Questioning the royal commission: risk of delay and political grandstanding

Critics of the royal commission warn that it could become a costly and time-consuming exercise that delays crucial infrastructure projects. They point to past commissions that ran for years without producing substantive reforms, while legal fees drained public funds. The inquiry may also deter investment, as construction companies face uncertainty over contracts and potential prosecution. Some industry groups argue that existing oversight bodies, such as the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC), are already equipped to handle misconduct allegations without the need for a high-profile royal commission. There are concerns that the inquiry could be used as a political tool by the Labor government to deflect blame for its own management failures. Delays to projects like the Metro Tunnel and North East Link could have real economic costs, affecting jobs and commuters. Critics favor targeted audits and stronger procurement rules instead of a sweeping investigation that risks becoming a circus. For voters, the commission may offer spectacle rather than solutions, further eroding trust in government.