Unfortunately, as you already know, what I found is basically a mirrored result of US politics. As your own fellow country women, Caitlin Johnstone, puts it, you don't have a government. You are essentially living in a vassal state of the westernized power structure, currently being highly controlled by the US ruling class. That's my paraphrasing of her comments from an article of hers a while back. This is her excuse for a constant attack on the US power structure, rather than addressing her/your own governments actions.

I dug up 2 articles to base an opinion on and read some information on some of my own sources, not totally related to this issue, but in whole leads towards understanding. Basically what I'm finding, as I state above that correlates with US politics, is a lack of genuine concern for the issue. Women's rights, go figure, right? Your country is currently making a major swing into fascism due to forces outside that your government is complacent to. The current agendas within don't have room for women's rights. You claimed your government has spent billions, over what time line? Where exactly did that money go?

I tried a search on the site you use here often (kangaroo court) and got zero results. But that would be the first search I'd do for an indication of improper fund distribution into NGO's, think tanks, and foundations. What I did find was seemingly a lack of genuine attempts to place a prosperous agency into place to address the issue. And a lot less money than your initial claim.

Ignored and given scraps: Office for Women demeaned by Morrison government

It is given no say, has meagre funding and few staff. Just another example of the regard in which women are held by the government.

[crikey.com.au]

{The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s Office for Women is supposed to “deliver policies and programs to advance gender equality and improve the lives of Australian women”.

It’s a big job. Yet it has just a handful of staff, offers meagre grants, and is rarely consulted about topics within its jurisdiction.

The office hasn’t responded to Australia’s landmark report on workplace sexual violence, and has yet to comment on the multiple allegations of rape and assault in Parliament House.}

A common practice in the US when a law is established in a bill is to allow it to go unfunded and or understaffed. These are bills that gather a lot of attention by the public, especially during voting periods, used as black mail bills, my terminology for them, then afterwards, forgotten by the media. When there is funding, it's often siphoned off to other projects and consultation companies draining that funding to a point nothing or to little is left to use at the direction of the committee board. Often funding is lost in a shuffle between regions, projected to an area that didn't ask for it, with no accountability, becomes lost. Essentially these projects are rarely ever mentioned again and just dropped off a cliff of obscurity unless some independent journalist took initiative to follow it.

{The office wasn’t even consulted about the $150 million scheme to boost females in sport or about the latest round of tax cuts. It’s not clear whether it was consulted about the closure of the Family Court or the Respect@Work workplace sexual violence report, which was released in March last year.}

If you follow the links provided in that paragraph, you'll find a correlation to what I stated above. Suggesting that the program has been heavily abused by purposeful undermanagement while the funds have been significantly routed in a means to deceptively benefit outside the program.

{This total, as analysts have pointed out, represents a tiny fraction of the $500 billion budget spend. It amounts to about $40 per female worker, or $8 a year, until 2025.}

Ok, this is where you came up with billions? The budget as a whole? Again, the links in this article lead to more explanations.

{Trish Bergin was the first assistant secretary at the office between 2017 and 2019. She is now co-director of the 50/50 by 2030 Foundation. Bergin says she left because it was an “impossible job”.

The Office for Women has just 39 staff — less than half it had before 2010, Bergin says.

During her time working there, Bergin says she was repeatedly denied access to information such as modelling and data around tax cuts.

“The treasurer’s office particularly just refuses to allow any kind of input from the Office for Women,” she said, citing the government’s refusal to acknowledge gender disparity.}

I would suggest looking into the 50/50 by 2030 foundation to see if it is a legitimate foundation. You know, if you can't beat them join them? The foundation could be one of the entities siphoning off the governments funding.

The other article was from The Guardian which lead me to the above article. I'm not a fan at all of The Guardian, but at least this time it lead me to a much more informative source. Their article was lacking any real information at all. But here it is if you want to scroll through it.

[theguardian.com]

@William_Mary Thanks its on my Monday to do list to get parliament reference on the debate which I got info from an organisation called Mothers of Sons who suggest the following letter to lobby start with:
Subject: National Domestic Violence Plan Dear
I am writing to you to express my strong concern that Australia wasted over $3 billion on the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, now found to have been a failure.
A recent bipartisan parliamentary report noted that the previous National Plan’s policies had been totally unsuccessful: “It is clear that the national plan has not achieved its objective of a significant and sustained reduction in violence against women and their children.”
This is unsurprising. Current policies do not address true causes of violence against women, falsely claiming domestic violence stems from gender inequality. The safety of women is too important to allow this important issue to be captured by misleading feminist ideology.
I urge the government to adopt two key recommendations from this bipartisan committee. Namely:
 “…that the next National Plan be inclusive of the diversity of victim-survivors. In particular, the next plan should recognise the rights and needs of women; children in their own right; men; older Australians; LGBTQI people; and people living with a disability.”
 “…that the next National Plan be named the “National Plan to Reduce Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence.”
Across Australia there are ordinary Australians who have witnessed domestic abuse of vulnerable people in all these groups. We object to the current hijacking of domestic
1violence funding by the women’s lobby, denying support for people desperately in need of help.

I know that in 1996 when part of an organisation called Men for Equal Justice I was told by local police sergeant that the police were not interested in preventing violence just locking men up.
I'll keep you updated.