A former senior official at the Victorian Health Building Authority (VHBA) has alleged he received a direct phone call from a government representative instructing his agency to keep a contractor on a major hospital redevelopment — after the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union had separately demanded that same firm be removed from the project. Victoria Crime News can report the allegation has been made in evidence to a formal proceeding, raising fresh questions about the influence of organised labour and political direction over the state’s multi-billion-dollar health infrastructure program.
The former VHBA executive director, whose identity VCN is not publishing at this time given the sensitivity of the ongoing inquiry, told the relevant body that the sequence of events left him in an impossible position: the union wanted the company gone, yet the government — through a channel he described as direct and unambiguous — wanted it to stay. He is alleged to have described the call as unprecedented in his experience of managing major public works contracts in Victoria.
What is the VHBA and why does it matter? #
For readers unfamiliar with the machinery of Victoria’s Big Build, the Victorian Health Building Authority is the body within the Department of Health responsible for planning, procuring and overseeing the delivery of major health infrastructure — hospitals, community health centres, mental-health facilities and aged-care redevelopments. It sits at the heart of Victoria’s capital works pipeline, which successive governments have described as the largest health-infrastructure investment in the state’s history.
Because of the scale of spending involved — running into the tens of billions of dollars across active projects — the VHBA’s procurement decisions carry enormous weight. Which companies win contracts, which are removed from panels, and which survive disputes with unions are not merely commercial questions; they directly affect how public money is spent and which workers are on site at taxpayer-funded hospitals.
The sequence of events as alleged #
According to evidence VCN understands has been placed before the inquiry, the CFMEU raised concerns about a contractor working on the redevelopment and, through processes the union commonly uses on major Victorian construction sites, sought the firm’s removal. That kind of pressure is not, of itself, unusual — unions regularly raise safety and industrial concerns about subcontractors and head contractors alike on large public works.
What the former VHBA official alleges is that, shortly after the union’s position became known internally, he received a phone call from a government contact. The nature of that call, as he has described it, was to make clear that the contractor should remain engaged on the project. VCN understands he has alleged the call was not a routine stakeholder inquiry but a directive — and that it came from a level of government with the capacity to influence procurement outcomes at the VHBA.
The former official is understood to have raised his concerns internally at the time and, when he felt they were not adequately addressed, to have preserved a contemporaneous record of events. That record, sources close to the matter have told VCN, forms a significant part of the evidence now before investigators.
IBAC context and the broader CFMEU investigation #
The allegation lands against a backdrop of sustained scrutiny of the CFMEU’s conduct on Victorian construction sites and its relationships with both employers and the state government. The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) has, in recent years, examined the intersection of union power, government contracting, and the Big Build in a series of investigations — most notably Operation Daintree, which examined procurement practices and alleged corrupt conduct in the construction sector.
IBAC has not publicly commented on the specific allegation raised by the former VHBA official, and VCN is not in a position to say whether his evidence forms part of any current or future IBAC investigation. What can be said is that the nature of the allegation — a government representative directing a public authority’s procurement decision in circumstances that coincide with union pressure — is precisely the category of conduct IBAC was established to examine.
A spokesperson for the Department of Health told VCN it would not comment on matters that may be the subject of external scrutiny. The CFMEU’s Victorian branch did not respond to questions sent by VCN before publication. The contractor named in the underlying dispute has not been publicly identified in the proceedings VCN has reviewed, and we are not naming them at this stage.
What the whistleblower is asking for #
The former executive director is understood to be seeking formal recognition as a protected disclosure maker under Victoria’s Public Interest Disclosures Act 2012, which provides legal protections to public sector employees and former employees who report suspected corrupt conduct, misconduct, or maladministration. Sources have told VCN he has expressed concern that his career trajectory changed following his decision to raise concerns, though VCN has not been able to independently verify a direct causal link between his internal disclosures and any subsequent employment outcomes.
His legal representatives, VCN understands, have written to the relevant authorities outlining the basis of the disclosure and requesting that the matter be assessed and, where appropriate, referred to IBAC or the Victorian Ombudsman for further investigation.
Government accountability and the Big Build #
The allegation, if substantiated through any future inquiry, would represent a serious breach of the procurement integrity principles that are supposed to govern how Victoria’s major public works are managed. Those principles — set out in the Victorian Government Purchasing Board guidelines and the specific procurement frameworks that apply to health infrastructure — require that decisions about contractors be made on merit, on safety, on financial grounds, and on the public interest. They do not permit ministerial or political direction to override an agency’s assessment of a contractor’s suitability.
Victoria’s Auditor-General has previously raised concerns — most recently in a 2023 performance audit of major health infrastructure projects — about governance gaps in the VHBA’s project oversight functions, including the management of contractor relationships and industrial issues on site. That audit did not make findings about the specific project or the specific allegation now before investigators, but it identified systemic vulnerabilities that critics say create conditions in which the kind of conduct alleged here could occur.
The Opposition’s infrastructure spokesperson called on the government to make a full statement to parliament about the allegation, telling VCN that Victorians who are funding these hospital projects deserve to know who is making decisions about the companies building them, and why. The government had not responded to that call as of publication.
What happens next #
VCN will continue to follow this matter as it develops. If a formal referral to IBAC or the Victorian Ombudsman is confirmed, or if parliamentary proceedings are initiated, we will report on those developments. Readers with information relevant to procurement practices on Victorian health infrastructure projects are encouraged to contact VCN’s secure tips line or to contact IBAC directly at ibac.vic.gov.au.
The matter is currently before the relevant oversight bodies. All persons and organisations referred to in this article are presumed innocent of any wrongdoing unless and until a contrary finding is made by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction. No findings of corrupt conduct have been made at this stage.
If you have information about corruption or misconduct in public office, you can report it confidentially to IBAC on 1300 735 135 or at ibac.vic.gov.au. Crime Stoppers Victoria can be reached on 1800 333 000. If you are experiencing distress related to workplace matters, support is available through Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636.
