Peter Dutton has rejected a proposed public holiday if the Matildas win the Fifa Women’s World Cup as a “stunt” and “ego trip” for the prime minister, Anthony Albanese.
The opposition leader and the shadow sports minister, Anne Ruston, have complained the holiday could cost the economy $2bn and promised instead that, if elected, the Coalition would give $250m in grants for community sport infrastructure.
The pledge is likely to be controversial, given the auditor general found ahead of the 2019 election the Coalition skewed the $100m community sport infrastructure grant program towards marginal and target seats.
For several weeks Albanese has praised the Matildas for their success at the World Cup, and indicated that if they win the tournament he will lobby at national cabinet for a public holiday.
On Monday, Albanese said the idea had got “a pretty warm reception in most quarters” and the New South Wales premier, Chris Minns, announced his state will institute the public holiday.
But Dutton and Ruston said in a statement the “one-off public holiday … comes at a potential cost to the economy of $2bn; not to mention sidelining the recent triumphs of other female teams in the Netball World Cup and the Ashes”.
“It is a stunt which will have no legacy impact. The prime minister has tried to make the Matildas’ success all about him.”
“With the recent success of the Matildas, the Diamonds and our Women’s Ashes team, we are seeing a surge in interest in women’s sport. We must harness this goodwill to build the sporting infrastructure that our young athletes need.
“This is a better and more lasting proposal than the prime minister’s public holiday ego trip. It will mean better outcomes over the decades ahead for millions of young girls and boys across the country.”
Under the Coalition proposal the federal government would spend $250m over four years on projects which “reduce barriers to participation for women and girls”, or “increase accessibility and improve local facilities for children around Australia”.
Funding would go only to proponents who contribute at least 20% of the project cost. The states and territories would be encouraged to match the commitment.
“Our priority will be improving sporting infrastructure in population growth areas in outer metropolitan, rural and regional areas: areas where young families live and where participation in sport is vital,” Dutton and Ruston said.
“We think this sporting infrastructure improvement fund is a better idea than Mr Albanese’s public holiday thought bubble.”
In February 2020, the auditor general found the Morrison government gave funding to 400 sport infrastructure project that were not recommended by Sport Australia because they scored lower than 74%, the score above which all projects could have been funded if grants were decided on merit alone.
The sports rorts controversy increased scrutiny on Coalition programs, including the $150m for female facilities and water safety program, for which funding was allocated to projects without a competitive application process.
On Monday Albanese explained the origin of the public holiday proposal in an interview with ABC Melbourne.
“It was weeks ago, before the round of 16, I got asked, if they win the whole thing would you support giving them a public holiday? And I said it’s up to the states and territories but [it’s] not a bad idea,” he said.
When asked about choosing between funding local sport and the public holiday, Albanese argued that Australia can “do both”.
“Is there enough funding that has gone into women’s sport? No. There is a need to do more, to be very conscious about it.”
Albanese repeated that the public holiday will “be up to the states, premiers and territory leaders” but noted that Victoria already has a day off for the Friday before the Australian Football League grand final.
“The achievement of the Matildas in getting as far as they have is quite extraordinary … One of the things that are Matildas have done is to lift up the whole country as well, the spirits of the country and I think that’s incredibly positive.”
Albanese noted concerns were also raised about the public holiday for the Queen’s memorial but “there was a lot of economic activity in the cafes and pubs and theatres and everywhere else around the country” at that time.
