Thursday, 19 June 2025

Local Jobs First Amendment Bill 2025

Statement of compatibility

Colin BROOKS (Bundoora – Minister for Industry and Advanced Manufacturing, Minister for Creative Industries) (10:11): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the Local Jobs First Amendment Bill 2025:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter), I make this statement of compatibility with respect to the Local Jobs First Amendment Bill 2025 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with the human rights protected by the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview of the Bill

The purposes of this Bill are to:

• clarify the obligations of suppliers and agencies under the Local Jobs First scheme;

• provide additional enforcement powers for the Local Jobs First Commissioner (the Commissioner);

• introduce new civil penalties and other consequences for non-compliance with the Local Jobs First scheme;

• provide for additional Local Jobs First Policy (the Policy) objectives; and

• clarify references to the Local Jobs First Policy and associated obligations and guidelines.

The Bill does this by amending the Local Jobs First Act 2003 (the Act).

The amendments in this Bill will primarily affect corporations, rather than persons (as defined in the Charter). However, to the extent that they may affect the rights of persons, I discuss the relevant human rights issues below.

Human rights issues

The following human rights are relevant to the Bill: privacy (s 13(a)); reputation (s 13(b)); freedom of expression (s 15); fair hearing (s 24); and property (s 20).

Site inspections by the Commissioner

Clause 11 of the Bill inserts sections 18A to 18F into the Act, which provide new and additional compliance powers for the Commissioner including in relation to investigations by the Commissioner, the provision of written reports to the Minister, site inspections and certain powers of the Commissioner during site inspections.

Section 18A permits the Commissioner to investigate any matter relating to the performance of its functions or the exercise of its powers under the Act. The Commissioner may investigate a matter under this provision on its own initiative, at the direction of the Minister or in response to a complaint (new s 18A(2)). The Commissioner may also refuse to investigate a complaint in certain circumstances and if the complaint was received in writing, it must give written notice to that person of the refusal (new ss 18A(3) and 18A(4)).

New section 18C provides the Commissioner with the power to conduct site inspections by issuing an inspection notice in writing (Inspection Notice). Inspection Notices may be issued to the person who is subject to an investigation by the Commissioner or the owner or occupier of a place or premise where a search is considered necessary. The site inspection power applies if the Commissioner believes on reasonable grounds that entry and inspection of a place or premises by the Commissioner is necessary to determine whether a person has failed or is likely to fail to comply with Local Jobs First (which includes the Act, the regulations and the Policy) or a Local Industry Development Plan and entry and inspection are necessary for the purposes of an investigation by the Commissioner.

An Inspection Notice must set out the Commissioner’s intention to enter, the purpose and reason for the proposed entry and inspection, the address, time and day (which must be not less than three business days after the person receives the Inspection Notice), any information or document that the person must provide to the Commissioner during the proposed entry and inspection and any prescribed information (new s 18C(3)).

A person who receives an Inspection Notice can request an alternative time or refuse the proposed entry and inspection, this must be done in writing and they must set out the relevant grounds in each case (new s 18C(5)). The Commissioner must then determine whether the request or refusal is made on reasonable grounds (new s 18C(6)).

The recipient of an Inspection Notice must take all reasonable steps to facilitate the Commissioner’s entry and inspection and to provide any information that the Inspection Notice requires to be provided to the Commissioner during the inspection (new s 18C(7)). These obligations do not apply if the person has made a request or refusal in respect of the Inspection Notice and the Commissioner has either not made a determination in relation to a request or refusal or the Commissioner has concluded it is made on reasonable grounds. A person who fails to comply with an Inspection Notice may be liable for a civil penalty order.

Right to privacy

Section 13(a) of the Charter provides that a person has the right not to have their privacy unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with. An interference will be lawful if it is permitted by a law which is precise and appropriately circumscribed, and will be arbitrary only if it is capricious, unpredictable, unjust or unreasonable, in the sense of being disproportionate to the legitimate aim sought.

The exercise of the site inspection power may interfere with the privacy of an individual in some cases, however, any such interference will be lawful and not arbitrary (s 13(a) of the Charter). The site inspection power is necessary to support the Commissioner’s existing information gathering and compliance activities so it can effectively carry out its monitoring and compliance function. The new site inspection power will allow the Commissioner to obtain information that it is not readily able to obtain using the existing powers in the Act.

The site inspection power is appropriately tailored to the objective. The power must be exercised with clear notice at a reasonable time and only for the specific purposes of an investigation by the Commissioner. In most cases it will be exercised in respect of commercial places or premises as opposed to residential premises, and therefore is likely to involve a lesser impact on privacy. The Bill provides a mechanism for the person to request an alternative time or refuse the entry or inspection on reasonable grounds. The Policy only relates to persons voluntarily involved in government contracts and high value construction projects, is reasonably confined and serves a proper purpose. Accordingly, I consider that these provisions are compatible with the right to privacy under the Charter because any limitation on privacy is not arbitrary, in that it is reasonable and justified in the circumstances.

Powers of the Commissioner during a site inspection

Clause 11 of the Bill adds section 18D which provides a range of powers that the Commissioner may exercise during a site inspection for the purposes of the investigation in which the relevant Inspection Notice was issued. These powers include examining or inspecting documents, taking photographs or making audio or visual recordings, making copies of or taking extracts from documents, requesting the assistance of any person, requesting a person at the place or premises answer questions or produce a document located at the premises that is in their possession or control (new s 18D).

Right to privacy and freedom of expression

These powers engage the right to privacy in s 13(a) of the Charter, which protects against unlawful and arbitrary interferences with a person’s privacy, family, home or correspondence. Section 15 of the Charter also protects a person’s right to freedom of expression, which has been interpreted to include a right not to impart information. This right may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary for the protection of public order (s 15(3) of the Charter).

While these powers may involve some interference with a person’s right to privacy and expression, they are necessary to ensure that the Commissioner can investigate failures to comply with Local Jobs First or a Local Industry Development Plan or to investigate complaints regarding the same. The powers are limited to being used during a site inspection at the specified place or premises that is the subject of that site inspection. The places or premises subject to site inspections will generally be places of business and therefore areas where there is a limited expectation of privacy. Furthermore, individuals and businesses that will be issued Inspection Notices will be limited to those connected with projects to which the Act and Policy apply. Where such individuals and businesses are not suppliers that have directly entered into contracts with an agency, they will be subcontractors that have entered into contracts with suppliers to support the delivery of projects to which the Act and Policy apply. Accordingly, I consider that the interference is neither unlawful nor arbitrary and is therefore compatible with the right to privacy in section 13 of the Charter. I also consider it compatible with the right to freedom of expression because the limitation of this right is lawful and reasonably necessary for the protection of public order.

Civil penalties

The existing Act provides the Commissioner with powers to issue a notice of non-compliance (Compliance Notice) and in certain circumstances determine that a person has failed to comply with an information notice, the Policy or a Local Industry Development Plan.

Clause 12 of the Bill inserts the failure to comply with an Inspection Notice as an additional basis for the Commissioner to issue a Compliance Notice under s 26 of the Act. Failure to comply with an Inspection Notice includes but is not limited to failing to take all reasonable steps to facilitate the Commissioner’s entry and inspection of a place or premises in accordance with the Inspection Notice or to provide information or a document to the Commissioner in accordance with the Inspection Notice (new s 26(1)(ab)).

A determination of non-compliance by the Commissioner attracts various potential consequences.

Section 28 of the Act is amended by cl 13 of the Bill to allow the Commissioner to seek a civil penalty in circumstances where it has determined that a person has failed to comply with an information notice or an Inspection Notice (Compliance Determination). Alternatively in these instances, the Commissioner may recommend that the Minister issue an Adverse Publicity Notice (new s 28(3A)). Before determining to make a recommendation to the Minister that the Minister issue an Adverse Publicity Notice or an application for a civil penalty, the Commissioner must consider whether compliance with Local Jobs First would be better promoted or encouraged by the issue of an Adverse Publicity Notice or the making of a civil penalty order (new s 28(3B)). Clause 18 of the Bill adds section 30A which creates a civil action for failure to comply with a civil penalty requirement which is where the Commissioner has made a Compliance Determination that a person has failed to comply with an information notice or an Inspection Notice. If the Commissioner recommends that the Minister issue an Adverse Publicity Notice, then the person does not contravene a civil penalty provision, and therefore, the Commissioner cannot issue civil penalty proceedings against that person (new s 30A(2)). Clause 18 also adds section 30B which provides that the Commissioner may apply to a court for a civil penalty order in relation to a person’s contravention of a civil penalty requirement.

Criminal process rights

Civil penalties may engage the criminal process rights under the Charter where the penalty is of such a magnitude that a court may consider that it involves truly penal consequences. In my view, the civil penalties in this instance, for a failure to comply with an information notice or an Inspection Notice, would not be considered as being in effect criminal penalties. Further, punishment is not a relevant consideration for the Commissioner in determining whether to seek a civil penalty or recommend an Adverse Publicity Notice.

The civil penalty provisions apply to persons involved in projects covered by the Policy under the Act, including Local Jobs First applicable projects in rural and regional areas with a budget of $1 million or more, or Local Jobs First applicable projects with a budget of $3 million or more located partially or wholly outside of rural and regional Victoria; they will have limited application to general public life and will apply primarily to corporations, rather than individuals. A civil penalty order will be enforceable as a judgment debt, a person will not be liable to be imprisoned for a failure to discharge the debt. Accordingly, I do not consider that the criminal process rights under the Charter are engaged by the civil penalty provisions.

Adverse Publicity Notice

The Bill extends the existing Adverse Publicity Notice regime to instances where a person has failed to comply with an Inspection Notice.

An Adverse Publicity Notice may give rise to the identification of individuals and thereby impact negatively upon the reputation of those individuals. However, for similar reasons as set out in previous Statements of Compatibility in relation to previous amendments to the Act, I consider that any interference with the right to privacy and reputation resulting from these provisions will be neither unlawful nor arbitrary. This is because the adverse publicity notice scheme is clearly set out and only enlivened in specific circumstances relating to non-compliance. An affected person is afforded procedural fairness to respond to a recommendation that an Adverse Publicity Notice be issued. In my view, it remains appropriate that the scheme provides a power to name persons and detail their failure to comply with inspection powers, as it serves the purposes of promoting accountability and transparency of a person’s non-compliance with requirements that reflect important public policy.

Deprioritisation regime

Clause 19 of the Bill adds Part 2A of the Act which provides a regime to enable the deprioritisation of a person who has previously failed to comply with their commitments in their Local Industry Development Plan in relation to future government tenders. The deprioritisation regime is intended to ensure that appropriate consideration is given to a potential supplier’s past performance on applicable projects in the weighting of a supplier’s commitments to Local Jobs First on future applicable projects. New section 11H provides that the Minister may issue guidelines relating to the deprioritisation of suppliers, including in relation to the processes or procedures required, the matters to be considered in making a decision under Part 2A and the weight to be given to those factors. Under Part 2A the Commissioner may issue a deprioritisation notice in relation to a supplier if the supplier does not submit a completion report within 90 days after practical completion of the project or if a supplier fails to comply with any commitment made by the supplier that is specified in the Local Industry Development Plan for the project (new s 11C).

New section 11C includes the matters that the Commissioner must take into account in issuing a deprioritisation notice and the requirements of such a notice. Part 2A also outlines the process of the deprioritisation regime including the requirement for the Commissioner to provide a notice of intention and the process by which the supplier may seek review of the decision to issue the deprioritisation notice. If a deprioritisation notice is confirmed on review, or the supplier does not apply for review within the prescribed period, then the Commissioner must make a deprioritisation determination.

New section 11G provides that the Commissioner is to maintain a register of suppliers in respect of whom deprioritisation determinations are made and any prescribed information, which the Commissioner may disclose to prescribed persons.

Fair Hearing

Section 24(1) of the Charter relevantly provides that a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the charge or proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing. The concept of a ‘civil proceeding’ is not limited to judicial decision makers but may encompass the decision-making procedures of many types of tribunals, boards and other administrative decision-makers with the power to determine private rights and interests. While recognising the broad scope of s 24(1), the term ‘proceeding’ and ‘party’ suggest that s 24(1) was intended to apply only to decision-makers who conduct proceedings with parties. The deprioritisation regime does not involve applications to a court.

The right may also be limited where procedural fairness is not provided. However, the entire decision-making process, including reviews and appeals, must be examined in order to determine whether the right is limited. If a broad reading of s 24(1) is adopted and it is understood that the fair hearing right is engaged by this Bill more broadly, this right would nevertheless not be limited. In the context where merits review is not provided, an administrative decision-making procedure may still be compatible with fair hearing if the procedure is consistent with affording natural justice, and judicial review is available to ensure the decision was lawfully made.

To the degree that being issued with a deprioritisation notice affects a legal right or interest so as to the engage the right to fair hearing, I am satisfied that the right is not limited because the process outlined in the Bill affords procedural fairness to the person the subject of a deprioritisation notice before they are subject to a deprioritisation determination, including an opportunity to seek internal review.

Deprioritisation notices may only be issued by the Commissioner in specified circumstances. The Commissioner may issue a notice of intention to issue a deprioritisation notice in writing to the supplier before issuing the proposed notice in circumstances where the supplier does not submit a completion report within 90 days after practical completion of the project. A supplier who receives a deprioritisation notice may seek internal review. It is only if the Commissioner confirms a notice or the supplier does not seek review of the deprioritisation notice that the Commissioner must make a deprioritisation determination. The regime provides a reasonable opportunity for the supplier to be heard prior to the Commissioner making any deprioritisation determination. Further, these decisions of the Commissioner will be subject to judicial review. Consequently, the fair hearing rights in section 24(1) of the Charter are not limited by the deprioritisation regime.

Right to privacy and reputation

The deprioritisation regime may engage the right to privacy under s 13(a) of the Charter by authorising the inclusion of the details of certain suppliers on a deprioritisation register if a deprioritisation determination has been made in respect of that supplier. The Bill provides that the information on the deprioritisation register may be disclosed by the Commissioner to any prescribed persons in accordance with the regulations. It is likely that suppliers impacted by this regime will be corporations rather than individuals, and so it is not anticipated that personal information will frequently be included on the register. It is also not intended that the information on the deprioritisation register will be publicly available. The purpose of the register is to deprioritise a supplier who has previously failed to comply with commitments in the Local Industry Development Plan in relation to future government tenders. It is not intended to have any wider application and will only apply to persons involved in government contracts on projects subject to the Act, who have voluntarily chosen to tender for and enter into contracts to which these obligations and consequences apply. To the limited extent that the register impacts the privacy of individuals, the limitation on privacy is not arbitrary, is reasonable and justified in the circumstances.

The regime may also limit the right to reputation under s 13(b) of the Charter. Section 13(b) of the Charter relevantly provides that a person has the right not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked. An ‘attack’ on reputation will be lawful if it is permitted by a precise and appropriately circumscribed law. As previously outlined, the deprioritisation regime will be prescribed in the Act, is precise, targeted and confined to the specific circumstances of the Act and the Policy. It only impacts persons who have entered into contracts to which these obligations apply. Further, the provisions will primarily apply to corporations, rather than individuals. Any interference with the right to reputation will be neither unlawful nor arbitrary.

State Liability

The Bill adds section 11I which provides that the State and the Commissioner are not liable in any way for any loss, damage or injury resulting directly, indirectly from or arising out of the Bill or the confirmation of a deprioritisation notice or the making of a deprioritisation determination.

It is intended that the immunity in s 11I(a) will extend to any actions carried out under the new provisions added to the Act by this Bill. The scope of the immunity is limited in that it only applies to actions carried out by the Commissioner under these new sections. The Commissioner, as a creature of statute, exercises confined powers described by the Act.

Right to property

Section 20 of the Charter provides that a person must not be deprived of their property other than in accordance with law. This right requires that powers which authorise the deprivation of property are conferred by legislation or common law, are confined and structured rather than unclear, are accessible to the public, and are formulated precisely.

Insofar as a cause of action may be considered ‘property’ within the meaning of section 20 of the Charter, section 11I in clause 19 may engage the right. However, even if these immunity provisions could be considered to deprive a person of property, any such deprivation will be ‘in accordance with law’ and will therefore not limit the Charter right to property. Any deprivation of a cause of action is reasonably necessary to achieve the important objective of ensuring that the Commissioner can effectively perform their functions without assuming legal or financial risk, in particular, the Commissioner’s functions to confirm or make a deprioritisation notice, which may affect a person’s commercial interests in relation to their capacity to be awarded future Government tenders or contracts (new s 11I(b)). It serves the objectives of the Act and the Policy by ensuring that suppliers who do not comply with the requirements of the Act or Local Industry Development Plans can be deprioritised from future government tenders without repercussions against the State. As such, there are no less restrictive means of achieving the Bill’s objectives of providing additional enforcement powers to the Commissioner.

The immunity in s 11I(a) also supports the objectives of the Act and prevents a potential perverse outcome which would arise where suppliers who have not complied with the requirements of the Act, or the commitments made in their Local Industry Development Plan, could pursue the Commissioner for consequences arising from action taken by the Commissioner in response to the non-compliance. The Bill strengthens the powers and functions of the Commissioner in relation to compliance and enforcement which supports the objectives of the Local Jobs First scheme. The immunity in s 11I(a) is reasonably necessary to achieve the objectives of ensuring that the Commissioner can effectively perform their functions and exercise their powers without assuming legal or financial risk in the event that a supplier’s commercial interests are adversely impacted by any compliance or enforcement action taken by the Commissioner in relation to that supplier.

Accordingly, the relevant State liability provision is, in my view, appropriately granted.

Hon. Colin Brooks, MP

Minister for Industry and Advanced Manufacturing

Second reading

Colin BROOKS (Bundoora – Minister for Industry and Advanced Manufacturing, Minister for Creative Industries) (10:11): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard.

Incorporated speech as follows:

The Local Jobs First Act (the Act) is Australia’s longest-standing industry participation legislation and has been supporting Victorian businesses and workers for over 20 years. Since 2014, Local Jobs First has been applied to 3,185 projects worth over $197 billion in government investment, ensuring that Victorian businesses, workers, apprentices, trainees and cadets benefit from Victorian Government procurement. Additionally, Local Jobs First local content requirements have been set on 382 Strategic Projects, supporting more than 60,000 jobs, and enabling local companies to compete for both large and small government contracts on Victoria’s largest projects.

Since its introduction in 2016 the Major Projects Skills Guarantee has been applied to 480 projects worth over $176 billion and supported 19,179 apprentices, trainees and cadets secure employment on Victoria’s largest construction projects.

It has been 7 years since the Act was last amended, establishing the role of the Local Jobs First Commissioner (the Commissioner) and bringing the Major Projects Skills Guarantee under the legislation.

Today I am introducing a Bill to deliver on our commitment to strengthen the Act to ensure it continues to maximise opportunities for local jobs and businesses, supporting a stronger workforce, local industry and the Victorian economy.

In summary the Bill will:

• clarify and strengthen mechanisms that support compliance with, and enforcement of, Local Industry Development Plan commitments

• provide the Local Jobs First Commissioner with additional investigation and reporting powers, including a power to conduct site inspections with notice

• introduce stronger consequences for non-compliance with Local Industry Development Plans and the Act, including a deprioritisation scheme, civil penalties for non-compliance with the Commissioner’s information gathering powers including the new site inspection power, and contingent payment mechanisms for agencies to include in appropriate contracts

• clarify and strengthen existing policies and procedures under the Act and incorporate additional Local Jobs First objectives, and

• explicitly allow the Minister responsible for the Act to set requirements to use a specified amount of locally produced uniform and personal protective equipment on Strategic Projects.

This Bill acquits the government’s 2022 election commitment and ensures that Local Jobs First is fit-for-purpose and meets contemporary expectations.

Enforcement of Local Industry Development Plan commitments

To strengthen compliance with commitments to local content and jobs, the Bill clarifies that suppliers must meet the commitments made in their Local Industry Development Plans, not just the requirements set by the Minister or the Act. The Bill also clarifies that suppliers must comply with those commitments in an aggregate sense, rather than the individual line items stated in the Local Industry Development Plans.

This change will elevate the importance of commitments made by suppliers in their Local Industry Development Plans in relation to local content, job outcomes, any requirements specified by the Minister under the Act, and the Major Projects Skills Guarantee, if applicable.

The amendments will provide greater clarity in relation to supplier obligations and support the strengthened compliance and enforcement measures introduced by the Bill.

Expanded Commissioner powers and functions

The Commissioner was established in 2018 and is responsible for advocating for the Local Jobs First Policy and facilitating greater involvement from local businesses, workers, apprentices, trainees, and cadets. The Commissioner is also responsible for overseeing systemic and project-level compliance with the Local Jobs First Policy by both agencies and suppliers.

Since the establishment of the Commissioner, the Victorian economy and government spending on projects has changed, both in the number of major infrastructure projects under delivery, and the availability and participation of local businesses and workers in the supply chains for major projects.

This Bill introduces new powers and functions for the Commissioner, including additional investigation and reporting powers, a new power to conduct site inspections with notice, and an explicit role to provide advice and support to contracting parties in the resolution of non-compliance issues.

These changes expand on the Commissioner’s critical role in advocating on behalf of local businesses, workers, apprentices, trainees and cadets on government procurement matters and ensuring that suppliers uphold their local content and job commitments.

Investigations and reporting functions

The government committed to formalising the Commissioner’s role to conduct investigations and produce reports on compliance.

The Bill gives the Commissioner an explicit function to conduct investigations and the ability to receive and investigate complaints.

Currently the only specific Commissioner reporting mechanism in the Act is section 31, which requires the Commissioner to submit an annual report to the Minister responsible about the performance of functions and exercise of powers by the Commissioner during the financial year.

The Bill strengthens and clarifies the Commissioner’s reporting functions by creating a function for the Commissioner to report to the Minister at any time on any matter in relation to the Act, the regulations, the Local Jobs First Policy, Local Industry Development Plans, including the Commissioner’s functions or powers. This will greatly improve the effectiveness of the Commissioner’s investigatory role and the ability of the Commissioner to highlight compliance concerns to the Minister.

Further, the Bill provides the Commissioner with a power to make non-binding recommendations to agencies on how to address specific or systemic compliance issues, supporting a more graduated approach to resolving issues in relation to non-compliance.

These new functions complement the Commissioner’s existing compliance functions and will strengthen the process for identifying potential compliance breaches.

Function to facilitate resolution of non-compliance issues

The Bill introduces a function for the Commissioner to provide advice and support to contracting parties, if both parties consent, in relation to potential and actual non-compliance with the Act, regulations, Local Jobs First Policy or a Local Industry Development Plan.

This facilitation function will clarify the Commissioner’s role in providing expert advice to contracting parties and support the resolution of issues more quickly, preventatively address non-compliance, and potentially limit the need for agencies and suppliers to invoke costly dispute resolution clauses in their contracts.

Site inspection powers

The government publicly committed to introducing the ability for the Commissioner to conduct site inspections to support its role in investigating Local Jobs First compliance.

The Bill introduces a new power for the Commissioner to conduct site inspections, with notice, if the Commissioner considers it reasonably necessary to investigate an actual or potential failure to comply with the Act, the regulations, the Local Jobs First Policy, or a Local Industry Development Plan.

This power will support the Commissioner to obtain information or evidence that cannot be readily obtained through their existing information-gathering powers, such as conducting a visual inspection of materials, equipment and structures, as well as obtaining information from the supplier on site.

This site inspection power, in conjunction with the Commissioner’s expanded investigatory and reporting functions, ensures that the Commissioner is equipped to identify compliance concerns during project delivery, assist with the rectification of any issues and better informs any potential enforcement actions.

Consequences for non-compliance

The government committed to introducing new penalties for the Commissioner to use where non-compliance will lead to suppliers being de-prioritised for future government tenders or financial penalties for non-compliance.

The Bill includes significant reforms designed to disincentivise Local Jobs First non-compliance and ensures that suppliers are held to account to deliver on their local content and job commitments, ensuring the best outcomes for local workers and businesses.

Deprioritisation scheme

The Bill establishes a deprioritisation scheme based on the Commissioner’s determination of supplier non-compliance with the fulfilment of aggregate Local Industry Development Plan commitments after a project reaches practical completion.

The scheme will commence on 1 July 2026 and will only apply to new Local Jobs First projects where the solicitation documents or agreements are released after that date.

The process has been designed to ensure procedural fairness for suppliers and that they are not unduly penalised for factors outside of their control.

When a project reaches practical completion, the Commissioner may issue a deprioritisation notice to a supplier if the supplier does not submit a completion report within 90 days of practical completion, or the completion report indicates that the supplier did not achieve one or more of its aggregate Local Industry Development Plan commitments.

Suppliers will have the option to seek a review of a deprioritisation notice, outlining reasons or mitigating factors to explain why they were not able to submit the completion report or fulfil their aggregate Local Industry Development Plan commitments.

The Commissioner will consider this explanation, and if the deprioritisation notice is confirmed, a deprioritisation determination will be provided to the supplier in writing. This determination will result in the supplier being placed on a register established and maintained by the Commissioner. If a supplier is subject to a deprioritisation determination, it will impact the 20% Local Jobs First weighting applied in the evaluation of any future tenders by that supplier for Local Jobs First-applicable projects.

The administrative and operational processes to support the deprioritisation scheme, including how a supplier’s tender will be evaluated if they are subject to a deprioritisation determination, will be prescribed by regulations.

The scheme will disincentivise non-compliance with Local Jobs First requirements by strengthening the Local Jobs First compliance framework and establishing a mechanism to ensure that a supplier’s poor past performance on Local Jobs First-applicable projects is taken into account on future tenders.

Civil penalty scheme

The Commissioner currently has limited ability to penalise suppliers for non-compliance with the Commissioner’s information gathering powers.

The Bill introduces a civil penalty regime to enable the Commissioner to apply to a court for a civil penalty order in relation to a supplier’s non-compliance with an information notice issued under section 24 of the Act or a site inspection notice.

This amendment will incentivise supplier compliance with information requests and the facilitation of site inspections by the Commissioner.

Contingent payments

The government committed to introducing a requirement that suppliers ‘fulfil local content commitments before receiving the final payment of the contract’.

The Bill introduces a requirement for agencies to include a contingent payment mechanism in Local Jobs First contracts linked to the fulfilment of Local Jobs First deliverables, unless it is not practicable or appropriate to do so. This requirement will preserve agencies’ flexibility to manage the drafting of payment mechanisms linked to Local Jobs First deliverables in the project contract, while retaining the discretion to determine where the contingent payment mechanism is appropriate.

This will strengthen the compliance measures available to agencies to ensure Local Jobs First deliverables and supplier non-compliance can be appropriately managed.

Miscellaneous amendments

The Bill includes amendments designed to address stakeholder feedback, improve and optimise the overall operation of the Act, and ensure it is fit for purpose moving forward.

The Bill promotes consistency with other Victorian procurement policies, with ‘value for money’ being defined under the Act. It also introduces non-contestability and emergency procurement exemptions to the application of Local Jobs First to reduce the administrative burden on agencies and suppliers.

The Bill clarifies and strengthens agencies’ obligations in relation to Local Jobs First monitoring and reporting. Additionally, the Bill strengthens agency obligations under the Act by assigning administrative responsibility for the performance of an agency’s functions, duties and obligations to the relevant ‘accountable officer’ of the agency.

The Bill introduces an explicit requirement for suppliers to follow the significant diversion process set out in either the regulations or the Local Jobs First Policy.

This will ensure suppliers investigate local alternatives before considering the need to access an international supplier when significant changes to the local sourcing of goods, materials or labour are proposed.

Additional Local Jobs First objectives have been included in the Bill to promote stronger alignment with our economic development goals. This will mean that, in developing the Local Jobs First Policy under section 5 of the Act, the government must have regard to:

• providing equitable opportunity for the participation of Aboriginal businesses on Local Jobs First projects to reflect government’s commitment to working alongside First Peoples to deliver reforms that respect, recognise and empower their participation in, and contribution to, Victoria’s economy.

• encouraging the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises based in regional areas in Local Jobs First projects.

• encouraging the use of local content at each stage of Local Jobs First projects.

• promoting the use of Australian Standards on Local Jobs First projects.

• ensuring that the processes and mechanisms for tenders and procurements are structured and designed to provide fair and reasonable opportunities for local industry participation.

Importantly and to acquit the government’s commitment to support jobs and businesses in the local Textile, Clothing and Footwear industry, the Bill introduces an explicit provision allowing the Minister to set requirements to use a specified amount of locally manufactured uniforms and PPE on Strategic Projects.

The Bill includes specific transitional provisions in relation to the deprioritisation scheme to ensure that this scheme will not apply to existing Local Jobs First applicable projects that are already underway. In relation to other reforms, the Bill includes a power to make regulations dealing with transitional arrangements to clarify the application of amendments in the Bill to Local Jobs First applicable projects which will be at different stages of development when provisions of the Bill commence.

Conclusion

Local Jobs First plays a significant role in supporting Victorian businesses and workers by leveraging government spending to provide opportunities for local businesses to create jobs and grow our economy.

From construction to manufacturing to professional services, Local Jobs First ensures that our investments benefit Victorian businesses and workers.

This Bill builds on the strong foundations established in Victoria over 20 years ago and ensures that Local Jobs First continues to be Australia’s flagship industry participation policy.

I commend the Bill to the house.

Roma BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (10:11): I move:

That the debate be now adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned for two weeks. Debate adjourned until Thursday 3 July.