WHY SHOULD QUEENSLAND PAY FOR ALBANESE’S VENDETTA?
The Federal Government’s treatment of Queensland councils is shaping as the one disaster they won’t be able to recover from.
Labor’s proposed changes to the Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements should alarm every Queenslander who relies on the food and resources produced in our regions.
The Albanese Government wants to replace the existing scalable funding arrangements, currently a 70:30 split, to a flat 50:50 split with the states.
It is also increasing the financial threshold at which Commonwealth assistance is triggered and winding back the Betterment arrangements Queensland has used so successfully.
Astonishingly, the independent Colvin Review that Labor cites as the basis for reform did not specifically recommend reducing the Commonwealth contribution to 50:50.
So you have to ask: Why does Queensland have to suffer because Albo has a vendetta against David Crisafulli?
The Commonwealth collects about 81 per cent of Australia’s taxation revenue. States collect about 16 per cent and councils just three per cent.
These are the choices Anthony Albanese’s new funding model could force on Queensland councils: higher rates or new levies, cancelled projects and services, more debt, slower recovery and damaged infrastructure left waiting for repair.
This is completely unfair, because you cannot apply a “one size fits all” model to councils with different challenges and needs.
We have already seen Labor wage war on Queensland’s resources, agriculture and fishing, while pursuing energy policies that impose their greatest costs on the regional communities that produce the nation’s wealth.
Now the same attitude is being applied to disaster recovery.
Queensland experiences more natural disasters than any other Australian jurisdiction. This year alone, 74 of our 77 local government areas were disaster declared following two cyclones and five months of monsoonal flooding.
According to the Local Government Association of Queensland, councils would have missed out on at least $2.8 billion in Federal support if this model had been in place since 2018.
I have now been contacted by more than 20 Queensland councils raising serious concerns about these reforms.
These are councils with different economies, different populations and vastly different geography.
They are all telling Canberra they cannot afford the Albanese Government’s changes.
The numbers councils have provided to me are sobering.
Noosa Council calculated that, had the proposed model operated since 2019, its Commonwealth disaster recovery funding would have fallen by $27.7 million, a reduction of about 22 per cent.
Townsville Mayor Nick Dametto says councils could face the choice of imposing an annual disaster levy or leaving damaged infrastructure unrepaired.
Townsville has received $18.4 million since 2019 through a recovery efficiencies program Canberra now proposes to abolish, funding everything from rural roads to backup power for critical water and sewerage infrastructure.
Ipswich Mayor Teresa Harding warns her growing city could face slower rebuilding of parks and walkways, delayed repairs to roads and waterways, longer disruption after disasters and greater pressure on ratepayers.
Then consider Burke Shire in the Gulf of Carpentaria.
Its 2023 floods caused more than $211 million in damage, while the council raises only about $3.5 million a year in rates.
Carpentaria routinely faces annual road damage bills of $50 million to $60 million. Its road network, if laid end to end, would stretch from Normanton to the Gold Coast.
In southwest Queensland, LGAQ modelling found Quilpie Shire would have missed out on $21.4 million in Commonwealth disaster support had the proposed arrangements been in place since 2018.
There is simply no capacity for many councils to fill a multimillion-dollar hole left by this new funding model.
This is why the Labor Government’s national formula makes no sense.
It argues its reforms will make disaster recovery simpler, faster and more resilient.
Queensland councils support cutting red tape and speeding up funding. So does the Coalition.
But that shouldn’t be achieved by cutting the Commonwealth’s contribution.
Queensland hardly needs lessons about building resilience.
Our Betterment program has allowed councils to rebuild damaged infrastructure so it survives the next disaster instead of repeatedly sending taxpayers the bill for repairing the same vulnerable asset.
In Noosa Shire, three projects that received about $4.93 million through existing Betterment arrangements would have received only about $429,000 under the proposed new model.
Noosa also cites Queensland Reconstruction Authority evaluations finding every dollar invested in Betterment has avoided about four dollars in future reconstruction costs.
The South Burnett Regional Council voted unanimously to oppose the proposed changes.
Its submission points out that if the new model had applied since 2013, more than $1 billion in Betterment funding for Queensland roads, bridges and other infrastructure would not have been delivered.
It adds that just 23 projects worth about $3 million would have qualified under the proposed replacement criteria.
Southern Downs Regional Council has also written to me opposing the changes, warning about the proposed 50:50 funding model and its impacts on disaster-hit residents, including reduced Betterment support, and the loss of restocking assistance for primary producers.
Mareeba used Betterment funding to upgrade 59 vulnerable gully crossings across 29 rural roads. Those crossings subsequently endured further rainfall disasters while remaining serviceable.
That’s precisely how governments should spend taxpayers’ money.
The proposed arrangements are scheduled to begin in July 2027, so there is still time for Anthony Albanese and his Government to listen.
I urge Labor MPs to knock on the Prime Minister’s door and stick up for their councils. Stop being Canberra’s voice in Queensland and do the hard work of being a Queensland representative in Canberra.
ENDS