Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion in relation to the response just tabled by the government with regard to the East West Link.

Leave granted.

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

I must say that it is really quite discourteous of the government not to even give notice that they were going to table these documents. It was only fortuitous that someone was glancing at the screen when this occurred. I note that the letter the government has tabled is, in effect, not a response to the Senate's request for the business case for the East-West road project in Melbourne. This is the most perfunctory and discourteous piece of correspondence because it simply represents a letter from the interim infrastructure coordinator of Infrastructure Australia indicating that Infrastructure Australia's assessment is progressing and that no assessment has been made on the project. But the request of the Senate was to actually provide the business case.

This is an important issue that goes to the expenditure of $3 billion of Commonwealth money. It is an issue about the handing over of very large sums of money to the Victorian government without a verifiable business case being presented. The project is of considerable importance to the city of Melbourne, to the people of Melbourne and to the communities that are directly affected by the project and the claims that are being made, which remain untested. This is a project which, to all intents and purposes, is half baked. It was rushed through in such a manner that even the Victorian government planning minister responsible has ordered that significant sections of this project be redesigned. So there remains a vital question, unanswered by the government's rather tardy response on these issues, which goes to the expenditure of moneys being proposed and whether it is appropriate that very large sums of money be provided to the Victorian government without a proper business case being provided.

As we have seen in regard to the evidence put before the Senate estimates committee, $1.5 billion of the money is proposed to be paid by the Commonwealth, or Infrastructure Australia, without a proper business case being prepared for either stage 1 or stage 2. Stage 1 is the link between the Eastern Freeway and the Tullamarine Freeway. Infrastructure Australia has only been presented with a 40-page, short-form business case—a business case which, as has been advised to the Senate, was not suitable for a part of a proper assessment. Infrastructure Australia has classified the project as having real potential but not currently ready to proceed. Yet the government provides $500 million to be paid to the Victorian government before 30 June for stage 1, and another $1 billion is to be provided for the following three years. For stage 2 of the project, Infrastructure Australia has indicated that only a conceptual business case has been provided. That is the assertion being made—that only a conceptual business case exists. We of course know that there needs to be substantially more for there to be appropriate consideration of the value of this project.

If the government is providing such extraordinary sums of money, you would have thought that there would be a proper planning process in place and that there would be a formal business case provided. As recently as 6 June, the minister responsible, the Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, said that payments would only be made when they were hitting milestones for the particular project. Yet the East West Link has not hit the first and most fundamental of those important milestones, the production of a credible business case. So I am led to believe that there may be serious doubt as to whether a business case really exists beyond this conceptual claim that is being made.

It will only return, from what we do know, 80c for every dollar invested, according to Infrastructure Australia. The process of committing $3 billion of Commonwealth funding to this project would be laughable if it were not so serious—$2 billion of funding for this project will have a cost-benefit ratio of 0.8, and there is $1 billion of funding for stage 2 of this project but no evidence of a formal business case existing. It is little wonder that my colleague Senator Conroy has described this whole project as somewhat shonky. Perhaps we could suggest that there is somewhat more to be said about it than that.

There are a number of serious questions that I think the Senate is entitled to have addressed. Why is it that the Commonwealth is providing this money without a proper planning and business case proposal? Why is it that such a folly is being produced for the electoral support of the state government in Victoria, at a great cost to the people of inner Melbourne? And why is the Premier of Victoria proceeding with this matter? There is no clear understanding of where the money is actually going to come from, given the recent amendments to Infrastructure Australia's legislation which we saw passed through this parliament and accepted by the government.

There appear to be no traffic forecasts for when the freeway will happen. There is no proof of the alleged benefit of it being a congestion-busting project that can actually be produced. There is no decision on the level of tolls. There is no disclosure on how much taxpayers' money will go into the road over the 30-year life of the project. We saw, in Senate estimates, revelations that the project would deliver a cost-benefit ratio of only—let me repeat it—80c for every dollar that is being invested.

If this project is ready to proceed, as has been claimed, then we need to see its ranking. My understanding is that it is not even second on the ranking system. And if the project does show real potential and if it is in fact shovel ready, then why is it that its ranking, in Infrastructure Australia's assessment, has been so low? It is inferior to other major projects in Melbourne. The project means that there are serious resource allocations in terms of opportunities for public transport. We know that that fits within the government's political priorities of intense hostility to the provision of funding support for public transport.

What we do know, through the estimates process—and this is not dealt with in this ministerial response today—is that this whole process is surrounded by a shroud of silence. The government has determined to impose on the project and on Victoria—the government has resorted to, once again, what is now becoming characteristic of it—a culture of secrecy.

There is no way they can hide behind the fig leaf of commercial-in-confidence. The Senate has asked for these documents quite legitimately, and it is appropriate that these documents be provided. The government has given no explanation as to why they are not being provided. The documents cannot possibly be considered commercial-in-confidence because the bidders of stage 1 have already lodged their bids. The planning for stage 2 remains at a conceptual stage, despite the promise of an early payment of $1 billion.

The correspondence with Infrastructure Australia assessments are not commercially confidential, nor do they enjoy executive privilege. So I think we are entitled to raise questions about why the government is seeking to behave in this manner about this particular project. We do not agree that these documents should be withheld from the parliament and from the people. The government's nondisclosure continues a process of intense secrecy, which is now becoming all pervasive within this government. It is a pattern of contempt—contempt for the community, contempt for the Senate and contempt for this parliament. And, of course, far from building the infrastructure of the 21st century, it appears that we conclude from this that the government is engaged in a secret deal to get this road built at the expense of local communities—secret deals which try and save a hapless and hopeless Victorian government, which is facing a very serious challenge. I look forward to its defeat at the election in November. Secret deals only confirm the view that, far from building the roads of the 21st century, this government in Canberra is engaged in a pork-barrelling cavalcade to assist their mates in Melbourne. (Time expired)