Loss of Supply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Loss of supply occurs where a government in a parliamentary democracy using the Westminster System or a system derived from it is denied a supply of treasury or exchequer funds, by whichever house or houses of parliament or head of state is constitutionally entitled to grant and deny supply. A defeat on a budgetary vote is one such way by which supply can be denied. Loss of supply is interpreted as indicating a loss of confidence in the government. It is important to note that not all 'money bills' are necessarily supply bills. For instance, in Australia, supply bills are defined as 'bills which are required by the Government to carry on its day-to-day business' [1] When a loss of supply occurs, a prime minister is generally required either by constitutional convention or by explicit constitutional instruction to:
- immediately resign (allowing the majority blocking supply to form a government) or
- seek a parliamentary dissolution (so allowing the electorate to pass judgment on the issue).
Some constitutions, however, do not allow the option of dissolution, instead requiring a resignation.
A similar deadlock can occur within a presidential system, where it is also known as a budget crisis. In contrast to parliamentary systems, the failure of the legislature to authorize spending may not in all circumstances result in an election, because some such legislatures enjoy fixed terms and so cannot be dissolved before a date of termination, which can result in a prolonged crisis.
A deadlock between a head of state and the legislative body can give rise and cause for a head of state to prematurely dismiss the elected government, requiring it to seek re-election. If a government maintains the support of a majority of legislators or the elected parliamentary representatives, the blocking of supply by a head of state would be seen as an abuse of authority and power. Many western countries have removed or restricted the right of a head of state to block supply or veto government budget unless there is overwhelming justification and cause for such action. If a government maintains the support of the elected parliament, the budget must be approved within a nominated period or else entitlement and authority for the approval of the budget is determined by a statutory majority of the parliament.
[edit] Examples of loss of supply
- In 1909, the UK House of Lords voted against the "People's Budget," precipitating two general elections and the Parliament Act of 1911, which limited the power of the Lords.
- In the Australian constitutional crisis of 1975, the elected Senate wilfully delayed voting on a bill which authorized supply for the government until prime minister Gough Whitlam called an election for the House of Representatives. He was subsequently dismissed by the Governor General, Sir John Kerr, having refused either to resign or request a dissolution, proposing to procure alternative supply money by non-parliamentary means.
- The defeat of Garret Fitzgerald's government in a budget vote in Dáil Éireann in the Republic of Ireland in 1982. Fitzgerald immediately sought and was granted a Dáil dissolution.[2]
[edit] References
- ^ Browning A. R. (ed) House of Representatives Practice (Melbourne 1989) page 72.
- ^ Article 28.2.2. of Bunreacht na hÉireann (the 1937 Irish constitution) states that
- The Taoiseach shall resign from office upon his ceasing to retain the support of a majority in Dáil Éireann unless on his advice the President dissolves Dáil Éireann and on the reassembly of Dáil Éireann after the dissolution the Taoiseach secures the support of a majority in Dáil Éireann.
- The President may in absolute discretion refuse to dissolve Dáil Éireann on the advice of a Taoiseach who has ceased to retain the support of a majority in Dáil Éireann.
