Arrow Building Group collapses into voluntary administration - leaving projects in the lurch
A Melbourne building company has gone into voluntary administration, leaving a dozen projects across the city in doubt.
Arrow Building Group appointed an administrator, Hamilton Murphy's Stephen Dixon on April 22.
The company lists several projects as 'under construction' on its website, including a development of eight two-bedroom homes in Lilydale, eastern Melbourne.
'From forever homes to multi residential developments for investors, our skilled team work on a vast array of different projects,' Arrow Building Group's website says.
Photos showed the underslabs and structural steel for the homes had already been installed.
Other projects included homes in Heathmont, Dandenong and Windsor.
A staff member declined to comment when reached by phone on Tuesday.
In the financial year to March 2025, more than 2,600 Aussie construction companies became insolvent for the first time, up 23 per cent from the year prior.
Daily Mail Australia has contacted Hamilton Murphy for comment.
What's going wrong in the Australian construction industry?
Several well-known companies in the industry have collapsed, including Clough Group, Probuild, and Porter Davis Homes.
'Australia's homebuilding industry is characterised by low-profit margins and fixed-price contracts, meaning that there is little headroom or mechanism for builders to absorb pressures such as rises in material costs and labour shortages,' explained Bradley Hastings, a building expert from the UNSW Business School.
'This means that many homebuilders have been operating at negative cashflows, where suppliers don't get paid, and projects are left unfinished.'
He said that when a residential homebuilder goes bust, consumers become unsecured creditors and are at the bottom of the food chain after a lengthy insolvency process.
'The fallout does not stop at consumers, subcontractors also join consumers on the unsecured creditor's lists.
'Often, small or family-run businesses become unsecured creditors needing to cover the cost of their materials and staff if they want to continue to trade.'
Mr Hastings said that unlike other large investments, such as superannuation, the construction sector has little regulation regarding how consumer funds are utilised and protected.
'When a homeowner places a deposit with a builder, this money can be spent for any purpose.
'In some cases, there have been stories of builders on luxurious holidays at the same time as homes go unfinished.
'More often, given the cash flow pressures across the industry, consumer deposits from one project are used to complete prior commitments.'
He said a solution could be protecting consumer deposits with 'project accounts where consumer funds reside until they are drawn down by builders and subcontractors and the work is completed to standard.
'In the event that the builder goes bust, this money remains in place to pay subcontractors and continue the build. A side benefit of this approach is that it may improve the robustness of the construction industry, providing homebuilders with a motive to ensure that each project stands on sound financial footing.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
YouTube fires back at eSafety commissioner's push for platform's inclusion in under-16s social media ban
YouTube has criticised calls for it to be included in the under-16s social media ban, accusing the nation's online safety boss of ignoring parents and teachers. The eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, has urged the government to rethink its decision to carve out the video sharing platform from the minimum social media age which will apply to apps such as TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram. YouTube has said the government should stick by its draft rules and disregard Inman Grant's advice. 'Today's position from the eSafety Commissioner represents inconsistent and contradictory advice, having previously flagged concerns the ban 'may limit young people's access to critical support',' YouTube's public policy and government relations manager, Rachel Lord, said. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email 'eSafety's advice ignores Australian families, teachers, broad community sentiment and the government's own decision.' Inman Grant's speech to the National Press Club on Tuesday set out more details of the social media age limit – which she referred to as a 'delay' rather than a 'ban' – to come into force in mid-December. While there are still no details of how social media users would be age checked, she said Australians should expect 'a waterfall of tools and techniques', many likely to include artificial intelligence like analysing facial or hand features. Guardian Australia is aware several social media platforms have privately expressed concern about a lack of information about their obligations under the laws, and raised doubts they would be able to build such age assurance systems with less than six months until the deadline. Inman Grant indicated age verification would take place on individual platforms, rather than at the device or app store level, adding that many social media sites already used tools to estimate or verify users' ages. She said platforms would need to report their progress to eSafety, and demonstrate they were using tools to verify users and remove children. However Inman Grant also conceded systems would not be perfect: 'We know that companies aren't going to get it right the first time. None of these technologies are foolproof, but again, if they're using them in tandem with one another, they'll have greater levels of success.' 'While the social media delay will not solve everything, it will create some friction in the system … this world-leading legislation seeks to shift the burden of reducing harm away from parents and carers and back on to the companies themselves,' Inman Grant said. 'We are treating big tech like the extractive industry it has become. Australia is legitimately asking companies to provide the lifejackets and the safe guardrails we expect from almost every other consumer-facing industry.' YouTube had been pledged a carve-out by former communications minister Michelle Rowland, who listed it alongside Google Classroom and online services from ReachOut and Kids Helpline as being exempt from the ban because they help children 'get the education and health support they need'. Federal government sources said the communications minister, Anika Wells, would decide within weeks whether to take the commissioner's advice to amend the draft rules. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion YouTube maintained its service is about video distribution and watching content, not social interactions. Lord said YouTube had been a leader in building age-appropriate products and responding to threats, and denied it had ever changed policies to negatively impact younger users. YouTube said it removed more than 192,000 videos for violating its hate and abuse policies in the first quarter of 2025 alone, and has designed age-appropriate products specifically for young children. Lord said the government should not change course on exempting YouTube from the ban. 'eSafety's advice goes against the government's own commitment, its own research on community sentiment, independent research, and the view of key stakeholders in this debate.' The shadow communications minister, Melissa McIntosh, said the government must provide more clarity on the looming reforms. 'In or out, the government needs to make its position clear on the requirements for social media platforms and families to protect our kids from the vitriol that is so prevalent online,' she said. 'There are more questions than answers right now, including what verification technology will be required, which platforms are in or out and what constitutes platforms taking reasonable steps to implement social media age minimum standards by 10 December 2025.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Don't believe the hype: Victorian government deserves credit for not buckling to aggressive pro-gas campaign
It didn't go as far as previously flagged, but don't believe the negative hype about Victoria's plan to start weaning off gas: it is a significant step that will help drive households and businesses away from fossil fuels and cut energy bills. The Allan Labor government announced that gas heating and hot water systems will be banned in all new homes and nearly all new commercial buildings, including schools and hospitals, from 1 January 2027. They will not be connected to the state's gas network and will run on electric systems. New agricultural and manufacturing buildings, some of which use gas for high-temperature industrial processes, are excluded. Rental properties including public housing – a third of the housing stock – will have to move to electric appliances when existing gas heaters and water systems reach the end of their lives, starting from 1 March 2027. Owner-occupiers will have to make a similar shift, but only for hot water. Crucially, landlords will also have to do a range of energy efficiency work on their properties, including installing an efficient electric cooling system in main living areas – or a reverse-cycle air conditioner that both heats and cools – sealing leaky external doors, windows and wall vents, and making sure there is ceiling insulation. If properly implemented, these minimum standards will further cut bills and lead to homes being better temperature-regulated and healthier to live in. The logic for the move away from gas is straightforward. There are three main parts to it. Though still marketed as 'natural', and sometimes even as 'clean', gas is actually methane – a highly potent fossil fuel. It releases plenty of greenhouse gas when burned. The electricity grid is moving from being dominated by coal-fired power to renewable energy. Electric appliances are better for the planet and the people who live on it. It is a necessary part of getting to net zero emissions. Gas is expensive. Analysis has found electrification of appliances should save households nearly $1,000 a year on their energy bills. There are upfront costs in getting new systems, but the Victorian policy is not forcing people to change over until their existing system is dead, and offers rebates to help with the change. Victoria is running out of gas. For decades, it has relied on reservoirs in Bass Strait, but they are running low, and all potential new sources are expensive. The state government wants to install a 20-year floating liquified natural gas (LNG) import terminal near Geelong to make sure demand is met. It sounds ridiculous, but may be the least bad option available – after the most obvious one: reducing gas use as much as possible so that it is available for the few industrial processes that do not yet have viable alternatives. Victoria is Australia's most gas-reliant state, with about three-quarters of homes connected to the gas network, and there is a decent case that it could be going further. Labor shelved an earlier proposal to also require owner-occupiers to buy electric heaters when their gas heaters died. Gas cookers are not included at all. They can continue to be installed indefinitely. But the government deserves credit – and has been praised by advocates and some in industry – for not buckling to an at-times aggressive pro-gas PR campaign that has lobbied ministers and government staff and sought to sway the public. Australian Gas Networks-sponsored MasterChef Australia, which is shot in Victoria, ran advertisements that were found to include unsubstantiated claims about the potential for 'renewable gas' to replace fossil fuel gas in networks. The Herald Sun claimed to support net zero emissions commitments, but ran prominent advertorials sponsored by gas companies that neglected to tell readers that the fossil fuel is part of the climate problem. Some organisations, such as the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, suggested that the state should have instead just backed new gas extraction. The chamber's chief executive, Paul Guerra, continued his criticism on Tuesday, telling 3AW that the policy – which just imposes minimum standards most homeowners take for granted – was 'class warfare' against landlords. Sign up to Clear Air Australia Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis after newsletter promotion Others, such as the Australian Industry Group, were cautious but open. It welcomed the changes as 'pragmatic', and argued that over the next decade it could free up gas supply equivalent in scale to what would be extracted from New South Wales' Narrabri gas field over the same period. That the package got up is primarily due to the state's longstanding energy and climate minister, Lily D'Ambrosio, who designed and championed it. She won support from the plumbers' union, whose members install gas appliances. The final plan was backed by conservation organisations including Friends of the Earth and Environment Victoria, which said it showed the government was willing to put 'the interests of households and business owners ahead of wealthy gas corporations'. The head of the Victorian Council of Social Service, Juanita Pope, said the new rental standards were 'a major win' that would 'literally save lives'. The chief executive of the thinktank Rewiring Australia, Francis Vierboom, summarised: 'It's a BFD.' The chief executive of the Energy Efficiency Council, Luke Menzel, said while it was disappointing that the mandatory phasing out of gas space heaters in owner-occupied homes was dropped, the government should be applauded for making 'big, bold decisions' – and the rest of the country should be paying attention. 'It is a nation-leading reform,' he said. 'It is setting the pace for the other states.' It is also an assessment of what the government believes is politically durable. More will be needed. But it is a promising start. Adam Morton is Guardian Australia's climate and environment editor
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Albanese government delivers $12.7billion blow to Australia's most populous state
The Premier of Australia's most populous state is angry at Anthony Albanese for reducing funds from the GST as high immigration fuels a housing affordability crisis. Chris Minns and his Treasurer, Daniel Mookhey, on Tuesday delivered their third Budget since Labor came to power in NSW in 2023. The state is home to a third of Australia's population and receives close to a third of new overseas migrants, mainly in overcrowded Sydney where housing is particularly unaffordable. But it only receives a little more than a quarter of the revenue from the Goods and Services Tax, which the federal government collects and distributes to the states and territories. A $3.427billion deficit is forecast for 2025-26 in NSW, with no surplus forecast for another two financial years, as gross government debt soars by another 7.7 per cent to $178.8billion. With its finances still in the red, the NSW Treasury Budget papers noted Australia's most populated state was missing out on $12.7billion over four years as funds raised from the GST cross-subsidised poorer states - including Victoria. 'While the GST share for New South Wales has fluctuated over time, New South Wales has always been a donor state,' it said. 'Over the past few years, New South Wales has faced declines in relativity, significantly tightening the state's fiscal capacity. 'Since the introduction of the GST in 2000, New South Wales has never received as much as its population share of the GST pool. 'If GST was distributed on a per capita basis, from 2025-26 onwards New South Wales would receive an additional $12.7billion over the four years to 2028-29.' NSW is home to 31 per cent of Australia's population but only receives 27.1 per cent of funding from the GST, with 28,118 residents last year leaving the state for another part of the country. The state last year housed 106,730 new overseas migrants, or 31 per cent of the 340,800 permanent and long-term arrivals into Australia. Yet NSW only gets 86.7 cents for every GST dollar collected, a drop from 92.4 cents in 2023-24 as part of a Commonwealth Grants Commission change. During that same period, Victoria's allocation has climbed to 96.5 cents for every dollar, up from 85.2 cents, after the state imposed the world's longest lockdowns in Melbourne. While both states are run by Labor, their finances are very different. Net debt in NSW - total debt minus its ability to raise cash - was projected to reach $120.3billion by June 2026, making up 13.7 per cent of gross state product. By comparison Victoria - home to 1.5million fewer people than NSW - was forecast to have a net debt of $167.6billion in 2025-26 - or 25.1 per cent of the economy. Put another way, Victoria's debt levels as a proportion of the state economy are almost double those of NSW. High immigration is putting pressure on Sydney and Melbourne in particular, including on water and transport infrastructure. The NSW government is spending $127.6billion on services in 2025-26 with much of that directed to coping with population growth with a plan to 'improve access to quality housing and reduce pressure on housing affordability'. NSW is set to receive $27.9billion from Commonwealth GST payments in 2025-26, which would make up 22.4 per cent of total state revenue of $124.2billion. Treasurer Jim Chalmers last week said he would consider expanding or raising the 10 per cent GST, so more funds could be distributed to the states, when he convenes a productivity roundtable in August. 'What I'm going to try and do - because I know the states will have a view on it, I'm going to try not to dismiss every idea that I know that people will bring to the roundtable,' he told the National Press Club in Canberra. 'I suspect the states will have a view about the GST - it's not a view that I've been attracted to historically but I'm going to try not to get in the process of shooting ideas between now and the roundtable.' Any change would mark the first reform since the GST debuted in July 2000. Items like fresh fruit and vegetables, bread and unflavoured milk were exempted from the consumption tax under a deal reached between the Coalition government and the Australian Democrats in the Senate.
