Ms CATHERINE KING (Ballarat—Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) (14:50): I thank the member for Calare for his question. He is doing what all members do, by being a strong and clear advocate for the interests of his community. The Bathurst car park upgrade project, as I understand the member indicated when he met with my office yesterday, is a project that is subject to application of round 2 of the Growing Regions Program, which is making $393 million available for regional community projects—and, as I said, he met with my staff about that yesterday. As to these projects, the applications are currently under assessment. As the process is still underway, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on applications that are under assessment. We need to allow the process to be completed in a fair way, in accordance with the published program guidelines. Round 2 of the Growing Regions Program had been open for applications since 5 September and closed on 10 October. In accordance with best practice, we will allow the assessment process, and then departmental recommendations to be made, before final decisions are taken, and we'll announce those outcomes when that is done. This is because we have done what we said we were going to do, and that is to deliver grants programs that are transparent and provide value for money. We have, frankly, cleaned up the appalling mess left by those opposite, whose legacy was of scathing Auditor-General reports, sports rorts, colour-coded spreadsheets—ignoring the grant guidelines for their own electoral benefit. We have improved the processes for grants by ensuring that they are merit based, with clear assessment processes. We have significantly improved the processes for grants—so much so that the Auditor-General has recently found, in two reports on the Growing Regions Program, that the design and implementation of the program has been effective. It found that applications were assessed in accordance with the guidelines—something those opposite should pay attention to—and in accordance with the funding recommendations that were made. Mr McCormack interjecting— The SPEAKER: Has the minister concluded her answer? Ms Catherine King interjecting— The SPEAKER: Well, I was also checking with the minister whether she has concluded her answer. Ms Catherine King interjecting— The SPEAKER: Thank you, Minister. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER: Order. The member for Riverina is entitled to raise a point of order and he is entitled to be heard. Mr McCormack: My point of order is on relevance. The member asked a very specific question about a very specific project, and the minister should not delve into past programs of past governments—which were very good governments, I might add. Mr Husic interjecting— The SPEAKER: Order! The Minister for Industry and Science is warned. The minister was asked about a specific project. In her answer she is entitled to do some comparing and contrasting. She just needs to make sure her answer is being directly relevant to the project and in line with her portfolio duties. Ms CATHERINE KING: As I said at the start, this is a project that has a current application before the Growing Regions Program, which I am talking about in relation to the audit report. It, of course, found that funding recommendations and decisions were made in accordance with the Commonwealth grant rules and guidelines. We have spent a lot of time returning integrity to grant programs—following, frankly, what was the shameful record of those opposite we have had to deal with— Mr Chester interjecting— Ms CATHERINE KING: of which the member who's putting his hands up might like to inform himself. We have also had to deal with the legacy of robodebt and the contracting arrangements that have resulted as a result of robodebt, from those opposite, in all of our grants programs— (Time expired)