Every major contractor in Australia, from BMD Group and Downer to Vinci (Seymour Whyte) and Fulton Hogan, wants the same thing: safer roads and safer people.
Nobody in this industry wants a worker standing next to live traffic. The intent is there. The issue isn’t willingness; it’s structure.
We’ve built a system that celebrates innovation in design and engineering but freezes safety in time the moment a tender is awarded. Once a project is locked in, specifications are fixed, budgets are set, and new technology, no matter how effective or evidence-based, struggles to find its way onto site.
It’s a paradox that every contractor, regulator and supplier recognises: the people most committed to safety are often the least empowered to improve it once the job starts.
The Safety Paradox
In practice, it looks like this: a council, state or federal contract is awarded based on a set of specifications drafted 18 months earlier. During that time, a safer, more efficient technology might have entered the market, such as a new automated traffic management system or an integrated alert network designed to remove people from high-risk areas.
But the procurement framework doesn’t know what to do with it. The spec is locked, the cost plan is final, and any change triggers a lengthy variation process that no one wants to open. The result? Safety innovation is deferred to the next project, and the cycle repeats.
Procurement is the Problem, Not the People
The road construction and traffic management industries are full of people who genuinely care about safety. The problem lies in how we fund and contract for it.
Government-funded projects are typically awarded on cost competitiveness and compliance with fixed specs. That’s understandable; accountability is essential. But the same structure that prevents cost overruns also discourages the adoption of emerging safety technology.
If safety truly is “non-negotiable,” then our procurement model needs to reflect that. Because right now, the message we’re sending is: safety matters, but only if it was written into the tender.
A Smarter Way: Safety Variation Clauses
The solution isn’t complicated. Every publicly funded road project should include a Safety Technology Variation Clause — a mechanism that allows approved contractors to propose and adopt new technology post-award, provided it can demonstrate a measurable safety improvement.
It’s not about rewriting specs midstream or handing suppliers a blank cheque. It’s about building flexibility into the system so that innovation doesn’t stop the day the contract is signed.
A properly structured clause could:
- Allow principal contractors to submit safety-based variation proposals without commercial penalty.
- Fast-track regulatory approval when backed by data or certification.
- Create a cost recovery pathway for proven safety upgrades, so Tier 1s and traffic management companies aren’t carrying the full load for decisions that ultimately benefit the public.
A safer project shouldn’t require an argument. It should require a process.
The Industry is Ready
Talk to anyone on site — constructors, traffic controllers, or suppliers — and you’ll hear the same frustration. The desire for safer, smarter worksites is there. The technology is there. The bottleneck is the framework.
Contractors want the ability to act when something better becomes available. Traffic management firms want to invest in automation without being forced to absorb the cost. Suppliers want to demonstrate that safety tech isn’t a luxury; it’s a measurable reduction in exposure, downtime, and claims.
No one is resisting the future; they’re waiting for permission to bring it into the present.
Evolving the Economics of Safety
If we can price risk, we can price safety. The two are inseparable. Every avoided incident has a financial value, not just in insurance or downtime, but in human impact.
That’s why we need funding models that view safety investment as a shared responsibility, not a competitive disadvantage. The next generation of contracts must give project owners and contractors capacity to vary for safety, especially when it comes to technology.
Because as innovation accelerates, the question isn’t whether safer options exist — it’s whether our system allows anyone to use them.
Closing Thought
Australia’s road-building sector has led globally in design, engineering, and delivery. Now it’s time to lead in how we fund, approve, and adopt safety innovation.
Every worker removed from the line of fire is a life changed. The technology to make that happen already exists; we just need the framework that lets us use it.
Keywords: road safety, traffic management, construction innovation, work zone automation, safety technology, eSTOP, eBOOM, roadwork safety systems, ARROWES, safety procurement, contractor safety, tier 1 contractors, infrastructure safety, smart road technology
Author: Nathan Psaila – GM ARROWES Roading Safety
