Max Chandler-Mather (Griffith, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The reality is that Labor and the Liberals are going to team up to pass some of the most draconian antiworker laws this country has seen. No matter what you think of the CFMEU, this should worry you, because Labor has set a precedent where parliament can seize control of a civil society group that the government doesn't like and suspend its basic rights.

As the member for Melbourne said, the New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties has summed it up perfectly. It's worth quoting here because I don't think every member of this place is taking their responsibility as lawmakers nearly seriously enough, given the enormous overriding of natural justice and of the basic separation of powers that this country is meant to run on. They are almost flagrantly disregarding our responsibility to uphold the rule of law and natural justice. If those two principles are to be worth anything, then they should be applied universally. Obviously we have seen some serious allegations made in the media, and those allegations should be tested in a court under the usual processes. Indeed, precisely because of the seriousness of those allegations, we should go through the courts and legal system, which this parliament should trust, to get to the truth.

But instead, as the New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties has said:

While any allegation of criminality is serious and must be addressed, the powers set out in this bill are far-reaching and establish a dangerous precedent for the trade union movement, membership-based organisations, and the rights of individuals to natural justice and procedural fairness.

The rushed nature of this legislation which is designed to override a process begun by the Fair Work Commission and the Federal Court threatens the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. We note that the proposed legislation would set a precedent where membership-based organisations can have democratic control externally removed on the basis of untested allegations. This is of concern to all Unions, registered Clubs, and Australian membership-based organisations.

The Bill violates Australia's obligations under the International Labour Organisation, namely Articles 3 and 4 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948.

The NSWCCL has long held that everyone has the right to natural justice and procedural fairness, regardless of the allegations they face. If this legislation is passed next week, it threatens this fundamental right. The right to freedom of association and the nature of membership-based organisations across Australia must be protected.

As the member for Melbourne said, they are entirely correct, but the problem is that none of this been tested or aired in parliament or inquiries. There has been no coming to terms with the fact that this is an historically unprecedented piece of legislation that sets an extraordinary precedent. Is the government suggesting that it no longer trusts the courts, the Fair Work Commission or the Federal Court to get to the bottom of this? Is that the suggestion here? That would surely necessitate a full-scale review of our legal system, not overriding basic natural justice and the rule of law.

Let's step out some of the things that this legislation allows the government to do: entirely seize control of the CFMEU through an administrator for a minimum of three years; permanently ban officials/workers from ever working for a union again without any proof of wrongdoing; fire any elected officials or staff they wish to without any proof of wrongdoing and effectively deny those staff or officials natural justice or even standard employee rights; take control of all union assets; decide when and if elections are called; and completely override the union's own constitution.

Now, again, even if you do not like the CFMEU—and clearly neither Labor nor the Liberals do—a lot of the people in this place seem to just simply want to crush this union without any recourse to natural justice or procedural fairness. Remove the CFMEU, for instance, and insert another membership based organisation and imagine if the government was doing that to them. That is the precedent that this sets. The precedent this sets for a future government when they decide they do not like a membership based organisation or a civil society group that happens to offend the government in some way is that the government then, rather than taking that organisation through the courts for any legitimate allegations of wrongdoing reason, can pass a piece of legislation that effectively annihilates that organisation. There is a reason that we have a separation of powers, and we are meant to respect natural justice and the rule of law in this country.

Corruption, sexism and intimidation should be strongly opposed. Precisely because they are serious and should be opposed, they should be prosecuted through the court and a system that we have established to determine the truth of allegations and test them properly. Effectively what parliament has done is override that separation of powers and declare that it is going to pass judgement on those allegations without any formal legal process. No wonder there are no members from the government who are willing to speak on this bill apart from the minister.

At the end of the day, I think a lot of organisations and civil society groups will be wondering: What happens when we offend a future government? What happens when a future government decide that they want to crush a membership based organisation? What happens when that organisation in some way falls foul of the government or the media? Well, now we're seeing what the government can do. The deeply irresponsible nature by which this law is being rushed through parliament without any consideration of those basic elements of what is meant to constitute how this country is governed is genuinely remarkable. It displays a genuine irresponsibility. We hear all the time accusations in this parliament about the Greens being irresponsible and 'How dare the Greens do this?' or 'How dare the Greens do that?' But you would think that every member of this place would respect the separation of powers, natural justice and the rule of law. This bill makes a mockery of all those things. Again, principles are only worth the paper they are written on if they are applied universally. That is how liberal democracy is meant to work. But clearly, in this case, the government has decided to throw that completely out.

I will finish with this. We have seen serious allegations made against all sorts of institutions in this country. We saw the devastating impact of the banking royal commission and the impact that the banks have on people's lives. We have previously seen serious allegations made against institutions around systematic sexual abuse. We have seen serious allegations made time and again against institutions in this country and never have we seen a piece of legislation like this. Why is it that this reaches the threshold to override natural justice and the rule of law but all of those previous ones didn't? We have never seen the government come and propose to place a bank into administration, but all of a sudden, when it comes to a trade union, Labor and the Liberals are happy to team up and completely override all the basic principles that are meant to define how this country is run.

See this speech in context