Markets 
When is zero tolerance not zero tolerance?
That is what anyone who has listened to Premier Jacinta Allan and her ministers answering questions about corruption on Victoria’s Big Build has to ask themselves.
In February this year, Allan released to the public a letter she had written in July 2024 – after The Age began publishing its bombshell Building Bad series – addressed to the state’s Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission. This letter, she maintained, was proof of her government’s seriousness in confronting alleged wrongdoing on its signature infrastructure projects.
Except that it was nothing of the sort. It was a Clayton’s referral. As former IBAC commissioner Robert Redlich noted at the time, “it should have been well known to the premier and her officers assisting her that IBAC’s jurisdiction is limited to investigating misconduct by public officials … and so we come to a massive area of corruption in which IBAC can currently play no role”.
Before 2024 ended, Allan was reminded of this fact by IBAC. So what was the purpose of showing her letter to Victorians this year?
February was also when this masthead revealed that CFMEU investigator Geoffrey Watson, SC, accused Victoria’s political leaders of Big Build of ignoring corruption and how much it likely cost – an estimated $15 billion. Then CFMEU administrator Mark Irving said the number wasn’t “properly tested”, but Allan went further, declaring that “that claim, of any amount, has not been well tested or properly founded”.
And February still wasn’t over when The Age revealed another attempted Big Build rort, with employees of Swiss firm Schindler accused of claiming $6 million for fictitious escalator repairs. This alleged corruption wasn’t even part of the Watson report’s eye-watering calculations.
The Metro Tunnel consortium had contacted Schindler with concerns soon after the $6 million claim was made in October 2024. Schindler investigated, removed three employees and repaid the funds. State government officials working for the Victorian Infrastructure Delivery Authority were informed in November 2025.
At this point, according to Transport Infrastructure Minister Gabrielle Williams, a “referral” was made to Victoria Police. But once again, all is not as it seems.
For it was only after The Age’s February report that police Taskforce Hawk launched an investigation into what went on. As the police pointed out, they may have been told in November 2025, but “a formal report was not made by any party regarding any allegations of criminality”.
When this was pointed out in a budget estimates hearing this week, Williams called it “semantics”. The Age calls that another chapter in this government’s saga of obfuscation. What is the point of telling police in such a way that they are not obliged to take action?
This is especially so when Allan has repeatedly said to the point of being insulting that anyone with information about criminality should be bringing that to the police. As the opposition pointed out in parliament this week, her own government has failed this test.
The reason she has repeated the line so often is because of the continuing stream of stories about suspect conduct on the Big Build which, as yet, has not produced any prosecutions, partly because the government refuses to properly inquire into them and empower a response.
As Watson said, responding to our recent revelations about alleged corruption in the hiring process on Big Build sites: “Premier Allan’s likely response to this latest scandal will be to refer it to the police, which is akin to perpetuating a cover-up given police can do nothing. A powerful agency or commission of inquiry with coercive powers is needed to expose the human and financial cost of this rot.”
Redlich has argued that IBAC can be that agency, provided it is given powers to follow the money, powers that Allan has repeatedly knocked back.
Allan responded that she had “absolute confidence in Victoria Police to investigate allegations of criminal behaviour on work sites”. This is the same Allan who wrote to IBAC when IBAC didn’t have the powers needed to investigate the identified wrongdoing.
So it’s not a question of whether Watson has confidence in the police. The question is who has confidence in this government’s desire to confront allegations of corruption?
The Age’s View – Since The Age was first published in 1854, the editorial team has believed it important to express a considered view on the issues of the day for readers, always putting the public interest first.From our partners
Read the full article here
