Funding loopholes frustrate Mathew Cole

I have been looking into the various funding options currently available to help with some improvements to our muck storage, cattle yards and stock management; it seems as though the more you look into it, the more complicated it becomes.

There are various pots of money with very similar objectives, but they all seem to have their hands tied. They all want to help you but they are not allowed to fund the most valuable and environmentally worthwhile parts of the project, just the bolt-on bits and only in the funding windows.

It also sticks in my throat a bit that we invested heavily while expanding at the prison farm over the past few years; with the benefit of hindsight a lot of this could now have been funded. It does seem as though those people who have invested in their businesses over the past few years from of their own money are now being disadvantaged.

In a moment of clarity the other day, I did think to myself most of this funding is derived from modulation money. Why not make the system a lot simpler and remove all the funding and administrators, and take a lot less modulation money? Our businesses would have more funds available to invest in their infrastructure; it would be fair and the outcome would be almost identical, just without the hassle of applying for funding in the first place. This may be a simplistic notion fraught with holes, I know, but sometimes the simplest solution is the best one.

See more