Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

When the news broke about the extent of allegations against the CFMEU and that all became clear, I called one of my friends who works in construction to get his take. He said to me, 'Look, Allegra, I'll talk to you about what is going on, but under no circumstances can you ever mention my name and that we have spoken, because they could ruin me.' This is the level of intimidation and corruption that is in the construction industry. It matters to those people in the industry, but it matters to all of us. This is why this Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Administration) Bill 2024 is so important.

It matters to all of us because there are individuals in the construction industry who have had terrible personal experiences because of the behaviour of the CFMEU, because of the criminality, because of the thuggery, because of some of the issues that were outlined by the previous speaker talking about the physical intimidation, harm and hurt that have been caused by people within the CFMEU. That personal piece is incredibly important. But it also matters because it has a broader impact on our society. If there are businesses in this country who cannot operate as good, decent businesses can, because of corruption, because of threats or because of thuggery, this is a concern to all of us and is a potential contagion to other sectors of the community. This sort of corruption and behaviour has no place in any Australian industry.

Finally, it matters because construction is critical to this country, and it's critical right now, probably more than ever. This is a time when Australia has an acute housing shortage. We know the future of this country and the future of generations behind us having a fair go, owning a home or bringing up their kids with stable housing depends on our ability to build the houses that we need. We know that this government and governments around the country are spending tens of billions of dollars on public infrastructure—public money. The construction industry is critical to this country right now, and with that CFMEU and the impact that it has had on that industry in terms of cost, lost productivity and setting a culture for that industry is profound and has an impact on every single Australian out here who cares about the future for their kids, about housing and about good public infrastructure. It matters to all of us.

So why do we have to have this bill? Frankly, it's because the CFMEU has forfeited the right to clean itself up. The insidious behaviour of union officials and the iron grip that they have wielded over the construction industry for decades appals me. I'm also going to be moving in a moment to provide an extra layer of security on any appointments made by the independent administrator. I supported the adoption of an independent administrator because I could see no other way for us to really have a root-and-branch reform of the CFMEU. It has to start here. It's critical that we start here.

I also acknowledge and highlight my support for the opposition's amendments that they negotiated in the Senate. They are a really important range of amendments and they're ones that I thoroughly support. I support this bill. It is critical and it is important. I have put forward an amendment, the spirit of which I think the government has mainly picked up but could still, I believe, go further. The question for me is: is this enough? Is this bill enough? This is where I absolutely say no and this is where I will be holding the government and the whole parliament to account to truly deal with the issues that face the construction industry. It is the time now that we got rid of the problems facing the industry once and for all.

I want to raise two areas of why I believe this is not enough. Firstly, because we have had, I think, four royal commissions into the building industry since 1982, with a combination of 11,500 pages worth of findings and recommendations in terms of how to improve the construction industry and, particularly, the unions within it. We've had all this work done and still we are here, more than 40 years on from the original royal commission. I was four years old in those days—that's how long this has been going on. We have a systemic issue in the construction industry that no government has managed to solve. We've reformed the unions, we've done all sorts of things—I do not believe, and insiders in the industry do not believe, that we are going to get far enough by just appointing an administrator.

The second reason I do not believe this is enough is because of the insidious relationship between the CFMEU and the Labor Party. This is one that does need to be broken. I note that the Labor Party received $4.3 million worth of donations at the last election from the CFMEU. This is one of the biggest donations that the Labor Party got. I note that the history of corruption and intimidation in the CFMEU is extremely well known—has been known for decades. Frankly, as one of my colleagues did earlier today, if you type in 'CFMEU corruption and misconduct' into an internet search bar, the date range of media articles goes back more than a decade. This is what's been going on, but the Labor Party consistently—including in this term of parliament—has turned a blind eye to these issues because of the influence that the CFMEU has had on the Labor Party through its money and through other areas as well.

It's frankly appalling that the Labor Party has stood by this union and the behaviour of this union for so many years and accepted the money knowing full well what has been going on. I do not buy the Premier of Victoria's claims that she basically didn't respond to concerns related to the CFMEU over a year. I do not buy the faux outrage that we have seen from the Labor Party on this issue, saying: 'Oh no; what a terrible situation. We had no idea. Wow; we really need to clean this up.' This has been something that has been hiding in plain sight, and the Labor Party has not wanted to deal with it. In fact, what the Labor Party has done in this parliament is abolish the ABCC, which was at least a watchdog to focus on the construction union. Now, I'm not claiming that the ABCC was perfect; there were many issues with it, not least, I understand, that many of the allegations against the CFMEU right now happened while the ABCC was in place, so obviously it wasn't strong enough. But the Labor Party in this government abolished the ABCC, said everything was going to be fine and did not set up any alternative body, and here we are again.

I heard the minister on the radio the other day saying: 'The system is working. We didn't need the ABCC, because, when there's a problem, now we're rushing through two pieces of legislation to deal with it. This is the system working.' The only reason we're in this House dealing with this issue is the work of the journalists who have exposed this issue. This is not the Labor Party's doing. This is not the Fair Work Ombudsman who's exposed these issues. This is the work of excellent journalists, and I pay tribute to them. They have uncovered, at significant personal risk to themselves, what has been going on, to a point that the Labor Party could no longer deny it. And so, to be honest, I do not trust the Labor Party to be able to clean up this union or its administrator point of view.

We have years of evidence of issues in the industry and we have a government that has sat by and, frankly, made it easier for the CFMEU to do what it wanted to do without proper accountability, and that is a stain on the government. For me, this is the time that we need to go further. This is about short-term changes that we need to have in place and about long-term changes. On the short-term changes, I wrote with my crossbench colleagues to the Prime Minister a few weeks ago and said: these are a number of the changes that we want in the short-term. One is the appointment of a robust administrator, and I am glad to be speaking to this in the House. Two is for the Labor Party to suspend all donations from the CFMEU indefinitely. Now we have a time scale on this, and that is a positive thing. Three and four are that we need the resourcing to support police at different levels of government to conduct thorough investigations involving the misuse of public money, abuses of power in the union and fraud by actors in the sector. We need to make sure that the police are there as part of these investigations. Finally, there should be a commitment by the federal government to withhold infrastructure funding from projects—the stuff that we are funding—until states can show evidence that they are dealing with potentially criminal activity on their building sites. Those are what we need to do in the short term.

I'd like to finally come to the long term. The truths is that, as I said, we've been concerned about issues within the construction industry for 40 years. We probably were before then, but that's just the royal commissions. I think the opportunity now is: can we in this House come up with a way to fix this for the long term so that workers are protected? I want to acknowledge that construction is hard work and it is dangerous work and workers do need protection. I think that is important. Workers need protection. But they also need representation by people who are not trying to intimidate and are not, I think, thugs. They need proper representation.

We also need a sector that has high productivity. Because, frankly, we all rely on construction in this country, we need to get it right. We do need to come together. There are cowboy builders out there. There are people who don't pay their bills. There's dodgy stuff that goes on in the construction industry, and I don't want to see any of it. There is an opportunity—and I think it is a once-in-a-generation opportunity—to try and clean up this industry for all.

This is where I part ways somewhat with the opposition. The opposition wants to reinstate the ABCC. I support that. I voted against its abolition. But the truth is that, if we play politics again, we will not get a solution. I acknowledge that while the ABCC is better than what we have at the moment, which is nothing, it also didn't fix things. The current opposition was in power for almost 10 years, and we still had these problems in the industry. It's the political football on this issue between the major parties that has created, over a long period of time, this situation where we have pendulum politics. Someone comes in; they abolish it. Somebody else comes in; they bring it back. It's all great for the major parties, but it's actually not making a fundamental difference in the construction sector for the long term in a way that protects workers, protects businesses and allows that industry really to flourish.

That is what I'm seeking. I'm seeking for once—it could well be too much of an ask—for everyone to put the politics aside on this and to say, 'What would it take to come together—for the good union officials who are there to bring what they think is important, for the good businesses that are there to come forward and make their contribution, and for every group in this House to come together and work out what is the right regulatory framework, what is the right legislative framework, what are the right protections for our workers, what are the right safety conditions and what are the right productivity frameworks to make this industry work over the long term?' I'm seeking this because it matters. It matters to every Australian whether we can build the houses and infrastructure that we need; it matters because a corrupt industry in any part of our country sets a terrible precedent and has terrible tentacles throughout the rest of the country; and it matters because there are individuals out there whose lives have been ruined because of what goes on in the construction industry, and it is up to all of us to fix that.

So that is the call that I'm making across all the parties. This is the time to grow up, to take responsibility for what has failed over the last 40 years and to say that politics as usual is not going to deal with it. This is an opportunity for people to come together in this House and show that we mean it when we say that we're here to represent the best interests of the Australian people.

See this speech in context