Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Corangamite for his fine question. Our policy is very clear. We believe in putting in place in law the appropriate protections for employees and also—indirectly for employees—in making sure that employees are able to get on with the job without having union thugs come onto the work site to try to close it down. What does this mean? In the case of the government, we were the government that introduced changes to the building code. We introduced the Building Code itself and set up the Australian Building and Construction Commission, which has delivered real dividends not only for the people who are buying homes and purchasing office space but also, importantly, for workers in the building industry.

The ABCC commissioned an Econtech report into the benefits of having set up the Building Code in the ABCC. The Econtech report found that, if the independent building watchdog were to be abolished, as the Labor Party want to do, it would have a dramatic impact not only on inflation but also on housing prices. In fact, Econtech found that, by curbing unwarranted and vexatious union strike action and acts of thuggery, the ABCC has reduced inflation by one percentage point. Just think about the impact on interest rates should the Labor Party’s industrial relations policy be implemented and the union thugs and the CFMEU were to go back onto the work site and close down housing construction, certainly making it more expensive.

In fact, Econtech found that the cost of a house in Australia is now three per cent lower, thanks to our industrial relations laws. On a $300,000 home, that is nearly $10,000—and the Leader of the Opposition, me old china here, says that he is worried about housing affordability! For new entrants the biggest barrier to housing affordability is the Labor Party and their industrial relations laws changes. The biggest impediment to cheaper housing is an inflexible workplace relations system. The only policy the Labor Party have released—and it is only part of a policy; it is a working document—is their industrial relations policy. They still do not have a policy on health. They do not have a policy on education. They do not have a policy on foreign affairs. They do not have a policy on defence. They do not have a policy on small business. They do not have a policy on transport. They do not have a policy on immigration. We are waiting for the policies—and the election is around the corner. But do you know what? They have a policy on T-shirts.

I was wondering why they would have a policy out there on industrial relations. Why did they go so early on industrial relations, when they have not come out with any other policy? I came across a letter on the union intranet from the Finance Sector Union, the FSU. It is a standard pro forma letter that the FSU sends out. It says:

In my view—

that is, in the union’s view—

the key principles of Labor’s policy are similar to those outlined in the policy adopted by the ACTU at its congress of 2006.

So we had the hypocrisy of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, who went on the John Laws program and said:

I’ve already had some disagreements with the trade union movement. The policy we produced was not the policy they wanted.

Yet here, the unions are running around saying that, in fact, the Labor Party’s policy is the policy that the union bosses wanted. Do you know what, Mr Speaker? This says everything about the Labor Party and everything about their hypocrisy. They go out there and say one thing to the general public, but behind closed doors they are doing these shady deals with the union bosses—because it is the union bosses that are funding the Labor Party, it is the union bosses that are supplying the candidates for the Labor Party, it is the union bosses that make up 70 per cent of their frontbench and it is the union bosses that will be back in control on the dark day that a Rudd Labor government gets elected.

See this speech in context