James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

As the seconder of the motion, of course I rise to speak in favour of it and commend the member for Mackellar for moving it. I mean, what kind of low-life union leaders—in the middle of one of the greatest challenges in the lifetime of anyone in this parliament—would behave in the way that they have in recent months? Of course it comes as no surprise, because this is nothing new. If you go back in time, this has been happening for generations and generations. I refer particularly to the disgraceful conduct of the precursor of the MUA during the Second World War, when they were holding up the loading of critical war supplies going to Australian and Allied troops in the South Pacific. This was extortionate behaviour. They held up the loading of arms and food and medical supplies to relieve our troops who were fighting the imperial Japanese forces that were trying to invade this country and subjugate the continent of Australia. It's absolutely disgraceful. It goes on and on and on, and still goes on to this day. Soon after the war, even Chifley had to stand up to the Barrier labour council in Broken Hill; it spread up to Mount Isa, of course, and there was the collaboration with the communists, seeking to overthrow our democracy. And of course now, in the middle of the once-in-a-century pandemic, we've got the union leaders of this country disrupting the supply chains that are keeping Australians safe and keeping our economy ticking over, at a time when our economy has had the greatest challenge since the Second World War—which was the last time they behaved like this, in such a disgraceful way—and they continue to seek to extort, as to the supply chains of this country and the businesses of this country.

We've got some significant trade challenges at the moment. That's obvious when you open a newspaper. It's obvious when you see the different industries that are struggling with our relationship with our major trade partner, China. Could there be a worse time to add uncertainty and disruption to the supply chains that are taking our product to export markets and bringing vital supplies in, when we're in the middle of a health pandemic in this country, when we're trying to expand our markets around the globe and when we're trying to support jobs and businesses and ensure that people stay in employment and off the unemployment queues? The reality is: 20 per cent of the jobs in this country in the private sector are linked to export industries. So, when you constrict supply chains, when you make it difficult for businesses to export overseas, you're putting jobs at risk.

I would've thought that the Labor Party, who claim to be the party of jobs and the party of the worker, would be against this sort of thing. But instead we've got them in here defending—not the workers; this is not about the workers—the behaviour of the unions, who are their overlords, their masters, as the member for Mackellar has pointed out. We know full well that the decisions about these disruptions, the decisions that have been taken on the waterfront, in the middle of a once-in-a-century pandemic, have been decisions of union leaders interested in the unions' interests, not in the interests of workers, and particularly not of the workers who rely on the jobs in the businesses that can't export their product overseas and around the world. The future of this country—

See this speech in context