Government grants: 'park barrelling' or pledge-keeping?

In the fortnight since it was unearthed and aerated by the Centre for Public Integrity, the federal government's invite-only $560 million grants fund has drawn criticism from all sides.

The Major and Local Community Infrastructure Program was created by Labor to fund electorate-level campaign promises from the 2025 election.

The coalition says a juicy $6m golf club redevelopment in Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's electorate "stinks".

The Greens have fumed over the secrecy involved, while independents lash out at "park barrelling" of promised upgrades to local playgrounds and sports grounds.

These threads will all be pulled at a parliamentary committee after Greens senator Steph Hodgins-May secured opposition support to launch a probe.

Behind closed doors, the government is quietly furious scrutiny of the funding round has ballooned.

Mr Albanese was contemptuous of the ABC's reporting on the matter, telling the public broadcaster on air it should "do better".

The government is adamant this type of scheme is appropriate for funding election promises - and insists projects must still meet value-for-money tests prescribed in legislation.

At the heart of the issue is tension between an electoral mandate and best practice funding processes.

The government maintains parties should be able to promise funding to groups during an election and, if they win, provide it.

"Ministers are not Daleks which answer to bureaucrats," one tells AAP.

But Centre for Public Integrity chief executive Catherine Williams says funding decisions should be put to the test before they are promised.

Otherwise, the major parties are engaging in an arms race to fund community projects like men's sheds, skate parks and swimming pools, where value to taxpayers might not exist.

The integrity centre's analysis of the funding round earlier in September kickstarted the national conversation around grants probity.