Bridget Archer (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

As the federal member for Bass, I've seen several grant programs support a number of critical projects. As the member for Indi acknowledged, Commonwealth grants are vitally important to the positive and meaningful work carried out by community organisations, local governments, businesses and not-for-profits, particularly in regional and rural areas. However, our communities, who are vying for necessary funding, must have faith in the procedures and nobody wants to see any grant program misused. Whether an application is successful or not, there needs to be a level of trust in how the decision was made and the transparency of process should be at the centre of grant funding going forward.

The issue of ministerial discretion is a great place to start. No matter the government of the day, it's difficult to build a level of trust with the public, particularly if a minister has the ability to override a decision made by the Public Service without needing to explain to the public why this decision was made. I note the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit recently tabled its findings after an inquiry into grants programs. The eight recommendations handed down by the committee include: clarifying the definition of an election commitment for the purpose of delivering grants; that competitive merit based processes be adopted by default and that decision-makers be forced to document reasons why any are not; and that the Australian National Audit Office audits the manner in which the finance minister is told of grant approvals which don't match agency recommendations. These recommendations should be supported, and I fully support all of those recommendations.

Additionally, though, the member for Indi's call to introduce legislation to reform grants administration to ensure public money is not misused also has merit and should have the support of elected representatives that walk these halls. Asking for clear requirements for published Commonwealth grant guidelines and selection criteria; robust and public reporting requirements about how grant programs are administered, including grants that are awarded contrary to departmental advice; and a framework for a parliamentary joint committee on grants administration to improve grants oversight are all reasonable measures and shouldn't be feared by any elected representative.

In 2018, a joint study from Griffith University and Transparency International Australia found that 85 per cent of Australians think at least some federal politicians are corrupt, while 56 per cent had personally witnessed or suspected public officials of making decisions that favoured a business or individual who gave them political donations or support. It's interesting to note that the number was higher amongst those who had worked in government, 61 per cent, and even higher among those who had worked in federal government, 67 per cent.

These reforms and proposed legislation are a solid building block towards restoring trust and integrity in how grants are administered and shouldn't leave MPs or senators concerned. A more transparent process is a win-win situation for our electorates and their representatives. A clear and defined process would also avoid unnecessary delays in commitments made, which often lead to increased infrastructure costs or the loss of a project altogether. In my seat of Bass, $500,000 in funding for the local tennis centre was awarded through the community sports infrastructure grants program prior to me becoming a candidate at the 2019 election. This grant was to update incredibly out-of-date facilities, many of which were utilised for the Launceston Tennis International tournament, which, for some years, saw up-and-coming tennis champions having to use shipping containers to get changed. While the review of the program was necessary, and while the grant was found to be above board, the lengthy delay led to a cost blowout within the project. To date, that project has been unable to proceed, and, sadly, our region has now lost this prestigious tournament to the North West.

Additionally, in March 2022, I was proud to announce two projects of substantial merit—the safe harbour project on Flinders Island and the redevelopment of the Exeter recreation hub—as part of the March budget. These two projects were of much significance for the local communities, but, with the change of government, the federal government placed the projects under review. Whilst I don't have any issue with the review process, the length of time the review took placed an unnecessary burden on the project proponents. It took a little under 18 months for both projects to finally get the tick-off and for funds to proceed, again causing budget blowouts.

I understand the need to ensure these projects are awarded through due process. If considerable reform was undertaken in how grants are administered, that would avoid this issue, and I'm all for that. As somebody who has actively advocated for action to be taken to rebuild the trust the Australian public have in their elected officials, I believe this reform is another necessary step towards achieving this goal.

See this speech in context