Thursday, 19 February 2026

 James NEWBURY (Brighton) (14:19): My question is to the Attorney. The Premier said 10 times yesterday that if anyone has any allegation it should immediately be referred to Victoria Police. Allegations and evidence of criminal behaviour were put to the Attorney by a labour hire firm on a Big Build site in October 2022. Why did the Attorney first refer it to the then Premier rather than immediately to Victoria Police?

Danny Pearson: On a point of order, Speaker, I fail to see how this question relates to the Attorney’s current portfolio. She was not the Attorney-General at the time those allegations were made.

The SPEAKER: If that is the case, the Attorney can rightfully answer in that way.

 Sonya KILKENNY (Carrum – Attorney-General, Minister for Planning) (14:21): I absolutely back the calls of our Premier, this government and the administrator of the CFMEU that anyone that has allegations of any criminal or illegal conduct on construction sites needs to refer those to the relevant authorities.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: The member for Mildura can leave the chamber for an hour.

Member for Mildura withdrew from chamber.

Sonya KILKENNY: The member for Brighton referred to an incident back in 2022, when I was ‍– and I still am – the member for Carrum. I acknowledge that at that time a labour hire firm did raise with me concerns about that worksite on Lathams Road, Carrum Downs. I also confirm to the member for Brighton that at that exact time I raised those matters and those concerns immediately with the agency and the authority responsible for delivering that project, and those matters were referred to Victoria Police.

 James NEWBURY (Brighton) (14:22): The firm reported allegations 80 times to 15 members of Parliament, including the Attorney. Doesn’t this prove the problem is not the reporting but that this government is covering it all up?

 Sonya KILKENNY (Carrum – Attorney-General, Minister for Planning) (14:22): As I said in my answer to the first question, I immediately referred that matter to the relevant authorities, and that matter was reviewed by Victoria Police, as it should have been. And I encourage everyone in here –

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, the question initially went specifically to Victoria Police. The Attorney has referred to agencies, but the question related to Victoria Police.

Ben Carroll: On the point of order, Speaker, on relevance, I heard the Attorney-General very clearly talk about agencies and Victoria Police being referred to.

The SPEAKER: I do not uphold the point of order. The Attorney has concluded her answer.