❓ Mrs. Hayden questions short-term funding for community centres and issues with the Empowering Communities program. The Minister responds by blaming the previous government for funding cuts and defends the tender process as a way to broaden access to funding.
AnsweredQoN 619Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMUNITY CENTRES
619. Mrs A.K. HAYDEN to the Minister for Community Services:
I refer to an important community resource in my electorate
called the Roleystone Neighbourhood Family Centre, which is experiencing
significant uncertainty at the chaos associated with state government funding.
(1) Can the minister clarify why organisations can secure
only three-month funding?
(2) What are
the issues in the Empowering Communities program that are causing the funding
delay, which is obviously doing anything but empowering our communities?
619. Mrs A.K. HAYDEN to the Minister for Community Services:
I refer to an important community resource in my electorate
called the Roleystone Neighbourhood Family Centre, which is experiencing
significant uncertainty at the chaos associated with state government funding.
(1) Can the minister clarify why organisations can secure
only three-month funding?
(2) What are
the issues in the Empowering Communities program that are causing the funding
delay, which is obviously doing anything but empowering our communities?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) I find it astounding that the member has
raised this issue about one of the neighbourhood community centres, because it
was actually the member's government that cut accommodation support to
those centres. Her side cut the funding for accommodation support, which we
have now reinstated. That is the first point.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Members!
Ms S.F. McGURK : The second point is that it was also
the Liberal–National government that decided to put those contracts out
to tender. It decided to put all those contract arrangements out to tender and
commence that process. In fact, I did decide as minister to continue with that
process. The reason was that the funding for the neighbourhood community
centres had never been out to tender in that section that I know about. For 20–25
years, the only organisations that could apply for funding were those that
already had access to funding. That meant that over 20 or 25 years, as the
profile of our communities changed and the suburbs and regional areas
developed, those neighbourhood and regional centres did not have an opportunity
to bid for funding. So short of putting in new funding, which we are not in a position
to do because the member's side left us with a dirty big debt, we
decided to continue with the process of going out to tender.
There was concern among the
neighbourhood centres; that is true. What their organisation, Linkwest, said to
me was that they could have handled the tender process, but because they have
inherited uncertainty about their accommodation funding—a decision made
by the member's side when it was in government—they cannot do
both. So we decided to pull back and have a longer period of consultation with
the sector, which is what we have done. That is why there has been an extension
of the tender process, so that we can consult with the sector about the criteria.
For instance, one of the concerns of the neighbourhood centres was that large
not-for-profits, or even perhaps for-profits, could come in over the top and
bid. So we made sure that one of the provisions in the tender criteria was that
the organisations had to demonstrate that they were building local capacity and
local presence. People have given us overwhelmingly positive feedback about
extending the tender process, and about including those organisations in the
criteria development. Those tenders have now gone out. I think the tender
process has actually finished and is being decided at the moment.
As I have said, it is incredible
that anyone from the member's side would raise this, because she has
done nothing but insult and create uncertainty for those neighbourhood centres.
raised this issue about one of the neighbourhood community centres, because it
was actually the member's government that cut accommodation support to
those centres. Her side cut the funding for accommodation support, which we
have now reinstated. That is the first point.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Members!
Ms S.F. McGURK : The second point is that it was also
the Liberal–National government that decided to put those contracts out
to tender. It decided to put all those contract arrangements out to tender and
commence that process. In fact, I did decide as minister to continue with that
process. The reason was that the funding for the neighbourhood community
centres had never been out to tender in that section that I know about. For 20–25
years, the only organisations that could apply for funding were those that
already had access to funding. That meant that over 20 or 25 years, as the
profile of our communities changed and the suburbs and regional areas
developed, those neighbourhood and regional centres did not have an opportunity
to bid for funding. So short of putting in new funding, which we are not in a position
to do because the member's side left us with a dirty big debt, we
decided to continue with the process of going out to tender.
There was concern among the
neighbourhood centres; that is true. What their organisation, Linkwest, said to
me was that they could have handled the tender process, but because they have
inherited uncertainty about their accommodation funding—a decision made
by the member's side when it was in government—they cannot do
both. So we decided to pull back and have a longer period of consultation with
the sector, which is what we have done. That is why there has been an extension
of the tender process, so that we can consult with the sector about the criteria.
For instance, one of the concerns of the neighbourhood centres was that large
not-for-profits, or even perhaps for-profits, could come in over the top and
bid. So we made sure that one of the provisions in the tender criteria was that
the organisations had to demonstrate that they were building local capacity and
local presence. People have given us overwhelmingly positive feedback about
extending the tender process, and about including those organisations in the
criteria development. Those tenders have now gone out. I think the tender
process has actually finished and is being decided at the moment.
As I have said, it is incredible
that anyone from the member's side would raise this, because she has
done nothing but insult and create uncertainty for those neighbourhood centres.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.