Tuesday, 3 March 2020

Bills

Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Mr WYNNE:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Ms RYAN (Euroa) (13:50): I am pleased to be able to rise today to outline some of the opposition’s thoughts about the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. Effectively I think this bill lands before us due to a series of machinery of government changes which actually took effect on 1 January last year. As a consequence of those changes we saw DEDJTR, the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, which was always a mouthful for anybody—I think I always wondered if when the government first created that department anyone tested the acronym before going ahead with it—

Mr D O’Brien: This government? They test everything.

Ms RYAN: DEDJTR was always a difficult one to say. But as a consequence of those machinery of government changes, known within the public service as MOG-ing, we had the creation of the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions and also the Department of Transport as a standalone department. Under the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions we now have Global Victoria; the Office of the Lead Scientist; jobs, innovation and business engagement; creative, sport and visitor economy; precincts and suburbs; rural and regional Victoria; and Agriculture Victoria. So it is still a very large department that covers a range of different portfolio areas.

I do have to say that I do think it is a shame that this government has moved away from actually having agriculture in the title of a department. I think it really reflects where the current government sees agriculture, and also rural and regional Victoria—that it has basically been made a division of a department and bundled in among a whole lot of other things, but I will leave that to one side for today.

When this change occurred there was also the creation of the Department of Transport. The Department of Transport listed a whole series of things around how it thought its services would improve, and it came with a whole lot of new promises that it would respond much faster, that it would make better use of existing road and rail, that it would respond quicker to innovation, that it would take a holistic view in planning for the future most particularly and that it would partner with others. And I think there is not really any evidence—or I do not really see any evidence to date—that those machinery of government changes have delivered on that large promise for the Department of Transport. There is no doubt that the shuffling of the deck chairs cost taxpayers money, but what it actually achieved in practice for Victorians on the ground is a question that remains to be answered—not a lot in my view so far in terms of how the government actually serves Victorians, but I will come back to that a little later.

The purpose of this bill is to give effect to those machinery of government changes that were made after the last election. To that end the bill amends the principal act, the Project Development and Construction Management Act 1994, to establish the Secretary, Project Development. It dissolves the Secretary to the Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development, which is currently the Secretary to the Department of Transport body corporate established under section 41A of that act. It sets out a process for the transfer of certain property, rights and liabilities to the Secretary, Project Development, and it sets out a process for the transfer of property, rights and liabilities relating to specified transport projects to the head, Transport for Victoria. It also sets out a process for the transfer of projects to successor bodies corporate constituting the Secretary, Project Development.

Under those changes the Department of Transport became the legal successor to the old Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources. So as a consequence, as I understand it, some of the projects for which the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions is supposed to have responsibility are now incorrectly sitting within the Department of Transport. I do have a full list of those projects, which I thought I might read into Hansard because I think it is important. Whilst many of them are historical projects, I think it is important that that is reflected on the record. Only a few of them were mentioned in the minister’s second-reading speech.

Those projects which have been delivered under the Project Development and Construction Management Act 1994 include the Austin and Repatriation Medical Centre and Mercy Hospital for Women project; the Australian Synchrotron project; the Bayside project; the Biosciences Research Centre project; the Bullock Island project; the Bundoora Mont Park precinct project; the City Square Regent Theatre project; the Commonwealth Games project; the Commonwealth Games village project; the convention centre project; the Craigieburn rail electrification project; the Docklands project; the Dynon port rail link project; the Federation Arch project; the Federation Square project; the festival market project; the former fish market site redevelopment project; the former Royal Park Hospital site interim management project; the Immigration Museum project; the Janefield project; the joint arts storage project; the Jolimont project; the Kew Residential Services redevelopment project; the Larundel laundry project; the Lynch’s Bridge project; the Malthouse Plaza project; the Melbourne Casino site delivery project; the Melbourne Casino project—

Mr D O’Brien interjected.

Ms RYAN: The member for Gippsland South unfairly suggests that I am trying to pad out my speech. I just want the record to reflect that I think it is important that these things are actually noted in Hansard—the Melbourne Casino project, the Melbourne Convention Centre development project, the Melbourne Convention Centre development project—extension of project boundary; the Melbourne rectangular stadium; the Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre project; the Melbourne markets relocation project; the Mount Buffalo Chalet project; the multipurpose venue; the National Air and Space Museum of Australia at Point Cook; the National Gallery of Victoria upgrade; the National Tennis Centre pedestrian bridge project; the new exhibition centre project; the new Museum of Victoria project; the Old Customs House project, the Old Treasury Building project, the Olympic car park project, the Olympics project—

Mr D O’Brien interjected.

Ms RYAN: I have got a lot to say on this bill, member for Gippsland South. There is the Olympics project, Prince Henry’s site disposal project, Princes Gate project, Queen Victoria Hospital site project, rapid transit link project, redevelopment of the MCG Southern Stand project, Royal Botanic Gardens bicentennial project, Royal Melbourne Showgrounds redevelopment project, Sandridge Bridge project, Scienceworks museum exhibition project, Southbank project, sports and entertainment precinct infrastructure upgrade implementation, sports facilities Albert Park project, state archive centre, State Library restoration and extension project, State Library redevelopment project, State Library museum project, State Netball and Hockey Centre, Sidney Myer Music Bowl refurbishment, Victorian College of the Arts project, wholesale market sites acquisition project, World Congress Centre project, Yarra precinct arts integration project, Flinders Street administration building, Palais Theatre project, State Library Ballarat offsite storage project, Geelong Performing Arts Centre redevelopment and Melbourne Park redevelopment—and I am sure at some point down the track some public servant or perhaps legal eagle will thank me for reading those into the record, member for Gippsland South.

As you can see, this is a very functional bill designed to correct that misalignment within departments. I think there might be a question around why we are only seeing this bill a year after those machinery-of-government changes were made, and there are probably some questions about how some projects have been managed during that time while they have been sitting with the incorrect entity. However, many of the projects are historical. But I think there is a broader question to be asked, and that is, as I mentioned earlier: have those machinery-of-government changes actually worked for Victorians on the ground? Have they delivered more streamlined services? Have they improved decision-making or have they improved people’s interactions with government? Because I think they are really the benchmarks that the government needs to examine when it is reflecting on whether they have been a success. Have they made the transport system more reliable, more sustainable and better able to service the needs of Victoria’s growing population? Do people actually feel that the government is now delivering a better service as a consequence of those structural changes?

When I asked myself that question, I went back and thought about where things were at with the Fishermans Bend development, which sits under the Minister for Priority Precincts in the other place. We have a project there where the former government had proposed and funded a new station, and apart from really cancelling that project the government has completely stalled. They have set up committees, they have done studies, they have made plans and they have looked at strategies, but there has been no meaningful action in developing a site that is very important to the economic development of this state. It is the largest urban renewal zone in Australia, but it appears to have completely stalled despite it being officially named as one of the priority precincts, so I struggle to see how this structural change has really accelerated progress or resulted in a better outcome on the ground for Victorians there.

Similarly, have a look at the total disaster that we had over the Christmas and January period around Central Pier, where Development Victoria basically cancelled the use of that facility in the middle of an event when people had actually sat down to their entrees. People were told to evacuate Central Pier and that it would be closed indefinitely over safety concerns, despite the fact that Development Victoria had been inspecting it every two months. There was one general manager of a venue down there who actually said:

If they had been inspecting every two months why did the gala dinner have to be evacuated in the middle of the night?

How could things have been so mismanaged to have got to that? I feel like I am living an episode of Utopia.

That was a view reflected by many of the vendors down there, where there were hundreds of staff who lost their jobs literally on the eve of Christmas, and many of the vendors down there felt that Development Victoria and the government had put that information out in the middle of the severe situation we had with bushfires to minimise exposure and minimise negative publicity. Again, that does not really reflect to me that the government is more transparent or is serving Victorians in a better way.

Mr T Bull: Good points, there.

Ms RYAN: Thank you, member for Gippsland East. I appreciate your support, as always. I could make similar comments around the East Werribee employment precinct, where proposals for the Australian Education City have been dumped, and there seems to be very little action at that site. If you have a look at the Department of Transport—and again, I mentioned the promises that were made around how this restructure would impact within the transport portfolio—the Department of Transport on its website basically said that these changes would provide a singular and integrated focus to tackling the big issues. They said that this integrated approach would enable them to respond much faster, make better use of existing road and rail, shift more journeys onto rail, prioritise public transport on roads and respond much quicker to innovation and new transport technologies, and the one that really got me was that they said that suddenly the Department of Transport would be taking a holistic approach in planning for the future to meet demand for more than 23 million journeys a day.

But that is just not a story that is remotely reflected on the ground in Victoria at all. You only have to look at the incredibly decrepit state of V/Line in this state. The government cut $149 million out of V/Line’s budget last year, and I can tell you it is reflecting on the ground. Their performance is absolutely woeful. You have just got to look at their reliability and punctuality statistics. If you have a look at December last year, 10 out of 11 of the state’s rail lines failed to meet their reliability targets. Nine out of 11 failed to meet punctuality targets, and—I have both the members for Gippsland here; they will be interested to know this—the Gippsland line did not meet its punctuality target a single time last year, but in December it sank to 52.2 per cent punctuality.

Similarly the Albury-Wodonga line was at 58.7 per cent, and that was one of the best performances it had had in almost a year. We had the punctuality performance of the Albury-Wodonga train get down to 30 per cent at times last year, which means that two out of every three trains that ran on that line were late. Now, that does not reflect to me a government that is really performing well or is delivering on the changes that it promised under these machinery-of-government changes.

You have just got to look at today’s Geelong Advertiser, where you have a whole group of mayors who are coming out with their concerns over the government’s decision on the airport rail link and the very real prospect that they will not build dedicated tracks—a dedicated tunnel—from Sunshine to Southern Cross, basically cruelling the fortunes of rail services across Geelong and across key regional centres like Shepparton, Ballarat and Bendigo. These are really big legacy decisions for the state which the government is going to ruin for many regional cities and centres for years to come if it does not hold to that original vision of building dedicated rail tracks. You have got, as the Geelong Advertiser says today, ‘A trio of current and former mayors’ are warning that ‘a new tunnel between Melbourne and Sunshine is the only way to properly deliver fast rail services to the state’s west’. We would certainly call on the commonwealth to ensure that the proper engineering solution is delivered here to ensure that those regional services are not locked out permanently from a reliable and fast rail service. That is why the promise around these machinery-of-government changes to take a holistic view of the future planning of transport I just do not think has been delivered when you have a look at some of these very ad hoc decisions that are being made. Similarly if you have a look at—

Ms Couzens interjected.

Ms RYAN: Well, the member for Geelong says we are jumping the gun and that no decision has been made, so we very much look forward to the right decision being made and ensuring that those dedicated tunnels are built with airport rail so that the people of Geelong can actually have a reliable rail service.

One of the most extraordinary things in recent times was the revelation last week that we have had the signalling system between Craigieburn and Seymour out of action for two and a half years. It is the oldest signalling system in the state and it is the only stretch of line in Australia that uses the double line block system, which means that the signallers along that line are actually using Morse code to communicate. If you have a look at the boxes that they basically operate with, they look like something out of Harry Potter; they are like an antique radio. That system, which was installed in the 1890s, has not been operational for two and a half years and V/Line has said nothing about it. The government has said nothing about it. The government has not told people that on that line they have actually had to go back to a completely manual system where they are operating via phone—

Mr T Bull: Carrier pigeon.

Ms RYAN: Yes, effectively carrier pigeon. It is just extraordinary to have signal operators operating manually on one of the state’s busiest regional rail lines that both the Shepparton and Seymour lines rely on. And then we also discovered that for the Seymour and Shepparton trains—and it actually also impacts trains coming in from Sunbury—there are controllers who are responsible for interfacing those trains with the metropolitan network. The GPS tracking screen that they look at in order to interface those trains has been out of action for eight weeks and no-one has done anything about it. So not only are these controllers operating manually on this line with the system completely out of action for two and a half years, but they now cannot even see the location of those trains to interface them with the metropolitan network. How that is not a safety issue baffles me, and how the government has just quietly let that go—it really shows you that those huge cuts to V/Line that were made last year are really starting to bite because V/Line has basically just let that whole thing go. We now have the Treasurer talking about a further $4 billion in cuts across government services. How that is going to impact regional rail transport just really terrifies me.

Following the very tragic derailment we had on the Australian Rail Track Corporation line I had a gentleman from Beechworth, Bill Wilson, email me. He contacted me yesterday and said that he had just been advised via text that the V/Line services from Albury to Melbourne would resume today, but that:

We have been advised to allow up to an additional 120 minutes for the journey.

An extra 2 hours for a journey from Albury!

Mr T Bull: No-one will go.

Ms RYAN: That is right, no-one will go, and that will cause patronage on that line to fall even further. He said:

That means that a journey scheduled to take three and a half hours will now take up to five and a half hours! It is getting close to double the scheduled time. Nowhere else on the Vline network would accept this abominable service. Some of us have no other option and have to use this non service but surely we should not have to spend five and half hours travelling 328 kms, at less than 60 Kph.

This is beyond third world service it is an utter disgrace, use buses until the trains can run at a reasonable speed, we are not cattle and deserve a reasonable train service, if you cannot deliver it please, please direct that Vline use buses until a service somewhere approaching normal can be provided.

That is so typical of the feedback that we on this side of the house get from people around that line. It has suffered from a distinct lack of investment. The federal government, to their credit, have put $235 million on the table to improve the track, but the Victorian government is just walking away. It is walking away from those V/Line services. It is walking away from its responsibility as the owner of the track to ensure that appropriate standards are put in place and adhered to.

Kathy Burden from Chesney Vale got in touch with me late last month just after the derailment. She said:

I can’t help that yesterday’s tragedy was completely avoidable had both NSW and Victorian Governments, along with the Federal Government all worked together instead of politicising the issue.

And I think that really gets to the nub of it. People are so sick of people pointing fingers on this issue. They just want governments to actually get together and fix it.

She also raised another matter. When she was travelling home on 11 February her train was delayed by an hour or so, so she lodged an online compensation claim through V/Line. In their email response they said:

We have welcomed the Victorian State Government in providing $235 million for the North East line for track—

firstly, that is the federal government, not the Victorian government, so I hope V/Line are not saying that because that would not be true—

signalling and station improvements. The investment will enable VLocity trains to run to Albury/Wodonga for the first time as well as track, signalling and station improvements along the north-east line to pave the way for better services.

Well, that is just not happening. It is an absolute joke. We have been told for the last two and half years that we have train designs taking place and that somehow it takes two and a half years to figure out how to move a VLocity over to a standard gauge bogie. It is absolutely ludicrous. As Kathy said:

This one paragraph says so much and yet so little. My biggest question is ‘when’. Until they start quoting dates/timeframes, I’m not convinced that anything is going to change.

The reason why Kathy feels like that is that over the life of this government there has been successive underinvestment in regional rail, and people are sick of it. They see billions of dollars being poured—in an ad hoc way, I might add—into infrastructure in city communities, and they see regional communities getting shafted time and time and time again without adequate investment.

Mr D O’Brien interjected.

Ms RYAN: The member for Gippsland South looks at the Murray Basin rail project—which I will do, thank you. This is another project where the Andrews government has just tried to walk away with a project half finished. We have stakeholders there now saying that they were better off before the project started, while the Minister for Transport Infrastructure has done absolutely nothing to fix a project that has gone completely off the rails. The Victorian government was required to put in a business case to the federal government by the end of last year that outlined how they would actually complete those final stages of the project. I do not know if that has happened. The minister certainly has not been upfront or transparent with those people in western Victoria who rely on that project to get their produce to port. That is an incredibly important project in western Victoria and another that the government has basically just walked away from. While they tip money in to cover cost blowouts in projects in the city all the time, in the country when it comes to something like the Murray Basin rail project they just walk away and leave it half finished.

Mr D O’Brien: They tell the feds to do it.

Ms RYAN: It is absolutely disgraceful. They tell the federal government that they should do it instead—it is absolutely disgraceful.

You look at the West Gate Tunnel project—very similarly, a project where the government did not seek submissions for that proposal. There was no competitive tender process. The business case showed only marginal value as a standalone project. It did not meet a transparent cost-benefit analysis. It was not peer reviewed properly. They did not let independent experts in infrastructure actually look at the project. They did not undertake a comprehensive or transparent assessment of the value for money for that project. Alternative funding options were not looked at, and instead we have a project that went from a $500 million commitment to a $6.7 billion project that even the builders are now saying they do not want a bar of.

This is what happens when you do not properly plan infrastructure in this state, when you do not have a proper transport plan. I think it is very interesting to reflect on the fact that you can make all of the machinery of government changes that you want but they are worthless if there is no strategic approach, and the reality is that those opposite have had the Transport Integration Act in front of them from back in 2010. It was actually developed by the Brumby government and they had several years of extensive stakeholder input into that act that was designed to create an integrated and sustainable transport system. That act is still in place in Victoria, and it obliges the government to produce a transport plan and to make revisions along the way to periodically revise that transport plan. They have not done that. They have not complied with the requirements of their own transport act. Instead, all of the planning in this state has been completely ad hoc.

There has been no proper transport plan developed. Instead we get complete thought bubbles like the Suburban Rail Loop, which got announced on Facebook with no price tag and no detailed work done. The bureaucracy have never seen it and they have no idea what it is about. Infrastructure Australia has never seen it. We chuck Infrastructure Australia’s recommendations in the bin all the time because they do not line up with the political priorities that this government has. That is the reality of what is happening in this state at the moment. It is all very well to reshuffle some seats, to change the deck chairs, to move some bureaucrats from here to here, but the reality is that is not how you integrate and take a holistic approach to transport planning in this state. That is not going to deliver the outcome. There is no proper plan in this state for transport infrastructure, and that is because that all comes down to the fact that those opposite are only interested in the politics of it. They are interested in the politics of infrastructure, not in actually building the most effective projects for this state that would deliver the outcome for Victorians in the long term.

Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (14:19): On the face of it this is about the machinery of government, but you can almost hear—whirling away beneath the legislative reforms—jobs, growth, new precincts of opportunity that are given priority by this government, and then, building on that, some of the key areas where Victoria is a world leader, such as medical research and through our sciences. We need to actually look at what is the frame of reference that brings all this together. Do not be caught up in the negativity of the response, that this is just superficially about the machinery of government—it is really about what it is driving to achieve.

I will reference that with medical research and priority precincts from today’s events. I had the privilege to be with the Premier and the Minister for Health this morning when we were at the Doherty Institute, named after one of our Nobel Prize winners, the eminent Peter Doherty. It was the announcement of an extra $6 million in funding for the centre to look at the research on what we need to do to address what is now a pandemic of the coronavirus, or COVID-19 as it is now being called. You had Professor Sharon Lewin there, one of our best and brightest, and she was saying that the money will be spent on developing a vaccine. There are very few places in the world that can actually do this, and this was a centre that made the initial international breakthrough on how to make the first advances.

So this is a bill that brings together the architecture that is needed to address and to drive these sorts of elegant science research and institutions that will be the anchors for our future development for the next generation. I would like to actually propose that we look at a centre for disease control to be one of the next priorities that we have here, and that would most fittingly be in Melbourne with the Doherty Institute; the Burnet Institute—again, named after a Nobel Prize winner, Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet; the Florey Institute; and the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute. We have got this wonderful integrated area and we also have the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre there, the billion-dollar jewel in Australia’s medical research crown. Even with that we have been able to address a cancer moonshot and get a deal with the United States, originally under former President Barack Obama and now under current President Donald Trump. There are not too many unity tickets like that, if I can just call it that in a political sense. But that is what we have and that is the elegance that we have.

If you actually think of priority precincts and you look at that Parkville precinct and how we can deliver on that, whether you anchor it around the University of Melbourne and how we can leverage that, if you consider a centre for disease control, that would really be an investment that the Australian government, through the Medical Research Future Fund—remember, it is rising to $20 billion—should absolutely look at making in a coordinated way with our leading institutions. Then do not forget the great southern hub, where we have Monash University connected to the CSIRO by Innovation Walk, and then all of the hinterland on production and everything there. These are the precincts that this government is looking to bring together. How do we add value to them?

Of course on the manufacturing side in the north we have got CSL, one of our leading companies, whose share price is now more than $300. That company, I am proud to say, is in the state district of Broadmeadows, and it manufactures and exports life-saving blood products.

Do not just look at the superficial view of what this piece of legislation does. If you see the thought and the strategy behind what it is attempting to achieve, this is really about how we get better coordination and how we get better clarity. At its finest point, I guess, if the bill is not passed, the priority precincts portfolio will be unable to undertake new projects or deal with land to benefit the vital priority precincts using the provisions of the act independently of the Secretary of the Department of Transport as body corporate. This is a bill that is pertinent today for these specific reasons that have to be adhered to, but it is also vital for our future projects and the priorities that this government gives them. The strategies of this government for the Big Build, for infrastructure and for looking at these different projects and priority precincts and how to build them has made it a leader. I refute some of the commentary that was made by the lead speaker for the opposition.

Then if you want to look at transport—Melbourne Metro and all the other ingredients we have that fit within there—we are also looking at different projects that affect our communities. The electrification of the rail line from Broadmeadows to Craigieburn is captured by this. Also associated with those works is the opening of the new train station at Roxburgh Park, the upgraded station at Craigieburn and the grade separation of the Somerton Road level crossing. These projects have been completed, but they need to be captured by this legislation. We know this is the vital infrastructure that you need to develop Melbourne’s growing north, which will have a population the size of Adelaide in less than a decade—that is the reality of it.

This is how successive Labor governments have built the infrastructure that is required and have had the vision to actually address that and to look at how we also manage population growth and how we revitalise these areas. Of course of specific interest for me as the member for Broadmeadows and chair of the Broadmeadows Revitalisation Board is how we address those issues and opportunities—and I see them as opportunities. We have been able to attract an investor for $500 million into the old Ford sites in Broadmeadows and Geelong, and that is the first part of the investment. That is for the new industries and jobs. Why is that important? Because we are trying to fast-track deindustrialisation and we are trying to take care of the people whose muscle, sweat and manufacturing nous have underwritten prosperity for generations and say to them, ‘We will make sure that we connect the disconnected and give you lifelong learning skills and jobs—and here are the jobs of the future’. These are critical themes that run through here.

The other point I should also reference is that the Ford Motor Company is actually reinvesting hundreds of millions of dollars in innovation. This is their centre of excellence for Asia-Pacific, and this is really where we have to evolve to create the new jobs. They are going to be in niche and advanced manufacturing: high profit, high pay—it is not a bad formula. We need to look at how we drive these communities and then make sure that we have the other social infrastructure that is part of welding together communities so that you connect the disconnected so that they do not feel left behind and that they have lifelong learning—they have the connection to the jobs and they have the skills and the training. That is what the Andrews Labor government does.

There was a statement that the government supposedly does not have a strategy. Well, I have just outlined briefly how it fits and works on a number of different levels from the high-end machinery of government to get that frame of reference right and to get the architecture correct. Then if you have a look at why that is important, it is because it attracts private investment, which we need to keep driving. The Treasurer and the Minister for Economic Development has been outstanding on how we do that. We build the infrastructure around it. We say, ‘Here are key priority precincts and competitive advantages’, and we bring them together. That is what this bill will be able to achieve in a neater way to give everybody certainty about how we need to drive this agenda, because this is what we need for the new industries and jobs, the new economic development. If we are to retain our uninterrupted economic growth and avoid recession, we have got to go back into these communities, help redevelop them and revitalise them and set ourselves up for what is the next generation of economic development and how we then underscore prosperity and of course make everybody feel part of it—give them a hand up and connect them into this future driven by the Andrews Labor government. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr HIBBINS (Prahran) (14:29): I rise to speak on behalf of the Greens to the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. This is a largely technical bill covering machinery of government changes due to the fact that the new Department of Transport is the legal successor to the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources. This has resulted in a number of projects now sitting within the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions and the Department of Transport that now are essentially in the wrong department. They have responsibility over projects that sit with them, so we have got to shift some projects over to the Department of Transport or over to the new Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions. I will not go through it; I think the member for Euroa has done a very good job of going through all the projects that have been moved over.

The Greens will be supporting this bill. Certainly we do support the creation of a standalone Department of Transport and any changes that go along with it. We think this is an important reform in strengthening the transport bureaucracy and administration here in Victoria. I would note that it does seem to have been a very lengthy and ongoing restructure of the transport bureaucracy, and we do not appear to be quite at the end of it yet. We have had previous legislation that has rolled VicRoads and Public Transport Victoria into Transport for Victoria. It has made clear, from what I recall of that legislation, that you have got the Department of Transport secretary in charge of the strategic side of things and you have got the head of Transport for Victoria in charge of operations, but as I understand it, currently the secretary is the head of Transport for Victoria. I think we have still got a bit of work to be done in terms of what the bureaucracy is going to look like and how the machinery of government will work for transport here in Victoria. We are still a long way from the promised Transport for London model, which is a very transparent, very thorough and very effective model for transport governance here in Victoria.

There is, however, the missing piece to the puzzle here. As the member for Euroa mentioned in her contribution, it is a long-term integrated transport plan for Victoria. I believe yesterday the RACV—our mates, the best friends of the Greens—became just the latest transport group to call for a long-term transport plan here in Victoria and not ad hoc solutions. They join a number of transport groups and academics that have been calling for this plan for a very long time. Of course the government is actually legally obliged to develop such a plan under the Transport Integration Act 2010. This was introduced by the former Brumby government in 2010. At the time they did have a Victorian transport plan, but we have not seen one since. I guess the catch in the legislation is that whilst they are required to have a plan, they are not required to publish that plan.

That is something that the Greens tried to change by moving amendments to the previous transport amendment legislation in the upper house that would have compelled the government to table that plan and any updates before Parliament. I think that is a fairly reasonable ask, for a government to table a plan that they are legally obliged to actually have. We had quite a bizarre debate where essentially the government on one hand would say that it was compliant with the act but then on the other hand say that if the amendments passed, they would have to do something new and have a consolidated, single plan. And they were saying that that plan could be potentially out of date. It was ridiculous. The government is wanting to get away with essentially making it up as they go along or have a series of individual plans that do not necessarily integrate with each other. It is disappointing that whilst we got support from the opposition and some crossbenchers, the government and some other crossbenchers decided that it was in their best interests to try and protect the government and save them a few blushes rather than act in the best interests of this state.

Of course the problem with not having an overarching plan is that whilst it has been fantastic and it is certainly welcome to see the level of investment in transport we have had from this government as compared to the previous government, the question is: are we just going to do more of the same with more population or are we actually genuinely shifting people out of cars and into public transport and sustainable transport? As it stands right now this government does not have a mode-share target for transport; it is not an explicit aim. Nowhere have they put down or said, ‘We are actually trying to shift the modes of transport or more people onto public transport rather than vehicles’. The New South Wales government and their minister have been very clear that that is their aim, and it is a Liberal government in New South Wales—not so the Victorian government.

The government does not have a carbon emissions target for transport. You have got emissions from transport now upward of 20 per cent of Victoria’s emissions and going north, yet incredibly we do not have an emissions target. So what you are having are all of these projects and funding with no clear aim to actually reduce emissions from transport. What we are getting when we question the government or ministers about this is the sort of Yes Minister response: ‘We want to take a flexible approach. We want to give people choices’. But in reality what they want to do is actually just make it up as they go along.

Melbourne is going to be as big as London is now by 2050, and we do need a transport system to match. Without a long-term plan we are getting what is being described as project-led planning, or you could even put it as Transurban-led planning. With their incredible influence and involvement within our transport system Transurban is effectively the world’s first privatised transport department. They are planning, building, owning, operating and profiting off transport projects in this state. Yes, great, we have got a standalone Department of Transport, but we have got two departments of transport—the actual Department of Transport, and Transurban.

What we are getting is, on the one hand, the government going around touting and saying, ‘The Suburban Rail Loop—we’re going to get a couple of hundred thousand cars off our roads’, and ‘Melbourne Metro—we’re going to get more capacity on our public transport network’. But on the other hand you have got the North East Link. That is another 100 000 cars on the road. The West Gate Tunnel—that is thousands of cars in the inner city. So what are we doing? Are we taking cars off the road or are we putting more cars on the road? This is the issue with not having a long-term plan, making it up as they go along and allowing the influence of Transurban and their profit-led transport planning. It really is not going to serve this state well.

I want to go to the North East Link because seriously, this is probably one of the biggest examples. It is being called the missing link, and that is if you believe that all the freeways have got to join up so you never get off a freeway. There is a reason it is missing. There is a reason it has been the missing link, because you have just got to look at what actually now has to happen for them to build the thing. It is not only 100 000 extra cars on the road, it is hectares of open space and threatened species’ habitat loss for billions and billions of dollars—at a time when the Treasurer is going out saying he has got to make some tough decisions, we are getting $4 billion cut from the public service, we have got debt pushing at its limits, we have got a climate crisis and we have got an extinction crisis. This is a toll road that is economic and environmental vandalism, and the only way they have managed to get it to work is to suddenly have masses of lanes on the Eastern Freeway pouring into the city. As has been reported, this is really going to make it a precursor to a future east–west link.

Councils have rightly taken the government to court over the environment effects statement process, primarily over the fact that this whole process was based around a reference design and the fact that the minister has ignored the panel’s findings and recommendations. What this really does show is that the whole environment effects statement process is simply a rubber stamp for projects that permit environmental destruction. We have had multiple parliamentary inquiries over a decade and an Auditor-General’s report recommending the strengthening of the environment effects statement provisions, but they have remained weak. This government has not acted. You have got an act that has no mandatory trigger for what projects go to it, with very little detail and which has been found to not actually contribute to good environmental outcomes. You have got planning panel recommendations. Well, they are not binding, but then the minister’s recommendations on the projects are not actually binding.

The fact is that you would be very hard-pressed to find any project that has ever been stopped because of these laws. It is hard not to draw the conclusion that, despite multiple parliamentary inquiries, despite an Auditor-General’s report saying these laws need to be strengthened to protect our environment, this government has deliberately chosen not to act in order to get a project like the North East Link through.

Similarly with the West Gate Tunnel, which has been called a tunnel but is actually a section of tunnel and a very long section of overpass of Footscray Road, this is a project that is going to pour thousands of cars into the inner city. You would be hard-pressed to go anywhere in the world that is building a project that pours thousands of cars into their CBD and inner city. Incredibly the government at the 2014 election already had a project that they said was going to do the job—$500 million, 5000 trucks a day off the West Gate Bridge, if you believed what they were saying. I reckon, I suspect, they might want to go back in time and resurrect that project instead of what is happening now, when you have got tunnel-boring machines stuck there doing nothing whilst they figure out what to do with contaminated soil. Who would have thought that there would be contaminated soil issues in the western suburbs?

The issue that this project goes to as well is not just Transurban’s influence over transport planning in Victoria but just how the government is actually financing some of these projects and how they are actually being implemented. I mean, you have got the much-touted public-private partnerships where you are often saying, ‘Well, no, it is actually the private sector that is going to handle the risk of these projects’, yet you have got builders saying, ‘Well, we’ll walk away from this project’, threatening to walk away. Well, who is essentially carrying the can for these projects? It is always the taxpayer. It is always the public. For a government that has put so much—

Mr Pearson interjected.

Mr HIBBINS: A point of order, Acting Speaker—

A member: On yourself?

Mr HIBBINS: the member for Essendon has simply walked into the chamber, listened to barely a word and started interjecting.

Members interjecting.

Mr HIBBINS: If the member for Essendon is not actually interested in the bill being talked about, keep on walking through the chamber and sit somewhere else.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Ward): The member may want to talk to the bill himself.

Mr HIBBINS: So we have got a government that have put so much of their political capital into a project. They are not going to abandon it. You are not going to have half a tunnel or an unfinished project; it will always be the taxpayer who bears the risk for these projects. It is the taxpayer and motorists, through this sweetheart deal with Transurban, that are going to be paying through the nose—for more tolls for the West Gate Tunnel. It is an appalling situation. This government really has taken the approach that they will try and raise revenue wherever they can, however they can do it, to fund some of these projects. We have got massive toll increases on one hand, yet privatisations on the other: selling off the port of Melbourne, something that the Labor Party, when this was first ever raised decades ago, were dead against—warned against. When Jeff Kennett brought in legislation to assist with privatisation it warned that the port of Melbourne was on the chopping block. Well, who would have thought now that it is actually a Labor government that is selling off the port of Melbourne and privatising public assets here in Victoria—the biggest sell-off agenda since Jeff Kennett?

Now, it has been good to see extra investment in public transport compared to the previous government. It is a start. Projects like the Melbourne Metro were sitting on the shelf under the previous government, and projects like the high-capacity trains. I mean, if you look at the original business case and you look at the original rolling stock strategies, these projects were supposed to start under the previous Liberal government, and I suspect that the fact they did not is very much the reason why they are sitting on the opposition benches. But it must be noted that these projects are just a first step in transforming our entire public transport network. We are going to need the high-capacity signalling to be across the entire network. We are going to need more tunnels and more tracks. We cannot just keep pointing to one project, the Melbourne Metro, and say, ‘This is going to be the one project that fixes everything’.

If you listen to people about their lived experience on our public transport network, it is not up to scratch. It is unreliable. It is overcrowded. It is our current, existing network that is simply not up to scratch. It is not just this one project that is going to solve it all. We are going to need significant investment over many years, and it would be ludicrous to suggest that to fix those problems you have a standalone suburban loop around Melbourne of 50 kilometres—you are going to have that project whilst you allow the existing network to rot and you have the same overcrowding and unreliability on those networks.

Members interjecting.

Mr HIBBINS: I am glad to hear that the government is actually listening to what I have got to say. One of the key things that they could be doing right now—

Members interjecting.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Ward): Order!

Mr HIBBINS: One of the key things they could be doing right now is actually getting the most out of the existing infrastructure. As I have raised in this place multiple times before, yes, the Metro Tunnel is needed to unlock capacity during peak hour. That is absolutely true. That is why we need that project, that is why we need a second metro tunnel, that is why we need the high-capacity signalling. But right now when you look across essentially most of the metropolitan network—when you look at, for example, the Sandringham line or the Craigieburn line—this is where you are waiting 20 minutes on the weekend for a train and 15 minutes during the day. These sort of wait times are absolutely not up to scratch for a world-class public transport network. You have got a government on one hand, yes, spending billions on infrastructure, but then not stumping up the relatively small cost for increasing services on our existing network. We see, for example, the Dandenong line and the Frankston line do run at 10-minute services. This should be the minimum. You should be getting these services during the day and on weekends. But instead, you have got ridiculous waits of up to 20 minutes during the day or on the weekend, when there are no trains running. It is absolutely absurd.

If we are fair dinkum about getting more people onto public transport, getting people to shift away from cars and onto public transport, then high-frequency services during all of the day are absolutely essential. It is absolutely bizarre. As I said, we have had this costed up by the Parliamentary Budget Office. It is around $170 million for the metropolitan rail network and about $40 million for the tram network to be getting trains and trams running at 10 minutes all day every day. It is a quick, easy reform that this government should be doing, and it is absolutely inexplicable that they are not. We will be supporting this bill, but they need a long-term transport plan.

Ms GREEN (Yan Yean) (14:49): I take great pleasure in joining the debate on the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020 and to come immediately after the voice of inner-city privilege, who purports to be an expert on public transport coming from that transport-impoverished area of Prahran. Give me a break! How dare he come in here and say that the North East Link is not necessary to the economic and transport future of the community that I represent, the hardworking families, students and older people in the north-eastern suburbs. We absolutely have a right to projects like the North East Link. We will not be told by those sitting in the cheap seats in the inner city, who will never actually have the privilege of being in government and getting anything done, who just want to pontificate and give lessons to everyone else and say that the system is crumbling. Well, he has not taken notice of any of the announcements that we have made about the record numbers of trains and of trams that have been ordered for our network. I think he was even saying—it was not even clear—that he supported the outer suburban rail network. It is not within the 10-kilometre bamboo curtain. Well, it is not the bamboo curtain, is it. What is it?

Mr Hamer: The tofu curtain.

Ms GREEN: The tofu curtain—or the quinoa curtain. I should say I like eating tofu and quinoa, but I am not about telling other people how to live their lives and criticising their way of life. I know you, Acting Speaker Ward, are also representing the north-eastern suburbs, and we are absolutely on board with the North East Link and especially the tunnel option, which is going to preserve an enormous amount of our environment. I just do not know where you start when you come after something like that tosh we have just heard from the member for Prahran. ‘We should only invest in public transport’. How does he think we get goods and services around the place? Does he seriously not understand how we get goods and services around the place?

In the bill we are talking about the land next door to the Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market. I am absolutely certain if the Greens political party were in government, you would have never moved it from Footscray. You would have never freed up the capacity of that land and freed up access and grown the port. He would not even understand that the location of that market not only has been a great jobs driver for the northern suburbs, but it has actually taken thousands of trucks off the ring-road because 75 to 80 per cent of the freight that is destined for the Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market comes down the Hume Highway. Before it used to come down the Hume, around the Western Ring Road and into Footscray, and it took forever to get in and out, and that meant it took precious road space from other trucks heading towards the port and other workers trying to go about their business. It has been amazing. To have a wholesale fruit, veggie and flower market in Epping has been a game changer for the north, and it has made it easier for the producers and the majority—the 75 to 80 per cent—of freight that comes down to Hume.

Because the previous member for Thomastown, Peter Batchelor, thought ahead and got a very large parcel of land there, there is now a parcel of land next door to the Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market that is ripe for development—ripe for industrial development. We are always wanting more jobs in the north. The CEO of Mitchell shire, when he was the CEO of Whittlesea council, put through a planning control—an aspiration, actually, not a planning control—that for every new house that was built in the City of Whittlesea there would be one new job. Well, developing that land involves another 50 per cent again. I do not have the figure right in front of me, but it is a massive parcel of land that was purchased by the state government. We thought into the future. I know that the Minister for Priority Precincts will oversee the development of that well, along with other areas like Fishermans Bend and some other priority sites.

The act has stood the construction industry in good stead in that it has been the mechanism that has seen significant projects being delivered under this act, which have included Federation Square; the Melbourne Rectangular Stadium project, mostly known as AAMI Park, especially for those of us who like going to see some rugby or other sports; stages 1 and 2 of the Melbourne Park redevelopment project; the Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre project; the Melbourne Convention Centre development and its various stages; the Melbourne exhibition centre expansion project; the Sidney Myer Music Bowl refurbishment; the Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market relocation project, which I mentioned; the Biosciences Research Centre project; and the Melbourne Showgrounds redevelopment project.

The machinery of government changes have created some anomalies, which has meant that some of the projects and assets within the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions’s budget responsibility and policy responsibility have incorrectly been sitting in the Department of Transport. The member for Prahran may not be aware, but members on the government side of the house and this rather large wedge here in bay 13 that are members of the government know that the Department of Transport has an awful lot of work on its plate. The administrative change proposed in the bill before the house will lighten the load of the Secretary of the Department of Transport so that the Department of Transport can focus on what it is doing best: delivering the Metro Tunnel and doing the planning for the airport rail link and all the improvements that are happening in regional services.

As you and I know, Acting Speaker, there is the Hurstbridge line stage 2. We have seen great performance in stage 1, so stage 2 is being planned as we speak. I had a memory come up on Facebook the other day, and it was the Premier and I, the member for Mill Park and the now Minister for Transport Infrastructure on the greenfield site of Mernda rail. It has been running for about 18 months. Four years ago it was a complete greenfield site. Literally it was about last week four years ago when we did the announcement onsite. Now it is just part of the transport furniture servicing the Yan Yean electorate.

We are also seeing the work that is occurring. I mentioned the regional rail project. I commend the regional rail authority for what they are doing at Wallan and at Donnybrook station.

While I am mentioning Wallan, this is the first opportunity I have had to speak since that horrific derailment at Wallan. The Minister for Public Transport has just walked into the house, and I know that the workers on site really valued the fact that she came and spoke to them firsthand. She went up to Seymour and saw the drivers. We heard when we passed the industrial manslaughter laws that it is really horrific to have someone die alongside you at work, whether it is for the families or the workers. I think it was really important to see that politics were put aside and that the Deputy Prime Minister was there with the Minister for Public Transport, mayor David Lowe and the member for Euroa, all showing our support collectively for that tragedy.

With those words, I commend the bill to the house, and I condemn the member for Prahran, the inner-city voice of privilege.

Mr PEARSON (Essendon) (14:59): It gives me great joy and privilege to be able to rise today to speak on the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. At the very start of the member for Yan Yean’s contribution I was disorderly and I was unruly, as you well know, Acting Speaker Ward, because I interjected and I said to the member for Yan Yean that she should teach the member for Prahran a lesson.

Now the member for Yan Yean is a much fairer and better person than me because she avoided that. But I think the member for Yan Yean could have shown the member for Prahran how you actually, as a local member, identify a project, champion that project and see that project being delivered. That is precisely what the member for Yan Yean has done; the member for Yan Yean very early on indicated and identified the need for heavy rail to be extended to her electorate, to Mernda, and she was a tireless advocate for that project. Through her patience and her advocacy she has delivered a fantastic outcome for her community. She was amply rewarded at the last election because of her advocacy and because she delivered for her community probably the single biggest investment in public transport that that community had ever seen and, dare I say, probably ever will see.

For the member for Prahran to come in here and, from the cheap seats, sledge us—sledge this government, a government which has invested more in public transport than any other previous government, Labor or Liberal—is a bit rich.

The bill before the house is a fairly straightforward bill. It seeks to address the machinery of government changes which became required with the dissolution of the former Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources and reallocates those responsibilities to the priority precincts portfolio in the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, as well as allocating responsibilities to Transport for Victoria.

Why I make this comment about the investment that is being made is because when Henry Bolte became the Premier of Victoria in 1955 he did not increase in real terms the budget for public transport in Victoria: the nominal figure stayed throughout those years. When Hamer became Premier in 1972 he had his vision for the loop. He pushed and pushed hard in the Bolte cabinet for that project, but he could not get any support from Bolte for that. But when he became Premier he used that position to try to push for, and succeeded in developing, the Melbourne city loop.

Bear in mind that from 1970 to 2000 public transport patronage tracked with population growth, roughly. It was growing at around 3 per cent per annum, so broadly speaking the system was not under any great strain or stress. Population was growing at a fairly steady rate and public transport usage grew at a fairly steady rate. The introduction of the GST in mid-2000 coincided with a petrol price shock, and straightaway people started to use public transport. Like most people, I think when they used public transport they realised that it was a very good service, it was a very efficient service, and as a consequence of that we saw rapid public transport patronage growth throughout the first 10 to 15 years of this century. I think the figure for that first decade was around about 9 per cent compound growth. I think the figure is 72, so when the cumulative numbers of growth hit 72, you effectively double the size from where you were previously. Running up against that of course has been massive population growth as we look to replace the baby boomers, as they retire, with a skilled workforce.

We are making these sorts of machinery of government changes to give effect to the need for Transport for Victoria and the priority precincts portfolio to get on and deliver these really important projects.

The member for Prahran asked—honestly I would get more sense out of my four-year-old son than that bloke, seriously—why we cannot just run more trains. Really? As if we have not thought of that. I mean, how stupid is this bloke? The loop is clogged and it is congested. You cannot shove any more trains down the loop; it is as simple as that. You have got to unclog the loop.

I have not been here for that long, but I have listened to the Leader of the House talk about the importance of unclogging the loop in various answers to questions without notice, in various ministers statements and in comments on the adjournment debate. You would think that if you had listened to answers provided by the minister you would appreciate the fact that we have to build the metro because the loop is clogged. You cannot put any more trains in there because it is clogged. It is a pretty simple proposition, and I would have thought that if you were representing a seat like Prahran and if you actually used public transport—I catch the train to work regularly—

Ms Green interjected.

Mr PEARSON: Thank you, member for Yan Yean. I do not reckon this bloke catches a train regularly at all. You would reckon that you might realise that you cannot put anything more into the system. It is like a pipe. If the pipe is full of water, you cannot put any more water in there; it is as simple as that. That is why we are making these investments. That is why we have entrusted Transport for Victoria with the task of delivering an overarching vision, and we are investing tens of billions of dollars. The member for Prahran let the cat out of the bag because he is just a closet Tory at heart: ‘You’re spending all this money’. He does not talk about investing, it is spending. He is just like those opposite. He is not talking about the investment that we are making—the tens of billions of dollars we are investing in public transport because it is the right thing to do.

The member for Prahran also likes to talk about the evils of entering into a long-term lease for the port of Melbourne. It is not simply a case of public good, private bad or private good, public bad. It is about recognising the fact that there is limited capital in the arsenal of government and that there is the capacity for government to determine that where there is market failure, where there is no capacity for the private sector to invest, then clearly that is the responsibility of government. A clear example of that would be public transport. You cannot get any real revenue from public transport to cover the cost of the service. If you are doing a hip operation for a patient in a public hospital, there are no private sector opportunities to offset that cost—that investment. If you are running a school, it is the same thing.

Now, we have determined that we will invest in those services which cannot be provided by the private sector, and we will invest heavily in those services. Where we have got competing services that can be delivered by the private sector, which will enable us to free up our capital to invest in the things that we think are really important, then that is what we will do. But we absolutely reserve the right to come back and legislate and regulate where there is market failure. For example, the promises of privatisation in relation to the gas and electricity markets have not been realised by consumers, so we have sought to reregulate, and regulate appropriately, those markets to ensure that they are providing proper services. The default offer is a case in point.

The infantile contribution from the member for Prahran sort of dragged me back to the 1990s when it was just through this blunt dichotomy: ‘I’m going to sit here and condemn a government that is investing billions of dollars in public transport’. It is just lunacy. You just wonder at times. We always have to fight the Liberal Party because they are here to oppose us, but then we have to deal with these deros on the way through. It just drives you nuts.

Look, this is an important bill that is before the house, because it demonstrates our bona fides and our commitment to investing in public transport. I absolutely commend the bill to the house.

Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (15:09): It is with some pleasure that this afternoon I rise to speak on the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. In reflecting on the elements of this bill, I reflected strongly on the 2018 state election campaign and indeed the period in the lead-up to that. The Andrews Labor government was out there working hard every single day to deliver the infrastructure that Victoria needs for our growing community. That infrastructure program, the Victorian Big Build program, is investing record amounts of dollars in building the infrastructure that our community, our state and indeed the city of Melbourne need to move people around in an efficient way and in an effective way. We know that doing that means our state works well. It means people are not stuck unnecessarily in long commutes to work or indeed to school or on the weekends to various family and recreational activities. With such a record amount of investment we are stretching government further than I think any government has been stretched for a very, very long time—in fact I would say in the whole of Victoria’s history, right back to the 1880s.

In order to deliver that record investment in infrastructure to support our growing state we need an efficient government. We announced, shortly after our re-election, some substantial machinery of government changes that would enable us to deliver that very, very substantial infrastructure program to support our growing state. This bill very much goes to the heart of some of those necessary machinery of government changes in order for us to be able to deliver on our commitments—the commitments that we took to the 2014 election and to the 2018 election. I think that is exceptionally important.

I have had the great privilege of sitting in the chamber for the last hour. I have listened to some fantastic contributions by my Labor colleagues, who have spelt out in an erudite way the very, very substantial Big Build program that this government is currently delivering. Unfortunately I had to endure the member for Euroa’s and the member for Prahran’s contributions. It occurred to me that the National Party and the Greens political party may as well hold hands and sing Kumbaya, to be perfectly frank. The contributions made by each of them failed to recognise that when from time to time this state elects conservative governments the infrastructure requirements of this state stop being met. In fact not only do they stop being met, they actually go down a path of privatisation and closure. The National Party sat by in coalition with the Kennett government when we saw the Ararat rail line closed and when we saw the Maryborough rail line closed. They of course had that great gift of government, that great opportunity to stand up for regional Victoria and for rural Victoria, and they failed to do that.

Now, the Greens political party have spent really the last five years now just being commentators, criticising the record investment that we are making into our rail network and into our road network. I very much suspect that when this bill is voted on towards the end of this week the Greens once again will vote with the National Party, they will vote with the Liberal Party and they will continue to show their true political colours—the colours that I think the member for Essendon highlighted, which are that they are really just supporters of the Liberal Party.

I also had the opportunity to listen to my friend and colleague the member for Yan Yean’s speech, and I think in a powerful way she set out the arguments why this reform is absolutely necessary. A large part of the debate over the last hour or two has been dedicated to Victoria’s Big Build, and it is not unsurprising that members of the Labor government are out there proudly talking about our record infrastructure and the investments we are making to ensure that our state continues to grow and continues to prosper. But we have also had a very clear plan to deliver support and services from a government perspective into our priority precincts. This is an important reform. This gives us the opportunity as a government to be able to, where appropriate, take some of the risk of the private sector and to support the development of these precincts that ultimately have the opportunity and capacity to generate opportunities for Victorians, to generate jobs for Victorians and to of course deliver livable communities for Victorians. I am looking forward to further reform in this space to ensure that we have the ability to create those opportunities for Victorians, particularly those in and around those priority precincts.

I listened very carefully also to the comments made by the member for Euroa, particularly on the airport rail line, the potential investment opportunities and the opportunities really to unlock capacity in the western suburbs of Melbourne, the northern suburbs of Melbourne and of course our regions. The Andrews Labor government will be seeking support ultimately from the commonwealth to assist us in delivering that project. That project is important not just for people wishing to get to the airport; it will be an important project for unlocking the rail capacity of the western suburbs of Melbourne and of our regions. As a government we have been very clear right from the word go that any potential investment from our government really must unlock that capacity so we can continue to grow our state.

Ms HALFPENNY (Thomastown) (15:19): I also rise to speak on this legislative change that we are making with the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. Now, I think, as previous speakers have said, this is quite a technical bill. Probably everything that can be said about it has been said, but I will still put in my bit as well as then going on to talk about some of the fantastic projects and investments that the Andrews Labor government is doing both in the electorate of Thomastown and also within the northern suburbs and the region where of course residents of the Thomastown electorate move and make use of such facilities and infrastructure.

I guess, in a way, the fact that we are having to introduce this amendment really is a good example of everything you do in government having a consequence or having something that follows on from something else. So what happens is that, because of a realignment of policy and priorities, often for government departments it is not just the name that changes but actually their responsibilities and what they do that change. In this case the Department of Transport that has now been created is the legal successor to the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources. A machinery of government change has created, as I said, the Department of Transport, and out of that there are a number of projects that really do not fit within, I suppose, the definition of what the Department of Transport would be properly responsible for but instead fit within another department. But because the new department that was created is to be the legal successor, it means that until this legislation is passed the Secretary of the Department of Transport has to continue to give authority to other departments to manage or act in a way over certain projects.

One of those projects which of course has been mentioned before is the Melbourne market relocation project, which involved the fruit, vegetable and flower market in Footscray relocating to Epping. Now, this project was commenced and decisions were made around it before I was actually the member for Thomastown, so I want to give a lot of credit and a pat on the back to those MPs, organisations in the north and businesses that actively advocated to have the Melbourne fruit, vegetable and flower market moved to Epping, because this has created jobs and a whole lot of economic activity in the area. Of course, as I think the member for Yan Yean said a little bit earlier, it has also meant some of the big trucks coming off the streets of Melbourne, because there is a lot of transport coming along the Hume Freeway, and then it can go into Cooper Street and into the fruit and vegetable markets rather than driving right into the almost now centre of the city, which is where the Footscray markets were located.

This legislation, as I said, creates a new body. So what it will do is it will create a corporate body that then can manage whatever projects the government needs to be managed, and if there is a machinery of government change, there will be a generic legal entity which will be called, I think, just the corporate body. That means that there will be no need for individual specific pieces of legislation to amend who is the legal responsible body for particular projects. So this will be ongoing and there will not need to be changes if there is, for example, another revamping or realignment of various government departments into the future.

So just talking I think as other members have, and in particular I guess the member for Prahran, with his babble about doom and gloom and all the terrible infrastructure projects that there are, it just seems that these projects that the state Labor government is investing in—whether it is the North East Link; whether it is the upgrade of the M80 that, again, is going to be a great thing for people in the northern suburbs; whether it is the Metro Tunnel; or whether it is the O’Herns Road interchange onto the Hume Freeway—are projects that provide huge economic benefits, with the moving of people and traffic more efficiently, so less time on the roads and things like that, as well as of course creating huge boons in jobs and employment, while also giving young people and people who in some ways may have had a disadvantaged background the vision and the hope and the possibilities they need by giving them skills and jobs and good paying jobs on these projects so that they then come away with a trade or engineering experience or whatever it is that they may have done on those projects. I do not know how anybody can sit there and complain about how terrible and unnecessary and unworthy these projects are given the benefits they have not just for the infrastructure at the time but also for people and society going into the future.

Now, the other benefit of, for example, the Melbourne markets is that we see extra economic activity in the north, and this is an area of course where the coalition federal government made decisions to basically boot out our car industry, leaving tens of thousands of people without work, not just within direct employment within those car companies but also of course in all the auto component and supply chain businesses. I think the state Labor government is the only government or only alternative that is trying to bring jobs back into those areas—so, through the Melbourne markets—and still there is work to be done.

There is a lot of land owned by the government around the area that we hope we can use to develop further businesses and industries to provide local employment, but these are the things that we need to do to make sure that we have a healthy society where people have meaningful work and hopefully full-time employment—skilled work—so they can look forward to a prosperous future for themselves, their children and their grandchildren. These projects in the north are so important for the optimism and for the belief of people within the area that they do matter, that they are important. We recognise that, and the government is doing things to basically intervene in areas to ensure that anything that comes out of this state is shared around in all parts of the state, and this includes the electorate of Thomastown.

Just going back to the legislation, as I said, this means that there will be little need, you would hope, into the future to have to put up legislation like this and speak on it, because this will be a piece of legislation that will be futureproof, if you like—that could be used when there are changes again in the future. I always find it incredible that here we are and that the purpose of Parliament is to debate legislation, to scrutinise legislation, and I think we have had one speaker from the opposition, from the coalition, on this bill—nobody else—which really is doing a disservice to the people of Victoria, where there is not an opposition that even has any interest or motivation in scrutinising or talking about legislation that we are debating in here or even putting up alternative points of view. There has been one opposition speaker on this legislation; no doubt it will be a similar case for the rest of this week, just as it has been in previous weeks. As I said, I think it is really a disservice to the Victorian people when they do not have the opportunity to hear debates in here providing all sides of views and all different points of view on legislation that we are looking to pass and that of course will have an effect on us all, whether we know it or not, in some way, shape or form.

Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (15:29): I will continue on from the member for Thomastown’s wonderful point. I am delighted to stand up and have my opportunity to speak on this wonderful bill, and a very important bill: the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. Just as an aside, though, it is actually our first bill I believe this year to actually have a 2020 tag on it.

Mr Fowles interjected.

Mr FREGON: I reckon it is. You can correct me if I am wrong. I want to thank the Minister for Priority Precincts in the other place for the important work that has been undertaken to get this bill before the house. But before I go into detail with my own points of view I just want to comment on what some of my esteemed colleagues have also pointed out. The member for Broadmeadows kicked us off, and I took out of his comments his points about local projects, the local relevance of the bill and the local knowledge from a good local member; the member for Yan Yean similarly so, drilling down on the member for Prahran on his lack of knowledge about the North East Link, and it was a very good point. To the member for Essendon, thank you very much for another history lesson. It is very important to put these things in perspective. I just think, on the relevance of what you were saying about the growth in public transport investment, we can see from the Andrews Labor government how much we have changed. I am still working on changing some of the Henry Bolte primary schools in my area, and I know I will get your support as I am talking to ministers about that. The member for South Barwon pointed us in the direction that this bill, like every other that we do, is aligned with our commitments from the 2014 and 2018 elections, and it is about jobs, infrastructure and the Big Build; more importantly, it is about people. Talking about people, the member for Prahran did something I had not seen in this house before. He raised a point of order on himself. I did not know you could do that. It was a pretty good effort, and frankly, the last time I heard that much or saw that much waffle it had ice cream and maple syrup on it.

This is an important bill that sets about clarifying arrangements arising from the machinery of government changes that were implemented on 1 January 2019. Under those changes from the machinery of government, the Department of Transport became the legal successor of the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources. The body corporate created under section 41A of the Project Development and Construction Management Act 1994 is now Secretary to the Department of Transport, so projects that were administered by the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions have been transferred to the Department of Transport. Landholdings, budgets and policies are the responsibility of the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, currently sitting in the Department of Transport. So this bill goes about altering these responsibilities and will also provide a mechanism that future machinery-of-government modifications can be effected under the Project Development and Construction Management Act without the need for legislative arrangements or amendments like this. Acting Speaker, I am sure you realise that that means that once this bill passes we will not get to do another bill exactly like this again because it will be done outside of legislation, and I, for one, will miss the opportunity to speak on that bill that will never happen.

A new body corporate will be established called Secretary, Project Development. This will occur with an amendment to the Project Development and Construction Management Act. Initially the Secretary of Project Development will be established by the Secretary of the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions. This bill, however, will allow the Secretary of Project Development to be attached to any other declared department by way of an order in council under the new section of the act. This will provide flexibility to the machinery of government but will also allow the priority precincts portfolio to be managed by the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions while not having to rely on the Department of Transport.

When looking at the very long list of important state projects that have been delivered under the original bill and historically effected—I think we had a full list earlier—a couple stand out. The Australian Synchrotron, which is very close to my district of Mount Waverley, is in the heart of the National Employment and Innovation Cluster (NEIC) at Monash. The Australian Synchrotron project was only possible after investments and commitments over many years from our Bracks-Brumby government. It is they we should thank for that fantastic Australian scientific and economic resource.

At the opening in 2007 Premier Brumby emphasised that although the Victorian government had provided $157 million out of $221 million in capital dedicated to building the project, the Australian Synchrotron was not just for Victoria but for all Australians and open to international synchrotron scientists. That goes to say that this bill is not just about what is directly listed in front of us or what has been done before but it is about all Victorians, and further on all Australians, and in that case scientists from all over the world that now have a resource they did not have. It is also worthy of note, as I said, that that is in the Monash National Employment and Innovation Cluster, and I will come back to that a bit later.

Also in the long list of projects I note the Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre (MSAC). It is a fantastic facility that hosted the Commonwealth Games in 2006 and the 2007 World Aquatics Championships. A little less known is the fact that it was the place for infant swimming lessons for my daughter Sophie. That one did not make the news. Bec and I would turn up with baby in tow, and we would all jump in the water. I am not quite sure how much swimming the baby learned that day. We had a great time. It was good to bond and become familiar with water. I think we all want our kids to be safe in the water. I guess I raise that more to say that these projects—the Big Build and the wonderful things that this government is doing in regard to infrastructure and level crossings—mean things as a family as well. They mean things at a personal level.

In regard to MSAC, when looking at it I noticed that it has two Olympic-sized swimming pools. As you would know, Acting Speaker, the Olympic-sized swimming pool is one of the measurements of government. You will often hear things referred to in the sense of, ‘That would be 40 Olympic-sized swimming pools’. But another measurement of government is MCGs, and I noticed there was some news about our solar panels being however many MCGs. So I wondered: how many Olympic-sized swimming pools are in an MCG? I am sure we have all asked that of ourselves at times. The good news is that I can tell you that there are 630 Olympic-sized swimming pools in an MCG. So I will just put that on the record to update the house. If you ever hear someone say ‘Olympic-sized swimming pool’, divide it by 630 and that is how many MCGs you have got. It is what I do.

Earlier I mentioned the Monash National Employment and Innovation Cluster is where the synchrotron is. This cluster is right next to my district. The Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions has coordination responsibility for this cluster. I know that the Minister for Priority Precincts—and for that matter all of the Andrews Labor government—is committed to ensuring that our employment and innovation clusters are a great place to live, work and invest. It is fitting to also mention that our Monash cluster is one of seven NEICs prioritised for development as part of Plan Melbourne: 2017–2050.

In this bill we have a crucial cog in the machine of government, especially in relation to jobs because the Monash NEIC is already the largest concentration of local jobs outside of the CBD. Over 80 000 people work in this area, and these numbers are expected to double over the next three decades. That sounds great, I am sure you will agree, but we will need extra infrastructure in the area obviously. But have no fear, we have the Suburban Rail Loop on its way. It is being planned. Families in my area are waiting with excitement, just like I am, for the Suburban Rail Loop. Geotechnical work is underway outside my office in Glen Waverley right now as we speak. The Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions has coordination responsibility for the Monash NEIC and is working to ensure that all activity in that NEIC is integrated with Suburban Rail Loop planning.

Finally, what I would say in regard to the infrastructure agenda of this government is that another area of town that is in this bill is the Sidney Myer Music Bowl. I went there many years ago to see Ray Charles, and Ray Charles, who was awesome, by the way, sang about ‘unchaining my heart’. I think the Andrews Labor government is unchaining the state. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh) (15:39): The member for Mount Waverley started his contribution by saying he was delighted to speak on this bill. I would not go that far. I think it is a very important bill, but it is very technical and it is somewhat dull in terms of the detail. Therefore I am not delighted to speak on it, but I am proud to speak on it because it unleashes a whole bunch of good public policy outcomes. It also actually assists us in keeping our commitments to the Victorian people in terms of the major transport infrastructure.

I cannot do justice to the bill in the same terms as the member for Mount Waverley did in terms of all these references to Ray Charles and others—I do not have that level of knowledge of popular culture—but I must admit that I did watch some of the contribution made by the member for Euroa, the lead Speaker on the opposition side. I watched from my office, and most of her contribution was, I think, harmless and consistent with being supportive of the bill. However, she did make a reference to the fact that somehow because we do not have a department named the department of agriculture there is an implication that we do not care about regional communities.

I just refer her to the answers given by the Treasurer in question time today about regional taxation and how we have the lowest regional taxation regime in the country. I also refer her to the Premier’s and the Minister for Health’s commitment to and delivery of making public what was a private hospital in Mildura because of the excellent advocacy of the member for Mildura. I also draw her attention to the Latrobe Valley and all the work that the government has done in the Latrobe Valley, including buying a timber mill, as well as a whole range of other initiatives. Regional unemployment in Victoria is the lowest on record.

I just wanted to put to bed some of the spurious implications of what she was saying in relation to our commitment to regional Victoria. I cannot help but think that it probably has something to do with her leadership aspirations for leading the Victorian Nationals. There was a puff piece in the Age two days ago: ‘Victoria’s Nationals face an uphill battle. Is Steph Ryan the answer?’. I quote:

When Ryan was elected—

Mr Southwick: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I understand that this is a very technical bill and it might be a little bit difficult for the member for Oakleigh to stick to the context of the bill, but I would ask you if you could draw him back to actually speaking on the bill and not talking about a whole range of other things.

Mr Pearson: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, in light of the provocations that the member endured with the member for Euroa’s contribution I think he is entitled to provide some background and context in rebutting some of those comments made by the member.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Couzens): There is no point of order. I ask the member to keep to the bill, though.

Mr DIMOPOULOS: Thank you, Acting Speaker, for your guidance. Although it is a technical bill—and I will come to the member for Euroa again briefly—it will allow, as others have said, the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions to meet its proper functions but also it will allow the Department of Transport to continue its mandate for the biggest transport infrastructure program in Victoria’s history. That line sounds almost glib because we use it so often in this government but it is so fundamentally true, and I will get onto that a bit later as well.

The machinery of government changes the government announced after the election in 2018 are important to meet the emerging needs of our growing community, infrastructure being one of the key ones. Appropriate precinct planning is important to help support our groundbreaking infrastructure programs, as others have talked about, including Minister Jennings in the other place. The concept of actually creating precincts around major transport hubs is something some European cities have done for years. It is what adds so much value to a whole range of social outcomes as well as transport outcomes. You combat isolation, you provide a city focus where people come out and actually recreate together, spend time together, shop together. It is one of the beauties of some of the best cities in Europe, and this government is committed to a transport agenda that also couples with the really important precinct planning.

One of those precincts in my patch—in my language ‘precinct’, not the priority precincts that the government has, although it is a priority precinct for the government in another sense—is the Monash National Employment and Innovation Cluster, as I said, in my electorate. When I went to Monash Uni many, many years ago—I know I do not look it, but it was many years ago—people were driving to Clayton. I mean, I lived in Oakleigh so it did not matter, but it was like, ‘It’s almost the sticks’. It was not really the sticks—Monash Uni was built in the 1960s—but it is extraordinary just in that period between me studying at Monash and now how that precinct has become such a hive of activity. It is extraordinary. The amount of small businesses, the amount of innovation that goes on in that precinct in my view, and I have said this before in the chamber, it is a sort of a Silicon Valley-type of geographic area for Melbourne.

Of course we are building the heart hospital there, the first ever heart hospital in Australia and in fact one of the biggest heart hospitals in the world, on the campus of the university. The Monash University medical school, in a recent conversation with the vice-chancellor—I do not want to misquote her, but I think it is in the top 50 in the world in terms of size. So imagine co-locating a heart hospital on a campus which has one of the biggest medical schools of any university in the world, one of the top 50.

Of course on the other side of town we have got the Sunshine priority precinct which is looking like it will become a transport hub for metro and regional Victoria with the Suburban Rail Loop, with the airport rail, with an enormous amount of infrastructure spend but also again a precinct planning approach so you get more value out of it than just the major transport infrastructure.

This is the kind of stuff that in my view the member for Euroa gave little regard to. In that same Age article it talks about the National Party still wrestling with exactly how they can rebuild their brand and reconnect with their electorates. I say: ditch the Liberals. That is how you can do it. Get back to your agrarian socialist past—

Mr Southwick: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I once again ask you to draw the member back to the content of the bill and not give us, if you like, his opinion on how one’s party may or may not be run. I mean, if that is the case, we could have a long discussion about the Labor Party, but we do not want to do that. We want to focus upon the legislation that is before us, and I ask you please to draw the member back to the bill.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Couzens): It is a long-ranging discussion on this bill but I ask the member to come back to focusing on the bill.

Mr DIMOPOULOS: Thank you, Acting Speaker. KPI met—I got two points of order called by the member for Caulfield. I now will continue with the bill.

Back to the Monash precinct and the Sunshine precinct, I have a lot of interest and in fact a bit of a role both with the Minister for Priority Precincts but also more generally in helping the Treasurer navigate the city deals that the commonwealth has selected for both the north-west of Melbourne, which covers Sunshine, and the south-east of Melbourne. It is no accident they were selected as city deal areas by the commonwealth—mind you, with little consultation, but nonetheless they were—because they are an opportunity for Melbourne and Victoria more generally.

Particularly with our plans with the airport rail and intersecting into providing better service delivery for passengers into regional Victoria, they are really areas that will, in the next five or 10 years, with our government’s interest and investment and of course some joint investment from the feds, be outstanding hubs and future cities for Victoria outside of the Melbourne CBD. I think that is something that this bill helps expedite and helps clarify through putting into law what the machinery of government changes were intended to effect, so allowing the full expression of those changes to be accommodated in the statutes.

I commend the bill to the house. I commend the work of both the Minister for Transport Infrastructure and the Minister for Priority Precincts, and I wish the bill a speedy passage.

Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (15:49): I am also delighted to rise to speak about the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. This bill, as has been described by a number of members, is a technical bill that does give effect to machinery of government changes. The Project Development and Construction Management Act 1994 has obviously been around for about 25 years, and over that time certain projects have been developed through various entities that now rest with the head of Transport for Victoria. Obviously that is not appropriate for a lot of the projects going forward, so creating a new entity in the name of ‘secretary, project development’ puts these projects and future projects fairly and squarely in the areas that provide the best direction for them to be developed.

I want to thank the member for Euroa for her contribution and for reading out and identifying all the fantastic projects that this state has delivered, particularly over the last two decades. It was a great list, and when you take each of those projects individually you think about how much they have contributed to the economic growth of this state and where we would be without them. A number of members have talked at length about each of the projects and how they have affected their own electorates and what a difference those projects have made to them.

I particularly wanted to talk about the Melbourne markets and their impact on transport. Obviously the Melbourne markets, neither in their original location nor in their new location, are particularly close to Box Hill, but the work that goes on there does affect every single community around Melbourne and around the state. The member for Yan Yean talked about where the trucks are coming from—all those large B-doubles carrying those cantaloupes, pineapples and bananas from Queensland, representing about 70 or 80 per cent of the total inbound traffic. But there is also all that outbound traffic that is coming from the markets—all the small single-tray trucks and small vans that are going to collect the produce at 5 o’clock, 6 o’clock in the morning to deliver it to your local greengrocers and your supermarkets and everything else right across the state. Based on what I was hearing from the member for Prahran, I think he would like to see every single shop connected by rail and then have it all moved by rail, but we all know that that is just not going to happen. I think the fact that so much of that distribution in terms of the volume of traffic is occurring is really underpinning the need for the North East Link. You have got the Melbourne markets, which are located right in the northern suburbs, in Epping—the apex of Melbourne—and you have approximately half of that distribution going to the west, so they can use the ring-road. Then you have the other half, which are going to the east and the south-eastern suburbs. At the moment they either have to go through the west and the city or have to go down Rosanna Road and other local arterial roads, just adding to the traffic congestion. So these projects are stimulating a lot of other economic growth and need for our transport projects.

The other point that I would like to draw the house’s attention to is just in relation to a comment that the member for Essendon made. He was talking about our public transport investment and how public transport use has changed over time. I would like to draw the attention of the house to an even longer period of time. In the early 1950s public transport use per capita peaked in Victoria, and it was almost 500 public transport trips per capita that the population would make. That steadily declined right through to the early 1980s. What is funny about that is that at the same time, between the early 1950s and the early 1980s, there was very little investment in public transport. From 1980 through to about 2000 the number of public transport trips per capita stayed roughly the same, at about 100, which is reflective of what the member for Essendon said—that it was growing in line with population growth. Beyond 2000, shortly after that period, through a combination of factors, public transport use has started to increase. A large reason for that is that obviously there has been population demand, but it is increasing more rapidly than demand. That is due to a range of factors, but it is also due to the investment in public transport that has been put in place, particularly by consecutive Labor governments, over the last 20 years. Without these investments this change in the way that people are travelling simply would not occur.

I know some of this discussion, even though it had been raised throughout the debate, is somewhat tangential to the bill at hand, but I do want to specifically refer to the priority precincts, which are identified as a key component of the bill, and particularly the priority precincts that are to be developed under the department and not under Transport for Victoria. This is really important going forward, particularly in the development of the Suburban Rail Loop. The Suburban Rail Loop obviously was a signature policy of the 2018 election campaign, with stage 1 going from Box Hill through to Cheltenham. If I look at the numbers for Box Hill in particular, a suburb which is relatively compact, its population is expected to double from 2016 through to 2026. It is already a very significant commercial area, having one of the highest amounts of commercial office space outside of the CBD. That commercial office space is predicted to double between 2016 and 2036. The rail will be a catalyst for major growth in Box Hill in both the residential and commercial areas. The actual rail and the technical details—the engineering obviously—will need to sit within the Department of Transport, but it is going to be able to unlock the broader precinct around Box Hill to fully utilise and realise all the advantages that an interchange at Box Hill will provide. This is why to me this legislation is so critical, because it sets up the state to be able to make those decisions, have the right entities and the department look at those priority precincts in their entirety and make those decisions that cover all elements.

In closing, while this bill is at its minimum a machinery of government change, it really does set the scene for further investment in our major projects and further investment in our priority regions to help the state grow in the future. I commend the bill to the house.

Ms HORNE (Williamstown—Minister for Ports and Freight, Minister for Public Transport) (15:59): It gives me great pleasure to rise and speak on this bill. Although my friend and colleague the member for Oakleigh said it is not particularly scintillating—although I do not want to particularly put words in his mouth—what I would say is it is incredibly important. In fact if the kids had still been in the gallery, I would have pointed out to them that this is a bill that is about jobs. This is a bill about delivering the 2014 election commitment that the Andrews Labor government got elected on, which was to create 10 000 jobs. And my have we done that time over.

This bill is particularly important to me for two reasons. Firstly, as a minister in the Department of Transport I see the sheer workload that the Department of Transport has on. But when I look at some of the significant projects that have been delivered under the Project Development and Construction Management Act 1994 it is actually a bit of a trip down memory lane, because I started my career working in transport and infrastructure running communications and stakeholder relations under the then minister, Peter Batchelor. Many of these projects that we are talking about are actually part of Batch’s legacy. He finished off the Federation Square project. There was the Melbourne Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market relocation that has created such a centre of economic activity by moving it out of next to my electorate in Williamstown and out of the port area there and up into Epping.

Let us be really clear: we have got plans for that old site. At the moment it is being used as a lay-down area for the West Gate Tunnel Project, an incredibly important project that is delivering thousands of jobs in the west. But we have got an expression of interest out there for part of that site to potentially be used as a port development area, whether it be the staging of trucks, whether it be putting containers there or fuel stations. It is important to be able to continue that development of the port and also to get trucks out of the inner west, which will be incredibly important in my local community.

Some of the other projects—having this little trip down memory lane—include the Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre. It was absolutely groundbreaking for the area and for future generations of athletes that we have got. The Melbourne Showgrounds redevelopment project—another project that I worked on many, many years ago. They are just some of the things that give me great pleasure to look at and say, ‘That’s not appropriate for the Department of Transport to be delivering’, because let us be really clear: the Department of Transport has got more than enough work on its hands. This I know, whether it is building new trains, whether it is building new trams or whether it is getting those additional 100 buses out on the network.

Just the other day we had our 85th new tram launched out onto the network. This is part of our commitment to putting more trams and more low-floor, accessible trams powered by 100 per cent solar power out onto the network. In terms of buses, we have got those 100 new buses that are being delivered under the Transdev contract. These buses are being built in both Dandenong and up in Ballarat, and the jobs that we are seeing being created with that are absolutely fantastic. When I was up in Ballarat last, not only are the buses being built there but the impact on the supply chain is immense because not only have we got the buses being built there but the livery that goes on the buses is being delivered by a company up there.

In terms of other projects that the Department of Transport has got onboard, it is things like the upgrades to many of our tram stops. Just this week I was actually out with the member for Pascoe Vale having a look at the new tram stop that is being completed out there. It has really transformed that local area. You can see safety implications. One of the tram drivers there was talking about the impact that it had made by getting people to and from that tram stop so much more easily and that there had been less incidents with congestion on the road. It was just making it so much easier. But these are just some of the things, whether it is bus stop upgrades, whether it is putting new bus routes out on the network or whether it is making tram stops fully disability compliant, that the Department of Transport is doing.

I do not intend to take up all the time allocated to me. There is so much that the Department of Transport is doing, and this important bill will actually then free up the Department of Transport to be able to really focus on the work it does: planning the services, planning the routes and working out how we can actually shape communities and deliver more community services and more public transport services both in metropolitan Melbourne but also too out in the regions. Whether it is new bus routes being installed or upgraded tram stops in your electorate, Acting Speaker Blandthorn, these are the things that the Department of Transport is working on. I would like to thank the minister for putting this bill before the house and commend it.

Ms WARD (Eltham) (16:06): I rise with, no matter what the member for Oakleigh might think about this legislation, a bit of enthusiasm for this bill. I have to tell you, Acting Speaker, the first thing that I would like to do in this debate is to enter into a bit of debate with the member for Prahran. I listened with great interest to the member for Prahran’s comments but in particular his comments around the North East Link.

I have to tell you that it is not useful, when you sit in the inner-city enclave of Prahran, where you can get the tram to work in probably 15 minutes, to talk about the fact that you do not need traffic relief in the north-east—to tell us all of the things that in the north-east we do not need. But I also note that the member for Prahran did not mention the Hurstbridge line upgrade and the extension to Mernda rail, both projects in the north-east that this Labor government has delivered, and he did not talk about the extra bus services that we have created, such as the 343 bus. What he did do is tell us that the people in my community and the people in the community of Bundoora, the people in the electorate of Ivanhoe, the people in the electorate of Yan Yean and in fact the people in a whole bunch of electorates do not actually need this road.

Now, the member for Prahran can tell that to my residents who see cars coming from Mernda, see cars coming from South Morang and see cars coming from Epping and elsewhere going through my community to get to work. He demonstrated how little he actually understands the transport needs of those in the north-east when he said they are all going into the city. Well, I have got good news for the member for Prahran: they are not all going into the city.

My community is shared between the Shire of Nillumbik and the City of Banyule, and Nillumbik has got between 70 and 80 per cent of its residents working outside of the municipality and Banyule has got around 70 per cent of residents working outside of the municipality. The reason why this amount of people work outside the municipality of Nillumbik is that it is the border of the urban growth boundary and it is the home of one of our green wedges—in fact in my mind it is one of our most valuable green wedges—so we are not going to have a huge amount of employment growth in our area. We have to commute to that, and the way we commute is by car. We like to use the train, and the Hurstbridge line is well serviced—and I am very grateful for the government’s investment in Hurstbridge stage 2, which will continue to duplicate our train line and add additional peak-hour services—but we work all across this city from my community, because there are jobs everywhere and there are jobs that we need to commute to. No matter how many train lines and no matter how many tram lines and no matter how many bus routes you could make with any money tree that you wanted to create, you still would not be able to address all of the transport needs of people who live up to, for example, 25 kilometres from the CBD, which my people do.

So I would invite the member for Prahran to actually come out to my community and to Eltham. In fact I would invite him to sit on Rosanna Road or on Fitzsimons Lane and see how much traffic comes through that is not local. Come and experience what we experience. Come and see the trucks that go thundering down Rosanna Road that North East Link will get off Rosanna Road. Come and see the houses that shake because of that. Come and drive along Rosanna Road when you have got big trucks ambling alongside you. Have that experience. It is a bit different from sitting in a tram with your takeaway chai latte as you trundle down Chapel Street. It is a different experience. I really would encourage the member for Prahran to widen his experiences and know what it is like to live in the outer suburbs.

Another thing that the member for Prahran might not be aware of is that my community has got one of the highest participation rates, if not the highest participation rate, in sport in this state. Kids play sport everywhere, adults play sport, and because we are in the outer suburbs we like kids. We like having kids. We have all got lots of kids because we are the suburbs, we are not the inner-city cafe latte set that might have one if they are lucky, or 1.5, because they count their dogs in the inner city often. We have to ferry them around. I can tell you that, for example, the Eltham Wildcats, which is the biggest basketball club in the Southern Hemisphere—and I say that advisedly; you can see them from the moon, they are that bloody big—have to ferry kids all over the shop. So I want to know how, when you have got an 11 o’clock game at Dandenong, you trundle your kids on the train, go to Flinders Street and then get the train from Flinders Street to Dandenong for that 11 o’clock game, and then get the train back home again to Eltham. He can talk about increased services and he can talk about his 10- and 15-minute services that he wants, but I can tell you that at 11 o’clock at night it is not always the most realistic option. It really is not. So I would really ask him to actually talk to people and understand their lived experience before he lectures us and tells us that this road project is not the way to go.

I would be happy to talk to the member for Prahran about this road project, because I have had road to Damascus moments myself over the years. Going back 15 or so years ago I would have been chaining myself to trees saying, ‘No, you can’t build this road. This is outrageous. Leave our community alone’. But the population has grown so much in our outer suburbs, it has grown so much to the north of where I live, that something has to give. That is why we have got to build this road, because our roads cannot contain that amount of traffic anymore. In my own community Fitzsimons Lane is going to get 14 000 vehicles taken off it a day—a day. That is a lot of cars off the road. There are around 60 000 vehicles that trundle along Fitzsimons Lane at the moment. This is going to help—it is absolutely going to help. Cars will go off Rosanna Road.

But importantly—and I go to the Minister for Public Transport’s comments earlier—this is about jobs. This is going to create over 10 000 jobs during the lifetime of the build of the North East Link. I would like to ask the member for Prahran: where are his 10 000 jobs? Where is he going to pull those jobs from? How is he going to provide, and how is he going to continue to stimulate this economy and create those opportunities for people not just in the north-east but across this state? Major projects have to happen and hard decisions have to be made. We have made that decision, we have made that commitment, and we are standing by it.

And I would say to the member for Prahran: it is not always a good idea to get in bed with the Liberal Party. Now, we know the Liberal Party have flip-flopped on North East Link a number of times. We know that they have said, ‘Oh, not in our backyard in Kew’, ‘Not in our backyard in Bulleen’, and that they talked about option 3, then they talked about option 2, then they told Marcellin they do not want any at all and they told this group that they do not want it and they told the electorate that they do. They have flip-flopped more times than any Olympic diver could have. They have absolutely flip-flopped.

So I would encourage the member for Prahran to not go down the same path as the Liberals, like the Greens did with the CPRS 10 years ago. We do not have a price on carbon emissions in this country because of the Greens voting with the Liberal Party, siding with the Liberal Party, and doing what they did to our country—which is put us in the climate chaos nationally that we are currently in, where the only ray of hope is actually the Labor Party in Victoria. I would counsel the member for Prahran to actually get out there and talk with people in the outer suburbs of the north-east and find out what they think about this road, because I can tell him: people in my community support it. I can tell him that when I am a millimetre short of a 50 per cent primary vote in my electorate, people support this road. People want this road. People want their local roads back. They want to get rid of that traffic that does not belong in our communities but actually belongs on a highway that does not go through us, and this is what this tunnel will do. It is sympathetic. It is the best way that we can actually get people from one side to the other, where we can do the missing link. I really do take objection to the member for Prahran when he says that we do not need a missing link and it does not mean anything. It does. It means it gets trucks off our roads and it gets people who do not need to be on our roads off our roads. It also offers transport solutions. It also improves bus access along the Eastern Freeway, and it means more public transport can go along the Eastern Freeway.

The fact that the member for Prahran has ignored the whole public transport narrative that we have got going on in the north-east shows how shallow the Greens’ agenda is, how they really do not want to understand and address the issues, and how they want to sit in the inner city and judge us people in the outer suburbs.

Mr RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (16:16): It is great to rise on the Project Development and Construction Management Amendment Bill 2020. A great summation by the member for Eltham on some of the hypocrisy around the Greens political party. Similar rhetoric is put forward around the opposition to the Mordialloc freeway, but you would be hard pressed to find too many people opposed to such an incredible project like the Mordialloc freeway and the benefits that that will deliver across our community.

This machinery of government bill and the changes that occurred on 1 January 2019 are very much I guess a hallmark of the activity and work that is being undertaken by the Andrews Labor government. You see, one in seven jobs were not created in Victoria before the Andrews Labor government came to office—a lot of construction jobs, a lot of people coming to Victoria for that opportunity and that prosperity. What we see through the priority precincts portfolio as well is looking towards the future and opportunities that might develop and occur from some of the major infrastructure projects and how we plan communities and cities for the growth we will experience in the coming years. When you have got 70 per cent of infill growth occurring in our infill council areas priority precincts are very important.

When we look at the Suburban Rail Loop it is something that will be the bread and butter for the Department of Transport and a whole-of-government approach now and into the future for many, many years. This starts in Cheltenham, this starts in 2022 and it will have substantial economic and social benefits into the future in my community and indeed all across metropolitan Melbourne. Part of stage 1 is to deliver that rail tunnel to Box Hill. It will transform the way we get around our communities and indeed our city. They are just some of the projects, and I will go into a little bit more detail on them shortly.

But it is amazing to see some of the work that has been done under the Project Development and Construction Management Act 1994 previously. One that I think is dear to the hearts of many people in this chamber, particularly reflecting on the legacy of former Premier John Cain, Jr, is the Melbourne Park redevelopment. We see how much that is a cultural precinct now and how many people across Victoria, across Australia and indeed internationally choose Melbourne. It is the busiest sporting event in the world for the month of January. It is extraordinary. That was delivered under this act.

But there is one that is very close to my heart. A lot of us in this place have had previous jobs and previous lives, and one that I had was as a line marker back in the day, painting lines on roads. Some will allege that I put more lines on myself that I put on the roads; some would be correct in that. But one of the most amazing contracts that the organisation that I worked for had was at the Melbourne Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market. That relocation project was a substantial jobs boon for Epping, and I know the member for Thomastown is incredibly excited about the Epping fruit and veg market there. I saw the activity and the fresh produce coming through there—I think it was 38 kilometres of forklift lines through the site at Footscray, an incredible network that underpinned our fresh fruit and vegetables. You could even sneak around the back and get a great bunch of flowers for $10. I always said it was more expensive, but for $10 you could get a great bouquet there.

This shows the diversity coming to Footscray at that time and then having the rail yard right there. The relocation was a massive, massive increase in, I guess, a priority precinct but also a massive increase in jobs and investment. As we grow as a state and indeed as a nation these assets need to be looked at in expanding into the future as well.

Of course there is the incredible Federation Square project, a meeting place at the heart of Melbourne where we come together culturally and for events opposite Flinders Street station. It is amazing. So when you think of some of those tens of millions of dollars of investments—indeed hundreds of millions of dollars for some of those projects—they are generational projects, they are job-creating projects, and a lot of those projects were initiated under Labor governments.

I doubt that you would need a project development construction bill amendment from those opposite in their previous innings, when they were in office in the 57th Parliament, when prosperity on projects was quite low and when there was not a major infrastructure project anyone could look at. Then at 5 minutes to midnight, on the edge of 2014, the best that they could come up with was the east–west link. There is no need to try to bring together efficiencies of scale in major infrastructure projects when you have only really got one. The other one, which you could say was part B, was the little stickerathon—stickers at Southern Cross. When we had visitors coming in from Melbourne Airport and getting off the SkyBus they would go, ‘Oh, there’s a rail line there’. It is alleged that some people accidentally got on regional trains and ended up in Warrnambool thinking they were going on the airport rail link that former Premier Napthine had announced. It was extraordinary. You would not need a machinery of government change like this under those opposite because previously our state ground to a halt, unemployment hit 6.9 per cent and the prosperity of Victorians was stifled by the lack of energy, by the lack of vigour and by the lack of purpose of those opposite to deliver those critical infrastructure projects.

I mentioned before the Suburban Rail Loop and the changes that have been made in this and the interconnection of the work that the Department of Transport will do in delivering this rail tunnel for Victorians, and on the other side, above ground, how our communities, how our suburbs, how our businesses, how our development community will change as we get ready for this massive, massive project. This is the vision that Victorians have been calling out for—a project that will be started under an Andrews Labor government. But someone else, as the Premier said, will deliver this and cut the ribbon at the other end. That is the vision that we need in Victoria. That is the leadership that we need. It is thinking to the future. It is not short-term politics at 5 minutes to midnight trying to get your election hopes up; it is thinking about the outcomes and making the tough choices today to benefit the communities tomorrow. That is what this project is all about.

They are up and about down in the Mordialloc electorate. They are pumped about this project, because when it goes from Cheltenham it will then be only a couple of years from the Melbourne Metro rail tunnel getting underway. There are 200 trains that run up and down the Frankston train line each and every day and tens of thousands of passengers. When the Melbourne Metro rail tunnel is online it will change the outcomes for my community. It will not be then the 1 hour and 5 minutes to trundle up to the city; it will be a 35-minute service going up the Frankston train line, saving people that precious time in getting home and back into the communities that they love so much and to make sure that quality time with family and friends is maximised. That is the type of vision, that is the type of energy that we need and this is the type of work that through priority precincts, through the machinery of government work that has been done to streamline the process is so very critical.

What does it also mean? It means jobs. We are seeing tens of thousands of people getting their opportunities. I will just add that there were students just in from across our metropolitan areas—26 school leaders across various different schools—who visited today as part of a Leader newspaper initiative. We were out talking to some of them, and do you know what filled me with so much joy? Hearing students wanting to get into engineering, wanting to be a part of building our state and knowing that with the effort and energy that is going on right now in our state they will have jobs.

There will not be engineers needing to fly to New South Wales and leave Victoria. You just have to talk to the sector. No-one could find a job. They were looking overseas, looking at different economies around the world just to get a look-in in engineering and development and construction. Well, people are coming back to Victoria. Indeed the next generation has that pipeline of opportunity coming through, so it is a really exciting time in Victoria, and this is an exciting opportunity for Melburnians. This is, I guess, that machinery of government change when you have so much on the go, so many projects and statutory authorities delivering those outcomes.

The Level Crossing Removal Project is a great example of that, delivering eight level crossings in and around my patch over the next 18 months. Then, also, the Mordialloc freeway. I know some have lined up on the member for Prahran, but there were a number of Greens political party members who on their campaigns and leading into 2018 were opposed to this project, absolutely opposed to this project. I would say to them, ‘You’re always welcome for a cuppa in Mordialloc and Aspendale Gardens—to come down and tell my working community and my working families that this project isn’t needed’. This was a 1970s map that was put together by the Hamer government about freeways and road networks in our community. It has seen the light of day under an Andrews Labor government in 2020, and it will be delivered next year.

The notion that that is not needed when you are sitting and trundling along and wasting time in cars because of the infrastructure not delivered in previous years is a poor outcome. It is not to say that it is just about roads; it is such a simplistic narrative by the Greens political party to narrowcast the issue of roads versus trains versus buses, and the notion that you would not invest today is why they got absolutely pummelled in my patch and why people saw that their narrative and their connection to community did not align with the values of my community. They wanted people to get on with the job of delivering those infrastructure projects and listening, engaging and understanding—not talking down and not belittling my community, because they were pleading for a project that should have been delivered years ago.

This is a great bill, and I wish it a speedy passage.

Ms WILLIAMS (Dandenong—Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Minister for Women, Minister for Youth) (16:26): I move:

That the debate be now adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.