Half of NSW's $222 million spend had no ‘tangible output', audit finds
NSW taxpayers spent $222 million on measures to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians but less than half led to tangible outcomes for First Nations people, a damning audit has found.
The report, released on Thursday by NSW Auditor-General Bola Oyetunji, found the premier's department had inadequate oversight and a 'passive approach' to monitoring how state funding for Closing the Gap measures were being spent.
The 2022 NSW budget included $222 million to deliver programs and initiatives under the Closing the Gap national agreement signed in 2020, to cover four years until 2024.
But only 38 per cent of the 142 initiatives funded had a 'tangible output' in the form of grants or direct funding to improve outcomes for Indigenous people. A further 49 per cent delivered reviews or frameworks 'without clarity on how this would contribute to an outcome', the audit found.
'Some individual projects conducted under the National Agreement have established effective partnerships and are beginning to demonstrate positive results,' Oyetunji concluded. 'However … governance arrangements do not provide adequate oversight of delivery.'
Loading
The auditor-general questioned a $9 million government grant given to the NSW Coalition of Aboriginal Peak Organisations (NSW CAPO) to hire 22 full-time staff across the eight peak bodies it represents.
When Oyetunji's office requested an update on the funding, neither the government nor NSW CAPO could say how many of the positions had been filled.
NSW CAPO did not respond to specific questions about the grant. Co-chair Charles Lynch welcomed the report's recommendations as 'a chance to strengthen how we work – both internally and in partnership'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
Albanese need not shy away from his Catholic roots
Australian historian Manning Clark described the Australian attitude to spirituality as 'a shy hope in the heart'. We are uncomfortable with overt displays of religiosity or, indeed, strident atheism. For most Australians, to be asked by a stranger (as happens in the US) if they know Jesus as saviour would be cringe-making. This is the cultural context in which Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who visited the newly installed Pope Leo XIV last month, claimed a strong Catholic heritage, then almost immediately repudiated that by telling journalists his faith played no role in his politics. It seems that Albo's faith is not so much shy as painfully introverted. It scarcely figures in his discourse compared with, say, his struggles growing up with a single mother in a council house. This is not to doubt his personal faith, but to suggest that he is constrained in the public arena. His papal visit and later counter-balancing remarks were carefully calibrated to please – or, at least, appease – both sides of the divide. Catholics are a quarter of the population, and agnostics probably more than half. Many people believe that for a politician to express faith is to betray the separation of church and state. Former PM Tony Abbott particularly suffered this because of his strong public Catholic identity, with one commentator calling him 'Pell's puppet' (a reference to the late Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney at the time). Loading This is a terrible misunderstanding. Politicians who are believers cannot help but bring their faith to their work because it shapes their values and convictions. They should and they must. This doesn't mean seeking to advance the cause of religion, but that denying their core convictions would be hypocritical and inauthentic. Further, importantly, this is true not only of Christian politicians. Atheists, agnostics and people of other faiths are equally shaped by their values and convictions, and they owe it to their conscience and constituents to honour these. Those who don't risk becoming venal or corrupt. Philosopher Willard Quine provided a helpful analogy with his web of belief, in which the outer strands are contingent but the innermost and strongest are foundational, first principles that may never even be examined. This applies to all of us.
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Albanese need not shy away from his Catholic roots
Australian historian Manning Clark described the Australian attitude to spirituality as 'a shy hope in the heart'. We are uncomfortable with overt displays of religiosity or, indeed, strident atheism. For most Australians, to be asked by a stranger (as happens in the US) if they know Jesus as saviour would be cringe-making. This is the cultural context in which Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who visited the newly installed Pope Leo XIV last month, claimed a strong Catholic heritage, then almost immediately repudiated that by telling journalists his faith played no role in his politics. It seems that Albo's faith is not so much shy as painfully introverted. It scarcely figures in his discourse compared with, say, his struggles growing up with a single mother in a council house. This is not to doubt his personal faith, but to suggest that he is constrained in the public arena. His papal visit and later counter-balancing remarks were carefully calibrated to please – or, at least, appease – both sides of the divide. Catholics are a quarter of the population, and agnostics probably more than half. Many people believe that for a politician to express faith is to betray the separation of church and state. Former PM Tony Abbott particularly suffered this because of his strong public Catholic identity, with one commentator calling him 'Pell's puppet' (a reference to the late Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney at the time). Loading This is a terrible misunderstanding. Politicians who are believers cannot help but bring their faith to their work because it shapes their values and convictions. They should and they must. This doesn't mean seeking to advance the cause of religion, but that denying their core convictions would be hypocritical and inauthentic. Further, importantly, this is true not only of Christian politicians. Atheists, agnostics and people of other faiths are equally shaped by their values and convictions, and they owe it to their conscience and constituents to honour these. Those who don't risk becoming venal or corrupt. Philosopher Willard Quine provided a helpful analogy with his web of belief, in which the outer strands are contingent but the innermost and strongest are foundational, first principles that may never even be examined. This applies to all of us.
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
The rich get richer: Australia is at risk of becoming an inheritocracy
It's been a little over a year since I last said this, but once again, there is a record number of billionaires in Australia. According to the Australian Financial Review' s annual Rich List, which names the 200 wealthiest Australians, our island nation is now home to 161 billionaires. Compared to last year's 150 billionaires, that's a growth rate of 7 per cent over just 12 months. Compared to the first Rich List, which was published in 1984, it's even more staggering. That list had just two people with the equivalent wealth of $1 billion in today's money. Each year's list always makes for interesting reading. In part because it's a pervy way of knowing more about notoriously private people, sure. But mostly because it tells us a lot about the state of personal wealth in Australia. And while this year's list is no exception, the picture it paints is far from idyllic. Some of the main takeaways from this year's list: there are only 10 new names from last year's, which makes the list's entry rate just 5 per cent. For comparison, in 2000, there were 40 new entries. It's also worth noting that only one of the 10 new entrants is a woman, and women comprise just 21 per cent of the total list of 200 (42 people). The most remarkable name among the newcomers list, though, is easily Michael Dorrell, the founder of investment firm Stonepeak, who not only made the top 200 for the first time, but made his way to No.7 with a personal wealth of $13.8 billion. Then there's the fact that the 'poorest' person on the list has a personal wealth of $747 million. Meanwhile, the richest person in Australia, Gina Rinehart, has a whopping $38.11 billion. She's also held the top spot for six years running. Collectively, the wealth of these top 200 Australians comes to a combined $667 billion. That's 20 per cent of Australia's GDP. And did I mention that while the rest of us struggled through the cost-of-living crisis that feels never ending, the group's wealth grew by a cool 6.9 per cent compared with last year? Perhaps most significantly, though, is the analysis of economist Reuben Finighan, which looked at 40 years' worth of Rich Lists (from 1984 to 2024) and compared them in real, inflation-adjusted terms. Here, he found that the spoils of the wealthiest 200 Australians grew 7.7 times faster than per capita wealth over those four decades.
