A year and a half after losing her job in the Morrison ministry amid the sports rorts affair, Senator Bridget McKenzie is back facing questions over her role in a new government grants scheme.
The $280 million Black Summer Bushfire Recovery Grants Program has been set up to help businesses and communities struggling after the 2019-20 bushfires. But just weeks after McKenzie announced the scheme in her newly appointed role as minister for emergency management, it’s already copping criticism.
Complete discretion
Independent MP Helen Haines, of the marginal northern Victorian electorate of Indi — which will likely receive funding under the scheme — told Crikey she was concerned the minister had complete discretion over the funding — something that had been a key feature in the sports rorts and more recent commuter car park scandals.
“I’m really, really concerned that there is so much ministerial discretion in this grant. I think that’s a bad idea,” Haines said. “The scheme that should be firmly attached to need, and that need should be transparent.”
She also questioned the scheme’s eligibility criteria, which she believes could see towns unaffected by bushfires receive funding.
“You have to ask yourself about the eligibility of a town thousands of kilometres away from the 2020 bushfires. I just want an explanation. We have seen other grant programs rorted, there’s plenty of evidence of that. And there’s never any repercussions.”
East Gippsland Shire Council Mayor Mendy Urie, whose community was affected by the 2020 bushfires, said she was also concerned that money could end up going where it wasn’t needed. “We think that the guidelines weren’t appropriate and didn’t give appropriate weight to need,” she said.
A statement from the National Recovery and Resilience Agency defended the program, saying that the minister would make the final decision based on advice from an assessment committee.
“Grants will be determined on merit,” it said.
McKenzie defends ministerial discretion
Three weeks after she returned to the front bench following the reappointment of Barnaby Joyce as Nationals leader, McKenzie is now in charge of overseeing millions in government grants schemes as part of the emergency management portfolio.
When questioned by Labor yesterday during question time over how many of those schemes she had complete discretion over, she defended the need for ministers to be the ultimate deciders when it comes to administering grants.
“Ministerial discretion is absolutely key to how our government functions,” she said. “My ministerial discretion, in other programs I’ve administered, resulted in a fairer outcome for Australian taxpayers.”
More than $5 billion in taxpayer funds have been misused due to inadequate checks on ministerial power according to the Centre for Public Integrity (CPI), which has exposed the extent to which taxpayer funds have been rorted by the federal government. It found a further $5 billion was at risk of being misused.
CPI chair Anthony Whealy QC warned ministerial oversight was the key factor that allowed the government to use taxpayer money for political gain.
“Ministers have too much control, departments aren’t following proper processes, and pork-barrelling is allowed to continue,” he said.
The scheme is one of many bushfire funding grants being run out of the Morrison government’s National Recovery and Resilience Agency, which has separately been accused of funnelling money to companies controlled by big political donors, including billionaire Anthony Pratt’s Visy paper recycling empire. The agency is now being overseen by former Liberal NT chief minister and ex-national president of the Liberal Party Shane Stone.
Labor’s disaster and emergency management spokesperson Murray Watt said McKenzie was not fit to oversee any funds.
“Barely a month into the job and we have already seen criticism of funding decisions for bushfire recovery under McKenzie’s watch,” he said. “These funds should be used for preparing, protecting and helping communities recovery from disasters. Not used as another slush fund for Scott Morrison and Bridget McKenzie.”
“Ministerial discretion is absolutely key to how our government functions,” said McKenzie.
This is obviously true, and it sums up what is wrong. The main purpose of having a parliament, going right back to its origins under the Plantagenet kings, is that ministers cannot be trusted and Parliament must have oversight. When Parliament gives ministers discretion to act as they please without robust mechanisms to ensure the actions conform to Parliament’s will, it is failing to do its job. When ministers abuse their discretion, as McKenzie has done repeatedly, it is a national disgrace and failure of governance. McKenzie has no basis for determining that her actions result “in a fairer outcome for Australian taxpayers.” That is a judgement to be made by others. From where I am McKenzie’s claim looks like one of the most shameless political lies of recent times. Sadly, that’s a crowded field.
Ministerial discretion is nothing without ministerial responsibility.
Misusing public funds for private benefit should result in a prison term.
The Rorter’s elevation is just about as bad as Porters. Must be a low talent pool
Things are about to get worse for the Morri$sinners, Rex Patrick won his FOI case to release national cabinet records.
Katy Gallagher, the shadow finance minister and chair of the Senate select committee on Covid-19 said:
“This is a devastating judgment for the prime minister, who was the architect of a structure specifically designed to avoid transparency and to refuse access to information that is genuinely in the public interest,” “We have a long list of documents that have been kept secret under the so-called national cabinet defence that will be re-lodged and in light of this judgment we expect all the documents and information to be released immediately.”
Rex Patrick:
“For almost 40 years Australians have had a legal right under the Freedom of Information Act 1984 to access information relating to intergovernmental meetings, subject only to a test of public harm.” “Last year prime minister Morrison tried to take that right away,”
“He did not ask the parliament to change the law, he just declared that national cabinet to be part of the federal cabinet, and as such, exempt under the cabinet secrecy exemption of the FoI Act.
“That arrogant declaration has now been overturned”.
Looking forward to Scum’s secret squirrel cabinet records going on the record which they should have in the first place
Given that George Brandis received his prestigious, and twice sought after SC title, which happily the Liberals made it ok to call a QC as they tugged their forelocks and genuflected in front of the combined forces Betty Windsor Whitlam coup, it’s of no surprise as the Liberal/Nationals talent pool has ALWAYS been a shallow stinking cesspit.
Brandis’ name wasn’t on the Queensland Bar Association’s shortlist of who should become an SC, but Chief Justice Paul de Jersey added the Senator and two other barristers. (De Jersey was later made Gov of Qld by Newman when Newman rose to power}
Brandis hasn’t practised law since he entered politics in 2000. It was a Clalyton’s SC bestowal by CJ Paul de Jersey
It was Brandis’s second attempt to get the SC title, his first was knocked back as he wasn’t considered to meet the criteria.
Do you mean there’s not much in the talent or is it a pool well and truly full of low talent?
There’s only one antidote for this parasitic sort “help-yourself to our money” agrarian arrogance hidden in a core of “regional welfare” – that is such a disease on the whole of society – and that’s to flush them from parliament, not just government. “Fraud”?
Their actions are anathema to all fair minded people, which includes the demographic they “rort for”, the majority of whom do not benefit : while these gNats suck their “commission” blood. A demographic these professional societal bloodsuckers profess to have at the heart of their sucking, but in fact are used as an excuse to carry on their rorting.
These are the Ugly Agrarians – they reflect badly on those that elect them to represent them and their interests.
‘ave a look at ’em – do they really think they are “the repository of all whizzdom”, best suited to oversee such welfare? They can’t help themselves in any way but this negative sense.
Bridget “Slush Puppy” McKenzie.
and the second step is to get a federal ICAC in place, and set it up so that it has a guaranteed budget and can investigate past misdeeds and stop the corruption going forwards.
The “Disinfect” stage.
Ministerial interest in Regional grants extends only as far as their arms can reach into the cash bag for their electorates or the electorates of their political colleagues. That this funding system is a rorter’s paradise is evident from the hasty and unseamly return of the madame par excellence to the trough to continue distribution of her personal favours with our money to party clients.
There is no acceptable reason why this system of cloaked party political patronage should be permitted to continue – however, I am under no illusions that many politicians in every political party are completely unwilling to swear off this abuse of the public purse.
Any vote not made in an election is an an attack on our democracy, most electors’ votes lodged in an election perpetuate the rorts and blatant dishonesty of most of the elected, also an attack on our democracy. It is illegal not to vote in an election, however it is not illegal for recients of those votes to pursue obviously fraudulent practices. In this case, the law is indeed an ass – quite at home with the braying occupants of our national parliament.
No offence ‘Rorted’ . . but I’m in favour of terminating the term rort, and replacing it with ‘corrupt’ and/or ‘corruption’. Far more precise.
At Least the new term would be more accurate. When we came to Oz over 40 years ago. “rort” was very much treated in the same vein as “larrikin”.