Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The announcement of the allocation of funding under the auspices of the Regional Development Australia fund last week was yet another disgraceful illustration of this government's contempt for regional Australians. The Gillard government promised over $10 billion in funding for regional Australia upon forming minority government last year. Announced nearly two months later than promised, the allocation of funding that has occurred raises serious questions about the application process and the overall design and purpose of the fund itself.

Taking a look through Minister Crean's press release and the accompanying chart of projects that were deemed to be of such significance to rural Australia that they warranted taxpayer investment leaves me terribly vexed. I was reminded of Hanlon's razor, which states, 'Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.' Members of this House and the Australian people at large would be forgiven for holding this sentiment towards nearly every appalling policy this wretched government has dreamt up or failed to deliver. For this government, stupidity is not in short supply, but like all country people I can spot a con when I see one. Even with only one eye, I smell bacon on the government benches.

The Gillard-Greens government has allocated almost two-thirds of the RDA to Labor-held electorates or to electorates which have propped up the minority Labor government. This is despite Labor holding just 23 out of 62 non-metropolitan seats in federal parliament. Labor has left itself open to the charge that it cares more about sandbagging vulnerable Labor-held marginal seats against the torrential voter backlash it is expecting at the next election than according salt-of-the-earth rural communities the respect and investment they deserve.

I personally supported over six separate applications for funding under the RDA, from Boorowa, Goulburn, Mulwaree, Harden, Yass and Cowra shires and councils. These included the $2.2 million bid by Endeavour Industries for a new green recycling centre in Goulburn; the $3.3 million bid by Goulburn Mulwaree council to fund a new outdoor swimming pool—which, might I add, the Liberal Party committed to assist through a fifty-fifty funding arrangement at the last election; $12.5 million to go towards a new university campus in Goulburn; a $2.1 million bid by Boorowa shire to replace the Tarengo Bridge to allow Cunningar Road to be opened up as a B-double route, thus expanding economic opportunity for the shire and improving road safety; funding to upgrade Cowra Showground's facilities; $2.5 million for the Moppity Vineyards wine tourism development project, in partnership with Harden Shire Council; and $10 million towards the $23 million estimated cost to raise the Yass dam wall by three metres to meet the future water requirements of the exponentially growing Yass Valley shire. None were deemed to have met the criteria for funding under the RDA. In fact, several applications, such as Yass Valley shire's, have been rejected for the second time.

Feedback I have received from several shires and project managers is that the RDA application guidelines and funding eligibility requirements are tedious and require an enormous investment in time and energy in and of themselves. I can accept that some projects will inevitably miss out. But the editor of the Goulburn Post, Gerard Walsh, in his editorial which appeared in the Post on Monday, 12 September, made some pretty compelling points relating to the obvious flaws in the RDA process:

It's quite clear that the more detailed an application is, the better its chances of succeeding … Geelong Football Club (which received a $10 million grant for the continued upgrade of Skilled Stadium) would have the resources and corporate wherewithal to ensure a first-class, squeaky-clean application that would have proved irresistible to the independent panel and thus the Minister … So what chance do smaller players like Goulburn Mulwaree Council and Endeavour Industries have?

He goes on:

The RDA provides grants of between $500,000 and $25 million. But nowhere in its guidelines does it incorporate a type of "means test" on applicants to enable the panel to better assess bids not on their scale or presentation, but their merit and community benefit.

It's a flawed system if the likes of Geelong Football Club—which will share in the mega $1.25 billion AFL TV deal proceeds—are competing for the same pool of government funds under the same rules with genuine regional minnow entities such as Endeavour Industries—

which, I might add, is an industry which employs people with disabilities. Mr Walsh has hit the nail on the head. It is outrageous that rural communities with worthy projects are being deprived of funding because of a flawed application process which disgracefully favours big corporate entities with popular— (Time expired)