Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, , 3:42:45 to 3:46:07
The committee examines reports of a "secret levy" on public transport fares in Victoria intended to fund the Suburban Rail Loop and whether this was disclosed to the Commonwealth.
Topics: Infrastructure, Government spending
Speakers: Hon Bridget McKenzie, Lachlan Wood, Mr. Jim Betts, Senator Ross Cadell, Unknown Speaker
>> Uh, so that levy was not identified in the funding and financing strategy that was provided to us.
>> But were you aware?
>> We were not aware of a secret levy before it was public in the um auditor
>> It's what the business case was based
I'm not sure that that is correct that the business case was based on that. It wasn't the levy was and this has been said by um department of transport and planning for broader rail network investment. Um it was not one of the funding streams in the value capture um funding and financing strategy. But to
Senator Cadell's question, would it
>> I don't. It wouldn't change. It's more about the funding as opposed to the cost or the benefit. So, I wouldn't expect it would change that assessment. Um, and with all of our projects, we don't assess the state's capacity to pay their portion of the um project contributions.
If you weren't aware of the project's largest value capture source of revenue, if you weren't aware, which is your evidence today, how did the Commonwealth make an informed decision to pour $6 billion worth of Commonwealth taxpayers money into the SRL if you weren't aware?
As I said, it wasn't identified as a component of the value capture or the funding and financing strategy. Um, so it wasn't something that we knew of or would take into account.
>> So the um Commonwealth's contribution is capped as we've described. How the Victorian government raises the funding for its contribution to that project is to a great extent a matter for the Victorian government. Whether that's through debt or through a budget contribution or through a fairs levy feeding through into a budget contribution. It doesn't affect the business case and it certainly doesn't affect uh the Commonwealth's investment decision per se.
>> So the Commonwealth decides to make contributions irrespective of a state capacity to pay.
>> Well, the state government is the proponent for the project. Um and uh the funding share or the Commonwealth's contribution is what it is and the balance of that project budget uh is um the responsibility of the state. That's
>> Is it you the $5.5 billion shortfall then? Um is the levy part of making It's probably
big enough to let
>> It's a matter for the Victorian
>> What's your understanding, Mr. Betts?
>> My understanding is that Commonwealth's contribution is capped at $6 billion at
>> Yes. All right. We've said that a few times today. >> it's capped until it's not capped until we recap. Um, following the auditor general's findings, does the department still consider Infrastructure Australia's funding and financing recommendations to have been satisfied?