PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 293
sub-clause (d)—and I have verified myself by reference to May’s “ Parliamentary Practice ” where this matter has been discussed at great length—is a term of art and it involves two things: first the naming of the service, the particular service, and secondly the exact allotment of money to be spent on that particular service. It is these two things that go to make what we know now as appropriation and it is in that sense that the word is used both in Article 114 and Article 266 of the Constitution.
Reading the two clauses 5 and 6 in the Bill I do not think it is possible to import into those two clauses any such thing as we now understand by the term “ appropriation”. They are, in my judgment, mere directions to the Government that this is a service on which money may be spent which Government may or may not spend. Therefore, so far as Article 117, clause
(1) is concerned, the Bill, it may be said, sails clear and no difficulty can arise on that account.
Now, I turn to clause 4 of the Bill. There, we have to consider whether that clause offends against clause (3) of Article 117. My conclusion is that it does, because clause 4 of the Bill imposes a liability upon the Government to undertake a service which, if the Bill is passed by this House, would undoubtedly involve expenditure out of the Consolidated Fund. Therefore, it would require a recommendation from the President under the provisions of clause (3) of Article 117.
The question that remains for consideration is this. At what stage must the recommendation of the President be forthcoming? The word used there is “ consideration ”. It has been contended that “ consideration ” means the very initation of the Bill. I am afraid I cannot agree with that contention. A bill has two stages: the first stage is called in our parlance “ Introduction ”, which is different from ‘ consideration ’. After a Bill is introduced, then the stage of consideration begins and the stage of consideration continues from that point when the Bill is taken up by the House after the stage of introduction, until it is passed. During that interval the proceedings are proceedings in respect of consideration of the Bill. Therefore, in my humble opinion, if before the motion for passing is put,