Thursday, 14 November 2024

Bills

Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Harriet Shing:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (10:29): I rise to speak on the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024. At the outset I will inform the house that the opposition will be moving a number of amendments and that we will be opposing this bill overall. The stated purpose of the bill is to amend several existing acts to grant the ministers and authorities delivering precincts and infrastructure programs greater power, and we all know what happens when the government assumes greater power. This continues the Labor government’s shameful record of riding roughshod over communities. As my friend the member for Caulfield said in the other place:

The problem with this bill is it fails one key thing, which is the most important of all: it fails to consult with the public. It actually cuts Victorians out of the equation, and if you did not have to worry about voters and you just had a state and that is all you had to do, then this would be great. And if you just said, ‘We’re just going to build infrastructure, and we don’t care about where people live, we don’t care about what we do to people’s backyards, we don’t care about their sporting fields and we don’t care about their community facilities, their hospitals or their schools. We just want to build infrastructure,’ this would be great. But it is not, and unfortunately this bill should be renamed the ‘Local Voices Ignored Bill’, because local voices have been ignored. Third-party rights have been ignored. The ability for community, for councils, to raise issues when it comes to land acquisition, when it comes to various agencies coming onto their land and when it comes to easements and the acquisition of easements is ignored. Local voices have been ignored again.

In 10 years time the legacy of this tired, 10-year-old Labor government will not be something to be proud of. It will be a trashing of local communities and local amenity throughout many suburbs and precincts, sky-high towers against the wishes of local residents, giving unprecedented power to this government and to this Premier. I note recent polling which shows that the community are quite unhappy with the government’s housing plan. After a whole week of flurried announcements which did not cut through it all, the Premier managed to go backwards. Premier number 29 herself – the runner-up Premier, certainly not the preferred Premier.

We know this government had eight initial priority precincts and many of those eight precincts are absolutely prime for development, prime for high-rise, great opportunities, but have been missing in action for quite some time. That was one of the key things with Arden, with the hospital: now the hospital is gone, how do we fill the housing in with it?

This government is big on promises, not so good on delivery, and you will forgive the opposition for being more than a bit sceptical about the government’s plan to fix the housing crisis. Mr Batchelor, Mr McIntosh and Mr Berger said in Hansard, on behalf of the government, they were delivering 80,000 homes each and every year for 10 years. In classic Labor incompetence they will actually go backwards on last year’s attempt. Eighty thousand homes a year for 10 years, and the Premier said it in Hansard as well and it was on the housing statement website and it was on the department of planning website. That promise is no longer on the department of planning website and it is no longer on the housing statement website, but it is still in Hansard, isn’t it, Mr McIntosh? What is also in Hansard is the Premier’s promise that the government will deliver 10,000 homes, and what is also on permanent record is then Premier Daniel Andrews’s media release which promised 80,000 homes a year each and every year.

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Evan MULHOLLAND: It is a very good speech. Have a read. I got my Hansard yesterday and had another read. I would encourage others to read it as well. To quote the member for Caulfield again:

No-one believes that they are going to actually deliver the housing that they promised, but on top of the eight precincts we have … got seven Suburban Rail Loop precincts. Within those … precincts, we know that the government has said that part of the $34.5 billion –

he corrected his error: it is now $40 billion –

… because the Premier herself has said that all major projects since 2021 have gone up by 20 per cent except for the Suburban Rail Loop.

The Suburban Rail Loop is such an amazing project with a business case that stacks up and everything. It is such an amazing, incredible, magical, miracle project that it is completely quarantined from cost blowouts, cost blowouts that have been consistent over every transport project in Victoria since 2021 – 20 per cent cost blowouts on everything, and the Premier has agreed with that proposition. But the Premier has disagreed that there is a 20 per cent cost blowout on the Suburban Rail Loop. It is such a miracle project, which is going to deliver them government again and again and again, which it will not, that it is quarantined from any cost blowout that is occurring anywhere else. This is why you cannot believe this Labor government.

Danny Pearson has said that he has sent everything to Infrastructure Australia now. We still have no evidence that Victoria has received the $2.2 billion it was promised. In debate on motions every Labor backbencher has gotten up and given the same yarn about Mr Albanese saying that the Suburban Rail Loop is the most exciting public transport project in Australia. The problem for their speaking notes, which I have probably pre-empted, is that he never said that comment as Prime Minister. Never has he said that comment as the elected Prime Minister of Australia. You have a range of very senior Labor MPs running around Victoria at every event, many of whom I have spoken to recently and I run into in the northern and western suburbs, privately bagging the Suburban Rail Loop, saying how terrible it is, how much of a lemon it is, how much of a white elephant it is. I think ‘lemon on steroids’ were the words used to me by a federal Labor MP. It has no love, it has no friends.

This government has recklessly signed us up and signed contracts, signed Victoria up for contracts, not knowing how it is going to fund it. To quote John Pesutto, it is like going to an auction, bidding at an auction, bidding against others and bidding successfully and then going to the effort of seeing if you can sort out the finance. It is recklessness. Think of all the other services – infrastructure, health care, education – that are missing out because of this government’s recklessness in signing Victoria up to this dog of a project. Trust me, I have no qualms in saying that this is a dog of a project. I know many criticised my former colleague Dr Bach for describing the Suburban Rail Loop in various ways. When I go to the growth areas, when I go to places like Wallan and Beveridge and Greenvale and Mickleham and Kalkallo, there is no love for the Suburban Rail Loop. Good luck to the member for Yan Yean, for example, in selling the fact that they are spending $40 billion on an eastern suburbs rail tunnel when Donnybrook Road is not duplicated.

Members interjecting.

Evan MULHOLLAND: Forgive my error: the Liberals duplicated the eastern side of Donnybrook Road. If you go on Mickleham Road, on the Mickleham side you have got a beautiful four-lane highway with a lovely median in the middle, because we put developer contributions to work and signed developer contribution agreements, whereas the Labor government’s practice is to just send it all into Spring Street, wait two years for costs to increase and then give less back to growth areas in dribs and drabs. How can the member for Yan Yean explain to her community that they are going to get $40 billion for a rail tunnel in the eastern suburbs when they cannot even get Yan Yean Road stage 2 going? They cannot even get Donnybrook Road duplicated. There are people waiting for hours. In fact last week many constituents contacted me because Donnybrook Road was closed for the entire day. People could not get in and out of their estate due to a truck accident because of the poor design from this government. You have basically got an old farm track with tens of thousands of homes being built either side. People from the Olivine estate residents committee have contacted me, people from Kinbrook estate, people from Cloverton, and I do speak to many in that community because it shares a postcode with my community. In Kalkallo, in Mickleham – it is a very, very similar community.

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Evan MULHOLLAND: I will take the interjection from Mr McIntosh, because as many would know, you are a constituent of mine.

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Evan MULHOLLAND: Well, hopefully you will vote for me above the Greens. But this is a very serious issue because the government has signed us up for a project and the obvious consequence of that is that people are missing out. Victorians are paying the price because Danny Pearson and Jacinta Allan have signed us up to a dog of a project without doing the proper finance. A third of this project is meant to be funded by value capture, but they cannot tell us what that is. Obviously it is going to mean very, very high taxes on communities – a lot of windfall gains tax, a lot of land taxes, a lot of value taxes and uplift taxes to make sure they tax the bejesus out of the people of Box Hill, out of Glen Waverley and out of Cheltenham.

They have got form in this. Let us look at the West Gate Tunnel – over $4.7 billion in blowouts and three years behind schedule. Now they are throwing more money and staff at it, but is going to cost us more. The Minister for Transport Infrastructure came out recently and promised that no extra cost would fall on taxpayers, but no-one believes that; no-one believes Danny. A little over a month ago we were told the Metro Tunnel needed $800 million more due to the Ukraine war, and now the Gaza conflict is apparently causing issues that are leading to blowouts. But these excuses only reinforce the reality that you cannot trust Labor to manage projects properly.

You continue to get over $40 billion – almost $50 billion – of cost overruns on infrastructure projects around the state. You have got –

Members interjecting.

Evan MULHOLLAND: I think it is very well documented. The Premier even had to call a review into some of the illegal CFMEU coercion and standover tactics going on on Victorian construction sites that are leading to some of these cost blowouts. But we know that the government cannot manage money, and they have a record – they have form. It is not the same form as Knight’s Choice would have in the Melbourne Cup. Just look at the Suburban Rail Loop – costs are out of control. It was initially pegged at $40 billion, with a third meant to be captured covered by value capture. The Suburban Rail Loop was not on any Public Transport Victoria development plan. You know those plans drawn up by experts with cross-agency taskforce departments coming up to map out the future of Melbourne? Instead, it was dreamt up at tax evasion city, down the road at PwC, in a locked room. The department secretary did not even know about it. What process is that? Deborah Glass was right: it is subverting Westminster processes. It is subverting the checks and balances that should be common practice in government.

The federal Labor government – let us make this clear – has not committed funding to it yet. They have not committed the $2.2 billion because the government have not sent them the details they were asked for over and over again. Those on the other side of the chamber cannot honestly believe that this project stacks up. You cannot. You cannot make it make sense. Surely you would rather deliver a Pakenham community hospital. Surely you would rather deliver a duplication of Donnybrook Road or an electrification of train lines, like you promised at two elections, for the good people of Melton and Wyndham Vale. You promised that at two separate elections, let it fester there and prioritised the Suburban Rail Loop, a project in the eastern suburbs, which are already flush with good infrastructure and good public transport – and I say ‘good’ compared to the people of Melton and Wyndham Vale, to whom you have promised airport rail but also electrification. That has never happened, and now you have gone back on your promise. You have gone back on your promise to people in growth areas. I mean, look at the people in Mount Atkinson – they cannot even get a bus. You have got the member for Kororoit tabling a petition acknowledging the neglect by her own government. I reckon the member for Kororoit cannot really boast about a $40 billion spend in the eastern suburbs for a tunnel. You cannot seriously believe this project is decent. No-one in the federal government does, none of your federal Labor colleagues do, because it is a dog of a project. It is going to shackle generations of Victorians with debt – unfinanced debt. This is a serious issue. We are heading to $188 billion of debt under this government, and you have signed us up to a $216 billion Suburban Rail Loop without knowing how you are going to fund it – absolute recklessness by this government.

As I said, I was at the Wallan market last Saturday, and even bringing up the Suburban Rail Loop elicits responses that would be quite unparliamentary for me to repeat in this chamber, particularly with the amount of potholes in Wallan and the fact that the government still have not built the Wallan diamond ramps. They originally promised that they were going to upgrade Watson Street as part of that; that is apparently now off the table – cutting corners. The state government actually promised $130 million for Watson Street at the election, which was also a promise by the Liberal Party, but what the Labor Party did not tell the community is that that $130 million would also include the $50 million budgeted in 2019 by the federal coalition government. So it was actually only $80 million. They penny-pinched the people of Wallan down to an $80 million contribution, and as a result they are not upgrading Watson Street.

They have got terrible local members in the member for Yan Yean and the member for Kalkallo, who just sit idly by while the government penny-pinches our community, and now they are not getting the upgrade of Watson Street that was meant to be part of the original project. Instead they are prioritising the Suburban Rail Loop in the eastern suburbs – a $40 billion spend on a tunnel in the eastern suburbs. How could the member for Kalkallo and the member for Yan Yean possibly be happy with that outcome or possibly be happy with the gross prioritisation of a tunnel in the eastern suburbs when you have got a massive growth area in the outer north that is being neglected and being deserted? They will not be happy. They will not say anything about it and they will not fight for their communities, but I will tell you what, I will – every day. I am in my community and I am out in my community, and yet several residents that came up to me about the death tax and land taxes and how they are killing their businesses and about the state of the roads had to go over and yell at poor old Rob Mitchell, the member for McEwen, who is probably on the way out, because no state MP will come and listen to their community. They will not. They are not out there in their communities because they know they are going to cop a lot from their constituents about the neglect that the outer north has gone through.

Talk to the development industry – which the government has taxed to death – and housing experts and they will tell you that a lot of these developments will be designed for the wealthy, not ordinary Victorians. They are not building affordable homes, they are building luxury apartments that only a select few can afford. The government’s focus is supposed to be on improving transport infrastructure, but instead it is using transport projects as a backdoor way to push its housing agenda. Take a look at the Metro Tunnel, West Gate Tunnel, North East Link, Suburban Rail Loop – all massively over budget, behind schedule. The cost of these projects is driving up prices for everything. There is an inflationary effect from doing all these projects at once, and we know this from speaking to the industry and speaking on the ground. There is a massive inflationary effect when you have got supply, labour and materials all being sucked into Big Build projects. Speak to any small builder, as I do in my community, and they will tell you they cannot get labourers onsite. Why would you be a labourer on site for $80,000 a year when you can earn a lot more as an apprentice on a Big Build site? And it is not just labour, it is the price of things like concrete and other materials that are making it much more expensive to build homes for people. It has also had an impact on the domestic construction industry in terms of some of the builder collapses that we have seen that have made building homes uneconomical and led to some really poor outcomes and exposed some really poor regulation from this government.

This government is clearly broke, and Victorians are paying the price. And now we have this bill, a flawed piece of legislation that gives the government more power to approve developments in SRL precincts without proper consultation. The Municipal Association of Victoria has raised concerns about the rushed timelines for approvals and the lack of transparency. The government is sidelining local voices and making it harder for people to have a say in the future of their own communities.

I talked last week in Parliament about the residents of Brunswick, who are living in Labor’s ideal of high-density development in the inner city, close to train lines, and who are going to have to have their amenity and homes rendered somewhat unlivable due to the government’s flawed plans to amalgamate stations, which is going to end up like Keon Park train station where you have a sky rail train station right outside your balcony. A lot of residents have contacted me. I am sure they have contacted those opposite as well, but that is leading to a really poor outcome.

But the government all of a sudden wants to build priority precincts. Let us not forget what Richard Wynne did in Brunswick, what Mr Erdogan did in Brunswick as a councillor. They helped introduce height limits in Brunswick – Mr McIntosh mentioned my maiden speech – an area which, as I said then, is flush with public transport, good access to local schools, health care and amenity. The Labor Party spent a long time advocating against any development there, and they call us the blockers. The reality is you have been in government for 10 years – you caused the housing crisis. You literally passed the Planning and Environment Amendment (Recognising Objectors) Bill 2015, which gave VCAT more weight to consider community objections. You want to call us the blockers. You have enabled blockers. You have enabled community members to have a greater say over developments in their community.

You have got the Carnegie activity centre now. Let us not forget the member for Oakleigh blocked our Carnegie activity zone – a very similar activity zone to the government’s – and then implemented two-storey height limits. If you want to look at the practical reality of who has blocked more homes, it is the Labor government. They talk about the status quo not being an option. They are the status quo. They have created the status quo. How would you be if you were the member for Oakleigh, having to go out to the community and say, ‘Oh, sorry, I blocked that previous activity zone. Here’s pretty much the same thing’. I mean, seriously, how pathetic, after calling my good friend and colleague Matthew Guy all sorts of names. I am pretty sure he is proud to be called Mr Skyscraper, because it was Labor that blocked our plans and capped our plans for the downtown CBD, where we can actually build a lot more homes, that blocked plans for places like Brunswick and the Preston activity zone. That was a good plan, Plan Melbourne, and Richard Wynne and the Labor Party in the northern suburbs killed that off. But now we have a Preston activity centre – what do you know? Really, you have prevented development in your own communities for political purposes, and now you are reinventing it and claiming you are the heroes of the housing crisis. Seriously, you have created the housing crisis – actually created the housing crisis.

I want to quickly talk about my amendments, and I am happy for those amendments to be circulated.

Amendments circulated pursuant to standing orders.

Evan MULHOLLAND: I will just talk through them. Amendment 1 is to proposed section 165Q of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009, which gives a project authority the ability to enter, occupy and use land within the project area for the approved project if the project authority intends to compulsorily acquire at least one part of the land on which the permanent infrastructure can be constructed and if the project authority is satisfied that it is not reasonably practicable to precisely identify the area of land on which the permanent infrastructure will be constructed before the works for the construction of the permanent infrastructure are commenced. We are seeking to amend proposed section 165Q to increase the mandatory notice period from 30 to 90 days to give landowners greater certainty – I know businesses, particularly in Box Hill and Glen Waverley, have been given no certainty at the moment. We are also seeking to amend proposed section 201QB in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to give VCAT appeal rights to persons and entities impacted by a precinct project declaration. VCAT will be given the ability to modify, set aside or confirm the declaration.

With amendments 3 and 4 we are seeking to amend proposed section 201QD in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to mandate the notification of landowners, land occupiers, council, road authorities and infrastructure managers prior to the declaration of a precinct project. Under our amendments a precinct project declaration will not legally take effect unless these entities have been notified and been given a mandatory 30-day period in which to make submissions to the Premier regarding the project declaration and the Premier publishes a response to the body of the submissions received. It is creating clear appeal rights for communities.

Proposed section 201QO in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 would allow the Secretary of the Department of Transport and Planning to authorise persons to enter private land to carry out surveys prior to the precinct declaration. We are seeking to increase the notice period required to be given to landowners from seven to 14 days. This is a minor amendment, but it will minimise disruption and give landowners greater flexibility with their land and affairs accordingly.

We know how ridiculous the Suburban Rail Loop is, and we know how ridiculous Labor’s so-called housing reforms are due to the map of their precincts and activity centres. I took great interest in the map because it prescribes Werribee as an SRL precinct. It has got Werribee as an SRL precinct, right? The SRL will not get to Werribee until about 2080. I do not know about any of you, but I am probably going to be long in the ground by then, and so will most people in this chamber. But the government is boasting about how much housing is going to go in the Werribee SRL precinct in 2080. I mean, seriously. Maybe people receiving their free kinder packs from this government might get to see the Werribee –

Members interjecting.

Evan MULHOLLAND: I got one the other day – might get to see the Werribee activity centre precinct. I was talking about it before, and I will mention it again: it is important to give notice and certainty to businesses. I know Mr Welch speaks to many businesses, which he will talk about, in Glen Waverley and Box Hill. The government keeps changing the timeframes and the government keeps changing the rules. There is no certainty. They are killing these businesses.

This government’s housing policy is a disgrace. It is clear the Victorian community do not like it. It is clear the Premier is the runner-up Premier, definitely not the preferred Premier, and this bill should be opposed.

John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (10:59): This bill is another step that this government is taking to deliver a better Victoria. This bill will deliver important planning and development reforms to improve the process of development happening across Victoria. The Allan Labor government is building a record amount of infrastructure across the state, all of which will significantly improve the lives of everyday Victorians. This bill is being introduced to facilitate that delivery. It makes reforms to several areas of transport and planning legislation to collectively improve planning processes. The bill will do this by amending the following acts: the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009, the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Road Management Act 2004, the Suburban Rail Loop Act 2021 and the Transport Integration Act 2010.

Before getting into the finer points I would just like to reiterate how valuable and beneficial doing this will be. Public transport is an essential service to many Victorians for work and study. Victorians use public transport every day – approximately 2 million Victorians. Due to this it is vital that Public Transport Victoria be operating at an exemplar level. It is simple: Victorians deserve better. This government has always known this and has worked tirelessly to deliver an improved public transport network: the Metro Tunnel, the Suburban Rail Loop South and East, West Gate Tunnel, the North East Link. All these projects will deliver meaningful changes to the daily commute in Melbourne. Those opposite have fought us tooth and nail the whole way because they do not actually care about the community. Their opposition is proof that they would rather do some grandstanding than deliver for the community, and it is disappointing to see this apathy and pessimism towards delivering a better Victoria, but I guess without any vision for Victoria they must rely on that pessimism.

Whilst this bill is predominantly concerned with transport infrastructure, it does deal with facilitating the development of priority precincts across metropolitan Melbourne. The consideration of priority precincts means that all transport improvement projects will not just improve what it is like to use the Public Transport Victoria network but will also improve the community and the way of life in these suburbs and precincts. These precincts include Arden, Docklands and Fishermans Bend – both of which are in my electorate of Southern Metro – Footscray, East Werribee, Parkville and Sunshine. Firstly, these precincts are set to deliver more housing for Victorians. This will be quality housing close to shops, close to transport and walkable – quality living in quality areas.

Not only is this incredibly beneficial to the lives of countless Victorians, but it is also likely going to be vital in the coming years. It is a simple fact: Melbourne and Victoria are growing. Victoria has been experiencing a pretty steady population increase for some time. We need to account for this, and luckily we are with projects like priority precincts. The priority precincts are an effective solution to population growth and growing housing pressure that does not simply plant housing for the hope and hope for the best. This government is ensuring the housing we deliver is top-quality housing. Victorians should not have to settle for housing that is far from where they work and where they study. They deserve to have access to housing that is convenient to them and their routines. This is achieved through the improvement of transport infrastructure and increase in housing supply. The knock-on effects of this will be vital for the state as we continue to tackle population growth in the coming decades. This bill addresses the delivery of these precincts and other major transport projects through multiple means. These measures deal with the improvement of many aspects of major transport project delivery, from the declaration to the maintenance of said projects once they are delivered. This is true of the priority precincts and every other major transport project currently underway and in the future.

The bulk of this bill is to introduce planning reforms that will significantly cut down the time and cost of major transport projects as well as streamlining and improving other planning processes in Victoria. Victoria needs these projects delivered as soon as possible to enjoy the benefits that they offer sooner rather than later, and it is what they deserve. This bill seeks to modernise planning powers to be better suited for precinct projects and other major transport projects. We found this to be the best course of action when completing other major transport projects – legislation and processes customised to the specific needs and issues that the projects will face. This will improve efficiency by avoiding potential obstacles; improved efficiency means less vulnerability to cost delays. These are all important to the completion of these projects and important to the Victorians whose lives they will vastly improve.

Another important aspect of this bill is the improvement of community asset ownership. This goes back to what I was saying when I was covering the housing benefits and the priority precincts offer. This, however, extends beyond housing and beyond the precincts. These transport projects and priority precincts will deliver countless assets to the communities that are already benefiting from increased housing and transport assets – assets like parks and other recreational sites that are vital to quality of life, bridges and footpaths that provide access to local areas and so on. These assets are for the community, and it would only be right if the community had recognised ownership over them. At this stage there are legal mechanisms to account for the transfer of freehold land to councils. However, the mechanisms for transferring Crown land are currently absent from Victoria’s planning legislation. This bill resolves the issue by introducing those much-needed mechanisms.

How exactly does this bill outline the delivery of quicker and cheaper project delivery? Let me walk through the ins and outs of this great bill and just how we expect it to deliver our precinct projects to Victorians. Firstly, the bill will make several amendments to the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009. The Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 does what it says: an act to outline the proceedings of major transport projects. It is a Brumby-era piece of legislation that has proven useful to delivering transport infrastructure, yet more proof that Labor governments are the only governments that deliver on the public transport front. This act thoroughly outlines the procedure of major transport projects in Victoria from declaration protocol to project delivery. This important tool for the state government has proven moderately useful for transport projects. However, it is necessary that certain processes be improved for efficacy and costs. This bill will improve the efficacy of several functions outlined in major transport projects facilitation. In regard to the project declarations, the bill makes quite significant amendments to the protocol for declarations of major works. Declarations require the Premier to outline several aspects of the projects ahead of the commencement. Much of this is outlined in the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act and the Planning and Environment Act, which is also being amended and which I will also speak to.

In a declaration the Premier would declare a project minister and project proponent, and it is also required that the declaration be published in the Government Gazette. This bill will allow for the Premier to declare multiple related projects at one time as a program of works. To be clear, many of these projects will remain individual projects, but time will be saved in the group declarations. This is also appropriate given how the Allan Labor government often delivers projects that complement each other. Take, for example, the incredibly successful level crossing removal program and how it has impacted areas also affected by the Suburban Rail Loop. Further alterations to the declaration of transport projects would address appointments of the relevant project minister and project authority. This will replace sections 14 and 15 of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act with a streamlined version of a similar process. Whilst currently section 15 provides that the Premier is responsible for that project proponent, the bill will amend this and allow for this responsibility to be shared with the appointed project minister. In this case – the Premier deciding not to manage this – section 15 will be removed and section 14 will be extended to include these provisions I have just described.

To further promote efficiency of major transport projects this bill makes adjustments to the delegation process and declared projects in section 15A(2) of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act. The phrase ‘specified declared project’ would then be followed by the phrase ‘or part of a declared project’. This is to expand the flexibility of the assigned project minister’s delegation powers, which in turn allows for faster project delivery.

This bill also gives the Premier powers to expand the scope of the declared project. This measure is being introduced in recognition of the nature of the progressive planning. Allowing for changes to the scope of the declared project would allow for flexibility in the process of project delivery. This in turn will improve the efficiency of the declared project. This is important, especially when considering the nature of the progressive development of precinct projects.

There is also a new subsection in this part of the bill addressing certain miscellaneous sections of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 that require amendment and reform. This subsection is where you will find the amendments that introduce legal mechanisms for the transfer of community assets on Crown land, as mentioned earlier in my contribution. The bill makes amendments to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 also in relation to such areas as declaration. These amendments would effect similar changes to the amendments that will be applied to the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act. First, this part of the bill allows the Premier to make declarations on works, programs or individual works that will fall under the precinct project. In this declaration the Premier will describe the land relevant to the precinct project. The Planning and Environment Act will also be amended to give the Secretary of the Department of Transport and Planning certain powers for an efficient and thorough preparation ahead of the precincts project work’s commencement. This will allow for a more timely project delivery due to the possibility of early investigations into land and other early preparation measures.

Also amended by the bill will be the Road Management Act 2004. The Road Management Act 2004, at the time of its commencement 20 years ago, was a major overhaul of how the oversight of the state roads was managed. This bill seeks to introduce section 14A, which will give project authorities designated by the department of transport the power to declare a road classification within an applicable project area. This will allow for a smoother, quicker and ultimately cheaper build, meaning Victorians get local workers down and accessible quicker.

The next act to be amended by this bill is the Transport Integration Act 2010. The Transport Integration Act is another Brumby-era act that has been quite beneficial to Victorians since its implementation. This act essentially threw transport authorities within Victoria into the 21st century and was essential in laying the foundation for projects that would eventually evolve into the Metro Tunnel and Suburban Rail Loop. It is an act for a vision of a better transport system in Victoria and has had a lasting impact on the state. Now it is time to modernise the act to ensure that the government can continue to use it to deliver an improved public transport system. The bill specifically seeks to achieve this by amending section 34, which outlines the roles and powers of the Secretary of the Department of Transport and Planning. It outlines how the secretary may, on behalf of the Crown, perform several actions relating to the acquisitions or use of land, development of land, entry of contract and more. To boost the efficiency of the act, this bill would add to section 34 a sixth subsection that reads:

In addition, nothing in this section limits the powers the Secretary may exercise on behalf of the Crown.

This is to specify that the secretary has the same powers they hold for major transport projects when dealing with priority precincts, such as the ability to enter contracts on the Crown’s behalf. This clarification will allow for a cheaper, more effective development process as we go forward in building a better Melbourne and Victoria.

The final act to be updated by this bill will be the Suburban Rail Loop Act 2021. I believe we are all aware of the function and the purpose of the Suburban Rail Loop Act, and I will save the summary. This bill adds to the SRL act the definition of an applicable project area. The bill also outlines what the specific completion process for the Suburban Rail Loop project looks like. This is important as we come closer to the expected completion years of several sections of the SRL. I would like to add that I am very excited to see the benefits that my community will enjoy from the SRL East, given our proximity to the project’s area. This bill will help bring those projects’ completion dates closer. This is very important for the community, and the Allan Labor government is important for the community. They deserve better – better public transport, as this bill addresses, better housing opportunities, better lives. That is what this bill really delivers for Victoria. The Allan Labor government’s public transport offers a better, more efficient way of living and travelling around the city.

To summarise my contribution, this bill is another important piece of legislation that will deliver for everyday Victorians. It is imperative that we have a good public transport system, and that requires the work. The works and builds require appropriate legislation to support the development process. It is in the interest of Victorian people that government agencies and departments be thoroughly equipped to deliver major transport projects. I commend the bill to the house and urge my colleagues in this chamber to join me in voting in support of it.

Gaelle BROAD (Northern Victoria) (11:14): I guess I am pleased to speak about the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024, which amends several existing acts to grant the ministers and authorities delivering precincts and infrastructure programs greater power. I will say that this Labor state government love to go after further power. The only problem is they seem to abuse it. There are a couple of main concerns that we have with this bill. Project authorities and project ministers will be given intrusive project delivery powers across swathes of Melbourne as the government has not specified exactly where and how it intends to declare precinct projects, so no community is safe. That is a very major concern, and it is something that we are seeing right across Victoria, where the opinions and needs of local communities are being overridden. A second key area of concern is the forced densification. As the Allan Labor government’s proposed activity centres and priority precincts have reduced planning controls, this legislation may give the Premier and the project ministers and authorities almost unfettered discretion to approve private residential and commercial high-rises in project areas.

When you consider the Suburban Rail Loop, I know that the Premier has indicated, ‘Look, it’s gone to two elections. We took it to 2018. We’ve taken it again in 2022’ – very different times. That was before COVID. We have had a lot happen since then, and we are in a very different situation now. We know at the time there was very little information about it or very little detail, and it is still very hard to find out the details of this project. There has been a very poor case study. It was not taken through the proper channels or authorities such as Infrastructure Australia – a project of this size, this scale and this magnitude. It has been described as generational infrastructure in one project. It is a huge amount of funding. It has been said to be costing in excess of $200 billion. So to not go through the proper procedures for a project of this scale is extraordinary.

It has been described as a gravy train, and I think that is very appropriate, because when you look at some of the information that has just come out recently, in the 2023–24 financial year the Suburban Rail Loop Authority expenses were nearly $58 million. There are 102 executives and subexecutives that are on average incomes of $322,000 a year. That is extraordinary. We know that the Commonwealth government have indicated – $2.2 billion they put towards the project – they are certainly not keen to give any further funds until they see further background as to the merits of the project. To this point we are not aware of a single cent from the Commonwealth actually being given to the state. The big question is: where are the funds coming from to pay for this project? It is huge.

When you consider our state debt at the moment, we are currently already the highest of any state in Australia as far as state debt goes. We are heading towards $188 billion within a few years, and we are going to be paying interest every single day – $26 million. That is over $1 million every hour just on the interest payments, and that is certainly not adding a project of this scale to that. So it is extraordinary that the Premier has gone ahead and signed contracts to put a noose around our neck, and not just our neck but that of future generations as well.

Let us consider Labor’s track record – if I can say track record – when you look at the railway line in Bendigo, which I have used on a reasonably regular basis. I do enjoy coming down to Parliament on the train sometimes. I will say it is very disappointing that in 2006 under Peter Batchelor, who was the transport minister at the time, the second track was removed, and that is still causing issues today. I know that I have been on the train recently, and unfortunately the train in front broke down, but of course we could not pass it, so I had to take the train back to Melbourne before I could go back to Bendigo. Again recently I caught an express train. I was not able to go express because we were stuck behind another train in front that was stopping at all stations. What is more, the temperature outside was 21 degrees. You think that is not that hot, but we were on the extreme weather conditions timetable, so we had to go very slowly because it was looking at nearly being 30 degrees that day in Melbourne. That is a concern, when our regional railway lines cannot cope with weather getting hot.

These are some of the issues, and I know there are many when I speak to people across Northern Victoria. We know in some areas there is no public transport at all. I have had parents contact me; they travel a thousand kilometres in a week to give their kids opportunities to go places, and they are the ones driving them around. I have had a constituent recently raise a petition in Strathfieldsaye, not far from Bendigo at all, just minutes away, and yet there is only a bus service on a Sunday, not the other days of the week – and this is a pretty key suburb of Bendigo. Then we have had the same at Marong: a lack of bus services. I know in Ripon the Labor member there has been calling for increased bus services. So we know right across regional Victoria we are lacking the public transport needed, not just on our trains but in our bus networks as well, and yet here we have a government that remains focused on big projects in Melbourne, big-city projects. They seem to be forgetting what is happening in the rest of our state.

When you look at the amount of money that is going into this project you think, ‘Okay, well, if we’re spending that much on this project, maybe things are going really well in other areas that the state government looks at.’ So let us look at the police. No, they are on strike at the minute. There are huge numbers of vacancies with the police; there are issues there. We look at health. Is everything going well in our hospitals? Certainly not. There are massive ambulance ramping issues happening with hospitals, and the health system is under pressure at all times as well. Consider housing. There are big issues there again: massive waitlists, 60,000 people on the waitlist for social housing, and we have a huge need I know in the Bendigo area. Housing developments certainly happen very, very slowly, and they are not keeping pace with the growth that we are seeing in regional areas. More generally we know that this government has not been allocating a fair share of funding to regional Victoria, because we do have 25 per cent of the population but for new infrastructure the amount allocated under the state budgets has been more like up to 13 per cent.

We are a long way off being a state or a government that is governing for the whole of the state. It seems to be focused time and time again on Melbourne. When the Premier says, ‘Well, we’ve promised it at a couple of elections,’ I say that certainly did not stop them with the Commonwealth Games. They promised that before the election and then pulled the rug out from under our feet in regional Victoria, and I know that has had a ripple effect for the way we are considered on a world stage when it comes to managing events.

Then we have seen the same with public forests recently. The Premier said, ‘No, we’ll not be putting a padlock on that.’ But then we have seen Mount Arapiles, and we have rock climbers out the front today who have come to Parliament, who are so frustrated at this government’s decision to lock up those routes. It is a world-class tourism destination that this government wants to see locked up.

So it is a big concern that this bill is yet another power grab by the state government. I will say we are 100 weeks away from the next state election in November 2026, and it cannot come soon enough. Certainly the Nationals are opposing this bill.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (11:23): I rise to speak in support of the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024, a bill that reflects the Allan Labor government’s unwavering commitment to delivering transformative infrastructure, the infrastructure needed to support Victoria’s future. The purpose of this bill is clear: it introduces a series of technical amendments to modernise and strengthen Victoria’s capacity to deliver major transport projects and priority precinct developments. Through these changes the government aims to streamline project delivery processes, reduce costs and minimise risks, ultimately facilitating faster and more efficient development of critical infrastructure across the state.

The Allan Labor government has an impressive track record when it comes to delivering major infrastructure projects, and this bill builds upon that foundation. Our investments have been vital to the safety, accessibility and growth of Victoria’s transport infrastructure. It is worth noting that with over $100 billion invested in Victoria’s Big Build program we have certainly enhanced connectivity, fostered economic growth and improved the quality of life of millions of Victorians. One of the fundamental goals of the bill before us today is to improve delivery of transport projects and priority precincts. The bill amends the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 (MTPFA) to expand the scope of delivery powers, allowing these powers to be used for priority precincts. This change is crucial because it means priority projects such as housing developments, health facilities, education hubs and the like can be developed alongside transport infrastructure, creating really integrated communities that are well connected and sustainable.

I also note with great interest that the bill enhances the government’s ability to transfer community assets built on Crown land to local councils or other public agencies. As we develop transport projects it is common for community assets – I am thinking about parks, lighting and even recreational facilities – to be included in that. Transferring these assets to local councils ensures that they are managed and maintained by the most appropriate bodies, supporting their continued use and enjoyment by the public.

An essential component of this bill is the flexibility it provides in terms of land acquisition. Under current arrangements when relocating utilities for a project the project authority is often required to acquire more land than necessary. This bill allows project authorities to undertake preparatory work in designated project areas before finalising land acquisition. The adjustment will save costs, reduce red tape and provide clarity to landowners, who will receive full compensation for any impact. These changes prioritise efficient use of land and resources while ensuring that owners are treated fairly.

This bill also introduces a provision that allows the Premier to declare a program of works for related projects, consolidating them into a single delivery stream. This change allows for cohesive large-scale project management which saves time, reduces administrative burden and enhances project outcomes. An example of this would be declaring all level crossing removals along a single rail line as one project rather than handling each removal separately. This is a really practical and time-saving approach that enables faster and more effective project delivery. The bill also permits the addition of further scope to projects after their initial approval. This flexibility is necessary because in many instances additional elements like car parks or public facilities become apparent as a project progresses, and including this scope within an already approved project will minimise disruptions and enhance the overall project outcome. This benefits all Victorians by ensuring that productivity remains unhindered.

Furthermore, the bill allows project authorities to extinguish easements in situations where they hinder project completion. The provisions in the bill will prevent projects from getting bogged down in some unnecessary legal hurdles, enabling timely and cost-effective delivery. An example in the Northern Metropolitan Region I wanted to highlight for the chamber, if I can, is the Preston level crossing removal project, one that I know quite well, where an easement had to be extinguished for the project’s flood mitigation works to proceed. With this bill similar projects can move forward smoothly. We have delivered so many major projects, I have got to tell you, that we are getting really good at this and know how we can improve productivity as we learn from the many infrastructure projects that have been delivered by this Allan Labor government right across the state.

The TIPLA bill – that is the acronym for the bill that we are discussing right now – also makes important updates to road management powers. Under the current system every temporary road closure relating to project construction must be published in the Government Gazette. This approach is really outdated, inefficient and inaccessible to so many Victorians who need timely updates on road closures. What we are doing in the proposal before us is to move notifications to the Department of Transport and Planning’s website, and this bill will enable that to be much more efficient and accessible to all road users right across the state.

The bill also streamlines the classification of roads in project areas, allowing project authorities to declare and classify roads as freeways, arterial roads or municipal roads as needed. This change will improve consistency and efficiency in road management for transport projects, ensuring smoother transitions for new infrastructure into existing networks. The TIPLA bill supports the Allan Labor government’s goal of creating priority precincts to meet Victoria’s growing housing and infrastructure needs. Our state is projected to reach a population of 10 million by the 2050s, and these priority precincts are really vital to accommodating that growth.

By streamlining the development of precincts and areas like Fishermans Bend we can expedite the creation of housing, education, employment, health care and all the associated opportunities where they are needed most. The bill empowers the Premier to declare priority precincts, which will then benefit from the same delivery powers under the MTPFA, which I discussed earlier, that have enabled the success of major transport projects right across the state. I further emphasise that this includes land assembly, infrastructure coordination and faster access to delivery tools, which will reduce the time, cost and complexity associated with large-scale precinct development.

The Allan Labor government, as I have said and will continue to say, has a proven track record in delivering transformative infrastructure projects for Victorians, and the ones that come to mind are certainly the level crossing removals, the suburban road upgrades, the regional rail revival and, excitingly for me in the Northern Metropolitan Region, the Metro Tunnel and the West Gate Tunnel. When opened, they will not only reduce travel times but also have created thousands of jobs and improved safety on our roads. These projects have refined Victoria’s public transport landscape as well and will see people getting home sooner and safer.

With over 100 major transport projects completed or underway, our Big Build program represents a $100 billion investment in Victoria’s future. These initiatives are pivotal to ensuring that all Victorians, regardless of where they live, have access to efficient, reliable and safe transport options. By expanding and enhancing our public transport network, we are reducing congestion, supporting sustainable growth and laying the groundwork for a greener, more livable state.

Our infrastructure investments go beyond improving transport. They are creating jobs, stimulating economic activity and supporting local communities. The Big Build program has also provided employment for a staggering number of Victorians – in fact over 17,000 Victorians – and has additionally supported 38,000 indirect jobs throughout the supply chain. These jobs span construction, engineering, administration and more. I will also take a moment to acknowledge the apprentices that are working on these projects right across the state. I have had the good fortune of meeting a range of apprentices right across the state. Many of these projects have some enthusiastic apprentices learning on the job and committing themselves to a future here in Victoria, building the homes, transport and communities that we need. Apprentices, can I just give you a big vote of thanks for all that you do. Of course so many of those apprentices are supported by free TAFE, which I could go on for a long time about. I have to say at its peak the Big Build is estimated to support 50,000 jobs across the state, and this investment in our workforce really is critical to building a strong, resilient economy that benefits absolutely everyone. It is clear that the Allan Labor government’s commitment to infrastructure is not just about projects but also about creating a more prosperous future for our state.

Look, I could go on about the views of those opposite, but I know that there are others that will want to make a contribution on that. Can I just say this bill reflects the Allan Labor government’s vision for a connected, thriving Victoria. Through transport infrastructure projects that are designed to integrate with the development of housing, health care and education precincts, we are creating well-rounded communities that support the diverse needs of our growing population. Through the bill before us today we are expanding our capacity to deliver these essential projects with greater efficiency, reduced costs and of course less red tape. With this bill we are supporting today’s infrastructure needs but planning for the future. Our transport investments are strategically positioned to serve the areas that will see the highest growth – and that is really important to know – ensuring that Victorians in the outer suburbs and regional areas have the same access to high-quality public transport as those in metropolitan Melbourne. I spoke only yesterday about the incredible enthusiasm for fairer fares. I know that investment in high-quality public transport in regional Victoria is something that is very much firmly in the minds of regional Victorians but also city folk that have loved ones and places right across the state that they want to see and experience and enjoy.

I will say that this bill before us, the TIPLA bill, represents a pivotal step in our infrastructure journey. It is about modernising and extending our delivery powers. We are enhancing our ability to meet the challenges of a growing population and changing economic landscape. You see, this bill empowers us to deliver the transport infrastructure and precinct projects that Victorians need, all while supporting jobs, reducing red tape and ensuring efficient use of our resources. The Allan Labor government is committed to building a Victoria that is not only well connected but also inclusive and sustainable. We are investing in infrastructure that will shape our state for generations to come, creating opportunities, as I said, and supporting communities throughout Australia.

Can I also take the opportunity to put on the record my entire enthusiasm and excitement about the Metro Tunnel, which is so, so very close and will be enjoyed by millions of not only Victorians each and every day but folks from right around. I know that there are a bunch of world-class researchers that right now are looking to take up some research projects in our world-class medical research precinct. They are in Parkville, and when the tunnel opens they will likely be enjoying it too. A big shout-out to our medical research institutes in Parkville. Thank you for all that you are doing to tackle some of the biggest challenges of our times.

This bill really is a testament to our government’s dedication to delivering on its promises and investing in the future of our great state. With that I will finish my remarks by commending the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 to the house.

Richard WELCH (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (11:38): I am pleased to rise and speak on the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024, which I guess could be called the ‘Stalinist Five-year Plan Bill’ in reality. It would be no surprise to anyone here that I do not support this bill. I am glad we are voting against it. I think we are putting up a number of amendments, but I do not think any number of amendments can repair this bill.

These activity precincts and the Suburban Rail Loop (SRL) are quintessentially bad urban planning. They are what you do when 10 years of housing plans and transport plans have failed you and you have completely run out of ideas and run out of money – you simply throw mud against the wall and hope some of it sticks, hope some of it forms a strategy. This is basically throwing the complete kitchen sink in haste at the community to create the appearance that you are doing something. There is absolutely no deep reflection, no strategy, that goes along with it. It is policy by press release, hoping that there is enough of a bump in the media for a couple of news cycles before you put out another press release. If you look how the activity centre and precinct information has been drip-fed out over the last 12 months, that is exactly what it is. It is a series of press releases. None of them have gained traction. In fact even this last one, as big and all-encompassing as this is, has not gained traction in the minds of the community, because it does not deliver what the community want or need. I think the problem that those opposite have – and I hope they take this to heart – is that Victoria no longer believes them. You can say anything you want from this point going forward. You can put any press release you like out with any large-scale hubristic claims – no-one believes you anymore. You have got no credibility. This is just another example of where you have gone for the headline, and the substance brings you undone every time.

Why I am so pleased to stand and oppose this bill is because we are fighting on a number of fronts here. First of all, we are fighting for the community, especially my community in the North-East Metro, who are bearing the brunt of the Suburban Rail Loop. We are fighting for that community because they do not want this project. They were sold, ‘You’ll get a new train station – how great,’ and that went to two elections. But it was a train station – none of the peripherals about high-rises, densification, lack of additional social infrastructure. None of that was on the table. None of the considerations like ‘You’re going to lose 80 per cent of your open space per citizen’ were on the table when these things came out. The people who live in these areas are the last consideration of this government and the last consideration of this plan. It is not for them.

In the City of Whitehorse there are currently 74,000 residences, and under this plan and under the mandates of the government we are supposed to add 79,000 more in the same footprint. And somehow that is not going to affect quality of life. Somehow that is not going to overstretch the infrastructure that is there in terms of open space, in terms of health services, in terms of schools and education, in terms of primary care et cetera. It is a fantasy full of assertions not backed up in fact. You can assert that they are quality homes close to work and where you live – that is just purely an assertion. There is no reality to it; it is just a headline that you have chased.

So this is a fight for my community, who do not want this, who do not see this as a solution and who do not want their children and grandchildren growing up in flats without a proper home. They do not want their children having to bear the intergenerational burden of debt. This is not for that community; this is for you to have a headline and that is all it is. But you know what? Unfortunately for you, this will all unravel over time. Time is on our side, not yours. This will all unravel, like all of your other policies. As soon as you scratch the surface of it you will see what a fantasy this really is. Whether it is at an urban planning level or an economic level or a social level, it is a fantasy project.

This is also, in opposing this bill, a fight for due process. When the extraordinary powers were granted to empower the SRL authority to do what it needed to do in the SRL precincts, unprecedented powers were given to the government. I guess people thought it was some sort of exception. It is a bit like when they say, ‘Beware of when a government puts in emergency powers, because they will never get repealed.’ These powers were given and the idea was that this might have been some sort of special case, but what we have seen is that it has become the template for everywhere. It does not even need a debt-consuming leviathan project like the Suburban Rail Loop to justify it. Now at the whim of a minister you can declare an activity centre. You do not need to consult anyone. In your own words, and I will quote the Minister for Planning herself:

Are they afraid of people expressing a different view to their own? Why are they so afraid of objectors? These are local residents from our communities who love where they live and work and who just want to be heard.

Well, not anymore under this. Then we have another quote:

As we know, public participation is an important part of the process of making better planning decisions. It means decisions are based on more fulsome information – fulsome because it is the community that provides that information and it is the community that best knows the local areas and local issues.

Not anymore.

Members interjecting.

Richard WELCH: No, I cannot hear you. I am speaking, so be quiet. There is another quote from the Attorney-General:

It is time to let the community talk in full voice and more importantly to ensure that community members are heard and listened to and that their views are taken seriously and into account on matters that will affect them.

That was your view three, four or five years ago but clearly not now, because the minister can, at a whim, impose an activity centre. And it is not just activity centre; it also includes any sort of parallel infrastructure. None of these things are defined. There is no objective criteria by which this activity centre can be declared. There is nothing. There is no benchmark it has to meet; is simply their opinion or their view. There is no requirement for consultation. You are outlawing it. Live with your own words. Own your own words. Eat your own meal. This is your doing. On one hand you are saying the community must be consulted, but what you are putting in law is that they do not need to be any longer. So we are fighting for due process. Due process also includes the fact that maybe you get things through Infrastructure Australia before you start signing contracts. Due process means that your consultation is not where communities are consultold – that you actually consult with communities. Due process means that your procurement means you do not have an automatic 20 per cent blowout on every project. That is what due process is. This simply removes all the due process.

We are also fighting for good urban planning, and this is the opposite of good urban planning. Melbourne has been historically a low-density city, and it has been a key to the success of Melbourne. A low-density city means we have high quality of life, the ability for communities to integrate and high amounts of equality and equity across communities, because we all have our own patch of land and homes. Urban planning says you do not bring 120,000 more people to a municipality with no plan for extra schools, no plan for sewerage and electricity upgrades, no plans for road upgrades, no plans for additional school capacity et cetera. This is bad urban planning, and it is obvious why: because you have done it in such a rush. The cupboard is bare. You have no ideas. ‘Quickly, let’s rush over to this side of the boat. We’re going to do activity centres.’ It is also bad urban planning because whilst the activity centre concept has merit and has precedent around it, that is only in places where it improves the quality of life or has economic uplift. You are not improving the quality of life of people in Box Hill. You are not improving the quality of life for people in Burwood or Glen Waverley or Blackburn. It does not work.

Members interjecting.

Richard WELCH: If you want to paraphrase me and selectively quote me, that is fine. That is what you would do. Let us take up this point. There are areas that could do with –

Ryan Batchelor interjected.

Richard WELCH: How about Casey? How about Narre Warren? How about Cranbourne? They want activity centres. They are not getting any. How about the northern suburbs, where the infrastructure is needed, where an activity centre would actually bring the combination of quality of life and economic development? You are superimposing this on an established suburb.

This is also a fight for Victoria’s economy. The greatest challenge of course here, particularly in the SRL areas, is that none of this is funded. It is not funded because the federal government does not believe in what you are doing – you have got a $10 billion shortfall there – and you have this vague concept of value capture, and you have got another $10 billion shortfall there. The more that you impose land tax to fund it, the more economically unviable the activity centres themselves become, because people cannot make a margin in what you are doing. You are completely ignoring economic fundamentals in that we are going from a famine to a flood. Your inability to provide housing stock has created a famine. Part of that has been driven by the fact that you have pushed prices up with land tax and part of it is because you have drawn significant amounts of the workforce and capacity into the Big Build projects. But now you are going from that famine to a glut. You are going to allow unfettered development across the city at a scale where what it will mean is that we will have projects that will not get up, there will be oversupply and there will be half-finished projects that will have to be abandoned. We will head towards a recession as a result of this. We will have housing at a higher price but lower quality and with lower living standards.

Again, I am pleased that we are opposing this bill. Victorians do not want this bill. Victorians do not want this style of urban planning. It is only because you have no imagination, no vision and no plan for the future beyond the next press release that you are approaching it this way. I will conclude there.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (11:51): I am pleased to rise to speak on the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024, which deals with a range of matters seeking to reduce unnecessary costs and time in the development of major transport projects, commonsense changes that will help ensure the smoother delivery of key transport infrastructure projects here in Victoria.

This bill is a bill for those who want to build. That is why the government supports it, because we want to build. It is no wonder that those opposite oppose it, because they do not want to build things, they want to block things. What this legislation is seeking to do is to enhance the capacity of the transport and planning systems to get our major infrastructure projects delivered. To the extent that the bill will facilitate that, it should be absolutely welcomed and absolutely supported. It should be opposed if people are opposed to delivering transport infrastructure, if they are opposed to delivering more places for people to live, if they are opposed to finding solutions to the number one crisis facing Victorians, which is the housing crisis. They keep telling us that they want more homes, but then they keep opposing plans to build them. They are absolutely opposed to that.

This legislation will amend the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009, the Transport Integration Act 2010, the Suburban Rail Loop Act 2021 and the Road Management Act 2004. It will facilitate the construction of essential infrastructure. By building new infrastructure we can create places that can accommodate more people who want to live there, because there is then the capacity for them to travel into the city or to connect by rail infrastructure to Australia’s largest university, to connect to jobs precincts, to connect to education hubs and to connect people to their communities, which is exactly what our transport infrastructure agenda will do.

Mr Welch in his contribution I suppose let the cat out of the bag a little bit on what the opposition’s preferred approach to both transport infrastructure planning and housing policy is. On transport infrastructure, they are opposed to building transport infrastructure, they are opposed to the investments that are being made in rail, they are opposed to the delivery of improvements to our infrastructure, particularly our rail network, that will mean that we can get new services, more frequent services and less dangerous conditions and provide people with real and tangible savings in the time that they spend commuting so that they have more time to spend with the people that they love.

The Liberals are opposed to that. What they want to do instead is to somehow create more housing in other places. Mr Welch really let the cat out of the bag when, after railing against the government’s plans for activity centres and the concept of providing a structured planning process that will deliver more housing close to existing infrastructure, he made quite an impassioned opposition and quite a derisive opposition to the concept of people who want to or do live in apartment buildings. I thought it was quite remarkable for a member of this place to be so condescending about those who choose to live in apartment buildings. He basically said that those who live in apartment buildings are second-class citizens. That is not something that I agree with, and I am sure, President, it is not something that you agree with either. But he said the activity centre concept actually had merits. On the one hand, he was criticising our plans for activity centres to build more housing around existing infrastructure – close to jobs and close to schools, providing more connectivity – and on the other hand, he was actually saying it is a good idea. He was actually saying it is a good idea to have activity centres – in his words, ‘The activity centre concept has merit.’

That is exactly why the Labor government – on the activity centres, for example – since the housing statement was released in September last year has been out consulting with members of the community in the 10 metropolitan activity centres that have been developed. There have been community reference groups and detailed discussions in addition to the very extensive consultation that the department and the Minister for Planning have been undertaking with the refresh of the plan for Victoria. It has not only been in those 10 centres but right across the state. Local governments, local communities, planning groups and environmental groups have all been engaged in the process over the last 12, 13 months to figure out ways that we can provide solutions to the housing crisis here in Victoria.

I have said in this chamber time and time again that we are not going to solve the housing crisis unless we build more homes. We have got to build more homes. We know, because the stats are not actually lying on this front, that in the last 12 months here in Victoria more homes have been approved than anywhere else in the country. This Labor government is getting on with the job of building more homes, unlike those who oppose this bill and who want to block more homes being built in this state. They have got no solution to tackle the housing crisis in this state. All they want to do is oppose, and that is not what this Labor government is about.

This Labor government is about providing, through this legislation, improvements to the transport and planning infrastructure process to enable this state to get on with the job of building more homes so that more Victorians have a place to live that is close to the places that they work and convenient for accessing neighbourhoods and communities near to where we have been investing in record numbers in our school infrastructure and making sure that Victoria is established for the sorts of housing and broader community and transport infrastructure that this growing state needs, because people want to live here in Victoria.

The PRESIDENT: I wish to acknowledge in the gallery former minister of the Telangana state of India the honourable Malla Reddy MLA.

Business interrupted pursuant to standing orders.