Infrastructure and Construction Projects
The Hon. H.J. GUMBYS (18:15): I rise to oppose this motion. At its heart, this motion is not about accountability, nor is it about improving the delivery of infrastructure to South Australia. Rather, it is a crude attempt to import an Eastern States culture war into this parliament, despite no evidence that the kind of serious misconduct alleged elsewhere has occurred here.
Let us be absolutely clear: the Malinauskas Labor government has zero tolerance for workplace misconduct. Wherever unlawful, corrupt, intimidating or coercive behaviour occurs, it should be called out and addressed. That has been our position consistently and unequivocally. That is why this government has been prepared to speak frankly about the unacceptable conduct that emerged within the CFMEU's construction division in Victoria under the leadership of John Setka. We have supported the federal government's action to place the CFMEU into administration and the commitment of that administration to restoring the South Australian branch to local democratic control free of Victorian coercion.
Importantly, we have also been vigilant in ensuring that any issues identified interstate do not spread to South Australia. We have worked to maintain high standards across our building and construction sector and have made clear that there should be no tolerance for this kind of practice that has rightly attracted public scrutiny elsewhere.
The overwhelming majority of construction workers go to work every day, do the right thing and deserve safe, lawful and respectful workplaces. They should not be intimidated and they should not be disadvantaged for speaking up. That is why we support mechanisms that encourage the reporting of bad behaviour on worksites and ensure allegations are properly investigated and acted upon. The best way to protect workers, taxpayers and the integrity of the industry is not through politically motivated inquiries. It is by ensuring that those who witness misconduct have the confidence to report it and that authorities have the powers and support they need to take action.
The South Australian government has established an unacceptable behaviours guide for transport and infrastructure projects. The guide gives workers clear and consistent ways to identify and report these behaviours, and the guide applies to all our projects and to suppliers and their employees working on our projects. It provides contact details for the Office for Public Integrity (OPI) in South Australia, where unacceptable behaviours can be reported.
The OPI receives complaints about corruption, misconduct and maladministration about public officers, and they work to keep public institutions reliable, fair and trustworthy. That brings us to the central flaw in this motion. There is no evidence to suggest that the criminal practices which have occurred in Victoria have been replicated in South Australia. One Nation is effectively asking this parliament to launch an inquiry based not on evidence from South Australian projects, but on events that have occurred in other jurisdictions.
South Australians expect us to govern based on facts. They expect us to focus on delivering services, infrastructure and economic growth, not on importing political campaigns from interstate. Furthermore, the suggestion that major projects are escaping scrutiny is simply incorrect. Major infrastructure projects are already subject to rigorous oversight and accountability. Ministers and agencies are regularly examined through the estimates process. The Auditor-General has substantial powers to scrutinise expenditure, governance and project delivery.
Infrastructure SA also conducts regular project and gate reviews for additional independent oversight. Procurement processes, contracts and project management arrangements are all subject to established mechanisms of review and accountability. If members have concerns about the cost or performance of major projects, there are already multiple avenues through which these concerns can be tested.
Turning to the Torrens to Darlington project, the facts speak for themselves. The T2D project remains on time and on budget. Drilling is underway and work continues to deliver the nonstop north-south motorway by 2031, exactly as promised to the people of South Australia. The government is focused on delivering this transformative project, not engaging in speculation that is not supported by evidence.
Indeed, where substantial project variations have occurred, including on the Women's and Children's Hospital and the Torrens to Darlington project, those changes have arisen because this government was required to address deficiencies inherited from the former Liberal government. When Labor came to office in 2022, we undertook detailed reviews of both projects and discovered they were inadequately developed and poorly designed. In relation to the Torrens to Darlington, we have made substantial changes that ensure that three tunnel boring machines could operate concurrently, minimising the duration of disruption to motorists and improving the delivery of the project.
In relation to the Women's and Children's Hospital, we took the responsible decision to identify a new site so that both the new hospital and the Royal Adelaide Hospital would have the capacity required to meet the needs of South Australians into the future. These were necessary decisions made in the interest of good governance and sound project delivery. They were decisions taken to fix problems, not create them. We have supported the reporting and investigation of misconduct. We have taken a strong position against wrongdoing exposed in Victoria and have been clear that such conduct should never take hold in South Australia.
Parliamentary committees should be established because there is evidence of a problem requiring investigation, not because political parties want to retaliate or relitigate interstate controversies. South Australia already has strong oversight mechanisms. There is no evidence that the kind of conduct exposed elsewhere has been replicated on South Australian projects and, consequently, there is no justification for this select committee. For those reasons, I oppose the motion and urge members to do the same.