Tuesday, 27 August 2024

Metro Tunnel

David SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (14:22): My question is to the Minister for Transport Infrastructure. Labor’s secret letter to companies building the Metro Tunnel said that it ‘represents the state’s counter offer to settle project issues’. What are the specific project issues?

Danny PEARSON (Essendon – Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop, Assistant Treasurer, Minister for WorkSafe and the TAC) (14:22): I am delighted to answer the Deputy Leader of the Opposition’s question. As we have indicated today, the Metro Tunnel is a transformational project which will completely transform the way Victorians get around this great state. In relation to the letter that was published in the Age today, the point I made this morning I will make again: there is no deal that has been agreed to. Conversations are ongoing with our construction partners. Those conversations are occurring in good faith.

David Southwick: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, I ask you to ask the minister to come back to answering the question about what the specific project issues are.

Mary-Anne Thomas: On the point of order, Speaker, there is no point of order. I ask that you rule the member for Caulfield’s attempted point of order out of order. The minister was being entirely responsive to the question. He was being relevant, he was being accurate and he was being succinct, and I ask that you let him get on with answering the question.

James Newbury: Further to the point of order, Speaker, the Leader of the House has asserted that the minister was being responsive to the question. I do not think the government has been responsive to any question ever. The minister was not in any way responsive to the question.

The SPEAKER: On the point of order, the minister was being relevant in the sense that he was referring to the Metro Tunnel and a secret letter. However, I ask him to come back to the specific question.

Danny PEARSON: We are at the most complex phase of the Metro Tunnel project. We have got two stations down and three stations to go. In relation to the two stations in the CBD, these are really complex builds. It is like keyhole surgery, and we are building these stations right in the heart of the city underground. The test trains have travelled more than 20,000 kilometres to date, and we have got another 150,000 to go. As I have indicated, we are working closely with our construction partners in good faith.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, the minister is abusing your ruling. You have asked him to come back to the question –

The SPEAKER: I did ask the minister to come back to the question, but as I said before, I cannot compel or direct the minister how to answer the question.

Danny PEARSON: So, as I indicated, we are working with our construction partners in good faith. When an agreement is reached, it will be reported in the usual way. But I want to make the point, given the sensitive commercial nature of these discussions, it would be inappropriate to make any further comment. As I indicated this morning, no agreement has been reached. Construction is occurring in good faith and –

David Southwick: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, I ask you to bring the minister back to answering the question. He defied your earlier ruling, and he is going down the same path again.

The SPEAKER: Minister, come back to the question.

Danny PEARSON: I simply will not jeopardise the position of the state in these discussions. I will not. The reality is that we are continuing to work closely with our construction partners. In the event there is an agreement that is reached, it will be reported and disclosed in the usual way.

David SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (14:26): How much did the companies building the Metro Tunnel demand in their commercial settlement proposal offered in March to settle the project issues?

Danny PEARSON (Essendon – Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop, Assistant Treasurer, Minister for WorkSafe and the TAC) (14:26): I refer back to my answer to the substantive question. I am not going to be drawn on the specifics of these discussions. We are working in good faith with our construction partners. Those conversations are ongoing, and in the event that there is any change to that contract, that will be disclosed in the usual way.

John Pesutto: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, the question is not about what the state’s position is; it is what the subject matter of the dispute is. The minister in both answers is confirming there are issues in dispute. Why can’t he be drawn back to that and disclose those? Telling this Parliament what the issues in dispute are will not jeopardise negotiations.

The SPEAKER: Order! A point of order is not an opportunity to make a statement to the house. The minister has concluded his answer.