Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Money is in short supply, and that is no more the case anywhere than with taxpayers' money, which is a finite resource, and I think we have to respect that. Much of the debate in this place and the other place focuses on how little of it there is to meet the demands of government. Tonight, that's why I'm speaking about an issue that a number of Tasmanians have contacted me about, and it's an issue that I believe does warrant further scrutiny. I'm going to be speaking about the Tasmanian Community Fund, or the TCF as it's abbreviated to, which is an entity that was set up by the Tasmanian government following the sale of the state owned bank in Tasmania, the Trust Bank, in 1999.

Using the proceeds of the sale of the bank and an annual appropriation of around $7 million from the Tasmanian government in their annual budget—and following an application process that usually means projects miss out because of, again, that finite resource, the money available to the TCF—the TCF board chooses projects to fund. Many of them are worthy. These projects, as is convention, are community based ones, ones that come from grassroots organisations where Tasmanians can see real benefits, tangible benefits, on the ground in their communities. Previous examples of some of the very good projects that have been funded by the TCF—and there have been many good ones funded by the good people who are members of its board—are $140,000 to the Launceston Women's Shelter; $300,000 towards the Queenstown squash courts, which is a much-needed facility in that remote community; and $6,800 for the Kingborough Community Missions emergency food relief efforts. All of them were very worthy projects and ones that I applaud the board for funding.

The fund and the board that manage it are governed by an act, the TCF Act. In that act, section 7(5) states:

(5) In performing its functions and exercising its powers, the Board must –

(a) act honestly in all matters concerning the Fund; and—

importantly—

(b) ensure that its functions and powers are performed and exercised in the best interests of the Tasmanian community.

I emphasise that: in the best interests of the Tasmanian community.

Therefore, having read that piece of legislation, I was astounded to hear that the Tasmanian Community Fund board had made a donation from these taxpayers' funds, $7 million annually, to Australians for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition Ltd, an affiliate of the Yes23 campaign. I hence wrote to the TCF board, on 21 September, seeking some details. I was asking two questions in particular. The first question was: how much was this contribution? Because it wasn't disclosed on any of their websites or social media publications. The second question I asked was: did the Yes23 campaign or its affiliates go through the same application process as Tasmanian proponents of their community and grassroots projects? The chair of the board did write back to me on 26 September in a two-page letter, and the chair did disclose that the contribution that was made to the Yes23 campaign was a whopping $557,800—one of the biggest in their history. But the chair didn't disclose to me whether this application had been put through the same process as any other grassroots application from Tasmania.

Tasmanians are rightly outraged at a contribution to one side of a divisive campaign that was made with taxpayers' money meant for community good on the ground to help communities in Tasmania. I can assure you, Acting Deputy President, that if the funding had gone to the 'no' campaign I'd be asking the same questions. This money is meant for Tasmanians, for good Tasmanian projects. This is not where the money has gone. I don't think any reasonable Tasmanian wanted to see a contribution made to either side of a political campaign, whether it was in support of the 'yes' or the 'no' campaign. The TCF's board's approach to funding allocation makes me question the decision-making process that's been followed here in how they allocate funding. How could the board make this massive contribution to a political campaign when no clear argument about how it would benefit the community on the ground was ever made, let alone how it would directly benefit Aboriginal communities, let alone Tasmanian Aboriginal communities?

I saw a news article recently where the chair of the board said they would not be changing their decision-making process. This deserves a relook. I'll be writing to the Tasmanian Auditor-General for him to examine the process and ensure future decisions reflect the original intention set out in law when the TCF was set up for genuine community good.