill the Senate could try to amend the
bill to separate the tax measure or it could express the view that the
tax measure should not be in there and a majority in the Senate could
vote to prevent the appropriations bill from being debated until it was
taken out and presented separately.”
Asked whether that would amount to blocking supply, Laing said it could be seen that way.
The
Labor leader, Bill Shorten, has said his party would “have no part” in
passing a deficit levy because it was “the mother of all broken
promises”.
“Labor will not support increasing income taxes on Australians,” he said this week.
Christine
Milne has said the Greens would not support the levy, and Clive Palmer
told the ABC’s World Today program this week: “We would vote against any
debt levy, because we may as well change the name and call it an
'Abbott levy', or a 'Hockey levy' – that's the irrelevance of it. It's
got nothing to do with our debt.”
Other senators-elect, including
the Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm, also oppose the idea. Leyonhjelm
said “a deficit levy equals a tax increase. I will never support any
increase in taxes.”
DLP senator John Madigan said he was "100% against" the levy.
"I won’t support any tax that harms families," he said.
Before the election, Abbott promised: “What you'll get under us are tax cuts without new taxes.” Abbott also campaigned on Julia Gillard’s promise before the 2010 election not to introduce a carbon tax.
Tony Abbott and the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, have all but confirmed a
deficit levy will be imposed on high-income earners in next week’s
budget, despite intense external criticism and the Coalition’s clear
pre-election promise not to impose new taxes.
Addressing reporters
in Canberra on Wednesday – the day cabinet met to approve the May
economic statement – Cormann said there was a need for “an immediate
special effort in order to put ourselves into a stronger starting
position as we repair the budget”. Abbott replied to questions about the
levy by talking about the need for all Australians to "chip in" to
address Australia's debt levels.
LETS HOPE FOR A DOUBLE DISSOLUTION SO THAT WE CAN VOTE OUT THE MOST CALLOUS, TOXIC GOVERNMENT IN HISTORY NEVER TO RETURN
No comments:
Post a Comment