Mr BAYLEY (Clark) – Honourable Speaker, I rise tonight to talk about Webuild, given significant developments over the winter break. The Greens are on record with serious concerns about Webuild’s involvement in a joint venture approved to tender to construct the Mac Point stadium. The company has had a number of budget blowouts, construction issues, workplace safety violations and environmental breaches on projects around the nation. Just last year Webuild was accused of covering up its subcontractors’ suspicious underpayments, tax fraud and inadequate workers compensation on the Western Sydney Airport metro. The New South Wales Premier has publicly accused it of price gouging on this project.
More concerning still are the recent revelations that Webuild are facing criminal charges from SafeWork New South Wales. It is alleging the company risked the death or serious injury of workers when they were instructed to continue operating a broken tunnel-boring machine on the Snowy Hydro 2.0 Project in 2022. The company has also been accused of failing to enforce adequate inspection and maintenance of the drill and engage suitably qualified and confident people in supervisory positions. Hearings on the case were held last month.
There is a clear requirement in the stadium EOI process for disputes to be disclosed. I quote, ‘The respondent’s response to this EOI response schedule must include any other claims and disputes which are on foot and subject to litigation, arbitration or determination by an independent expert.’ In June, we Greens revealed that the dispute against Webuild by SafeWork New South Wales was under litigation from at least April 2025, before it submitted its EOI. A spokesperson for MPDC denied this evidence, saying, ‘these charges have only just been outlined and could not have been declared at the time of the EOI assessment.’ Now The Australian newspaper has confirmed the case was filed on 17 October 2024 with Webuild first ordered to appear before the Industrial Court of New South Wales on 3 February 2025. This reveals this dispute was well underway a full year prior to the stadium EOI process. It was ongoing at the time of that process and it continues today as criminal litigation. This is irrefutable evidence Webuild was in active dispute under litigation at the time of submitting its EOI. It should have declared this dispute and it failed to do so. This complete lack of honesty from a company tendering for the stadium is alarming. That it passed into the tender process and remains there, casts a serious shadow over the credibility of the EOI process.
It gets worse. Since the first set of criminal charges were revealed, another completely separate set of criminal charges has also come to light. According to SafeWork New South Wales, three men were performing maintenance underneath the concrete agitator when it fell from its lifts. These workers narrowly escaped injury. SafeWork New South Wales have said Webuild exposed these workers to risk of serious injury or death by failing to have the proper procedures in place. Despite this case being filed in the New South Wales Industrial Court in October 2024, it was also not disclosed by Webuild during the EOI process for the stadium. Whether you support the stadium or not, surely everyone should be able to agree that the company chosen to build it is fit to do so, can be trusted and prioritises the safety of its workers. Webuild’s track record already casts significant doubt over its bid, but its failure to meet the requirements to declare such significant matters in its EOI should be disqualifying. This isn’t the type of company Tasmanians can trust to build the biggest infrastructure project in Tasmania’s history.
These revelations also shine a light on another major failure, how MPDC has conducted the EOI process. There has clearly been a lack of due diligence if MPDC did not find out about these issues until the Greens raised them publicly. More so, now in full knowledge of the breach and the charges, the fact MPDC have since said these issues don’t preclude it from the tender process reveals just how shallow this process has been. Prima facie, as the rumours have long alleged, it seems a blind eye is turned and a noncompliant EOI bid accepted to create the semblance of competitive tension in the two-bidder construction tender process. Tasmanians have seen mismanagement on major projects before and suffered the financial consequences. This is a reckless approach, creating yet more risk of higher costs and worse outcomes for Tasmanian taxpayers. All for a third AFL stadium that Tasmanians don’t want, don’t need and can’t afford.
