TT-Line project

From Hon John Howard OM AC:

I was very sorry that circumstances conspired to lead to your resignation. I am certain that you took the decision in the best interests of the Liberal Party in Tasmania. Your decision to remain an active member of the Tasmanian parliament encourages me greatly. You have always behaved with much integrity, both as a federal Member for Bass and over the last decade as a member of the Tasmanian Government.

From Hon Jeremy Rockliff MP:

Michael displayed great leadership. He carried full responsibility for those who failed to deliver the job entrusted to them. In a sign of personal integrity and strength of character, he stood up and was accountable despite the cost to him and his career. The company eventually admitted its responsibility.

TT-Line Company Pty Ltd and the Spirit of Tasmania Project

Key findings of the Public Accounts Committee

On 5 November 2025, the Tasmanian Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) released its Interim Report into the Spirit of Tasmania Vessel Replacement Project. The PAC’s findings are clear and important.

The Committee found that the failure of the project was driven by governance, capability and information-flow failures within the relevant Government Business Enterprises. As the Public Accounts Committee makes clear, the outcome was the result of multiple, compounding governance and information failures over several years, not a single decision or individual.

The PAC Interim Report¹ found that:

There was a fundamental breakdown in governance and collaboration between TT-Line and TasPorts
TT-Line did not have the project management capability required for a project of this scale
Reporting to government masked deteriorating project conditions rather than escalating them
Critical information and decisions were not appropriately conveyed to shareholder ministers

These findings align with what later became apparent and what I acknowledged publicly once the full facts were known. I further note that the Public Accounts Committee have not made any findings that contradict my evidence² given to that committee in August 2024 (available from the link below).

[UPDATE, MAY 2026]

Today, with the benefit of the Public Accounts Committee inquiry report, subsequent admissions by TT-Line Company Pty Ltd under its new Chair and CEO and the passage of time – the following excerpt from my Budget debate speech addresses what occurred in the Spirit of Tasmania project, what the inquiry revealed and the role played by TT-Line Company Pty Ltd.

It explains why the reductive claim that “the Government forgot to build the berth” is wrong and misses the issue, and why the Public Accounts Committee concluded that the full position was far more complex than many Tasmanians were led to believe.

These views were formed after the facts were examined through a parliamentary inquiry and tested through public evidence.

Extract from my 2026 Budget Debate Speech:

TT-Line has been a significant part of this Budget, and I’d like to address it. I’m speaking to those who continue to hold concerns about the TT-Line project, and I want to say that is absolutely fair enough. It has had significant implications for the Budget and for our state. I want to encourage anybody with genuine interest in the issue to read the Public Accounts Committee report published last November in this House. It’s a very good and fair report in my view. That report demonstrates that the reductive slogan that the government forgot to build the berth is wrong and misses the issue.

TT-Line repeatedly assured government the project would be delivered by July 2024 with the first ramp. The government became increasingly involved based on concerns raised with us by a stakeholder, and we escalated oversight in late 2023, again with assurances that we now know were out of touch with reality. During the 2024 election caretaker period TT-Line terminated its berth builder without telling the government. I believe it’s very safe to say that was a serious and, in my view, unforgiveable failure of governance. The Public Accounts Committee report also makes clear that the full position was far more complex than many Tasmanians were led to believe, particularly in relation to internal governance failures and information not reaching ministers when it should have.

Speaking about myself and my own role, as I’ve said before, I should have exercised much greater scepticism toward that management and their assurances. I should not have trusted them, and those individuals are culpable.

Regarding the politics and the ministerial responsibility, the record is clear and I stand by taking that responsibility. I’m also grateful that the Premier noted:

“Michael carried full responsibility for those who failed to deliver the job entrusted to them.” And he goes on to note: “The company eventually admitted its responsibility.”

Speaker and colleagues, I want to acknowledge that the new TT Line board and management have approached these issues with refreshing honesty and professionalism, in my view, and have accepted responsibility for the company’s failure under its former management. We now need to look forward. With the very positive intervention now close to finished, I believe Tasmanians should look forward with confidence and unity to the successful completion of the project, just a few months away. Won’t that be a great day for our state and every Tasmanian?

This speech was given on 27 May, 2026.

The Mercury Newspaper, 6 December 2024. TT-Line finally took responsibility for the situation after months of blaming TasPorts and failing to inform its shareholder ministers of its decision to terminate its preferred contractor during the election caretaker period.

Key points:

TT-Line Company Pty Ltd chose to manage its own Devonport berthing infrastructure project, moving away from the initial plan to have TasPorts do so.
As Minister for Transport prior the 2024 election, TT-Line repeatedly advised that the new ships and at-grade berthing infrastructure would be in place at Devonport by August 2024, and that TT-Line had engaged a preferred contractor under a letter of commitment. The company gave the same timeframe to a Parliamentary committee, under oath.
State-owned Companies are established under the (Commonwealth) Corporations Act 2001. Like other companies (such as Qantas, BHP, Bank of Us), TT-Line is governed by a Board of Directors which is responsible for major decisions. Operational decisions are made at the executive level, with oversight by the Board.
Companies are required to advise their shareholders (ministers) of major decisions in a timely manner.
During the election caretaker period, TT-Line unexpectedly terminated its preferred contractor: Hazell Bros/Brady Marine Joint Venture despite telling me they would be signing a deed imminently. TT-Line failed in its duty to inform the Government (shareholders). Neither did it provide advice on the impact of this critical decision on the Devonport berth project, nor the very significant project delay this decision would cause.
In December 2024, after months of blame game, the new replacement chair of the TT-Line company board Mr Damian Bugg KC made the frank admission that after his analysis, the company was at fault and took responsibility.
In November 2025, after 18 months of inquiry work, the Public Accounts Committee found that the failure of the project was driven by governance, capability and information-flow failures within the relevant Government Business Enterprises.

Conclusion:

The challenges with the TT-Line berthing project are deeply regrettable and have been a major learning experience for all involved. Responsibility for the decisions made has been shared across various individuals and entities involved in the project. While mistakes were made, the Government took significant steps to address the issues and believed this would ensure the project’s success. The Government and I have apologised for the mishandling of this significant investment that became apparent – an investment which we still believe will ultimately be a very positive and exciting development for our state. By acknowledging these facts and reforming GBE governance, we aim to avoid similar challenges with future projects managed by GBEs and deliver better outcomes for all Tasmanians.

Today with the benefit of hindsight, I hold a strong view that those former senior personnel within TT-Line Company who were trusted with governance, project management and reliable communication with their shareholders have escaped meaningful sanctions and should be held to account as if they were in a similar corporation owned by private shareholders.