Wednesday, 9 September 2026

 Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (14:01): As I was saying earlier, this is a secret tax that no-one knew about except for the entire cabinet. We had members like Minister Dimopoulos saying that the first he had ever heard of it was in the Auditor-General’s report. Well, he is clearly not reading his cabinet minutes.

David Davis interjected.

Evan MULHOLLAND: It is a huge worry. This is a corrupt government that corruptly levied a secret tax on all Victorians. When Infrastructure Australia and the federal government were saying its value capture assumptions did not make sense and needed further work, they clearly never told the federal government that it already had a plan to pay for it by secretly charging every metropolitan and regional transport user without telling them. Buses, trams, trains – every public transport user was being secretly charged a tax for two years for a project that does not make sense.

As I was mentioning earlier before I was rudely interrupted by question time, the then Treasurer admitted in the committee for the budget papers that the 40-year loan off the back of the value capture mechanisms – the $11.5 billion loan over 40 years – is modelled to include interest. Well, if you take a 40-year loan of $11.5 billion up-front – the Treasury Corporation of Victoria yield for anything over $10 billion is about 6.25 per cent – it means you are paying around $28 billion over 40 years without even paying the $11.5 billion. So it is clear that SRL North is never going to be built, because despite what successive ministers for the Suburban Rail Loop have said, you cannot have a positive cost–‍benefit ratio without SRL North adding into that as well, which is longer and will cost more. The Parliamentary Budget Office says over 50 years it will cost $216 billion for the first two stages. That is more than our entire state debt. This government has no plans to build a second stage, so it knows by its own admission that the Cheltenham to Box Hill line does not stack up.

You have got several more worthwhile projects: the Upfield line duplication, the electrification to Wallan and the electrification to Melton and Wyndham Vale that they have promised at two elections. I can tell you that would be done now if the government did not go off on a vanity project that no expert body or secretary recommended with the Suburban Rail Loop. That would be done. Several projects in the south-east of Melbourne – Clyde rail, road duplications – would have been done. I am sure Mr Galea would have preferred a lot of infrastructure investment into the growth areas of Melbourne instead of the Suburban Rail Loop. Instead not only are they charging a secret tax, but Mr Galea and his mates have commissioned $600,000 –

Michael Galea interjected.

Renee Heath: On a point of order, President, it is an offence to standing orders to interject when you are not in your place.

The PRESIDENT: I uphold the standing order, and Mr Galea is on notice.

Evan MULHOLLAND: As I was saying, not only have Mr Galea and his mates charged a secret tax on all Victorians, but they have also commissioned over $600,000 of taxpayer money on research to find out how we can charge growth area communities more – another secret tax. They were also briefed on and Ben Carroll and others are pondering a $110 tax on all of metropolitan Melbourne. $110 per household they have looked at to fund the Suburban Rail Loop. It is no wonder Mr Galea is up and about right now, because he is ashamed. He is ashamed of the secret tax they are levying on households.

Michael Galea: On a point of order, President, it is worth the chamber knowing that Mr Davis joined the Kennett government, which closed the train line to Clyde back in the 1990s.

The PRESIDENT: It is not a point of order, but if you would like to –

David Davis: On the point of order, President, I was elected in 1996, that is true, in the Kennett government, but actually the Cain and Kirner government closed far more lines than the Kennett government ever did.

The PRESIDENT: That is not a point of order either.

Evan MULHOLLAND: I am going to continue. To quote the Premier, the way that this tax was come up with was ‘not transparent’, and it was unfair of Andrews, Allan, Pallas and Merlino to come up with it in this way. Now, Mr Merlino serves at the confidence of the Premier as chair of what body – the Suburban Rail Loop Authority. So if he thinks the way that Mr Merlino came up with this tax was not transparent, does he still have confidence in Mr Merlino as chair of the Suburban Rail Loop Authority, and did Mr Merlino’s appointment have anything to do with the fact that he co-invented and was concealing a secret revenue source for the very authority he was appointed to?

This is a corrupt government that has dreamed up this project on the back of an envelope, and every single Victorian is paying the price. With everything I went through, the only thing to do and what the Liberals and Nationals commit to doing in the financial interest of all Victorians is pausing and reviewing this project. We need to get to the bottom of this secret tax, which is why I thoroughly and wholeheartedly support this select committee motion by Mr Davis.

 Jacinta ERMACORA (Western Victoria) (14:09): This motion does not identify any gap in the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office’s work. It does not put forward any new evidence that VAGO has not considered. Members should consider whether establishing a parliamentary committee to duplicate an independent audit represents the best use of Parliament’s time and taxpayers money. The irony of it is that the opposition say that this exercise is about protecting public money while they propose a committee that duplicates the audit. We already have 171 pages of findings, analysis, recommendations and agency responses that have been conducted by an independent expert body whose job it is to do just that. Can I emphasise the independence of the Auditor-General and perhaps point out the extent of political bias and pointscoring contained in the opposition’s motion.

The government has nothing to hide. A properly conducted inquiry is not something this government is concerned about, as you can see from the Premier’s response to the VAGO report. The Premier acknowledged there was not sufficient transparency around the creation and implementation of the charge. He did not defend it simply because it was policy; he abolished it. The rail improvement charge is gone, and that is what Ben Carroll’s new direction looks like: greater accountability, greater transparency and a willingness to fix what is not right. The Premier’s position is straightforward. He will not spend his time relitigating the past when there is work to do for Victorians right now.

 David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (14:11): It has been a long debate but a worthwhile debate. I am disappointed that a number of parties will not support this motion, despite earlier indications in a positive direction. That is disappointing, and I genuinely put on record that I would have preferred a different outcome there. A number of members have said, ‘What will this add?’ I will tell you what it will add: we will actually get to question some of the key ministers, and the Auditor-General clearly has not questioned the ministers directly. That is what needs to happen.

These ministers made the decision. It was obviously Andrews, and it was obviously Jacinta Allan – and very likely Ben Carroll. But he has been untruthful and not honest and not clear about his involvement in these matters. He was clearly the public transport minister at the time, in 2021, of the first decision to levy this new tax, and yet he has not been prepared to be honest here. We know that the cabinet minutes went to cabinet at some point, maybe up to eight months later. But let me just say, if you were the transport minister and matters in a cabinet subcommittee decision-making process related to transport, you would read it and your department would make sure that you did. So I, for one, do not believe Ben Carroll on this. I believe he knew from quite early on in 2021 that a new tax was being applied. I do not believe he has been honest with Victorians in this recent period. In 2023 and 2024 further decisions were made. The decision to impose the tax was reaffirmed, and then it began on 1 January 2025. Did Ben Carroll not think that it was important for people to know? Did Gabby Williams not think it was important for people to know this tax was being put on people?

Ms Ermacora spoke just now, but people coming from Warrnambool in her area got on the train and paid the tax. They have been paying the tax every time they got on the train. Every time they get on the train, they pay the tax – the nasty new tax. Why were they not honest about this tax? Why they were not honest about this tax from the start is very unclear, other than that they wanted to deceive Victorians. They did not want to be up-front. They did not want to tell the truth about the costs. The idea that you would put an additional 1 per cent over and above the CPI year after year after year until 2060 or beyond – that is an enormous amount of money to be collecting out of the system: $8.4 billion. I think Victorians are entitled to know whose idea this tax was, why it was implemented in the way it was and why they were not transparent with Victorians. Why did they seek to hide this in that way? What was it that the government wanted to cover up? I think we know what they wanted to cover up. They were deeply embarrassed about this public transport tax. I think the community are entitled to know whose idea it was. I think if Ben Carroll wants to be Premier after the next election, Victorians are entitled to know the truth about his involvement in conceiving this tax. It is my view that he knew from the start that he was up to his neck in this, that he knew exactly what was going on there, but the inquiry would be the way to do it. The inquiry would be the way to actually establish definitively whether Mr Carroll knew, when he knew, the nature of his deep involvement in this process and why he thought he could hoodwink Victorians.

Amendment agreed to.

Council divided on amended motion: