Jenny Ware (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Withdrawal from Amalgamation) Bill 2024 puts back into law policy and legislation of the former coalition government. It was good law back then and it remains good law today, as we have seen with the Labor Party backflip. It is a union demerger law. Unions have had a very important role in the history of Australia. It is important that honest and good workers should be able to join and remain in honest and good unions. If the union that they have joined proves to be dishonest, bad or dangerous for them, then workers should be able to move out of that union. Similarly, as we are seeing with this legislation, this relates to a division of the CFMEU being able to move out of the existing CFMEU, which in my view has always been toxic but has become even more toxic in the last few years, particularly under the stewardship of John Setka, and I will come to that in a moment.

By way of background, in 2020 the coalition government brought in legislation that said unions could demerge from larger unions. With his workplace relations agenda, one of the first things Minister Burke did when this government was elected was repeal the Australian Building and Construction Commission. That was a body that had been set up by the former government to specifically help and protect workers on building and construction sites. It was investigating workplace breaches in that industry, and it was very successful. The Labor Party came in and said, 'Oh, no, we need to remove that,' because the CFMEU, which had been sued successfully in 91 per cent of cases by the ABCC, told the Labor Party, in return for the $4.3 million it donated to the Labor Party's last election campaign, 'Quick, Minister Burke, you must get rid of this legislation.' So the minister did. Then, last year, the minister also repealed the union demerger laws that were brought in under the coalition. And today he is bringing back those coalition laws. Why? Because it was good workplace relations law. But it is a significant backflip, and it has been a backflip that the government has only been brought to by yet more egregious actions by John Setka.

This legislation has been brought in to allow the manufacturing division of the CFMEU to effectively demerge from the CFMEU. That division is made up of many textile workers, largely females, who have had to bear the brunt of the thuggery of the CFMEU and, particularly, John Setka. Union officials and union workers should not be forced to stay in a union that makes them uncomfortable. They should not be forced to be in a workplace that makes them uncomfortable, a workplace where we have seen specific examples of culture that is completely out of step with modern Australia and modern Australian workplaces. And John Setka's behaviour over the last few weeks has clearly demonstrated why the coalition government was right to legislate union demerger laws back in 2020 and why Labor was wrong to repeal them.

I think we need to look at all of the workers who make up those in the CFMEU. The CFMEU, of course, has many who work in the construction industry. These are our builders, electricians, plumbers, bricklayers, tilers, roofers, glaziers—our tradies. I have many of them in my electorate in southern and south-western Sydney. In the midst of a housing affordability crisis, when we all know that the main driver of the current crisis is the lack of supply of housing, the cost of construction within the construction industry has never been as high. Small businesses within this industry have particularly borne the brunt of this. Simultaneously we are seeing more and more of these construction companies going into liquidation, at record rates. This has happened in the past two years and it has happened for a number of reasons. There have been a lot of material supply issues, but it is also demonstrative of the lack of productivity that is occurring in many aspects of the construction industry.

This is at a time when we desperately need to build more houses and apartments. We need our construction industry to be thriving. We need it to be productive. And, for the many workers in this industry, we need it to be safe. We should be strengthening and supporting the construction sector, and one of the major handbrakes in the construction industry is the CFMEU. Statistics show that, on most sites controlled by the CFMEU, the productivity levels are around 2.8 days per week. Is it any wonder, therefore, that so many of our construction companies are going to the wall? No business can survive when its workforce is only productive for 2.58 days per week. So there is a direct link between the CFMEU and the lack of productivity in the construction industry and the number of construction companies that are going to the wall.

When we read the headlines about construction companies going into liquidation, we know that the workers within that company will have to look for a new job, but there is also the fact that the person who is building a home may then be left with half a home or three-quarters of a home. They are very badly impacted by the construction company going broke, and they have to go and find another construction company to finish their building work. This has a very big flow-on impact for the whole of Australian society.

I will turn to some of the other workers who are currently within the CFMEU. These are the workers that want to leave the CFMEU. The textile, clothing and footwear sector, which has the greatest number of females, has faced significant issues within the CFMEU. We've heard from various inquiries that it is a toxic, male-dominated culture, with jokes about domestic violence and specific incidents of violence and harassment by John Setka, in particular. This has all contributed to make the CFMEU an unsafe place for these women to work.

Over the last few weeks, John Setka's most recent behaviour and that of the militant CFMEU have clearly shown why the coalition was right to legislate union demergers and why Labor was wrong to repeal them. It all goes back to the ABCC. Setka's history of lawlessness and his recent attacks on Stephen McBurney of the AFL clearly highlight these ongoing issues. Labor's response was weak, with the Minister for Sport unwilling to answer questions and the Prime Minister unwilling to answer questions. Was their reluctance to answer those questions at all influenced by the $4.3 million that the CFMEU provided to the Labor Party at the last election? If it was, this clearly shows that the ALP that espouses and promotes itself as the party of the worker has been sold out, because that is not the action of a party that is actually there for the worker. It is the action of a party that was desperate to win an election and would happily take $4.3 million of money from thugs and bullies.

What we've seen in most recent times is Setka's threats against McBurney and the AFL, and—as I said—the Labor government's unwillingness to condemn these actions. Minister Burke admitted that the government is only acting now because of the attack on the AFL. Minister Burke has known for years and decades about John Setka's behaviour. He's known for years and decades about the behaviour of the CFMEU. He has known about the bullying of women within that union and within those workplaces, yet he did not prioritise this until it looked as though the government—in Victoria, particularly—was being held over a barrel by this union. Labor's actions on all of this are driven by political pressure and financial influence. They're not driven by genuine concern for workers. If they were, the Labor Party would have acted on this a long, long time ago.

I'll turn briefly to the textile clothing and footwear sector. After the merger, which was forced upon them, they moved into the CFMEU's offices. These are some of the quotes that some of the workers within the textiles union have said. One of the union secretaries, for example, told the Age newspaper about the first meeting with the CFMEU. She said:

It was a male dominated space. He just went on this big rant and there was fear if anyone tried to say anything it would have just got a lot worse.

One of the union reps also stated, with regard to the workplace culture of the CFMEU offices:

Within the building there were jokes about domestic violence. It was very uncomfortable, to the point where our division had to leave the building.

Minister Burke was well aware of this. He didn't just become aware of this in the last few days. This has been a culture that has been there for a long period of time.

Earlier this year, when Senator Lambie in the other place brought in a private senator's bill that would have allowed the manufacturing division—which includes the textiles union—to demerge from the CFMEU, the government said that they would not be supporting her bill. The government has now largely rewritten Senator Lambie's legislation, and that is what is before us today.

In conclusion, I want to point to some of the comments that have been made by the courts about the CFMEU, because these are, of course, independent bodies. Some of the comments that have been made by some of our judges when they have been looking into the actions and conduct of the CFMEU include Justice Salvatore Vasta from the Federal Circuit Court:

The most recidivist corporate offender in Australian history.

Then we have Justice Jessup from the Federal Court:

The CFMEU's record of non-compliance with legislation has now become notorious … That record ought to be an embarrassment to the trade union movement.

Then we have Judge Jarrett of the Federal Circuit Court:

The CFMEU has an egregious record of repeated and wilful contraventions of all manner of industrial laws.

This is a union that contributed $4.3 million to the Labor Party in the last election. This is what is being said by judges who have looked into specific conduct of the CFMEU. Their record speaks for itself.

The legislation that's before this place is legislation that simply puts back into law the very good law relating to union demergers that the coalition government brought in in 2020. It should never have been repealed. That much is evident.

See this speech in context