Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I did want to speak to this motion and just put a few facts on the table about what has actually happened to the Stronger Communities Program. It has existed now for eight rounds, and the eighth round was funded by our government in the October budget. The previous government, the Liberal-Nationals, announced there would be a round 8, but did not announce that there would be a round 9, a round 10 or beyond. The round 8 was not funded. Whilst it was in their budget, they did not implement their budget prior to calling the election. Upon coming to government, the Albanese Labor government funded round 8 in the October 2022 budget, and it is currently rolling out throughout our electorates right now. Those opposite didn't deliver the funding for round 8, and certainly didn't deliver or recommend or suggest or even talk about rounds beyond this round. The program wasn't ended by this government, it was ended by the previous government.

For the information of those who have spoken in this debate, funding has been allocated and $150,000 is available. Each electorate gets $150,000 and has to decide on how to spend that for up to 20 local projects. Our electorates work hard; most of us have independent committees that make recommendations after an expressions-of-interest process. Funding of between $2,500 to $20,000 is available for not-for-profit community organisations and local government to fund small capital works projects that deliver benefits to communities.

Over the years, I have seen that this investment has made a difference in areas of my electorate. Only on the weekend I was talking about one of the early projects, the funding of our local First Nations talking tram that tells our First Nations people's story as people jump on the tram and travel through our community. The project has helped sporting clubs buy equipment to help maintain their ovals. Even though a lot of our infrastructure in Greater Bendigo, Mount Alexander and the Macedon Ranges is owned by local government, these grants have allowed clubs to partner with local government to help deliver upgrades and needs. Other successful groups include our toy libraries and our community houses. This project has significantly helped a lot of community houses in our area, but as I have said from the beginning, we are always oversubscribed. I do believe that it is time to look at how we can better partner with community.

What I will say about this fund, when it comes to the regions, is that I don't believe that it does support our regions in the way it should. It isn't equitable. You cannot compare the needs of a regional electorate to the needs of a city based electorate. Some of our electorates are incredibly small, they're less than 20 kilometres wide, and yet they get the same amount of money allocated to them as a regional electorate. In every one of my regional towns, I have sporting fields, I have RSLs, I have community houses. I cannot stretch that $150,000 fairly. I also know that some of our metro members actually ring up the local council and say: 'What projects are you funding? Can I tap into that?' These electorates are so small they're able to do it in a way, if they're in town, where they have a lot more resources. It isn't fairly distributed between the need and the want that we have in our electorates, so $150,000 in a regional electorate doesn't go far enough.

It also, in a regional electorate, doesn't get to the real projects that really need a lot of attention. We have sporting grounds, where we are trying to desperately upgrade our change rooms and our equipment. But $20,000 doesn't get you an upgraded change room; $20,000 doesn't get you the lighting that you need to be able to use that change room. It may get you a new sink, it may get you a new bit of playing equipment, but it doesn't deal with the real infrastructure needs that a lot of our regions are crying out to be fixed.

I do believe it is time to rethink how we do community investment and infrastructure in our regions, and it is wrong for those opposite to say that we have cut the program. It was their government that didn't fund it beyond round 8 or even talk about beyond round 8. They threw it out there as an opportunity to pork barrel in an election so that MPs could make local commitments. That is not good enough. If we're genuine about funding projects in the regions and in our outer metro areas, then we need a fund which is accountable, which is a competitive tender and which genuinely delivers what regions need. To all those groups that have done well in my electorate, congratulations, but I believe we can do better when it comes to community infrastructure.

See this speech in context