Latest news with #StrongerCommunitiesFund
The Advertiser
9 hours ago
- Politics
- The Advertiser
Labor's pork-barrelling answer managed 'effectively'
A controversial community grant scheme spreading $37.2 million across 93 electorates has been cleared of pork-barrelling claims but conflicts of interest concerns linger. The NSW auditor-general on Thursday published its verdict after two years of consternation from the coalition over the integrity, efficacy and value of Labor's taxpayer-funded Local Small Commitments Allocation scheme. The grants program, announced by Labor before it swept to power in the 2023 NSW election, allowed each Labor candidate to nominate projects for $400,000 in funding. Nominations could be made by candidates with no prosect of winning. Several coalition MPs described the scheme as a "slush fund" where "taxpayer money is being used to try to buy votes". But Auditor-General Bola Oyetunji said the government had effectively administered the program and complied with grants administration laws as it divvied the pot between 644 projects. He identified two concerns around conflicts of interest of 54 panel members recommending the grants and minor administrative errors. Liberal MP Chris Rath, who was among a group of MPs critical of the grant, argued the report was "scathing." He called on Premier Chris Minns to order a conflict of interest check on all 93 Labor candidates the party fielded in 2023. The government office overseeing the grants program only reviewed such checks for 17 candidates, put forward by Special Minister of State John Graham. Two grants were subsequently not approved. The office said it had received verbal confirmation that conflict-of-interest processes had been implemented by Labor for all electorates. But it hadn't asked for documentation supporting those claims, the auditor-general's report said. More than 50 "moderate risk" conflicts of interest of panel members approving a total of 644 grants also should have been passed onto a probity adviser before ending up on the special minister's desk, the report said. A spokesman for Mr Graham said it accepted the audit office's recommendations to tighten up its processes. Labor's grants program followed a report in two damning indictments of coalition-organised grants programs. A 2023 report from the auditor-general found the former coalition government intervened to effectively exclude Labor electorates from receiving bushfire recovery funding. Another grants round, the $252 million Stronger Communities Fund, came under a cloud when an upper house inquiry found 95 per cent of the funds went to councils in coalition-held or marginal seats under the Berejiklian government. A controversial community grant scheme spreading $37.2 million across 93 electorates has been cleared of pork-barrelling claims but conflicts of interest concerns linger. The NSW auditor-general on Thursday published its verdict after two years of consternation from the coalition over the integrity, efficacy and value of Labor's taxpayer-funded Local Small Commitments Allocation scheme. The grants program, announced by Labor before it swept to power in the 2023 NSW election, allowed each Labor candidate to nominate projects for $400,000 in funding. Nominations could be made by candidates with no prosect of winning. Several coalition MPs described the scheme as a "slush fund" where "taxpayer money is being used to try to buy votes". But Auditor-General Bola Oyetunji said the government had effectively administered the program and complied with grants administration laws as it divvied the pot between 644 projects. He identified two concerns around conflicts of interest of 54 panel members recommending the grants and minor administrative errors. Liberal MP Chris Rath, who was among a group of MPs critical of the grant, argued the report was "scathing." He called on Premier Chris Minns to order a conflict of interest check on all 93 Labor candidates the party fielded in 2023. The government office overseeing the grants program only reviewed such checks for 17 candidates, put forward by Special Minister of State John Graham. Two grants were subsequently not approved. The office said it had received verbal confirmation that conflict-of-interest processes had been implemented by Labor for all electorates. But it hadn't asked for documentation supporting those claims, the auditor-general's report said. More than 50 "moderate risk" conflicts of interest of panel members approving a total of 644 grants also should have been passed onto a probity adviser before ending up on the special minister's desk, the report said. A spokesman for Mr Graham said it accepted the audit office's recommendations to tighten up its processes. Labor's grants program followed a report in two damning indictments of coalition-organised grants programs. A 2023 report from the auditor-general found the former coalition government intervened to effectively exclude Labor electorates from receiving bushfire recovery funding. Another grants round, the $252 million Stronger Communities Fund, came under a cloud when an upper house inquiry found 95 per cent of the funds went to councils in coalition-held or marginal seats under the Berejiklian government. A controversial community grant scheme spreading $37.2 million across 93 electorates has been cleared of pork-barrelling claims but conflicts of interest concerns linger. The NSW auditor-general on Thursday published its verdict after two years of consternation from the coalition over the integrity, efficacy and value of Labor's taxpayer-funded Local Small Commitments Allocation scheme. The grants program, announced by Labor before it swept to power in the 2023 NSW election, allowed each Labor candidate to nominate projects for $400,000 in funding. Nominations could be made by candidates with no prosect of winning. Several coalition MPs described the scheme as a "slush fund" where "taxpayer money is being used to try to buy votes". But Auditor-General Bola Oyetunji said the government had effectively administered the program and complied with grants administration laws as it divvied the pot between 644 projects. He identified two concerns around conflicts of interest of 54 panel members recommending the grants and minor administrative errors. Liberal MP Chris Rath, who was among a group of MPs critical of the grant, argued the report was "scathing." He called on Premier Chris Minns to order a conflict of interest check on all 93 Labor candidates the party fielded in 2023. The government office overseeing the grants program only reviewed such checks for 17 candidates, put forward by Special Minister of State John Graham. Two grants were subsequently not approved. The office said it had received verbal confirmation that conflict-of-interest processes had been implemented by Labor for all electorates. But it hadn't asked for documentation supporting those claims, the auditor-general's report said. More than 50 "moderate risk" conflicts of interest of panel members approving a total of 644 grants also should have been passed onto a probity adviser before ending up on the special minister's desk, the report said. A spokesman for Mr Graham said it accepted the audit office's recommendations to tighten up its processes. Labor's grants program followed a report in two damning indictments of coalition-organised grants programs. A 2023 report from the auditor-general found the former coalition government intervened to effectively exclude Labor electorates from receiving bushfire recovery funding. Another grants round, the $252 million Stronger Communities Fund, came under a cloud when an upper house inquiry found 95 per cent of the funds went to councils in coalition-held or marginal seats under the Berejiklian government. A controversial community grant scheme spreading $37.2 million across 93 electorates has been cleared of pork-barrelling claims but conflicts of interest concerns linger. The NSW auditor-general on Thursday published its verdict after two years of consternation from the coalition over the integrity, efficacy and value of Labor's taxpayer-funded Local Small Commitments Allocation scheme. The grants program, announced by Labor before it swept to power in the 2023 NSW election, allowed each Labor candidate to nominate projects for $400,000 in funding. Nominations could be made by candidates with no prosect of winning. Several coalition MPs described the scheme as a "slush fund" where "taxpayer money is being used to try to buy votes". But Auditor-General Bola Oyetunji said the government had effectively administered the program and complied with grants administration laws as it divvied the pot between 644 projects. He identified two concerns around conflicts of interest of 54 panel members recommending the grants and minor administrative errors. Liberal MP Chris Rath, who was among a group of MPs critical of the grant, argued the report was "scathing." He called on Premier Chris Minns to order a conflict of interest check on all 93 Labor candidates the party fielded in 2023. The government office overseeing the grants program only reviewed such checks for 17 candidates, put forward by Special Minister of State John Graham. Two grants were subsequently not approved. The office said it had received verbal confirmation that conflict-of-interest processes had been implemented by Labor for all electorates. But it hadn't asked for documentation supporting those claims, the auditor-general's report said. More than 50 "moderate risk" conflicts of interest of panel members approving a total of 644 grants also should have been passed onto a probity adviser before ending up on the special minister's desk, the report said. A spokesman for Mr Graham said it accepted the audit office's recommendations to tighten up its processes. Labor's grants program followed a report in two damning indictments of coalition-organised grants programs. A 2023 report from the auditor-general found the former coalition government intervened to effectively exclude Labor electorates from receiving bushfire recovery funding. Another grants round, the $252 million Stronger Communities Fund, came under a cloud when an upper house inquiry found 95 per cent of the funds went to councils in coalition-held or marginal seats under the Berejiklian government.
Perth Now
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Perth Now
Labor's pork-barrelling answer managed 'effectively'
A controversial community grant scheme spreading $37.2 million across 93 electorates has been cleared of pork-barrelling claims but conflicts of interest concerns linger. The NSW auditor-general on Thursday published its verdict after two years of consternation from the coalition over the integrity, efficacy and value of Labor's taxpayer-funded Local Small Commitments Allocation scheme. The grants program, announced by Labor before it swept to power in the 2023 NSW election, allowed each Labor candidate to nominate projects for $400,000 in funding. Nominations could be made by candidates with no prosect of winning. Several coalition MPs described the scheme as a "slush fund" where "taxpayer money is being used to try to buy votes". But Auditor-General Bola Oyetunji said the government had effectively administered the program and complied with grants administration laws as it divvied the pot between 644 projects. He identified two concerns around conflicts of interest of 54 panel members recommending the grants and minor administrative errors. Liberal MP Chris Rath, who was among a group of MPs critical of the grant, argued the report was "scathing." He called on Premier Chris Minns to order a conflict of interest check on all 93 Labor candidates the party fielded in 2023. The government office overseeing the grants program only reviewed such checks for 17 candidates, put forward by Special Minister of State John Graham. Two grants were subsequently not approved. The office said it had received verbal confirmation that conflict-of-interest processes had been implemented by Labor for all electorates. But it hadn't asked for documentation supporting those claims, the auditor-general's report said. More than 50 "moderate risk" conflicts of interest of panel members approving a total of 644 grants also should have been passed onto a probity adviser before ending up on the special minister's desk, the report said. A spokesman for Mr Graham said it accepted the audit office's recommendations to tighten up its processes. Labor's grants program followed a report in two damning indictments of coalition-organised grants programs. A 2023 report from the auditor-general found the former coalition government intervened to effectively exclude Labor electorates from receiving bushfire recovery funding. Another grants round, the $252 million Stronger Communities Fund, came under a cloud when an upper house inquiry found 95 per cent of the funds went to councils in coalition-held or marginal seats under the Berejiklian government.
BBC News
24-02-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Darlington 'lifeline' community fund scrapped by borough council
A "lifeline" funding programme which supported community groups has been Borough Council's Stronger Communities Fund had allowed councillors to give £1,000 a year to groups that enhanced local Party councillor Anna-Maria Toms criticised axing the scheme and said it was important to give residents money they could Labour's Nick Wallis, cabinet member for children and young people, said the funding was something the council could no longer afford. Toms said the scheme had recently been used to help a group hold weekly events at a church and connect residents with a warm space to combat loneliness."It is the only part of the council budget that can be directly influenced by residents to support them in ways that they choose for their local communities," she said."This can be a lifeline for vulnerable residents to access other services." Cost of fund The money had also supported non-profit groups with rent or events, had provided equipment for Brownies and Guides groups and had paid for park benches and play Stronger Communities Fund was launched in 2019 and cost about £50,000 overall, according to the Local Democracy Reporting only 23 out of 50 councillors used the funding over the last year.A joint Conservative and Green Party motion to keep the Stronger Communities Fund failed by 23 votes to 27. Wallis said to keep the fund would be "financial incompetence"."We are scrambling around for every penny and the opposition just don't get it," he said. Follow BBC Tees on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
