South Australian Regional Drought Relief Grant Open

Avatar
Image credit: Shutterstock - Dziurek

Grants are open for South Australia’s Active Club Program – Regional Drought Relief Round – until midday Wednesday 28 May 2025.

The Active Club Program is an ongoing grant from the South Australian government designed to support clubs attract participation and ease operation. This special Regional Drought Relief Round aims to address the disadvantages and barriers clubs face due to being adversely affected by drought.

In total the Regional Drought Relief Round is providing $2 million dollars to clubs in drought affected areas facing hardship, with clubs able to claim $5000.

Eligibility 

To be eligible for the grant, applicants must:

  • be a non-profit recreation, sport, or community club whose primary purpose is the delivery of sport or recreational programs or services within South Australia; or
  • be a non-profit fishing club whose primary purpose is the delivery of recreational programs or services within South Australia; and
  • be incorporated under the Associations Incorporations Act 1985 (SA); and
  • have a minimum total membership base of 20 members. Total membership can include
    associate, social and life membership; and
  • be operating for 12 months or longer; and
  • be located within an eligible council area or comparable regional or remote area. (List can be found on the guidelines page HERE).

Conversely, the following organisations will be ineligible:

  • Any organisation which holds a gaming license.
  • Organisations which have been operating for less than 12 months
  • For profit, commercial organisations.
  • Local councils/local government authorities.
  • State associations and peak bodies which receive funding from the State Sport and Recreation Development Program.
  • Educational institutions.
  • Dance organisations unaffiliated with DanceSport Australia or another recognised body by the Australian Sports Commission.
  • Any organisation whose primary purpose is not the delivery of active recreation, sport or recreational fishing programs.
  • Any organisation which has overdue grant acquittals for the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing (ORSR) at the time of funding recommendations.
  • Any organisation which has less than 20 members.
  • Any organisation which cannot demonstrate an acceptable level of financial responsibility.
  • Any organisation whose primary purpose is to run one off or yearly events.
  • Any organisation physically located in a metropolitan area.

Eligible Projects

Program grants can be used for projects and equipment which target participation and water initiatives or expenses.

Examples include:

  • Water saving or harvesting initiatives
  • Energy efficiency initiatives
  • Utility bill relief
  • Sporting equipment
  • Fishing equipment
  • Uniforms and protective gear
  • Professional development
  • Positive menstrual health initiatives
  • Medical training
  • Medical equipment
  • Club promotional material
  • Hardship subsidies
  • Technology directly associated with
    participation or club sustainability
  • Playing venue maintenance
    equipment
  • White goods
  • Travel and accommodation

Conclusion 

Before applying for the grants, ensure that you have the mandatory documents required. These are the most recent Statement of Financial Position (Balance Sheet) and/or Statement of Financial Performance (Income and Expenditure Statement) of your organisation, and they must cover a period of 12 months.

To apply for the Regional Drought Relief Round, click HERE.

For more information on the grants, learn from the guidelines HERE.

 

Previous ArticleNext Article

Bordeaux face uncertain future after American investor withdrawal

Avatar
Image Credits: EuropeanBestDestinations.com

Girondins de Bordeaux face their biggest crisis yet after their exclusion from France’s national competitions was upheld and proposed investor Park Bench walked away from a takeover. The club is on the brink of liquidation after poor financial management and failed ownership takeovers. The Paris Administrative Court rejected Bordeaux’s appeal in August. The court backed the decision that prevents the club from playing in national competitions for the 2026-27 season. Bordeaux will therefore this season remain in Régional 1, the sixth tier of French football.

The ruling followed a financial dispute with French football’s financial regulator, the DNCG. Bordeaux had presented additional financial guarantees after its previous hearing. The court ruled that those commitments could not be considered as part of that procedure.

The decision has now had a major impact on the club’s ownership plans. Park Bench, the US investment group working with Sparta Capital, has withdrawn from its proposed takeover. The group said its offer depended on Bordeaux remaining in the national championships. With that condition no longer possible, Park Bench decided not to proceed.

The withdrawal leaves Bordeaux in a difficult position. The club had hoped new investment would provide financial stability and help rebuild its sporting operation. Instead, the failure of the takeover leaves the future of the six-time French champions uncertain. Bordeaux has already endured several years of financial problems. The club lost its professional status in 2024 after bankruptcy proceedings and a previous administrative relegation. It then rebuilt its senior team in the second and third tiers of French football.

The latest exclusion represents another major setback. Bordeaux now needs to find a way to keep the club operating outside the national leagues. That means securing funding, meeting its financial obligations and establishing a sustainable ownership structure. The threat of judicial liquidation now hangs over the club.

In a statement issued in late August, Bordeaux said it would explore every remaining legal option after the administrative court ruling. But with Park Bench no longer backing the proposed takeover, the club has fewer options available.

The next priority will be survival. Bordeaux must find new financial backing or another solution to protect the club from liquidation. For one of France’s most historic and successful clubs, the immediate target is no longer a return to Ligue 1. It is simply making sure there is a club left to climb back.

Australia football needs to fix its football governance before it can fix its referees

Avatar
Image Credits: Football Australia

The clearest image yet of Australian football’s refereeing crisis arrived on Wednesday night as Sydney FC and Melbourne Victory met in an Australia Cup semi-final at Jubilee Stadium.

A first ever Big Blue in the competition – and towards it’s pointy end – should have been a showcase event for Australian football but instead, the referees were in the spotlight. Not because of the quality of their officiating, but because of the dire situation the game finds itself in and it’s present need to resort to international imports.

Four Singaporean referees were in charge of the fixture, which Victory won 2-0. Australian referees had refused appointments because of their ongoing dispute with Football Australia. The issue is no longer theoretical. Australian referees are not simply threatening industrial action – their absence has already changed how major matches are delivered. That is a governance failure on the part of Football Australia and the Australian Professional League.

What are the referees fighting for?

Around 90 elite Australian match officials are currently without contracts. That includes referees, assistant referees, fourth officials and video match officials working across the A-Leagues and Australia’s national competitions. The previous contracts expired last month. Some officials are also waiting for outstanding payments from A-League trial matches.

 The Professional Football Referees Association (PFRA) has set three main requirements:

  • It wants the existing contracts extended until June 30, 2027, or until a new agreement or independent refereeing structure is established. 
  • It wants all outstanding match fees and expenses paid.
  • It wants a professional refereeing structure that does not place elite officials directly under the APL, which is controlled by the clubs they officiate. A new central structure is what the referees are demanding and should get.

Evgeny Vizelman, chairman of the PFRA, believes that whilst the strike action is extreme, it is necessary to protect Australian referees.

“We do not take the decision to stop officiating matches lightly,” Vizelman told Sydney Morning Herald last week.

“Our referees are being asked to perform in one of the most scrutinised roles in Australian sport without basic certainty around their employment and, in some cases, without even being paid for work already completed. That is not acceptable.”

Football Australia and the APL have been working towards a new structure, but one in which the two organisations contract separately for Australia Cup and A-League matches. The referees believe that is the wrong model.

Their concern is simple: The APL is 67.7% owned by the A-League Club Unitholders. Essentially, the clubs are appointing their own referees. That creates a perceived conflict.

If the referees sit under Football Australia as a regulator, it ensures there is no conflict of interest and that A-League clubs have no opportunity to influence the referees they may be appointed to matches.

England shows another way

England has already built the structure Australia is struggling to create. Professional Game Referees, or Pro Ref, is the central body overseeing refereeing across the Premier League, EFL, WSL Football and FA competitions. It is funded by those aforementioned competitions.

The important distinction is those competitions do not each run their own separate professional refereeing workforce. Pro Ref manages the system. It oversees appointments, development, training and performance. For the 2026-27 season, its new Professional Referee Group will service the Premier League and EFL Championship.

Officials work within the same professional structure and can be selected across competitions. That centralisation brings consistency. It also allows referees to be treated as a professional group rather than a collection of officials contracted separately by different competitions.

Whilst it is centralised, the system is not perfect. England has also recognised the need for greater independence in assessing referee performances due to Pro Ref being owned and funded by leagues and, as a result, the clubs they represent. However, as the body is also owned in part by the English FA, the governing body can oversee practices.

Pro Ref has also implemented world-leading officiating practices. Its Key Match Incidents panel includes former players and coaches, alongside representatives from the Premier League and Pro Ref, and reviews major decisions independently each week.

Pro Ref now has dedicated development groups, specialist coaching, sports science, psychology and performance analysis. 37 Pro Ref officials are currently on the FIFA International List. That does not prove centralisation alone creates better referees. But it shows what happens when refereeing receives a professional structure, long-term investment and consistent management.

Australian football needs to collaborate

This is where the Australian dispute becomes bigger than referees. Football Australia and the APL have been unable to secure agreement over who funds the referees over a long period of time, leading to this standoff; it comes at the same time as the APL’s difficulty in negotiating a new CBA with the players’ union.

 Both organisations have a role in running their respective parts of the Australian game, but again an industrial dispute has the game appearing in shambles on the eve of another domestic season.

 The most frustrating part of this dispute is that everyone needs the same thing. Football Australia and the APL need referees; there is no doubt the refs deeply value their employment at the elite level. With due respect to Wednesday’s flow-in Singaporean officials – themselves from a valued partner member through our shared position in the AFC – nobody wants to see the circumstances under which they were required on Wednesday continue any longer.

The PFRA dispute should therefore be treated as more than an industrial disagreement. It is an opportunity to fix the structure. Australia should learn from the principle behind Pro Ref and the English system. Centralise, professionalise and protect the officials who manage the game.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend