Australia A supply bill in the Australian System is required to pass the
House of Representatives, the
Senate and be signed by the
Governor-General. The Senate has no power or ability to introduce or modify a supply bill, but has the ability to block or defer the passing of a supply bill, and can request the House of Representatives to modify the bill. The most famous instance where supply was blocked was during the
1975 constitutional crisis. This has resulted in agreements between political parties to prevent the blockage of supply bills through the Senate.
Bangladesh A money bill is specifically defined by Article 81 of the
Constitution of Bangladesh. The
President of Bangladesh can send back all bills passed by the
Parliament for a review except a money bill. However, a money bill can be introduced to the
Parliament only at the President's recommendation. Additionally, tax can only be levied by the Parliament.
Canada Although Parliament may pass money bills, under section 54 of the
Constitution Act, 1867 funds can be appropriated only on the recommendation of the
Governor General. This has resulted in the
convention that only ministers introduce money bills.
India Procedure for a Money Bill: • Money Bills can be introduced only in
Lok Sabha (lower House), by ministers as well as private members. • Money bills passed by the Lok Sabha are sent to the
Rajya Sabha (upper house). The Rajya Sabha may not amend money bills but can recommend amendments. To make sure that Rajya Sabha does not amend the bill by adding some non-money matters (known as Financial Bill), the
Speaker of the Lok Sabha certifies the bill as a money bill before sending it to the upper house, and the decision of the Speaker is binding on both the Houses. A money bill must be returned to the Lok Sabha within 14 days, or the bill is deemed to have passed both houses in the form it was originally passed by the Lok Sabha. • When a Money Bill is returned to the Lok Sabha with the recommended amendments of the Rajya Sabha, it is open to the Lok Sabha to accept or reject any or all of the recommendations. • A money bill is deemed to have passed both houses with any recommended amendments the Lok Sabha chooses to accept, and without any that it chooses to decline. • The definition of "Money Bill" is given in Article 110 of
The Constitution of India. A financial bill is not a Money Bill unless it fulfills the requirements of Article 110. • The Speaker of the Lok Sabha certifies if a financial bill is a Money Bill or not. • Policy cut motion - disapproval of the given policy. Symbolically, the members demand that the amount of the demand be reduced to 1 INR. They may also suggest an alternative policy. • Economy cut motion - it is demanded that the amount of the policy be reduced by a specified amount. • Token cut motion - used to show specific grievance against the government. Also states that the amount of the demand be reduced by Rs. 100. • A money bill can only be introduced in parliament with prior permission of the
President of India(Article 117) • Finance bill is supposed to be enacted within 75 days (including the Parliament voting and the President assenting). • Money bill cannot be returned by the President to the parliament for its reconsideration, as it is presented in the Lok Sabha with his permission. The concept of money bills in India came to the forefront during the enactment of the Aadhar Act, 2016. In spite of resistance by the opposition, the Aadhaar Bill was certified as a 'money bill' by the Speaker of the Lower House. The Upper House proposed certain amendments, but ultimately the
BJP-dominated Lower House rejected the amendments suggested by the Upper House and unilaterally enacted the Aadhar Act, 2016. Immediately thereafter,
Jairam Ramesh, a senior
Congress leader, challenged the speaker's decision to treat the Aadhar Bill as a 'money bill' before the Supreme Court of India. Article 110(3) of the Constitution of India categorically states that 'if any question arises whether a Bill is a Money Bill or not, the decision of the Speaker of the House of the People thereon shall be final'. Therefore, one of the prime constitutional questions before the Supreme Court is whether it can review the speaker's certificate classifying a bill as a 'money bill'. In three prior cases, the
Supreme Court of India has refused to review the Speaker's certificate. However, some commentators have argued that the Court's earlier judgements were incorrect and Article 110(3) made the Speaker's decision "final" for the purpose of the two Houses of the Parliament, not for the Supreme Court of India. This argument is further supported by the fact that in Kihoto Hollohan vs Zachillhu (AIR 1993 SC 412), the "final" decision of the speaker regarding disqualification of members of the House under the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution was held to be a judicial decision subject to judicial review. This suggests that the "final" status given by the Indian constitution does not automatically immune the Indian speaker's decision or certificate from judicial review. In view of this crucial constitutional question, it has been suggested that the Supreme Court in
Jairam Ramesh v. Union of India should create a constitution bench of at least nine judges to settle the law on this issue. The five judge bench decided that the Aadhar Bill was a Money Bill by a vote of 4–1.
Ireland The 1937
Constitution of Ireland defines a money bill () as one concerning
only specified financial matters. The
Seanad (upper house of the
Oireachtas or parliament) has restricted powers over money bills, and the "only" restriction prevents the
Government from
tacking onto a money bill some non-financial provision which it would like to bypass Seanad scrutiny. The specified financial matters are any of the following: The specification is based on that in the UK's
Parliament Act 1911. There is an exclusion for revenue and spending by
local authorities. The main annual money bills are the
Finance Bill for implementing the
budget and the
Appropriation Bill for implementing the
estimates. The Constitution requires all appropriation of public funds to be pre-approved by the Government in the form of a "money message" signed by the
Taoiseach. Thus, if a bill extends the powers of a
Department of State, it is not a money bill, but if it also imposes a new charge on the public, it still requires a money message. In the Oireachtas, money bills must be introduced in the
Dáil (lower house) The Seanad has 90 days to process other Dáil bills but only 21 days for a money bill; it cannot amend the bill but only recommend amendments for the Dáil to accept or reject. The
President's power under
Article 26 to refer bills to the
Supreme Court does not apply to money bills. The
Ceann Comhairle (Dáil speaker) certifies whether a new bill is a money bill. There is no
judicial review of the Ceann Comhairle's ruling; if the Seanad disagrees with it, the President may establish a
Committee of Privileges to adjudicate, with equal membership from both houses and chaired by a Supreme Court judge. No such committee has been established under the 1937 constitution, which contained similar provisions until the 1936
abolition of the Free State Seanad made the distinction of money bills moot since they were henceforth treated the same as other bills. The reference to the National Loans Fund was inserted on 1 April 1968 by section 1(5) of the
National Loans Act 1968. For this purpose, the expression "Public Bill" does not include any bill for confirming a
provisional order. Bradley and Ewing said that the statutory definition of "Money Bill" is "strictly interpreted". Most annual
Finance Bills have not been certified to be money bills. == Requirements in non-Westminster systems ==