Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday the environment minister confirmed that the Great Barrier Reef Foundation's formal proposal for the grant was not received by the government until 29 May. This was more than 20 days after the Treasurer had delivered the budget, which included money for the foundation; a month after the grant was announced; and more than a month after the Prime Minister first offered it to the foundation—half a billion dollars of taxpayers' money. Why is the Prime Minister so reckless with taxpayers' funds?

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm surprised that they let the member for Sydney ask this question, because the day we announced the funding the member for Sydney welcomed it. And it's going to create jobs in the electorate of the member for Herbert, and the electorates of the member for Flynn, the member for Dawson, the member for Leichhardt and the member for Capricornia. That is why we have invested $500 million in the Great Barrier Reef on top of the $2 billion we have contributed through the Reef 2050 Plan with Queensland.

I've made it very clear that in my correspondence with the chair of the foundation, to whom I formally wrote on 22 April, I said that a formal offer of any Australian government funds is dependent on negotiating and executing a new grant agreement. In consultation with the foundation, they formally lodged their proposal on 29 May. This was after I had released the Commonwealth grant guidelines, with which this was compliant. Now, on 20 June, under section 71 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act, I approved the grant to the foundation, having considered a detailed assessment of the application by my department, which had included the second stage of due diligence by my department and the Australian Government Solicitor. I want to read to the House what my department recommended to me, and I quote: that this investment in the foundation would 'meet the government's policy objective to protect and manage the Great Barrier Reef'; that it 'would represent value for money and a proper use of Commonwealth resources'; and that it was 'consistent with the provisions of the governance and accountability act'. That due diligence included a close examination by the AGS of corporate information, financial reports, compliance with applicable laws, litigation, property searches and ASIC checks of the foundation directors. This has been through the ERC process. This was money put to work with the reef, with our scientists, with our farmers and with Indigenous communities to underpin regional jobs, including the 64,000 jobs that depend on the Great Barrier Reef. So there we have it. The Labor Party only want to obstruct and criticise, because when they were in government they abandoned the Great Barrier Reef.