Wednesday, 27 August 2025

Suburban Rail Loop

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (10:23): I am pleased to move this short form documents motion 1053:

That this house:

(1) notes the Suburban Rail Loop costings were done ahead of the Suburban Rail Loop: Business and Investment Case, which was released publicly in August 2021;

(2) further notes that construction costs have increased significantly in the more than four years since the costing work was undertaken;

(3) in accordance with standing order 10.01, requires the Leader of the Government to table in the Council, within 30 days of the house agreeing to this resolution:

(a) copies of all additional or updated costing undertaken and presented either to the department and/or the government to the date of the house agreeing to this resolution; and

(b) updates or refreshed costings or newly initiated costings works, including estimates of overall cost for the Cheltenham to Box Hill component or other components of the Suburban Rail Loop.

We know this is a project out of control. There have been enormous cost increases across the construction sector in Victoria, and almost every government project has careered firmly out of control and in some cases well beyond time too. The investment case was released, and the Premier at the time called it very pointedly an investment case. It was not a business case of the type where you are considering options or changes is what Premier Andrews at the time.

He said this was an investment case where you have made the decision and you are just looking at the upside of it. I am paraphrasing him, but that is essentially what he said.

Michael Galea interjected.

David DAVIS: It is very close to what he said. The point is that a proper business case would look at all of the various options, and this one did not.

Having said that, we are proceeding in the sense that the government has made a set of statements, the government is pushing forward, and you would be naive to believe that costings have not changed in the last four and a bit years. You would believe that if you were believing in the tooth fairy or Noddy. We know that the government has done some work. There have been discussions in this chamber. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition here asked Minister Shing some questions around some of these points, and we have certainly requested details on other occasions that touch some of these materials, but this is a very clear request for the updated costings, the updated estimates of the project, to be provided to the chamber and thereby the community.

This is listed as the largest program in the state’s history – arguably in the nation’s history. It is an enormous cost to the state budget. It is a project where opportunity cost is a major point to be examined. It is also a project where significant work needs to be done to keep a project on track and on budget, and it would be very important for the community – and for the budgetary position of the community – to see that the government is updating and refreshing its costings and estimates. It would be irresponsible if the government were not doing that, so I would expect the government is doing that. We know that there have been some reviews. The minister has referred to those in this chamber, and in fact I would have thought some of those might be about ready to be released now. But this documents order is a straightforward documents order. Obviously the investment case released in 2021 is a dated case now, and there must be government work that has looked at different and updated costings as the government has proceeded with certain aspects.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (10:27): One of the great privileges I think we have as members of this chamber at this particular moment in time is that we get to hear a lot from Mr Davis. He is a frequent contributor, as befits his position as the Leader of the Opposition in this chamber. One of the things he talks a lot about is business cases and investment cases with respect to the Suburban Rail Loop project. I have been sitting here listening to him making the same points again, questioning the same issues, looking, searching, for meaning or content or something in documents that, as the Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop has so eloquently articulated on previous occasions, have been presented to the public. I am not suggesting that she would have any copies of them with her in the chamber right at the moment, but I am sure that she does.

One of the things that has been on my mind throughout all of this back and forth about business cases and investment cases is why it might be that Mr Davis is so obsessed by them. One of the reasons – and I am sure there are many, and he has articulated some of them – I think why Mr Davis is so interested in getting his hands on documents that talk about investment, particularly investment in transport infrastructure, is that he has probably never seen any, because we know that the record of the Liberal Party during the four glorious years that they were in power in this state between 2010 and 2014 was a record of doing nothing.

Harriet Shing: Worse than that.

Ryan BATCHELOR: Worse than that. It was a record of doing nothing. It was a record of taking the state nowhere fast. So I can only surmise that Mr Davis and the Liberal Party’s continued attempts to request further and further documents, seeking details about the significant investment that this Labor government is making in rail infrastructure in this state, are driven by the fact they have never seen any before.

Harriet Shing interjected.

Ryan BATCHELOR: As the minister so eloquently interjects, it is really a distraction, because they do not know what their policy on these infrastructure projects is.

It changes daily. It changes weekly. It might change with their leader. Who knows? What we do know is that the Liberal Party, particularly the last example we have of a Liberal government –

David Davis: On a point of order, Acting President, it is actually quite a narrow motion about documents. I did keep it pretty much to the point in fact, and even earlier speakers have done so. I just think that now running into an attack on the opposition is far beyond the pale.

Harriet Shing: Further to the point of order, Acting President, in his opening comments this morning Mr Davis referred to the former Premier and to the business and investment case and the process which had precipitated it, and on that basis Mr Batchelor is entirely within his rights to be responding to that. Notwithstanding Mr Davis’s editorial, this has now traversed beyond the area of the narrowcast documents motion, at his own making.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): Noting that the first speaker has leeway, I do not find that there is a point of order.

Ryan BATCHELOR: Just to clarify for Mr Davis, I was not about to attack the state Liberal Party. I was about to attack the former federal Liberal government and their track record of ripping investment out of Victorian infrastructure projects, because one of the things that Mr Davis might learn if he were to read the business and investment case that the minister has talked about – and probably has copies of – is that included in there and included in the broader documents which exist about the Suburban Rail Loop is investment from the Commonwealth government in the Suburban Rail Loop –

Harriet Shing: Well, this government – not Dutton.

Ryan BATCHELOR: Correct – but that is only because it is a Labor government. If we had a Liberal government in Canberra right now, there would be no funding for Victorian rail infrastructure projects, because we know that the Liberals wanted to cut it prior to the last federal election, which follows their history of cutting funding from Victorian infrastructure projects, like what Tony Abbott did to the federal funding for the Metro Tunnel, cut back in 2013 and 2014. Mr Davis, I have no doubt, will continue to seek documents about investment in infrastructure in Victoria, particularly investment in rail infrastructure in Victoria, because as I said at the opening of my contribution, perhaps he has never actually read one, because the Liberals never produced one when they were in government.

Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:33): I also rise to make a contribution on this documents motion moved by Mr Davis, seeking again, as is his wont on a Wednesday, to raise at least two documents motions for the government to respond to, again keeping many, many public servants busy and distracted from the very important work that they would otherwise ordinarily have to do. Yet again they are tied up going through voluminous papers and documents just so that Mr Davis can try and have a bit of a stab in the dark about what he thinks may be there – you know, fishing expeditions writ large. Again here we are, first thing on a Wednesday. Nevertheless, as I stated in the previous debate on the previous documents motion, the government’s position on these documents motions is that we do not oppose them, but nevertheless we are going to talk about documents and the Suburban Rail Loop today. So here we are again. There is a bit of a theme.

Ryan Batchelor interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: That is right, there is a bit of a theme. And yes, all the greatest hits can come out in this debate. But look, I wanted to focus my comments on the constantly evolving positions of those opposite when it comes to the Suburban Rail Loop, because what we know is that our community in –

David Davis: On a point of order, Acting President, the member has just indicated she intends to focus on the evolving position of those opposite. Actually, the motion is about the provision of documents, not about that.

Harriet Shing: On the point of order, Acting President, yet again Mr Davis is hoist on his own petard, because when he gets up to make comments about a document’s motion he cannot help himself; he goes into the substance and the detail of particular matters and therefore opens the door for further and broader discussion in response to those comments.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): I do not believe there is a point of order on either side.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Thank you, Acting President. Very sage ruling. I know the strategic non-point of order is to run down my clock. As I said, last week – this was noteworthy, and I know the minister was also on this interview – Matthew Guy, the member for Bulleen, actually said:

If a project is commencing then a project goes ahead, it’s as simple as that …

making it their eighth policy position on the Suburban Rail Loop since 2022 – eighth policy position. There are more positions here than the Kama Sutra – honestly, it is constantly changing and evolving positions. But I am glad now that the opposition are actually on board, because what they have realised is that people in my region and in the North-Eastern Metropolitan Region have voted on this project and they want this project.

In terms of documents – again, I do not actually agree with the characterisation that Mr Davis has made in his motion anyway in saying, ‘Oh, updates or refreshed costings or newly initiated costings work et cetera, et cetera.’ There is an assumption there that there is some kind of refreshed thing, and of course Mr Davis would want us all to believe and the community to believe that there is a blowout, there is hidden this or there is blah, blah, blah.

Harriet Shing interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Exactly right. As the minister interjects, what we have seen repeatedly is the project is on time and it is on budget. It goes to my earlier comments: this is a fishing expedition, tying up public servants, having them waste precious, finite government resources going through documents which will assist us, actually, because it will show yet again that this project is on time and on budget and is very much supported by the Victorian community. It is about time they got on board; it has taken them a number of years, though. As I said, there are multiple flip-flop changes in position, which is kind of embarrassing. Again, it is documents sought for what purpose? I am yet to see Mr Davis or anyone actually use any document they have gained through any process in this chamber anyway.

Ryan Batchelor: Certainly not using it to come up with a policy position.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Certainly not.

Harriet Shing: No, they support SRL now.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Yes, but nevertheless I am yet to see them actually use any documents that they gain through any processes in a debate or in any useful way in this chamber. I just think it is a waste of this chamber’s time. It is a waste for the public servants who have to do this, because someone has to read all of these documents; someone has to make an assessment under the relevant standing order about whether they are in or out and whether any exemptions apply, so it is not a simple exercise. As I said, we will not be opposing this motion, but I am glad to see that the opposition has now changed its position again, for the eighth time, and has come around to supporting the Suburban Rail Loop, because it is important and we know that. It is good to see those opposite supporting it, and they would also be very supportive of the fact that the Suburban Rail Loop is on time and on budget, because I know those opposite built nothing. They are the worst opposition in history ever and would not know what a costing or anything would look like, because they are too busy tearing each other apart internally. I will leave my comments there.

Motion agreed to.