Wednesday, 19 February 2025

Suburban Rail Loop

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (12:25): (810) My question is to the Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop, and it goes to the VAGO report released today. One of the recommendations was to:

Develop … meaningful public reporting on major projects’ performance …

• clearly describing underlying reasons why a project’s date or schedule has changed instead of only describing what the change was

The SRLA has disagreed and rejected this recommendation. Why?

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop, Minister for Housing and Building, Minister for Development Victoria and Precincts) (12:26): Thank you, Mr Mulholland. Again, I just want to, for the avoidance of any doubt in your minds or indeed the minds of people with whom you might speak, confirm to you the project is on time and on budget. The TEI remains at the levels that were forecast within the band that was published by government, by the SRLA, and as set out in the business and investment case. Again, Mr Mulholland, I have got a copy here in my drawer. I have got dozens of copies down in my office. Let us talk about the return on investment and TEI being between 1.1 and 1.7, and then let us also talk about the $300 million –

Evan Mulholland: On a point of order, President, on relevance, I asked why the SRLA has rejected a clear recommendation from the report as to their reporting on delays.

The PRESIDENT: I think the minister was first giving us some background. I will call her to the question.

Harriet SHING: Mr Mulholland, what a shame you do not actually want to know about the project that you are turning a blind eye to, as it will reduce and address so many of the issues around congestion and around a lack of access to jobs, to public transport, to education and to health care. You are determined to oppose a project that will address the very issues that you say are front of mind for Victorians.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, it was a very straightforward, narrow question about the SRLA’s decision to reject the auditor’s view. The question is simple and straightforward, but the minister is now going on a frolic and around the block.

The PRESIDENT: I think the minister knows the question. There is no need to repeat it. I will call the minister.

Harriet SHING: Thank you, Mr Davis. Right. If you think that the provision of information about the largest housing project we have in Australia is a frolic, then that reflects more on you –

David Davis: On a point of order, President, relevance is important. But also, she started off with an attack on the opposition instead of answering the question. She has to answer the question, not a question of her own choosing.

The PRESIDENT: It is very difficult, because since your last point of order it has been about five seconds. I am trying to work out whether she was relevant or not, but I think the minister was relevant within the five seconds.

Harriet SHING: Thank you, President. When we work through the processes associated with progression of a project there are of course a number of steps that need to be taken to ensure that all phases of a project in relation to their status and progress are fully understood. This is where, again, when we have changes to estimated completion dates this is able to be contemplated and achieved to better reflect the detailed schedule of work, Mr Mulholland. This includes ground conditions being better understood. It includes –

Evan Mulholland: On a point of order, President, on relevance, the minister is not going near the question. The auditor clearly recommended knowing why a project’s date or schedule has changed instead of only describing what the change was. The SRLA has rejected that recommendation, and I asked the minister why.

The PRESIDENT: I think that actually the minister was getting to the crux of the answer then, so I call the minister.

Harriet SHING: When we talk about the transparency that you are after, I would encourage you to read the budget papers. I would encourage you to look to the work that is set out in the reporting as part of annual reports, and there is an annual audit process by VAGO. There is already a process undertaken by the Auditor-General, and when we talk about changes to early works, as I said in an answer to an earlier question, ground conditions are better understood, including by SRLA, when we take possession of a site and when we can undertake those extensive geotechnical investigations. This is common practice in early phases of major transport infrastructure, but you would not know because you have never delivered any.

David Davis: President, the point of order is very clear. It is a relevance point. The minister did not answer the question in any way. She did not go near the point of why she is not accepting the auditor’s recommendation.

The PRESIDENT: Mr Davis, I do my best in real time to embrace and understand the question and the answer, and I think I just embraced it. The minister said the answer to the question is because there is already a process. I hate paraphrasing people, but that is where I have come to. At the end of question time people can call points of order to ask me to review if I am right or not, but that is what I gleaned out of the last 5 minutes.

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (12:32): The minister says to go and read the budget, but if we went and read the budget from last year we would not have found the $300 million blowout that we have found today in the VAGO report. The VAGO report also reveals that early works have been delayed by nine months and indicates that the delays in the SRL East initial early works could delay the main project itself. Is this correct?

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop, Minister for Housing and Building, Minister for Development Victoria and Precincts) (12:33): In the preamble to your supplementary, Mr Mulholland, you said that it was not in the budget papers. What a shame. I do not think that you were here in 2019, because if you went back and had a look at those budget papers you would actually see that it is there. So why don’t you have a squiz? I am not going to hold them up today, because again you will call them props, but we have actually committed that money. We are determined to make sure that we deliver the project on time and on budget. And as I confirmed to you, changes in some of the early works timings are being actively managed to minimise any potential impacts on other main works. This is not an uncommon process as part of major projects, but you would not know that, because you have never delivered any. The first tunnel-boring machine will be in the ground next year. Trains will be running by 2035, unless of course you are saying that you are not going to proceed with SRL, whether through the east or anywhere else, in which case you need to come clean and fess up to that fact.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, the minister is attacking the opposition rather than answering the question.

The PRESIDENT: The minister has finished her answer.