Review of NSW Labor's controversial $37m election fund urges rapid overhaul of grant guidelines
A controversial $37m New South Wales grants program which began as a 2023 election slush fund available to Labor candidates and members to offer to local community groups has revealed weaknesses in the state's grants making guidelines.
The NSW auditor general, Bola Oyetunji, found that he was unable to review how Labor had administered the Local Small Commitments Allocation (LSCA) grants prior to winning government.
Oyetunji concluded in his report that the grant guidelines should be overhauled as 'a matter of priority' to deal with election promises that later led to allocations of government money.
The LSCA program gave $400,000 to each electorate, but the projects were nominated by Labor candidates only.
When it became known about after the 2023 election, won by Labor, it sparked outrage from the opposition and minor parties because they had no opportunity to nominate projects, even if they were the sitting members.
The LSCA is now the subject of a parliamentary inquiry, amid allegations that some Labor MPs were on the boards of, or had ties to, organisations that they recommended for funding.
Oyetunji noted that once the bureaucracy took over the program, after the election, the program was largely run 'effectively'. Earlier, it was largely not transparent, he said.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
The auditor general found the Program Office which took over the grants program had reviewed the potential conflicts of interest of just 17 candidates out of 93, which were put forward by the special minister of state.
'The Program Office was told that NSW Labor had put in place conflict of interest processes to make sure the candidate did not have any issues, but the office did not seek any documentation supporting NSW Labor's conflicts of interest assessments,' Oyetunji said.
He said there was little he could do, because the NSW Labor party was not within his remit.
'These activities fall outside the scope of the auditor general's mandate,' Oyetunji said.
Instead he recommended: 'The guide [on administering grants] could be clearer about how the public sector is to administer grants involving election commitments.'
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
The LSCA program began as a policy proposal of NSW Labor prior to the March 2023 election. It involved an allocation of $400,000 to each NSW electorate to fund the election commitments of local Labor candidates in accordance with program guidelines.
After the election, the scheme was handed to the NSW government's Program Office, which engaged a probity adviser on 25 July 2023. But the adviser was not involved in any events before this date.
The premier's office provided the Program Office with a list of election commitments and the Program Office invited the nominated organisations on the list to submit applications to deliver small local projects.
The auditor found that once Labor won the election and handed to the Program office within the government, it was mostly run 'effectively'.
The audit identified two exceptions: 54 assessment panel members' conflicts were not identified and managed from a total of 644 approved projects, and there were some other minor administrative errors.
Oyetunji said the NSW government should consider updating the Grants Administration Guide to include additional guidance on how the public sector is to address financial accountability, probity, record keeping and administrative obligations when a grants administration process has been initiated as an election commitment.
He also recommended the Program Office should ensure conflicts of interest processes are implemented as intended for all future grant programs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘I come to save the system': why Melbourne tower residents fear for the future of public housing
Katherine Ceballos sat before a panel of Victorian MPs inside the Djerring Flemington Hub, her voice steady, her message clear. 'I come to save public housing. I come to save the land. I come to save the system,' she said. Ceballos has lived in Carlton's public housing estate for decades. For her, these high-rises are more than buildings – they are her 'sanctuary' and 'security'. But like thousands of others, she will be forced to relocate under the Andrews-era plan to demolish all 44 of Victoria's public housing towers by 2051. The government argues the buildings are outdated, unsafe and energy-inefficient. They promise to modernise each site, increasing housing supply, and allow residents to return once complete. But Ceballos, like many others who appeared before the first hearing of a parliamentary inquiry into the redevelopment on Tuesday, is not convinced. She described the plan as 'reckless, arrogant, foolish, undermining and insulting', and accused the government of trying to 'kick out the minorities' from the gentrified inner-city suburbs. 'This is not what Victoria, or Australia, is about,' she said. Reem Yehdego, another Carlton resident, echoed the sentiment: 'These demolitions don't feel like progress, they feel like erasure.' She said the migrants who made these areas safe and vibrant were being coerced into leaving by a 'government and developers seeing it as a cash grab'. Kah Wah, speaking through a translator, put it more bluntly: the government was 'collaborating in a bad way with businessmen'. He said he left his Flemington apartment after being told if he did not move before 30 September, he would have to pay relocation costs himself. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The government, however, has disputed these claims. They have said more than 70% of high-rise residents who have been relocated so far have been moved into homes that suit their needs, including in their local neighbourhoods, and they are not responsible for the costs involved. 'We are so proud of the diverse, close-knit and vibrant multicultural and multi-faith communities who have called the towers home – in many cases for decades – they are an incredibly important part of Melbourne's multicultural identity,' the housing minister, Harriet Shing, said. 'We also want more people to have access to quality housing in the inner suburbs, which is why the overall increase in the amount of social housing at these sites is so important.' In September 2023, in one of his final acts as Victorian premier, Daniel Andrews announced 'Australia's biggest ever urban renewal project', a plan to knock down every public housing tower in the state and replace them with a mix of 'social housing' – the umbrella term that encompasses two types of state-subsidised housing for low-income people: public housing, which is owned and operated by the government, and community housing, which is run by private not-for-profit companies. The first towers due to be developed by 2031 are 12 Holland Street in Flemington, 33 Alfred Street and 120 Racecourse Road in North Melbourne and two unoccupied red-brick towers in Carlton. Towers in South Yarra and Richmond will follow. So far, only the buildings in Carlton will return as public housing, thanks to federal funding. The rest will be rebuilt as community housing under a model where the government leases land out for 40 years. This 'ground lease model' was also used during the $5.3bn 'Big Housing Build', launched in 2020. Since then, community housing has proliferated. In 2022, it made up 20% of Victoria's total social housing stock. Stephanie Price, from West Heidelberg Community Legal Service, told the inquiry it proved a 'retreat and diminishment of public housing' by government. She said in the past three years, 20 new community housing providers have been registered – a 50% increase. Some, she said, had no website or contact details. While the number of providers has grown, Productivity Commission data from January shows Victoria has the lowest proportion of social housing stock per capita of any state, with only 2.9% of people living in social housing, below the national average of 3.9%. There were more than 55,000 applications on the state's housing waitlist as of March 2025. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Both Price and Louisa Bassini, a lawyer from Inner Melbourne Community Legal Centre, who represented tower residents in a recent class action, told the inquiry community housing lacks protections of public housing, including that private providers can charge higher rent – up to 30% of income compared to the 25% capped rate for public housing. Price also raised concerns about smaller unit sizes and the loss of communal spaces, impacting public housing residents whose families are often larger. Rose Aba told MPs her family was relocated to two adjacent community housing apartments on Victoria Street in Flemington. She was promised the apartments – one four-bedroom and one two-bedroom – would be combined. It has not happened. As a result, she is 'struggling to pay two rents'. 'I'm feeling crazy at the moment,' Aba said. 'This is the thing I didn't bargain for my family – to have my kid in the other apartment. Sometime I don't even sleep.' Another key theme of the inquiry is whether demolition is even necessary. MPs will soon hear from the towers' original architect and engineer, as well as firms proposing retrofitting instead of demolition. Among them is OFFICE, which released a proposal last year to retain and upgrade the Flemington estate and build five new mid-rises on existing car parks, saving the government $364m. The government disagrees. It said it would cost $2.3bn over 20 years – or $55m per tower – just to maintain the buildings, not improve them. Labor MPs at Tuesday's hearings went to lengths to illustrate the poor living conditions of the units, including the inability to install air conditioning in some. Ryan Batchelor cited a report on the Carlton buildings that said it was 'not feasible or practicable' to upgrade them as the sewer stacks were 'failing', causing damp and mould within the walls. 'Do we have to wait until there's a failure of the sewer stacks?' he said. 'Or do we need to have a proactive program of capital assessment management … to give the most vulnerable and poorest residents of our state homes that suit their needs?' He framed the redevelopment as a staged 30-year plan and accused 'non-government agents' of spreading misinformation. Hamad Ali, from the Carlton Housing Estate residents' group, agreed, saying confusion was widespread and rumours were flourishing. 'Because of the language barrier, sometimes people will put their own spin,' Ali said. Ayan Mohamud, a food security coordinator at the Church All Nations, however, put the blame on government. 'Rumours are coming from the government not giving information. So people are filling in the gaps,' she said. Privately, some Labor MPs agree the lack of clarity has allowed the Greens to capitalise on the issue, alongside the Victorian Socialists. They point to both Bassini and Price having run for the Socialists in local elections, while the party's Senate candidate, Jordan van den Lamb, and Greens housing spokesperson and Richmond MP, Gabrielle de Vietri, have led several protests. Shing, accused the Greens and Socialists of 'spreading misinformation' and 'creating fear without offering actual solutions'. 'These ageing towers will not stand the test of time – we have to act now. Victorians deserve better than bandaids on 1960s concrete,' she said. 'We do not underestimate the impact of such major change on residents who have in many cases called the towers home for decades – we are determined to make sure that all residents … have the information and support that they need.' The hearings will continue next month.
The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
Labour are in PANIC – Farage is streets ahead in polls & welfare rebels are set to pile more misery on flailing Starmer
WHEN it rains, it pours… and Sir Keir Starmer cannot catch a break. A poll today shows Labour is on course for a thumping at the next election at the hands of Nigel Farage. 4 4 The YouGov 'gold-standard' MRP puts Reform on course to win the most seats on 271, while the PM's current 412 would be more than halved to 178. Sir Keir's supporters point out there are still four years to go until the next election, giving plenty of time to turn things around. But it is the fact his government has become so unpopular so soon after last year's landslide that should really worry them. A map of the projected outcome shows Reform winning in all parts of the country, flipping once Labour strongholds in the Red Wall, while reducing the Tories to a rump of 46. That so many Labour MPs - including a string of Cabinet Ministers - look to fall in a Farage wave spells trouble for Sir Keir. Rebels who in good times would ordinarily remain loyal to the government could throw caution to the wind and vote how they like. As one party insider tells me: 'Why would they care about rebelling on something they feel strongly about if they'll be out in four years time anyway?'. It means the current revolt over benefits could be just the start of the PM's troubles. Such is the scale of the revolt over the government's package of welfare savings that No10 has gone into crisis mode. Ministers may be keeping calm in public but, like a duck's feet furiously paddling below the surface, in private they are panicking. I can reveal that Sir Keir's diary was being rejigged today so he can personally lead the ring-round of Labour rebels upon his return from his NATO dash to Holland. It is therefore perhaps a happy coincidence that his aides recently discovered the Downing Street vending machine has started stocking Red Bull. They are going to need all their energy for a fraught few days that could decide the fate of Labour's entire premiership. The golden rule in politics is knowing how to count - so some numbers: around 120 Labour backbenchers are threatening to torpedo the government's £5billion package in benefit cuts. They say the squeeze on Personal Independence Payments specifically could push 250,000 claimants into poverty. Combined with the opposition parties, they have marshalled enough troops to easily wipe out Sir Keir's 156 majority when the vote happens in just five days' time. Defeat would strike a humiliating blow to Sir Keir's authority and throw into doubt his ability to push through any serious reform. If he cannot even convince his troops to get behind £5billion in welfare cuts, what hope does he have of reining in a sickness benefits bill set to balloon to £100billion within five years? Downing Street has been left with two options: postpone the vote and buy time to redraw their proposals in a way that satisfies the rebels, despite the stench of weakness. Or roll the dice and try to peel off as many mutineers as possible with the prospect of concessions. For now, Starmer has chosen to go to the negotiating table, with both him and his deputy Angela Rayner publicly stressing the vote on Tuesday will happen. Over the next few days the PM, his ministers and his whips will use a mix of olive branches, arm-twisting, and downright dark arts to smash the revolt. A 'bleeding stumps' pitch has seen rebels told that popular policies - like more cash for hospitals and school breakfast clubs - could all be at risk without welfare savings. Meanwhile the more career-driven MPs are being gently warned that their hopes of a government job will evaporate if they walk through the wrong voting lobby. The name of one ambitious newbie who has been excitably telling colleagues he wants 'regime change' has worked its way back to No10. He can kiss goodbye to a ministerial red box… But even MPs loyal to Starmer - and there are still a lot of them - are not convinced anything other than serious concessions will pull the rebels back from the brink. One member of the government tells me: 'It's hard to see how they can get this over line on the current voting timeline without some concessions to get some of the heavy hitters to change course. 'But it is unclear if that reality has yet fully landed with No10.' Another supportive MP reckons a commitment on the floor of the House of Commons to soften the package later down the line is 'the only way to keep the show on the road'. One senior rebel insists they 'can find a compromise' but Downing Street 'need to take their fingers out of their ears'. And the rebellion is not just contained to the backbenches. One MP swears that as many as five Parliamentary Private Secretaries - the first rung on the ministerial ladder - are willing to abstain in protest. Whether Sir Keir wins the vote or not, this whole mess is symptomatic of a deeper problem running through his premiership: a growing sense he is not in control. A string of embarrassing u-turns - from winter fuel cuts to the grooming gangs national inquiry - are a dangerous smoke signal to his MPs that he can be pushed around. And worryingly to the government - much like the Brexit Spartans who hamstrung Theresa May's government - the new Labour rebels are organised. Experienced committee chairs on the soft left of the party have developed a sophisticated shadow whipping operation to marshal their troops. That No10 was totally blindsided by the ambush on Monday night is testament to their tactics - and exposed a Downing Street intelligence operation sorely lacking. Terrified of party whips getting wind, the ringleaders recruited disgruntled MPs to their cause through snatched conversations in corridors and on the Commons terrace. As one MP warns: 'They have spreadsheets and they can count. This whole saga has given them intel on how to whip'. And you can bet that fighting benefits cuts will not be their only rallying cause over the next four years. Axing the two-child benefit cap - on which the PM has already shown ankle at the mere flickers of backbench grumblings - will be next. The danger for Sir Keir now is spiralling into a doom loop of chaos, which breeds unpopularity, which breeds more chaos, which breeds more unpopularity.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Sussan Ley pushes for new collaborative policy process in bid to avoid Peter Dutton-style party control
Sussan Ley will ask Coalition MPs to endorse a new policy development process designed to empower backbenchers and include more diverse voices, part of efforts to avoid repeating the political overreach which occurred during Peter Dutton's leadership. At a meeting of the joint Coalition party room in Canberra on Friday, the opposition leader will outline a bottom-up approach for new policy proposals. Details of the plan were circulated to MPs on Thursday night, after a meeting of the shadow ministry at Parliament House. Liberal sources said Ley wanted consultative design work for ideas to be led by shadow ministers and specialist working groups before the 2028 federal election. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The new process will allow backbench policy committees more say in the opposition's pitch to voters, ending idea bottlenecks and taking advantage of MPs' expertise and community connections from outside politics. The scale of the Coalition's loss on 3 May is expected to be discussed at Friday's meeting, before a formal review led by Howard government minister Nick Minchin and former New South Wales state minister Pru Goward. Before the election, some Liberals complained about policy ideas being ignored by Dutton and the opposition leadership team, with backbench committees being asked to rubber stamp ideas immediately before they were announced. Ley has told MPs she wants a more strategic approach, based on expert advice and better external engagement. In a speech to the National Press Club this week, she announced the first working group, which will consider energy and emissions reductions policies. Led by shadow minister Dan Tehan, it will consider Dutton's nuclear power plan amid fierce internal debate about net zero by 2050 policies. 'Our policy development process will be iterative and continuous,' Ley said on Wednesday. 'It will evolve throughout the term in response to internal and external feedback, emerging issues, and ongoing engagement with the community.' Her promise to be a 'zealot' on recruiting more women to Liberal party ranks is being debated internally but frontbencher Angus Taylor on Thursday talked down any move to introduce gender quotas. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'It's not something that I think is necessary in order to get the outcome,' Taylor told Sky News. 'I think attracting, mentoring, retaining great people and great women in the party is incredibly important work for absolutely everybody, for all leaders. And I take that very seriously.' Nationals leader David Littleproud used the opening of the shadow ministry meeting to energise dispirited colleagues. 'You can do one of two things: you can get in the foetal position, give up, or you can come out swinging,' he said. 'Let's come out swinging. Let's hold this government to account, and let's show Australians that we are here for them and we have the solutions for them.' The minister for women, Katy Gallagher, warned the Coalition needed to do more than identify its failures on gender representation. Labor introduced quotas for female representation in the mid-1990s. 'It's actually the next step that matters, which is: what are you going to do about it? 'I think we'll just have to wait and see whether the rhetoric is actually matched by action,' Gallagher said.
