Government must be more transparent about who gets community grants – and why

The Australian government's Major and Local Community Infrastructure Program (MLCIP) has raised concerns about transparency and potential misuse of public funds. The $560.9 million program, launched for the 2025 election, was invitation-only and non-competitive. Out of the 220 organizations invited to apply, only a small fraction received funding.

According to a new analysis by the Centre for Public Integrity, nearly three-quarters of the funding (73.2%, or $409.1 million) went to Labor-held electorates, while only 22.6% went to Coalition-held divisions. This pattern suggests a disproportionate allocation of funds, with each dollar going to a Coalition-held seat receiving less than $3.20 compared to $3.80 for Labor-held seats.

The disparity cannot be attributed solely to the number of seats held by each party, as Labor-held seats still received about $118 million more than they would have under a proportional distribution. Moreover, the analysis found that marginal Labor-held seats received significantly more funding than expected, while Coalition-held safe seats received less.

The Centre for Public Integrity's investigation did not definitively prove that individual grants were awarded for partisan reasons, but the pattern of disproportionate funding is concerning. The government's closed, invitation-only process and lack of transparency about how projects were selected have raised questions about whether these grants are serving the public interest or merely advancing electoral interests.

The Commonwealth Grants Rules and Principles allow for discretionary selection in certain cases, but the Centre for Public Integrity argues that when a closed process is used, the government should be transparent about the criteria for selection and any risk mitigation strategies in place to prevent misuse of funds.