Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Hansard source

Let me start by saying that, for students of irony, for students of the political backflip and for students of those who have spent years in the political equivalent of receiving stolen goods and now have been found with their hand of the cookie jar, looking shocked, this is quite a moment. It's no surprise that the member for Watson has scuttled out of the chamber immediately after mumbling his way through that complete reversal of everything he's done for his more than 20 years in this place. For the member for Watson and the Labor Party to be involved in putting the CFMEU into administration is an extraordinary moment in Australian political history.

The member for Watson is the man who, in his previous portfolio as the minister for workplace relations, gave control of the construction sector in Australia to his mates at the CFMEU, who cheerfully and rapidly abolished the Australian Building and Construction Commission, in cahoots with his mates in the Australian Greens, and who danced to the tune of the CFMEU, as he has done consistently throughout his career and as has been done consistently throughout the political careers of just about every Labor MP in this place. It's no exaggeration to say that it was the lifelong political dream of the member for Watson to abolish the Australian Building and Construction Commission and to give the thugs, bikies and criminals of the CFMEU free rein on Australia's building sites.

What have been the results of the actions taken by the member for Watson in those heady first few months after Labor came to power? The results have been chaos, criminality, disorder and an explosion in the cost of construction to the detriment of every Australian, be it people who are building a new home in which to live or anybody who works in a new building, who is affected by what happens in the construction sector. That is every Australian. We have seen nothing short of chaos, bullying, violence, intimidation, harassment, thuggery, bribery, corruption and criminality. All of that has followed from the actions enthusiastically taken by the member for Watson with the full support of the Prime Minister and the entire caucus since Labor came to power.

They abolished the Australian Building and Construction Commission. They introduced tranche after tranche of legislation to remake the framework which applies to industrial relations in this country, to grant unions, including the thugs, criminals, bikies and misogynists of the CFMEU, unprecedented rights to enter workplaces around the country. The damage they have done has been legion, and it will last, sadly, for a long time. How did the Prime Minister respond to this set of actions and outcomes orchestrated and delivered by the member for Watson? The Prime Minister promoted him. He promoted the member for Watson following his disastrous performance as Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations.

The legislation that is before the House today—the legislation that a shamefaced member for Watson has very briefly spoken about this morning before deciding he had urgent business elsewhere—is necessary and is occurring as a direct result of the incompetence of the Albanese Labor government, the incompetence of the Prime Minister, the incompetence of the member for Watson and a series of disastrous choices they have made to look after their mates in the CFMEU, regardless of their proven, incontrovertible track record of corruption, criminality, thuggery and bullying over 10, 15, 20 or more years. They ignored all of that and made a series of dreadful, dismal, disastrous decisions. Now the consequence is that there have been very detrimental impacts on the Australian economy, on the people of Australia and on regulation and the rule of law in the construction sector.

This Prime Minister and the member for Watson were very happy to change workplace laws in Australia to directly benefit the CFMEU. Why? It's because their path into government has been smoothed—facilitated—by the millions of dollars in donations paid by the CFMEU to the Australian Labor Party. In exchange, for well over $6 million received by the Labor Party since the current Prime Minister became the Leader of the Opposition, we have seen his government happy to tear down much of the fabric of Australian industrial relations legislation, very much to the detriment of just about everybody in Australia who is not a union boss.

Of course, the actions of the Albanese Labor government and the member for Watson were warmly welcomed, perhaps unsurprisingly, by the thugs, crooks and criminals of the CFMEU. Let me turn to the Western Australian branch of the CFMEU and their Construction Worker magazine from the summer of 2023, which had a picture of a tombstone with the words 'ABCC dead and buried: The ABCC has been laid to rest under 10 tons of concrete happily poured by CFMEU members'. That is an occasion when they do happily pour concrete. On other occasions, they have been perfectly happy to interrupt a concrete pour at a cost of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars—one of their preferred modes of industrial thuggery.

The CFMEU and the Labor Party knew full well that, by abolishing the ABCC and through the other actions that the member for Watson and this Albanese Labor government took, they were handing effective control of the construction sector in Australia to this militant, corrupt, criminal union and the rich array of convicted criminals, bullies, thugs, drug dealers, bikies and other undesirables who are key officials of this union across the country.

The opposition has sought to raise these issues in the public interest at every turn. The member for Watson has been very happy to shut down that debate repeatedly—for example, during the second reading debate for the fair work legislation amendment bill in November 2022 and the fair work legislation amendment bill in 2023. In both cases, every possible procedure of this House was used by the member for Watson to gag debate, to reduce the time allowed for consideration in detail and to reduce the time allowed for scrutiny of the cosy arrangements entered into by this government on repeated occasions to make life easier for the crooks and thugs and criminals and bikies of the CFMEU, at the expense of the welfare and the interest of the great majority of Australians. The repeated behaviour of this government—of the member for Watson and of the Prime Minister—is nothing short of a disgrace.

Let me take a moment to remind the House of aspects of the track record of the CFMEU. I want to start by speaking about a former judicial officer Anne Gooley. According to media reports and telecommunications records, Mr John Setka, a well-known former CFMEU official, convicted criminal and thoroughly undesirable person, on a single evening in October 2019 called the former judicial officer Anne Gooley on 25 occasions and sent her 45 text messages. I'm going to resort to my usual principle of using code words in place of the actual words used by John Setka. He called her a 'weak flipping piece of shoe', a 'treacherous Aussie flipping cart' and a 'flipping dog'. It would not take much imagination at all to work out the actual words used by Mr Setka.

Of course, there is another well-known episode. None of this is a secret and none of this was unknown to the Prime Minister and the member for Watson as they engaged on their long legislative program of delivering favours to the CFMEU in exchange for over $6 million of donations. We know from court records in relation to the 2011 Melbourne markets case that a court found 'deliberate flouting of the law by the CFMEU to obtain industrial advantage'. The court imposed $250,000 in fines and awarded $190,000 in costs against the CFMEU after finding that the union had 'deliberately and illegally prevented work from going ahead on the new Melbourne market site in Epping, Victoria'.

Let's speak about Mr Shaun Reardon, another deeply undesirable individual. He was named in the findings of the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption. A witness told that royal commission: 'Shaun Reardon, who was an organiser, would regularly attend the Pentridge Village Site'—a particular construction site—'and taunt by shaking the fence and yelling, "We're going to get you and your family!" to a subcontractor and other staff on site.'

Let's look at one of the many other moments when the CFMEU has come to the attention of Australia's court system and judicial officers. In December 2015, Justice Jessup of the Federal Court fined the CFMEU $245,000 for intimidating a scaffolding company into hiring a shop steward. Let me read what Justice Jessup said about the union in his judgement. He said:

The case is devoid of any mitigating circumstances. The Union has shown no contrition, and has not cooperated with the regulator. … there is no circumstance to which counsel could point as tending to exert a moderating influence upon the level of the penalty which the court would otherwise impose.

Let's turn to the member for Maribyrnong, who has a long history with the CFMEU. It depends which personality we're getting from the member for Maribyrnong because he, in his political actions, has a case of multiple political personality disorder. In August 2012, he issued a media release denouncing the actions of CFMEU officials in the Grocon dispute and said: 'I would expect the CFMEU to respect and comply with orders of the Victorian supreme court.' By 2017, the member for Maribyrnong was opposition leader, and it seemed his position in relation to the CFMEU had evolved. In December that year, well-known journalist Sharri Markson reported that the member for Maribyrnong had been 'cooking up a secret deal between the CFMEU and the so-called industrial left'. Who was the point person in the CFMEU dealing with Mr Shorten at that time? It was none other than the highly savoury Shaun Reardon, who I mentioned earlier, the same individual who showed up at worksites and threatened workers' families.

Justice Burnett of the Federal Circuit Court said:

The CFMEU … has an extensive history of contraventions dating back to at least 1999. The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that the organisation either does not understand or does not care for the legal restrictions on industrial activity imposed by the legislature and the courts.

Another judge, Justice Flick, said that the CFMEU:

… has long demonstrated by its conduct that it pays but little regard to compliance with the law and indeed has repeatedly sought to place itself above the law.

Judge Jarrett of the Federal Circuit Court said:

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

Justice Jessup of the Federal Court said:

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

Can I remind the House that this organisation, with its longstanding record of flouting the law and its longstanding notorious record of criminality, corruption, thugishness and the involvement of bikies and other undesirable people, is the one that the Prime Minister and the member for Watson have been running a protection racket for for over two years, introducing bill after bill and passing act after act to advance and protect the interests of these thugs, crooks and criminals.

Then, just a couple of months ago, there were extensive media investigations, and I want to commend the journalists involved. It takes some personal courage to stand up to people who have a track record of threatening the families of those they disagree with, of threatening and, indeed, executing all kinds of physical violence upon people with whom they disagree and of threatening their pets and all kinds of unsavoury things. So it takes courage, and I want to congratulate the journalists involved. Just in July this year, there was extensive media coverage by 60 Minutes and the Nine Entertainment newspapers outlining corruption, intimidation, bullying, thuggery, bribery and criminal behaviour on building sites run by illegal motorcycle gangs, and the member for Watson was shocked, the Prime Minister was shocked and the entire Labor Party was shocked. They apparently had no idea that this had been going on. It came as a dreadful surprise. You almost have to feel sorry for them.

They engaged extensively with all of these highly unsavoury individuals, who I might remind the House were critical in the preselection of many members in this place and were critical in providing the dollars used by the Labor Party to campaign—over $6 million of donations. But apparently, in doing all of that, in receiving the rivers of money as they flowed into the ALP and in engaging with all of these heavily tattooed individuals who suddenly had an interest in Labor Party preselections and promised to deliver a whole lot of people to vote for Labor candidates, the trusting, naive, credulous members of the Labor Party never even noticed that they were thugs and criminals. Apparently they didn't notice what was written on their T-shirts and they didn't notice that they were heavily tattooed. All of that went over their heads. So, in July, when all this appeared in the media, it was such an enormous shock that they had to call for the vapours; they needed to be revived. One almost has to feel sorry for them, these trusting, credulous people who believed the best of everybody, including the thugs and criminals of the CFMEU. All of a sudden their idealism was facing a considerable challenge. It was as if the blindfolds were lifted from their eyes.

Many of us have enjoyed that moment in the classic movie Casablanca, when it's alleged that gambling is occurring in the casino and the police captain—I think it was Captain Renault—says that he's shocked. But his performance was nothing compared to the performance that we've seen from the member for Watson and the Prime Minister. The simple fact is that this would be funny if the stakes were not so high. This would be funny if it were not for the fact that we know that the Labor Party, for over two years, has engaged in abetting and aiding the crooks and criminals and thugs and a whole range of people who have been found guilty by judges of the court. This is not a political point; these are findings made by independently appointed judges. This whole collection of individuals has a rich array of criminal convictions and has consistently and repeatedly, for more than 20 years, engaged in the kind of conduct that most Australians and most decent people would regard as utterly reprehensible.

As the Leader of the Opposition said in this chamber yesterday, one of the consequences is that taxpayers are paying the CFMEU tax on major big build projects across the country. Up to 30 per cent more has to be paid on major projects because of the thuggish tactics of the CFMEU. On this side of the House, we have consistently warned against this. The very first question that the Leader of the Opposition asked in this place after the 2022 election was about the CFMEU. And it turns out—what a surprise!—that everything we warned of was entirely accurate. Thanks, in significant measure, to good work by some brave journalists, even the member for Watson and the Prime Minister have been forced to at least pretend that this is an issue of concern to them. As a result of that, we have before this House a bill. Now, let's be clear, the first draft of this bill could have been co-authored by John Setka. Indeed I suspect it was co-authored by John Setka. It was weak. It was so weak you could drive a truck through it. It was the kind of thing you produce when you want to look like you care but in reality you don't care.

But, thanks to the extraordinary and assiduous work of Senator Cash, shadow minister for employment and workplace relations, this bill has been significantly strengthened. We made it clear that we would only support it if there were amendments made in a whole range of ways. We have, for example, secured an amendment, which is now contained in the version of the bill that's before this House, that the administration period must last for a minimum of three years. This is essential if there is to be a serious attempt to tackle the appalling culture of the CFMEU. When you have this entrenched degree of criminal activity, bullying, thuggery and intimidation, that is not going to be something that can be solved overnight. It will take assiduous and determined work.

With the way that the bill was drafted initially, the minister, Senator Watt, could have chosen to stop the administration one day after it started. 'Why?' you might ask. 'Why would anybody of good will contemplate doing that?' Well, you need merely look at the track record of this government, of which Senator Watt is a significant part, in looking the other way for over two years and in ignoring all of the damning evidence on the public record over close to 20 years of the thuggery, criminality and corruption of the CFMEU. If this Labor Party is prepared to overlook that in exchange for more than $6 million, I tell you what: if the act did not require that the administration last for at least three years, they would have been looking to shut it down within weeks. You would have to be naive not to expect that that was the inevitable outcome with the drafting as it was originally presented to us. We said, 'Quite frankly, that's a joke, and we're not going to agree to it.' And, thankfully, that point has been acknowledged.

There is also enhanced transparency, with the government agreeing that the administrator must report to parliament every six months so that there can be oversight from all parties and not just from the political lapdogs of the CFMEU who make up the current government. The administrator will be required to provide the detailed financial information of the CFMEU in these reports. That is very important, and on this side of the House we will be scrutinising those reports carefully. It is important that the administrator be given the tools to do his job properly, and it is essential that progress be made.

A very important point is that, while the CFMEU is in administration, it would be entirely inappropriate and improper for the CFMEU to continue to shovel millions of dollars towards the Labor Party in political donations. I'm pleased to say that, thanks to the assiduous work of Senator Cash, the administrator has now set out in writing the guiding principles and goals he determined before accepting the role. One of those is as follows: 'The union will not engage in party politics during the administration: donations, positions at political party conferences, and promotions of particular candidates.' So, by the way, a tip for Australia's tattooists: don't go and set up temporary parlours near ALP conferences coming up, because one of your major sources of business won't be there. He also said, 'Further, I can advise you that I intend, should I be appointed as administrator, to vary the rules of the construction and general division of the CFMEU to prohibit the making of party political donations or the funding of party political campaigns.'

Other amendments have been secured thanks to the assiduous negotiation of Senator Cash and the determined work of the coalition, informed by the bitter experience of the victims of CFMEU criminality, corruption and thuggery around this country, who have been in constant dialogue with any parliamentarian of good will who is willing to listen to them. On this issue, that excludes more than half of this House. There have been so many victims of the CFMEU's thuggery. We have listened carefully and we have studied the grim history of the consequences of the CFMEU's behaviour and criminality over some 20 years.

Amendments secured by the opposition, the coalition, and contained now in the form of the bill that's before this House include that the administrator will have the ability to ban rogue CFMEU officials for life. The government had a maximum five-year ban in the original legislation. There's an extension of the administration to a maximum of five years, up from the three years proposed by the government. There is a list of matters in the bill that the administration scheme needs to address. The wording has been changed so that they 'must' address these matters, whereas previously the word was 'may'.

Here is a very important change we've made. It turned out that the draft bill set out a date before which the retrospective application of civil penalties could not occur. By a remarkable coincidence, an extraordinary coincidence, that date was after John Setka had resigned from the union. Imagine that? What a coincidence! Extraordinary! Deidre Chambers, what a coincidence! Thankfully, that particular outrageously transparent attempt to protect their mate has been removed and replaced with a date that will allow retrospective civil penalties to apply to a date before Mr Setka resigned from the union.

Other amendments secured include confirming investigations into the past conduct of the CFMEU. All of the amendments secured by the opposition now contained in the form of the bill before the House are ones that are critical to the operation of the administrator and will mean that we have a tough scheme in place to address lawlessness in the construction sector.

But this is not where it should stop. I want to make this point. This legislation is important, but it is not sufficient to address the problems in the CFMEU. We on this side of the House have made clear what needs to happen to restore law and order in the construction sector, but—surprise, surprise!—the Albanese government is too weak to take those next steps. If the Prime Minister wants to clean up the construction sector, he needs to bring back the Australian Building and Construction Commission. It is critical that we have a body which can combat lawless activity in the construction sector.

The Albanese government also needs to pass the measures from the ensuring integrity bill, which the government rejected in 2019. The opposition leader has just this week introduced two private member's bills which would achieve these aims. All the government need do is program these bills for debate and we can get these bills through the House.

The legislation we have before us today, critically including the amendments secured by the coalition, is an important first step towards cleaning up the construction sector. It will be a long journey to change the truly atrocious culture entrenched by the CFMEU. We on this side of the House made it clear that we're not going to give the government a blank cheque so that they can pretend they are cleaning up their CFMEU public policy disaster only to have the crooks, thugs and criminals of the CFMEU run riot again a couple of years down the track. We will not support a weak response. It is vital the administrator has the teeth to clean up the disaster in the CFMEU and to regularly report to the Australian parliament about what it is doing. The amendments we have secured go a long way towards achieving this aim. This legislation, though, is not enough and must be complemented by bringing back the ABCC and removing criminals from the construction sector once and for all. I encourage all members to support this legislation and also to support the other bills the coalition has introduced designed to address these issues.

See this speech in context