Tuesday, 30 April 2024

Select Committee on the 2026 Commonwealth Games Bid

Inquiry into the 2026 Commonwealth Games Bid

David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (13:14): Pursuant to standing order 23.22, I table the select committee’s interim report on the inquiry into the 2026 Commonwealth Games bid, including appendices and extracts of proceedings, and I present the transcripts of evidence. I move:

That the transcripts of evidence be tabled and the report be published.

Motion agreed to.

David LIMBRICK: I move:

That the Council take note of the report.

It has been a great privilege to chair this inquiry, on behalf of the people of Victoria, into the cancellation of the Commonwealth Games and present this interim report. I would especially like to thank those who made submissions or appeared at public hearings. I would also like to thank Parliament staff for their tireless efforts thus far in the inquiry along with my fellow committee members.

There are many ways that you could describe Victoria’s bid for the Commonwealth Games, but I think that a neat executive summary would be that it was a stuff-up. These games were doomed from the beginning, because they were built on the shaky foundations of a business case that grossly underestimated costs. The committee found that the Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions put limitations on the consultants that built the business case, including an unreasonably short time frame and strict confidentiality provisions preventing even site visits from occurring. It is possible that if the government had taken more time with the business case and allowed better cost estimates to be formulated, the decision to host the games would never have happened and the government would not have wasted over half a billion dollars of taxpayers money. It is my hope that recommendations will be made in the final report that will minimise the risk of this type of error happening in the future.

Much of the information requested by the committee of government was not provided or executive privilege was claimed. The report lays out in detail the disputed areas of executive privilege. Regardless, the government is accountable to the Parliament and through the Parliament to the people of Victoria; it should not set the conditions by which it is held to account. The self-defined classification of executive privilege is so broad that it has covered all but a few of the documents asked for by the committee.

Tomorrow I intend to use parliamentary processes to request these same documents. If the government maintains the claim of privilege, then this can be independently determined using the mechanism outlined in Legislative Council standing orders 10.03 and 10.04. Of note, this mechanism of appointing an independent arbiter to resolve these disputed claims has not been tested. Often when documents motions are passed through this chamber the response is a letter saying that there was insufficient time to collect the documents. However, in this case the documents have already been identified and assessed and claims of privilege already made. Disappointingly, during the inquiry key decision-makers, including Premier Allan and former Premier Andrews, declined invitations to appear before the committee to explain their decisions.

We also investigated many other aspects of the Commonwealth Games bid. We heard from many regional councils and sporting, tourism and business operators, but what is difficult to convey in a written report is the level of personal disappointment for regional Victorians. These people are proud of their towns. Regional cities are places that are built on trust. They were excited to welcome people from around the world to their homes. They saw great opportunities to get new sporting facilities and develop their towns. Some had grand plans to develop affordable housing. So when the games were cancelled, they felt more than deflated; they felt their time, energy and goodwill had been used and wasted. Councils expended significant effort in planning, much of which has gone to waste. Sporting codes that were expecting an uplift in interest due to the games have been left hanging. Tourism operators that were hoping to have a global spotlight on regional Victoria have been let down. We should learn to forgive regional Victorians for not getting too excited the next time government call to tell them they are here to help.

In lieu of the games, the government promised a $2 billion regional infrastructure package. The committee will be investigating this infrastructure rollout over the remainder of the inquiry, although most details of this package are not yet available. In many ways this inquiry was about much more than the Commonwealth Games alone; it was a rare chance to take a deep dive and see how government really works. What we found was an organisation that makes many mistakes, and I would feel some consolation if I was satisfied lessons have been learned. Victorian taxpayers and regional Victorians deserve much, much better. I conclude by once again thanking the many contributors, and I commend this report to the house.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (13:18): I join the chair in making commentary on the 2026 Commonwealth Games bid select committee interim report and paying tribute to the work he has done as chair in the first instance and the work of the committee secretariat – Kieran has done a very good job in that role. It is a committee that has faced significant challenges through the period, and I should note that the state government has not been helpful in the way it should have in providing the support that is necessary. I should also note the work of Matt Newington, Richard Willis, Chiara De Lazzari, Caitlin Connally and other administrative officers.

This inquiry has as its hallmark obstruction by the state government and government agencies in an attempt to frustrate the inquiry getting the material and evidence that it was entitled to get. These are high-handed claims that have been made by government of executive privilege, claims that do need to be tested and claims that need to be pushed forward, and I think the chair has nailed this in some of his commentary. But I do want to reiterate our thanks to the committee staff for the work they did and all of the submitters, who provided very significant evidence across the state.

Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (13:20): I am also pleased to rise to make a brief contribution on the 2026 Commonwealth Games bid inquiry interim report, and I would like to put on record my thanks to all of the secretariat, our committee members and indeed the witnesses and those people who made submissions. We heard evidence that with this ‘con games’ the government used regional Victorians as a political plaything. We heard, and saw, that Jacinta Allan, the then Minister for Commonwealth Games Delivery, refused to turn up at our hearings and provide commentary. We heard the loss that was suffered by people, and I will put one lady on record. She owns Farnham Court accommodation and restaurant. Here is what she said to our committee:

Morwell was the star. Finally we got a guernsey. We got the ‘dirty old coal town’ label taken off, and we were going to be hosting the Commonwealth Games. And I think that is the biggest kick in the guts … Forget about the individuals or the individual businesses like us – it is the town … So we lost more than business. It is motivation; it is incentive; it is the legacy; it is the volunteers that get trained; the community; the children; the excitement of meeting athletes, holding their hands, walking them to podiums. The florist wins. The beauty salons win. The hairdressers win … The physios win. Everybody does everything in a town when an event comes to town … The legacy of the Commonwealth Games is what we are missing, and now we are back to being Struggle Town again. In a heartbeat it was given to us; in … a heartbeat it was taken away.

I believe it was highly callous of the government to do so.

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (13:22): I also rise to share a few remarks in relation to the tabling of the interim report of the 2026 Commonwealth Games bid inquiry today, and at the outset I would also like to acknowledge the work of our secretariat staff from across the Parliament who have assisted with this inquiry, particularly including Kieran Crowe and indeed Richard Willis and Matt Newington as well. I thank them for their work. I would also like to take a moment to acknowledge the chair and the diligent and impartial way in which he has conducted this inquiry.

This has been a very interesting committee to take part in. The government was very clear from the outset when it first announced its intention to host the Commonwealth Games in 2026 in Victoria that it was to do so for the benefit of regional Victoria, not for the benefit of just hosting a Commonwealth Games. What we saw throughout the course of this inquiry was that when those costs did start to escalate and they were no longer adding up to provide those benefits for Victoria, the government took difficult but decisive action, and that action is seeing a $2 billion regional investment package still delivered as a result of these games. As the chair illustrated, that will form part of the work that we do in the latter part of this inquiry, but we did hear from a number of witnesses in Geelong, in Ballarat, in Bendigo and in the Latrobe Valley in particular on their experiences with it, and indeed some of the optimism as well around some of the projects. For instance, community sporting clubs will receive as a result of this $2 billion package in many cases projects which would not have been as well customised to their needs had we proceeded with the Commonwealth Games as originally intended.

There is more work to be done. Certainly it has been clear from members opposite that they have not got the smoking gun that they thought was there, quite simply because there is not one. We saw their outrageous behaviour when we had former ministers appear before our inquiry last year, and all sorts of outrageous accusations. They have not been able to prove a single one of them, and that just goes to show that their intent, while this has been a very well run inquiry – (Time expired)

Joe McCRACKEN (Western Victoria) (13:24): We all had thought that it was going to be bad, but no-one knew that it was going to be this bad. With the assistance of the Auditor-General, we found out that nearly $600 million has been wasted for nothing – for nothing. It is my electorate of Western Victoria and many other country areas that suffer because of this – $600 million wasted.

I want to pay tribute to the chair, Mr Limbrick. He has done an outstanding job in driving this committee in a very steady, calm and extremely diligent manner. You have been incredibly impartial, and I think you really should be congratulated for the way that you have handled this inquiry, Mr Limbrick.

I would also like to draw the attention of everyone to the findings of this report. They are listed on page xi, according to the report here. The findings detail what the evidence basically said to us: extreme disappointment from many community groups, sporting clubs, business associations and individuals, who all presented evidence, and many local councils, some of whom were forced to sign non-disclosure agreements so that they could not even disclose key details to their own local councillors, elected councillors – they were forced to sign them by the government. And there are many more instances in here of extreme disappointment. The business case in itself is an extremely flimsy document that was relied upon to make key decisions. There was not enough time to compile it, let alone ensure that it was robust. I urge the public to make sure that they review this report before we see the final report come out in a year’s time.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (13:26): I am pleased to stand to speak on this interim report. I too would like to thank the parliamentary staff and acknowledge the way the chair went about conducting our meetings and hearings throughout the inquiry and of course thank all those who attended the hearings throughout. I think up-front throughout the hearings we heard an acknowledgement of the fact that Victoria stepped into a vacancy within the games. The model of the games in 2026 and 2030 – that no country is taking on the games at this point was acknowledged. Also, there was much conversation about the global inflationary position that all of us found ourselves in at the time and the concerns, whether it be from councils or other people, sectors and businesses in regional Victoria, about the inflationary pressure of the games and the ability to deliver infrastructure.

There was much relief around the time frames of the delivery, and of course there was a lot of talk about the $2 billion regional package delivering on the commitment to regional Victoria and the fact that we have a billion dollars for housing to deliver 1300 homes around regional Victoria and $170 million for tourism, supporting our incredibly strong tourism economy here in Victoria. We heard repeatedly about worker accommodation, the importance of getting workers located where they need to work in regional Victoria; the importance of sports infrastructure and our community sports funds to ensure that the infrastructure and everything that goes around community sports is there locally; and food and fibre – supporting our primary agricultural exports and whatnot. Basically, we heard there was an understanding – a relief from many people but an excitement about what is to come.

Sarah MANSFIELD (Western Victoria) (13:28): I too would like to thank the staff and the chair for the incredible work they have done on this report and thank all of those who took the time to make submissions and appear at the hearings. I think regardless of how you feel about the Commonwealth Games, this report is worth taking note of. What became clear was that while the decision to cancel the games might have disappointed some, it was the decision to host it in the first place that was actually most problematic. The overwhelming drive to host the games despite the very obvious challenges it would pose was allegedly a desire to invest in regional Victoria. My question is: why do we need the excuse of a two-week sporting event, which there is plenty of evidence to show time and again underdeliver on benefits and cost an incredible amount, to make that investment in regional Victoria? Sure, that is the sort of place we have landed with the government now, but they wasted a lot of time and money in the interim and communities are not necessarily ending up with the things that they need.

As the report highlights, there was an astounding lack of due diligence and often just common sense applied to the decision to host the games, and this was a decision that was going to involve spending billions of taxpayer funds for limited benefit at best. Where and why the failures occurred, whether it was at the level of cabinet ministers, the public service or other governing bodies, continues to be pieced together, but it has been hampered by a lack of transparency, which has already been addressed by some of the others who have spoken today. Lack of consultation was also a key theme, whether it was from councils, the events industry, sporting groups or accommodation providers. They told us if they had been engaged with earlier, some of the problems that emerged may not have been there from the start. It also should not have taken a special committee to identify these issues. These are all things that should have been scrutinised through existing parliamentary processes, like the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee, which currently lack the teeth they need because they are government controlled. If we are to avoid fiascos like this in the future, these are the sorts of changes we need to strengthen parliamentary oversight, and we will continue to push for them.

Georgie CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (13:30):(By leave) If I can, I would just like to echo the comments made by the members of the committee who have worked very hard on this important inquiry. I would like to acknowledge the work that you have all done, chaired by Mr Limbrick. If you recall when the Liberals and Nationals put this motion to the Parliament, there was a huge debate and a huge pushback from the government. They did not want this inquiry to go ahead. Listening to the members of the government in speaking to this report, I echo that sentiment again. They are incredibly dismissive of the importance of what needed to be done.

Looking at the report, in the last 10 minutes or so since it was tabled, it is clear that the government is still baulking at the very transparency that Victorians deserve in order to be able to understand this decision. What on earth went on? In the overview I see that the inquiry says:

… the Committee has faced significant barriers in meeting its requirements … Certain individuals with knowledge of the Games have declined to attend public hearings and the Government has declined to provide key documents about the Games on the grounds of executive privilege …

Well, isn’t that a familiar theme? This government is not open to transparency. They have provided barriers to a range of issues that the Parliament has put to them. This decision was made by the then Andrews Labor government, in which the Premier herself was the chief minister looking after the games as the Minister for Commonwealth Games Delivery, and she would not appear. These two crucial individuals, who were sitting at the cabinet table making these decisions on behalf of Victorians, refused to front up. That says everything about Premier Allan and Daniel Andrews. There is no accountability and no regard for what they have done to the tourism industry, to the businesses around regional Victoria and, importantly, to the athletes but also to the reputation of Victoria.

Motion agreed to.