Funding
The CLC is pleased that the Australian Government has backed a serious commitment to disadvantage and abuse in Aboriginal communities with significant funding allocations. However, we do have a number of concerns:
- is it possible to track where money has been allocated?
- is the spending being properly evaluated?
- are the significant allocations value for money?
After the NTER was announced, the CLC made significant efforts to track NTER spending through appropriation bills, press releases and senate estimates questioning. Good information was hard to find and even this level of interrogation brought only a limited picture. A summary of this picture on monies allocated for 2007-08 is at Attachment B.
Now the first budget cycle is finished it is relevant to properly evaluate the first year of spending: what money was spent and what outcomes were achieved? For example, FaHCSIA was allocated $91.3m for ‘services and logistics’ – how was that money spent? $82.9m was allocated to health checks – how much of that money was spent for what outcome? ‘Welfare and workforce reform’ was allocated $94.8m – what happened to that money? More broadly, these kind of evaluations need to consider whether the outcome is value for money. Some of the allocations are significant and could provide substantial programs on the ground.
For 2008-09, the FaHCSIA Budget Statement does include performance indicators and targets for some measures. However, these indicators and targets are limited. For example, the target for income management is that it is ‘operating effectively in all communities with licensed stores’. On 5 year leases, the target is ‘increased number of communities with registered leases in place’. These are soft, measurable targets that do not in any way properly evaluate the spending of money and provide cost-benefit analysis. They need to go much further.
While there are significant allocations, at the same time, only $0.2m has been allocated to the Commonwealth Ombudsman to investigate complaints about NTER related matters. The Ombudsman has stated expenditure of over $1m last financial year investigating complaints. Given the amount of transitional problems that have been highlighted, together with avenues of appeal cut off in relation to income management, this paltry allocation of funding simply looks like silencing dissent.
Additionally, the CLC considers that since self government in 1978, successive Territory governments have mismanaged funding allocated for indigenous affairs. There is ample evidence to show that Commonwealth Grants Commission funding has not hit the ground in all cases. COAG’s own study in Wadeye showed that $2,000 less was spent on a person in Wadeye compared to the average Territorian. This situation over decades has clearly contributed to the need for an ‘intervention’. As part of a reordering of spending and responsibilities, a royal commission into previous NT government spending should be seriously considered by the current Australian Government.
CLC POSITION
Evaluate all NTER first year spending on the basis of a detailed cost-benefit analysis of each NTER measure.
Consider reallocation of profligate spending to ensure child protection programs, education and housing are adequately funded.
Ensure indicators and targets for continued allocations are real.