Admissibility of Amendments to the Appropriation Bill
The Appropriation Bill 2025 is at committee stage. The opposition tables Amendment 14 to increase the rural clinic budget line by 45 million, offset by reducing the contingency reserve by 45 million. Amendment 15, also opposition, would cut the same clinic line by 20 million and move the money to school meals. The Constitution provides that no amendment may increase a charge on public funds unless the President recommends it; the standing orders add that an amendment within the overall bill ceiling is admissible if it is not a charge on the people. The committee has 20 members; quorum is 7. When Amendment 14 is put, only 6 members are present: 3 government, 2 opposition, 1 independent. The chair is about to rule Amendment 14 inadmissible because it increases expenditure, and then to proceed to the vote. An opposition member raises a point of order that the committee is not quorate.
1. Rule on the admissibility of Amendments 14 and 15, giving reasons.
Read the worked answer
Amendment 15 is clearly admissible: it reduces expenditure, creates no charge, and reallocates within the bill ceiling. Amendment 14 is harder. The constitutional rule bars amendments that increase a charge on public funds without the President's recommendation. The chair must decide whether 'charge' means the total bill or the line. The standing order's offset exception says an amendment within the overall ceiling is admissible if it is not a charge on the people. On that text, Amendment 14 is admissible: the 45 million increase for clinics is exactly offset by a 45 million reduction in the contingency reserve, so the total appropriation is unchanged. However, the chair should verify that the reserve is genuinely uncommitted and not protected by another statute. If it is committed, the offset is illusory and the amendment would increase the total charge. I would admit Amendment 14 subject to that verification, and admit Amendment 15. If the chair takes the stricter view that any line increase needs a recommendation, Amendment 14 should be ruled inadmissible and the opposition should be invited to seek the President's recommendation.
2. What is the effect of the quorum point, and what should the chair do?
Read the worked answer
Quorum is 7; only 6 members are present. Under the standing orders, the committee cannot validly transact business without quorum. A vote taken with 6 would be procedurally invalid and could be challenged in the House. The chair should not proceed to the vote. The correct steps are: (1) count the members and state that quorum is not present; (2) direct the clerk to summon absent members; (3) wait for a reasonable period, such as 10 minutes; (4) if quorum is still not present, adjourn the committee to a fixed date. The chair may still hear argument or give a provisional view, but no decision should be recorded. If the chair has already ruled on admissibility, that ruling can stand as a provisional ruling, but the vote must be retaken when quorate. The chair should record the quorum failure in the minutes.
3. Draft the chair's short ruling on Amendment 14, in no more than 120 words, that would be defensible on appeal to the Speaker.
Read the worked answer
Ruling: 'Amendment 14 proposes to increase the rural clinic line by 45 million and to reduce the contingency reserve by the same amount. The total appropriation in the Bill is unchanged. Under Standing Order 42(3), an amendment within the overall ceiling is admissible if it does not impose a charge on the people. I am satisfied that the offset is genuine on the face of the Bill, but I direct the clerk to confirm that the reserve is uncommitted. Subject to that confirmation, I rule Amendment 14 admissible. Amendment 15 reduces expenditure and is admissible. The quorum point is upheld: no vote will be taken until seven members are present.' This ruling is defensible because it applies the standing order, identifies the factual condition, and preserves the quorum objection.