Ben Morton (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Perhaps. And there was $70,000 in sponsorship for MUA WA conferences and over $50,000 to an MUA WA training fund.

Then we go to the CFMEU.    Thiess—again—paid $100,000 to the Building Trades Group of Unions Drug and Alcohol Committee while it was constructing the Epping to Chatswood Rail Link in Sydney. Apparently that payment was for industrial peace. The payment was falsely invoiced as being for 'drug and alcohol safety training' but was siphoned into the CFMEU's general account. Underworld figure George Alex made regular cash payments of $2,500 to an official of the CFMEU NSW to ensure favourable treatment of Mr Alex's companies that were repeatedly involved in phoenixing, leaving workers with unpaid wages and entitlements. Mirvac executives provided around $150,000 worth of free building work on CFMEU Queensland President David Hanna's house in order to secure industrial peace and favourable treatment by the CFMEU. Mirvac disguised the work by inflating invoices from subcontractors on their existing Orion Shopping Centre project. A number of Canberra construction companies paid a CFMEU ACT organiser more than $210,000 to win construction work here in Canberra. The CFMEU denied knowledge of the payments but did not report these allegations to any authority and paid the organiser a very generous redundancy payment when he quietly resigned from the union.

I was due to speak on this bill on another day in this place and, on the day I was due to speak on this bill, it was revealed that the militant construction union, the CFMEU, had been hit with fines of almost $250,000 after the Federal Court found it had engaged in 'industrial bullying' and deliberately flouted the law during a blockade at the $80 million Perth Airport expansion project. In a scathing appeal judgment today, the court's full bench found the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union had shown it preferred to pay civil penalties rather than obey the law. This may come as an absolute shock and surprise, but it really should not—not when you have got ACTU secretary Sally McManus out there saying that unions should break the law when they believe it to be unjust.

Mr Hammond interjecting—

Isn't it interesting that I get interjections from the member for Perth when I talk about the CFMEU! I like to take note of things that happen in this chamber, Member for Perth, and I remember the member for Perth was ejected from this chamber during question time. On the first occasion he was ejected because the matter of the CFMEU was being raised in this parliament. And here he goes again! I wonder if the member for Perth has come into this chamber because he heard those letters C-F-M-E-U being rung out across this chamber.

Mr Hammond interjecting—

So he has come in here to interject once more. Perhaps today he will find himself ejected again, absolutely defending his union bosses, the CFMEU. Maybe the member for Perth and the member for Brand could interject and help me with the pronunciation of the name 'Mick Buchan'. I am not sure if I have the pronunciation right. He is not known as well to me as he is to those opposite. This is somebody who, along with the CFMEU's Joe McDonald, has committed 53 prior contraventions of the law.

We need to do all we can to support and protect workers from union bosses who corruptly take benefits for their own personal gain and for their own organisations. These secret deals and kickbacks of corrupt union leaders and corrupt employers seriously disadvantage workers. They need to be outlawed, and this is exactly what this bill will do. This bill amends the Fair Work Act 2009 to respond to the recommendations of the final report of the royal commission and will help to restore the confidence of workers—confidence that the management of their union is accountable, transparent, fair and ethical. This bill, of course, still allows legitimate payments, like the payments of genuine union membership fees consented to by employees or safety training programs provided by unions at market rates—what a surprise! It will also require unions to disclose to all employees all financial benefits that they would derive from an enterprise agreement before the employees vote on that agreement.

There is nothing wrong with transparency. On this side of the House we stand on the side of transparency. We have seen that very clearly this week. What do those opposite want to do? They want to hide behind their union bosses and they want to protect their corrupting benefits and payments. These are all fair and reasonable conditions. Perhaps most union members would think their delegates and officials would naturally act with the interests of workers first, but we know that is not the case.

This is a real test for those opposite; they need to admit that. They say they believe in the worker. They stand in this place and tell us black and blue that they are the party of the worker. They want to say that they are the best for every Australian, but time and time again it is proven they are about big unions and big deals with big business.

See this speech in context