Determination to Reduce Appropriations Upon Request (No. 21 of 2008-2009)

Overview

The Determination to Reduce Appropriations Upon Request (No. 21 of 2008-2009) was issued on 15 April 2009 by the Minister for Finance and Deregulation under subsection 9(1) of the annual Appropriation Acts (No. 1) 2007-2008. This legislation was enacted to allow for the reduction of departmental appropriations based on written requests from the responsible ministers. The purpose of this particular determination was to address unspent funds from prior fiscal activities: $59,393.72 for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service concerning 2007-08 communications activities, and $567,068.00 for the Department of Human Services relating to an unutilised advertising campaign for drought support programs in the Murray-Darling Basin. The enacting body, the Parliament, authorises these reductions through a disallowable legislative instrument, ensuring that the financial allocations are adjusted to reflect actual needs and expenditures.

Scope and Application

The Determination to Reduce Appropriations Upon Request (No. 21 of 2008-2009) applies specifically to the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs) and the Department of Human Services (Human Services). This instrument, issued under the authority of the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, targets the reduction of departmental appropriations as per the written requests made by the respective responsible Ministers. The instrument was enacted on 15 April 2009 under subsection 9(1) of the annual Appropriation Acts (No. 1) 2007-2008. The purpose of this instrument is to decrease the departmental items for Customs and Human Services in the Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2007-2008 by $59,393.72 and $567,068.00 respectively, reflecting the unspent funding for specific activities. This legislative instrument adheres to the legislative framework established by the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, which mandates consultation with the affected entities, Customs and Human Services, in its preparation.

Key Provisions

The main operative sections of the Determination to Reduce Appropriations Upon Request (No. 21 of 2008-2009) are found in Schedule 1, Items 1 and 2. Section 1 reduces the departmental item for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs) by $59,393.72, and Section 2 reduces the departmental item for the Department of Human Services (Human Services) by $567,068.00. These reductions are made in accordance with written requests from the respective responsible Ministers, as mandated by subsection 9(1) of the annual Appropriation Acts (No. 1) 2007-2008. The reductions pertain specifically to unspent funding from the 2007-2008 financial year: $59,393.72 for communications activities for Customs and $567,068.00 for advertising funding for a communication campaign on government drought support programs for Human Services. The Act imposes obligations on the responsible Ministers to make written requests to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation for any reduction in departmental appropriations. These requests must be specific to unspent funds from the previous financial year and relate to particular activities or campaigns. The Finance Minister is then required to process these requests and issue a determination under the legislative authority provided. Both the request and the determination are integral parts of the legislative process, ensuring that any adjustments to departmental appropriations are formally documented and authorised. Additionally, the Act stipulates that the entities affected, in this case Customs and Human Services, are to be consulted in the preparation of the Instrument, as required by the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. There are no explicit offences, penalties, or civil/criminal consequences detailed for breaches of the Determination to Reduce Appropriations Upon Request (No. 21 of 2008-2009). However, as a Legislative Instrument, the determination is disallowable. This means that either House of Parliament can review and potentially disallow the determination, although this is a rare occurrence and typically reserved for cases where the determination is deemed to be beyond the scope of the enabling legislation or procedurally flawed. The primary consequence of non-compliance would thus be the potential disallowance of the determination by Parliament, which could lead to a review of the process and possibly the re-allocation of the unspent funds if the determination is not upheld.