Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I want to express my absolute alarm over an action that the Victorian government is considering taking, and that is annulling the compensation payable if they breach the East West contract and doing that through a legislative instrument. This is an extraordinary proposition. Even the discussion of this proposal to legislate away the compensation payable is causing the business community to be concerned about future investment in Victoria. If the Andrews government goes ahead and puts this legislation through the parliament, it would put Victoria back to the Cain-Kirner era of governance and make every investment in Victoria more risky and, consequently, more expensive for every future investment project. What does this mean? This means ultimately fewer investments in Victoria and fewer jobs for Victoria.

Victoria as a state already has to deal with the most militant unions in the country, causing some global companies to literally boycott doing any construction in the state of Victoria. If Premier Andrews legislates to annul contractual rights, he will be trashing Victoria's reputation and the impacts will reverberate across Australia. How did we get to this position? I would like to give you a bit of context. This is not a new initiative. It has not even been a partisan initiative. For almost nine years, both parties in Victoria have encouraged it, facilitated it or actively supported it, until only a few months ago. When you look at some of the history, for example, you see that it was initially put on the table by the Victorian Labor government when they commissioned the Eddington report in March 2006, almost nine years ago to the day. In 2008, the important Eddington report was tabled and it made 20 recommendations. There were two very significant infrastructure recommendations, one of which was, of course, an 18-kilometre road connection, including tunnels, linking the Eastern Freeway with Footscray, CityLink and the Western Ring Road—that is, the East West Link as we know it today. In that report, Sir Rod Eddington made some very decisive comments. He said:

The evidence is clear: doing nothing is not an option.

The evidence is also clear that failing to take action will undermine Melbourne's future prosperity and reduce the benefits being generated by the city's growth and development.

Premier John Brumby responded to that report in August 2008. He said:

One way or another we've got to address this issue of a second east-west crossing and … one way or another … we've got to build capacity on the public transport system.

The Victorian Labor government at that time commissioned the report themselves, which recommended the East West Link. The Labor Premier at the time, Mr Brumby, had actively supported the proposal. Julia Gillard herself, an emerging leader, said that:

There are a range of possible options but I think everyone is recognising that something needs to be done to deal with traffic congestion from the west of Melbourne into the city.

The AWU at the time, which was led by the now Leader of the Opposition, actually said something in 2008. He would no doubt recall, sitting opposite me now, that it said:

The Australian Workers Union (AWU) believes that the new east–west link is crucial to jobs and economic growth. A new transport link from Melbourne’s booming west to the south east and eastern suburbs has the AWU’s strong support because the Victorian economy relies on the efficient movement of freight and people.

In fact, it actually went further than that in that. It makes comments about people who were opposing this. It said in that submission, back in 2008 when Bill Shorten was the leader of the AWU:

Opponents may prefer a declining population as the best means of dealing with congestion and the challenges of growth as their children leave the state to search for better jobs and migrants choose other destinations. However, such a proposition would never be supported by the AWU. Better solutions are at hand.

That solution that was at hand then, as it is today, was the East West Link project.

We are now in this situation and Daniel Andrews now has a choice. There are three options available to him. Now that the Prime Minister has arrived, I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

See this speech in context