Alison Lai

Volunteer funds set to dry up in longer term explains that funding win for the sector comes with troubling caveat

THE volunteering sector breathed a sigh of relief across Australia last month when the Australian Government reversed its decision to cut funding to volunteer support programs and services.

The change of heart, a result of extensive lobbying by the volunteering sector, will ensure funding for programs and services supporting volunteering remains available for the next 3.5 years.

This includes programs and services delivered by Volunteering Tasmania.

This is a victory for the sector because it saves the only funding stream dedicated to support programs and services, and because the campaign showcased the importance of volunteering.

But it is a victory that comes with a caveat in the form of three words, “nonongoing funding”.

It is only a reprieve.

The good news about shortterm funding has come with a Government directive that the funding will not be ongoing and groups receiving it should not expect the support to continue past 2021.

Groups like Volunteering Tasmania are under strict instruction to find other funding for their support programs because the Government does not believe this is something it should be funding moving forward.

In 2021, the sector will have to compel the Government to change its mind.

While the diversification of funding streams is a key result area in the strategic plans of community groups, the Government’s stand poses an important question. Should we expect the Government to prioritise investment in a healthy volunteering sector?

The Government does not have a bottomless bucket of funds to allow it to commit long term to every worthy cause. However, would the community expect taxpayer money to be invested into services that help Australians find volunteering roles?

I believe this is a fair expectation, and not just because I lead a group dedicated to those aims. It is a fair expectation because the figures support it. With four in five Tasmanians giving over seven million volunteer hours to the tune of $4.9 billion every year, if volunteering was identified formally as an industry I suspect we would see more money thrown at it to ensure its sustainability.

It is also a fair expectation because the livability of our communities depends on volunteers. Not just in the delivery of our community health services but during natural disasters, for our iconic festivals and events, to maintain our wilderness tracks and trails and to keep us physically active and healthy.

These examples are just touching the surface, with volunteers contributing an estimated $290 billion annually across the nation.

The Government could never afford to replace our volunteers with paid-workers.

I also believe it is a fair expectation that the Government invests because volunteers are not an entitlement. We should never take them for granted and we should never assume they will always be there.

With more groups seeking volunteer support, and an increase in groups with volunteer shortages, volunteers are becoming a scarce commodity in some regions. This is happening here on our island and right across Australia.

So if we know volunteers are keeping our communities alive and that the Government could never afford to replace them with paid workers, surely it is in its interest to invest in programs and services that nurture volunteerism. To do otherwise increases the risk of community groups having no option than to approach the Government for financial assistance to hire paid workers to replace volunteers because they do not have enough.

These requests are already happening, and I am sure these groups, and the people in the communities they support, would also think it is a fair expectation the Government set funding aside aimed at keeping volunteering alive.

A future that does not prioritise investment into developing innovative ways to get more Australians to volunteer is a future with few volunteers. And a future with few volunteers is one with less junior sport, the closure of regional museums, no one available to take our older Tasmanians to their doctors’ appointments, fewer friendly faces welcoming our cruise ships, and fewer people to help the homeless or those in crisis.