Peter Whish-Wilson says grant was made to small foundation without competitive tender
The Australian Greens
will push for a parliamentary inquiry into how $444m in reef funding
was awarded to a small not-for-profit foundation with little scrutiny
and without a competitive tender process.
Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson, the party’s spokesman for healthy oceans, will move for a Senate inquiry into why the Great Barrier Reef Foundation was announced as the recipient of the record government grant without the funds being offered to existing government reef agencies.
The inquiry, if supported by Labor and the crossbench, would also investigate the capacity of the foundation to meet the objectives of the government’s Reef 2050 plan, the proficiency of other organisations that could carry out similar work, and the foundation’s governance – including the management of commercial and potential conflicts of interest.
“So many questions remain unanswered into how this small foundation …has been granted hundreds of millions in public funding and why the government bypassed the specially designed public bodies that are already doing this work,” Whish-Wilson said.
“[The Greens] also have enormous concerns about whether this organisation has anything close to the levels of expertise or governance to effectively distribute this funding.
“No amount of natural resource management or science funding has ever been subjected to so little scrutiny as to where the money ends up.”
Labor’s environment spokesman, Tony Burke, said the opposition would talk to the Greens about the proposed inquiry.
The foundation has come under scrutiny since the government announced it would receive the record grant prior to the federal budget in May.
In Senate estimates hearings last week, Environment and Energy Department officials revealed there had been no tender process before the grant was awarded and the foundation itself was only made aware of the grant a few weeks before it was announced.
The foundation, which has just six full-time employees, has previously made clear it does not know why it was chosen for the funding and described it as like “winning the lotto”.
In statements provided to Guardian Australia last week it said it was focused on projects with large scale impact “that go to the heart of saving the Great Barrier Reef and that can also benefit coral reefs globally”.
The foundation has said it did not apply for the funding and was contacted by the Australian government before the initial announcement of the funding commitment that took place in Cairns on 29 April.
“The foundation is in the unique position of working across the entire science community and all levels of government, with leading scientists from different institutions, and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority – the reef managers,” a spokeswoman said.
“We work with everyone in the reef community to find the gaps, to find the points of innovation, and to find the areas of greatest impact.”
The foundation is backed by business and its chairman’s panel includes executives from Qantas, Downer Group, AGL and Peabody Energy.
Department officials told estimates hearings that the foundation’s business focus was seen as an advantage because it had the ability to leverage additional funding from private sources.
Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson, the party’s spokesman for healthy oceans, will move for a Senate inquiry into why the Great Barrier Reef Foundation was announced as the recipient of the record government grant without the funds being offered to existing government reef agencies.
The inquiry, if supported by Labor and the crossbench, would also investigate the capacity of the foundation to meet the objectives of the government’s Reef 2050 plan, the proficiency of other organisations that could carry out similar work, and the foundation’s governance – including the management of commercial and potential conflicts of interest.
“So many questions remain unanswered into how this small foundation …has been granted hundreds of millions in public funding and why the government bypassed the specially designed public bodies that are already doing this work,” Whish-Wilson said.
“[The Greens] also have enormous concerns about whether this organisation has anything close to the levels of expertise or governance to effectively distribute this funding.
“No amount of natural resource management or science funding has ever been subjected to so little scrutiny as to where the money ends up.”
Labor’s environment spokesman, Tony Burke, said the opposition would talk to the Greens about the proposed inquiry.
The foundation has come under scrutiny since the government announced it would receive the record grant prior to the federal budget in May.
In Senate estimates hearings last week, Environment and Energy Department officials revealed there had been no tender process before the grant was awarded and the foundation itself was only made aware of the grant a few weeks before it was announced.
The foundation, which has just six full-time employees, has previously made clear it does not know why it was chosen for the funding and described it as like “winning the lotto”.
In statements provided to Guardian Australia last week it said it was focused on projects with large scale impact “that go to the heart of saving the Great Barrier Reef and that can also benefit coral reefs globally”.
The foundation has said it did not apply for the funding and was contacted by the Australian government before the initial announcement of the funding commitment that took place in Cairns on 29 April.
“The foundation is in the unique position of working across the entire science community and all levels of government, with leading scientists from different institutions, and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority – the reef managers,” a spokeswoman said.
“We work with everyone in the reef community to find the gaps, to find the points of innovation, and to find the areas of greatest impact.”
The foundation is backed by business and its chairman’s panel includes executives from Qantas, Downer Group, AGL and Peabody Energy.
Department officials told estimates hearings that the foundation’s business focus was seen as an advantage because it had the ability to leverage additional funding from private sources.
No comments:
Post a Comment