Wednesday, 19 March 2025

Production of documents

Suburban Rail Loop

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (09:52): I move:

That this house:

(1) notes that the Auditor-General’s report, major projects performance report 2024, states at:

(a) Appendix D-60 that ‘Governance mechanisms for the Suburban Rail Loop East early works package include … updates to the Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop’;

(b) Appendix A-59 that a ‘pricing reset’ that was to be finalised in June 2024 was still underway at the time of publication and that a gate 4 review had demanded ‘clearer contingency options in case the main works are delayed or do not go ahead’ and the ‘SRLA has developed a detailed contingency plan for the early works and actions to take in each construction zone if there is a delay to the main works’;

(2) requires the Leader of the Government, in accordance with standing order 10.01, to table in the Council:

(a) within three weeks of the house agreeing to this resolution:

(i) the most recent Suburban Rail Loop Authority (SRLA) update to the Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop;

(ii) copies of the contingency plans and a copy of the most recent, complete or incomplete, ‘pricing reset’ document referred to in paragraph (1)(b); and (b) every update from the SRLA on the Suburban Rail Loop East early works package that the Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop receives within three weeks of its receipt by the minister until the expiration of the project or the expiration of the 60th Parliament.

My short-form documents motion on the notice paper discusses the Auditor-General’s major projects performance report 2024 and particularly looks at the most recent Suburban Rail Loop Authority update to the Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop and copies of contingency plans and a copy of the most recent complete or incomplete pricing reset. It was referred to in the Auditor-General’s report.

We know that the Suburban Rail Loop will go down in history as the most wasteful infrastructure project in Australia’s history. This was a project conceived with only a few people knowing about it – one the current Premier, the former Premier and a couple of goofs at PwC in a locked room – without any consultation with the Secretary of the Department of Transport and Planning and without any consultation with our public transport experts. It was not on any Public Transport Victoria development plan – those plans that map what Melbourne’s transport system should look like in the future based on expert evidence – none of that. This was set up in a locked room by a pretty disreputable organisation at the time, which was doing other pretty disreputable things, but of course the Premier and former Premier decided that was the way they would go.

This project was originally costed at $50 billion for the whole thing, from Cheltenham to Werribee. It was only going to cost $50 billion. It sounded too good to be true, and of course we know it was too good to be true. The first stage, on heroic government estimates, is going to cost between $31 billion and $34 billion, just for Cheltenham to Box Hill, and we know that that is going to be paid for by taxpayers for generations, just for one project in the eastern suburbs denying every single growth area in Melbourne the opportunity to have the infrastructure that they deserve.

The government has had a lot of backflips, and I can almost guarantee you the Suburban Rail Loop will be their next backflip. It is their Achilles heel. Every time I go into the growth areas and people mention the Suburban Rail Loop, they are not kind about it. You guys know that. Those on that side of the chamber know it. It is not popular. An unquantifiable in some respects amount of money is being poured down the drain by a Premier who is too proud to admit that she got it wrong. That money could be spent on a number of other infrastructure projects across Victoria, including in the northern suburbs, including in the western suburbs, including in the south-eastern suburbs, but that money is not available. We know that ministers have been told to stop spending money and to rein in their budgets. We know that local members have been told to halve their number of budget items for commitments this budget and not to include any infrastructure projects – they are completely off the table for funding by local members in this budget. I am doing this in your interests as well. We want projects funded in your seats as well, not just in one part of Melbourne.

This government is not going to admit they got it wrong – I think they eventually will under the leadership of Mr Carroll – but they did stuff up. The Auditor-General’s report tabled one month ago today revealed that the Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop gets regular project updates from the Suburban Rail Loop Authority (SRLA) on the Suburban Rail Loop East project, so at least one person in this place is privy to the waste and mismanagement going on in this project. We also learned:

The Suburban Rail Loop East early works package is currently going through a pricing reset with SRLA’s contractor to factor in items that were unknown or uncertain at the time the contract was awarded –

including unknown ground conditions, hazards and contamination at some sites. I know Mr Welch regularly speaks to locals, and there is I believe much more to come on the amount of contamination there is in the soil, the amount of disruption.

We know that this government is putting businesses out of business with the road closures around the Suburban Rail Loop, offering a pittance of compensation. They say it is worse than COVID and they will not be around by the time this project is built because they are bleeding money, but this government is pressing ahead with those road closures. We also learned that the SRLA has developed a detailed contingency plan for the early works package and actions to take in each construction zone if there is a delay to main works.

There are hidden pricing resets; we do know that. There are contingency plans for when this all goes pear-shaped, yet the Victorian people are not being told the truth. The government is wilfully wasting Victorians’ money out of pride and an inability to say, ‘We stuffed up.’ The Premier and the Treasurer and others did say ‘We stuffed up’ when it came to bail. They said, ‘We’re sorry. We’re sorry we got it wrong.’

Sonja Terpstra: On a point of order, President, I do not know what bail has got to do with this short-form documents motion on SRL that we are debating, and I ask Mr Mulholland to be relevant and come back to the motion.

The PRESIDENT: I call Mr Mulholland back to the motion.

Evan MULHOLLAND: You clearly were not listening. I was making a comparison. The government should apologise, should say it got it wrong, pause the Suburban Rail Loop and invest in infrastructure in our growth areas.

The PRESIDENT: Trust me; I was listening.

Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (09:59): I also rise to make a contribution on this short-form documents motion in Mr Mulholland’s name on the Suburban Rail Loop. As is our practice over here on the government benches, we will not be opposing this motion. We have a practice of doing that because we are quite happy to release documents, not withstanding what those opposite might say about that.

The Suburban Rail Loop project is one of the largest projects not only in rail but also in housing, and it is a project that will benefit people in my region, in the North-Eastern Metropolitan region. I know Mr Mulholland does not represent people in that region. I know that even when I have been out at festivals talking to people about the Suburban Rail Loop project, they cannot wait to see it get started. They are excited about the prospect of being able to catch a train and particularly about their children getting from Box Hill all the way down to Deakin and Monash universities for the first time without having to spend 4 or 5 hours on buses that do not connect up.

By 2050 Melbourne will be home to 9 million people, the same size as London today, and we need a public transport system that is going to manage almost 12 million extra trips per day. I know that is lost on those opposite because they have never built anything and never do anything other than criticise. We have got a clear and positive goal and vision for making sure that not only can we build a world-class public transport system but we can then support 70,000 affordable homes. People want to live close to public transport; they do not want to be stuck on congested roads.

As for Mr Mulholland’s comment about the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office report, I find this really curious. The earlier commentary on this project was that we did not have a business case, it did not stack up and it was a secret and all of these sorts of things. Well, the document has been tabled. Not only has it been tabled in this chamber, Minister Shing has talked extensively about the business case, and we saw, maybe in the last sitting week or the one prior to that, Mr Mulholland acknowledge that he had actually read the business case. Despite saying that it did not exist, he then acknowledged that it did exist and that he had in fact read it. What he would know, if he actually did bother to read it, is that there is clearly some excellent information in there.

The VAGO report also talks about the fact that the Suburban Rail Loop East remains on time and on budget. Wow! Tunnel-boring machines will be arriving this year and will be starting in 2026. I am really proud to report and underscore this point to the house: the Suburban Rail Loop project will be the first construction project that will have an all-female tunnel-boring machine crew operating with its crews. Our government is doing fantastic things for women’s employment – something that would be lost on those opposite. They are secure and well-paid jobs, and that is what women want. We do not want to be talked down to by those opposite, with them telling us what is good for us and how this government should be operating. What we know is that we are providing well-paid, secure jobs for women in construction, and that is what this project will do. Not only will it be providing jobs for local people who are skilled, but it will be providing 70,000 homes for people to live close to public transport. We know that without this sort of project and without these sorts of construction projects Melbourne will grind to a halt. There is growth in Melbourne, and as I said, we are going to be the size of London by 2050. If we do not build these projects, and that includes rail and road infrastructure, it is going to be very difficult to get around.

Again, the VAGO report says SRL East remains on time and on budget. With tunnel-boring machines arriving this year, tunnelling will start in 2026. That is a good thing, and despite what those opposite want to say and the disinformation that they want to peddle, we have got the independent VAGO telling us that. The report is public, and I do believe, Mr Batchelor, that it has actually been tabled in this chamber as well, so is it public and it is publicly available. I have read it as well, and it is a great report. With those opposite, the disinformation that gets peddled is absolutely shameful. Again, the message on SRL East is that the early works package remains the same. The SRL East is on time and on budget.

The release of documents may in fact impact the commercial-in-confidence information, which would increase the risk to the project. That is lost on those opposite because they never did anything; they never did big commercial projects of this scale. This Parliament does not have the power to prospectively order the production of documents that do not yet exist at the time of making any order that this chamber might seek to make. I will just comment again on the fact that government gets nobbled in not having enough time to speak to these things. That is the wont of those opposite. But nevertheless, the government will not be opposing this motion.

Richard WELCH (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:04): I rise to speak on Mr Mulholland’s motion 882 for the production of documents. The ones I am particularly interested in are on the price reset. This is a project that was costed on the back of an envelope. Those costings proved to be completely unrealistic. They were replaced with a $34 billion project. That assumed 66 per cent of that funding was coming from cash. We now know that it is a 100 per cent leveraged project, and that leveraged project comes at a time of rising interest rates, so state borrowings against this project are precarious.

If the budget turns out not to be $34 billion, if, like every other Big Build project, we have a blowout of even $10 billion, $20 billion or $30 billion, then the funding model will be completely destroyed, and there seems to be no contingency around that. There is no contingency around that for the state’s finances, because it would blow our finances out substantially. I have done some modelling on this. We would have a residual debt on this that we would not be able to pay back for several generations. No amount of value capture will address the debt that we are facing on this now, so the model is in jeopardy and it is absolutely contingent on this being $34 billion.

No other Big Build project has survived without a cost blowout or not had a budget or time blowout. We also have this notion that it is on budget and on time, yet in Box Hill the businesses have had a delay of nine months in being moved out there. In Glen Waverley and Clayton the businesses have had road closures extended by seven months. In Heatherton they found unexpected contamination and had to move certain works, and that remediation that was meant to be two weeks now is at six weeks plus and counting. I know within a big project that none of these individually may hit the critical part, but obviously we would be hitting the buffers, so with the repeated statement that we are on time and on budget the government is painting itself into a very difficult corner. The way we need to be clear about this is to have documents where we can see with clarity where the books really stand. Why hasn’t the price reset been released nine months after it was due? What is it showing? What is happening with the funding? You are right: this is Victoria’s biggest ever project, and with that scale it deserves proper scrutiny and transparency, and we simply do not have it.

The other element that is in here is: what are the contingencies? I think that is a very, very genuine thing. What are the contingencies for the state if we do not have the funding for this? Closer to home, what are the contingencies for the businesses and organisations that have been forced to enter into agreements and contracts because they are either being moved out or their businesses are being destroyed? They are not being compensated for that. What happens if there is a substantial material delay on this project? We need to know. They deserve to know. This is, like anything else, a simple matter of transparency. We should be able to see what is in the monthly reporting, because any monthly reporting will show how we are travelling against risk, how we are travelling against resource, how we are travelling on budget and how we are travelling on scope. I would not be surprised to see some scope changes coming through in the near future.

I absolutely endorse this motion. I think it is vital for the state to see where we are with this project. We need to tell the truth about this project.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (10:08): I am pleased to rise to speak on Mr Mulholland’s documents motion with respect to certain matters relating to the Suburban Rail Loop. It is curious that in the course of this debate the opposition have not been able to articulate their policy on what should happen to the Suburban Rail Loop. At no stage in the course of arguing for the production of these documents have they suggested how these documents would help inform their policy formulation one way or the other. They do not know what their policy on the Suburban Rail Loop is. If they did, they would say it and they would have the courage to say it in this Parliament, but they do not, because they do not know what it is.

They are not willing to be open and honest with the Victorian people about what their policy platform is, so I think it is a bit much to listen to their repeated plaintive cries for information, much of which is articulated in the various reports, the various business and investment cases or in the budget papers. Much of this information is made available through the usual government processes, so if the opposition were genuine and serious about wanting to understand how major infrastructure projects work and how they are funded, then they would be serious in that.

This documents motion I think on its face demonstrates that they are not actually serious about those kinds of inquiries, nor are they serious about meeting the infrastructure challenges that Victoria faces. We know that if the Liberal Party had their way, we would not be building infrastructure here in Victoria. We know that if the Liberal Party of today had applied this analysis to major infrastructure projects in Victoria in the past we would not have the city loop. Listening to Mr Welch’s contribution and listening to Mr Mulholland’s contribution on the production of these documents, you would think that Melbourne has never undertaken a significant underground rail project before that has involved getting funding from a range of sources, including from a form of value capture, which was one of the significant contributors to the construction of the city loop here in Melbourne.

If this Liberal Party had any influence on the Liberal Party of Henry Bolte and Rupert Hamer, we would not have a city loop here in Melbourne. We would not have a city loop in Melbourne if the analysis and the approach of today’s Liberal Party had applied in the past. I think that tells you everything you need to know about the narrow thinking, the narrow vision and the narrow approach of the Liberal Party of today. They are not interested in building the infrastructure that Victoria needs. They are not interested in making sure that a rapidly growing city has the transport infrastructure to get people from A to B, to get people across our growing city and to make sure that our leading employment and research institutions are connected by rail. They would not have built the city loop, they would not have built the Metro Tunnel, and they are determined to make sure that more suburban rail is not built here in Victoria.

The other thing that is a problem with this motion, other than highlighting the absolute lack of vision and the lack of detail that is within the Liberal Party of today, is that they are calling for the production of documents that do not yet exist. They are trying to cast some exceedingly wide net to possibly capture documents that have not even been created yet. We have had discussions in the context of these debates about how difficult it is for the government to produce documents that do not actually exist.

We are, as a matter of principle and convention, not opposed to documents motions in this chamber. But it is very difficult for the government to produce documents in compliance with the order that do not exist. And I think when writing these motions members should consider those constraints before bringing such matters before us.

Motion agreed to.