Executive spending under the Constitution.

[Nathan1927]

Good Evening all,

I was hoping to confirm I am on the right path when it comes to answering a hypothetical question involving executive spending.

I have been posed a hypothetical question about the Olympics coming to Queensland and whether the Federal Government can spend money on upgrading infrastructure (electrical, water systems, etc). It is assumed that they have the necessary appropriation bill.

From my own research, online and through my textbooks, I would say that under the Constitution the Federal Government cannot spend money on upgrading Queensland infrastructure for the Olympics. I think this is the case because there is no head of power under section 51 that would allow for an upgrade of public infrastructure nor is there any head of power for hosting the Olympics that could extend to upgrading infrastructure.
I think the way around this would be for the Federal Government to provide financial assistance to Queensland for the purpose of upgrading their infrastructures as per section 96 of the Constitution.

I feel confident in my answer however I am unsure as to whether I am missing something under the heads of powers? Some acknowledgement as to if I'm on the right path would be awesome.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Tim W]

Early years law student, are you?

Go and read Combet.
Then we'll talk.

 

[Nathan1927]

Yes, I just started and seem to be getting stuck on executive spending and legislation.

I had a look at Combet and this seemed to make me even more confused in my understanding of executive spending under Pape. It seems like Combet makes it hard for anyone to challenge the spending under an appropriation bill because of the general terms used?
However, this is where I feel like I am missing something. If the Federal Government has passed the Appropriation Bill No. 1 and No.2, which will most likely allow them to spend that money on whatever they wish under Combet, under Pape do they not need a separate piece of legislation allowing them to spend that money if the money is for something that is outside the heads of power (like infrastructure?).

Sorry if I am missing something here.