Tuesday, 9 September 2025

Transport Accident Commission

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (18:38): (1926) My matter is for the Minister for WorkSafe and the TAC. I am informed that there is an expression of interest process that has commenced in the Geelong region to move the Transport Accident Commission head office from its current building, owned by Centuria Capital, to a waterfront location with a view. The cost to taxpayers of the new building, I am told, would be at least $120 million. That is probably $100 million more than the cost of an upgrade to the existing site, which would cost a mere $20 million to extend its life and to ensure that the cost of relocation, including the moving and the decanting and so forth, would be avoided. I understand that there is a push to have a waterfront view for the TAC staff, but an additional $100 million in Victorian money does seem a lot – bearing in mind that the costs of the TAC are met from, in part, the premiums that are paid by Victorians through their licence fees, and they are very significant. Victorians are doing it tough with the cost of living at the moment, and Victorians are feeling the cost of renewing their licence, which has got a large, obviously legitimate, component of TAC money. It is also true that the government is scooping dividends out of the TAC and in that process are making it more difficult for the TAC to undertake the work it does need to do.

So what I am trying to understand here is: what is driving this? Why is this such an urgent focus? I have seen economic modelling commissioned by Centuria which indicates that the cost, as I say, to taxpayers for public servants to be moved to the five-star waterfront views would be in the order of $120 million. This will obviously affect neighbouring cafes. It will affect a whole range of different groups. We have got a shortage of housing at the moment. There seems to me to be a range of different alternatives for this money, but one obvious one would be lower registration fees for most drivers. What I seek from the minister is to make a public explanation as to why this EOI has been put out and why there is the urgency to move from the current location. Why not do a simple refurb at a much lower cost? Why is it such a push to get the waterfront views for these bureaucrats?