Record investment, real cuts.

In recent weeks, Queensland’s largest public sector union asked the Crisafulli government to reverse cuts to domestic violence, housing and homelessness services. At the same time, the government has been announcing record spending, hundreds of millions of dollars, new crisis hubs, more caseworkers. Both of these things are true. The reason is a word most people have never had to think about: indexation, the yearly increase governments apply to funding so it keeps up with rising costs.

Victoria has a version of the same problem, but it looks different. Its peak community body has been raising a similar concern for years, and a separate government review is now worrying the wider public service. The two states are showing two different symptoms of the same underlying issue, a growing gap between what governments say they are spending and what it actually costs to keep a service running.

Queensland’s 2025-26 budget put $379 million towards domestic and family violence services, including a new 24-hour crisis hub in North Queensland. Since then, the government has added $10 million for mental health workers and police-based domestic violence specialists, plus $7 million in community grants.

However, Queensland’s own peak body for the sector, QCOSS, looked at that same budget and found it “has failed to invest in frontline domestic and family violence services”, even while police funding grew. It has got worse since. When the 2026-27 budget was handed down in June, the indexation rate, the yearly top-up meant to cover rising costs, actually dropped, from 3.81 per cent to 3.31 per cent. QCOSS says that is not enough to keep up with real costs, and about half the sector’s own managers agree it hasn’t been enough for years. A union representing frontline workers is now petitioning the government to fix it. Queensland Treasury has not publicly responded to QCOSS’s specific finding.

Victoria’s story is not the same as Queensland’s, and it would be misleading to pretend it is. Two separate things are happening.

The first is a review of the public service. Then premier Jacinta Allan set up an independent review in 2025, promising frontline workers, including family violence staff, would not be touched. When the government responded to that review in December 2025, Victoria’s peak community body, VCOSS, said it had “serious questions” about where funding was actually being pulled back or moved elsewhere, including the decision to fold VicHealth into a government department. Ben Carroll became premier in July 2026 after Allan resigned, and that review is still being carried out. To be clear, there is no evidence that family violence or housing funding has actually been cut because of this. VCOSS is watching closely to see whether the government keeps its promise, not reporting a cut that has already happened.

The second thread is indexation again, the same issue as Queensland. Victoria’s formula is more generous, tied to wage decisions and inflation rather than a flat number, and for 2026-27 it works out at around 4.5 per cent. However, VCOSS has said for years that even this formula still leaves funding behind the real cost of running services. This is a long-standing worry, not a fresh dispute over this year’s number the way Queensland’s is.

Here is the plain version. Every year, governments give community organisations a small percentage increase on their funding, meant to cover wages, rent and everyday costs. If that percentage is lower than how fast those costs are actually rising, the total dollar figure can go up every year while the organisation can genuinely afford to do less. That is how a government can be telling the truth about record investment while a service is quietly going backwards.

Queensland’s case is the clearest right now: a specific rate, 3.31 per cent, that its own sector body says is not enough. Victoria’s case is softer: a better formula, no proven cut, but the same long-running complaint from its sector body, plus a separate review that has people nervous.

It’s also worth being upfront about who is raising these concerns. QCOSS and VCOSS represent the community sector, and it is in their interest to argue for more funding. That doesn’t make them wrong, their numbers come from budget papers and sector surveys, not guesswork, but it means their view is one side of a real argument, not a neutral referee. BYV treats every source this way.

Both states also get extra money from Canberra. Queensland has received $201.73 million and Victoria $228.59 million under the national family violence funding agreement. That federal money still runs through each state’s own contracts and indexation rules, so it doesn’t solve the problem, but it means state budget figures alone don’t tell you the full story.

None of this means either government is lying. They are measuring different things, headline spending on one hand, real buying power on the other, and voters are rarely shown both side by side.

Who controls this? Entirely the states. Family violence, housing and homelessness services are a state responsibility in both Queensland and Victoria, so this is a state election issue, not something either government can blame on Canberra.

What’s their actual record? Queensland can point to new dollars while its own sector says the top-up underneath them has shrunk two years running. Victoria has made a promise it hasn’t broken yet, however, its own sector body is watching closely.

Who funds them? Mainly the state, topped up by Commonwealth money that still runs through the same state system.

Who are they accountable to? This is the uncomfortable one. Indexation rates are usually set inside the budget process by public servants and treasury officials, not voted on individually by parliament. The people actually deciding whether a service survives are rarely named and never on a ballot.

Is it costed? That is exactly what indexation is supposed to answer, and in Queensland’s case, exactly what QCOSS says the government is not yet getting right.

You don’t need to wait for BYV to check the next funding announcement yourself. Ask what the indexation rate is, whether it’s fixed or based on a formula, and what the sector’s own peak body says about whether it’s enough. Friday’s piece shows you exactly how, using these Queensland and Victorian figures as the example.

Your Vote. Your Future.

You know what to do.

Sue Barrett is the founder of Democracy Watch AU and Before You Vote a free civic education resource for every Australian who wants to cut through the spin. Before You Vote publishes every Tuesday and Friday. If this was useful, send it to five people.