Ms O’CONNOR – Thank you, Chair. Minister, the Chair, through her line of questioning, has demonstrated the precariousness of the infrastructure budget and the fact that in the Budget, expenditure is being pushed out and, at some level, it makes the Budget look a bit better, I guess.
Mr VINCENT – Smooths the Budget.
CHAIR – Not much better.
Ms O’CONNOR – Although it is a disaster for the people of Tasmania. As a first question, I want to take you to the Tasmanian climate risk assessment. Given that we’re talking about infrastructure strategy, and there’s not a lot of evidence before us that the government actually has a strategy for infrastructure, and, if you wanted to address that in your answer, that would be helpful. The climate risk assessment says:
Damage to the transportation network is projected to have major consequences by 2030…
So that’s five years away, minister.
…which may result in service disruptions due to loss of critical transportation infrastructure. Further state‑level action is required to respond to specific climate change impacts on Tasmania’s transport network, including a coordinated approach across different levels of government.
Given the squeeze on infrastructure funding, a prioritisation of roads infrastructure, for example, what are you, as minister, doing to help to ensure that we’re ready for what’s coming?
Mr VINCENT – There are a couple of different things there. The state of the climate report that the TPC did, which was a long time overdue – we now have that being worked on by Mr Ramsey so that is reviewed on the five‑year window on a regular basis now. We’re putting that in place to start with. I know it’s only one step in –
Ms O’CONNOR – The State of the Environment Report.
Mr VINCENT – State of the environment. Thank you. We’re putting the system in place for that. Mr Ramsey is working on that at the moment. On what needs to be detailed and how that will be done.
I haven’t had a huge amount of discussions on the climate change effect other than – and I could bring Mr Moloney forward to talk more about this – discussions on several of the road projects. If I could use the example of the south‑east traffic solution, if you travel along to the end of the airport and then go down the old road near Barilla Bay, the new road is approximately, in my terms, about a metre higher. I can remember quite a few years ago the discussions on how the causeways could be done to minimise impact in the corridor that’s already there for them basically, although we had to extend it out. One of my questions then was what we are doing about the effect of climate change and it was very positive that it had been considered. The numbers had been considered and the department had actually talked with Pitt & Sherry, the contractor at the time doing the initial work, that the causeways would need to be about a metre higher all the way through to allow for that sort of effect. I’ve had discussions with several mayors and GMs about some of the impact that climate change may have on their road systems, but I can honestly say that I haven’t moved fully into a full understanding of the effects of climate change yet. I guess my answer is the department does take that into account when designing roads at the moment.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thank you, minister. That’s just roads and as you know, the infrastructure for which you’re responsible comes in many forms. I’ve sat across Estimates tables from various infrastructure ministers over the years and asked whether the department has done any kind of audit or risk assessment to existing infrastructure around the island. These questions have been going back since your colleagues came to government. Apart from considering the height of roads, what else is happening in the agency for which you’re responsible to make sure that our infrastructure is ruggedised –
CHAIR – Is that a real word?
Mr VINCENT – I was going to ask the same question.
Ms O’CONNOR – Made more rugged and more resilient, which of course also has then a community safety and an economic benefit in buffering us from some of the shots when these climate impacts hit our infrastructure, as they already have.
Mr VINCENT – My portfolio is roads; it says Infrastructure which is roads and bridges. I’m not involved with some of the other assets that are around. TasRail have discussions there about the work they are doing on maintaining their lines, they take a lot of those things in too, but I would like to bring Ben Moloney forward.
Ms O’CONNOR – There’s also the question of ports and coastal assets for which you have responsibility, and the assessment says:
As an island state, the operation of Tasmanian ports and coastal infrastructure is of critical importance. While there is a lower level of confidence for this risk compared to other tier 1 risks –
Which are detailed in the assessment,
the accelerating impact of rising sea levels emphasises the need for additional adaptation action as improvements to port infrastructure and coastal infrastructure can have long lead times for implementation.
Big questions here.
Mr VINCENT – Before I hand over to Ben, I will mention that on the ports for you, when I took the role on, it was just after I’d been through this process for the first time, and ports are obviously a big point of discussion. We discovered fairly quickly the projection of some of the infrastructure needs for ports, and this will be something that you could certainly talk to in the GBES next week, was somewhat limited. We now are working on a project, instead of a four or five‑year forward Estimates on works in ports, we are now working on a 20‑to‑30‑year infrastructure plan, of which a lot of work is being done on costing those projects all the way through.
Now, obviously you can get five years pretty accurate, 10 and so on, got to keep as a rolling stock, but there is a lot of work doing there. The other thing I’ve been quite fascinated with the ports is their measuring techniques of modern technology on assets, on vibration, movement, separation and hydrology is a lot more advanced than an old carpenter like me ever appreciates. I’ve learnt a lot on that and certainly not an expert on it, but I’m sure next week, exactly on ports, they will be able to answer a lot more on what they’re doing.
CHAIR – They couldn’t do it in 2023, that’s for sure.
Mr VINCENT – There’s been a lot of work done in the last 12 months and with that, I’d really like to welcome Ben Moloney to the table. He might be able to talk more specifically about what the department is doing when they’re thinking of individual projects.
Ms O’CONNOR – We’re trying to just get a picture – and thank you, Mr Moloney, just so that you can save the time of the committee – of the department’s strategy for dealing with climate risk in specific terms: succinct and specific terms, Mr Moloney.
CHAIR – Can you introduce Mr Moloney by his title as well, please, minister, or can he do it himself?
Mr MOLONEY – I’m Ben Moloney, I am the Executive Director of Major Transport Projects on behalf of the Department of State Growth. In terms of future proofing and taking into consideration climate change and everything else, there are probably two main aspects: there’s the maintenance side, making sure that you continue to maintain and protect your existing infrastructure assets, and then there’s new developments. For the last 10 years or so, I’ve been more in the new development side.
It’s a little bit more difficult for me to discuss how the department is currently approaching the maintenance side, but from my previous days working maintenance, it was a key consideration in how we programmed either periodic maintenance or regular maintenance to make sure that we were maintaining our assets, and where there was periodic maintenance, so where we were doing something more substantial, you were seeking to provide extra protection so that the roads were more resilient. If you think of some of our challenging roads in mountainous countries, making sure the drainage is sufficient for extra flows and the likes, and then –
Ms O’CONNOR – Or a road like the South Arm Highway at Lauderdale, which is right on sea level.
CHAIR – So is the Bass Highway nearly all the way along.
Ms O’CONNOR – Exactly: we’ve got a lot of these kinds of roads, that will be a real challenge, especially if we don’t have enough money to deal with it, which, if we go ahead with this ridiculous stadium idea is a strong possibility, on top of our debt situation.
Mr MOLONEY – Essentially projects have that opportunity to uplift and provide improved conservatism and protection against those future changes. For instance, if I use the new Bridgewater Bridge project as an example, we acknowledge and recognise that the Lyell Highway from Bridgewater to New Norfolk has a lot of sections there which are quite low. A project could, theoretically, take the approach, well, if there’s going to be a flood, they’re going to flood, so therefore we don’t need to do anything better than what is existing; but what that would do is set the benchmark going forward. Rather than doing that, the new Bridgewater Bridge project adopted the process of considering and making sure we accommodated for future sea level rises and the likes, so that the section that we were upgrading was at a higher level and could accommodate those adjustments in flood levels and the like.
That set the new benchmark, so that if there are further projects along that highway, the Lyell Highway between Bridgewater and New Norfolk, it could then ensure that each of those projects ideally, subject to budget and the likes, could be upgraded and lift the road and the level of protection in those locations. That’s, I guess, an example of where a major project has been able to set the new benchmark to take into consideration those longer-term changes.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thanks, Mr Moloney. Chair –
CHAIR – Could I just ask the secretary to add on a departmental level, please, which is where it all stems from?
Mr LIMKIN – Ms O’Connor, I have the benefit having the Climate Change Office in the department, and so since the 2024 report has been assessed as part of the work, the Climate Change Office has presented to our executive about that report and the importance. In addition, we’re presenting to the secretaries board regularly so all my colleagues understand the impact of the work there. In relation to a department basis, climate change is on our risk register –
Ms O’CONNOR – I should hope so.
Mr LIMKIN – It is on our risk register. I think it’s very important that it’s on our risk register. I wanted to say it, because it should be, and then it is embedded in all the assessments that we do across the department. We ask each one of the business units to do it and we will continue to have our Climate Change Office present at our executive so that people are informed, and that they can build this into their appropriate processes as Mr Moloney has spoken about.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thank you. I will say in closing before passing on, it’s really important that heads of agency and other skilled people within government departments are clearly focused on this, because as you know, minister, ministers come and go, and agencies often have people in there who’ve been working in the field for a long time. I thank you, Mr Limkin. I encourage you to even further elevate the understanding of climate risk and make sure that your department is helping whatever minister you serve access the funds that you need, even if it means difficult choices, in order to keep Tasmanians safe and buffer us from the economic shocks of what’s coming.
CHAIR – I think that’s a statement.
Ms O’CONNOR – Yes.
