Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) both the Building Code 2013 (2013 Code) and the Code for the Tendering and Performance of Building Work 2016 (2016 Code) require code covered entities to protect freedom of association on building and construction worksites;

(b) the 2016 Code includes requirements in respect of building association logos, mottos or indicia; and

(c) the Australian Building and Construction Commission's fact sheet Freedom of Association—Logos, Mottos and Indicia specifies that 'logos, mottos and indicia' that would breach the 2016 Code include 'the iconic symbol of the five white stars and white cross on the Eureka Stockade flag';

(2) recognises that:

(a) the Eureka Stockade flag was:

(i) first used in 1854 at Ballarat; and

(ii) a symbol of resistance of the gold miners during the rebellion;

(b) beneath the Eureka Stockade flag, the leader of the Ballarat Reform League, Peter Lalor, said 'We swear by the Southern Cross to stand truly by each other and fight to defend our rights and liberties';

(c) the people at the Eureka Stockade defending the original flag came from nearly forty nations from around the world; and

(d) the Eureka Stockade flag design has gained wider acceptance in Australian culture as a symbol of democracy, protest and the notion of the Australian 'fair go';

(3) further notes that:

(a) freedom of speech and freedom of association are valued by all fair-minded Australians;

(b) the Eureka Stockade flag has been a symbol associated with building and construction unions for over 40 years;

(c) restricting an individual's right to wear union logos or preventing a construction site from displaying a union flag implies that workers cannot join a union; and

(d) it is an attack on:

(i) an individual's freedom of association to prevent them from wearing the Eureka Stockade flag on their clothing; and

(ii) freedom of association to prevent a construction site from displaying the Eureka Stockade flag; and

(4) calls on the Government to immediately act to protect the rights of workers in the construction industry by making clear that displaying the iconic symbol of democracy, the Eureka Stockade flag, is not a breach of the 2016 Code.

This motion before the House notes that the Australian Building and Construction Commission has specified in a fact sheet published by the federal government that displaying the Eureka Stockade flag on clothing, property or equipment would breach the Code for the Tendering and Performance of Building Work 2016. This is an attack on Australian workers. This is an attack on the right of freedom of association. This is an attack on our very democracy itself.

The importance of the Eureka flag does not emanate from the fabric it is made of or even the design—the stars of the Southern Cross joined in defiance by a solid white cross. The importance of the Eureka flag emanates from the struggle of those who first flew the flag in Ballarat back in 1854, the miners who died under the flag during that battle and all who have flown the flag in protest against unequal laws and unequal rights in the many years since. Born out of adversity, it is a flag that belongs to all Australians.

The Eureka flag was first hoisted on Bakery Hill on 29 November 1854. The Eureka rebellion was the culmination of a revolt by goldminers in Ballarat against British colonial authority. The miners objected to what they thought was unfair taxation through the imposition of inflated licence fees. Twenty-two rebels died in that battle, and six police and troopers. The miners actually lost the battle but eventually won the war. 164 years later, the flag remains a symbol of nationalism and democratic struggles. In our representative system of government, power is vested in the people. The word democracy literally means 'the rule of the people'. What sort of country is this if Australians are banned from displaying a symbol that represents democracy itself?

The Australian labour movement has a proud history. Beginning back in the early 19th century, workers who were less skilled and working in rural areas began to organise and demand better conditions. Not long after the Eureka rebellion, a series of great strikes rolled across the country: the 1890 maritime strike, the 1891 and 1894 shearers' strikes and the 1892 miners' strikes. All of these strikes were broken by the use of police or military force, and in fact it was the heavy-handedness of authorities that facilitated the formation of the Labor Party and the search for a political solution.

This is not the first time that union symbols have been banned by employers. In 1912 the Brisbane members of the Australian Tramway Employees Association defiantly attached their union badges to their watch chains—sort of like the stickers that many of the people are wearing today, I guess. In a bid to discourage a swelling union membership, the Brisbane Tramways Company banned its employees from displaying union badges. It didn't go so well for them. Tram drivers who persisted in wearing their badges were stood down. In response, a strike committee was set up and 43 unions across Queensland called a general strike. Shops and hotels closed down. Bread deliveries halted. Newspaper printing was restricted. Train services were suspended at night. The commissioner of police refused to allow the unionists to march in Brisbane streets, something Joh repeated later. Police and special constables from outside Brisbane used force to quell the unrest. The Premier even requested that the Army intervene.

Eventually the strike dissolved, but the Australian Tramway Employees Association took the case to the arbitration commission and was granted the right for its union members to wear their badges to work. The Brisbane Tramways Company fought tooth and nail against this action by the union, arguing the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission did not have jurisdiction as it was not an industrial dispute. The question was sent to the High Court, and the High Court held in favour of the workers. So in 1912 the tramways employees and their union had to fight for the right to wear their union badges, and they won. Those workers keenly felt that sense of unfairness, that sense of authority overreaching, that sense of fighting for the common good. That is what the Eureka flag stood for in 1854 and it is what it stands for today.

Just like the tramways badge case, it is the right of the modern construction employees to be free to join a trade union. Being able to display a symbol associated with the CFMEU, AMWU, ETU, AWU or whatever union is the essence of freedom of association. The Eureka flag has proudly flown in Australia for more than 160 years. I call on the Turnbull government to rein in their building and construction watchdog. It is off the leash and rabid. I call on the Turnbull government not to take away the right of Australian workers to display the Eureka flag on their work sites. I call on the Turnbull government to preserve the right of freedom of association for all Australians. It would be un-Australian not to. I ask for tolerance to be able to show the symbol that we're talking about here. (Time expired)

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is absolutely incredible hypocrisy at the heart of this motion. The member for Moreton tells us that his mates in the union movement object to the ABCC's fact sheet on the grounds that its regulations on flags are an attack on individual and corporate freedom. No-one today is suggesting that a person can't join a union. There is an important principle—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Moreton was heard in silence.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is an important principle of freedom of association here. No-one is attempting to take that away from anybody wanting to join a union.

While those opposite are concerning themselves with the demonstration or flying of a flag, what about the freedom of people who simply want to go to work? What about the freedom of people who want to do their job? What about the freedom of businesses who have done nothing wrong to fulfil their contracts? What about the freedom of employees and site managers who want to go about their business without intimidation, abuse and threats of violence that the CFMEU continue to perpetrate upon mums and dad? Frankly, I'm surprised that the union movement is worried about this benign regulation. They are, after all, not at all concerned about breaking some of the nation's most important laws. There are laws against threats of violence and laws against intimidation and corruption, and yet those opposite all wear that badge with the CFMEU—proudly, they say—an organisation which is time and again determined by the courts of this country to be absolutely lawless. The ACTU secretary, Sally McManus, has already said that she doesn't believe in unions obeying the law.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When the CFMEU received a decision against them in the High Court of Australia this month, she said that it would not stop the unions continuing as they have before.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I do have the ability to remove members for 15 minutes at a time out of here, so let's just say I've issued a general warning.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If a single union are happy to have committed 106 separate contraventions of industrial law between 1999 and 2015, if they are happy to have racked up $13 million in fines for illegal activity and more millions in civil lawsuits, if they are happy for individual officials to receive as many as 15 separate fines without censure and if they are happy to ignore decisions of the High Court of Australia, then I am very surprised they are concerned with a simple regulation on flags.

Let's have a look at how the unions in this country protect freedom. How about the freedom to enjoy a safe workplace?

Opposition members interjecting—

This is so typical, isn't it, of those opposite—if anybody has a different view to you lot, howl them down. That's so typical, just like your union mates. This month, the Australian Federal Court found that CFMEU officials had themselves kicked down a safety rail designed to protect workers at a BKH Group—

Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What's this got to do with a flag, mate?

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's got everything to do with a flag.

Mr Gosling interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Solomon!

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He's asking to be kicked out, Mr Deputy Speaker. This month, the Australian Federal Court found that CFMEU officials had kicked down a safety rail designed to protect workers at a BKH Group site simply as a pretext to illegally coerce them into a pattern enterprise agreement.

How about freedom of movement and the right to work? In October last year, the CFMEU and its delegate Andrew Harisiou were fined $90,000 and $8,000 respectively for barring workers from entering their worksite to earn their living unless they agreed to sign up to the CFMEU and pay its membership fees.

How about freedom from intimidation or threats of violence? In June, CFMEU official John Setka threatened to expose ABCC inspectors and seek to make their children ashamed of who their parents were. And those opposite laugh.

Opposition members interjecting—

I'll keep going after the next speaker. (Time expired)

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unfortunately, we're going to get a second edition of the member for Fisher's speech. He spent such little time debating the actual premise of the member for Moreton's very good motion. This is a simple thing. The government have overstepped the mark. They're so hostile to the concept of workers' rights and so hostile to the concept of unionism that they've now completely overstepped the mark, jumped the shark and crossed into a place where they deny their own rhetoric. Time and time again, we're told that the government believes in free speech. We're lectured in the pages of The Australian and we're lectured in this parliament—

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The IPA.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and we're lectured by the IPA and other organisations about how they cherish free speech, how it's part of their moral code, how important it is to have this fundamental tenet of Western civilisation upheld in this country and how, if anybody dares to have an objection to freedom of speech, they're somehow snowflakes or the like. Yet, if you take a flag—a flag that's been around for our entire history which celebrates our values of liberty, justice, mateship and democracy—onto a building site, you'll then lose your job, probably lose a contract and probably be dragged through the courts and fined. And it won't be some union official; it'll be a worker—a worker who takes this book onto a work site.

If a worker took this book by Peter Fitzsimons onto a worksite, he'd probably be in breach of the code. How ridiculous. He'd be sitting there reading the book in his lunchroom, and he'd probably be in breach of the code, because here it is. There's a flag of Eureka. That's how ridiculous the government's got in its hostility to workers and its determination to basically outlaw unionism. When the ACTU, quite rightly, says, 'Change the rules,' that's because the rules are loaded for anybody who wants to organise, for anybody who wants to join a union and for anybody who wants to exercise a right to strike. There isn't really a right to strike left in this country. There isn't really a right to free speech in this country on building worksites.

If the honourable member wants an example of how unfair these laws are, look at the case of Ark Tribe. Ark Tribe was just a rigger in my electorate. All he wanted was a safe worksite, and he was dragged through the courts. He was dragged through the Federal Court, which is a very expensive jurisdiction for a worker to go through, with very high legal fees. He was dragged through those courts over and over again by the ABCC and its forerunner and put under immense stress. All he was was a rigger from Middle Beach who wanted a safe worksite. That's all he wanted. And yet what happened to him is an illustration of what this government wants to do to the union movement, writ large.

The honourable member for Moreton comes into this place with a completely legitimate proposition about this flag, which has stood for decent Australian values for years and years and years, which is the flag of the workers, which is a flag of the union movement, which is a flag of many right-thinking Australians—and it could be the flag of those opposite too, if they sought to look at the traditions. It could equally be seen to be small businessmen revolting against the tyranny of unfair licences. All of those miners were basically prospectors at the time. There is a contrary conservative tradition here. But it does celebrate a basic Australian idea of dignity at work, of being able to say, 'Enough's enough,' and being able to say, 'That's unreasonable.'

And those opposite refuse to realise the damage they're doing to this country's democratic traditions. They refuse to acknowledge that, in saying to a country that you can ban a flag or ban an idea or ban freedom of thought or freedom of association on work sites, you can do it anywhere. It's a very dangerous proposition to introduce to this place. It's a very dangerous proposition to introduce to a nation. I urge those opposite to just think carefully about what they're doing here and think about whether it really does accord with their traditions and their ideas about what this country should represent.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to continue the debate on the motion.

Mr Perrett interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Moreton, leave is granted?

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the interests of freedom of expression, leave is granted.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order! Before I call the member for Fisher, I want to remind honourable members that I have the ability to vacate the chair and close this chamber down if the discussion becomes unruly. I'm sure everyone wants to have a chance at this, so I call the member for Fisher.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I'm indebted to my friend the member for Moreton. CFMEU president Dave Hanna, on the previous matter that I was talking about—

An opposition member: Former.

the former president of the CFMEU—was fined $10,500 in May last year for illegally entering a worksite and threatening to bury an innocent bystander's mobile phone down their throat. Now, at the worksite of Glencore's Oaky North mine last year, the situation was even more appalling. I can't read some of the quotes that came out of this atrocious and long-running campaign of personal threats, but reports from the picket line—a picket line that the Leader of the Opposition visited—stated—

Honourable members interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I call the member for Fisher.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You're eating into my time.

Honourable members interjecting—

The Leader of the Opposition visited this picket line and stated that workers who were simply going about their business were told that union members were going to attack them with a crowbar and even do inexplicable things to their children. How about freedom from simple abuse? Once again the examples of abuse from Oakey Creek are unrepeatable in parliament. But there are many more. At Sydney's Barangaroo building site a lone CFMEU official has called Lend Lease employees and even a female police officer 'dogs', 'scum', 'lower than a paedophile grub' and much worse. Before the union movement and its political lackeys in the Labor Party come into this place and lecture us in long motions on the attack of freedom represented by a simple regulation on flags, they should look at themselves and the attacks that their officials are perpetrating in this country every single day. I ask the question of those opposite: who of those opposite have actually worked on a building site?

Honourable members interjecting—

Great, so you've all worked on building sites, excellent, terrific. Member for Moreton, come on, you are a solicitor.

An honourable member: So are you!

I am a barrister and I have worked on a building site.

An honourable member: Do you have a ticket?

No, I don't have a ticket. But the problem with those opposite, the CFMEU and its predecessor the BLF is they consistently believe in this concept of no ticket, no start.

An honourable member: Hear Hear!

Hear hear the honourable member says over here.

An honourable member: Safety first, mate.

It has nothing to do with safety. No ticket no start is an absolute attack on freedom of association, an attack that the CFMEU continues to perpetrate time and time again, the same organisation that constantly is criticised by the Federal Court for consistent breaches of the industrial laws of this country. There are 77 CFMEU representatives before the courts facing a total of 865 alleged contraventions.

Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for McEwen, your time will come.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The CFMEU now holds the very dubious honour of having received $12 million in fines. Just the week before last, the High Court ruled that it is permissible for a court to order that the CFMEU cannot pay fines imposed upon its elected officials. So we are hopefully now going to see a change in the culture of the CFMEU, badges that those opposite proudly wear despite having received millions of dollars in fines, despite having given millions of dollars in political donations that the Labor Party continue to gladly receive. Shame on you.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government's latest attack on workers is so ridiculous that when I first heard about it, I thought, 'Surely it's gotta be a joke; it's not the flags.' That is the latest three-word slogan from the knuckle draggers opposite. But you have got to sit there and ask: why could this not be a joke? How does the government really think that sending the ABCC goons out to wage war with the Eureka Stockade flag is something that is going to embed themselves in Australian culture? The Eureka flag is so strong, so deep in our psyche that the Australian cricketers sing after they win a game:

Under the Southern Cross I Stand

A sprig of wattle in my hand,

A native of my native land,

Australia you little beauty

That comes from the Flag of the Southern Cross by Henry Lawson. But what are they going to say now?

Under the Southern Cross I can't stand

For fear of the ABCC goons with their balaclavas and dogs in hand

Attacking workers and flags across the land

The Turnbull government idiocy is out of hand.

That is probably more appropriate than what we're seeing with the attack on the flag. This flag was first used in 1854 in Ballarat as a symbol of resistance of goldminers during the rebellion. The flag is a symbol of solidarity and unity. The people who defended the original flag came from about 40 nations around the world, and, beneath that original flag, the leader of the Ballarat Reform League, Peter Lalor, swore by the Southern Cross to 'stand by one another and fight to defend rights and liberties'. The flag stands for the great Australian values of democracy, the right to be heard and a fair go—things that are synonymous with union values. So it's not hard to see why our great unions identify with this symbol, one that ensures that all Aussies have their rights and liberties protected at work. The unions have been proudly sporting and flying the Eureka flag for decades.

But what the ABCC is doing is an absolute dog act, designed to crush Australian workers rather than look out for them. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that the dodgy ABCC has much better things to be doing than going on a witch-hunt for flag stickers. Maybe they should try and clean up the mess that they created from old dodgy Hadgkiss and co when they were deliberately misrepresenting the rule of law.

In 2016 the construction sector had the third-highest mortality rate, outdoing its 10-year average by almost five per cent. Since the ABCC started in 2005, worksite deaths and serious injuries have gone up, not down—up, not down. So this dodgy practice that this government supports is actually impacting workers' safety. Yet they sit there and laugh and think that it's great. In 2016 alone, 35 workers died on Australian construction sites, making up almost 20 per cent of workplace deaths in that year.

But never fear! The government has concocted an elaborate plan to distract from their inaction in securing our workplaces. Rather than fighting for workplace safety at the forefront of workplaces, the government is preoccupied with a dangerous sticker. Something we know those opposite have never seemed to be able to wrap their heads around is the importance of safe workplaces. It's baffling that they turn a blind eye while Australian workers are forced to do their jobs in unsafe conditions with no protections from the hazards on sites and the risks to their lives, day in and day out.

We on this side believe that workers have the right to go to work in safe environments, without the fear that they're not going to make it home for dinner or not make it home that night to see their families again. I know this at a personal level. My son-in-law is a construction worker. I've never been associated with the CFMEU, but I tell you what: I'll stand up for them 110 per cent of the time, because I want to make sure he gets home to see my granddaughter. You might not think that's important, but I do, and every family out there that's at risk because this government's focus is on destroying stickers and not standing up for safe workplaces will know exactly what I'm saying. This whole debacle is just an ABCC witch-hunt, a government distraction to cover up their lack of action to protect Australian workers, because what better protects construction site workers from unsafe workplaces? Getting rid of the dangerous stickers from their helmets, according to this lot!

The government doesn't know what it wants. It preaches freedom of speech left, right and centre, and now is trying to restrict the rights of people to wear union logos or to display the Eureka flag. Do your job for once, government. Stand up and protect the safety of workers in the construction industry. End your witch-hunts. Get out of your offices and actually do something for Australian workplaces and workers.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion be agreed to. I call the member for Fisher.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm seeking leave to continue my remarks.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is leave granted?

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, leave is not granted from this side. We're keen to have any of the 75 members of the House of Representatives from the coalition speak, but we can't have three in a row from the one person—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay. The question is that the motion be agreed to. I call the member for Wright.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to bring to the chamber's attention that the previous speaker was heard in absolute respect. Not one breath was spoken from this side, because that was in line with the standing orders. I do not expect the same level of respect from those in the chamber now. I have never seen so many Jacobites in the chamber to watch one particular debate as I have on this issue, all donning their Eureka flags. They on the other side are nothing other than puppets.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And here comes the intimidation factor, Mr Deputy Speaker. The thuggery and the tools of trade are instilled in those on the other side when they come into this place. They are servants and puppets to the union movement, and that's fine.

I want to pick up one of the points that the previous speaker made. There is a place for the union movement in Australia—yes there is. It is around work safety. Absolutely it is. I was first introduced to the union movement in the mining towns of Blackwater and Emerald, where I have property, and there is a number of great—

An opposition member: We're talking construction sites!

I'm talking about my first introduction to the unions. There is a place for them in the Australian landscape and it is around safety; it's not around intimidation, it's not around thuggery and it's not around corruption.

I want to bring to the House's attention that the CFMEU or its representatives are respondents for no less than 36 matters currently before the courts, facing a total of 1,723 suspected contraventions. This is what the union movement stands for. This is what this government is dealing with. There are 36 matters involving the CFMEU and its representatives currently before the courts. There are 77 CFMEU representatives before the courts, facing a total of 865 alleged contraventions and over a million dollars in penalties, as the previous speaker said. Over $10 million in penalties has been awarded against the CFMEU, and that is represented in cases brought by the ABCC and its predecessor agencies.

The CFMEU's behaviour, highlighted by the Heydon royal commission, includes no less than blackmail; unlawful industrial action; contraventions of boycott and cartel competition law provisions; and obstructing Fair Work building inspectors through intimidation, insults and threatening behaviour. Who does this type of stuff? One of the previous speakers who made a contribution to this debate had the audacity to claim in this House that they were representing the dignity of workers. They are absolutely kidding with 'dignity of workers' from those on the other side. To run through the Heydon royal commission, there were behaviours of blackmail; unlawful industrial action; contraventions of boycott and cartel competition law provisions; and obstructing Fair Work building inspectors through intimidation. Some of the behaviour, said Justice Heydon, highlighted 'the sustained and entrenched disregard for both industrial and criminal laws shown by the country's largest construction union'. Don't come into this place and cry crocodile tears that the union movement is under siege for waving a flag.

Heydon continued, 'judicial officers have noted that the CFMEU appear to regard financial penalties as simply a business cost like any other.' At the Gladstone Boardwalk project, CFMEU and its officials were penalised more than $54,000 after attempting to force workers to join the union at a major Central Queensland construction site. Where's the dignity for workers on that site? Where is the dignity for workers on that site when you've got CFMEU thugs intimidating workers, under the Eureka Stockade flag, claiming that they are trying to provide dignity for workers? Bull. Absolute bull.

In the Federal Circuit Court in Brisbane, Judge Jarrett found that union organiser Jody Moses warned workers in September 2013 with words to the effect: 'This is the way it'll be. You have to join the union otherwise you won't be able to work onsite and we will make sure you don't work onsite.' Where is the dignity for workers in that regard? The court had previously been told that workers had objected to the threats during angry and heated discussions at meetings, saying words to the effect: 'This is bullying. You can't force us to join a union … This is not the way to get people into the union, this is bullying.' It's those bullying tactics that we saw on the other side of the chamber here. It's not fair. We'll stand up every day to fight the unions—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allocated for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19 : 20