Government's Gippsland grants are untested or Howard rejects

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23764066-5013871,00.html

THE Rudd Government has made millions of dollars worth of unassessed grants to help its cause in the Gippsland by-election, including some rejected under the Howard-era regional grants scheme attacked by Labor as a vehicle for rorts and pork-barrelling.

Labor has pushed ahead with grants for projects such as the construction of a quay and an ice works without seeking departmental assessment, on the basis they were "Labor election promises". Another two approved projects - costing more than $2 million - were rejected for funding before the election under the Howard government's Regional Partnership program.

Labor is shutting down the program, which it has attacked as a cover for regional rorts and pork-barrelling. The Government is also introducing a three-stage probity process to prevent ministers unilaterally making decisions on discretionary grants.

But Agriculture Minister Tony Burke toured Victoria's Gippsland area last week with Labor candidate Darren McCubbin, and announced grants of $11 million would be spent at Lakes Entrance and throughout the electorate.

The June 28 Gippsland by-election - triggered by the resignation of former Nationals MP Peter McGauran - looms as a political test for Brendan Nelson's Liberal leadership and for public reaction to the Government's first budget and rising petrol prices.

Mr McGauran, the former agriculture and fisheries minister, had lobbied for funding for the projects before the election, but some of the applications were rejected or limited. Then Labor agriculture spokesman Kerry O'Brien made comprehensive promises to meet the $11 million funding, including the rejected projects, if Labor won government.

Mr Burke said last week the Government was now "honouring its election commitment to invest $11million in Gippsland Lakes communities". Labor's commitments included $5.75million for the local fishing co-operative and Gippsland ports and shire council.

But agriculture department officials told the Senate estimates committee on rural and regional affairs in February the $5.75 million was being provided without departmental assessment of the application because it was meeting "election promises".
The officials also told the committee that some of the applications now being approved from the fishing fund had failed departmental scrutiny last year and had been rejected.