Asbestos Concerns: Letters to GIICA
Initial Formal Complaint Email Sent to GIICA, 15 September 2026
Subject: FORMAL COMPLAINT - FAILURE TO ACT SAFELY IN RELATION TO ASBESTOS FOUND AT VICTORIA PARK (BARRAMBIN)
Dear Complaints Officer,
1. Background
On 7 September 2026, Save Victoria Park Inc. wrote to GIICA following the discovery of asbestos-contaminated material at the Victoria Park (Barrambin) construction site. That letter asked five specific questions, central to public safety and to GIICA's obligation to keep the community properly informed:
1. How long was the asbestos disturbed before work stopped, that is, how long was the community exposed?
2. What type of asbestos has been found?
3. Will the contaminated material be removed from the site, and if so, when?
4. Is GIICA required to install air monitoring, and if so, has this occurred?
5. How can the public be assured that they are safe?
As at the date of this email, that correspondence remains unanswered.
2. The newsletter does not address these concerns, and misrepresents the park
On 11 September 2026, four days after our letter was sent, GIICA issued a community newsletter, “Victoria Park construction update”, covering works planned for September on Brisbane Stadium and the National Aquatic Centre. Under “Brisbane Stadium,” the newsletter lists earthworks “including the handling of existing onsite contaminated materials in accordance with relative legislation requirements and controls” alongside routine items such as haul road construction, utility works and vegetation clearing.
The information in the newsletter did not answer any of the questions above. It does not state the duration of community exposure, the type of asbestos identified, whether or when the material will be removed, whether air monitoring is in place, or how residents, park users and nearby schools can be assured of their safety.
The newsletter however does highlight that future finds of contaminants are likely in that it says “Victoria Park has had a varied past, including being a dump, a military base and affordable housing quarter among many other uses over the past 150 years. Due to this, finding contaminants in the ground while works are being undertaken is to be expected … Contaminated materials were confirmed to be located throughout the area.” This framing normalises the discovery of asbestos as unremarkable. Whereas, for the community it flags that further air pollution is inevitable and makes it more important for GIICA to be treating this issue seriously, ensuring that the community is safe and detailing to the community how risks will be mitigated.
3. This is a complaint under GIICA's own policy
Section 01 of GIICA's Customer, Stakeholder and Community Complaints Management Policy (POL-004:1-06:2025) states that GIICA “is committed to ensuring all customer, stakeholder and community complaints are managed in a transparent and timely manner, matters raised are responded to effectively, and complainants are treated with respect.” Section 03 confirms that a complaint includes one about “the customer service provided” and about “an act, or failure to act.” Section 04 sets out that GIICA's complaints management is “Customer focused – People should be able to make a complaint via a clear and accessible complaint management system, with complainants respected and responses addressing all issues raised.”
We are raising a complaint in relation to GIICA's failure to act safely in each of the following:
• Failure to provide the community with adequate information about the asbestos find, despite a direct written request and members of the public raising the issue Queensland Health and Safety;
• Failure to stop work when the asbestos was first encountered, rather than only after some period of disturbance;
• Failure to install air monitoring around the affected area; and
• Ongoing failure to apply adequate dust suppression on the site, since the asbestos material was found (see photos below).
As this concerns ongoing construction activity at Victoria Park (Brisbane Stadium), we ask that it be triaged on receipt (Section 05.1 of the Policy) and investigated as a venue-specific complaint, with the decision-maker being the General Manager, Stakeholder Engagement and Communications as set out in Section 05.2, rather than as a general corporate complaint.
4. Timeframes that apply, on GIICA's own Policy
Section 05.4 of the Policy sets the following timeframes for a venue-specific complaint received by email during the construction phase:
• Acknowledgement of the complaint within 24 hours (during business hours); and
• A substantive response, or update on progress, within 5 business days, extending to up to 10 business days only where the complaint is technical in nature.
The five questions set out in Section 1 concern facts GIICA should already hold on record, the duration of disturbance, the type of asbestos identified, removal arrangements, and the status of air monitoring, rather than a matter requiring extended technical investigation. We therefore expect a substantive response within 5 business days of this letter, consistent with the Policy's standard email-complaint timeframe, and ask GIICA to advise us promptly if it intends to treat this as a technical-nature complaint under the extended 10-business-day timeframe, and why.
5. Why we are raising this as a serious matter
Because this concerns potential asbestos exposure, a matter regulated under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) and subject to oversight by Workplace Health and Safety Queensland, we consider the failures set out in Section 3 to be serious. Additionally, the inference from GIICA’s recent newsletter that future discoveries of contaminants are likely makes this even more pressing.
6. What we are asking for
We ask that GIICA:
• Acknowledge this complaint within 24 hours in accordance with Section 05.4 of the Policy;
• Provide a substantive, specific response to each of the five questions set out in Section 1 above, and to each of the four failures to act set out in Section 3, within 5 business days of this letter;
• Confirm, if it has not already occurred, that air monitoring is now in place and adequate dust suppression is being applied around the affected area;
• Confirm which decision-maker has been assigned under Section 05.2, consistent with the Policy; and
If we are not satisfied with GIICA's response, we will exercise our right under Section 05.5 of the Policy to seek an internal review, and, if that outcome is unsatisfactory, external review by the Queensland Ombudsman.
We look forward to your prompt response.
Regards,
Jo on behalf of
Save Victoria Park Inc.
GIICA’s Response, 18 September 2026
Subject: Re: FORMAL COMPLAINT - FAILURE TO ACT SAFELY IN RELATION TO ASBESTOS FOUND AT VICTORIA PARK (BARRAMBIN)
Dear Jo
Thank you for your recent correspondence dated, 30 August and 7 and 15 September and we appreciate your patience.
We understand that Victoria Park remains deeply valued by the community and we take the concerns outlined in your correspondence seriously, and the below is in response to our review of your complaint. GIICA recently met with community members to discuss the project including items listed below, in attendance were a number of Save Victoria Park members.
GIICA confirms that all works being undertaken at Victoria Park are in line with relevant legislative and regulatory requirements. A factsheet on GIICA's environmental management can also be viewed on the GIICA website here.
Vegetation and wildlife
Prior to vegetation clearing at the site, all environmental impacts including potential impacts to wildlife were understoodand in accordance with relevant legislative and regulatory requirements, qualified spotter catchers were onsite to identify and relocate any fauna found. Measures are also implemented to protect retained trees and vegetation adjacent to work areas. Opportunities for beneficial reuse of removed trees and feasible tree relocation options continue to be assessed.
Contaminated materials
As previously shared by GIICA, site investigations undertaken across Victoria Park identified potential contamination associated with historical uses including a dump, a military base, and a firing range. The presence of contaminated materials is anticipated and has been proactively managed as part of BMD's construction activities. Where contaminated materials have been encountered, these have been handled in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements including the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) and by appropriately qualified personnel. BMD has continued to safely manage, store, and dispose of contaminated materials. The safety and health of people and the environment remain our priority at all times.
Safety and dust controls
BMD has implemented monitoring measures and controls throughout site activities to manage potential construction impacts including dust controls (for example water carts). GIICA oversees its contractors' safety and environmental performance to ensure compliance for the protection of workers, the community and neighbours, and the environment. Examples of controls that may be implemented onsite are listed below.
· secured exclusion zones and controlled access,
· appropriate removal and handling methods,
· dust suppression and other environmental controls,
· appropriate personal protective equipment,
· decontamination procedures for workers, plant and equipment,
· controlled transport and disposal of hazardous materials,
· air monitoring where required and/or identified as an appropriate project control.
Status of complaint
GIICA has completed its investigation into the matters raised in your complaint dated 15 September 2026. GIICA is satisfied that BMD continues to manage environmental controls at Victoria Park and is acutely aware of the potential impacts of all activities undertaken on site. This complaint is considered closed and no further action is proposed.
Kind regards
Alana
Communications and Stakeholder Engagement
Games Independent Infrastructure and Coordination Authority
Save Victoria Park Follow Up Email to GIICA - Request for Internal Review, 27 September 2026
Subject: Request for internal review – complaint regarding asbestos at Victoria Park (Barrambin)
Dear Governance and Compliance team
RE: REQUEST FOR INTERNAL REVIEW – COMPLAINT REGARDING ASBESTOS AT VICTORIA PARK (BARRAMBIN)
Thank you for GIICA's response of 18 September, which advised that our complaint of 13 September 2026 is closed and that no further action is proposed.
Save Victoria Park is not satisfied with that outcome. Under Section 5.5 of GIICA's Customer, Stakeholder and Community Complaints Management Policy, we request an internal review by an officer of equivalent or greater seniority who was not involved in the original decision.
1. The response does not address the issues raised
Our complaint asked five specific questions:
- How long was the asbestos disturbed before work stopped?
- What type of asbestos was found?
- Will it be removed from the site, and when?
- Is air monitoring required, and has it been installed?
- How can the public be assured of their safety?
The response answers none of them. Instead, it describes controls that 'may be implemented' in general terms, and it addresses vegetation, wildlife and a community meeting, none of which formed part of this complaint.
2. Air monitoring: assurance is not evidence
The response lists 'air monitoring where required and/or identified as an appropriate project control' as one of several possible controls. It does not say whether air monitoring is in place at Victoria Park.
This is the central issue. Without independent air monitoring, the community is being asked to rely on the contractor's assurance that the contractor is managing risk safely. That is not a basis on which residents, park users, students and staff can be reassured. The community deserves to feel safe and at the moment, the community does not feel safe, as there is no independent evidence that the actions undertaken are resulting in no air-borne asbestos being on site or being carried off-site.
We ask GIICA to state plainly:
- whether air monitoring is being undertaken at or near the areas where asbestos-contaminated material has been encountered
- whether that monitoring is conducted by an independent licensed asbestos assessor, or by the contractor
- where the monitors are located, including at the site boundary
- whether the results will be made available to the community
3. Dust is continuing to being observed off site
Since our complaint was lodged, dust from the site has been noticed by people at the neighbouring university and by surrounding residents. This is inconsistent with the response's assurance that dust controls are effective, and adds urgency to the questions above.
4. Outcome sought
We ask that the internal review:
- provide a specific answer to each of the five questions in our complaint
- confirm whether independent air monitoring is in place and, if it is not, explain why it is not required
- commit to publishing air monitoring results for the duration of works involving contaminated material
- set out what additional dust controls will be applied in response to the observations above
- identify the reviewing officer
Under Section 05.5, we expect the outcome within 20 business days. If we remain unsatisfied, we will seek external review by the Queensland Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely
Jo on behalf of
Save Victoria Park