Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Hansard source

The venom and hatred that the Australian Labor Party have been spewing forth against Dyson Heydon is motivated by one reason and one reason alone—that is, the revelations that have emerged from this royal commission. There is the revelation that Mr Shorten hid from the Australian people for eight years the fact that he had been given a $40,000 donation in the form of a paid staff member to be his personal campaign manager. That person was, it appears, misdescribed—some would use harsher words—as a research officer for the particular company, in circumstances where he was clearly not so engaged.

How do we know all this? Before he had to give his evidence, Mr Shorten changed the documentation to delete 'nil' from his declaration to tell the Australian people that somehow, somewhere, a $40,000 contribution was made. How you could overlook such a matter is, quite frankly, beyond me. Why it would be misdescribed is also beyond me. But not all the evidence has been given. What we do know is that the Labor Party have changed their own declarations in relation to Mr Shorten's campaign for his seat those eight years ago.

We also know that, because of the royal commission—without any findings or recommendations being made—Mr Shorten's very, very good mate and successor in title in the Australian Workers Union had to resign as Government Whip in the upper house in Victoria. We know that. This is all about payback. It is about revenge. It is about shooting the messenger. It is about hoping to besmirch Mr Heydon in such a way that the actions that have now been exposed will not be seen in the light they deserve to be seen in.

But for the royal commission, we would never have known that the Australian Workers Union, led by Mr Shorten, had traded away workers' entitlements in exchange for what appears to be donations to the union. So cleaners can be paid less, mushroom pickers can be paid less, circus workers can be paid less—indeed, use was made of the Work Choices regime to ensure that these conditions were driven down by the Australian Workers Union. And—surprise, surprise—the businesses that benefited from these sleazy deals just happened to make donations to the Australian Workers Union. But for the royal commission, these sleazy dealings would never have been exposed. But for the royal commission, the Australian people would still be in the dark, like the mushroom pickers at Chiquita Mushrooms. But for the royal commission, we would not know—and this would have to be one of the lowest acts of all—that moneys donated by companies to assist people with drug and alcohol issues were misapplied; 80 per cent went to the CFMEU and only 20 per cent to the proper fund. Can you get any lower than taking money from the needs of those who have alcohol and drug issues?

What do we know about the money that goes into the Australian Workers Union? What do we know about the money that goes into the CFMEU? Thousands—indeed, over the years, millions—of dollars have gone directly to the Australian Labor Party. Their source of funding has been exposed by this royal commission: money from shonky deals with employers and money skimmed off charitable organisations goes to the unions, which in turn donate to the Labor Party. This is what motivates this attack on Mr Heydon, and I suggest to the Labor Party that they take into account the Law Council of Australia's admonition today to stop it. (Time expired)