Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

(   I am pleased to be able to speak in this debate. Needless to say, and it has been said by many people, the circumstances surrounding the HSU are very difficult circumstances. They are very unfortunate circumstances, and they certainly are not ones that any of us in this place want to see repeated. It needs to be said that they are, however, circumstances that are isolated and that do not affect the vast majority of unions—which go about their business of representing their members in a very steadfast and diligent way. I commend them for it.

At the outset I should say that it has been noted during the course of the debate this evening that, to quote one of the opposition members, 'All those contributing to this debate are union hacks'. I am very proud to support unions, but I have to say that I was formerly a corporate lawyer and acted for corporations. I find it extraordinary that this motion seeks to blur the distinction between organisations representing workers—traditionally not-for-profit organisations acting for workers, coming from a very different background and tradition—and corporations, which have, at their heart, the sole interests of shareholders in making a profit for shareholders. So, to begin with, there is a very different set of philosophical underpinnings to the regulation of registered organisations and the regulation of corporations, and I know that very well.

That said, it is important to note that there are some elements of the arrangements relating to registered organisations which have commonality with arrangements relating to corporations, and appropriately so. For instance, the general duties of officers of registered organisations and directors of corporations are similar. They must each exercise care and due diligence, act with good faith and not use their position improperly for personal advantage. I think it is the case in respect of most corporations, as it is the case in respect of most unions, that this is widely observed and rarely experienced in the breach. In relation to financial regulation, for example, there is commonality in relation to the regular reporting of financial accounts and auditors signing off on the books of those organisations, as is the case in relation to companies, in accordance with accounting standards. Similarly, the investigatory powers of regulatory bodies relating to corporations and relating to registered organisations are similar. So there are areas in which there is commonality, but it is important to bear in mind in this debate that there are very clear distinctions between the philosophical underpinnings of unions, registered organisations and corporations.

With all of that said, in the short time remaining to me I should note that this government has been very clear in the response it has made to ensure that trade unions continue to be democratic, professional, accountable and member focused organisations. I know that the minister has introduced into parliament legislation specifically designed to increase the transparency and accountability of registered organisations—both trade unions and employer organisations—to their members. It includes, for instance, requiring remuneration and board fees to be appropriately disclosed to members and requiring transactions with related parties and transactions where an officer has a material personal interest to be disclosed to members.

So there are a range of steps being taken by this government to scrutinise appropriately the activities and the reporting arrangements for registered bodies. These changes, and a range of other changes, would apply to all federally registered trade unions and all federally registered employer organisations. They represent very significant reforms to the regulation of employer and employee organisations.

Unlike the Liberals' approach to policy—and we are yet to find out what their arrangements will be in relation to regulation applying to workers and regulation applying to employment arrangements overall—these reforms developed by the minister have been made in consultation with peak employer bodies and with the ACTU through the National Workplace Relations Consultative Council. So in the context of those reforms, and having regard to the very distinct differences between unions and corporations, as mentioned earlier, I think it is appropriate that we reflect on the arrangements which are being put in place by the minister and see this motion for what it is: an attack on workers.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context