Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

That is not the case at all. You might dream that or wish that, but that is not the case, Senator Brandis.

When it comes to the arguments the opposition has used when questioning the competence of Fair Work Australia or why this is dragging out, we only need to look at some of the history and certainly the recent annual report of Fair Work Australia to understand their workload. A lot of this annual report has to do with Work Choices, because we had to come in here and fix a history of concerns about things like unfair dismissals, and we had to make sure that workers were allowed a fair go—'a fair go' is one set of words you will never hear coming out of those opposite—in their workplaces and that they were protected from unfair dismissals. If we look at one circumstance here in the annual report: as a result of bargaining and agreement-making back in the days when Work Choices was in place, only 189 agreements were approved or varied. Come 2009-10, there were 24,053. It demonstrates that there were a whole heap of people wanting to get out of Australian workplace agreements and it also demonstrates the ability of workers and their employers to make agreements. That is one capacity that has been resolved and granted through the introduction of the Fair Work Australia Act. This is an act we have been proud of, to make sure there is fairness in the workplace.

Returning to the MPI today, we should also remember that it is important that unions and employer organisations are accountable, and that is the framework of the Fair Work Australia Act—to make sure that accountability exists. I am sure that at the end of the day, when Fair Work Australia comes down with an outcome on this particular examination, there will be a concise and competent response in respect to its investigations. That is why there are financial reporting requirements in the act, the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009. They are modelled closely on the laws that apply to company directors of corporations. They are the same now as they were when introduced by Tony Abbott, when he was the industrial relations minister. We should remind ourselves that they are something he introduced.

It is something we have adopted and carried on to make sure that transparency exists for these sorts of issues. We should remember that in the allegations we are talking about here—these are the words Senator Abetz commenced with——no one has been found guilty. You opened your address here, Senator Abetz, admitting these are allegations and the true purpose of the law should be completed before anyone sledges anyone or claims that someone has done anything wrong in the circumstances of this particular case.