Victoria’s secret fare levy: why commuters deserve answers and refunds

The Victorian auditor‑general has revealed something commuters should have known long ago: from the start of 2025 a new levy was quietly added to public transport fares to raise money for the Suburban Rail Loop and other Big Build projects. That hidden decision matters because it shifts the costs of major infrastructure onto everyday travellers without parliamentary debate or public consent. Public transport users are not a faceless revenue line. For many people — workers, students, older Victorians, people on low incomes — fares are a regular household expense. A surcharge introduced without disclosure corrodes trust in government and in the case for grand projects. The auditor‑general’s report also raises further questions about whether the first stage of the Suburban Rail Loop can be delivered on time or within budget. If a major project is already uncertain, the public has a right to know exactly how much they are being asked to contribute and why. At its core this is a question of democratic accountability. Levies and taxes should be visible so voters and parliamentary representatives can judge priorities and trade‑offs. Secret levies shortcut that process. They make it harder for opposition MPs, scrutiny bodies and the media to hold decision‑makers to account. They also deny commuters the chance to weigh up alternatives — from reprioritising other spending to phasing works differently. There are also fairness concerns. Funding expensive rail projects by quietly adding costs to individual journeys is effectively a regressive measure: it hits those who rely on public transport hardest. If the government believes public transport users should contribute more to new infrastructure, that case should be argued openly, with clear rationale for why riders — rather than broader taxpayers — are being asked to meet the shortfall. The auditor‑general’s findings demand immediate remedies. The government should publish a full accounting of the levy: how much it has raised, how those funds have been used, and the legal authority it relied on to apply the charge without disclosure. Parliament should examine whether any procedural rules were bypassed and whether administrative practice needs tightening to prevent future hidden charges. Commuters should also be given clarity on the longer‑term funding plan for the Suburban Rail Loop. If the first stage is at risk of delays or cost overruns, citizens must be told and consulted — not told after the fact through fare hikes. Where a levy has produced revenue that was never transparently approved, consideration should be given to compensatory measures for those who have paid the extra, or to using the sums raised to reduce other fare pressures. Finally, this episode exposes a broader culture issue: major projects carried out without transparent public debate breed cynicism. Big infrastructure can transform cities for the better, but only when funding choices are above board and citizens are part of the conversation. The auditor‑general has done the job of shining a light. Governments must now answer the harder question: will they restore that trust, or keep treating farepayers as a hidden source of cash?