Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker Landry. It is good to get an opportunity to speak on the consideration in detail of the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2015-2016, the infrastructure and regional development budget. We heard from the previous speaker on this side about the cuts to infrastructure in the budget. We have also not seen in this budget the restoration of the indexation of the Financial Assistance Grant program that is hurting local government, particularly in rural and regional Australia. The cut to the Financial Assistance Grant program is almost a billion dollars over the budget. Local governments are now starting to grapple with what they are going to do in the face of the Financial Assistance Grant program cut that they got in last year's budget that continues in this budget and they were given no notice.

It was interesting when we finally got a response to one of the questions on notice in relation to the number of councils that have written to the minister in relation to the Financial Assistance Grant program. More than 100 councils around Australia that have been upset enough about the Financial Assistance Grant program cut to actually write to the minister and put the minister on notice that they are unhappy about these cuts because of the way that they are actually affecting councils, particularly in rural and regional Australia. The Financial Assistance Grant program cuts that were in last year's budget continue in this year's budget.

In this budget we have got some new money. We have got the Building Stronger Communities Fund, which is about $150,000 an electorate, I understand, for two years. We have heard from the government that it is going to work along the lines of the Anzac grants. But, given that the money is for this year and next year, I am wondering whether one of the ministers can let us know the process and guidelines for local members for the Stronger Communities fund, confirm that senators will not have a role in this, and explain a bit about what the role might be for local members as to how this money will be allocated and—given that we are already about to embark on the next financial year—when local members can expect to be in a position to talk to their communities about this fund.

I am also interested in the Community Development Grants Fund. This is the money—uncontracted RDAF 3, 4 and 5, that was pulled together by the government and allocated. Members might recall that a large majority of it went to coalition-held seats. Indeed, most of the election commitments from the then opposition, now government, were funded through this program. Around 80 per cent of the money went to coalition-held seats. That program had about $7 million left in it. In this budget, I notice, they have allocated another $50 million to the program. In estimates the department said that this is essentially funding government commitments and there is not a competitive assessment process. Given that there is now $57 million sitting in this grants program, that there does not appear to be a way to apply for it and that the government has actually already allocated a grant to it, I think the minister should come clean with the parliament about how this program is going to work and how other members—for instance, members from this side of the House—can access this grants program. It appears to be a bucket of money that the government can just decide to give to any program. I understand that there is some assessment by the department but I would like to know what criteria the department is assessing it against. What are the criteria for the Community Development Grants Fund, which now has $57 million in it, no way for people to apply to it and absolutely no competitive process? It does seem absurd that you would have a bucket of money sitting there called the Community Development Grants Fund and no way to apply. It just seems extraordinary that we can have a situation where this is occurring.

Another thing I would like to address is the cuts to infrastructure in my home state of Tasmania. Minister Briggs came down to Tasmania and talked about the Midlands Highway and the $400 million. Unfortunately for Minister Briggs, we had $500 million for the Midlands Highway, so it has been cut by $100 million.

Mr Briggs interjecting—

We will get to the irrigation in a moment, Mr Briggs.

Mr Briggs interjecting—

No, we are not. The issue is that $100 million has been cut from the Midlands Highway and half of the money that was there for freight rail has been cut. We understand from the department that it has been cut and put into the irrigation schemes. So the irrigation money is not new money and in fact has been cut from freight rail in Tasmania. We have had $100 million cut from the Midlands Highway and we have had $60 million cut from freight rail and put into irrigation instead. Tasmania has had cuts from this federal government when it comes to infrastructure. They should be delivering for Tasmanians. They are not.

See this speech in context