Thursday, 19 March 2020

North East Link Bill 2020

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Mr PALLAS:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (12:48): I rise to speak on the North East Link Bill 2020, and I do so because this bill has been brought in by the Treasurer and as Shadow Treasurer I respond to his bills. But I would note that the media release alerting the community to the existence of this bill was in fact put out by the Minister for Transport Infrastructure. We queried at the bill briefing why in fact, given that the media release was by the Minister for Transport Infrastructure, the Treasurer had brought it in. The answer we got was that it was because of the amount of money involved. I say that the adviser who gave us that comment was not making any editorial, but I will, because of course the Minister for Transport Infrastructure has incredible form in not being able to manage projects and get them in on budget.

When we even look at this project, the North East Link, it was originally announced as being a $5 billion project. It is now up to $16.5 billion. That is an enormous $10 billion cost blowout before we even start. I know there is a lead contractor or lead consortia appointed to build this, and I will come to that a bit later. This is yet another one of the reasons why this government has not been able to announce an economic stimulus package, unlike every other state and territory and the commonwealth, because they have blown $24.4 billion on waste and cost blowouts.

In beginning my contribution I go back to a piece that appeared in the Heidelberg Leader back in March 2014. It noted that the then Leader of the Opposition spoke exclusively to the Heidelberg Leader, and the opposition leader, now Premier, confirmed that a Labor government would not support the construction of the North East Link:

Mr Andrews said while there was no shortage of good “high quality” projects, he did not want a transport alternative that would cost $100 billion and take more than 50 years to deliver.

Well, sometimes the Premier’s words are the gift that just keeps giving, because in this case not only was he rejecting the North East Link—the project that this bill is about—but of course he was editorialising on projects into the future. He has come up with another one that is going to cost $100 billion and will take more than 50 years to deliver. No wonder we are in the state we are in when the Premier cannot determine what are good projects and has now at last come to realise that this is a worthwhile project. I went to the bill briefing, and I thank the Treasurer and his staff for organising that bill briefing for us. They came with slides, and the first three of those were about the project. They did not want so much to talk about the tolls, they wanted to talk about the project. I will have a bit more to say about that as well.

The reason we have this bill in the form that we do, which is a bill that sets up a toll company owned and run by the state of Victoria, is that the private tolling operators, both domestic and globally, have not shown interest in greenfields tolling. That is actually not a controversial point. It is clear that with the change to a low interest rate environment we do have a situation where the traffic projections mean that these private tolling companies are not interested in taking on the start-up risk, hence we have a government-owned entity. However, in setting up a government-owned entity, the government have said one of the reasons they are doing it is that they cannot get a private operator to come to the table, but another reason they have given is that they want to develop toll company capacity within the state of Victoria. As will be seen, this bill does not do that. This bill sets up a shell of a company. The actual tolls will continue to be set by the Treasurer working through Governor in Council, but more importantly, it is not envisaged that there will be North East Link tolling tags. People will still use their CityLink or EastLink e-tag, and then all of the tolling revenue for the North East Link when it opens will be roaming revenue. So in fact the state will not be developing tolling capacity. It will instead be getting it from the existing players in the market, but if we look at the project itself, before we even get to how it is going to be tolled, this project is mired in a whole lot of problems before it even turns a single sod on the main construction. The government cannot get a builder to make a compliant build to build the road.

John Holland has come out and said that it will most likely put in a noncompliant bid, because it does not want to take the risk inherent in the government’s demands, which say that for any cost blowouts, any unforeseen circumstances, the people building it have to wear those costs. That is why we currently have parties trying to walk away from the West Gate Tunnel Project. There have been stoppages on the Metro Tunnel, and the way this government has structured projects has now made them completely unattractive to the major builders. As a result, extraordinarily, the government has come back and said that if we do not get a compliant bid and nobody bids, then they would build it themselves. As my former colleague, the former member for Hawthorn and good friend, John Pesutto, said in the Age:

Have things become so bad that the current government is flirting, even if insincerely, with an idea that governments of both persuasions have eschewed for the better part of 30 years? That is the idea of actually building major infrastructure when the private sector is perfectly capable of doing so …

So not only can the government not get somebody to build their road, they have the additional problem that the road has been approved without a final design. As a result we have four local governments taking the Minister for Planning to the Supreme Court, arguing that by the time a design is actually finalised for this road there will not be the proper opportunity for locals affected to provide any input on the potential impacts. That was from a story in the Age by Clay Lucas and Timna Jacks on 12 February 2020. Similarly, in a comment piece, Clay Lucas has gone on to say:

… the process that has led to this gargantuan road project … being deemed environmentally acceptable by Planning Minister Richard Wynne is unacceptable.

What has been approved by Mr Wynne is not a road so much as a general ‘It’s the vibe, your honour’ notion about where the most environmentally disruptive road that Melbourne has seen will be built.

Again, this government is not doing its projects properly. This is why we end up with these massive cost overruns. Just on the issue of the route for the road and the planning, I note that the member for Bulleen is in the chamber at the moment and I am sure he will make an incredibly well-informed contribution to this debate, because this road does in fact go through the member for Bulleen’s electorate. He has repeatedly—most recently on Tuesday, 3 March—raised the issues around compensation, around planning, around consultation in this Parliament and in the community. Again, this government is just not getting this project right, and there is a long way to go before this becomes a world-class project.

The last thing I would say before I get to the seven parts of the bill is that the Treasurer, in his second-reading, made the point that the road will not open until 2027. That is on the best estimate of when we are likely to see it. He said:

The Bill establishes the framework for the operation of the North East Link, with the road to open to the public in 2027.

The reason I raise that point is we are debating a bill that is apparently so urgent that it takes precedence over the ability of all members to raise current issues in this place—to raise members statements, to raise grievances—where many members have now been denied the opportunity to speak to the Parliament, to speak to the executive and to raise concerns found in their communities, particularly around COVID-19, but in general the many, many issues that members want to raise. The argument was, ‘No. The government’s legislation is what is important. We must get through the government’s legislation’. This bill does not operate until 2027. No toll will be collected until 2027. There is no urgency for this bill. The other argument you could make if you were trying to rebut me on that would be to say, ‘Well, the bill also sets up a framework for the people who will build the road’. But, as I just said, they have not got anybody to build the road. The government does not have a partner to build the road. So there is no urgency for this bill. There is no reason that we need to be debating this today, but here we are.

I now move to the seven parts of the bill. Part 1 of the bill deals with preliminary matters and includes definitions. While the definition clauses of many bills are not perhaps that exciting, this one does illuminate a key issue with this bill. If we go to clause 3, ‘Definitions’, it says:

North East Link Project area means the area of land designated as the project area under section 95 of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 and published in the Government Gazette as varied from time to time …

If we then go to the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 and we go to section 95, what it says in subsection (1) is that this section applies if ‘the Premier declares a transport project to be a declared project’, which this one is, or ‘the Planning Minister makes an approval decision in relation to a declared project’, which the planning minister has. Then it says:

The Planning Minister, by Order published in the Government Gazette, must designate the area of land for … the declared project to which that declaration relates.

Why does this seemingly arcane definition matter? The reason it matters is that it is the first of two places where this bill allows the minister to designate any road within the north-east link area as the north-east link road. That means, as the handout that we got with the business case and many others say, one end of the north-east link road attaches to the Eastern Freeway. In fact this bill explicitly says that the government can designate the Eastern Freeway, particularly the works to widen the Eastern Freeway, as part of the north-east link area. That is what this bill allows.

The government has never ruled out tolling the expanded Eastern Freeway. They have said they will not toll existing roads, but when asked specifically very detailed questions about whether they would toll the expanded, additional lanes that are going on to the Eastern Freeway, the government has not ruled tolling those out. As a result we will be moving in the Council—we would have moved today in the consideration-in-detail stage but the Leader of the House’s response to the Manager of Opposition Business’s request to take this bill into the consideration-in-detail stage was, ‘You’ve got to be joking’. The Leader of the House treats the Parliament with contempt—and here is yet another example of it. In the Council we will move an amendment to make it clear that this bill cannot be used to extend tolling to the Eastern Freeway. There must not be tolls on the Eastern Freeway. There must not be the possibility of tolls on the Eastern Freeway, and we will invite the government to support this amendment and make it clear once and for all that they have no intention of tolling the Eastern Freeway.

I now move to part 2 of the bill. Part 2 of the bill sets out the functions and structure of the North East Link tolling corporation. It says in clause 12 that the North East Link State Tolling Corporation fixes and collects tolls. But if we then see clause 101, which is about who sets the roaming agreement—and I will come to this—all revenue on this road is going to be roaming, so it is actually the government itself setting the tolls; the North East Link corporation will not set the tolls.

Part 2 also sets out who appoints the directors and how they are paid. The directors of this company will be appointed jointly by the minister. Until the road opens that is the Minister for Transport Infrastructure, and once the road opens we have been advised it will be the Minister for Roads. These directors are appointed by the Governor in Council, by the minister and Treasurer. We asked about the remuneration for these directors because as a tolling company this corporation will end up with a lot of revenue and as a result would be in the top category for pay. But for seven years it is not going to have any remuneration, so how are the directors going to be paid? We got told that the government is going to set how much these directors are going to be paid. Let us remember: they are going to have seven years where they are not actually collecting revenue—they are not actually really doing anything other than the corporate plans and annual reports that this bill goes into great detail about them having to perform. They will do that—their chief executive no doubt will do that—and they will collect director’s fees. So I am curious, as I am sure other members in the chamber are, as to who will be appointed to this shell of a company that has no functions for seven years and what they will be paid.

For those members in this place who may be considering that this might be their last term for whatever reason, could I suggest that this might be one you want to stick your hand up for, because as far as we can see for seven years this corporation actually will not be doing very much.

Mr Angus: Gravy train for Labor mates.

Ms STALEY: Indeed, member for Forest Hill, indeed—another gravy train for Labor mates.

Again I refer the house to clause 40, which is in this part. It says:

(1) The North East Link State Tolling Corporation must exercise its powers and discharge its duties subject to—

(a) the general direction and control of the Minister; and

(b) any specific directions given by the Minister with the approval of the Treasurer.

This is not a standalone corporation. This is not a corporation that will make decisions for itself. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of the cabinet. And one has to ask, given that, of all the reasons you might have a government-owned corporation—arms length from government in decision-making, developing corporate expertise, having a sense of corporate continuity—none of those things exist within the structure that is being proposed here. Therefore one would have to ask why they do not just get the department to do it. That would be cheaper, to me.

If I go to part 3 of this bill, part 3 provides for the tolling agreements to be laid before the houses of Parliament and the ability to move revocation motions. And again I give notice that in the Council we will seek to amend clause 52(1). This currently says:

A North East Link tolling agreement may be revoked wholly or in part by a resolution of both Houses of the Parliament …

We will seek to amend that to mirror that of the CityLink agreement, which allows for revocation by either house of Parliament. We do think that the Council and the Assembly have their own heads of power and they should be enabled to revoke these tolls independently, and we would look to the crossbench in the Council to support us in that because no doubt the government will not.

Part 4 of the bill deals with tolling—the fixing and collecting of tolls and toll administration fees. These are mainly based on the EastLink and West Gate Tunnel tolling and enforcement provisions. I will not have more to say about them; they are actually copies from those bills.

However, I will move to clause 113, I think. We will start with that one. This covers the tolling roaming agreements. The roaming agreements are incredibly important to this bill because this is how all the revenue is going to be collected under this bill. At the bill briefing we were told that it is not expected that the state tolling corporation will issue tolling tags. Motorists will use a CityLink or EastLink tag. So this means it may not even run its own gantries, we were told. They may buy that technology in from EastLink or CityLink. So the tolls will be set by the government—maybe through this vehicle but effectively by the government—but that will actually flow to CityLink and EastLink and they will then pay it back to this corporation via a roaming agreement. So that will be their revenue. They are not collecting their own revenue, and I think that is an important point to understand, because while the government is saying this is partly around creating a competitor to CityLink when their deeds expire or come to an end, they are not creating that. This is a shell that is having revenue passed to it from CityLink.

Of parts 5, 6 and 7 I would perhaps highlight part 6 because, for anybody who wants to read this quite long bill that does quite simple things in many ways, part 6 provides for the making of regulations, and that is where we see a lot more of the control coming through from the state government into this corporate structure. Again, this is a shell. It is not delivering a new corporation.

So the Liberal-Nationals will not be opposing this bill. We do think that it needs a few amendments, and I have put a couple of those to the house today that we will be moving in the other place, and we would look forward in fact to the government’s and the crossbench’s support—both of them—particularly making it clear once and for all that we will not toll the Eastern Freeway. On our side of the chamber we are trenchant in our support for retaining the Eastern Freeway as a freeway.

Mr Angus: Absolutely. It is vital.

Ms STALEY: It is a vital, vital link, member for Forest Hill, but those on the other side have not been so open. They have only said ‘existing roads’.

Mr Angus: Tricky!

Ms STALEY: Yes, tricky, member for Forest Hill. Very tricky in their language. So we will give the government and we will give the Parliament the opportunity—an opportunity I am sure they will embrace; I look forward to them embracing the opportunity—to join with us and make it very clear that the Eastern Freeway will not be tolled. So with those few briefish remarks I commend the bill to the house.

Mr TAYLOR (Bayswater) (13:14): As the member for Bayswater it is a great privilege and honour, and a pleasure really, to rise today to speak about this fantastic bill that is before this house, the North East Link Bill 2020. For all members in this place, you have probably heard me speak passionately, and there are many other adjectives I can probably use about my level of enthusiasm for this fantastic project, the North East Link, which is the single biggest roads project in Victoria’s history.

Can I first start by acknowledging the, put simply, fantastic work by the Minister for Transport Infrastructure, the fantastic work that she has done on this bill and the fantastic work of the office of the Treasurer as well, obviously leading the bill but with the minister’s team also playing a huge role in the infrastructure part of the North East Link. It is a significantly important road, and it will make a huge, huge difference to constituents in my patch, right across the Eastern Metropolitan Region area and right across Melbourne. From the outset I also want to thank of course the staff of both ministers’ offices.

I just want to quickly cover off on what the member for Ripon in her contribution was asking. I am sure she will be just as honest, after I clarify this point for her, in her social media contributions and her media releases and the like. I am sure she will; I have got no doubt.

The North East Link’s website says, ‘Will North East Link be tolled?’. I can read it verbatim. I am sure members can go to this website and have a look:

Yes. North East Link will be funded by a combination of government contributions and tolls. North East Link will be tolled but there will be no new tolls on existing routes. This includes no tolls to use the Eastern Freeway, Greensborough Highway/Bypass and the M80 Ring Road.

Tolling points and prices for North East Link have not yet been finalised. Prices are expected to be in line with other tolls around metropolitan Melbourne.

That is very much consistent with everything that this government has said—very consistent.

Mr Angus interjected.

Mr TAYLOR: Member for Forest Hill, bless you. Bless you, member for Forest Hill. Try as you might, you can run your scare tactics. We have seen the scare tactics you have run on this and on other matters this week, but we will discuss the topic and what we have at hand here, which is roads projects, which you and those opposite have no idea about delivering. You had four years. You were the first government in decades to be kicked out in one term, and do you know what? There was an absolutely bloody good reason for it. There was a very good reason for it, and it was because those opposite have no idea how to deliver roads projects or projects of any large nature—exactly what this government is fantastic at doing.

Members interjecting.

Mr TAYLOR: I am glad they are riled up. It is fantastic. I love it. It is fantastic. If only they had this kind of passion when they were in government in delivering roads projects. All they could do was sign a site letter before the last election, and this government committed to not building a road that did not stack up. And I have got more to say about that a bit later.

I can tell you now, we have been very, very clear. As I said, I am sure that in all of their communication out to their electorates, as a responsible opposition, as they are, they will make sure that they reflect actual government information that has been communicated out time and time again. But I am sure the member for Ripon likely will not follow that, because it is not in her nature.

Ms Staley: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I would invite the member to withdraw that comment.

Mr TAYLOR: I withdraw.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr McGuire): The member for Bayswater has withdrawn. The member for Bayswater to continue on the bill.

Mr TAYLOR: Having corrected some of the confusion, both members said ‘tricky language’—there is no tricky language. The language is very plain and clear.

But I will move on because there are more important things to talk about, like the benefits of this roads project which is going to completely change the game not only in the way that we move around the eastern suburbs but the way we move across metropolitan Melbourne and the flow-on effects for all Victorians not just of this project but other projects being delivered by the Andrews government. When we talk about the need for this and who is interested in this project I can tell you right now, hands down, the community love this project. They love it. Everywhere I go, across every single corner of my electorate, whether we are in Heathmont, whether we are in Bayswater North—

Members interjecting.

Mr TAYLOR: Yes, in Forest Hill too, I have got no doubt. In Forest Hill as well, I can tell you now.

Members interjecting.

Mr TAYLOR: I am sure they do in Kew as well. It is a fantastic community in Kew. Everybody is for this project. What people want to see is government stop debating. They want to see governments take decisive actions, and that is exactly what we are doing, unlike those opposite, who talked about things and did not do a single thing, and unlike those in the federal government. We keep hearing communication of this $4 billion. It is not budgeted for. It does not exist aside from on the front page of the Herald Sun. This money does not exist, unlike the North East Link with $15.6 billion committed to it in the last budget handed down by the Treasurer. That is a massive, massive commitment for what is a roads project that stacks up. It was 45 cents in the dollar we saw in their own independent business case.

They continue ad nauseam to put out piece after piece after piece, trying to have their tricky political lines, to say ‘Alexandra and Hoddle, Alexandra and Hoddle’. Absolutely the Alexandra and Hoddle bottleneck needs to be fixed—absolutely. Their project did not fix it. The North East Link actually fixes this issue. When you look at the modelling, 11 minutes is saved on the Eastern Freeway—11 minutes—and it is 35 minutes across to the airport, and for people in my community that is what they want to see. They do not want to see cheap political scoring points. They want to see a road project delivered that actually stacks up. It is $1.30 in the business case, and when you take into account other factors, $1.40, so this project absolutely does stack up. We will not be delivering projects that do not stack up; we will not be doing that. We will be listening to expert advice, listening to the community, and that is exactly what the community voted for in 2018. Do you know why? I am here, the member for Box Hill is here, and the member for Mount Waverley and a number of other members in the eastern metropolitan area are here because we are part of a government that delivers good projects.

When we talk about the benefits, we talk about 11 minutes on the Eastern Freeway. In terms of the other benefit—remember that, by the way, this is something that has been talked about for decades—of closing the missing link in the freeway network, that is exactly what we are doing. Not only are we just getting on with things but we are not talking about them like those opposite, as I have said time and time again, because there were a number of other things when they were in government—whether it was Rowville rail, whether it was the airport rail—they promised. We know what our commitment is on that: 2022 is when construction starts. We are working with the federal government. We work very well with the federal government—extremely well. But we will actually get things done and not just talk about them, because talkfests are not for government, in case you have not learned, and I think in 2014 you might have learned that the hard way. It is not about talkfests, it is about delivering. I am sorry; I am very, very sorry for the member opposite.

Now, when we talk about benefits, it is not just about time savings, although we are also going to see average speeds boosted up to over 85 kilometres an hour based on the modelling we have as opposed to 45 kilometres an hour. So we are getting there quicker. We are getting there faster. That is important. But significantly important as well are the jobs we are creating: 10 000 jobs are being created as a result of the North East Link Project—10 000 jobs. That is pretty good, and I can tell you what: my community thinks so as well and those in the eastern metropolitan area think so as well.

It is not just about the local jobs that will be created; it is about the boost for the economy. It is a significant boost to the Victorian economy—a significant boost—because when you deliver projects that stack up the flow-on effects to the economy come through. When we talk about the eastern metro economy—because that is what my community want to hear about; my community want to hear what the benefit for them will be—it is over $5 billion of added benefit to the eastern metropolitan GDP, and that is absolutely significant.

Half a million Victorians of course live within 2 kilometres of the planned interchange for this project, and it will change the way that we move around the city. When we talk about 10 000 jobs, there are also 56 000 workers who will have access to more job opportunities simply because they will be able to get to where they need to go; 135 000 vehicles will use this road every day—135000 vehicles. The member for Ivanhoe and the member for Eltham will greatly appreciate the congestion this is going to ease in their communities. It is going to take 15 000 trucks off local streets. I have driven around Ivanhoe, I have driven around Rosanna, I have driven around Heidelberg and I have driven around Eltham, and this project—

A member interjected.

Mr TAYLOR: Well, the facts are there, whether you have read them or not. I do not know whether you have read clause 113. Maybe you want to have a look at the actual facts and the actual modelling, then come back and have a chat. Have a bit of a look.

So we are talking about taking 15 000 trucks off local roads, and that is extremely significant. Of course it will save upwards of 40 per cent of time on the Eastern Freeway and actually fix the bottleneck on the Alexandra and Hoddle equation. Importantly as well, when we talk about benefits for the environment, of course we are building 25 kilometres of new and upgraded walking and cycling paths, upgrading bridges, adding more signalised crossings for walkers and riders and a bunch of 8500 square—

Mr Angus interjected.

Mr TAYLOR: I am very glad the member for Forest Hill asked: 8500 square metres of green public open space, creating absolutely thousands of square metres of open space, and more than 30 000 trees will be planted. Importantly as well, we are not just delivering roads projects but delivering Victoria’s first dedicated busway. As well, this links into jobs and it links into training, because we knew this was coming. We knew it was coming. That is exactly why—whether it is this, whether it is our investments in three-year-old kinder—we are investing heavily in TAFE to make sure that people have the skills to build projects like this, with nearly 40 000 priority TAFE places last year.

Ms Staley: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, look, in the 8 seconds that the member has left, perhaps he could refer to just some part of the bill—just some part, any part.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr McGuire): On the point of order, the member’s time has lapsed.

Mr GUY (Bulleen) (13:25): Well, I have not been drinking red cordial so my presentation might be a little less manic. I do appreciate the opportunity to talk about the North East Link. It is the biggest infrastructure issue in my electorate of Bulleen, and it is one that has brought a lot of concern to a number of my constituents, in particular those who are business owners and operators in my electorate. So I appreciate the opportunity that this bill allows me to put on record a number of their concerns and their genuine fear about the construction of what is still an unfunded road project. There is not $15 billion as a by-line in the Victorian budget from last year there to build this road, as the Shadow Treasurer has pointed out; it is not funded. And parts of this bill are to clarify the funding mechanism, hence that is why it is in the Parliament—because it is not funded and these funding mechanisms need to be enabled to ensure that it can be funded. That is why we are here to debate it.

As I said, this bill is an enabler for the funding of the project. But of course what is the project? And I have heard this project referred to in many ways; the completion of the ring road is one. Well, I grew up in the north-eastern suburbs—I do not think many people in this chamber did; a couple of us did—and the ring road ends at the Civic Drive roundabout in Apollo Parkways; that is the end of the ring road. VicRoads have, in the current planning scheme in Nillumbik, land which ends at Ryans Road, and that is slated to be the end of the ring road. This is not the completion of the ring road. And I am not opening that debate up—I think debate is now settled—but I am putting on record that this is not the completion of the ring road. This is the construction of the Tullamarine Freeway on the eastern side of the city. This is an access freeway for the growth corridor through the City of Whittlesea, through the E6 onto the Metropolitan Ring Road, to then follow south through what would be the North East Link and then meet the Eastern Freeway; that is what this project is about. And again, I would put on record my support for the construction of a freeway that will alleviate traffic through what should be or is in effect a Heidelberg bypass—to take that traffic out of the Burgundy Street and Banksia Street quarter in Heidelberg and then connect that with the Eastern Freeway. My contention has been for some years, from when this was first mooted, around the style of propositions that had been put forward, the access points for the tunnel, the funding mechanism—which the Shadow Treasurer has referred to—and that this project is going to be disruptive in its construction.

And it is important that we put those points on record in this Parliament, the first point being of course about the Bulleen employment precinct. On the current designs that have been put forward for the North East Link Project, that entire employment precinct will be abolished. I understand that in every project like this you will see land that will be compulsorily acquired. I understand that and the opposition understands that. But we have a proposition that VicRoads and this project are putting forward for a massive interchange at Manningham Road which will see the loss of all of those precincts and no compensation offered to any business that may fall on the other side of the road from a works area.

Now, this employment precinct employs more people than the entirety of Hazelwood, for instance—or in your seat, Acting Speaker McGuire, than the loss of Ford. This is an enormous loss of employment for working people in this area of Melbourne. There is no talk of compensation for any of the employees in these businesses. They will be paid out their entitlements and they will then be farewelled. There is not a discussion, as there should be, around those employees and what they will lose and the great level of certainty about what they will lose—in what we are now looking at as a very uncertain economic time.

So I think it is important to place on record my concern that there has not been any discussion about those employees’ future. And I think that is important to put on record in this debate. There will be a loss of investments for individuals, and there is a local, O’Brien—and I have raised his concerns in this chamber a number of times, to limited replies from ministers, about those who have complied with all council planning schemes along routes which are slated for greater density. They have then commenced construction and of course have had a works area put next to them, which then means that midway through their construction their product cannot be sold. They are left with enormous debts and are now servicing huge debts to which they see negative equity now being realised. There is no compensation being offered for these people.

It is important that we in this debate put on record those people’s concern with this project. So when people say that everyone wants this project—well, yes, everyone wants to alleviate traffic concerns and we agree with that, but we need to do it properly and not in a haphazard way which just slides other people’s concerns to the wayside. The expansion of the Eastern Freeway has caused much contention in the eastern suburbs. The Eastern Freeway from Bulleen Road is slated to be 10 lanes each way, and that is going to fall to—I think, 6 or 6.5 kilometres away at the Mullum Mullum Tunnel—just three lanes each way. The traffic modelling which has been put to date says, ‘No, there will be no bottleneck’.

Mr Angus interjected.

Mr GUY: To go from 10 lanes each way to three lanes each way in barely 6 to 7 kilometres is, as the member for Forest Hill says, delusional, because that traffic is not getting off at Middleborough Road. I drive it every single day, and so does the member for Forest Hill. I see where the traffic gets off, and I can tell you that that traffic which is coming through is not getting off at either Middleborough Road, Springvale Road or Blackburn Road. It is headed to the tunnels, so we are going to see great congestion in those two tunnels, and that issue has never been addressed. Nor has the loss of open space and parkland along the Koonung Creek Reserve.

At times I know the member for Ivanhoe and the Speaker, the member for Bundoora, along with myself will make the brave decision to ride our bikes into Parliament—I see the member for Ivanhoe slinking away at this point—and we will do that because the north-east—

Mr Carbines: Not together.

Mr GUY: That is correct, not together. Indeed when I was minister I reprioritised a lot of funding to build what was the north-east link for bikes to cross the Yarra River, and I did that because it is important to have good bike lanes for the northern, eastern and north-eastern suburbs. But the Koonung Creek Reserve is going to be wiped out by this project. There is no discussion of what will replace it—neither the bike lanes nor the public open space. The public open space won design awards for how good it was when it was completed in the 1990s; it won design awards. For those who use those trails, you will see the plaques down there about the use of wetlands, the interactivity with other urban areas and about how important it is and how well that was done. There is no discussion of any of that being replaced. As I said, I ride the Koonung Creek Trail. I get onto the Main Yarra Trail and then the Capital City Trail and will come into work, come into Parliament sometimes. It is a good ride. It is a highway for bikes. It is not just a walking track; it is a highway for those who choose to cycle to the city. There is not clear discussion about what will replace it. It is more than just a freeway; it is about a way of life for many in Melbourne’s east. The loss of all of that parkland by the Koonung Creek; there is no discussion of that loss. You cannot create parkland. It is not Dubai. We do not go building islands in Port Phillip Bay, and even then, that is 40 kilometres away from what we are talking about. What we are going to see is a major loss of open space, and that has not been addressed. That is why in this debate it is important to do that.

There is the compulsory acquisition of homes issue. I know the member for Ivanhoe will talk about his area, but I have had some discussions with home owners who are very worried about it. There is the impact on local sporting clubs, who have still not to this day had proper discussions with the North East Link about where they may relocate. North of Templestowe Road there is currently a seed farm. I have raised it personally and I have raised it publicly with ministers to try to get the Yarra Junior Football League to relocate there. I have tried in good nature to do that to try to get an outcome there. It has not been addressed. They have been told there is no more money left. There is the loss of the school front at Marcellin College, for instance. Marcellin have a great big oval, as you could imagine, at the front of their school fronting Bulleen Road. They have been told, ‘It is okay’, by the North East Link, ‘You will only lose 2 metres off your oval’. With great respect, an oval is not something that you can just shave 2 metres off and the thing still works—it is an oval. You take 2 metres off the lot, not just one bit. These are the kinds of discussions that have been had.

There is still a lot of community angst over the North East Link. Not over the concept of getting traffic flowing off Bulleen Road, and certainly not that coming off the Eastern Freeway and onto Bulleen Road, which certainly does need to be improved. The Heidelberg bypass and Rosanna Road is clearly a problem. My grandfather, before he passed away about a year or so ago, lived right near that area in Rosanna, so I know it very well—near St Martin of Tours—and I can tell you that the traffic there is a disgrace. It does need to be addressed, and we do not oppose that, but we do have questions that need to be asked about the construction of this project and some of those design options. They have not been addressed to date.

I put on the record for my community in the City of Manningham, the western end of the City of Manningham, that I hope that this debate and associated discussions around it will draw out some level of community certainty around the issues that I have today put on record. Those questions will only get greater over the next few months because this project is about to ramp up. As I said, I place on record in the final 10 seconds that we do not oppose fixing the traffic problems in the north-east. I am a child of the north-east, but we want those questions answered for our communities.

Mr KENNEDY (Hawthorn) (13:35): I am very pleased, delighted, excited to speak on the North East Link Bill 2020, a project that will bring many benefits to the east, where my electorate of Hawthorn is situated. This project has been spoken about for many years, but it is the Andrews Labor government that, as we have seen so many times, is getting on with delivering this vital piece of infrastructure. This bill will facilitate tolling on the North East Link and establish the State Tolling Corporation and necessary toll enforcement and governance regime, to which I will return shortly.

Up to 135 000 vehicles will use the North East Link. This will see 15 000 trucks a day off local roads, with significant environmental benefits, while dramatically reducing congestion in the north-east. Additional lanes on the Eastern Freeway will also help ease some of Melbourne’s worst bottlenecks. Not only catering to the many road users, there will also be a range of benefits for cyclists, walkers and public transport users like myself. As I will outline later, this road will also play a vital role in connecting communities.

As the Treasurer has outlined, the project will be built to the highest environmental standards, with an emphasis on noise reduction or minimisation and engineered to a higher standard than any previous Victorian road project. Consistent with the project’s environmental credentials are Victoria’s longest road tunnels to protect those key areas of high sensitivity. Of course, Environment Protection Authority Victoria’s role in daily monitoring ambient air quality is recognised by six selected locations.

I believe it is also worth highlighting the differences this project has to date from some other roads proposed in this house. Work began on the North East Link on day one of the second term of the Andrews government. To paraphrase a former Prime Minister, this government did not lose a referendum on the North East Link. There was no need for secret side deals. This project was voted on by the Victorian people and endorsed by the Victorian people. While one project was shrouded in secrecy until a new Premier had the guts to release the details, this project worked with local councils for three years—three years—and held an environment effects statement process, which saw 2000 individual pieces of feedback, 870 submissions, 40 days of exhibitions and 36 days of hearings. Engaging with the grassroots community, working with the people rather than just having a born-to-rule attitude, ensures this project’s success.

Enthusiastic and passionate groups, such as the Boroondara Bicycle Users Group, BBUG, and the Metro East Bicycle User Group, MEBUG, as well as other bike groups and walkers will be able to use more than 25 kilometres of new and upgraded walking and cycling paths. Whether it is a school fete, mobile office or even on an election day, a passionate member of BBUG or MEBUG will find time to visit and speak with me. It is clear from their dedication and advocacy that there is a need for more cycling infrastructure around Melbourne. Long have there been complaints that the current eastern route along the Yarra River is indirect, but the eastern bike corridor will provide a direct route for commuters and recreationalists alike.

In addition, the north-east bicycle corridor will be completed, which is a new commuter cycling route to the city along the Eastern Freeway between Chandler Highway and Merri Creek. Bridges will also be upgraded, and more signalised crossings for walkers and bike riders will be provided. This will include upgrading the bridge next to the Koonung Creek wetlands, improving disability access to an incredible local resource.

While most of this falls outside my electorate of Hawthorn, it has many benefits to my community. The Anniversary Trail will now be our link to many other parts of Melbourne. Cyclists will be able to come down from the inner north or outer east, stopping along the way at some of the cafes that Canterbury and Camberwell have to offer. They will learn the history of the outer circle railway, with two historic bridges marking the edges of my electorate: the Canterbury Road bridge in the north and the Toorak Road bridge to the south, both built around 1890. Weekends will be better spent on two wheels, exploring Melbourne and its history and culture. So many families and friends, with cycling and walking at the forefront, will be better connected across our city.

My grandfather was born in the 1880s and was ahead of his time, driving a car in the 1920s. Alas, this was not a skill passed down the generations, with neither my father, me nor even my son having received their drivers licence. Now, some may be asking why as a non-driver myself am I speaking on a bill about a road I will not be using. Well, of course, like many Victorians, I too will benefit, and as an avid user of public transport I am keen to highlight the important upgrades included as part of the project. The inclusion of Melbourne’s first dedicated busway is a win for public transport users along the Eastern Freeway corridor. The communities of Doncaster, North Balwyn and Bulleen will see improvements in their morning commute with an upgraded park-and-ride at Doncaster as well as a brand-new park-and-ride at Bulleen. The new busway will feature dedicated connections to both locations, allowing for unimpeded access, cutting delays. By eliminating the need to navigate traffic at on- and off-ramps, buses will be able to travel up to 100 kilometres an hour, slashing the morning commute for thousands by up to 30 per cent. It is more than just speed, though; this is connecting more communities. By giving people in Doncaster express trips along new uninterrupted routes, they are given easy and affordable access to more parts of our beautiful city—no more weaving in and out of traffic.

This vital road, linking the north to the east, also provides increased economic opportunities for people living in the north, east and south-east. There will be more job choices, and residents will be able to boost income levels and support the development of suburban hubs. Therefore the North East Link will be critical in providing 56 000 more job opportunities for workers in the north-east.

I now turn to specific elements of the bill. The government will introduce a new structure where a state tolling corporation, or STC, will be responsible for fixing and collecting toll revenues for the North East Link. The powers and responsibilities of the new statutory body will be managed through a North East Link tolling agreement with the government, with changes to this agreement subject to review and the right to revocation by Parliament. In addition to the many benefits it will bring, the North East Link will change for the better the way we move around Melbourne.

I would like to mention briefly some of the wrinkles that were highlighted by the member for Bulleen. Like the member for Bulleen, I have a great love of Marcellin College and a number of other activities and institutions that will be affected by the North East Link. But I believe these are wrinkles that will be settled over time—and there is plenty of time, but we need to get some things settled and organised right now. Whilst I acknowledge that there can be some wrinkles and that there is still work to be done, in consultation and working with various sporting institutions and educational institutions, such as Marcellin College, I believe these are fixable things and that in the long run the whole bill will work for the mutual benefit. So I commend the bill to the house.

Ms McLEISH (Eildon) (13:44): I rise to speak on the North East Link Bill 2020, and I am interested to follow the member for Hawthorn, who was speaking on a road bill but says that he has never had a drivers licence. I am not quite sure how easily he can understand the issues that face drivers on a daily basis when he is so far removed from that himself.

The bill that we have before us proposes to establish the North East Link State Tolling Corporation for the North East Link road, which will enable the future operation and maintenance of the North East Link road and of course the imposition and enforcement of tolls for the link. And obviously, as with most bills, there are related changes.

I think it is important that we do have large road projects in this state. It is important that we also have large rail projects. But a road project like this that could make a difference is something that is certainly worth investing in for the state government. We have road projects that are large and we have smaller ones. I have got smaller ones at the moment in my electorate along the Maroondah Highway between Coldstream and Healesville, and community consultation is important—real consultation. The Minister for Roads must as a matter of priority schedule community consultation sessions with regard to proposed changes on the Maroondah Highway between Coldstream and Healesville, in particular the proposed reduction in speed limits from 100 to 80 kilometres per hour. Whether you have larger road projects or smaller road projects, it is important that the right amount of consultation is done.

This is going to be a massive cost to the state, and that in itself will be interesting—how the state government is going to be able to afford to fund this going forward given that we have got massive black holes already and we know that they are certainly well and truly over a billion dollars in the red. And that was before the bushfires hit, before the coronavirus hit, so that was for the first six months of the financial year. So we have got a long way to go, and for big projects like this, whilst important, the financing is going to be interesting.

They do not have a build partner at the moment, but you have to have a look at what is going on out there in the construction world. They are seeing what is going on with the West Gate Tunnel and the absolute stuff-up that has been. It has come to a standstill, and they have not done the appropriate planning. The stories are continuing that John Holland wants to get out of that, and you have got to ask what the wider construction community is saying about that project and about the message that the state government is sending to major construction companies that will be looking to participate in this either themselves or as part of a joint venture. I think that is something that is going to be quite interesting to follow.

Also, there are issues currently on the Eastern Freeway. We know that at the moment as you zoom down the Eastern Freeway you hit that T-intersection at Hoddle Street. This road without an east–west link will be funnelling more and more traffic to that junction and you will have incredible congestion points. We heard the member for Bulleen, who knows this project quite intimately because it goes smack through the middle of his electorate, mention that the Eastern Freeway was looking to be 10 lanes in either direction. I am not sure how many of those lanes they are going to actually try to heritage protect or whether those 10 lanes in each direction are going to muck up some of the heritage listings. Perhaps the minister at the table, the Minister for Planning, may make a contribution and talk about some of the heritage listings on the Eastern Freeway, which are quite ludicrous and ridiculous. But what is going to happen is we will still have tunnels—the Melba and Mullum Mullum tunnels—that are not going to be 10 lanes in either direction, and we are going to have absolute bottlenecks there. To bring 10 lanes down to three is going to be—

Mr Angus: It is shambolic.

Ms McLEISH: It will be shambolic, because we know now when you are driving along a road and two lanes have to come into one because of roadworks the slowdown and the congestion that that causes. I cannot see how, simply, that will work.

The bill here sets up the tolling regime for the North East Link. It makes it clear that the state sets the tolls but does not obviously set out what those tolls are. It is pretty well a shell of a bill. The provisions in this bill are very similar to those of the CityLink, West Gate Tunnel and EastLink tolling regimes. As you would expect, they are drawing on those. As I have said, the bill does not set the tolls, it merely allows for that to happen in the future, and I guess this is something that we are quite concerned about—the extent of the tolls in the future. Where will those tolls be? North East Link, yes, is going to be tolled. Everyone is agreeable knowing that that will be what happens. At the moment at the far end of the Eastern we have the tolls at the EastLink underpasses, the Mullum Mullum and Melba tunnels, but where else on the Eastern Freeway are these going to be? This is the question. You know, I think the government, Labor, have a track record. It was not that many years ago that they were not going to put tolls on—

Mr Angus interjected.

Ms McLEISH: Scoresby and EastLink. And what has happened? That is what ended up. So people out in the outer east know that they cannot trust Labor with that. They are saying, you know, that there are not going to be any future tolls on the Eastern Freeway. Well, I hope that that is very much the case. You cannot trust them. Are we going to have tolls on the Greensborough bypass or a section of the ring-road? We are really not sure about that and that is of great concern. And of course this is of great concern for me and my electorate because a lot of people in the Nillumbik shire will be looking to use the North East Link when it is constructed. Many of them from the Yarra Ranges now use the tunnels and the Eastern Freeway, so these issues are particularly pertinent and relevant.

I want to just take the house back a little bit to the history when they first started putting proposals on the table in 2017. One of the proposals—there were three roads that were proposed—was really looking at splitting the green wedge in half, and this was something people in my electorate were quite alarmed about. The government was investigating a freeway route cutting through Kangaroo Ground and Bend of Islands. Now, if anyone knows anything about Bend of Islands, it has a special protection zone. It is an area where people do not have fences and you are not allowed have domestic animals, whether that is dogs, cats or chooks. Everything there is native. It is really quite a special area, and one of the proposals was to chop through the middle of that, and people in my electorate were really quite outraged. There were the three proposals that were on the table at that moment: one heading down through Ringwood and joining the freeway at the end; at EastLink, the intersection of EastLink and the Eastern Freeway; and one in Greensborough, which we have heard is what they are proposing.

The people in my electorate, many of them in Nillumbik shire, head to the city, and they go a variety of ways. They will go through Heidelberg, Warrandyte and Eltham fairly well in equal numbers and around the ring-road through Tullamarine as well. Not so many go with public transport—we are not so well serviced by public transport in my electorate—but people do have a very strong interest in this project, about how it is going to end up, the damage it is going to cause. We know we have heard with school ovals, bike paths—for example, the Koonung Creek—and what impact that is going to have on those areas. We do have open space and we do have very valuable wetlands, and these have been in place for quite some time. I think we have got to make sure that when we have progress we do not absolutely kill off communities and kill off our recreational elements that communities rely on. For me it was pleasing, actually, that fairly soon the government did eliminate the option that went through Kangaroo Ground and the Bend of Islands, but they did do some works in the early days, and I think that was more a bit of a demo to say, ‘We are looking at a variety of options’. I hope that seriously they were not looking at that as an option, because it had so many environmental risks. It really had everybody up in arms.

So we are concerned also here that, as I have mentioned, there are no future tolls on existing roads. This is incredibly important for so many people that know they have been dudded by Labor governments in the past. They do not want to be dudded by Labor governments again, but I am sure that they do not trust them completely. I am sure my other colleagues will have a lot more to say about how this impacts on their areas, because it certainly does impact the people of the Yarra Ranges and people of Nillumbik and their commutes in and around the city.

Mr CARBINES (Ivanhoe) (13:54): I am pleased to contribute on the North East Link Bill 2020. It is interesting, isn’t it, in all the years since the Melbourne transportation plan, when you go right back to 1969, to think that here we are finally dealing with the traffic congestion issues in a significant way in the north-eastern suburbs of Melbourne. There are a number of different aspects that I would like to go to in the time that is available to me to make a contribution. Firstly, I want to start with the nub of this bill, which is about establishing the North East Link State Tolling Corporation.

The key points that I want to make on this matter are in relation to a paper called Our Plan for a Fair and Effective Toll Enforcement System for Victoria, a briefing paper from April 2017 contributed to by Westjustice, by people like Denis Nelthorpe. Denis Nelthorpe previously did very significant work at the West Heidelberg Community Legal Service, which was accommodated at the Banyule Community Health service. He has gone on to do significant other work out in the west now, but he is known particularly for his advocacy for people who suffer financial hardship, people who I suppose have found themselves on the wrong side of administrivia with issues in relation to outstanding toll fines and debts. In the paper he contributed to, a key point is that on 30 June 2015 Victoria’s outstanding infringement warrant debt totalled $1.6 billion, a 9.5 per cent increase on the previous total. Warrants for toll fines made up some $686 million of that figure or around 40 per cent of total debt. Outstanding infringement warrant debt is inflated on account of Victoria’s toll fine system that adds between $155 to $342 to almost every single unpaid toll fee of between 41 cents and $8.90, an increase of between 3800 per cent and 83 400 per cent. Every single day of unpaid toll road usage attracts a separate toll fine and therefore a driver can be fined thousands of dollars for one week’s use of a toll road.

The key points I want to make in relation to that is that while this bill sets out the structures for the establishment of a tolling corporation, there will be significant work in regulation that our government and the Parliament need to do to make sure that we provide fairness and accountability to people in the community who find themselves with toll debts. We have seen through a range of other public policy arrangements that have been in place with private tolling companies that they have not been effective but have clogged up our court system, cost our government, cost our Parliament and cost our community significantly because of the way in which those tolling regimes have been managed and the enforcement of debt collection arrangements. The 11 local government areas that recorded the highest outstanding infringement warrant debts in the 2014–15 financial year were all outer suburbs of Melbourne.

Can I just say in conclusion in relation to that report that the current system is a result of commercial negotiations and policy decisions whose consequences were not foreseen. In light of substantial research showing that disproportionate, automated systems which do not afford individuals respect and procedural fairness lead to a decline in system integrity and rates of compliance, it is probable that the current punitive system is not responsible for achieving the compliance objectives it was designed to achieve. At the same time, the current system is destroying the lives of vulnerable individuals in disadvantaged communities, while it also imposes unsustainable pressure on the courts and the justice system.

That is really the nub of the issues that relate to how important it is that we set up a state tolling corporation. There is no problem in relation to the North East Link. It will be how we practise what we preach in relation to justice for people who find themselves on the wrong side of the tolling regimes and arrangements. I am very confident that our government, in the significant work we have done in so many places across government and across public policy in this place to bring justice, fairness and equality to people in our community in so many ways, are up to the task of making sure that a state tolling regime here in Victoria through that corporation will walk the walk and will provide fairness and justice to people in our state.

People are going to be tolled on roads through my electorate on the North East Link. I want to know that they will also be treated fairly, equally and with respect and that justice will be absolutely paramount. I know that we will do that, and I think there is a lot of comfort to be drawn from having a state tolling corporation, because that also puts great responsibility and accountability on the government and the Parliament to make sure that it is better, more effective and more just than any of the private tolling arrangements that we have seen operate in our state. I will leave those comments there because there are many other matters that we need to go to.

Let me say that on a daily basis—yesterday, today, right over the break—I spend a lot of time talking to people in my electorate who are working their way through the North East Link and how it will affect them. I pay tribute to them and reaffirm to them my determination to advocate on their behalf and to ensure that they are treated respectfully and fairly and that we work extremely hard to make sure that their concerns are addressed. They remain in many cases outstanding, and that is the nature of these very significant projects. I have worked through this in other projects, whether that be duplications of rail lines in the Ivanhoe electorate between Heidelberg and Rosanna, removing boom gates or spending another half a billion dollars in upgrades to the Hurstbridge line. What you find is that you realise how small some of those projects are when we are talking about the largest road project in our state at $16 billion. It is going to create some 10 000 jobs. It is going to remove some 9000 to 11 000 vehicles off Rosanna Road every day.

But the point is that we have walked this walk before: we have demonstrated our investment in local public transport investment. I just know that what we will be able to do as well is make sure that we are able to support residents who are directly affected and impacted, whose lives will be changed for all time in relation to this project, but also so many people in the community where I live. I live in Rosanna. I grew up in West Preston and Viewbank; I know very well what it is like living either side of Rosanna Road.

I fought very hard to make sure that we introduced a curfew regime on Rosanna Road. Some people might say it is not perfect, but I do not hear anyone telling us to ditch the curfew arrangements for trucks on Rosanna Road. We have done safety audits on the road. We have invested multimillions of dollars in terms of traffic safety cameras and new intersections. I was just up at St James Road, where we flicked on the pedestrian-operated signals this week. There are so many small but significant pieces of work that have been done. Not only that but there is the work that we have done to duplicate the Hurstbridge line in stage 1, to remove boom gates and to also then invest another half a billion dollars in further works up through Watsonia, Greensborough and Montmorency with my colleagues the members for Eltham and Bundoora.

It shows a demonstration that for our government it is not all about roads and it is not all about trains. It is about a comprehensive investment in public transport and other infrastructure that keeps Victoria moving, and we have got a track record of that. This is a marathon, not a sprint. This project has come a long way. There will always be, whether it is those on the other side or local government, those that will find reasons and fault us as to why things cannot be done. But for 50 years we have been talking about how we cannot do anything about the traffic in the north-eastern suburbs. Well, I live there; I live in Rosanna. I cycle to this place on occasions; I get the train here most days. On the duplicated train lines and extra services we provided it was important to make sure that those services were delivered first and that we continued to meet those financial half-a-billion-dollar contributions on stage 2 of the Hurstbridge line to demonstrate to the local community that we are focused not just on road projects but also on local public transport projects—to demonstrate those projects, to deliver them, to continue to invest in them—so that we can then tackle the very significant project that has been in the too-hard basket for too long and has marginalised communities.

When we talk about how the North East Link will divide communities, as sometimes we have heard, I can tell you what divides communities: it is tens of thousands of cars on and trucks on Rosanna Road every day, people who do not live in our community, people who use it as a traffic sewer to get from the city and from the eastern suburbs to the ring road to the north. That needs to stop, and we need to do something about that because it is undermining out local amenity. It has undermined us for far too long, and it needs to change.

We also have got significant affirmation. I have doorknocked right through all these places—around Viewbank, around Rosanna, around Heidelberg. I know what people think, and I talk to them every day. We weighed the votes in Viewbank; we did not need to count them. People support the government’s determination to deliver this project. It is a marathon, not a sprint, as I said. There is a hell of a lot of work still to be done, but we will press on with this project and we will deliver it, because that is what the Victorian people affirmed in overwhelming numbers in 2018.

Mr HIBBINS (Prahran) (14:04): I rise to speak on behalf of the Greens to the North East Link Bill 2020. This bill will establish the North East Link tolling corporation, provide for the imposition, collection and enforcement of tolls and provide for the tabling and amendment of the North East Link tolling agreement. It will also make several consequential amendments to the Road Management Act 2004 and other acts.

It is important to go into why this bill has been brought before this house—why the government is setting up a publicly owned tolling company to run tolls on the North East Link. It is not because the government has suddenly seen the light and decided that publicly owned tolling companies is the new way of business and the new way that they are going to do things and that is in the best interests of the state. It is not because they have seen the light and said, ‘Well, we’ve done the sweetheart deal with Transurban on the West Gate Tunnel—that was the wrong approach; we’re going to take a different approach here’. It is not because they have turned the corner on their privatisation agenda—the biggest sell-off of state assets since Jeff Kennett. You have just got to look at the port of Melbourne, roads, land, public housing, the land titles office. VicRoads is now on the chopping block. Even Federation Square they tried to privatise. It is not because they have turned the page on privatisation; it is because the private sector do not want to touch the tolling rights of this road. They do not want to take the financial risk on the inevitable—and it always is—shortfall in tolling revenue, in traffic projections, in the supposed benefits that are being spruiked by the government. The private sector do not believe it. They do not want to touch it. They do not want to take the risk, and that should signal warning bells to everybody else.

So instead the government’s approach is that they want the taxpayer—they want the public—to bear the financial risk when these overinflated numbers do not materialise, and then after a couple of years, once they know how many people are actually using the road, they will just sell off the tolling rights. That is what they want to do. What we will end up seeing is higher tolls going towards private profit. The minister stated in the second-reading speech that:

Establishing the State Tolling Corporation as a Government entity will build the State’s capability and capacity in relation to the operation and management of toll roads.

I mean, what nonsense, as was pointed out by previous speakers. They are going to be using the tolling technology used on other roads—this is nonsense. This is not about what is in the public interest. It is not about value for money. It is not about a new approach in how the state government is going to finance these big projects. It is an absolute act of desperation. The government wants to get a bad project up, no matter what the cost to the Victorian people, and then continue on their privatisation agenda by selling off the tolling rights, resulting in increased tolls for profits. We know this is the case because as was reported in the Age in 2019, the government shopped the tolling rights around and found there was, quote, unquote, ‘little appetite’ in the private sector to take on the risks of a toll road that is underperforming. I have got to say I found those words really apt—quite amusing, actually—because it did paint a scene. It painted a real history of what has actually been happening in this state.

After decades and decades of governments of various colours serving up an absolute feast—an absolute Christmas feast—stuffing millions of dollars of public money into the profit-hungry roads lobby, this government, the Treasurer and the Premier, have served up their biggest creation yet. This is the big one. This is like the duck stuffed in the turkey. It is one of those big mediaeval banquet creations that they have come out and served up to the road lobby—and they have turned their noses up at it. They do not want it. It is chopped liver. It is incredible. And this should ring absolute warning bells to the public that the government, after years of feeding this profit-hungry industry with sweetheart deals, with public-private partnerships, have suddenly served this one up—and it does not want a bar of it. They do not want to go near it. They do not want to take the financial risk of these so-called benefits that the government are spruiking. In an article published in 2018 in the Age:

The government plans to eventually sell the tolling rights on the North East Link, with the tender document stating that this could happen in 2030, three years after the road opens.

It is in the tender documents. So we have got the worst of both worlds. The public takes the risk, wears the loss, before we then sell it off to the private sector so they can make a profit. That is why under standing orders I wish to advise the house of amendments to this bill and request that they be circulated.

Greens amendments circulated by Mr HIBBINS under standing orders.

Mr HIBBINS: These amendments essentially will see what the government’s plans are for privatisation of the tolling rights. These amendments will essentially require approval through resolution of both houses of Parliament for the sale and disposal of the main undertakings of the North East Link State Tolling Corporation. This will be a test. Granted, I doubt we are going to get to a third reading on this bill in this house, as is the case 99 per cent of the time, but what we are seeking to do is prevent the government from having the taxpayer bear the losses and then the private sector reap the benefits. That is not the approach, and that is why we will be moving these amendments, and we will be moving them in the upper house as well.

What should also be a warning on this project is that the private sector increasingly do not want to build it. They have now got the Treasurer saying he will go it alone. Again this is not because the government has changed its tune and believes the government is best placed to build major infrastructure. It is because there are too many financial risks for the private sector. The question also remains: why are we debating this bill now? The road is not going to be completed until 2027. Are they going to continue to shop around the tolling rights once this legislation is passed? We have also got a Supreme Court challenge by four councils into the environment effects statement process, because only a reference design—a concept of the road, not the actual detailed design of the road—was submitted to the environment effects process.

The government is pushing ahead despite this case and despite the exact opposite approach that the then Labor opposition took when Moreland and Yarra councils had a Supreme Court challenge in 2014 against the east–west link, when Labor then argued that a contract cannot be validly entered into while the issue is before the Supreme Court. Their advice stated at that time that if a court found that the approval of the project by the government was invalid there is no power to enter into contracts for the project and any contracts entered into were beyond power and unenforceable.

So we have a road subject to a Supreme Court case. We do not actually know what the final road will look like. It is clear that the private sector do not trust the traffic modelling and the benefits spruiked by the government and do not want to accept any no doubt generous deal that the government has put on the table. Increasingly they do not want to take the risk in building it, and the reality is we should not be proceeding with this bill at all.

Beyond this bill—if you do believe what they are saying—this is a bad project. This is a bad project that should not be built. The private sector know that, because they do not trust the benefits being spruiked, and even if you did trust it, it still means 100 000 more cars on the road; hectares of open space, green space, endangered species habitat, tens of thousands of trees destroyed; a massive widening of the Eastern Freeway to 20 lanes—and all at the cost of $16 billion. This is at a time of a climate crisis and a species extinction crisis, and at a time when the government is cutting billions from the public sector, when our existing public transport system is unreliable, is overcrowded.

The North East Link is environmental and economic vandalism, and you also cannot argue that there is not an opportunity cost here of sinking $16 billion into yet another mega road project. Just think of what else could be done with $16 billion, what other uses it could go towards that could benefit this state. Could it go directly into public transport projects and making sure that we have got a world-class public transport system here in Victoria? Could it go to building new, big, publicly owned renewable energy so we can get to 100 per cent renewable energy? Could it go towards a big build of public housing to end homelessness and make sure we have got homes for all? There is a massive opportunity cost in proceeding with this road, and there are far more beneficial things that those funds could go towards.

Previous members have spoken about the environment effects statement (EES) and that process. Really that whole process, as many residents from the area who have engaged in that process have reached out to me and said, was a sham. It just goes to absolutely highlight, number one, that the environment effects statement process in this state is a rubber stamp. Over the last decade or so we have had parliamentary inquiries and Auditor-General’s reports all recommend a strengthening of the environment effects statement, and it is now very clear why the government has never actually acted to strengthen that process.

What we have had is the independent advisory panel finding that the North East Link in its current form—and of course this was just a reference design—poses unacceptable ecological risks and disastrous impacts for local communities. These include increased local traffic, job losses, noise, poor amenity and environmental impacts. They are among many of the issues raised by submitters. The independent panel found that the project had not taken sufficient measures to avoid and minimise the ecological impacts of the project, that there would be significant and unacceptable effects on endangered species such as the Studley Park gum and that the measures proposed are not demonstrated to be effective and do not represent an offset for these species.

The panel proposed five key recommendations that were rejected by the planning minister: to extend the bored tunnel option northwards to the vicinity of Grimshaw Street; to review of the need for the Lower Plenty Road interchange, to significantly reduce ecological impacts on Banyule Creek; to significantly reduce social noise, air quality, business, landscape and visual impacts on the community along Greensborough Road and the Watsonia neighbourhood activity centre; to exclude Borlase Reserve as a tunnel-boring machine launch and retrieval site; and to designate the Simpson Barracks as a no-go zone due to potential environmental impacts and further suggestions for future planning.

Even when you had this whole process going on that identified the massive environmental damage that this project would do, and recommendations put forward, it did not stop the project, which of course we have never actually seen from an EES process, which just shows how flawed it is. But even when there were suggestions to improve it the government said, ‘No, costs too much, it’d take too long’. What it shows is this government is determined to ram through this road no matter what the impacts on our environment and threatened species are. We have got the concreting of waterways, the loss of 52 hectares of native vegetation, 25 000 trees, the impacts on threatened flora and fauna.

I do want to go through some of those flora and fauna because these are important. We have got the matted flax lily. It is a threatened species, and you are going to have one-third of the population at the Simpson Barracks removed. At the Simpson Barracks is one of the largest known Victorian populations of the species. They have found that the negative impact of the proposed construction on the matted flax lily will be critical. The only commitment provided is that the North East Link Project will only retain the vegetation to the extent that it does not interfere with the delivery of the North East Link. That is simply not acceptable.

You have got the Studley Park gum, which is proposed to be translocated—98 Studley Park gums. But it has been unsuccessful, and this has been found not to be a suitable approach for these trees. You have got the destruction of a 300-year-old river red gum in Bulleen that predates colonisation. I mean, you cannot ignore the massive environmental and ecological vandalism that this project poses, yet all we have heard from government members is absolute greenwash, just singing from the hymn sheet. They actually went through an environment effects statement process and found these issues, and the government has ignored the key recommendations to fix these issues.

It is not just about environmental vandalism; it is economic vandalism. Time and time again we have seen these mega toll roads. The benefits have simply not come to reality. If you just list off enough of these similar projects, you see that the Clem7 tunnel in Brisbane had half the traffic going through it of what was projected; the airport link tunnel in Brisbane, one-quarter; the Cross City Tunnel in Sydney, two-thirds; and EastLink here in Melbourne, one-third lower.

The government has made some really big claims about economic benefits, travel-time savings and positive benefit-to-cost ratios. But we know from the evidence, from all this roadbuilding that has gone on in the last half a century, that any travel-time benefits are short lived, with even worse congestion occurring in the future. The fact is that we have never gone—in the absence of a proper cost-benefit analysis—to see whether other public transport options could actually achieve some of the same objectives that the government is claiming will occur because of this project. We are just going to be now stuck with a future of massively expensive, congested roads while what should be a world-class public transport system crumbles.

This road has gone from $7 billion in 2016 to $10 billion within 18 months, and then to $16.5 billion, and this is just on a reference design. As has been found by the Auditor-General, looking at the Level Crossing Removal Project, when it is just a reference design, that is a recipe for costs going even further. Now we are hearing, it is apparent, that 22 per cent of the project’s costs will be recovered because of tolling revenue. Now it is going to be the taxpayer that is going to be up for, exposed to, any variability in that occurring. It is going to be the public that is going to be forced to pay the costs of the failed traffic revenue projections, so it is unsurprising that the private sector are not wanting to touch this, and this should be a warning sign for everyone else.

This mega toll road project—and that is government’s own quote—has come out of essentially a state that does not have, despite its own legislation, a long-term integrated transport plan. That is despite that being in the Transport Integration Act 2010 that Labor passed in 2010. Coming out of one of the recommendations of the independent planning panel was that the Department of Transport should develop a Victorian transport plan as required under section 63 of the Transport Integration Act to provide an effective framework for consideration of future major transport projects. All the advice from the independent panel, from experts, is telling us this state needs a transport plan, but this government just wants to make it up as they go along, and it will be the public now through the passage of this bill that are going to bear the financial risks of that. This is a massive opportunity cost for what we could have—a world-class public transport system here in Melbourne. The Greens oppose this bill, and we urge this government to cancel this project.

Ms THEOPHANOUS (Northcote) (14:24): I am pleased to contribute to the North East Link Bill 2020, which forms a vital piece of a very exciting plan, and that plan is for Victoria’s transport infrastructure future—a plan that will see this city and this state prepared for the next century and beyond. Now, I know that in these challenging times, with the outbreak of coronavirus, it is very difficult to turn our minds to what the future will look like, but we have a responsibility to look beyond the hurdles, beyond the horizon, because we will get through this. Life will return to normal, and when it does we know that we will need the systems, the infrastructure and the arrangements in place to not just resume business as usual but grow and to thrive.

The North East Link is a game changer for the inner north. It will take thousands of cars and trucks off local roads and slash travel times for motorists. Residents living in Preston, Thornbury, Northcote, Fairfield and Alphington know how busy our major arterials can be at peak hour. St Georges Road, High Street, Station Street and Grange Road all see the pressure of motorists moving north–south as they make their way in and out of the city. That is part of the pressure of our location, wedged as it is between the CBD and the outer northern suburbs. The North East Link will shift some of that burden, encouraging movement to the east, to get onto the new road and down into the city, freeing up our neighbourhoods for local traffic.

I have spoken before about the burden of government, but governments must make decisions on behalf of those they represent. That is about 5 million Victorians, and we take that seriously. We make decisions on behalf of all Victorians, and when I look across the chamber I wonder whether everyone in this chamber takes the same view. I note The Nationals tend have a very focused view, and that tends to focus on their electorates outside of Melbourne. The Liberals, well, that is a different story again, because we saw last time they had the chance—last time they were given the opportunity by the people of Victoria to govern this state—well, they did not govern at all for Victorians. They did not, largely because they did not govern. They phoned it in, and they hit the snooze button. And when it comes to major transport infrastructure, they still run the standard lines—standard lines that have not changed for a very long time, no matter what the project, no matter how much it improves the lives of Victorians, no matter how many jobs it creates or apprenticeships it delivers. It is hard to listen to because when I look to the major transport infrastructure projects they have built—well, there aren’t any. They turned up and cut the ribbon on projects that they did not fund, and that was it. So if you are not building major infrastructure at all, you are certainly not governing for all Victorians.

Then of course there is the Greens political party. We all know they have no interest in governing, let alone governing for all Victorians. They are focused on themselves, and we learned recently just how low they will sink in the Greens political party on that front when their response to a pandemic was to solicit donations to their party under the guise of helping the most vulnerable through the crisis. Who does that? I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall during that meeting when they sat around to discuss their response to a global health crisis. What question was asked where the answer was, ‘Let’s solicit donations for our party’? And no-one said, ‘I don’t think that’s a good idea’. It is a glimpse of exactly how they think.

Of course, it is not surprising. When it comes to major transport infrastructure the Greens political party have no interest in governing for all Victorians, and there is no better example of this than the member for Prahran’s spray on the North East Link last sitting week and on this bill, where again we saw the virtue bubble at play. They will do anything to stop roads being built—nimbyism dressed up as indignation. I will summarise his comments like this: rail is good, roads are bad. Unfortunately for all of those Victorians who own a car and need a car for their job, to drive to work or to pick up the kids from school, they do not fit the Greens political party virtue bubble. At the last census, two out of three Victorians in work reported that they travel to work by car—two out of three.

And the fact is that the Andrews government does have a plan. It is not just in the Greens’ virtue bubble, because we have a plan that includes all Victorians. We have a plan that includes improving our road network and our rail network and our cycling network. Our plan acknowledges the fact that far more of our modes of public transport actually operate on our roads—buses, trams, taxis, bicycles all travel on our roads; they rely on investment in our roads. I have said it before in this place—my community gets it. They see the virtue bubble for what it is.

And there is another thing that I have said before in this place, and I will say it again. The Chandler Highway bridge project, including the Grange Road level crossing removal, has changed the way my local community moves around. It has changed things for the better. I think I can speak for the member for Ivanhoe, the member for Hawthorn and perhaps I can even safely say the member for Kew in saying the new Chandler Highway bridge is a good project. It has dramatically improved road journeys for individuals and families, it has opened up the prospect of more public transport opportunities through more bus services and it has also greatly enhanced cycling routes. But it is a road project, and road projects do not fit in the Greens virtue bubble so they opposed it. They opposed it at four elections, state and federal—they opposed it every step of the way. True to form they also oppose the North East Link—essentially just because it is a road project. But my community knows that we must upgrade our entire transport network—road and rail—if we are to prepare our state for the future.

My community also knows that the North East Link has huge benefits for our neighbourhoods. They know that for decades there has been an unofficial north-east link, and it runs through their suburbs and those suburbs represented by other members in this house. They know that taking 15 000 trucks per day off local roads is a good thing. They know that 25 kilometres of new and upgraded walking and cycling paths is a good thing. They know that the north-east bicycle corridor between the Chandler Highway and the Merri Creek is a good thing. They know 10 000 jobs is a good thing, and that is before you look at the economic benefits of the improved connectivity for business and freight.

That brings me to the state tolling corporation that this bill facilitates. The legislation introduces a new structure, where a state tolling corporation will be responsible for fixing and collecting toll revenues for the North East Link. We know that one of the great benefits of this road is that it will allow for faster moving traffic and more reliable travel times for freight, and that means that companies like Toll Holdings and Linfox will gain vastly improved journey times between freight terminals. So it is only right that they contribute through tolls. Tolls on roads are not inherently bad things. When done properly they can be very beneficial. When drivers have the choice of using toll roads or using other roads they can be incredibly effective. I come back to my comments about governing and making choices. I am part of a party that believes we should govern for every Victorian, and that means making decisions that are in the interest of all Victorians. The state tolling corporation allows the government to keep greater control of the operation and management of toll roads, and it allows the government choice on behalf of Victorians and having dividends returned to ratepayers. It gives government the option to make decisions in the future that are balanced in favour of Victorians.

In my final minutes I want to acknowledge that major infrastructure projects like North East Link are not currently front of mind. Indeed linking and connecting with each other may seem a more and more difficult prospect as we face the challenge of coronavirus ahead. I acknowledge the burden that we are all carrying at a practical level but also at a spiritual level as we feel the weight of what is to come and as many of our hearts go out to families and friends abroad. I want to thank my community for their calm and their determination to get through a challenge that we have not seen in our lifetime.

I know that people are worried about what coronavirus means and they are uncertain about the future, but all over the electorate I am seeing acts of kindness and camaraderie in a joint effort to do what is needed to protect ourselves and each other. I want to say thank you to all of our healthcare workers and to all the doctors and staff at the clinics in my community, such as Your Community Health and all the private clinics. There are no words to express the gratitude that you deserve. Thank you to all the teachers, staff, cleaners and volunteers and to the parents and indeed the students at all our wonderful schools. Thank you to the kinder and childcare workers. Thank you to the workers in our supermarkets; I know you are dealing with a lot right now. Thank you to the organisations providing services to the vulnerable—organisations like CareWorks and our neighbourhood houses. Thank you to the carers and our aged-care workers. As a community, our combined efforts in heeding the advice of the medical experts will reduce the impact of this pandemic and it will save lives.

Of course, we know that with work comes dignity and that physical distancing and home quarantine means that for many, many people they are facing the prospect of no work. My community has many casual workers and normally a vibrant small business and hospitality and art scene. I want to send my gratitude to the businesses and organisations in my community doing what they can to keep staff employed. I know we are working on ways to support you through this. To everyone in my community and others: thank you and take care of yourselves and of others from a safe distance.

Finally, please remember that physical distancing and home quarantine need not mean social isolation. We can still check in on our friends, loved ones and neighbours by phone or technology. We can and will get through this. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr T SMITH (Kew) (14:34): I rise to speak on the North East Link Bill 2020. I do so as the member for Kew. This project will have a dramatic impact on my local community, particularly the suburbs of North Balwyn and East Kew. We still do not know the extent to which the Eastern Freeway will be widened under this project. We do not know whether the Eastern Freeway will in any way, shape or form be tolled by the end of this project. We certainly know that the Eastern Freeway will continue to end in a T-intersection at Hoddle Street, which beggars belief. If you think about the hundreds of thousands of cars that will be channelled onto the Eastern Freeway by the North East Link, only for them to continue to end in a T-intersection at the corner of the Eastern Freeway and Hoddle Street, it is just absolutely stupid. I put on record again my community’s sincere desire to see a link from the Eastern Freeway to the Tullamarine Freeway. Call it what you will, a project that the Morrison-Frydenberg federal government has $4 billion on the table to build. My community is sick of seeing people rat-run through Kew, through Kew East, through Deepdene, through North Balwyn, and this is only going to get worse with the construction of a North East Link that will pour an absolute tsunami of cars through my local community.

I have been inundated over the last few years with concerned residents who live near the current Eastern Freeway, in North Balwyn and Greythorn in particular, who are going to see 26 000 trees removed, the Boroondara Tennis Centre gone, Freeway Golf gone, Koonung Creek Reserve dramatically obliterated and smashed to pieces, where people have walked their dogs for decades, where families enjoy picnics, where people enjoy the leafy ambience of living in North Balwyn. This is to be destroyed, but we do not know specifically what is going to be built. The environment effects statement process and the so-called independent review into the North East Link still do not really have a sufficient amount of clarity with regard to what actually will be constructed by this corporation, by this project.

The EES process was only undertaken on reference designs; therefore it is a bit like a council making a decision on a planning permit without actually seeing the planning permit. This is ridiculous. This makes no sense, and I commend the cities of Banyule, Whitehorse and Boroondara for their advocacy on this vitally important local issue that is going to impact the amenity of my local residents so dramatically. Parents at Belle Vue Primary School in North Balwyn are absolutely disgusted and outraged that there is going to be a Los Angeles-style spaghetti junction literally built at the back of their primary school that will forever severely impact the air quality at that school and for neighbouring residents. Banyule, Boroondara and Whitehorse put out this joint statement:

The Alliance maintains that it was not possible to properly assess the impacts of the project using the proposed reference design. Other than in the most general terms, nobody really knows what is proposed to be built. Too much about the project has been left to be determined at a later time which excludes the community from the process. This is not the way this process should work—

and we will find out about this when it goes to court.

It is critical that all decisions made in relation to this significant project are made with a clearer understanding of what is proposed.

The Alliance is concerned that the full extent of environmental and community impacts remain unknown as no actual design was available for assessment. By the time that a design is finalised, there will not be the proper opportunity to provide input and make submissions in relation to the potential impacts.

The Alliance remains hopeful of achieving better outcomes for our communities.

Speaking on behalf of the City of Boroondara, the mayor, Cynthia Watson, said:

The IAC panel hearing heard from a range of experts considering a reference design which was then approved by the Minister. The process undertaken here is akin to Council approving a planning application without having received plans that demonstrate what might be built. How can a reasonable assessment of the environment, traffic and social impact on communities be made without sufficient detail?

How indeed could my opponent, the member for Richmond, make a decision in his capacity as the Minister for Planning when he did not have the full facts in front of him? I would allege that that decision by the Minister for Planning was a foregone conclusion, that no due diligence was in effect done and that he was corralled into that decision by a government utterly committed to ramming this project through, to the detriment of my local residents.

Now, I support a North East Link, I support a link between the Eastern Freeway and the ring-road, but the process by which this road has been consulted on with my local community and indeed the member for Bulleen’s local community has been disgraceful, and I again put on record my severe concerns with regard to the environmental impact on my local community, the added traffic that it will create in the suburbs that constitute my electorate, the impact that it will have on Belle Vue Primary School, the air quality in the suburb of North Balwyn and the absolute and unwarranted destruction of Koonung Creek Reserve in North Balwyn, particularly if the Eastern Freeway is extended by the 15 to 20 lanes that have been suggested in a number of the reference designs.

We do not yet know what will be the final project, particularly after it goes to tender, but my community is particularly concerned that various aspects of a widened Eastern Freeway will have a huge impact on their livability but, more importantly, that it will be tolled. The Eastern Freeway has never been tolled, and whilst we are talking about the Eastern Freeway, I am still utterly, utterly amazed, bemused and disgusted that the Andrews Labor government is actively considering heritage listing the Eastern Freeway. I mean, heavens above. Sometimes you just do think that the cardigan wearers in the department have taken over and there are no sensible people running planning in this state. If the Eastern Freeway between Hoddle Street and the Chandler Highway is heritage listed, that will make a potential future east–west link virtually impossible, and I condemn that. I condemn that process, and I condemn any potential heritage listing of the Eastern Freeway in the strongest possible terms. I thank the house.

Mr BRAYNE (Nepean) (14:42): I rise to speak on the North East Link Bill 2020, fulfilling an election promise that was taken to the people of Victoria at the 2018 state election by the Andrews Labor government. The business case for the North East Link was released to the public ahead of the 2018 state election, and given the result of that election, work can now begin on Melbourne’s missing freeway link. This bill’s main purposes are to establish the North East Link State Tolling Corporation in relation to the North East Link road; to provide for the imposition, collection and enforcement of tolls in relation to the use of the North East Link tollway; to provide for the tabling and amendment of North East Link tolling agreements; to amend the Road Management Act 2004 to modify the operation of that act in relation to the North East Link road; and to make related and consequential amendments to the Road Management Act 2004 and other acts.

Now, immediately after the election result of 2018 the government opened the tender process to show Victorians that, yes, we may have won the election but that the work begins straightaway. The North East Link was one of many infrastructure promises made by the Andrews Labor government at the 2018 state election, including of course the removal of 75 of the most dangerous and congested level crossings and the completion of the Metro Tunnel and the West Gate Tunnel. These projects, like the North East Link, are absolutely vital—

A member interjected.

Mr BRAYNE: Is that okay?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nepean, you should not respond to interjections.

Mr BRAYNE: Sure. They are absolutely vital to setting up Melbourne, indeed Victoria, for the long term, for the future.

Mr Angus interjected.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I remind the member for Ferntree Gully he is not in his allocated seat.

Mr BRAYNE: The North East Link’s benefits are well known by the community. It is expected to cut travel times by up to 35 minutes and provide for a safe and efficient freeway connection for up to 135 000 vehicles a day. In difficult economic times securing projects that will keep people in work, that will keep Victoria’s economy going, are vital. This project will create more than 10 000 Victorian jobs. The North East Link will take 15 000 trucks off local roads every day and reduce congestion in the northern and eastern areas of Melbourne. Local residents will have access to more than 25 kilometres of new and upgraded walking and cycling paths as well as upgraded bridges and signalised crossings for walkers and bike riders. We are constructing five land bridges over the North East Link between Wittman Reserve and Winsor Reserve, creating approximately 8500 square metres of green public open space, and we will plant more than 30 000 trees as part of the project. Previous examples of this have been seen most recently through the sky rail project along the Pakenham line, which has seen huge sections of new green play space for residents, including bike paths, basketball facilities, picnic seating, dog parks and bouldering. The North East Link’s relevance to the—

Ms Vallence: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, on relevance, the member seems to be talking about a level crossing removal which clearly is nowhere near the east–west link—sorry, the North East Link—

A member interjected.

Ms Vallence: Well, they got rid of the east–west link. Deputy Speaker, I ask that you bring the member back to speaking on the bill.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! A number of members have strayed far from the bill, but I do ask the member to refer specifically to the bill.

Mr BRAYNE: I do not know how I referred to it any differently, Deputy Speaker. I was still talking about roads and then general projects and infrastructure projects. I think that the shadow minister is just trying to show her chops now that she is in a new position. I guess, good luck to you. All the best.

Mr T Smith: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, the member for Nepean referred to my friend the member for Evelyn as ‘showing her chops’. Could he enlighten the house as to what he means by that, please?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

Mr BRAYNE: The North East Link’s relevance to the peninsula might be limited, but we experienced our own missing link before the establishment of Peninsula Link under the Brumby Labor government. Peninsula Link was a game changer. When Peninsula Link opened up in 2013 it too created new bike paths along huge stretches of the freeway—approximately 25 kilometres worth of bike and walking paths. So many of my friends who grew up on the Mornington Peninsula have had to move to areas such as Narre Warren, Moorabbin and Sandringham, and while I am blessed to continue to live on the Mornington Peninsula, Peninsula Link has meant—

Ms Vallence: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, the member is referring to Peninsula Link. This bill is about the North East Link. In line with your earlier ruling, could you please remind the member to be relevant to the bill?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: My understanding is the member for Nepean is contrasting with other road projects, and I accept that that is okay.

Mr Donnellan: On the point of order, Deputy Speaker, Peninsula Link links directly into EastLink, which then leads on to the North East Link. It is a seamless transition from Frankston all the way to the airport, so it would be appropriate if you were to ask the member to stop interjecting while the member is talking about this great project which links you all the way from Frankston straight into the airport. That is all part of one seamless transition on freeways. What a mighty project. What a great work of the Labor Party.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have already ruled on the point of order.

Mr BRAYNE: It has also meant that so many families have chosen to live on the Mornington Peninsula even if they work close to the city because it has meant that in non-peak times they can get to the city in just over an hour. It has also meant quicker times for goods and services to get to the peninsula. These are the ongoing benefits of making investments in infrastructure: the millions of hours saved, the millions of litres of petrol saved and the additional time with family and friends. These are the sometimes hard-to-quantify benefits of a huge piece of infrastructure.

Peninsula Link cost approximately $850 million. The North East Link is estimated to cost close to $16 billion, the largest transport infrastructure project in Victoria’s history. The North East Link will connect the M80 Ring Road to the Eastern Freeway. The five separate projects that combine to make up the link include the primary package, which is construction of the North East Link from Somers Avenue to the southern tunnel portal, including all tunnel components and interchanges at Lower Plenty Road and Manningham Road; commissioning of the whole North East Link corridor and operation and maintenance of the entire North East Link from Plenty Road to Springvale Road and Hoddle Street; and of course delivery of the tolling infrastructure.

The secondary package is the north part, so construction of the M80 upgrade from Plenty Road to Somers Avenue, including the Greensborough bypass interchange and infrastructure interfacing with the Hurstbridge rail line, including any related changes to the rail infrastructure; and construction of the tolling-enabling infrastructure which forms part of the secondary package works. The North East Link is expected to open to the public in 2027. The benefits that were outlined in the business case when it came out included 35-minute travel time savings between Melbourne’s northern and south-eastern suburbs; trucks off local roads, up to 15 000 per day; the creation of more than 10 000 Victorian jobs; cars and trucks off Rosanna Road, up to 11 000 cars per day; Melbourne’s first dedicated busway along the Eastern Freeway; the creation of a new park-and-ride at Bulleen; and improved access and upgraded car parking at Watsonia station. Due to the works there will be permanent and temporary relocations of sporting groups, the reconstruction of sporting facilities, the upgrade and expansion of existing facilities and more than 30 000 trees will be planted as part of the project, as was stated earlier.

Now to the State Tolling Corporation: the bill will facilitate tolling the operation and the management of the North East Link and establish the necessary toll enforcement regime. Legislation is required to establish the State Tolling Corporation as a statutory corporation and to confer upon it the relevant tolling powers and road management responsibilities. Establishing the State Tolling Corporation as a government entity will build the state’s capability and capacity in relation to the operation and management of toll roads. The State Tolling Corporation will also be the direct recipient of toll revenues. The bill provides the framework for the operation of the North East Link by the State Tolling Corporation. It is a project that will deliver significant benefits to the state of Victoria.

The North East Link Bill 2020 continues the legacy of the Andrews Labor government, a government that is getting things done—big projects for the future that will leave Victoria in sound economic condition for the long term. This was an election promise in 2018, and we are getting straight to work.

Mr WAKELING (Ferntree Gully) (14:52): I am very pleased to rise to contribute to this debate on the North East Link Bill 2020. Can I say from the outset that whilst the establishment of the North East Link is an important piece of infrastructure, the way in which this government has gone about the creation of this project has been shoddy and has caused great concern not only for local residents but for sporting users, for business communities and also for local councils. They have themselves made representations and articulated their concerns about the way in which this government has managed the North East Link project.

Certainly part of the concern that I have, part of the concern my community has and part of the concern other members of this house have, is the potential for the establishment of tolling on the Eastern Freeway. For residents in the City of Knox, who reside in either my electorate or the member for Rowville’s electorate, we would be gravely concerned to think that those residents who travel from Knox to the city and back again will now be required to pay a toll when currently no toll exists. We need to ensure that this piece of legislation makes it crystal clear that there will be no tolling on the Eastern Freeway. This is not the case in the bill that we see before the house. It is imperative to provide certainty and clarity. As other members have said, if it is not the intention of the government to toll the Eastern Freeway, then the government needs to put it in this piece of legislation. It is very simple: if your intention is not to toll an existing road, then put it in the bill. Refusal to put it in the bill only sends one message to residents in the eastern suburbs, and that is that the government will say one thing today, but in the future you will be paying a toll. They are hoping that residents will forget what the government tells them now and in the future that they will forget the commitment this government made. It is imperative that this government amend this piece of legislation to ensure that the provisions regarding tolling, particularly as it pertains to the Eastern Freeway, clearly spell out there will be no tolls on the Eastern Freeway.

Another major concern I have is that clearly for those Victorians who will use this North East Link coming from Greensborough, heading south to Bulleen and exiting onto the Eastern Freeway—many of those vehicles will naturally be heading towards the city. So not only is the Eastern Freeway congested in the morning but for residents in my community who face the peak-hour traffic at the end of the Eastern Freeway, where it ends in a T-intersection, it is only going to get worse. You are literally going to be pouring thousands more vehicles onto the Eastern Freeway—onto an already congested road. If anything, it just highlights the fact that what is needed is that you have got to end the bottleneck. You have got to end the bottleneck at the end of the Eastern Freeway. You have got to ensure that you build the infrastructure at the end of the Eastern Freeway and link it up with the Tullamarine Freeway. What you actually need to do is both pieces of infrastructure. You need a North East Link, but you also need the creation of that east–west link because for those people in the northern suburbs of Melbourne who will travel south on this newly constructed road, all they are going to do is hit an already congested road which carries vehicles that have come from the eastern and south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne. It is illogical to continue the argument that there is not a need for construction of the east–west link, because it is going to be directly impacted by the creation of this new piece of infrastructure.

The government is considering heritage listing a freeway when you have got houses, which would be considered by many across this state as being worthy of heritage listing themselves, being bulldozed by developers, for which this government has no concern. They are wanting to heritage list a piece of freeway—a piece of freeway, for heaven’s sake!—purely as a political ruse to stop a future government creating the east–west link.

I have a short amount of time left to me, and in normal circumstances we would have at least had a lot longer to speak in this house. We have been gagged as an opposition by this government. This government has rammed through changes to the standing orders of this house to prevent the opposition from standing up in this house and standing up on behalf of their community. But I will stand here and clearly articulate this on behalf of my residents, on behalf of those people who live in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne and on behalf of those Labor members of Parliament who represent those communities as well and are unwilling to stand up for their residents and actually fight for the east–west link when they know themselves that many of their residents actually want that piece of infrastructure built.

It is not a zero-sum game. It is not a choice between the east–west link and the North East Link. They actually want both, and you can actually do both. This government would have done both, because we know that John Brumby, when he was Premier of this state, championed the construction of an east–west link. If he was still Premier, you may have had both pieces of infrastructure being built by a Labor government. But not under this Premier. All this Premier is doing is selling out Victorians, selling out people in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne, and the construction of this North East Link is only going to exacerbate the problem that we are going to see on the Eastern Freeway.

So again, I call on the government, I call on the minister, if you are telling Victorians today they have nothing to fear, there is nothing to be concerned about, there will be no tolls on the Eastern Freeway—if that is what you are saying—to not just put it on a website but put it in a piece of legislation. If you are going to stand by your words, agree to put it in the act. Because if you are not willing to do that, then that sends only one very clear message to Victorians—that you are not prepared to stand by your words and you are not willing to change the legislation to ensure that residents in my community are not paying for tolls on the Eastern Freeway.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The time set down for consideration of items on the government business program has arrived, and I am required to interrupt business. The house is considering the North East Link Bill 2020. The question is:

That this bill be now read a second time.

House divided on question:

Question agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The SPEAKER: The bill will now be sent to the Legislative Council and their agreement requested.