Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to add to some of the comments that Senator McKenzie made about the inquiry we had last week. As Senator McKenzie noted, I was one of the people who went to that inquiry. We had one day where we looked at two bills. When we looked at the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2013—and I am happy to stand corrected on this—I think we had just under three hours. In that time we heard from the ACTU, who had about 40 minutes; we heard from AiG; we heard from a range of other employer organisations; and then we heard from the department. I do not think that three hours is anywhere near an adequate time to hear from people.

I do not know if Senator McKenzie has ever been a member of a trade union, but I have spent most of my working life working for a trade union, prior to becoming a senator. I worked for United Voice. I worked as a paid organiser, and then I took on elected positions. In the Western Australian branch I was the assistant branch secretary of United Voice. In early 2000 I became the assistant national secretary of United Voice. I am a trade union official; it runs through my blood. I am now a senator, but 'once a trade union official, always a trade union official'. And I must say that, as a trade union official, I really took offence to what Senator Abetz was saying. A point that has certainly been overlooked is that one of the reasons we need a reference is to give people a fair go. What most of the organisations said last week was that they did not have enough time.

My union, United Voice, for example, has a governing structure of 100 national councillors; it has both a state and federal structure. The governing council of the Western Australian branch is two-thirds ordinary workers, who give their time in an unpaid capacity to manage and govern and comply with all of the requirements under the act to make sure United Voice is a competent organisation. I am talking about people like cleaners. In fact, the president of United Voice is a health worker who worked in the kitchen at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. The vice-president is a worker from the disability sector, a personal carer. The other vice-president comes from the paint industry. Other members of the committee of management are from, for example, the bread industry or the childcare industry; they are from schools; they are cleaners, and so on.

It is ordinary members who take on, in a voluntary capacity, the management of a very large organisation like United Voice. In fact, United Voice is the largest trade union in Western Australia, so there are significant responsibilities there that need to be given voice. They need to be given an opportunity to speak to a Senate inquiry, a references group, to say what it is really like from their perspective to be a manager of a trade union, because that is what they are. That is the role they take on and that is the role that is spelled out in Fair Work. It is time that we heard from those people who, every week, every month, come along to executive meetings of trade unions, who attend branch meetings of trade unions, who attend national meetings of trade unions, in their own time. To get those people to Melbourne last week for a three-hour hearing at which they might have got two minutes is simply an insult. If we are serious about regulating trade unions we need more time than that.

There is not a person in the Labor Party who does not believe that we need strong trade unions and we need regulation. No-one is backing away from that; no-one is backing away from the fact that we need strong trade unions. But I am not going to short-change those members of trade unions who give their time voluntarily, who have my enormous respect, and stop them from having a say. I do want to hear from ordinary committee members of trade unions about what they think, about how they feel about the sorts of onerous regulations that the coalition government wants to impose on ordinary working folk in this country.

They are the voices we need to hear, and we will only hear them if we have a references committee that has enough time; that is able, for example, to go to Perth or Hobart or Brisbane to hear those voices. They are the voices that are missing and they are, by and large, the people who manage all of our trade unions across this country. That is why we need much more than a three-hour hearing at which the ACTU represents the whole of the trade union movement. I have to say they did a brilliant job in a very short space of time to give that evidence. But 40 minutes is an insult for the working people of this country.

I have to say too, after listening to Senator Abetz today, that I want paid trade unionists in this country to be able to talk to Senator Abetz about what it is really like

As the former national assistant secretary of United Voice I can say that, despite its name changes over the years, it is one of Australia's oldest trade unions. As I just described in response to comments made by Senator McKenzie, it has a strong representative structure at branch level, with branches in every state and the territories and at the national level. It takes its obligations under the various state and federal industrial relations systems very, very seriously. It is not unique: it is like most trade unions in this country in taking those responsibilities seriously. And of course, like any progressive organisation, United Voice is always open to new and better ways of undertaking its role, including accountability.

United Voice, along with other trade unions in this country, has always had open and transparent methods of reporting to its membership. That has always been a requirement of trade unions. In many ways, United Voice has reported far more extensively than what was required at various times by state and federal jurisdictions. United Voice is not alone there. Yes, Fair Work would have set out a minimum set of requirements, but most trade unions in this country, because of their own rules, have always reported much more extensively than what was required.

I can certainly assure the Senate that when I was an elected official I had obligations under the Fair Work Act which I took seriously. Again, I am not unique in taking my obligations seriously. If you work in a trade union there are particular obligations and you work within them. Any worker in this country tries to abide by the laws that govern their particular work, and I was not unique in that. As I said, United Voice, like many trade unions in this country, takes its obligations seriously. After all, union budgets are raised from members' subscriptions—in the case of United Voice, low-paid members.

United Voice is a typical Australian trade union that takes its responsibilities seriously, and we need the reference to the committee so that we can talk to trade union officials and elected representatives around the country. I particularly want their voices to be heard in this debate. As Senator Cameron pointed out, if you just listened to Senator Abetz you would think it was all about trade unions, but the AiG and ACCI are very concerned about this legislation too and I would like to give the AiG and ACCI a further opportunity to bring their volunteer board members along so their stories can be heard. I think there will be commonalities between our trade union unpaid representatives and those who sit on the boards of AiG and ACCI. They will have some similar concerns about this new bill.

The ACTU was at pains to point out that it does not want to be above the law and it does not expect to be above the law. On behalf of trade unions it certainly made the point that, yes, trade unions have to be accountable. But we have got accountability through the passage of the bill that became the 2012 act. This current bill, apart from increasing penalties, is quite similar. I certainly would like some of AiG's officers to come to a references committee to talk us through how onerous they are finding the bill. AiG were at pains to point out last week that they were just starting to implement the requirements of the 2012 act and they were finding that act onerous. Let's not kid ourselves—this legislation goes much further. Again, that is a reason for us to have a references committee to give those representatives much greater time to be heard.

Like United Voice, AiG have been around for a very long time. This is a respected employer organisation. I heard Senator Cameron say today that in his former role with the Metal Workers Union he had had some pretty tough fights with AiG, but he too respected them as an organisation. They are to be respected. They were registered in the New South Wales industrial commission in 1902 and gained federal registration in 1926. So this is an organisation, like the ACTU, like United Voice and other trade unions who have been around a long time, who have some expertise in this area, who are worth listening to and who are worth giving more than 40 minutes to.

AiG, a longstanding and well-respected organisation, do not see any need for this new bill—none at all. AiG not only think this new bill is unnecessary from their own organisation's perspective, but they also do not believe it is necessary for trade unions. As I said before, their expertise, the history they have lived through and the experience that their organisation has are worth delving into. They should be given the opportunity to give much more detailed input and for their branches throughout the country to be heard. After all, we saw their key personnel, as we did from the ACTU, but let's go and hear from the branches, big and small, who have to deal with this onerous legislation. The 43rd Parliament, as we have heard today, considered and adopted a bill that addresses much the same things as the bill in question. Again, I take issue with Senator Abetz because if you listened to him today you would think that almost every trade union had some kind of corruption going on. It was quite disgraceful. If that is his view, there are now laws in place to deal with that.

Given the attack that we are getting from the opposition, we should look at corporations. We have had some staggering corporation crashes in this country, but it is just: 'Oh well; it's just another corporation; let's not worry about it.' Why don't I ever hear Senator Abetz talking about One.Tel or ABC, which crashed spectacularly? That is why we need a references committee inquiry, so that we can hear from the ordinary folk managing our employer organisations and our trade unions.