Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I thank the member for Fisher for his contribution. It's a practical demonstration and one that all Australians can understand. Importantly, as the member for Fisher pointed out, we're having this debate because the government is running against common sense and logic and the views of the majority of Australians. Of course, that chippy or the plumber or the electrician is going to go to the boss and say that—or he or she is going to take the job on the biggest CFMEU building site. We talk about productivity in this country, but certainly not enough. We need to have a productive economy. When people hail the reforms of the Hawke-Keating period—which was supported by John Howard in opposition—and the economic reforms of the period from 1996 to 2007 under John Howard and Peter Costello, productivity was key to many of those changes that were made to modernise our economy. It wasn't just floating of the dollar and it wasn't just the way in which our tax system operates, or that the old sales tax needed to be replaced by the GST; it was about industrial relations reform.

There are many good unions in this country, and they are besmirched by the activities of the lawless CFMEU. But, somehow, the CFMEU has gained legitimacy within the Australian Labor Party. They influence votes within preselections, so there are members here in the Labor Party—who have all got their heads down at the moment—who rely on delegates from the CFMEU at their conference or at preselections, and that's why they're remaining silent. Let's be very clear about it: they know firsthand what is happening within the CFMEU. They fully understand, and despite the points made by the Leader of the House, the minister knew full well what was going on here. Let's not fall for that pathetic nonsense that the first Tony Burke knew of this was—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Please use the correct title.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The first the minister for industrial relations knew of this—no, he's the new minister for immigration, and congratulations to him for being appointed to that role and cleaning up the disastrous mess left by Minister Giles—but I digress. The fact is that the minister had complete and absolute knowledge of what was happening because these matters have been before the Federal Court, as was pointed out before.

We know that since 2003 the CFMEU and its officials have broken workplace laws on more than 2,600 occasions. That's not the record of the Health Services Union, even though they have their own problems at the moment. That's not the record of the AWU. That's not the record of other unions across the country who may from time to time inadvertently or otherwise breach the law. This is an organisation that's been described by judges in the Federal Court as having no regard for the rule of law.

Yet somehow the Labor Party does nothing about it. It's not just because they influence preselections and debates; it's because they donate tens of millions of dollars to this Prime Minister's party. That's what has happened here. So what justification, given that on 2,600 occasions the officials have been before the courts and been involved in about 213 proceedings and been penalised with over $24 million in penalties by the courts? How could you be blind to that? How could you pretend that that is not a reality? Well, it's because they donate money.

That is why the Greens are silent too, I might say. The Greens political party is a very significant beneficiary of the largesse dished out by John Setka and his friends. I don't know whether any of the teals have received any money from the CFMEU. It'd be interesting to get a full understanding given how interested they are in disclosure and transparency. But ultimately whether they could talk on those issues is a decision not of theirs but of Simon Holmes a Court, but that would be interesting to understand.

Look at what happens in Victoria, for example—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for North Sydney on a point of order?

Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Objection. I would ask that the Leader of the Opposition refrain from casting aspersions.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition will continue.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's obviously not a point of order. As we know if we go to Victoria, where the CFMEU has its claws in deep to the Allan government, a union official on major Victorian government construction sites and senior Bandidos bike enforcer is currently charged with serious assault. The union official is currently on trial for a violent home invasion where a woman was attacked. The Fair Work Commission deemed this individual a fit and proper person on 23 June and granted him a right-of-entry permit despite it being aware of his criminal history. A union official who was a convicted drug dealer was able to obtain a right-of-entry permit, only to have it revoked when he was penalised by the court for failing to comply with that said permit. Yet still this parliament, this government, has refused to pass a law that seeks to remove these individuals from our worksites and protect people in small business when unions threaten, coerce and bully them. It has to change. There needs to be a restoration of the rule of law.

Why the government would abolish the Australian Building and Construction Commission when it had a decent record, as we've just referred to, is because of the influence. It's because of the political influence. When we look at this government's motivations, they are motivated by only a few things. One is preferment on the unions because the unions pay millions of dollars of donations to the Labor Party. They are obsessed—particularly this Prime Minister—with an inner-city Sydney view about how he can stop the bleeding of votes to the Greens, so the motivation is what can benefit the unions.

A lot of people across the country now are rightly asking themselves what on earth is the Albanese government about? No. 1 is how can we help out the unions—not the Australian people, not people who are struggling in the suburbs at the moment with paying their bills. How can we help the unions? No. 2 is how do we stop haemorrhaging votes to the Greens? Therefore, we're driven further and further to the left on issues, including in relation to matters that are in the press at the moment in relation to migration matters et cetera. That's why they're selling out part of the community here in Australia and it's why they've made Australia less safe than what it has been in the past.

So the Albanese government is about unions, it's about stopping votes going to the Greens, it's about making sure that they can take care of friends otherwise—and I think we'll have more to say in due course about some of the people who have been donating to the Labor Party in recent times. They're not concerned about the Australian public, who are really at odds with the government's perspective on home ownership because this government doesn't believe in making it easy for young people to buy a home. Their model is build to rent—that is built to rent for life because you're more likely to be a Labor voter if you're building to rent and you're a renter for life than you are if you are a homeowner, because you're worried about interest rates and economic management et cetera.

As we're seeing in the polling now, people really understand that despite this Prime Minister's best attempts, he has no clue when it comes to economic management.

Labor always, always run up debt. They always have higher interest rates. They always mismanage the economy and, ultimately, unemployment goes up; inflation is sticky as it is at the moment. Interest rates are going down in New Zealand and Canada and in the United kingdom but not here, and it's because of the Labor government's mishandling of the economy.

So they're not worried about homeownership. It's at the core of who we are, because we believe in choice. We believe in making sure that the economy works for people, not that people are working for the economy. We want to make sure that people who save and work hard keep more of their own money. That's what our coalition partners are about. That's part of our vision for our country. We want to make sure that Australians can realise the great dream of homeownership. We want to make sure that there is more prospect, but there is less prospect of homeownership when the CFMEU is running riot across building sites, whether they're industrial or commercial or, indeed, residential in this country.

This Prime Minister and the weakness that he has displayed every day over the course of the last two years have resulted in the CFMEU holding this government to ransom. That's what's happened here. But the average Australian is paying the price. Taxpayers are being ripped off. Nick McKenzie, to his great credit—the work that he and others have done in the Nine Network in exposing some of this. It's just scratching the surface. There are builders and subcontractors who, when you speak to them in private, their stories are horrific: their dog at home being baited, their family being threatened. The way in which the CFMEU uses bikies, who are the biggest distributors of drugs in our country: they're enforcers. That criminal conduct that takes place is not conducive to a good building sector and one that is affordable for Australians.

This is the biggest rip-off of Australian taxpayers in our country 's history, and this Prime Minister continues to turn a blind eye. That's why I would encourage the House to consider this bill and to support it in due course.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

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

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Debate adjourned.