If the Palaszczuk Government is serious about burnishing its accountability and integrity credentials, I’ve got a suggestion.

Why doesn’t it provide a full accounting of the more than $750 million it’s spent on its Advance Queensland industry development programs over the past seven years.

It’s handed out hundreds of millions of dollars to more than a thousand recipients – from researchers and innovators to start-ups and large companies – but has never provided much by way of detail beyond the self-serving content of accompanying media releases.

Tourism, Innovation and Sports Minister, Stirling Hinchliffe released the latest of them last Saturday – another $2.4 million of public money to 21 Queensland companies with innovative ideas.

That brings to nearly $50 million the Government has given to nearly 390 companies under its Ignite Ideas scheme, which “supports Queenslanders to take their innovations to the next level by tapping into new markets and helping to attract investment”.

And that’s just one of the more than 30 current and closed funding programs under the Advance Queensland umbrella.

Not one of them, as I’ve noted in this space before, https://inqld.com.au/opinion/2020/09/21/755-million-spent-but-has-this-government-fund-managed-to-advance-queensland/ has provided anything close to a proper accounting of the worth to the state of this largesse – apart from grand claims of the number of jobs and local communities supported.

The Queensland Audit Office had scheduled a review of Advance Queensland’s activities this year but cancelled it last year to better concentrate on assessing COVID-19’s impact on government business.

That’s let the government off the hook. It can keep generating good publicity and goodwill – who objects to receiving a cheque from the government? – without having to go through the tedious business of explaining whether it’s actually money well spent.

And much of this money could indeed be well spent.

A casual glance through the list of Ignite Ideas grant recipients reveals some real success stories, such as Covid-19 rapid testing company, Ellume.

Ellume, which received $250,000 in the early years of the Ignite ideas program, has had its test kits accepted in the US and is now valued at more than $500 million.

But, on balance, are we getting our money’s worth? Who knows, at least if you’re relying on the public record to find out.

I randomly checked the websites of about 100 successful Ignite Ideas applicants, using the Government’s own list of recipients as my source. Eighteen  no longer worked.

This could simply be because companies have changed their names or upgraded their online presence. Or perhaps, their idea didn’t work after all.

Whatever the case, you’d think the Government itself might want to know. Advance Queensland was the Palaszczuk administration’s first big economic development policy, launched just weeks after winning office in early 2015.

It was supposed to be the first step in weaning Queensland off its dependence on resources by creating a new “knowledge-based economy”.

Seven years on, it’s surely fair to ask, has it worked? What exactly has the more than $750 million poured into Advance Queensland programs delivered for the state?

This is as much as I’ve found – on Advance Queensland’s website, last updated in July last year:

“We have already helped thousands of innovators and projects to succeed and supported 27,000 jobs across the state.”

Who knows where the jobs figure came from? I suspect nothing more than a totalling of all the estimates supplied by successful grant recipients in their applications.

Has anyone gone back to check whether the estimates turned out to be right? Or, for that matter, whether the companies still actually exist?

And if the Government actually knows the answers, is it ever likely to tell us?

I doubt it because the real point all these grant schemes isn’t whether they work or not in terms of economic policy. It’s all about the announcement and being seen to be doing something.

“Look, we handed out some money,” the government can say when asked about its economic development credentials.

Which raises the other question the Government should answer if it’s serious about accountability, integrity and transparency – how exactly did it choose all these hundreds and hundreds of grant recipients?

Why this company over that one? And why even hand the money out in the first place? The world is full of investors looking for good ideas.

Why should the government be handing out public money to companies that, presumably could have raised private money if their idea was strong enough?

But that’s a policy debate for another day.