What do you think about reasons for identifying as *Bulbine bulbosa* ? Cf. *Bulbine glauca* ? I'm checking your photograph closely now looking at botanical key features shown in it. Any more photographs available please, especially of the foliage and close–up focus on one healthy flower ? For example one key feature visible here, yes, the hairs on the stamens occur far enough below the anthers for *B. glauca* (not *B. bulbosa*).
References (in brief, without full citations):
• Australian Plant Name Index (APNI) and Australian Plant Census (APC) (2024): *Bulbine* → https://biodiversity.org.au/nsl/services/search/names?product=APNI&tree.id=&name=Bulbine&inc._scientific=&inc.scientific=on&inc._cultivar=&inc._other=&max=100&display=&search=true
• Flora of NSW online PlantNet: *Bulbine* → https://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/NSWfl.pl?page=nswfl&lvl=gn&name=Bulbine .
• Flora of Vic. online VicFlora: * Bulbine* key to species → https://vicflora.rbg.vic.gov.au/flora/key/2106 .
• Flora of Au. online: *Bulbine* key to species → https://profiles.ala.org.au/opus/foa/profile/Bulbine .
I have undone your accidental phone screen tap of *B. bulbosa* as a suggested identification, so you can redo the identification to *B. glauca*. The first hand sighting author's identification has most importance.