Wednesday, 4 March 2026

 Brad ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (09:35): I move:

That I introduce a bill for an act to ensure Victorian government construction and development activity complies with the construction industry code by providing for a Head, Construction Enforcement Victoria who will monitor and enforce compliance with that code and for other purposes.

I am seeking to introduce this bill today for the very simple reason that Victorian taxpayers money should be respected. Following almost 12 years of the Andrews and the Allan Labor governments in this state, it is quite clear that Labor do not respect Victorian taxpayers money. In fact it is worse than that. It is not that they just do not respect it, but they are allowing Victorian taxpayers, hardworking Victorian families, to be ripped off, because here is the economics of it: the more government money and the more taxpayer money that is wasted, the more the Labor government seeks to get through higher taxes, through greater regulation and by making Victorians lives more difficult, and it is Victorians who are paying the price for that every single day of the week.

The establishment of Construction Enforcement Victoria, an independent watchdog on the beat of Victorian government construction sites, is the right thing to do. Labor in New South Wales recognised that it is the right thing to do. Why not this government? In fact it was the former Liberal government in this state, the Baillieu–Napthine governments, that had Construction Enforcement Victoria, that had an independent body implementing a code on Victorian construction sites, and one of the first acts of the Allan government was to remove that oversight. That coupled with the federal Labor government’s shutting down of the Australian Building and Construction Commission has enabled crime to run rampant on Victorian building sites and for corruption to flourish. It is unacceptable.

This bill must be introduced. This bill must be first read. This bill must be second read. This bill must be debated in this place as a matter of urgency, and anything else is completely and utterly unacceptable in our view. We are prepared to take leadership where the government is not prepared to take leadership. We are prepared to do the right thing by Victorians when members of the government sit there idly by looking at their phones, probably checking their social media subscriptions, comments and trolls.

A member interjected.

Brad ROWSWELL: And bots no doubt. We are prepared to do what the government is not prepared to do, and that is to stand up for Victorians, to fight for them, to be on their side and in their corner and to back them in, because unlike the government we are not beholden to the union, we are not beholden to the labour movement and we are not beholden to the militant union and the union forces in this state. We need Construction Enforcement Victoria established in this state.

Construction Enforcement Victoria is part of our plan to clean up crime and corruption in Victoria, to enforce the law, to find the money and to stop the rorts. I do not think at this point in time anything could be more important than that. Construction Enforcement Victoria will have an ability to investigate. The head of Construction Enforcement Victoria, under the bill that I seek to introduce, will be compelled to report instances of allegations of criminal activity to the appropriate authority, whether that be Victoria Police for further investigation or whether that be WorkSafe or another body appropriate to investigate those allegations.

When it comes to corruption, the head of Construction Enforcement Victoria will be compelled to refer that to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission for their investigation. Construction Enforcement Victoria and its head will have the opportunity, in fact the obligation, and the power, should they think that an individual or a group of individuals is not in compliance with the code first introduced in 1999 and then in 2014 – both by coalition governments, never by a Labor government – to issue a banning order against those individuals. A banning order is important. It sends a signal and it sets a standard on Victorian government building sites that corruption is unacceptable.

Speaker, I do not mean to presuppose who the head of Construction Enforcement Victoria should have on that list, but starting with Mick Gatto is probably a bloody good idea, frankly, given his history, and there are so many others who could be on it as well.

The SPEAKER: I remind the member for Sandringham about the use of unparliamentary language in the house. I would ask you to apologise.

Brad ROWSWELL: I apologise.

 Paul EDBROOKE (Frankston) (09:41): I am glad the member apologised; I think we were all offended by that.

If the Liberals spent as much time talking about policy as they do the CFMEU, they might show an alternative to the Victorian people. When they find a problem, they turn it into a slogan. When we find a problem, we fix it. This oversight watchdog that we are talking about, we just heard that was in operation –

Richard Riordan interjected.

The SPEAKER: The member for Polwarth!

Paul EDBROOKE: Please, member for Polwarth, I do you the respect when you are on your feet.

The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Frankston, through the Chair.

Paul EDBROOKE: We heard about an oversight watchdog in place during the Napthine–Baillieu governments to police, to regulate, the building sector at that time. The problem was that the Napthine–Baillieu governments did not build anything – not one inch of rail, not one level crossing removed. It is this government that has built over 120 schools –

Danny O’Brien interjected.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Nationals!

Brad Rowswell: On a point of order, Speaker, relevance.

The SPEAKER: The member for Frankston was being relevant. I do ask him to come back to why the bill should be or not be introduced.

Paul EDBROOKE: By virtue of the nature of the word ‘construction’ – when you talk about a building, I think they are fairly well connected. I will leave it at that. I cannot back the introduction of this bill. It is just another way that the Liberals are finding a problem, wasting this government’s time and wasting the people of Victoria’s time.

 John PESUTTO (Hawthorn) (09:42): I rise in support of this bill. Has there ever been a time when Victorians have lost so much hope, confidence and pride in the leadership of their state? The fact is the Victorian people can no longer believe in this government. They cannot trust it, they cannot rely on it. This mounting evidence of outrage after outrage across construction projects by the CFMEU and their fellow travellers has Victorians scratching their heads at the Premier’s incomprehensible and implacable opposition to what is obvious – that is, the need for a royal commission and a body like Construction Enforcement Victoria to oversee our capital program.

It is not just about the billions of dollars that are flying out the door; it is about more than that. We have lost a life because of this. A young man’s life was lost because of the intimidation that we saw in relation to Marda Dandhi. We see businesses and livelihoods being squandered because no action is being taken. We have a government that knows this is going on and will not do anything about it. We are all asking as Victorians: how can that be? How can the government have drifted so far from the principles of accountability, scrutiny and transparency that they would turn a blind eye to this and pretend that the mounting calls for a royal commission and for a body like Construction Enforcement Victoria should be ignored?

The scale of this is urgent. Think about this: this year, in the government’s own budget papers, $213 billion is being spent on construction projects. Now, to put that in context, our gross state product is about three times that, so for every dollar of value produced in our state economy, think of this: a third of it is going into major projects and infrastructure projects in this state.

And while the government stands flat-footed and stubbornly defiant of the obvious need for greater scrutiny over the capital program, billions are being lost, billions that are not going to schools, not going to hospitals, not going to childcare and child protection services, not going to fixing potholes in our state.

We on this side of the house have a very different approach. We know that the only way out of this hole that the Allan Labor government has put this state in is by restoring the faith of the Victorian people in their government so that they can trust in their government again, that they can have hope for the future, that they can rely on their government, and we are already building that architecture. We believe in integrity, oversight and scrutiny. As the Leader of the Opposition has said and all of us have argued on this side of the house, we have begun that architecture. We started some time ago with fiscal integrity, getting the budget back on track, a budget you can believe in. Even the Auditor-General has said you cannot rely on the budget papers anymore, and in particular budget paper 4, which deals with all of these capital projects.

Members interjecting.

John PESUTTO: Go read the report, Minister for Health and Leader of the House. We have also said that we will strengthen – we have championed this – the powers and ability and resources of our integrity agencies. There are two already: we will restore confidence in transparency and reliability in the budget papers, and we will beef up and support our integrity framework and the regime that supports all of that. This represents an important third part of that architecture. It is saying that for one of the largest parts of the Victorian budget, something all Victorians rely on in one way or another, we are going to put that back on track. We are going to restore integrity. We are going to ensure that all people who work on major projects can go to work in a safe environment, that they will not be subject to intimidation and criminal behaviour and that they will be able to believe in and support a government that really has their backs and that will ensure that every dollar that is spent on their behalf is spent for a purpose that they will see in the infrastructure that they enjoy around their state.

It is hard to believe that in the face of all of this evidence, the outcry, the scandal from the community, we could have a Premier who has been in this place for over a quarter of a century and cannot see what is obvious to everybody else. I join with the member for Sandringham in what is an important measure. It appears to be a measure that only we will ever be able to implement, a measure that has proven to be successful, including in evidence before the royal commission some years ago that the code established under the Baillieu–Napthine governments worked. I support the member for Sandringham and commend him.

 Lauren KATHAGE (Yan Yean) (09:48): I do not support the introduction of this bill for some very simple reasons. Firstly, I thank the member for Hawthorn for setting out their view of the government’s infrastructure projects: that we are building too much. He has looked at the budget, he has looked at the list of projects, and he has said ‘This is too much investment for Victorians; this is too much building for Victorians.’ I think we should see the introduction of this bill through that prism – that they want to cut back and claw back the investments we are making for Victorians.

The member for Sandringham spoke about hardworking Victorian families, and that is who we are building for. They have got no experience of doing these sorts of investments and these sorts of projects. In my electorate, when they were last in government, they spent zero dollars on major projects, which is shameful. When we talk about hardworking Victorians, that is what we should talk about.

Everything that they are saying that this body would do is already being covered by other parts of this government. That is why I oppose this bill. Those outcomes are already being achieved through the action that we are taking, the hard work of our police in cleaning up any construction sites that need it. The member for Hawthorn’s view and those opposite’s view is that we should stop our infrastructure, childcare building, hospital building and the apprentices I have met on those worksites who are developing skills as sparkies or as formworkers. We will always support them. We will keep investing for Victorians, because we know what Victorians need.

 Martin CAMERON (Morwell) (09:49): I rise to support the introduction of this bill and support the member for Sandringham. As we have just heard from the other side of the bench, there are builds that are going on around Victoria. That may be so, but it does not give the government the green light to actually employ criminal elements that are wasting Victorian taxpayers money. It is not the government’s money, it is the money of mums and dads and small business owners in this state – it is their money – that the government are trying not to say that they are wasting, but they are turning a blind eye to criminal activities right across the builds of whatever they are trying to do. There are criminal activities which they are burying their head in the sand about, which they do not want to know about. The Premier knows –

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: What is outrageous in this house is members interjecting across the chamber when a member is on their feet.

Mary-Anne Thomas: On a point of order, Speaker, the member on his feet is required to be factual, and in order to be factual he should outline the number of steps that the Premier has taken in relation to the allegations that have been made.

The SPEAKER: I am not sure what your point of order was.

Martin CAMERON: We have asked the Premier many, many times, especially in the last two years as we have been here in the chamber: what is happening, what steps are they taking on these allegations – the allegations that are being brought up from right across everybody in Victoria, from people that are working in the Big Build, from people on this side of the bench – and what actions are being taken? And what we are told, from the Premier to the Attorney-General, is ‘There is nothing to see here. We have it in hand.’

This bill that the member for Sandringham is putting up to be introduced here puts forward steps that will hold the government to account, no matter which side of government is in charge. You cannot have a free run at building projects that funnel allegedly billions of dollars into criminals’ hands – criminals that are building empires so they can put their tentacles out into the community and cause grief to Victorian taxpayers by coercing others into these criminal activities. It needs to stop. They need to be made to stand to account. We need to be able to follow the money. We need to be able to find where it is going. And there will be a trail – but have the courage to put it up. The coalition have got the courage to stand up and put a bill forward that will absolutely follow the money and find out what is going on. We will not hide from it. We will guarantee the Victorian public that we will not look down the camera and say to you ‘There is nothing going on,’ because we know that there is.

We know that this needs to be tested right across the state, whether it is builds that are going to be here in Melbourne or builds across regional Victoria. There is no confidence in the government at the moment that they want to find this trail. They do not want to try and see who is in charge. Where has the money gone? That is a pretty easy question that is being put forward: where has the money gone? Who is actually making sure of it and contributing to this money being funnelled into criminal activity? It is pretty easy to see from this side of the chamber and it is pretty easy for the Victorian public to see that there is an issue. There is a major issue with the construction industry at the moment. This bill that we are putting forward now will put measures around that to hold people to account, to enforce the law, to find the money and to stop the rorts. I commend this bill.

 Nina TAYLOR (Albert Park) (09:54): It is well known that the government has already taken decisive action; with Operation Hawk there have been almost 70 charges laid. Obviously those opposite do not have any faith in Victoria Police, and I am sorry they do not. The Labour Hire Authority has already cancelled 126 licences. There is already a complaints referral service set up.

I should say it is a shame that the opposition think we have delivered too many projects, that it is too much for the Victorian community. One hundred new schools – what would you say? Fifty new schools? Should we get rid of Narrawong primary school?

The SPEAKER: Through the Chair, member for Albert Park.

Nina TAYLOR: Sorry, Speaker. Should we get rid of Port Melbourne Secondary College? Let us take a pick. Frankston Hospital, the rebuild; Footscray Hospital – should we just smash them down? Those opposite obviously do not think that the community deserve them. What about Metro Tunnel? What about the West Gate Tunnel? What about the level crossing removals? What about free TAFE? We were going to discuss free TAFE today, but those opposite do not want to go there because they do not want to deliver for the Victorian community. They have said already that we have delivered too much and the Victorian community does not deserve it. What about their $11 billion black hole? Where are they going to cut? We can see already that they do not want the new hospitals, they do not want the level crossing removals, they do not want the Metro Tunnel and they do not want the West Gate Tunnel. Where are they going to cut? Health –

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: I ask the member for Mildura to cease interjecting.

Brad Rowswell: On a point of order, Speaker – actually a number of points of order come to mind. I will raise a point of order on this occasion of relevance.

The SPEAKER: The member for Albert Park will come back to the debate before the chamber, which is why the bill should be introduced or why the bill should not be introduced.

Nina TAYLOR: I will close there. I believe I have attested as to why we should not proceed with this bill.

Assembly divided on motion: