Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

It is very telling that during question time the Prime Minister was unable to answer a question in relation to the very close affiliation between the CFMMEU and the Australian Labor Party. He was not able to answer a question with a straight answer, and it demonstrates a few things. At the moment, when Australians are facing increased electricity costs, when Australians are facing an increase in their gas prices and when Australians are facing an increase in every cost-of-living component of their household budget, this government decides as a first-order priority to bring in a policy change which will drive up inflation and drive up construction costs in this country. That is seen by this government as a higher-order priority than addressing the problems that Australian families and businesses are facing in their budgets at the moment.

It says a lot about this government that over just the last three years it, as the Labor Party, has taken over $5 million in political donations—$5 million! Now, why? Why would a union give $5 million to the Australian Labor Party? Would they ask for anything in return? Would they expect anything from the Australian Labor Party? Would they expect to be able to pull the strings of the Australian Labor Party for $5 million? I think they would, I really do. I think that's the track record. That's the history of the relationship between the CFMMEU and the Australian Labor Party. So what did they ask for the $5 million that they gave to the Australian Labor Party in just the last three years? Of course, we're talking tens of millions of dollars over the last decade or so. What did they ask for it? They asked for a policy change.

One thing you can say about the CFMMEU—sure, they're mostly union thugs, they have close relationships with bikie members, and they are before the courts on multiple counts of assault and all sorts of intimidation—is that they are very open about their intent. They are very open about providing money to the Australian Labor Party and that has now resulted in a policy change. That's what they asked for, that's what they expected, that's what they demanded from the Australian Labor Party for the $5 million and that is what this Prime Minister has delivered. This Prime Minister has changed a policy and that is going to result in high inflation and higher construction costs in this country, and he has decided that that is his highest priority in the opening days of this government. It says a lot about this government, it says a lot about the priorities and it says a lot about how the Australian Labor Party will always put the union bosses' interests ahead of the interests of the Australian public. There are countless examples before the courts that have been decided by the courts, right up to the High Court, in relation to the CFMMEU. Their conduct cannot be discounted.

The Prime Minister comes into this place and says, 'Oh, well, I want to see all workers treated equally and I want to see unions held to account.' Well, the fact is that the Australian Education Union is not representing members, teachers and university lecturers, who are before the courts on assault and intimidation charges and all sorts of corruption allegations. The reality is that the Missos union is not before the courts representing their members where there have been allegations made against those workers that they've been involved in syphoning funds, involved in corrupt practices in workplaces, breaking the arms of workers on those building sites or intimidating female workers. There has been no other union in the country since the BLF that has conducted themselves in this sort of manner. So do they stand themselves out above and beyond any other union movement? Of course they do, and it can't be dismissed by this Prime Minister just because the Labor Party received $5 million worth of donations over the course of the last three years.

It's unconscionable for the Australian Labor Party to say to builders and to tradies on worksites around the country that this sort of conduct can be condoned. They cannot stand by and passively look at the way in which the CFMMEU conduct themselves on building sites. The Australian Labor Party can't stand by. This Prime Minister can't turn a blind eye to the escalation in building costs, the cost of materials and the cost of the add-on supplement that builders need to put into their contracts to win contracts—to allow the CFMMEU to conduct themselves in the way that they do. It results in an escalation in prices for houses, for the construction of aged-care facilities, for roads, for hospitals. Who wears that cost? Is it the builder that wears that cost? Of course it's not. It's the homebuyer that's paying more for their home because of the conduct of the CFMMEU, and the Labor Party is standing shoulder to shoulder with these thugs in the union movement, facilitating that sort of behaviour.

The whole idea of the Australian Building and Construction Commission was to have a watchdog in the construction industry that could hold the CFMMEU to account, and the Australian Labor Party, because they've received $5 billion of funding from the CFMMEU, are going to abolish the ABCC, which will see an increase in the costs and prices. It will mean that those that are going into an aged-care facility will have to pay more because the cost of construction and the provision of that service cost more. You are going to see fewer transport options available to governments in my state of Queensland or in New South Wales, WA or elsewhere because you are not going to get the value for your dollar if the CFMMEU is dictating the prices that go to support their corrupt and criminal behaviour. That's the reality.

So for the Prime Minister to stand up here and say that the conduct of the CFMMEU doesn't matter defies what the courts have said in relation to the CFMMEU. Don't just take our word for it. If you look at what has happened through enforcement action undertaken by the ABCC, this is what they've undertaken: unlawful industrial action—over 1,400 breaches resulting from more than 20 cases, resulting in $3.6 million in fines against the CFMEU; coercion—over 470 breaches resulting from more than 32 cases, resulting in $5.9 million in fines; right of entry—over 300 breaches resulting from 40 cases, resulting in $4.2 million in fines; freedom of association—more than 120 breaches resulting from 15 cases, resulting in $900,000 in fines; unlawful picketing—over 20 breaches resulting from four cases, resulting in $1 million in fines; and misrepresentation—almost 30 breaches resulting from six cases, resulting in $380,000 in fines.

That is egregious enough, but, having worked in the Home Affairs space and having seen the conduct of unlawful criminal behaviour by organisations in this country, I know that the connections between outlaw motorcycle gangs—the biggest distributors of amphetamines in our country—and the CFMMEU are indisputable. The CFMMEU use the bikies as muscle and enforcement on building sites. So, as egregious as all that I just read out is, and as much as the Prime Minister says there is nothing to see here, the most concerning fact is what the Labour Party is prepared to turn a blind eye to: the treatment of women on building sites at the hands of the CFMMEU thugs. It is outrageous, and all of the sanctimony that we have from the Australian Labor Party counts for absolutely nothing. It shows the true colour of the Australian Labor Party.

The unions are back in business. The unions are back in this game, and they are dictating every move of this government. So when you see the next report from a building site of a female stop-and-go member who is just there to do a job being abused by some bikie or by some member of the CFMMEU, know that it is sanctioned by this Prime Minister. Know that the next act of assault or unlawful conduct on a building site that results in a worker being injured is the result of this Prime Minister. The union movement completely owns and operates this Labour Party.

See this speech in context