Helen Haines (Indi, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move amendments (1) and (3), as circulated in my name, together.

Leave not granted.

I move amendment (1), as circulated in my name:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:

I have put to this chamber some important amendments. They are best practice, and they are the gold standard for how a government should spend public money. They would also end pork-barrelling, a corrupt practice that buys votes and that Australians are absolutely sick and tired of. My amendments would require all grants programs to have clear and publicly available merit-based selection criteria and guidelines. A requirement for each grant program to have guidelines and selection criteria might seem perfectly obvious, but right now it is optional under the Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines. This has serious consequences for fairness in spending public money. It means that public money can be spent without rules and safeguards. Clearly, this is ridiculous, and these amendments will fix this so that the government can be upfront about who can apply for grants and the criteria that must be satisfied to be awarded that grant. We are talking about tens of billions of taxpayers' dollars after all.

This is common sense. This is the very least that our nation would expect of any government. I think this is very fair and sensible amendment, and I asked the government to consider that amendment.

Question unresolved.

See this speech in context