The golden age of government rorting continues, with an Auditor-General report finding the government’s Safer Communities Fund funnelled money to Coalition-held and marginal electorates.
According to the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO), a majority (54%) of funding decisions made during five rounds of the $184 million program were made without a clear basis for the decision recorded.
The fund was initially set up in 2016, and intended to help local councils tackle crime and other anti-social behaviour. Later, in the aftermath of the Christchurch attack, it was expanded to include protecting schools and community organisations against risks related to racial or religious intolerance.
Dutton’s big rorts
The Auditor-General’s analysis of the fund indicated 59% of projects funded were in Coalition-held electorates, with just 27% in Labor electorates. Of the projects funded in Labor-held electorates, all but one (99%) were marginal seats.
The Safer Communities Fund was referred to the Auditor-General last year, after reports that former home affairs minister Peter Dutton, largely responsible for the fund, had overruled merit-based assessments made by his own department and had funded his own hand-picked list.
At a Senate estimates hearing late last night, ANAO Executive Director Brian Boyd confirmed round three of the fund, which triggered the referral to the auditor-general and was presided over by Dutton, 91% of funding ended up in Coalition-held or marginal seats. The report noted this was one of the most significant trends across the funding round.
During this round, two projects in Tasmania were funded ahead of the 2018 Braddon byelection before being assessed, and in spite of the department noting they didn’t represent value for money. At estimates last night, Boyd confirmed Dutton had been the minister responsible for approving the funding. Back in 2018, he spent $36,000 on a RAAF jet to Tasmania where he announced the grants.
Churches win, temples lose
The Auditor-General’s report also found a significant skewing of funding toward certain religious groups. Despite the fund’s broad remit, 84% of community organisations funded were religious ones. Funding overwhelmingly went to Christian and Jewish organisations, and the report notes Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist and Sikh groups were relatively under-represented in both applications and final funding.
In submissions made to the ANAO, Hindu and Tamil groups raised concerns about “favouritism to European religions or communities” in distribution of grants. The Hindu Council of Australia wrote that the process favoured groups able to access grant submission consultants to assist with applications, leading to under-representation of South Asian religious groups among applicants and recipients.
Government’s rorting continues
The report is just the latest example of dubious use of various community grants under the Morrison government. Last year, the ANAO revealed a $660 million program to fund commuter carparks had largely favoured Coalition seats, with a list of the top 20 marginal electorates drawn up in minister Alan Tudge’s office forming the basis for funding decisions ahead of the 2019 election.
The $100 million community sport infrastructure program was rorted to favour Coalition seats in 2019. While it led to the demise of former nationals deputy leader Bridget McKenzie, she’s now returned to cabinet. A $150 million program to fund female swimming change rooms overwhelmingly favoured Coalition electorates. And as Crikey reported last week, Prime Minister Scott Morrison gave more than $4 million worth of public money to a Pentecostal organisation.
Meanwhile, the Leppington Triangle rort made a return at estimates yesterday. A 2020 report from the ANAO found the government paid $30 million for land owned by Liberal Party donors, which was later valued at just $3 million. But a key public servant at the heart of the deal is now challenging that finding.
A submission from a Commonwealth public servant investigated by police was uploaded shortly before the hearing, disputing the ANAO’s finding of over-valuation, and accusing the auditor-general of “unreasonable conduct” and misleading Parliament over the land deal.
