BICEGO, Mr Carl, Company Secretary and Group Head of Legal and Risk, Goodman [by video link] McGILP, Mr Ben, General Manager, Development, Goodman [by video link] MACKELLAR, Mr Tom, Vice President, Origination and Market Expansion, AirTrunk [11:45] CHAIR: Welcome. I understand information on parliamentary privilege and the protection of witnesses and evidence has been given to you. Thank you for being here. We would have preferred to have you all here in person, but we're glad that you're here, nonetheless. We'll go to Mr Mackellar first. You've got a short opening statement for us. You've obviously heard some of the witnesses already. We can go to some of their questions once we've gone through the statement. Over to you. Mr Mackellar : Chair, senators, thank you for the opportunity to appear today. AirTrunk is an Australian founded company that develops and operates hyperscale data centres across the Asia-Pacific and Japan. Here in Australia, we have invested more than $10 billion across four campuses, with five further campuses and more than 1.2 gigawatts of capacity announced across Sydney and Melbourne. The demand for digital services is already here. Australians rely on them every day for payments, communications, health care, government services and businesses. Data has always needed somewhere to live. What once sat in office service rooms or under desks is increasingly housed in specialised data centres, where computing can be delivered more securely, reliably and efficiently. Modern data centres are around seven times more energy efficient than smaller server rooms that businesses traditionally operated themselves. Data centres are where Australia's digital economy becomes physical. Increasingly, they also support AI with the potential to lift productivity, accelerate research and support innovation. Building this infrastructure responsibly is our responsibility. Data centres use significant energy, water, land and enabling infrastructure and they can affect surrounding communities. Community expectations are rightly high. We are committed to continuous improvement, and we are constantly learning by looking at evolving technologies that can reduce those impacts. At Lane Cove, where we are today, practical measures include acoustic enclosures and silencers on generators and mechanical equipment; noise barriers and building insulation; and restricted generator testing schedules. Our investment creates Australian jobs and supply chain opportunities. SYD3 is expected to support around 10,000 construction jobs, while MEL2 is expected to support more than 200 direct operational jobs once up and running. In financial year 2026, AirTrunk worked with 615 Australian suppliers, representing more than $3.3 billion in spend. We believe data centres should bear the infrastructure costs associated with their projects. By 2030 our target is to match 100 per cent of electricity consumption at our data centres with renewable energy. As data centres grow, they should also help strengthen Australia's energy system by using their long-term demand to support new renewable energy generation and grid investment. AirTrunk is on a journey to reduce its water usage. Historically, water has been a critical input, but we're now designing facilities that use no water for cooling. Where we do use water, we are in active discussions about using recycled water. Cooling is essential to data centre operations. There is a trade-off between water and energy, so we need to choose the most efficient solution for each location and its local conditions. A central proposition of AirTrunk's submission is that Australia should set a very high bar for responsible data centre development and make that performance visible. The value of a data centre should extend beyond its boundary. We want the communities where we operate to see tangible benefits through local jobs, skills, businesses and community investment. This starts by engaging early—equipping our communities with the information they need to participate in meaningful consultation and using that feedback to inform how we design, build and operate our facilities. Communities should be able to see what a project has committed to and whether those commitments are being delivered. We believe high standards, transparency, accountability and investment can work together. We welcome the committee's questions today. CHAIR: Goodman, do you have an opening statement for us? Mr McGilp : Good morning and thank you for the opportunity to appear at the committee today. At Goodman I oversee development projects across Australia and appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the committee's inquiry into artificial intelligence and data centres. Goodman started in Australia more than 30 years ago, and we're proud of what we've built over that time. While we've grown into a global business, our headquarters remain here in Australia today. Throughout our history, we've specialised in large-scale and complex projects that require significant investment, long planning horizons and close collaboration with governments, customers and communities. Those projects have taught us the importance of careful planning, responsible development, and of taking a long-term view. As digital services continue to grow, it's understandable that people have questions about what that means for Australia. Questions about the role data centres will play, the benefits they can bring, the impacts that need to be managed, and how policy can keep pace with that growth are all reasonable. Today around 75 per cent of our portfolio is located outside of Australia. That gives us firsthand experience of developing, owning and managing data centres and other infrastructure in major markets around the world. Importantly, the issues being considered by this committee aren't unique to Australia. Governments around the world are working through how to support growing demand for digital infrastructure while managing energy, water, planning and community expectations. Data centres support many of the services Australians rely on every day, from communications and banking to health care, education and research. Our customers are responding to increasing demand, and we're responding to their need for efficient, well-located infrastructure. We also know these projects need to be planned and delivered responsibly. That means working closely with communities, governments and regulators and carefully considering environmental, social and local impacts. As a long-term owner and manager, we believe community confidence is earned through listening, transparency and accountability. Ultimately our focus is to deliver infrastructure that creates lasting value for customers, communities and the broader economy. We welcome the opportunity to contribute to the committee's work and support clear, consistent and evidence based regulation that provides confidence for communities, governments and industry. Thank you, and we look forward to your questions. CHAIR: Mr Mackellar, you obviously heard the concerns from locals in this area and their frustration at not being consulted—not really knowing what's going on and feeling as though they've been shut out of the process. So people can understand, and to shed some light and transparency on this process, who uses your facility? Before, when you said, 'We need data capacity,' everybody at the table accepted that. So people can understand the connection, who are the customers and the clients that you serve? Mr Mackellar : As AirTrunk, we create the physical infrastructure that allows data centres to operate, and then within our data centres, we have customers that operate the computer servers and so forth. Our customers are typically hyperscale customers—the household names you'd know, like Microsoft, Google, Amazon et cetera. CHAIR: So people understand that if they're engaging with products from those companies, it's facilities like yours that are powering that compute. Mr Mackellar : That's right. CHAIR: Can I ask about the water use. You said that you're looking to move away from using water. What's the timeframe for that, and will that be the entire facility or just the new expanded areas? Mr Mackellar : To give you the big picture, we use water within data centres for cooling the heat that's generated from the chips that are processed. Within our data centres, traditionally, we used water to help cool those data centres. In future we're looking to ensure we don't use any potable water for our cooling system, so we would rely on dry cooling systems or recycled water. We're actively working with Sydney Water and Melbourne Water to access recycled water to be used at our data centre facilities. There is a trade-off of dry cooling versus using water. Dry cooling uses more energy. Where we can use recycled water, it will be more energy efficient at our data centres. CHAIR: There's been some concerns raised about PFAS chemicals in the facilities and in the way the water is being used. Do you have any evidence or any answers for us in relation to PFAS chemicals? Mr Mackellar : The majority of water used on a site is a closed loop system, as you will have seen this morning, that is contained and circulates through the facility. That is not discharged into wastewater. The small proportion of water that is discharged does not come into contact with chemicals or refrigerants. We have done some testing on our facilities, and there's been no PFAS as evident in that water. CHAIR: So there are no PFAS chemicals in your facilities at all? Mr Mackellar : From the testing we've done, there has been no PFAS detected in that water. CHAIR: Has Sydney Water or the EPA ever come and done any testing? Is there any kind of maintaining or testing regime, or is there any kind of back and forth with Sydney Water or the EPA? Mr Mackellar : We have active dialogue with Sydney Water and the EPA on all our facilities to ensure that we're always talking about both future demand and how we access recycled water and things like that. Where testing is required, we naturally welcome that and comply with Sydney Water or the EPA when they need to do that testing. CHAIR: Where is the closest residential boundary to your facility? We were told earlier today it could be about 150 metres. Mr Mackellar : Our Lane Cove facility is about 600 metres from the neighbours that adjoin the Lane Cove industrial precinct, and then there is one tower, the building on Epping Road, which, as the crow flies, is approximately 220 metres from that facility. CHAIR: Some locals have raised concerns about bushfire risk. Obviously, there's a lot of nature around here. Has that come into your planning about how to manage if there were a bushfire? Mr Mackellar : When we design our data centres, it's done so in very active consultation with all the relevant authorities, including planning departments, local fire departments and so forth, and we ensure that all our designs undergo very rigorous standards and engineering controls. We will always make sure that we're complying with all those requirements to make sure that our facilities are very safe and secure. We take that responsibility very seriously. CHAIR: But have you been asked specifically to consider what you'd do if there were a bushfire in this area? Mr Mackellar : With regard to our facilities, where there are potentially dangerous materials stored on site, they're stored in secure facilities. They have rooms that contain them that have four-hour burn times. Around our facilities, there are significant setbacks from the local environment and so forth, and that's all part of ensuring our facilities are designed with regard to the local surrounding environment, including managing risks, such as bushfire risks and so forth. CHAIR: I'm going to let some of my fellow senators ask some questions, remembering we have both Goodman online and Mr Mackellar before us. I might go to Senator Ghosh. Senator GHOSH: Thank you for being there. I would be really interested for you to outline—just in sketch form, orally, and then on notice for any more detail you want to provide—what steps are involved in your community engagement process for new proposals and how long that community engagement or community consultation usually lasts for. Mr Mackellar : As I mentioned, we take the community engagement very seriously. A foundation of developing new data centres is building trust with the community. Our ambition is that communities are proud of the investment that's made in their local community. As an example for what we are doing, we have a new proposal for a data centre in Kurri Kurri, up in the Hunter region. We have held six community engagement sessions with that local community. Over 250 people have attended those engagement sessions. We have done letterbox drops to all the community surrounding our facility. We have opened a drop-in centre within the local town of Kurri Kurri to enable residents to come in and ask the questions that they may have about the facility. That was all done prior to us lodging our planning application, which was done so that we could take on board that feedback from the local community and attempt to address any concerns that they may have. We see that as good practice by us, and it's the standard we try to set on all our proposals for new data centres. CHAIR: Goodman, could you give us an outline of your community consultation, please. Mr McGilp : I'm happy to take you through that. Our consultation started for Lane Cove on 17 February 2025, so it's quite significant. It is a little bit like the AirTrunk response: it does cover off phone numbers, face-to-face meetings, webinars, pop-up stations, advertising, letterbox drops, websites and briefing sessions with counsellors. [Inaudible] But it essentially went from 2025 and, seriously, it's continuing today. To be honest, I don't think we've considered this the end of the process by any means. Senator GHOSH: Are you able to outline examples—just a few—where you've had a proposal or a part of your proposal that has then been subject to community consultation and that you then changed to accommodate some of that feedback? One of the observations made by witnesses earlier was that, while there are these information sessions, it doesn't feel like it's a two-way process; it feels like it's a one-way dissemination-of-information process. Mr Mackellar : Where we have sought community input and feedback, that has helped us inform, as a basic example, the design of these facilities to make sure that the aesthetics of how they sit within the local environment are thought through. Also, where there is equipment that may be seen as noisy, such as, potentially, the air-conditioning units, they're set back from those more sensitive users. We've also sought to seek input from the local community about any skills and job opportunities that we may be able to talk to that local community about and so, when we are looking at investing in local training and so forth, we're targeted about what skills might be required in that local community as well. Mr McGilp : I suppose design is iterative, so it continues to evolve with lots of inputs. Maybe the best place to start this is where we are in the planning process itself. We received submissions post exhibition, and we have agreed with the department that we wouldn't continue the response-to-submissions phase until after the community consultation had evolved. We've had some intensive conversations with community over the last few months, which has been informative. From our perspective, the challenge for us right now is to determine how to marry what we thought was a complying development with what the community obviously thinks is not. We're quite serious about having a look at what that means in reality. and I would expect that that would result in some form of design change to satisfy what community would be asking for. We're probably at the point right now where that's a really good question, but I'm not at the point where I'm at a point that I can answer it meaningfully. [Inaudible] CHAIR: We might ask the representatives at Goodman to turn their video off, because audio keeps cutting out and we might get a better engagement. Back to you, Senator Gosh. Senator GHOSH: To the witnesses from the Goodman Group, can you please take that one on notice? If there are examples where the design or that iterative process has reflected community concerns, I'd be very interested in seeing those in time. The next question relates to the issue of power or electricity for data centres. There are real concerns about how that power is going to be generated, its impact on the grid and potentially its impact on demand and prices. Are each of you able to address or outline what steps you're taking to deal with what is going to be a significant power demand from data centres that you're starting? Mr Mackellar : I'm happy to take that one first. As AirTrunk, we have a commitment to, by 2030, source all our energy from renewable sources. Globally, today, we're at 72 per cent, and, in Australia, 86 per cent of our energy is sourced from renewable power. We seek to use our long-term demand for power to underpin the development of new renewable energy. As an example, in Mulwala we have launched a solar farm with our partner Google. They're the types of projects that we seek to do. With regard to the cost of energy, we are very much committed to paying our share of costs related to the upgrading works that are required to support our data centres and ensure that we're funding the infrastructure upgrades required for that, to ensure that households do not have to pay. Mr McGilp : I might follow on. We think the data centre acceleration is a good opportunity to support the energy transition. We have started our engagement with renewables providers to look at how the two of us, both the provider and the consumer, can come together so that our facilities are 100 per cent renewable. That would be our commitment on completion of a facility. With respect to cost, it's the same as AirTrunk: the reality is we're very comfortable with the idea that we pay for all augmentation associated with our— CHAIR: It's excruciatingly frustrating that the video link keeps cutting out. Senator Gosh, are you still there? Senator GHOSH: Yes, I am still here, but I've finished my questioning for these witnesses. CHAIR: Okay. We'll go to Senator Henderson. Senator HENDERSON: Mr Mackellar, I'll start with you. We heard this morning from residents groups, talking about the contempt that they feel has been shown to their communities by reason of the development of the new age of data centres, by reason of the AI so-called revolution. Why are data centres being built so close to residential communities? Mr Mackellar : AirTrunk's data centre facilities are located within industrial zones, and all our proposed data centres are within industrial zones. As I've mentioned, the Lane Cove example is 600 metres from the adjoining boundary of the residential community. And there is one building within 220 metres. Senator HENDERSON: I'll cut to the chase, Mr Mackellar, if you don't mind. Clearly the planning laws allow you to do this, but there is enormous concern that some data centres are being built right on people's doorsteps, right where they live. Did you consider establishing your data centre in an area which did not encroach as much as it does on residential communities in Lane Cove? The major concern of residential groups is that you've taken advantage of a big black hole in the planning laws, which is not acceptable, given how data centres have exploded and the changing nature of data centres. Did you consider looking at another location which presented less impact on residential communities? Mr Mackellar : I might start with the big picture and come back in. Data centres need to be located close to the customer for the speed of transmission of information, as we're seeing with this video feed. You need to have the data centres located close to the end customer. When we consider the location of our data centres, we have regard to a few different factors. One is the local community and the local environment in which we would be developing that data centre. Senator HENDERSON: I'll stop you because I want to cut to the chase. We heard evidence from one person this morning that a data centre has been built 16 metres from someone's home. Surely you're not going to try and run the argument that that's necessary to improve your connectivity? I just want to go back to the question. Why didn't AirTrunk consider a more appropriate location based on the view that this is arguably not light industrial? This is on a scale that we haven't seen before, and it is having a very significant impact on communities. Mr Mackellar : I can't comment on other people's proposals. I can comment on our Lane Cove facility, which, again, is set back 600 metres from that local boundary at the end of an industrial precinct, well away from those local users. We established that facility within an existing industrial zone. Our future proposals are all within industrial zones. Our facility at Kurri Kurri is on an old aluminium smelter, a heavy industrial use. Our facilities in Western Sydney are all in existing industrial zones that have been zoned for industrial for some time— Senator HENDERSON: Mr Mackellar, I understand that— Mr Mackellar : and they are set back materially from residential communities. Senator HENDERSON: I understand that, but some of these light industrial zones are not appropriately set back from residential communities. So what do you believe is the appropriate setback? Do you have a benchmark in your organisation? Mr Mackellar : We don't set the planning framework. Within our organisation, we're constantly looking, when we're evaluating new sites, at the impact or benefits on that local community. Senator HENDERSON: So what's the minimum offset that you think is appropriate for a data centre that you're looking to develop? Mr Mackellar : We don't have, necessarily, a policy around that. The Victorian government this morning, as you may have seen, launched a new standard of 150 metres away from residential communities. That feels appropriate to us as a measure. Senator HENDERSON: Well, I'm not sure that it is. The offset for your centre in Lane Cove, which we visited this morning, is 600 metres. Could you run through the other offsets for your other centres? Mr Mackellar : That would be the closest proximity to a residential community that we have. Senator HENDERSON: What are the other ones? Could you just run through them? Mr Mackellar : In Western Sydney we have one existing facility, SYD1, and one at SYD2. They're all in existing industrial uses where the residential setbacks are materially more than 600 metres. Senator HENDERSON: Approximately how much more are they? Mr Mackellar : I'd have to come back to you on the exact distance. Senator HENDERSON: You can give that to us on notice. You're developing other data centres? Mr Mackellar : We are developing other data centres. Senator HENDERSON: How many more are you developing? Mr Mackellar : We have five under development here in Australia. Senator HENDERSON: Whereabouts are they going to be located? Mr Mackellar : In New South Wales we have one proposal at Kurri Kurri. We also have another proposal in Western Sydney, and we have two more that we're developing in Melbourne. Senator HENDERSON: What location in Melbourne? Mr Mackellar : They're in industrial estates in Melbourne. Senator HENDERSON: What suburbs? Mr Mackellar : We have one at Tullamarine, and I'll come back to you on the other one. Senator HENDERSON: What about the fifth data centre? Where is that located? Mr Mackellar : The fifth one is the expansion of an existing facility in Western Sydney. Senator HENDERSON: What are the residential offsets for those data centres under development? Mr Mackellar : As I said, they're all more than the 500 metres that I've mentioned, but I can come back to you with specifics of each of the setbacks. Senator HENDERSON: If you could, that would be great. Do you understand why communities are so upset, particularly when they don't feel that their concerns are being listened to? Mr Mackellar : We take very seriously the community engagement, and we want to hear from all the local communities before we submit a planning application so we have plenty of time to listen and have their input into our facilities. We think building community trust is fundamental to any development of a major project, and the communities rightly need to be engaged in that process. We want to be there to ensure that we can answer any questions they have or address any concerns that they may have about the data centre facilities. Senator HENDERSON: Mr Mackellar, in relation to your data centres, do you release any water into local river systems or into sewerage at all? Mr Mackellar : With regard to water, the majority of water used is a closed-loop system, so it's not discharged. There is some water that would be discharged into the sewerage system, and that water would be water that is used in the cooling process. It does not come into contact with any chemicals or refrigerants. We do test that water to ensure that when it flows into the sewerage system we're aware of it. Senator HENDERSON: So there are no chemicals whatsoever in that water? Mr Mackellar : It does not pass through any chemicals at the data centre facility. We take— Senator HENDERSON: My question is: are there any chemicals in that water? Mr Mackellar : I can't absolutely say that there are no chemicals in that water. It goes into Sydney Water's sewerage system, and they would treat that water as part of their protocol. Senator HENDERSON: So you can't say there aren't any chemicals. Are you doing testing? Mr Mackellar : Yes. Senator HENDERSON: What do those test results show? Mr Mackellar : I don't have the exact data on that, but we have no concerns about the safety of the water. Senator HENDERSON: Do the test results show that there is the presence of any chemicals in the water that's been discharged into the sewerage system? Mr Mackellar : I'd have to come back to you with specifics on tests. Senator HENDERSON: I mean, that's a big issue. I would have thought you would have known whether or not there were chemicals in the water that's being discharged into Sydney's water system. Mr Mackellar : What I can say is, from the testing we have done, we have no concerns about the safety of that water. Senator HENDERSON: But that's a different issue to what I'm asking. I'm asking: what chemicals are in that water? Obviously, there are some chemicals in that water. Mr Mackellar : You've asked the question as to whether there are any chemicals present in the water at all. I'm saying we'd be happy to provide the test results. We're happy to take that on notice. Senator HENDERSON: Could I ask you, on notice, to not just answer the question about the presence of chemicals but also if we could have access to your recent testing results as well. If you could provide those testing results that you've conducted for the last 12 months. Mr Mackellar : Yes. I'm happy to take that on notice. Senator HENDERSON: Mr McGilp, I will ask you the same offset question that I asked Mr Mackellar. Could you go through each of your data centres and detail the offset between the actual data centre—I'm talking obviously about the perimeter—and residential housing. Mr McGilp : I assume it was the same question around offsets? Senator HENDERSON: Yes. Could you go through each of your data centres and explain the offset between the perimeter of your property and residential houses, please? Mr McGilp : We've got one data centre under construction at the moment at Artarmon, and that's the only one. I'd have to come back to you with how far that is from residential. I think it would be substantial, though. Senator HENDERSON: Well, Artarmon is a very well-known residential suburb in the lower North Shore of Sydney. So you don't have any idea about that offset? Mr McGilp : I don't, but I would be more than happy to come back to the committee with details. Senator HENDERSON: What about the data centres in existence owned by Goodman? Mr McGilp : We're building the first data centre at Artarmon. We have a number of other planning proposals being considered, but there are no other operational data centres. Senator HENDERSON: Can you run through the other data centres in development, please—where they will be, and what is going to be the offset between the perimeter of the data centre and residential housing. Mr McGilp : I think, of the most advanced applications that you might be interested in, obviously there's the Lane Cove one, which, as I think we've heard this morning, is very close—20 metres, from memory. That's at the planning phase only. Obviously, we're not at the end of that phase and we have made no decision about whether or not to proceed. Senator HENDERSON: Can I just stop you there? For this proposed data centre in Lane Cove, we heard it was 16 metres. You're saying it's 20. I mean, on what planet do you think that is acceptable, to build a massive data centre 16 or 20 metres from someone's home? How is that possibly acceptable? Mr McGilp : The application commenced in '25. It sits within industrial lands. I appreciate that you'd prefer us to test through other means other than the regulatory authorities, but— Senator HENDERSON: What I'm saying is that I think you need to be responsible corporate citizens. The idea of building a data centre 16 metres or 20 metres from someone's home or from a residential community is surely completely unacceptable. Goodman should immediately, today, reassess its plans and give that community the comfort that it is not going to go ahead in its current proposed form. Mr McGilp : Unfortunately, sorry, I missed a part of that. As I said before, I think that we're more than comfortable to take on the community feedback post the last round of engagement. Design is a real consideration from here, and— Senator HENDERSON: I'm seeking a confirmation today that you are going to withdraw this proposal and that you are not going to build a data centre 16 metres from the homes where people live. Can you confirm that you are prepared to withdraw this plan, which, frankly, treats local communities with contempt? Mr McGilp : I can't confirm that. We're not at the point where we've made a decision about what next to do with this planning proposal. We're long-term owners of property around Sydney, and it's important to us that we do seek the support of the community. It is something we're taking very seriously, and I would expect we would keep the community involved in consultation as we evolve our thinking. Senator HENDERSON: Mr McGilp, I don't think you need to consult any further. This is a wholly unreasonable and frankly grossly irresponsible proposal which shows contempt for local residents. When will you withdraw this proposal and reassess the way and the impact that you're having on residential communities? Mr McGilp : I expect by the end of the year we will have made a decision about what happens next with this development. Senator HENDERSON: Could you just detail exactly what streets surround this particular proposed data centre? Mr McGilp : I'll have to take that on notice. I don't have the details with me. Senator HENDERSON: What about your other data centres under development? Have you got any maybe within two or three metres of someone's home? Is that on the drawing board? Mr McGilp : The other one under construction is on Campbell Street and Lanceley Place. It's certainly not adjacent to residential areas. Senator HENDERSON: And whereabouts is that exactly? Mr McGilp : It is in Artarmon. Senator HENDERSON: Will you come back to us with how close that is? Mr McGilp : Yes. Senator HENDERSON: It's just near the hospital. Do you know how close it's going to be to the hospital? Mr McGilp : I don't, but I'm more than happy to come back to the committee. Senator HENDERSON: Okay. Are there any others under development at all? Mr McGilp : No. Senator HENDERSON: Do you understand that you do require a social licence when you are building these new age data centres? Mr McGilp : Yes, we do. I think we do take that seriously. We are long-term owners of our property. We've got a strong track record of operating successfully within our communities. I think our obligation is clearly to operate transparently and accountably before, during and after development. We need to be able to explain the benefits to the community about proposals. Clearly, we've got a difference of opinion in Lane Cove to our community. It's something that sits uncomfortably with us, and we'd ultimately like to bridge that in some form. Senator HENDERSON: Well, we would be very grateful if you could inform the committee as to when you might be making that decision. My view is you should bring that forward quite dramatically. People are grief stricken about what you're proposing, Mr McGilp. You're not suggesting that you have a social licence to build a data centre 16 metres from someone's home, are you? Mr McGilp : No, I'm not suggesting we have social licence in that particular example. At Lane Cove. I think we've got work to do. Senator HENDERSON: I think you do too. CHAIR: Senator Pocock. Senator DAVID POCOCK: Thank you for being here in person, Mr Mackellar. I am looking at information provided to the committee. Airtrunk stresses that onshore data centre infrastructure gives Australia the domestic compute necessary to develop, train, adapt and deploy AI locally, positioning the nation as a maker as well as a taker of AI. How much of Airtrunk's data centre capacity is used by local companies? Mr Mackellar : Our data centres in Australia are, obviously, located in Sydney and Melbourne. We don't have the specifics of how our customers use the data within those data centres. That's a question for them, but the proximity to local communities and local users is very important, so I would expect a large proportion of it to be used for Australians. Senator DAVID POCOCK: How many Australian customers do you have? Mr Mackellar : Our customers are typically the hyperscalers, so we have a handful of customers that we contract with. They will then use the facilities and engage with their customers. Senator DAVID POCOCK: So you have no Australian local customers apart from maybe via big multinationals? Mr Mackellar : Correct. Senator DAVID POCOCK: What, in your view, is the best way to ensure that local governments, researchers et cetera get access to the best compute? Mr Mackellar : I think the policy framework that should be set out by the government on how data is used in this country is very important. We see that the rules and regulations that the government sets are very important, particularly at the moment in terms of the use of both AI and data within our country. Senator DAVID POCOCK: Do you think that would change things for Airtrunk, where you currently are just selling compute to multinationals? Do you think Australians would get a look in there, or what would change? Mr Mackellar : We don't sell compute. We sell physical space for those customers to occupy, they create the compute power and they sell that. By having data centres located in Australia, those players need to comply by local rules and regulations. That gives the government the ability to set the framework for those particular customers around how they use their compute in our country. Senator DAVID POCOCK: So Australians would essentially just have to bid against the multinationals. How much corporate tax did Airtrunk pay in the last financial year? Mr Mackellar : Airtrunk takes its responsibility to pay taxes very seriously. We pay significant amounts of tax here in Australia, through income taxes, land taxes, payroll taxes and stamp duty. I don't have the exact figures on tax. I'm happy to take that on notice. Senator DAVID POCOCK: Every large business is paying payroll tax et cetera, but what about corporate tax? Did you make a profit last year or— Mr Mackellar : Airtrunk did pay corporate tax. Senator DAVID POCOCK: Okay, maybe you could let us know how much on notice. That'd be good. Do you think the proposed national standards for data centres will be a deterrent to new investment? Mr Mackellar : We strongly believe that the framework for responsible data centre development—if you look at the New South Wales government guidelines, at the proposed guidelines that the Australian Government is looking at or at what the Victorian government has come out with, they set a high bar. We strongly encourage a very high bar to be set for the development of data centres, with regards particularly to engagement with the local community, energy and water usage and also the efficiency of those data centres. We're very strongly supportive of the government coming out with these policies and setting an appropriate playing field for everyone in the industry. Senator DAVID POCOCK: In terms of reporting obligations under anything that the government puts in place, how do you see those reporting obligations cascading to tenants of the data centres, given how secretive a lot of the hyperscalers are about what they're actually doing with the chips? Mr Mackellar : What I can say is we're firmly of the view about transparency of how we use our data centres. If the government sets a benchmark, we should report against that benchmark. If we say to the community that we're going to do something, we should report our performance against those commitments. That's probably a question for those customers about that one. Senator DAVID POCOCK: Do you currently know what your customers are using the chips in your spaces for? Mr Mackellar : No, we don't. That's confidential to the customers that use that, as you'd expect. Security of our data is very important, and we take our customers' security very, very much— Senator DAVID POCOCK: What about some of the requirements that your customers place on you? It's my understanding that these customers will often mandate that power backup systems must be diesel generators, not batteries. Is that true? Mr Mackellar : That's correct. When we're thinking about a data centre, the main, primary, source of power is from the grid, usually. Then, because a lot of the systems that are used rely—a lot of technology in banking, healthcare and government systems relies—on 24/7 access to that data, it is really important—like for a hospital and so forth—that we have backup in case there is an outage of power. That is typically achieved through backup generators that are powered by diesel. To date, we have not had to use those generators for such a situation. We merely use them for routine testing to ensure that, if that event did occur, we could power those generators at that point in time. Senator DAVID POCOCK: How often do you have to test them? I imagine you can't just store diesel indefinitely. What do you do to the diesel in the tanks? Mr Mackellar : The backup generators are tested. There's a schedule that we use to test those generators. Each year, we run them for a small proportion of time just to make sure they're running properly. We do that within timeframes where it's not disruptive to the local community. We also have noise suppression systems and acoustic barriers to ensure that that doesn't disrupt local neighbours. That also includes how we manage the diesel fuel that is stored on site. Senator DAVID POCOCK: What about the health impacts of burning large amounts of diesel near residential areas? Mr Mackellar : As I said, our data centres are set back some way from local communities. But of course we understand people may be concerned about that. All our diesel generators have scrubbers on them, to ensure that the emissions that come from them are filtered before they would discharge into the air. We are not using these generators regularly. They are used only for testing purposes. They are merely a backup system in the very unlikely event that power from the grid does go down. Senator DAVID POCOCK: How many litres of diesel are used a month, across your data centres, for testing and just making sure that they are working alright? Mr Mackellar : I thought you might ask that question. We store about 2,000 kilolitres of diesel for those facilities across all our data centres. That is there basically to be able to run those generators for 48 hours in the event that there is a power outage. Senator DAVID POCOCK: How much do you burn a month, testing them? Mr Mackellar : I don't have the specific data on how much diesel we burn. Senator DAVID POCOCK: Diesel doesn't keep indefinitely. What do you do to those 20,000 litres? Is that just used up and turned over in testing, or, after 12 months, do you have to go and drain the tanks and replace it? Or do you never have to, because you're testing regularly? Mr Mackellar : We're testing. Senator DAVID POCOCK: It's a decent amount of diesel. And so what happens if things do go badly? Say the grid trips out and you've got to run the diesel generators for days. What about the communities around you? If you're half a kay from a community, there's going to be a fair bit of diesel— CHAIR: Pollution. Senator DAVID POCOCK: particulate in the air. What happens then? Mr Mackellar : Thankfully, that event has not occurred. We are tapping into very reliable energy systems here in Australia. Our Lane Cove facility is immediately adjacent to the high-voltage powerlines. As I mentioned, as to the design of our backup generators, they are in enclosed spaces. They have filters to ensure that the air is filtered before it goes into those areas. We have not had to run those generators for an emergency situation before. It would be a major grid outage, should that need to happen. Senator DAVID POCOCK: And these scrubbers—the filters you're talking about—are just like a DPF, a diesel particulate filter? Mr Mackellar : I don't have the specific things— Senator DAVID POCOCK: Maybe on notice— Mr Mackellar : We can take that one on notice. Senator DAVID POCOCK: you can give us that, and then let us know what's actually going into the air and maybe some of the details about how much you're burning. How many people do you employ? Mr Mackellar : At the end of FY 2024-25, AirTrunk employed 500 people. At a typical data centre, such as the one at Lane Cove, we employ around 100 full-time staff. During the construction phase of a project—as an example, our SYD3 project in Western Sydney will have about 10,000 construction workers on site at that time. We create significant employment opportunities both through construction and once the facility is complete. Senator DAVID POCOCK: What do you say about the concerns that this data centre boom is actually taking tradies away from building houses? Mr Mackellar : We're very focused on how we upskill the workforce and how we increase the supply of skilled workers in Australia. We start off by investing in local businesses. Last year we had 615 Australian suppliers, investing $3.3 billion into those organisations. We are always looking at: how do we run apprenticeship programs and training programs. We are partnering with local TAFEs where we are constructing new facilities. As an example, in Kurri Kurri we're working with the local TAFE to look at how we can increase the capability of electricians and so forth. That will benefit not just us but the entire Australian workforce. Senator DAVID POCOCK: How many apprentices have you brought on through all of your builds? Mr Mackellar : I'll have to come back to you on the exact number of apprentices. CHAIR: And the category would be good. Senator DAVID POCOCK: I've got some questions for Goodman, but I might just put them on notice, given the delay. CHAIR: That's fine. We may have to get Goodman back to the Canberra hearing if there are questions that warrant that. Mr Mackellar, you've got a small number of customers who use your facility, and they've got their data halls. They basically rent that space, right? How much does it cost to rent a data hall in this Lane Cove facility, for example? Mr Mackellar : I don't have the specific rental rates for individual customers here today. That's a commercial negotiation. CHAIR: I want to understand the realms of this. We're told that this is a huge amount of investment coming into communities. I'm trying to understand what that is really worth. You don't need to tell me exactly what the Google contract is worth, but I'd like to know approximately how much it's costing to host four or five customers in your facility. Mr Mackellar : Sure. Maybe the way to think about it is that, when we think about investment into a data centre—we've invested $10 billion today into Australia in our data centre campuses—that spend, effectively, goes into local contractors and supply chains and to paying electricians, plumbers and so forth. It creates jobs with regard to the people onsite who will be working at the facility. It goes to the local suppliers that supply our facilities and also the supply chain. As I mentioned, last year we partnered with 615 Australian companies, investing $3.3 billion into their data centre. The amount of investment into that local community is very significant. We want to ensure we're also leaving a legacy within that community. In Kurri Kurri, as an example, we've committed to investing $37 million into that local community to upgrade local sporting facilities but also to work with that community to think about how we can leave a positive legacy for the community there. CHAIR: Mining companies have been doing that for years too—build a mine and pay for the sports field and the mowing and upkeep. It doesn't actually answer my question, which is: how much does renting a data hall for Google cost? Mr Mackellar : That's probably a question for Google to answer. We wouldn't disclose individual customer contracts. CHAIR: Are these contracts for yearly rent they're paying? Is it from construction phase forever and a day? What is the type of contract that you have with your customers? Mr Mackellar : Typically our customers are making long-term commitments to these facilities. Ten to 15 years is not an unusual length of time, like someone might rent an office building and so forth. So they are committed to being in these facilities for a long period of time. They're making significant investments into the technology and infrastructure that goes into these facilities. The investment that they are making is very significant, along with the rent that they pay. CHAIR: Perhaps I could get you to take on notice the range of how much these contracts are worth, because, without us being able to understand that, it's very hard to believe anything that the hyperscale companies are saying about what's coming into Australia and how much this investment is worth to them. Of course, we will ask Google, Microsoft and others directly, but I'm trying to work this out. You're the landlord. You set the base rate. So we do want you to answer. If you don't have the figures, I understand that, but I'd like them— Mr Mackellar : We're happy to work out how we can help the committee with that. CHAIR: Thank you. If we could just take the Lane Cove facility as an example, is that full at the moment? Is that operating at capacity? Is it that there are some halls that have been rented out per se and they're computing away and you've got more capacity in that facility that we walked through, or is it packed out? Mr Mackellar : As you'll probably have learned through this inquiry, the demand for digital infrastructure is growing and rapidly and the demand for our facilities is growing significantly. The SYD2 facility, as you will have seen today, we are expanding within the existing footprint to keep up with that demand that our customers have, and our existing facility is almost approaching capacity as built today. CHAIR: I think you did give us the answer to this when we walked through this morning, but just so that it's on the record: what is the existing capacity of the Lane Cove facility as it is today? Mr Mackellar : It's at 86 megawatts, and the expansion is a further circa 40 megawatts. CHAIR: When do you expect the expansion to be finished? Mr Mackellar : The construction period for these is typically quite short. So we expect in the next 12 to 18 months that expansion that's already underway would be completed. CHAIR: Could I get you to take on notice a list of the facilities that you currently run and those that you are in the process of constructing and what their capacity is going to be. Mr Mackellar : We can take that one on notice. CHAIR: Thank you. Goodman representatives, thank you for your time. I must say the videoconferencing was a bit frustrating. We've got lots of questions for you still on notice, and we'll be in contact as to whether we need to get you back in front of us before we report. We appreciate your time today. Proceedings suspended from 12:49 to 13:36 .