(Transcript from World News Radio)
It's a political joust over the way in which a major multicultural grants program has been administered, and it's left some community groups struggling with federal government bureaucracy to try to get answers.
Greg Dyett has the story.
(Click on audio tab to listen to this item)
It's called the Building Multicultural Communities Program and it came into being under the former Labor government.
The then-government allocated $14.29 million to the program which offered two types of grants, known as Stream One and Stream Two funding.
Stream One offered grants of up to $10,000 for non-fixed equipment.
Stream Two enabled the successful applicants to obtain up to $150,000 for major capital works.
The South Australian German Association, which operates the non-for-profit German Club in Adelaide, was told its application was one of the best-received.
President Michael Hemmes says members were thrilled when they got notification they'd be receiving 150,000 dollars to help fund a major renovation of their premises.
"We separated our building down into five sections and the worst part of the building was probably the entry way or the façade of the building and the 150, plus 200,000 dollars we were prepared to spend, was going towards upgrading the front of the building: things like electric opening and closing doors, having wheelchair facility ramps, all that sort of thing."
Michael Hemmes says he recalls being told by the Member for Adelaide, Labor's Kate Ellis, that the funding was secure.
But that was before last year's federal election.
In December, the Abbott government announced a major cut to the program.
The $14.29 million program became a $2.79 million initiative after the federal government removed $11.5 million in its Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook.
It wasn't long before Michael Hemmes received another notification which left him having to break the news to his club members that the 150,000 dollars offered by Labor was now being withdrawn by the Coalition government.
"My feelings were that I've let down the members of our club. We've got approximately 750 to 800 members currently. The membership was very excited about seeing the changes."
The scale of the cuts became clear when the Assistant Minister for Social Services, Mitch Fifield, took questions in the Senate and provided figures calculated up to February the 21st this year.
It was revealed that 337 Stream One offers under Labor have been cut by 96 to 241 under the Coalition.
Stream Two cuts resulted in 122 rejections: Labor's 133 offers were cut to 11 by the Coalition.
The chairman of the Federation of Ethnic Communities' Councils of Australia, Joseph Caputo, says his organisation tried to convince the government to reinstate the grants.
He says FECCA was concerned that groups may have committed to some expenditure on the expectation that funding was coming.
"The government didn't see it that way but it did agree with us that no organisation would incur out-of-pocket expenses because of the belief that they were going to receive the funding."
Senator Fifield says any out-of-pocket expenses will be refunded, and that's exactly what the South Australian German Association has been told.
"We have had some communication and they have offered to pay for any expenses that we incurred and there were approximately ten thousand dollars' worth of architectural fees involved and they have offered to pay for that."
But Michael Hemmes says his club hasn't yet received that refund.
Michelle Rowland is Labor's spokeswoman for multicultural affairs.
She says the federal government should reverse its decision and make good on the funding offers made by its predecessor.
"Any government with any decency, any incoming government would recognise that these weren't just promises, these were fully budgeted grants: fully budgeted and fully allocated grants. It wasn't as though new money was being procured, it wasn't as though this was an appropriation, this was simply the minister doing her job in making sure that everyone who was successful was notified of that."
Senator Fifield told the Senate the Coalition has been, and will always be, a strong supporter of cultural diversity and of Australia's multicultural communities but he says the program has been reduced in scope in light of the current state of the federal budget.
Senator Fifield drew attention to the fact that Labor's former minister for multicultural affairs, Kate Lundy, signed the funding offers on August 5 last year.
The date and time is significant.
It was a day after the federal election had been called, and just before the caretaker provisions began at 6pm on August the 5th when Governor General Quentin Bryce issued writs for the September 7 election.
"It was revealed at the recent Senate estimates committee hearings that the previous government had signed off on these grants on the 5th of August and colleagues, I'm sure, will be very well aware that that was after the last federal election was called. The grants were used to buy certain things such as coffee machines, juke boxes, and billiard tables. It was also revealed at Senate estimates that the program blew out by approximately $1.3 million."
The caretaker conventions provide guidance over what the government of the day can and can't do during the time between when an election is called and the election itself.
They aim to ensure important decisions aren't made which would be binding on any new government.
Updated just last year, the guidelines ask the government to avoid making major policy decisions that are likely to commit an incoming government; to avoid making significant appointments; and to avoid entering major contracts or undertakings.
The caretaker provisions started officially at 6pm on August the 5th and in the hours leading up to that time, then-Minister Kate Lundy signed the letters of offer.
Senator Fifield says this wasn't appropriate.
"I'm strongly of the view that the previous government was acting outside the spirit of the caretaker conventions received in this country, that what they did in signing off on those particular supposed grants at that time was a cynical political exercise and they should apologise to those community organisations."
So does Senator Fifield have a point?
No, says Labor's Michelle Rowland.
She says Senator Fifield is choosing to focus on the caretaker provisions because he has no other argument to justify what she says is a betrayal of so many community groups.
"This is simply an attempt to deflect from the fact that this government has betrayed a large number of community groups right around Australia. Finally I would say on this point, if they think Kate Lundy did something wrong in her capacity as minister, which she did not, then they should point it out. I have challenged anyone who raises this to point out exactly what she has done wrong, point to the relevant provisions of the caretaker, the caretaker protocols, point out what she did wrong and take it up but no one has been able to because this is a complete red herring."
