Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, , 2:20:14 to 2:26:52
The hearing shifts to the Major and Local Community Infrastructure Program (MLCIP), focusing on the nomination and selection of election commitment projects by duty senators.
Topics: Infrastructure, Grants administration, Government spending
Speakers: Hon Bridget McKenzie, Hon Anthony Chisholm, Unknown Speaker
>> Uh since the election, uh my understanding is that Minister King was >> prior to the election.
>> Prior to the election, Minister,
>> uh yes, I had some involvement in uh some of the projects being assessed.
>> Okay. Um what was your role in that process?
>> Uh my role was for instance uh as a duty senator for some seats. I was able to put forward some projects uh for assessment.
>> Yep.
>> Uh and also was involved in um some of the due diligence process on assessing
>> Yep. Yep. Yep. Um has the prime minister ever discussed with you the grant to the Marville Golf Club for which he had an undisclosed honorary membership? Uh, no,
not to my knowledge.
>> Well, you're the one having the conversation. Not do you can't recall?
>> Uh, I I've never had a conversation with him about the Marville Golf Club.
>> Okay. Uh, Minister McBain told uh the ABC Camber radio on the 9th of September that she had nominated Ed Eden Monero projects uh prior to the 2025 election. Did you nominate uh community facilities and infrastructure projects uh in your role as duty
>> Uh I would have. Yes. Yes.
>> Can you uh recall those projects?
>> Uh I I
>> that you were a passionate advocate for.
>> I I can recall one. I'd have to come back on notice if there was any others. So >> which was that one? Uh it's the uh Estdale uh rugby league club in Meborough. Um so I'll have to get the
exact details. Yeah. Yeah.
>> It was about a like a a um new change rooms or facility or something like
that. so what was the process in order for you to nominate that project?
I suppose through a party process and as you can imagine these are election commitments. Um so some of these questions um would be matters for the party to deal with. Um but in my role as a duty senator as part of the campaign I was able to put forward um some proposals for some of my duty electors.
>> Yep. But you didn't pay any given your former role as state secretary in Queensland, you didn't play a formal role in the internal process of selecting um projects to go forward for election commitments.
>> Not not selecting projects for um other jurisdictions. uh no but um had some engagement on uh ensuring that you know we were meeting robust processes in terms of determining uh which projects we supported
>> um so there was a due diligence process around the projects what did that sort of entail
>> you'd be better off putting those are you talking before the
>> Estelle for the Estle Rugby League what did you have to do did you just say I need new train rooms or I'm assuming there would have had to be I'm only assuming given >> that there would have had to be some documentation saying it's required or letters of support or how how did the >> process work for you in the projects you nominated?
>> Yeah, we were able to put forward projects. These are obviously matters that you're better off putting um to the Labour Party office in terms of coordinating a campaign. I'm asking
about your role as
>> understand that and you know we're here to answer questions on behalf of the minister and the department about you know how these programs were implemented post the election.
>> My question remains what due diligence what documentation did you have to provide as the duty senator? You you mentioned a due diligence process. I would hope so. Um what what did you have to provide for the projects you put
forward? Um the election commits commitments were made uh according with long-standing practice of how uh both or or many of the parties operate in terms of putting forward election commitments. Um there was a process that was gone through that was handled by uh my understanding is the national office in terms of how those things are coordinated. uh and then obviously the process that was gone through uh post the election uh with the department as well in terms of how those projects have been assessed.
>> So my question remains the Estelle rugby league project what as the duty senator that nominated this into the internal process what documentation did you have to provide to back your advocacy up?
Well, it it was a process that was done internally through the party um to
>> So, there's no documentation. It's not on anyone's wish list. It's not on the local council's top 10. It's >> Did you have plans for the project or a rough costing for the project?
>> Um I I would have to come back to you in terms of the knowledge of
gave to Labour head office. Was there a bit of paper about what was needed? Uh
I'm sure there would have been a process that was gone through.
>> Well, I want to be assured that there was an appropriate process.
>> Yeah. And and
>> what did you put forward to get the project >> onto the consideration? Whether it gets delivered or not is a whole another ball game, but to feed this project into the process, what did you have to provide?
>> Yeah. And uh that was all provided to an internal party process that you'd be
better off was provide. I'm not going I don't want to go to your internal party processes. I want to understand
>> you are going to Exactly.
>> No, no, I'm not. I'm actually not. What >> documentation did you as the duty senator from Queensland have to provide to the internal party process in order for your projects to be considered?
uh we uh go through as all parties do before an election uh want to ensure that our candidates are able to make announcements about local commitments. Um that is the process that we went through uh in terms of uh uh the Labor Party. I'm sure that the coalition went through some similar process as well uh in terms of putting uh their election commitments together as at the same