This is the second paper in the series. This paper considers ways to regulate ‘commitments’ made before Tasmanian parliamentary elections and ‘grants’ provided after elections.
A fundamental tenet of our democracy is that public money should be administered responsibly by elected officials. This requires probity in the use of public funds, including in the distribution of grant money – regardless of whether the grant was a campaign commitment.
This paper examines examples of previous election funding commitments made in Tasmania and recommends that rules and legislation be implemented to ensure future election commitments are formulated and administered according to good practice.
- Australian National Audit Office, ANAO Audit Report No.21 2011–12 – Administration of Grant Reporting Obligations (January 2012)
- Australian National Audit Office, Auditor-General Report No.23 2019–20 Performance Audit – Award of Funding under the Community Sport Infrastructure Program (January 2020)
- Australian National Audit Office, Auditor-General Report No. 47 2020–21 Performance Audit – Administration of Commuter Car Park Projects with the Urban Congestion Fund (June 2021)
- Australian National Audit Office, The Auditor-General Auditor-General Report No. 16 2021–22 Performance Audit – Award of Funding under the Safer Communities Fund (February 2022)
- Department of Finance (Australian Government), Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines 2017 (2017)
- Tasmanian Audit Office, Auditor-General Special Report No. 98 – Premier’s Sundry Grants Program and Urban Renewal and Heritage Fund (June 2011)
- Tasmanian Audit Office, Report of the Auditor-General No. 2 of 2014-15 – Follow up of selected Auditor-General reports: October 2009 to September 2011 (September 2014)
Related content: Media release